Theories On What Happened to Caylee Part #4

[JBean]

It is a standard defense technique to proffer an alternative senario and perpertrator of the crime, and thus put the seeds of reasonable doubt in the jury's mind. A defense lawyer would only propose a senario which is likely and rational based on the evidence, else it would not effectively sway the thinking of the jury.

But the entire burden is on the prosecution's CIC to prove guilt.

If the SA has proof then the defense will counter it with any information that will lead to reasonable doubt. if there is no proof then the prosecution will not be able to meet the burden.

 

[JBean]

we are getting way offtopic hercule.

 

[itsyourworld]

It is a standard defense technique to proffer an alternative senario and perpertrator of the crime, and thus put the seeds of reasonable doubt in the jury's mind. A defense lawyer would only propose a senario which is likely and rational based on the evidence, else it would not effectively sway the thinking of the jury.

to propose an alternative perp scenario for a client whose history of lying will in fact be laid out before the jury will not serve them well.

 

[Rumpole]

we are getting way offtopic hercule.

I agree.

The topic is "What happened to Caylee"

My point is she was killed by Casey! Mountains of evidence support that notion.

Not a hypothetical alternative person that is not even hinted at in any of the evidence.

 

[Rumpole]

to propose an alternative perp scenario for a client whose history of lying will in fact be laid out before the jury will not serve them well.

That is my belief too.

I was trying to say there is no alterative that is REASONABLE based on the evidence.

A proposed alternative would appear irrational based on the evidence.

 

[JBean]

I agree.

The topic is "What happened to Caylee"

My point is she was killed by Casey! Mountains of evidence support that notion.

Not a hypothetical alternative person that is not even hinted at in any of the evidence.

But there is always the possibility until all the evidence is laid out before us. We just have to listen to all theories which is why this thread is here.

 

[Rumpole]

But there is always the possibility until all the evidence is laid out before us. We just have to listen to all theories which is why this thread is here.

Though we should evaluate theories based on the evidence.
There is not even a remote possible suspect other than Casey. Unless and untill evidence suggests one it is silly to claim one.

It could be an alien abduction with a dastardly spreading of evidence to frame KC, but I will not cosider that unless scorch marks and landing pod dents appear on the Anthony's back lawn.

 

[itsyourworld]

Though we should evaluate theories based on the evidence.
There is not even a remote possible suspect other than Casey. Unless and untill evidence suggests one it is silly to claim one.

It could be an alien abduction with a dastardly spreading of evidence to frame KC, but I will not cosider that unless scorch marks and landing pod dents appear on the Anthony's back lawn.

my Belgian friend, i disagree most emphatically! there could indeed be a possibility of another suspect! there just hasn't been another that fits the evidence so well as her.

 

[Dr. Know?]

Though we should evaluate theories based on the evidence.
There is not even a remote possible suspect other than Casey. Unless and untill evidence suggests one it is silly to claim one.

It could be an alien abduction with a dastardly spreading of evidence to frame KC, but I will not cosider that unless scorch marks and landing pod dents appear on the Anthony's back lawn.

You are so good & funny too. I like your approach. Thanks HP. I haven't laughed this hard in a while.

 

[Rumpole]

my Belgian friend, i disagree most emphatically! there could indeed be a possibility of another suspect! there just hasn't been another that fits the evidence so well as her.

Who? Who can you even wildly imagine?

By all means argue an alternative explanation that is not negated by the evidence, but to just say "there could be someone", and not outline it, is no better than my "alien abduction" or KC's imaginary Nanny, or the fugitive's One Armed Man.

As I have said before:
Proposing an alternative, well explained and argued, and accounting for all the evidence could be a legitimate defence. Sowing the seeds of Reasonable Doubt in the minds of jurors. However just claiming blindly and contrary to evidence that someone else did it, when NO evidence supports it, and a mountain of evidence in fact already points to someone else (KC), is likely to be seen by a jury as Irrational Supposition.

 

[itsyourworld]

Who? Who can you even wildly imagine?

By all means argue an alternative explanation that is not negated by the evidence, but to just say "there could be someone", and not outline it, is no better than my "alien abduction" or KC's imaginary Nanny, or the fugitive's One Armed Man.

As I have said before:
Proposing an alternative, well explained and argued, and accounting for all the evidence could be a legitimate defence. Sowing the seeds of Reasonable Doubt in the minds of jurors. However just claiming blindly and contrary to evidence that someone else did it, when NO evidence supports it, and a mountain of evidence in fact already points to someone else (KC), is likely to be seen by a jury as Irrational Supposition.

juries, though charged to be reasoned beings, and to accept logic and operate purely from that as the basis for establishing "beyond a reasonable doubt" can and have often be swayed to see things less clearly than the general public.
proposing a "who" has not served me well in the past. i will just say that the dynamics of the anthony family play such a bigger role for the defense than is given serious consideration by most. i do not think casey will attempt to dance away from having killed Caylee. but it is in the why that everyone is so darn desperate for that will keep the jury tuned to the testimony, and if you can engage the jury in a plausible story (remember, it only has to be reasonable!!)................then...........

 

[Rumpole]

juries, though charged to be reasoned beings, and to accept logic and operate purely from that as the basis for establishing "beyond a reasonable doubt" can and have often be swayed to see things less clearly than the general public.
proposing a "who" has not served me well in the past. i will just say that the dynamics of the anthony family play such a bigger role for the defense than is given serious consideration by most. i do not think casey will attempt to dance away from having killed Caylee. but it is in the why that everyone is so darn desperate for that will keep the jury tuned to the testimony, and if you can engage the jury in a plausible story (remember, it only has to be reasonable!!)................then...........

What "story" are you hinting at. Propose one. Just an outline.

I could not explain all the evidence thus far, let alone potentially far more damning evidence?

 

[cyberborg]

I am not sure an "accident" is even a possibility. The duct tape, most likely, sealed Casey's fate.

LE and the state knows from the forensics whether or not Caylee was struggling and trying to breathe while the duct tape was over her mouth. If Casey put the duct tape over Casey's hair, she didn't intend for the duct tape to ever come off.

Casey's best bet would have been a deal BEFORE Caylee was found.

I agree that Casey isn't insane. I also agree that it's not a possibility for Casey to have "left" Caylee with someone "else".

As LE told Cindy in the interviews, LE knows where Casey was and who she talked to. They've had her phone records and pings since early in the investigation.

JMO

Bolded by me.

I agree. It removed the incentive from LE as well, the intention being to recover Caylee. Too late!!! The case is solidifying.

 

[cyberborg]

I agree with the Dr. Purpur from Nancy Grace show that the tape shows homicide. I don't believe anyone, even half crazy, would duct tape a child of that age that was intended to live because 1) the child would have told her grandparents, even if she could only use baby talk and tears, and 2) it would have left a terrible rash, and 3) it would not easily come out of the hair. So, I believe it was premeditated murder by a scatter-brained, criminal mind who does not have a normally developed conscience or empathy level.

I agree. You do NOT put duct tape on a living child to silence them unless you intend to silence them forever. I did wonder if it was afterwards to stage the murder as a kidnapping but tend towards Dr. Perper's premise. The heart sticker and personal items conflict with staging the scene.

Hard to comprehend. Like others I preferred to believe accident at first and that KC would fess to that. As time passed and details emerged it became more and more clear. I am sure there is worse to come.

 

[JBean]

Though we should evaluate theories based on the evidence.
There is not even a remote possible suspect other than Casey. Unless and untill evidence suggests one it is silly to claim one.

It could be an alien abduction with a dastardly spreading of evidence to frame KC, but I will not cosider that unless scorch marks and landing pod dents appear on the Anthony's back lawn.

We may as well just skip the whole trial!

I don't disagree with your supposition that KC did it.But I do disagree with your need to belittle those that don't see it your way.

So now let's stop all this and let others state their theories.