Is Casey Anthony Possibly Innocent?

[katydid23]

It absolutely should not be excluded, its crime scene evidence, I am just saying its a LEAP to say Casey just have used that duct tape simply because the same duct tape was found in the Anthony home. I cant take that leap if I am a fair and impartial juror following the judges instructions and basing my verdict ONLY ON THE FACTS, it is not a fact that Casey used that duct tape that is only a guess.

To understand me you need to understand I have seen way too many innocent people, truly innocent people, spend years locked up away from their loved ones and children for crimes they did not commit because of jurors making giant leaps based on gut feelings, I hate it and I work tirelessly to put an end to it.

I can relate. Both my father and older brother were defense attorneys. I understand your position and I feel the same way. But THIS case, is not like those you are describing. Casey was not railroaded, was not misjudged, nobody jumped to false conclusions. IMO, she is a rare example of a pathological liar and an extreme sociopath, who just plain got tired of her life circumstances. And here we are.

People like you, compassionate ones, do a double take because it is so hard to believe these cold blooded actions. And I think that is how Baez got caught up in this. She did her lying number on him and he thought he as going to save a damsel in distress, and ended up with a young black widow spider instead. imoo

 

[magiemay]

I can relate. Both my father and older brother were defense attorneys. I understand your position and I feel the same way. But THIS case, is not like those you are describing. Casey was not railroaded, was not misjudged, nobody jumped to false conclusions. IMO, she is a rare example of a pathological liar and an extreme sociopath, who just plain got tired of her life circumstances. And here we are.

People like you, compassionate ones, do a double take because it is so hard to believe these cold blooded actions. And I think that is how Baez got caught up in this. She did her lying number on him and he thought he as going to save a damsel in distress, and ended up with a young black widow spider instead. imoo

Katy, I feel as though you hit the nail on the head!!!

 

[Canadian4]

Before I post my thoughts I want to find out how many rolls of duct tape were found in the home. Was it just the one and it was partially used or were there more. Thanks.

 

[bananarama]

I shared your belief of her not being guilty of PREMEDITATED murder. As of right now I still have not heard evidence to say she planned to KILL Caylee. The cholorform searches are not enough for me to say she wanted to MURDER her child. Since Caylee's neck was not broken according to Dr. G...the search is irrevelant for me as well. The duct tape is where I get stuck sometimes (no pun intended). I think we can all agree there is never a good reason to place duct tape over a toddlers mouth. Unfortunately, I have been in close contact with children in the foster care system and I have seen some extremely sad abuse cases. I waiver between the duct tape being a cruel punishment or attempt to keep Caylee quite or muffle her cries. As bad as it looks, I can't say she attempted to MURDER her (based on what I know now) but I CAN say that whatever happened to Caylee, the tape over her mouth and her mom not knowing or reporting where her kid was for over 31 days (so she says) is definately BEYOND a reasonable doubt a form of aggravated child abuse.

Now..that being said, KC lives in FLORIDA. In Florida, the state does not need to prove PREMEDIATION. They just need to prove that Caylee died (yes) in her mothers care or lack there of (yes) and that there was abuse (yes, duct tape and they may even be able to prove cholorform) THAT IS ALL THEY NEED FOR FIRST DEGREE MURDER.

A simular cases was recently tried and a mother was convicted. The appeal lost. Taken from Florida case law: Lewis vs. State March 2010(the link provided at end of post.) Snipped form case:

In Florida, a defendant may be convicted of first-degree murder if the unlawful killing of a human being is 1) perpetrated from a premeditated design to cause the death of a human being; 2) caused by a person perpetrating certain enumerated felonies or 3) caused by the distribution of certain specified controlled substances. See § 782.04(1)(a)1.-3., Fla. Stat. (2007). The second category is commonly referred to as the “felony murder statute,” which provides:(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:

2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:
h. Aggravated child abuse,

Snipped for space
* * *
is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082.

Now get this...if further states in the conclusion:

The plain, unambiguous language of the statute demonstrates that the legislature intended that a defendant who kills a child during the perpetration of the crime of aggravated child abuse may be charged and convicted of both aggravated child abuse and felony murder, regardless of the number of acts of abuse which caused the child’s death. - end of snip

So all of these testimonies about how KC loved Caylee and was MOTY means nothing. That state just has to show ONE single act of abuse. Two words "DUCT TAPE" The case law and the news story about the other case is posted below. In that case the mother was sentenced to LWOP and her appeals were denied. It took the jury 2 hours to vote guilty. I am interested to see how the SA presents the evidence.


http://video.onset.freedom.com/newsherald/l20t9f-050710lewis.pdf

Awesome post. That about spells it out for me!

 

[D96s]

Hey CiCi so glad to see you again. Its a little late for me but a lot of talk of the duct tape. The duct tape is highly circumstantial and doesnt prove anything IMO, it can link anyone in the Anthony household or anyone with access to that houshold to the death and not JUST Casey. IMO the duct tape possibly serves as a staging device, that is to say someone, whomever killed her, after tried to make it look like an abduction which also jives with her being put in a trash bag and dumped in the woods, The duct tape simply cannot be tied any more directly to Casey than it can George, Cindy or Lee. And that being the case, one could seed reasonable doubt from that alone.


Also there was talk upthread about Casey texting her friends complaining about the horrible smell in the car, its possible she did smell something and had no idea what it was, perhaps whomever killed the child put her in the trunk without Casey knowing, as a means of framing her or further redirecting LEO's attention away from them and on to someone else ie Casey. Again I dont necessarily believe all of this but it is POSSIBLE and therefore, in good conscience, I would not be able to utlize such evidence to coem back with a guilty verdict because it doesnt matter what I BELIEVE or what my perceptions of those things are, all that matters is can the state prove she killed her, put duct tape on her and put her in a trash bag and discarded her in the woods? No they cannot, not beyond a reasonable doubt, I could stand in front of that jury all day long and sow enough reasonable doubt for at least a hung jury and maybe although unlikely, an acquittal. I am just of the opinion and I respect those who disagree, that the state has a tough case to prove AND IF the jurors are truly following the law and are not influenced by the media coverage of this case since day one a unanimous guilty verdict is a long shot.

PAXIMUS - It is the totality of the evidence that will convict Casey. As I said yesterday, there are a lot of little pieces of evidence along a road map to a crime. You have step/evidence 1, step/evidence 2, step/evidence 3, etc. All of these steps have one common denominator, or one thing in common and that is Casey. The defense is going to try to take each piece of evidence and show it could have been from a different source (as you did above with the duck tape). The defense will say that step/evidence 1 could have been caused by Casey, yes, BUT it also could have been caused by Person A so therefore you have reasonable doubt. Step/evidence 2 could have been caused by Casey, yes, BUT it also could have been caused by Person C so therefore reasonable doubt. But, when you get ALL those peiced together and you look at the road map you will see that there is no way you can connect Person A with Person C with Person F with Person K with Person W, etc. to equal the crime. The only way the totality of the evidence makes sense is that Casey is the only denominator that could have "driven that path" in its entirety and that would be without a reasonable doubt.

 

[darnudes]

Hey CiCi so glad to see you again. Its a little late for me but a lot of talk of the duct tape. The duct tape is highly circumstantial and doesnt prove anything IMO, it can link anyone in the Anthony household or anyone with access to that houshold to the death and not JUST Casey. IMO the duct tape possibly serves as a staging device, that is to say someone, whomever killed her, after tried to make it look like an abduction which also jives with her being put in a trash bag and dumped in the woods, The duct tape simply cannot be tied any more directly to Casey than it can George, Cindy or Lee. And that being the case, one could seed reasonable doubt from that alone.


Also there was talk upthread about Casey texting her friends complaining about the horrible smell in the car, its possible she did smell something and had no idea what it was, perhaps whomever killed the child put her in the trunk without Casey knowing, as a means of framing her or further redirecting LEO's attention away from them and on to someone else ie Casey. Again I dont necessarily believe all of this but it is POSSIBLE and therefore, in good conscience, I would not be able to utlize such evidence to coem back with a guilty verdict because it doesnt matter what I BELIEVE or what my perceptions of those things are, all that matters is can the state prove she killed her, put duct tape on her and put her in a trash bag and discarded her in the woods? No they cannot, not beyond a reasonable doubt, I could stand in front of that jury all day long and sow enough reasonable doubt for at least a hung jury and maybe although unlikely, an acquittal. I am just of the opinion and I respect those who disagree, that the state has a tough case to prove AND IF the jurors are truly following the law and are not influenced by the media coverage of this case since day one a unanimous guilty verdict is a long shot.

Comes back to

Motive

Means

Opportunity

Only ICA has all three, and there goes your reasonable doubt.

 

[kaRN]

If you make a conscious decision as a parent not to call 911 after your child has a life threatening accident, that could be called premeditation. Lots of Nurses on the jury so far and none of them will have any problem with that concept. Pre-meditation only requires a single though a second before the crime. The chloroform and neck breaking searches are just icing IMO.

 

[Wisteria]

I think Casey is guilty, however, interesting g topic to discuss. We have a lot lot lot of discovery and evidence. It all points to Casey. The problem is we didnt have the precious baby's body early enough to learn cause of death.
To me, that is the mystery that Casey and only Casey knows. We are all so passionate about this case because it is a mystery about a beautiful baby. We are so angry at KC because she wont talk. We are so angry at the gp because they seem to want to cover up how Caylee died, in a manner not unlike KC.
But--- until we know how Caylee died, there will be doubt. That is why people sleuthed out *advertiser censored* links, trafficking, sec trade, escorting.... Thinkingmaube there was some twisted thing that caused an event ripe for the murder of a young child. That KC had an accomplice...
The doubt about the moment of death. The cause. This is the one thing we all want to know.
IMO this is the only card KC holds. And she is never going to play it because it just might be her ace in the hole.

 

[gamom]

Hey CiCi so glad to see you again. Its a little late for me but a lot of talk of the duct tape. The duct tape is highly circumstantial and doesnt prove anything IMO, it can link anyone in the Anthony household or anyone with access to that houshold to the death and not JUST Casey. IMO the duct tape possibly serves as a staging device, that is to say someone, whomever killed her, after tried to make it look like an abduction which also jives with her being put in a trash bag and dumped in the woods, The duct tape simply cannot be tied any more directly to Casey than it can George, Cindy or Lee. And that being the case, one could seed reasonable doubt from that alone.


Also there was talk upthread about Casey texting her friends complaining about the horrible smell in the car, its possible she did smell something and had no idea what it was, perhaps whomever killed the child put her in the trunk without Casey knowing, as a means of framing her or further redirecting LEO's attention away from them and on to someone else ie Casey. Again I dont necessarily believe all of this but it is POSSIBLE and therefore, in good conscience, I would not be able to utlize such evidence to coem back with a guilty verdict because it doesnt matter what I BELIEVE or what my perceptions of those things are, all that matters is can the state prove she killed her, put duct tape on her and put her in a trash bag and discarded her in the woods? No they cannot, not beyond a reasonable doubt, I could stand in front of that jury all day long and sow enough reasonable doubt for at least a hung jury and maybe although unlikely, an acquittal. I am just of the opinion and I respect those who disagree, that the state has a tough case to prove AND IF the jurors are truly following the law and are not influenced by the media coverage of this case since day one a unanimous guilty verdict is a long shot.

Respectfully, I disagree. Lets not forget what the HHJP tells every juror:

"A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt."

Don't you think we are getting into that imaginary doubt range? 2 year old's don't just get misplaced for over a month without SOMEONE noticing. You would think if your kid was misplaced, the grandmother would not have to track you down in between beer runs to force you to call 9-1-1. I am just sayin... The A's might have all had access to the duct tape, but Caylee was not last seen in their care. In fact, if I remember correctly, they were helping LE find Caylee and the imaginary Nanny who took her. But wait, where was her mother a.k.a MOTY???:waitasec:

Oh I remember..."OMG, calling you guys a waste, a huge waste, can someone please just get me Tony's number??" Thank goodness from what I have heard right now, the jury will be made up of REASONABLE people.

While I do agree, the state may have a hard time helping the jurors understand why and how KC was involved in the death of her child, they will have no problem proving that she was involved and that is all they need to prove in this case.

How many murders are on death row and the SA is STILL trying to figure out the why? or in somecases where the body is? TONS!! Heck, I still want to know what happend to Laci Peterson. She was a adult and there was NOTHING tying SP to the crime. But hey, thankfully, our couriosity and desire to want to know all the facts does not stops a reasonable jury for finding them GUILTY. :twocents:

 

[JenniferTx]

I believe it was premeditated without any doubt. The internet searches show me that she was looking for "a way" to carry out the crime. The smell in her car trunk, the duct tape and the heart sticker. I say guilty and yes it was premeditated.

 

[goldleaf]

If anyone has their baby taken from them, they call the police, notify family, etc.

This always irks me because the premise is so simple. One day she had her baby, the next day she did not. She has never been able to give the reason why.

Her actions show her to be self-absorbed and selfish, not the type of person who would willingly suffer for someone else's misdeeds (Like CA and GA).

If she could have pinned it on anyone she would have - no one who loves to have sex, drink and party, steal from family and friends, watch soaps all day and text nonsense would stay in jail for three years if they could avoid it.

 

[LucyLu]

How will it be proven ICA made the internet searches?

 

[Wisteria]

If anyone has their baby taken from them, they call the police, notify family, etc.

This always irks me because the premise is so simple. One day she had her baby, the next day she did not. She has never been able to give the reason why.

Her actions show her to be self-absorbed and selfish, not the type of person who would willingly suffer for someone else's misdeeds (Like CA and GA).

If she could have pinned it on anyone she would have - no one who loves to have sex, drink and party, steal from family and friends, watch soaps all day and text nonsense would stay in jail for three years if they could avoid it.

I agree completely that if she could have said anyone REAL was at fault, she would have. Her smartest most frustrating move was lawyering up ANC then never saying a word about anything that really mattered: location of the body (that sounds AWFUL) and any clues about what event could have caused her to put Caylee in the trunk dead.
We know she did it. We think we know why. But those moments we don't know hold the scariest pieces for the jury to discuss.
I wish KC would take the stand and give a detailed account of what happened. Truth. Plain and simPle. That is what makes me angry. Even my 9 year Old daughter knows the mom was at fault and she says, "why won't she just admit it and save her own life?". Smart little one huh?
The strategy of the DT is yet to be seen. They can say anything in the media, then have no obligation to back it up because the jury supposedly cannot watch or listen to it now. JB has mo obligation to answer questions I have. He only needs to convince this jury the state didn't prove their case.
I will be very surprised if we learn more from KC about cause of death and the moments surrounding the death. This is how she will maintain the only control she has.
If only RK had been able to get the cops there sooner.


I agree c

 

[tfrohning]

In 2008 I thought she sold Caylee....and I thought that for a long time. And still feel Duckett sold Trenton. Maybe I just can't wrap around my head how any mother could killed their child. I always has hope until a body is found.

There just to much evidents and her actions in the months following that change my mind.
I think many us here at WS sleuth every possible scenarios to find Casey innocent of murder. Hours after hours we sleuth-ed the Lexus dealer. Many us went searching for Zanny in every state. Hours searching boyfriends and friends. When the letters to Casey was release I even try to find out about the weird guys that wrote her.

I still feel that there 1% that she could be somewhat innocent. Once I hear what JB said about the 31 days...I see how feel after the openings. I sure this will be rollarcoaster ride for me.

I want Justice for Caylee ♥

 

[gamom]

Incorrect, most threads on WS and this case in particular are TOPIC SPECIFIC and since most threads are about her being guilty and everyone calling for her head I thought it would be nice to have a thread for those of US who may not agree with that and may think she is innocent and maybe someone else killed the child.

Just throwing ideas around as to the possibility of her being innocent and I wanted a thread where like minded people ie those who think she may be innocent could be heard since its impossible for such a person to be heard in all the other threads where the majority of posters have made up their mind and cant wait for her to be sent to the gallows.

Personally, I am glad you posted. I think it is fair to bounce around all options. I often play devil's advocate myself. I find that I know so much about this case, that I get jaded. Not only do I find it healthy to debate this topics and hear other views, but post like yours help me remember all of the facts that the SA does have and I feel even more secure that she will be found guilty. I am even wiling to bet the jury is out and back before lunch recess is over with a verdict. moo

Lets face it, is it a slam dunk case? Nope. I rarely see ones that are. But people have been convicted on a lot less. If the state keeps it simple and not overwhelm the jurors with evidence, experts and details. They will get a conviction. Murders of unreported missing children, never go unsolved.

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

Not a problem but it possible for a logical and reasoned mind to come to the conclusion that there is no concrete evidence that points to Caylee being a murderer, what I see is alot of circumstantial evidence and alot of people willing to take a giant leap based on that circumstantial evidence and write her off as guilty for murder.


I just dont see any evidence that proves to me beyond a reasobale doubt that she killed the child, I see a lot of evidence indicting Casey is dumb, stupid, immature and a bad seed whose judgement isnt very sound, but if that made a person a murderer well I could list thousands of people who fit that bill.


My gut feeling tells me she probably had something to do with the childs death but that means nothing in a court of law, the evidence doesnt tell me that and the state likely cant prove it.

I sincerely appreciate the sentiment of this thread. It has great potential to discover and discuss any gaps or missing links the prosecution may encounter. I've struggled with this very subject: whether ICA is indeed guilty of first degree murder.

That being said: one thing we have not yet heard HHJP state was that the jurors must use their common sense when listening to all of the evidence. He will state just that before opening statements begin. I believe if all jurors are able to balance evidence with their common sense, there is no way she will be found innocent. Now, guilty of first degree murder? Not being in the jurors minds I can't say... but no way will she be found innocent.

Upon thinking about this subject a little more I think what will do her in the most is the duct tape. Not reporting Caylee missing could maybe be explained by fear. I don't buy it myself but there are people out there who would. There is never ever reason to cover a childs head with duct tape. If ICA was attempting to make it look like a kidnapping, she really really did herself a disservice. The duct tape is what convinces me she should she found guilty of First degree murder. Doesn't matter to me when it was put on, it shouldn't have been there at all.

 

[agathie]

This is my first time posting, but I have followed the case over the years. I do not think Casey is "innocent" but I'm not entirely sure if Caylee's death was premeditated. I guess in my own little world, I think the vast majority of mothers who kill their children have some serious problems. Psychological issues or abuse, for two examples. And I would NEVER say that ANY of these reasons somehow justifies the killing. BUT, to me at least, on some level it is still different than a random slaying or murder out of pure, unadulterated hate.

On the other hand, it infuriates me to see every mother charged with the crime of killing their children hiding behind the abuse/psychological defense.

I think Casey killed Caylee either in a fit of rage or by neglect. I don't think Casey was a great parent. But I don't necessarily think she is a monster, a would-be serial killer either. I think the lack of planning or forethought is shown in the way she acted AFTER the crime. She had to know that this was going to be her last big hurrah before the inevitable questions came. She certainly did not spend her time coming up with a better story to explain away Caylee's disappearance. She was living in complete and utter denial, along with occasional pangs of "WTF am I going to do?" I am sure it was much easier to push those thoughts away rather than start to deal with reality.

Sorry this is so long... to be clear, if I was on the jury, knowing what I know now, I would probably convict Casey on some type of murder charge. I really don't think we will ever know what really happened to Caylee. The only one who could tell us is Casey and I think she has shown herself to be incapable of telling the truth.

 

[tfrohning]

How will it be proven ICA made the internet searches?

I not sure but I think there could be a timestamp on the searches. I think everyone who was at the home or has albi that they were elsewhere would be a start:waitasec: I just guessing:waitasec:

 

[2goldfish]

Thats a very good point, not guilty does not mean innocent it only means the state didnt prove guilt. Im with you.

you're thinking of this maybe

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven[/ame]


"not guilty...but dont do it again" they use it in scotland



**disclaimer** I think she is guilty of first degree, and I think she will be convicted of it as well

 

[Mystery Mouse]

Thanks for starting this thread Paximus.

I have followed this case from day 31. I have read the evidence, read the depos, read the statements by all parties that were made to law enforcement. While the evidence as a whole does seem to point to Casey’s guilt, there has always been one point that has niggled in the back of my mind that has made me question it:

George’s statement as to when he had last seen Caylee.

He remembered what he was watching on TV. Remembered exactly what she was wearing. Later embellished his statement to include that he had given her breakfast that morning. I can’t remember what I was wearing last week, let alone a month ago. I can’t remember if I ate breakfast two days ago, and certainly cannot remember if I did on a specific day 31 days ago. Can I reasonably believe that GA remembered these points a month later? No. Therefore I suspect that he may be lying.

But why lie about this? What benefit is there to lying about that specific day? What piece might it add to the puzzle? It does nothing to make Casey look innocent, but in fact reinforces the fact that Calylee left with Casey and that Casey was the last person to have seen Caylee.

Is that it? Are George’s lie and embellishments meant to show that Caylee left with Casey and shift the focus from him to his daughter? I can’t answer that, but as I said, it has niggled in my mind for several years.

The 31 days of happy partying? The baby was safe with her grandfather.
The smell in the trunk? The grandfather had a key.
The duct tape? It belonged to the grandfather.
The lies to LE? She hadn’t had a chance to talk to her dad to find out what the heck was going on so she made something up until she could talk to him alone.
Sitting in jail all of this time? She knows the evidence points to her and she still doesn't know what really happened. Is putting her trust in the justice system to find her innocent.

I really feel that I need to hear the evidence as presented by the state and the rebuttal of that evidence from the defense before deciding guilt or innocence. If the bus is headed towards George, my mind can only think…maybe it should be.

I don't know if my doubt is "reasonable doubt", but these are my thoughts ... for what they're worth.