2011.03.04 Motions Hearing - #2 (PM)

[Riley1833]

Did you also see the hearing summary thread on the top front of the Caylee page, just under the" todays news no discussion"?

You will get a good sketch of the high points also.

No I didn't...thanks again....I am off there now:blushing:

 

[gamom]

JMO, until the defense can prove Caylee put that duct tape on her own face I can't see any reasonable doubt.

I could be wrong, but I always thought the burden of proof is on the state. They need to prove that Casey put the tape on Caylee's mouth. The defense does not have to prove anything other than raise enough doubt that something else could have happened.

 

[faefrost]

I could be wrong, but I always thought the burden of proof is on the state. They need to prove that Casey put the tape on Caylee's mouth. The defense does not have to prove anything other than raise enough doubt that something else could have happened.

While technically under the law the burden of proof is always on the state. In actual real life practicality this is not always the case in the juries eyes, particularly in any situation involving a small child. While teh state has to prove its case, the defense will have to answer certain questions to the juries quiet and unspoken satisfaction or they will lose. Any questions involving the handling and movement of a child are prime examples of this. Things like "Why does the authoritative parent/guardian not know where the child is> Why do they not report the child missing? Why or how is there duct tape on the child?" While KC has a legal presumption of innocence, there is also a practical and societal presumption of responsibility regarding a child that will be deeply embedded in any jury seated. That will be a difficult barrier to overcome at trial.

 

[BondJamesBond]

ooops. I shoulda closed this down earlier. Asking everyone to pls take the detailed discussion to the appropriate thread. Thanks.