Premeditation

[Wudge]

Whoever applied that tape to obstruct her nose and mouth most assuredly 'wanted her gone'.
She was in Casey's hands when that was done.

What other purpose would duct tape covering nose and mouth have? Do you have some suggestion that it might have a benign presence?

I previously offered up pool water leakage and still do.

 

[Bittiness39]

I said: "The point is that based on all the evidence in the public domain, people in this forum have hundreds, if not thousands, of different holdings on what transpired. Obviously, this immemse breadth of view and holding points to an immense lack of clarity -- a smog pot centric case. This is true not only as regards premeditation and the murder one charge, but lesser charges as well.

This lack of clarity exists, because the evidence itself does not provide a high degree of clarity. And when the evidence does not provide a high degree of clarity, then people must necessarily guess amongst a large number of options."

I didnt say that you or others lack clarity in presenting hypos or alleged storylines. People here are certainly clear enough. But their hypos or storylines are anything but consistent as regards what transpired. And when the evidence is not clear, you will find an immense breadth of output as regards how people read the evidence and interpret what must have transpired. That lack of unity establishes that the evidence is ambiguous and open wide to interpretation. In other words, the evidence itself is not clear and does not produce for storyline consistency (not even close) on what transpired. In a non high-profile case, that would significantly favor the defense.

Which is why I am happy we have this forum...and are not held to the scrutiny that a jury would be.

 

[Brini]

I said: "The point is that based on all the evidence in the public domain, people in this forum have hundreds, if not thousands, of different holdings on what transpired. Obviously, this immemse breadth of view and holding points to an immense lack of clarity -- a smog pot centric case. This is true not only as regards premeditation and the murder one charge, but lesser charges as well.

This lack of clarity exists, because the evidence itself does not provide a high degree of clarity. And when the evidence does not provide a high degree of clarity, then people must necessarily guess amongst a large number of options."

I didnt say that you or others lack clarity in presenting hypos or alleged storylines. People here are certainly clear enough. But their hypos or storylines are anything but consistent as regards what transpired. And when the evidence is not clear, you will find an immense breadth of output as regards how people read the evidence and interpret what must have transpired. That lack of unity establishes that the evidence is ambiguous and open wide to interpretation. In other words, the evidence itself is not clear and does not produce for storyline consistency (not even close) on what transpired. In a non high-profile case, that would significantly favor the defense.

The evidence is not clear in your opinion.

It is crystal clear in the opinions of others.

And, as more and more is released, the many and varied interpretations dwindle down as timelines and activities clarify. AEB: the time window for the actual killing has narrowed to a few hours on 6/16, if this new witness is to be believed.

But, of course, the ULTIMATE experience of clarification will be offered in the courtroom. Which is as it should be.

 

[Brini]

I previously offered up pool water leakage and still do.

And, that's fine!

If everyone held the same opinion, we wouldn't have a forum.

 

[Imbackon]

Admitting that you would convict and execute Casey on a basis that was lacking in evidence represents pure honesty. I certainly can't admire that you would do such a thing, but I do admire your honesty.

Your post supports my holding on the need for professional jurors in capital or high-profile cases, and it further helps to explain the large number of wrongful convictions and/or wrongful demonizations in cases such as this one.

WE went over this months ago, back when you were tallking in terms of mathematical proofs of 99% I notice you are not bringing that up anymore.

This from NY jury instructions @ http://www.courts.state.ny.us/cji/1-General/CJI2d.Evidence-Circumstantial.pdf

Because circumstantial evidence requires the drawing of
inferences, I will explain the process involved in analyzing that
evidence and what you must do before you may return a verdict
of guilty based solely on circumstantial evidence.
Initially, you must decide, on the basis of all of the evidence,
what facts, if any, have been proven. Any facts upon which an
inference of guilt can be drawn must be proven beyond a
reasonable doubt.5 (5. See People v Cleague, supra, 22 N.Y.2d, at 365-366.)
After you have determined what facts, if any, have been
proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must decide what
inferences, if any, can be drawn from those facts.
Before you may draw an inference of guilt, however, that
inference must be the only one that can fairly and reasonably be
drawn from the facts, it must be consistent with the proven facts,
and it must flow naturally, reasonably, and logically from them.6
Again, it must appear that the inference of guilt is the only
one that can fairly and reasonably be drawn from the facts, and
that the evidence excludes beyond a reasonable doubt every
reasonable hypothesis of innocence.7(7. See People v Sanchez, 61 N.Y.2d 1022, 1024 (1984).)
If there is a reasonable hypothesis from the proven facts
consistent with the defendant's innocence, then you must find the
defendant not guilty.8 (8. See People v Morris, 36 N.Y.2d 877 (1975).)
If the only reasonable inference you find is that the
defendant is guilty of a charged crime, and that inference is
established beyond reasonable doubt, then you must find the
defendant guilty of that crime.9 (9. See People v Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196 (1979).)

Back to me.
There is an ungodly amount of circumstantial evidence for which to find Casey guilty of murder. The only question will be premeditated murder imo.


It has been discussed ad nauseum regarding the known FACTS in this case, so I will not go over all those either.

Despite your implied statements that the current known circumstantial evidence is not evidence that can convict casey the above clearly states the sort of evidence that is being discussed here is certainly good enough to find her guilty of minimum 2nd degree murder, and I'm personally willing to state premeditated murder based on the duct tape evidence.

Short of a huge bombshell from the defense, I stand firm.
"If there is a reasonable hypothesis from the proven facts
consistent with the defendant's innocence, then you must find the
defendant not guilty."

WHERE IS YOUR REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS???

1. Explain why Casey is saying "she loves zanny" to iassen weeks after she went missing.
2. Explain how a dead body, with evidence of it being Caylee's body wound up in her trunk.
3. Show your proof that Zanny the nanny exists?
4. Explain why Casey did NOTHING TO HELP LE FIND CAYLEE
5. Explain why Casey never reported her daughter missing
6. EXplain who else had motive to kill Caylee
7. Explain how ANYONE had possession of Caylee, without her knowledge (doesn't even have to be answered since she said Zanny had her last).

As you know there is much more, but I am tired now.

 

[Brini]

Yes, I know, but I was hoping for a biggie!

Evidence junkie! ;-)

 

[ZsaZsa]

I previously offered up pool water leakage and still do.

Well as Brini keeps stating, applying duct tape after death is a not a reasonable explanation.
She had a dead child in her trunk so what would a bit of chlorinated water matter?
A towel or blanket would absorb it easily enough.... but how fortunate it was that she had some duct tape handy.
The only purpose for that tape,applied in that fashion was to cause death.

 

[Wudge]

So we can't show our outrage at the senseless, heinous killing of a child? We're demonizing an innocent person? I may not know the how, what, or why...but I most certainly know the who! I feel absolutely nothing for Casey...she doesn't deserve my energy...Caylee does. Three pieces of tape is enough premed for me.

You read the tape as heinous evidence of premeditation. I read the tape as evidence that works against premeditation, because Caylee hands were not bound, heart stickers certainly do not suggest sinister intentions in my book and, most importantly, the tape is neither said nor claimed to be the instrument of death.

Regarding demonization, Casey has certainly suffered that fate. My high-profile case lessons strongly suggest there's an excellent chance it's unwarranted. However, our culture seems to have adopted demonization as an enjoyable form of sport. Holding to the presumption of innocence has definitely lost its cache in recent decades. Go figure.

 

[Bittiness39]

Regarding demonization, Casey has certainly suffered that fate. My high-profile case lessons strongly suggest there's an excellent chance it's unwarranted. However, our culture seems to have adopted demonization as an enjoyable form of sport. Holding to the presumption of innocence has definitely lost its cache in recent decades. Go figure.

Snipped respectfully. I disagree with you on the demonization. Her own grandmother thinks she belongs in general population. Her uncle believes her guilty. Not one of her friends will agree to be a character witness. This would include people she has known since she was 5. I like and respect your opinions...but I would love to see you attack the defense with the same zeal you do the prosecution. Quid pro quo...ya know? :blushing:

 

[JBean]

Premeditation..does the tape confirm it?
That is the question and the topic.

 

[Brini]

You read the tape as heinous evidence of premeditation. I read the tape as evidence that works against premeditation, because Caylee hands were not bound, heart stickers certainly do not suggest sinister intentions in my book and, most importantly, the tape is neither said nor claimed to be the instrument of death.

Regarding demonization, Casey has certainly suffered that fate. My high-profile case lessons strongly suggest there's an excellent chance it's unwarranted. However, our culture seems to have adopted demonization as an enjoyable form of sport. Holding to the presumption of innocence has definitely lost its cache in recent decades. Go figure.

Are you stating as fact that Caylee's hands were not bound? You've stated that several times.

Or, that KC would not have been able to control Caylee, had her hands been unbound?

Baby killers pretty much demonize themselves. Especially if the killer is the mother.

But what do YOU mean by "demonized," by whom, and how?

What do you mean by your statement that it's "unwarranted?" What is it that's unwarranted?

KC still has presumption of innocence-- in the courtroom. However, there is no legal requirement that the public overlook the 10,000+ pages of evidence that have been released-- and it's pretty damning.

Do you think JB worked against his client by insisting on no gag order? Is that action at fault for the "demonization?"

Thanks!

 

[Wudge]

WE went over this months ago, back when you were tallking in terms of mathematical proofs of 99% I notice you are not bringing that up anymore.

SNIP

and that inference is established beyond reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant guilty of that crime.

SNIP

[/COLOR]
[/I][/B]
Back to me.
There is an ungodly amount of circumstantial evidence for which to find Casey guilty of murder. The only question will be premeditated murder imo.

It has been discussed ad nauseum regarding the known FACTS in this case, so I will not go over all those either.

Despite your implied statements that the current known circumstantial evidence is not evidence that can convict casey the above clearly states the sort of evidence that is being discussed here is certainly good enough to find her guilty of minimum 2nd degree murder,

SNIP

It's not the strict topic per se, but I do hold the certainty level for proof beyond a reasonable doubt to be in excess of 99%.

As for your saying "the only question will be premediated murder" or not, I'm fine with that, because without such proof murder one is off the table and murder two has never been on the table. Thus, no proof of premediation = no murder conviction.

 

[JBean]

snipped
. The only question will be premeditated murder imo.
snipped
.

Zackly. Thanks for coming back to topic.
So do we see enough evidence for premeditated murder? some say yes and some say no. That is what she is charged with, can they prove the premeditation?

 

[Bittiness39]

Zackly. Thanks for coming back to topic.
So do we see enough evidence for premeditated murder? some say yes and some say no. That is what she is charged with, can they prove the premeditation?

ITA. I haven't seen anything that definitively says premeditation...YET. and I stress the word YET...miss Jelly Bean. Also you are an awesome mod.

 

[Jolynna]

I previously offered up pool water leakage and still do.

If KC says Caylee fell in the pool and there aren't traces of pool chemicals in her car or in the clothes found with Caylee at Suburban, that won't bode well for KC.

 

[Brini]

Zackly. Thanks for coming back to topic.
So do we see enough evidence for premeditated murder? some say yes and some say no. That is what she is charged with, can they prove the premeditation?

Not sure. Haven't seen all the evidence, yet.

But, I'm thinking they can prove it. 1) Because of what we HAVE seen, plus, 2) Because the state felt confident of filing charges BEFORE the remains were found, and 3) Because the FBI doesn't like to stick around, if the case isn't close to a slam-dunk.

 

[wonders]

What is not debatable is the fact that she died, of homicide (per the coroner), while in her mother's sole care and control.

What is also not debatable is that her airways were closed with duct tape. That may have been applied pre-or post-mortem. Per the Florida Supreme Court, there is only one conclusion to be drawn from that.

That may or may not be the case. If there is some understandable reason for taping the child's face that way, KC will have to take the stand. That is unavoidable.

My opinion: she won't be able to explain it away, and she will do badly on cross-X.

Everything is not the state's fault, here, honey. Based on the defendant's behavior, and the evidence that has so far been released (due to the defense's opposition to the state's request for a gag order) there is reason for KC's negative image with the public. Thanks!

Brini
Thank you. I am so uneducated and wish I knew how to get my point across like you and so many others here on WS. I give up but will be reading what all of you great people have to say.

 

[JBean]

Has Dr. G released an opinion on the cause of death? In the Huck case the ME testified to either downing or asphyxiation by tape as being the reasonable assumption for cause of death.
I understand that Dr. G has not put a cause of death in her findings using medical certainty, but I am asking if she rendered an opinion that we know of?

 

[Bittiness39]

If KC says Caylee fell in the pool and there aren't traces of pool chemicals in her car or in the clothes found with Caylee at Suburban, KC will be in more trouble than ever.

If she comes up with an oopsy...she better hope no evidence contradicts what she says.

Doubt it. It is not in her nature to cop to anything. Accidental or not. And since we are lucky to have this forum to debate in...my guess, best guess, is that it was no accident. I believe that she premeditated the crime. She was too intent on having busy time in the bedroom with whomever. I think it is so telling that she would steal money from her own grandparents...in a nursing home. Disgusting. Now this is not proof of guilt...but pieced together with all of the other super happy facts we know about her it paints a portrait of a...(thinking of a word I can use...) grifter. Not that it means she is guilty. But she is the epitomy of an unsympathetic defendent.

 

[Bittiness39]

Brini
Thank you. I am so uneducated and wish I knew how to get my point across like you and so many others here on WS. I give up but will be reading what all of you great people have to say.

Your opinions are educated and valued. :woohoo::woohoo: