Did the jury get it wrong, or...

Did the jury get it wrong?

  • The jury got it wrong

    Votes: 1,051 81.9%
  • The state didn't prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt

    Votes: 179 14.0%
  • The Defense provided reasonable doubt and the jury got it right

    Votes: 55 4.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 31 2.4%

  • Total voters
    1,283
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Juror #3 said that once she dismissed the chloroform then it was easy. Greta did not ask her about the duct tape after that question which she should have. I would have liked to hear how she dismissed the duct tape. I'm sure she would have just said "cause she didn't know what to make of it and that's how it is." Anyways, it seems almost like this juror was trying to find ways to dismiss evidence or anything that pointed to a wrong doing instead of using the evidence to prove the state's case. Do you get what I'm saying?
She was asked about the duct tape on Good Morning America I believe. I am trying to find the video because I can't remember her exact quote but she said something along the lines of 'it looks bad, it smells bad, but it doesn't tell you anything. Something nonsensical like that.

It does seem like some of them including this juror were just looking for ways to dismiss the evidence and acquit. Those who did not want to convict for manslaughter refused to because they didn't know who her caretaker was. What the heck?
 
influenced by what? everyone in orlando, the media, etc that think casey is guilty?

Ya know jurors can be paid off... Info can be bought where the jury will be having dinners etc and ppl can be put in as waiters and such ... AND talk to these jurors.... I wouldnt put it past CM...He wanted to retire with big bang!!!!!

Oh and Yea Casey is guilty!

The defense could have gotten someone put on that jury and that person could have influenced the others, religious beliefs also can play a huge part in jury tampering...

JMO I dont think these ppl came to their own verdicts sorry..

jmo
 
In my opinion i think this jury had been talking amongst themselves for quite a while, there were special dinners special events and id bet my last dollar that these 12 ppl were talking about this trial i also think there was one or more persons with a very strong opinion of not guilty verdict and instilled that into the others.

This JURY never even asked to see any of the evidence didnt read any of the transcripts
look at any pictures nothing, I think they walked into that deliberation room with a verdict and only waited till the next day to read it. I am appaled at these 12 ppl and i hope they are seeing with open eyes all the things Casey Anthony has done that they maybe were not aware of. Pinellas county is not far from Orange County and i know these ppl knew all about ICA some maybe moreso then others but I would love to know if any of these ppl were seen with or talking to others Im not so sure there was not some jury tampering.
JMO

I also think that at least one was well aware of this case before being selected for jury duty. All they saw were dollars.
 
I can see why they found George strange because I do, too. However, for once I didn't hold it against him because Baez was asking him the most ridiculous questions. He didn't just ask him "Did you molest Casey?" He was asking him, "You wouldn't admit that you molested Casey, would you?" That question is assuming George is guilty of molestation, and if he answers it "yes" or "no," he is basically admitting to molesting Casey! Even I, not a George fan at all, couldn't blame him for getting a little testy about being asked questions like that.

LOL...It's like that old joke, Have you quit beating you wife? There is no right response. Can you imagine the emotions and sheer fear having a demon child make those kinds of accusations and having to answer to them to the world? On the other hand we have a family member facing a life sentence in both Nebraska and Iowa for sexually abusing, video taping and photographing his child from age 6 to 10. We had no clue. We saw this family several times a year and we saw no outward sign.
 
I just listened to the alternate juror's interview. I totally get what people are saying about him using the term 'we' as if they were a cohesive bunch. He had nothing to do with the deliberation or the verdict so there is no 'we' unless they talked beforehand.

Also, he just seems naive to me and that he was never going to believe a young pretty girl would kill her daughter. He takes no responsiblity for being a juror and what his duty entailed.
 
Hmm, I have been reading that ABC gave $200K to the defense of CA, then the first juror's interview was on ABC? Is this normal?

With all the hacking allegations that the News of the World is under,maybe... just maybe there should be a probe into the jurors cell phones etc. Could ABC been hacking Something just isnt sitting right. something smells off. No way, all jurors could be that gullible and stupid to acquit or not have the brains to go for a lesser charge.




Hopefully someone will investigate.

Well ABC took them and their families to Disneyworld!!!!!!
Let a child killer go free and then go to Disneyworld... Something wrong with that pic if ya ask me!
 
how sure is anyone they didn't have the evidence in the room with them? so far i have had no one prove or disprove this. all of the info i have had on that is AZlawyer in the lawyer questions thread saying that in every case he has tried, the evidence had been in the deliberation room.

Juror #3 admitted they didn't go through the evidence.
 
Why is the jury so surprised by the public outrage about their verdict? Because Caylee's own family didn't care about seeking justice so why should the public. Surprise-Surprise!
 
I also think that at least one was well aware of this case before being selected for jury duty. All they saw were dollars.

ONe of them was a CNN junkie... So how would she not know

and i do not think Jurors should be able to make money off a case no matter which way the verdict goes. JMO
 
I just cannot imagine, if they felt strongly, that they would just cave so quickly. They could have given themselves another 48 hours, or slept on it. I have a feeling the trial went on too long, and they just did not want to stay and keep hashing it out. It is just odd, the way it tipped, though.

Oh I can. It would have gone something like this:

Cmon dude! Vote innocent! There's money to be made.

Bam.
 
QUESTION: so many people are saying they don't agree with the jurors reasons for acquittal. what reasons could they have given that would make their findings valid? is there none?

You know, that's a really good question.

In my mind there wouldn't be any valid reason they could give for aquittal because I think she's 100% guilty of killing that beautiful child. However...

To make their finding 'valid' to me they need to explain why they didn't consider the lesser charges. They need to explain why they based their decision on the DT's opening statement when they were instructed that this is not testimony. Some said they thought GA was responsible or involved in some way, although that wasn't/couldn't be proven by any testimony. It was only alleged in the OS - which was emotional 'testimony' by Baez himself. And yet they stated that they didnt' base thier decison on emotion - quite a contradiction. They need to explain why the the alternates speak as a collective group with 'we' and 'us' when they never deliberated and were instructed repeatedly that they were not to discuss the matter amongst themselves. These are but a few questions I have.

I would have been content with a guilty verdict of a lesser charge. To find her guilty of nothing but lying? Why exactly do they think she was lying then? And what about?
 
ONe of them was a CNN junkie... So how would she not know

and i do not think Jurors should be able to make money off a case no matter which way the verdict goes. JMO
#3 said she watched Investigative Discovery, 48 Hours, and Dr. G. I don't believe her claim that she never heard about this case when she shows an interest in criminal cases.
 
QUESTION: so many people are saying they don't agree with the jurors reasons for acquittal. what reasons could they have given that would make their findings valid? is there none?

I really can't say with any certainty because we haven't heard from all 12 jurors. But based on who we have heard from, there is no way to make their findings valid.

They did not examine ANY of the 400+ pieces of evidence, they talked about the case amongst themselves before deliberation, they did not ask for any clarification from Judge Perry, they only deliberated for 11 hours.

Add to that, the fact that KC admitted (through her att. Jose) that 1)she was there when her daughter drowned, 2) she did not seek medical care, 3) she allowed her father to place her in garbage bags and 4) dump her in the woods.Even if they were naive enough to buy that load of bologna, the part that I have bolded and underlined, at the very least, meets the charge below (which is one of the charges this jury was allowed to choose:

Count Three, Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child: causing the death of Caylee by culpable negligence the maximum sentence is 30 years in prison. The estimated minimum sentence for this charge and other charges which might result in conviction along with this count would be 16 years and 6months

This is why, I am convinced that someone got to this jury.

KC admitted that Caylee drown in the pool, that she didn't call 911, that she allowed GA to pack her up in some garbage and laundry bags and that she let GA dump her body in the woods.

JOSE TOLD THIS JURY THAT THIS IS WHAT CASEY DID!!!!!

Throw out the chloroform level, throw out the duct tape, throw out the heart sticker, throw out the decomp, throw out the chloroform searches on the computer. Just based on what Jose told the jury the Casey did, if they followed the law, aggravated manslaughter SHOULD have been her verdict at the very least

But don't throw justice out the window and then come seeking money and fame.

Someone got to this jury, IMO.
 
#3 said she watched Investigative Discovery, 48 Hours, and Dr. G. I don't believe her claim that she never heard about this case when she shows an interest in criminal cases.

Well one of them said she was an avid Cnn watcher i think its the one that her dad is a lawyer now she most def would know the case .. dont ya think?
 
You know what???????????? They searched for chloroform searches on the computer AFTER they found the chloroform in the car!!!!!!!!!!!!! How can people so be irrational????? God, I am about to BLOW!!!!!!!!

I totally understand. I'm going to have stop listening or reading comments from these Jurors. I literally get knots in my stomach. They are trying to say anything that will justify their part in the verdict. It's not working for them very well. JB's opening and closing arguments are in their every word.

IMO
 
ONe of them was a CNN junkie... So how would she not know

and i do not think Jurors should be able to make money off a case no matter which way the verdict goes. JMO

I would like to see a law like that myself.
 
Well one of them said she was an avid Cnn watcher i think its the one that her dad is a lawyer now she most def would know the case .. dont ya think?
Yes I agree. That was #7...the one who was seen crying in the court room after the verdict was read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
924
Total visitors
1,084

Forum statistics

Threads
589,931
Messages
17,927,846
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top