2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[RJA00]

Family? More like a cult. And that's gross washing a strange man's underwear, I dont care how much he looks like "Johnny Depp" supposedly. We need IQ tests and weirdo tests for juries...

i guess people see things different

my husband has been told many times he looks just like jonny depp
( i am sorry i just dont see it)

after a few times of being told that, he asked me who is johnny depp? he said i think a lady at the gas station wanted me to go home with her lol

after i mention a few movies he remembered who he was, he just shook his head

 

[Who_What_When]

That is the problem I think, the way everyone defines reasonable doubt is different. I dont think there is a reasonable explanation for ALL the evidence except for murder, but others think it's reasonable to say a mother of a child who accidentally drowned did what she did, acting happy as a clam while she did. I wish there was a way to make the reasoning in these cases more consistent, it scares me that justice can come down to the simple luck of the draw, based on the jury you get. I wish there were a more concrete way to determine guilt or innocence...

ITA, but it’s based on what an individual believes to be reasonable or not. It's unfortunate that it doesn't always work but it’s not uncommon and it doesn’t mean the system doesn’t work at all. It's just that this case was televised and got the attention that most cases don't get.

 

[Who_What_When]

I don't think the verdict is proof that they are morons, but their reasons for the verdict sure make then look like ones.

That's because you don't agree with it. The people who agree with the verdict feel what they are saying is exactly what they thought about the case.

 

[Sustained]

Just the one's that somehow all come up with an irrational verdict that doesn't fit the evidence. Even most of the experts were saying there was enough for at least a manslaughter conviction, they see trials and the outcomes every day, everyone was shocked at the verdict.

Flip it around for a sec ... what if FCA was convicted of 1st or 2nd degree murder or aggravated manslaughter ? Do you honestly think there would have been any protesters or anger from the public ? Everyone would be saying "I told ya she was going to the slammer".

Doing your civic duty as a juror on the Anthony case involved not only sitting thru 6+ weeks of testimony in a circumstantial evidence case, but making inferences and connecting the dots with each piece of circumstantial evidence and ignoring the smokescreen and theater the DT threw out there. Well, I'll give them credit for getting the sitting part right.

IMO, if another little child dies at the hands of FCA, a few drops of the blood will be on this jury's hands.

 

[katydid23]

So I guess every sequested jury that is stuck together for weeks is a cult? Or is it just the ones who don't do what the majority wants them to do?

I am not sure how often juries are sequestered in 5 star Florida hotels for 6 weeks, with little special events planned, day trips, special restaurants, the private Dessert Lady. I thought it was great at the time. BUt now I wonder if they all didn't just see it as a big ol vacation. They certainly didn't return the favor to Judge Perry. They probably deliberated a total of 5 or 6 hours if you subtract meals, breaks, small talk and filling out the final paperwork. They couldn't even be bothered to ask any questions or double check any facts. Which is really sad, considering they got a lot of them wrong.

 

[3doglady]

That's because you don't agree with it. The people who agree with the verdict feel what they are saying is exactly what they thought about the case.

They think it's good to not take notes and deliberate one day in a murder trial?

They think circumstantial evidence (bad behavior) presented in court as part of the case is not supposed to be considered?

They think if KC had been convicted of manslaughter that she would get the DP?

They think because the foreman can "read people" it's ok to accuse GA and completely ignore everything KC did? Was GA on trial?

They think GA was at home when he was at work?

They think because a couple of LE did not smell the car that means they should discount the tow yard guy, GA, CA, LA, cadaver dogs,Dr Vass, hair banding, coffin fly and CA's "It smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car." Oh yeah and KC, herself, texted Amy about the smell.

Every time JF speaks she changes her story.

I could go on and on.

 

[grandmaj]

If your posts have disappeared you may want to go to the Rules and TOS and read them. We do not talk about other posters nor do we single each other out for personal attacks.

KNOCK IT OFF!

 

[goldenlover]

I am not sure how often juries are sequestered in 5 star Florida hotels for 6 weeks, with little special events planned, day trips, special restaurants, the private Dessert Lady. I thought it was great at the time. BUt now I wonder if they all didn't just see it as a big ol vacation. They certainly didn't return the favor to Judge Perry. They probably deliberated a total of 5 or 6 hours if you subtract meals, breaks, small talk and filling out the final paperwork. They couldn't even be bothered to ask any questions or double check any facts. Which is really sad, considering they got a lot of them wrong.

I would hope the would not come up with guitly verdict just to return the favor to JudgePerry for the accomodations he gave him.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't think the verdict is proof that they are morons, but their reasons for the verdict sure make then look like ones.

But there were plenty of people calling them names before they spoke out...

 

[3doglady]

But there were plenty of people calling them names before they spoke out...

That may be, but they've gotten much more criticism for the reasons they gave.
The media was saying we have to respect the jury, before they were interviewed. Now some in the media are acknowledging that the jurors reasons are based on inaccurate facts and their misunderstanding of the law. Example: JF said that she did not vote guilty on any charges other than lying because KC would have gotten the DP. She said if lesser charges had been included she would have voted guilty. She also said she needed to know, how, when, why and where.:waitasec:

 

[com n sense]

I would hope the would not come up with guitly verdict just to return the favor to JudgePerry for the accomodations he gave him.

I certainly hope not! But they should have done her next child a favour by keeping her in there.

 

[cluciano63]

I wish they hadn't spoken out at all because I agree with the verdict, but also agree that they are not coming across well at all.

 

[*~Aimee~*]

What I don't understand is Juror #11 is upset Casey is gonna make $$ but what is he doing off of Caylee? Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black????

 

[mitzi]

I'm gonna be rude and quote my own post from 7/13/11. I knew that "scared to show his face" was just a ruse for more money.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey_anth...s-george-anthony-influenced/story?id=14050196

Is this the guy who supposedly looks like 'Johnny Depp'? Ummmmm, NOT! I don't even think he's attractive in the least. And he wanted to 'still maintain his anonymity'? Ummmmmm....I think a profile of him won't help him achieve that.

Lastly, will he have 1 more highly paid interview where he allows us to see his full-frontal face? Geesh, he makes me sick.

ETA: Talk about a softball interview...what has happened to Ashley B. since 9/11? When is someone going to tell this jury that most cases ARE circumstantial? That the 31 days WAS evidence? That the only things the jury was missing in the evidence were a video of the murder or a witness to the murder? Why are all the interviewers soft-peddling this? :maddening:

 

[mitzi]

Apparently she was the "den mother" type. Very helpful. Even washed all his clothes and folded his underwear. He didn't know underwear could be folded.
:ziplip:

Well, there ya go...#12 obviously was also under his (foreman's) spell. Ugh!

 

[mitzi]

Seriously? What is the big deal? So what if she washed his laundry. Everyone is acting as if a crime was commited.

Well, I can barely wash my DH's 'underwear' (cuz underwear can be kinda...how shall I say it...sweaty?)...there is no way I would touch the dirty underwear of Juror #11! :sick:

 

[manatee]

As I stated in my post above, who knows what else he said during the interview and what was/wasn't aired. I guess we see it differently, as I saw it as a lighthearted comment. I definitely didn't see it like some did as I didn't feel like puking when I heard it. Honestly at this point I think anything any of the jurors say will be criticized and dissected to no end. Funny when you think about it, because if the same jury came back with a guilty verdict everyone would be talking about how intelligent and selfless they were.

well, yes. A job can be done well or done poorly. This is part of what performance evaluations are. They are entirely subjective. It is the opinion of many of us that IN THIS CASE, based on the statements they have made to how they arrived at the evidence, it is abundantly clear that they did a poor job and if they had a performance appraisal, it would also be poor. It is a matter of opinion. That is my evaluation of their performance.

 

[manatee]

Apparently she was the "den mother" type. Very helpful. Even washed all his clothes and folded his underwear. He didn't know underwear could be folded.
:ziplip:

this is creepy! :sick:

 

[katydid23]

I would hope the would not come up with guitly verdict just to return the favor to JudgePerry for the accomodations he gave him.

NOPE. The favor I was talking about was NOT a guilty verdict. The 'favor' they owed the judge after all the effort he went to for them, was for them to put SOME EFFORT into real deliberations. They should have started with SECRET BALLOTs, not raising hands. They should have reviewed a list of the state's evidence, and if 'CONFUSED' by anything, asked for the testimony reviewed.
They should have gone over the 27 page jury instructions CAREFULLY. And they DID NOT DO SO. They had no time to do so in such short deliberations.

The 'FAVOR' they owed Judge Perry was to take the necessary time to make sure they understood and followed the instructions he gave them.

 

[Phoebeb]

Well, I can barely wash my DH's 'underwear' (cuz underwear can be kinda...how shall I say it...sweaty?)...there is no way I would touch the dirty underwear of Juror #11! :sick:

It shows just a little bit too much of a camaraderie IMO. No wonder the 6 who voted NG guilty flipped right over. They were too comfortable with each other by then!