Felony Murder Vs Premeditated Murder

[JBean]

If you all are interested in debating whether premeditated murder can be proven or whether felony murder can be proven please do so.



Everything posted on this topic is going to be a posters opinion because this is a subjective topic. It cannot be answered with 100% accuracy because it can only our opinions as to the probable outcome.

The ONLY question being discussed and debated in this thread is:

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Murder 1?
Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Felony Murder?
Does the prosecution have enough to convict on any of the lesser included offenses?

That is all that is open for discussion on this thread.

If anyone posts anything OT, ignore it and report it. If anyone responds to anything OT then you are also OT and it just goes on and on and on and on.

Feel free to bump this post if you see someone go off topic. and then report the OT post but do not respond to it.


I will leave this closed for awhile to make sure this post is viewed and then open later.

Thank you everyone!

 

[marspiter]

1. Looking at this as a 3rd party not sitting in the jury room.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Murder 1? I feel the prosecution could get a conviction on what they have right now with the circumstantial evidence we have seen. Based on other guilty convictions that had less evidence.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Felony Murder? I would say most assuredly yes.

2. As a member of the jury if I were to be looking at this case with the evidence we have right now.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Murder 1? No the evidence of premed is just not strong enough in my opinion for myself to rule guilty on this charge at this point having looked at all the evidence thus far. It's close but not good enough yet. However I would like to add that how the state presents this evidence could be a factor as well. How it's presented could sway me to say yes. Presentation by both sides and the testimony of the experts is going to be key I think. It would for me at least.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Felony Murder? Yes. Once the premed requirement is removed for the felony murder the circumstantial evidence in this case thus far is enough to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[impatientredhead]

1. Looking at this as a 3rd party not sitting in the jury room.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Murder 1? I feel the prosecution could get a conviction on what they have right now with the circumstantial evidence we have seen. Based on other guilty convictions that had less evidence.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Felony Murder? I would say most assuredly yes.

2. As a member of the jury if I were to be looking at this case with the evidence we have right now.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Murder 1? No the evidence of premed is just not strong enough in my opinion for myself to rule guilty on this charge at this point having looked at all the evidence thus far. It's close but not good enough yet. However I would like to add that how the state presents this evidence could be a factor as well. How it's presented could sway me to say yes. Presentation by both sides and the testimony of the experts is going to be key I think. It would for me at least.

Does the prosecution have enough to convict on Felony Murder? Yes. Once the premed requirement is removed for the felony murder the circumstantial evidence in this case thus far is enough to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt.

Totally agree. For me personally I could come back with premeditated because I believe there was intent and that intent was not to silence, sedate, or any other scenario. I am not sure the odds are great for an entire jury coming to that consensus. But as you have said once you take that barrier away and all twelve only have to agree that she either intended to kill or she died as the result of the abusive actions of Casey Anthony I think they will have a consensus.

No offense to any of the posters here but the concept that she used duct tape postmortem for leakage makes no sense to me at all, none. I think most of your average day folks will see placing duct tape on the mouth of a two year old to be aggravated abuse. moo

 

[logicalgirl]

Totally agree. For me personally I could come back with premeditated because I believe there was intent and that intent was not to silence, sedate, or any other scenario. I am not sure the odds are great for an entire jury coming to that consensus. But as you have said once you take that barrier away and all twelve only have to agree that she either intended to kill or she died as the result of the abusive actions of Casey Anthony I think they will have a consensus.

No offense to any of the posters here but the concept that she used duct tape postmortem for leakage makes no sense to me at all, none. I think most of your average day folks will see placing duct tape on the mouth of a two year old to be aggravated abuse. moo

Wow, thank you! If I was sitting on the jury and heard just what we know now, I could certainly agree with pre-meditated. Who is so afraid of anyone that they cart their dead child around in the trunk of the car after an accident?

 

[tweety933]

I believe that the LIE that Casey told about the phone call she received from a supposedly ALIVE Caylee on JULY 15th, is gonna convict her of one or the other types of murders that would warrant a death sentence. Why would she tell them that she talked to her (phone records prove NOT), when it has been proven (by the plant experts) that Caylee was deceased by this time? Because she killed her, THAT, and MAINLY THAT....is what the jury is gonna hear, IMO. Everything else is just icing on the cake.

 

[Just Jayla]

Totally agree. For me personally I could come back with premeditated because I believe there was intent and that intent was not to silence, sedate, or any other scenario. I am not sure the odds are great for an entire jury coming to that consensus. But as you have said once you take that barrier away and all twelve only have to agree that she either intended to kill or she died as the result of the abusive actions of Casey Anthony I think they will have a consensus.

No offense to any of the posters here but the concept that she used duct tape postmortem for leakage makes no sense to me at all, none. I think most of your average day folks will see placing duct tape on the mouth of a two year old to be aggravated abuse. moo

"On the worst of worst days, remember the words spoken..."

The state will have to nearly beat it out of CA, or squeeze something out of LA, but if a fight can be confirmed on the 15th, the state could hit premeditative gold.

 

[cecybeans]

Totally agree. For me personally I could come back with premeditated because I believe there was intent and that intent was not to silence, sedate, or any other scenario. I am not sure the odds are great for an entire jury coming to that consensus. But as you have said once you take that barrier away and all twelve only have to agree that she either intended to kill or she died as the result of the abusive actions of Casey Anthony I think they will have a consensus.

No offense to any of the posters here but the concept that she used duct tape postmortem for leakage makes no sense to me at all, none. I think most of your average day folks will see placing duct tape on the mouth of a two year old to be aggravated abuse. moo

ITA. Leakage would be from every orifice at that point, and only the ones associated with breathing (ie: a living child) are covered. And if leakage actually was occurring to somehow make it necessary to try to stop, I can't see Miss KC getting her hands all gooey covering up just two of the orifices that would be in that condition.

If the SA can convince the jury the evidence says it was ante or peri-mortem then a leakage theory is moot and immaterial. I'm hoping that so the jury does not have to imagine what we already have in order to test our opinions.

 

[cecybeans]

"On the worst of worst days, remember the words spoken..."

The state will have to nearly beat it out of CA, or squeeze something out of LA, but if a fight can be confirmed on the 15th, the state could hit premeditative gold.

CA's little MySpace missive also indicates that these two spoke indirectly and rather cryptically to each other. I sure wonder sometimes what CA really thinks of KC's whole little ditty above.

I can't remember when KC posted that - was it AFTER CA's July 3rd rant?

 

[Just Jayla]

CA's little MySpace missive also indicates that these two spoke indirectly and rather cryptically to each other. I sure wonder sometimes what CA really thinks of KC's whole little ditty above.

I can't remember when KC posted that - was it AFTER CA's July 3rd rant?

Looks like Monday, July 7th is when she posted.

http://patrishka.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/casey-anthony-myspace-diary-of-days/

 

[cecybeans]

Looks like Monday, July 7th is when she posted.

http://patrishka.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/casey-anthony-myspace-diary-of-days/

Good lord! I never imagined it could be an "answer" to CA's missive, but looking at it now, it could certainly be read as one.

They both imply some kind of altercation has occurred with subsequent "consequences".

 

[cyberborg]

You guys just stop going around about this issue.
Debate is fine, beating a dead horse is tiresome and old.

The conversation has long stopped being constructive and everyone just needs to agree to disagree because this constantly engaging each other is really really old.

I am going to close this thread and I will reopen later if people would like to pick up the debate in a constructive way.

Isn't this a classic case in point? Thank you Judge JBean!!!!!!

The law, no matter how well written is open to interpretation and can be viewed differently by even the most intelligent of minds after much analysis.

Isn't the role of attorney's to argue their position and point of law and for the Judge to decide and rule on it --- assuring it will also hold scrutiny on appeal?

:innocent:

 

[AZlawyer]

Looks like Monday, July 7th is when she posted.

http://patrishka.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/casey-anthony-myspace-diary-of-days/

Casey posted Diary of Days July 7, but the creation date for the document was July 2--the day before Cindy posted hers.

 

[JBean]

Isn't this a classic case in point? Thank you Judge JBean!!!!!!

The law, no matter how well written is open to interpretation and can be viewed differently by even the most intelligent of minds after much analysis.

Isn't the role of attorney's to argue their position and point of law and for the Judge to decide and rule on it --- assuring it will also hold scrutiny on appeal?

:innocent:

I have been trying to say exactly this for months yet could not get it across as well as you just did.
Unfortunately, I am not a judge so I am not qualified to determine whose argument or interpretation is the best LOL.

Okay I'm breaking all the rules and going OT..again. argh.