If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why

[stilettos]

I won't disagree but others had mentioned that you need to answer what exactly did she do to cause child neglect. Obviously the law isn't clear that simply not reporting your child missing = child neglect (thus the petitions for Caylee's Law) so what did she do that caused child neglect then? They already found her not guilty of actually murdering her child.

Well I guess leaving your baby's corpse out to rot and be mangled by animals would be considered failure to provide adequate shelter if the jury actually needed to go that far. Pffft.

 

[cityslick]

Well I guess leaving your baby's corpse out to rot and be mangled by animals would be considered failure to provide adequate shelter if the jury actually needed to go that far. Pffft.

That's my point, they already found her NG of all that (murder, throw in the trunk, dumping, etc) so at that point what exactly would the child neglect come from?

Trust me, I was shocked when they found her NG of child neglect until I found out the law doesn't address not reporting your child missing/dead.

 

[GhostCrab]

To tell the truth, I am really flabberghasted by those who think the verdict was correct.

Testimony IS evidence...and GA stated that he saw KC leave the house with Caylee, who was never again seen alive. Now, had KC taken the stand and stated that GA was the last person seen with Caylee, there would be conflicting evidence. That did not happen. GA's testimony stands, unchallenged by other testimony or evidence.

Opening statements are NOT evidence. The defense put forth a scenerio that was based upon WHAT??? Who provided evidence to back any of their wild claims and theories? NO ONE, because the only other person who could have done so, exercised her 5th Amendment right.

To me, it's simple. KC was the last person to have physical custody of a living Caylee. KC disappeared for 31 days while telling various and sundry people, including her mother, that Caylee was either still in her custody or with her sitter.

KC tells lies to mislead her family, friends and police who are trying to locate Caylee. KC goes to JAIL because she refuses to tell the truth about Caylee.

Caylee is found dead 6 months after she was last seen with KC and no other person. No other person has ever come forward to claim that Caylee was seen with anyone other than KC.

And remember please...GA's testimony has never been impeached. So JB floated a fabrication that was never, ever verified by ANYONE...and the jury, oblivious to the judge's admonitions and cautions that opening statements are not evidence, fails to connect any dots whatsover in logically reasoning out WHO done it. HOW she done it is actually immaterial. No one makes an accident look like murder, people....all dysfunctions and compartmentalizations considered.

<modsnip>

<modsnip> that if you agree with the verdict then you must not understand reasonable doubt, circumstantial evidence and the like. I am an attorney myself. I fully understand the standard of reasonable doubt, the weight of CE and of an OS. And I submit that in light of this unanimous verdict by her peers, that it is <modsnip>, those who disagree with the verdict that do not understand these concepts and standards.

As for GA testimony, I do not recall that it was ever impeached by the defense. But that is never the end of the story. A jury is never required to believe the testimony of any witness, whether it is impeached or not. And apparently this jury did not like GA, so they chose to give little or no weight to his testimony that Casey was the last to see Caylee. Not to say that he was lying about this, just that the jurors did not find him trustworthy in general. A criminal case is far more complicated <modsnip>.

 

[SailorMoon]

I think she was guilty - for pete's sakes - how did all that decomp fluid get in her car? I mean I have to routinely clean that out of mine -- NOT. I don't think GA and CA helped any though--- they should have called police at the first smell of the car. I don't understand how the jury didn't request anything - no read backs, not to look anything, not a freaking thing. Are they that brilliant?? NOPE. They failed. The jury failed to do their job. And a murderer is walking around free. Thanks Pinellas County 12. You rock the hut.

 

[gngr~snap]

This may have been posted. If so my apologies.

If not here is a little comic relief
Perry's Law - Episode 3 - Eccentric Witness

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jp1TRTudRU&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL"]&#x202a;Perry's Law - Episode 3 - Eccentric Witnesses&#x202c;&rlm; - YouTube[/ame]

 

[cityslick]

I think she was guilty - for pete's sakes - how did all that decomp fluid get in her car? I mean I have to routinely clean that out of mine -- NOT. I don't think GA and CA helped any though--- they should have called police at the first smell of the car. I don't understand how the jury didn't request anything - no read backs, not to look anything, not a freaking thing. Are they that brilliant?? NOPE. They failed. The jury failed to do their job. And a murderer is walking around free. Thanks Pinellas County 12. You rock the hut.

Wasn't all the evidence outside of videos already in the jury room?

 

[suzihawk]

I want to start by saying that this thread is for those that agree with the verdict.

<snipped>

With respect, the title of the thread is, "If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why".

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

For me, all the evidence found in area A, all the evidence found in the trunk, and the computer forensics was a battle of the forensic experts. I feel both sides performed equally well, or close enough to equally, that reasonable doubt had to be applied.

Like most people, the 31 days of unacceptable behavior looks to be very, very, very bad for KC. If I had not witnessed first hand, bizarre bahavior from several of my relatives following untimely, and very sad deaths in our family, I would have had a very difficult time considering KC's behavior for 31 days could be explained by grief. The grief expert, although having a rather unique way of presenting testimony, made enough valid points that one could come around to believing it is possible that KC's behavior may have been caused by grief. Again for me, this possible explanation added to the equally possible explanations for the forensics by the defense experts, leaves me with reasonable doubt.
So I have to agree with the verdict.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

 

[JBean]

Even if I had not changed the title, both points of view would be allowed in here.This is not a support the verdict thread, it should be a lively but TOS abidin' discussion about those that agree and/or disagree with the verdict.

post lands at random

 

[Chablis]

Aired out samples of a cleaned car and one search for chloroform in March is not enough to kill someone and prove murder. Not when a tried and true FBI guy is saying the levels were normal in a trunk consistent with cleaning products. There was not 31 days of partying shown, just one night, and thats not strong enough to use as motive.

 

[Silver~Bell]

For me, all the evidence found in area A, all the evidence found in the trunk, and the computer forensics was a battle of the forensic experts. I feel both sides performed equally well, or close enough to equally, that reasonable doubt had to be applied.

Like most people, the 31 days of unacceptable behavior looks to be very, very, very bad for KC. If I had not witnessed first hand, bizarre bahavior from several of my relatives following untimely, and very sad deaths in our family, I would have had a very difficult time considering KC's behavior for 31 days could be explained by grief. The grief expert, although having a rather unique way of presenting testimony, made enough valid points that one could come around to believing it is possible that KC's behavior may have been caused by grief. Again for me, this possible explanation added to the equally possible explanations for the forensics by the defense experts, leaves me with reasonable doubt.
So I have to agree with the verdict.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

-------------------------------

I appreciate your thoughts, but what stopped me with the "grief angle" of "ugly coping" was that Casey had not CHANGED her behavior with the death of Caylee - she was just continuing ON with behaviors already in place for a LONG TIME!

However, the State did a poor job, IMHO, bad enough to make me unable to do anything other than to sit on the fence now. The 84-times vs 1 time searches, etc., the SINGLE hair with a new technology...I just don't know and I really wish the case had been presented differently. But that's just wishing, not reality. What happened, happened, and she was found NG. I hope she doesn't have more kids.

 

[beccalecca1]

Well I guess leaving your baby's corpse out to rot and be mangled by animals would be considered failure to provide adequate shelter if the jury actually needed to go that far. Pffft.

There wasn't any evidence linking her to doing that though. So, that would be why they couldn't convict on the child abuse charges.

 

[Sustained]

As for GA testimony, I do not recall that it was ever impeached by the defense. But that is never the end of the story. A jury is never required to believe the testimony of any witness, whether it is impeached or not. And apparently this jury did not like GA, so they chose to give little or no weight to his testimony that Casey was the last to see Caylee. Not to say that he was lying about this, just that the jurors did not find him trustworthy in general. A criminal case is far more complicated then many of you are making it out to be.

Where is the evidence that GA was lying ? So with no evidence of lying, the jurors found him not trustworthy and didn't like him and didn't consider his testimony relevant ? I guess they didn't "like" Dr. G, Inspector Bloise, Simon Birch or Yuri Melich either. Maybe they "liked" CA and disregarded her obvious perjury on the stand. If this jury disregarded any witness testimony b/c they didn't "like" them even though their testimony was not impeached, then this jury deserves all of the disrespect they are getting.

 

[dvdman]

Well I thought she was guilty 3 years ago so I believe the jury got it wrong. I just think some people are just looking too deep into what's pretty simple in my opinion. Her defense team admitted she was there when Caylee died in their opening statement but they never proved that George was there too. I think that speaks volumes. Then you add to that the 31 days, lies, videos,smell,duct tape,blanket,chloroform,motive,etc. and doesn't take an Einstein to figure out who did it. As the Prosecution stated who had more to gain?

 

[Leah0107]

I agreed with the verdict simply because I do not believe that the state proved their case BARD. But let me say this: I watched this trial with a presumption that she was innocent, one that I would maintain up and until the state proved otherwise and I do not believe that they ever did.

I never formed an opinion in this case in the three years leading to the trial. I think that makes a huge difference because in reading posts on this forum it seemed as if most, if not all, had concluded that she was guilty before the trial even started.

And I saw every piece of evidence and watched all of the testimony, so there is no point in accusing me of doing otherwise. And like the state said in their press conference following the verdict, they put ALL the evidence out there, so it is really unfair to claim that the jurors (and by virtue, me) did not see all the evidence against her.

I also approached the case with a presumption of innocence, never formed an opinion leading up to the trial and I also watched all testimony and evidence and I believe she is guilty and would have voted so. I tried to continue to believe in her innocence, tried to believe some other theory or person could be responsible for Caylee's death. Couldn't do it. Even now after hearing other opinions I just can't come up with any explanation (in my mind) to explain anyone other than her responsible for Caylee's murder.

 

[Chablis]

Well I thought she was guilty 3 years ago so I believe the jury got it wrong. I just think some people are just looking too deep into what's pretty simple in my opinion. Her defense team admitted she was there when Caylee died in their opening statement but they never proved that George was there too. I think that speaks volumes. Then you add to that the 31 days, lies, videos,smell,duct tape,blanket,chloroform,motive,etc. and doesn't take an Einstein to figure out who did it. As the Prosecution stated who had more to gain?

What stopped the prosecution from using the pings and call records on the last known day Caylee was alive when she made these frantic calls to her Dad first then Cindy 6 times, and no one answered, and she left never to come back and rest her head just down the road from where her daughter was, like NG falsely reports.

 

[beccalecca1]

-------------------------------

I appreciate your thoughts, but what stopped me with the "grief angle" of "ugly coping" was that Casey had not CHANGED her behavior with the death of Caylee - she was just continuing ON with behaviors already in place for a LONG TIME!

However, the State did a poor job, IMHO, bad enough to make me unable to do anything other than to sit on the fence now. The 84-times vs 1 time searches, etc., the SINGLE hair with a new technology...I just don't know and I really wish the case had been presented differently. But that's just wishing, not reality. What happened, happened, and she was found NG. I hope she doesn't have more kids.

BBM

Respectfully disagree. I'm pretty sure I came across statements that Casey wasn't much of a party girl prior to this. Casey didn't drink that often, etc. I believe her behavior did change in that aspect afterwards.

 

[Sustained]

What stopped the prosecution from using the pings and call records on the last known day Caylee was alive when she made these frantic calls to her Dad first then Cindy 6 times, and no one answered, and she left never to come back and rest her head just down the road from where her daughter was, like NG falsely reports.

How do you know these calls were frantic and not to ascertain whether anyone was home at the Anthony residence ? FCA looked pretty cheerful at Blockbuster in the early evening of the 6/16, arm in arm with TL ...

 

[Chablis]

How do you know these calls were frantic and not to ascertain whether anyone was home at the Anthony residence ? FCA looked pretty cheerful at Blockbuster in the early evening of the 6/16, arm in arm with TL ...

I think the hours before someone is dead is pretty much the key to figuring the truth out. She was up all night on the phone. She had to get ready for work and wait for George to leave, so she could go back home, then there is an hour of inactivity, which was RARE for her, then calls to the parents and then gone. So logic said something happened to Caylee during the hour of inactivity and when she tried to get help and couldn't she just handled it badly. But what I think does not matter. Something happened to her that day and the State could have proven George was elsewhere, but they didn't and I find that shoddy.

jmo

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

What stopped the prosecution from using the pings and call records on the last known day Caylee was alive when she made these frantic calls to her Dad first then Cindy 6 times, and no one answered, and she left never to come back and rest her head just down the road from where her daughter was, like NG falsely reports.

I would like to know this too. I was very surprised the SA never brought up her cell pings/cell activity/computer activity for June 16th. JB said in his OS that Caylee died on June 16th and that FCA was there. IIRC correctly though she was constantly on the phone or texting or on the computer...so what? she was texting while she was searching under the beds and in the closets for Caylee? And there are 2 hours of NO activity...when George was already at work though. I wonder why that wasn't shown?