2011.07.26-28 HLN & FOX (Weekly) News Coverage - Caylee Anthony

[pcrum12]

When Jennifer Ford (juror #3) said that I didn't understand it and now you are saying not guilty doesn't mean innocent. Explain that to me please.

If I was on trial for a crime and found 'not guilty' I would certainly rejoice that the jury found me innocent of the crime. It's black and white ... Guilty or Not Guilty ... there is no gray area in there in my mind.

I have served on civil and criminal juries in addition to one Federal jury. We had a decision to make each time Guilty or Not Guilty or if we couldn't arrive at a verdict ... hung. But never have I heard 'not guilty' described as 'doesn't mean innocent' until this trial. :cow::cow:

Sure. I'll explain it. Not Guilty by COURT OF LAW means not guilty of the charges under the indictment. Stating not innocent means she wasn't charged for what she is guilty of.

 

[Italy]

The State told a story and I agree they tied it (their story) all together, but the important fact is they couldn't tie it to Casey. I can assure you that I'm not incapable or critical of thinking to not see the evidence or what happened.
Just because I haven't posted here many times doesn't mean that I'm ignorant or don't have a brain, or that I haven't had years of reading and following other cases.
All I can say, with respect to you is that what was wanted by most is a Guilty Verdict but there wasn't a connection, and you cannot assume that someone premeditated a murder and then carried it out, without the evidence to prove it. That is why we have a jury and laws, and instructions to follow. You can't connect what is not there, sleuther or not.

Too bad the jury didn't follow the law and the instructions. We know they did not by the jurors own words. We have heard loud and clear.

We KNOW what happened. We KNOW what the evidence and the connection was. We KNOW who the guilty party is. WE are not the ones who have assumed facts not in evidence. We saw the trial too.

We also know how this case was lost and a child killer set free - we have heard it from the collective horse's mouth.

 

[Drama Queen]

In my opinion she was as guilty as the day is long. How lucky she was to get this particular jury. I am sure she has nothing but high regard for them unlike the majority of folks out in the world.
What is interesting to me are the reports on HLN that deals are in process...JB bought her a shiny new camera to photograph the world after release...books, movies, all sorts of chit happening as we speak.
This is horrible and does nothing to dignify the life of little Caylee who for some reason has been lost in all of this.
FCA is surely laping up all of this publicity and feeling like to kill this little girl was completely worth it. Bella Vita has arrived.
Well...how are we helping prove her wrong? Anger and outrage accomplish nothing. The verdict is in and it will not change. We need to get back to who we are as a people and do the positive things in life that Caylee deserves. Don't forget about "Caylee's Law," TES, Klass Kids, children who are missing and abused throughout the world and our own states.
This is where I intend to focus my outrage and to make it positive for change in memory of Caylee, Haleigh, Kyron and other's who don't recieve as much press.
Just sayin...
MOO and Hugs

 

[EPfan]

You can't blame the jury because they based their verdic on what information/evidence that was given to them.

The jury DID NOT base their verdict upon 'everything' that was given to them. They ignored most of the forensics, labeled some of it as 'too confusing' and 'too emotional.' They said much of it was too speculative, and then the foreman admits that they discussed their opinion that George may have killed the child. And that is not pure speculation? Besides all of that, they showed their ignorance concerning the jury instructions a few times, making statements showing they did not follow them correctly.



And they came to the verdict rapidly, WITHOUT going through the evidence and asking any questions. Just the fact that they said they were 'confused' and yet they asked for no clarification tells me they shirked their responsibilities. imoo

You can't connect anything to Casey. You can speculate all you want but that isn't evidence.
The Duck tape is not connected to Casey, it is connected to George and it was proven in court.

YES, you CAN connect things to Casey. The jury admitted that they thought the body was probably in Casey's car trunk. Is that NOT a connection?
So they agree that she drove around with her dead child in her trunk, never reported the child dead, and yet there is no 'connection' to Casey?

She was the child's mother and caretaker and guardian. THAT right there is the connection. She is legally responsible for her welfare and well-being. How could they acquit of the involuntary manslaughter at the very least, knowing she was dead in the car trunk while Mom partied?

The duct tape was not connected to George, it was the 'family' duct tape. And do you really believe he would duct tape a dead child's face and then keep that roll and carry it around to the tents later on? That right there is evidence he was NOT the one who duct taped Caylee. imo

The jury thought that GA might have had something to do with it because the evidence was there and he acted strange, and many think he lied on the stand. Also, he didn't call 911 when he said he knew he smelled death in the car at the tow yard when he went to pickup the car. You have to admit he wasn't that great of a witness.
Being a mother and caretaker/guardian doesn't make you a killer. I stand to be corrected but I didn't think that Involuntary Manslaughter was one of the options. (I'll check on this)
The duck tape was testified by Cindy, that it belonged George's.

You have to realize that you can't answer the following questions.
When did Caylee die?
How did Caylee die?
Where did Caylee die?
Evidence that Casey put Caylee in the car.
Evidence that Casey took the body to the place the body was found.
These are question you can speculate but you don't have DNA, soil on shoes, soil on the car, etc. Name one thing that you can connect without speculation to anybody.
The only thing I can think of is the duck Tape, and it isn't tied to Casey.
These are facts of the case, I don't like the facts anymore than anyone else. I am just saying that you have to follow the law.

When JA said as soon as he saw the duct tape, he knew it was the murder weapon and he knew how Caylee died. Now, that is and was his opinion but it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[CarolinaWoman]

Sure. I'll explain it. Not Guilty by COURT OF LAW means not guilty of the charges under the indictment. Stating not innocent means she wasn't charged for what she is guilty of.

That doesn't make too much sense either! :yuck:

If FCA is 'not guilty' of murder, manslaughter, child abuse then ... she is innocent according to the Pinellas 12. :banghead:

:cow::cow:

 

[Oldsoul2]

IMO the jury did not understand HOW to come to a verdict in the first place based on the evidence presented at all. I believe, since a jury can be a mixed bag of people who may or may not be intelligent, in the end their own perception/opinion, their own concious in regards to sending someone to jail for the rest of their lives or to death based on their OWN emotions and thoughts, NOT EVIDENCE, was the cause as to why she got the verdict she got. Juror #3 put it best "We cannot come to a punishment if we don't know what happened" Guess what...they didn't need to know the why or how. The goverment needs desperately to train jurors about how to determine a verdict etc.... and decide if the jurors are fit to do the job, not just whether the defendant is capable of sitting trial. I think I'll go now and give my dog the bar exam and see how well he does...

 

[MissJames]

The State told a story and I agree they tied it (their story) all together, but the important fact is they couldn't tie it to Casey. I can assure you that I'm not incapable or critical of thinking to not see the evidence or what happened.
Just because I haven't posted here many times doesn't mean that I'm ignorant or don't have a brain, or that I haven't had years of reading and following other cases.
All I can say, with respect to you is that what was wanted by most is a Guilty Verdict but there wasn't a connection, and you cannot assume that someone premeditated a murder and then carried it out, without the evidence to prove it. That is why we have a jury and laws, and instructions to follow. You can't connect what is not there, sleuther or not.

The 3 jurors who have spoken publicly made it clear ,in their own words, they did not follow the jury instructions,they did not follow the law and they gave more credence to the unsubstantiated DT opening statement ,than any of the evidence presented.

Even other defense lawyers have written articles stating the same,which have been linked repeatedly.

The jury screwed up. Period

JMO

 

[EPfan]

Sure. I'll explain it. Not Guilty by COURT OF LAW means not guilty of the charges under the indictment. Stating not innocent means she wasn't charged for what she is guilty of.

Well said. This is what I am trying to say. They should have charged a lesser charge.

 

[IfIMay]

The jury thought that GA might have had something to do with it because the evidence was there and he acted strange, and many think he lied on the stand. Also, he didn't call 911 when he said he knew he smelled death in the car at the tow yard when he went to pickup the car. You have to admit he wasn't that great of a witness.
Being a mother and caretaker/guardian doesn't make you a killer. I stand to be corrected but I didn't think that Involuntary Manslaughter was one of the options. (I'll check on this)
The duck tape was testified by Cindy, that it belonged George's.

You have to realize that you can't answer the following questions.
When did Caylee die?
How did Caylee die?
Where did Caylee die?
Evidence that Casey put Caylee in the car.
Evidence that Casey took the body to the place the body was found.
These are question you can speculate but you don't have DNA, soil on shoes, soil on the car, etc. Name one thing that you can connect without speculation to anybody.
The only thing I can think of is the duck Tape, and it isn't tied to Casey.
These are facts of the case, I don't like the facts anymore than anyone else. I am just saying that you have to follow the law.

When JA said as soon as he saw the duct tape, he knew it was the murder weapon and he knew how Caylee died. Now, that is and was his opinion but it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Go back and read the jury instructions and law. Much of what you say isn't part of what must be proven. :waitasec:

 

[Dr.Fessel]

The State told a story and I agree they tied it (their story) all together, but the important fact is they couldn't tie it to Casey. I can assure you that I'm not incapable or critical of thinking to not see the evidence or what happened.
Just because I haven't posted here many times doesn't mean that I'm ignorant or don't have a brain, or that I haven't had years of reading and following other cases.
All I can say, with respect to you is that what was wanted by most is a Guilty Verdict but there wasn't a connection, and you cannot assume that someone premeditated a murder and then carried it out, without the evidence to prove it. That is why we have a jury and laws, and instructions to follow. You can't connect what is not there, sleuther or not.

BBM, by Casey's own admission she was the last person to have seen Caylee alive. Now she did lie about ZHG and that was proven to be a lie. She admitted she had Caylee which there was no evidence presented to prove that not true and there was evidence presented she was the last one to have seen Caylee alive.

It was proven and there was evidence Casey had access to the duct tape, garbage bags, blanket, and laundry bags found with Caylee.

There was no evidence presented that there was a drowning. There was no evidence of any accident.

There was evidence of a murder. No child can live taped up and put in two garbage bags and a laundry bag, and then thrown in a dump.

 

[Whisperer]

The jury thought that GA might have had something to do with it because the evidence was there and he acted strange, and many think he lied on the stand. Also, he didn't call 911 when he said he knew he smelled death in the car at the tow yard when he went to pickup the car. You have to admit he wasn't that great of a witness.
Being a mother and caretaker/guardian doesn't make you a killer. I stand to be corrected but I didn't think that Involuntary Manslaughter was one of the options. (I'll check on this)
The duck tape was testified by Cindy, that it belonged George's.

You have to realize that you can't answer the following questions.
When did Caylee die?
How did Caylee die?
Where did Caylee die?
Evidence that Casey put Caylee in the car.
Evidence that Casey took the body to the place the body was found.
These are question you can speculate but you don't have DNA, soil on shoes, soil on the car, etc. Name one thing that you can connect without speculation to anybody.
The only thing I can think of is the duck Tape, and it isn't tied to Casey.
These are facts of the case, I don't like the facts anymore than anyone else. I am just saying that you have to follow the law.

When JA said as soon as he saw the duct tape, he knew it was the murder weapon and he knew how Caylee died. Now, that is and was his opinion but it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

George had something to do with Caylee'd death....But casey didn't? :banghead:

The first sentence above states george might have something to do with it because he acted strange and their is evidence. The exact same thing can be said of casey, yet she is excused, why?

This post quoted is a perfect example of not understanding reasonble doubt.

 

[Italy]

"The Anthony trial was an intricate circumstantial evidence case, but it shouldn't have flummoxed a jury of even borderline intelligence.

Why did these jurors so lack the courage of their convictions (literally) that they were not willing to fight for their convictions for even one full calendar day? It seems to me that the jurors collectively certainly did not carefully evaluate the evidence in the manner that this circumstantial evidence required — when such careful examination could have resulted in a guilty verdict.

None of the reported comments of the several jurors who have communicated, in one form or another, has said anything that inspires confidence that they knew what they were talking about, understood the difference between inferences that could be drawn from evidence as opposed to mere speculation or properly understood what the prosecution was required to prove.

Don't get me wrong. I respect the jury system and, in some philosophical sense, respect the verdict although I disagree with it. But part of that "respect" is respect for the system that I understand is designed to sometimes yield inexplicable verdicts, and is based on the fact that the verdict is unimpeachable — and speaks, or should speak, for itself.

The more the jurors talk — and make tragically incorrect, dare I say uninformed, statements such as that the case lacked "hard" evidence, that the time of death and manner of death was not shown and that the jury largely ignored all of Casey's lies as having nothing to do with the case because it shed no light on the specific day that Caylee died — the less their verdict and decision-making deserves to be respected. The more they make public comments, whether or not for compensation, the more they set themselves up for constructive criticism in the cacophony of public debate.

The prosecution is not blameless here. It has to take responsibility for helping select this jury. It also has to take responsibility for frittering away four hours of closing argument without adequately explaining to the jury how to properly evaluate a circumstantial evidence case. But that is really a separate topic deserving a separate discussion."

 

[EPfan]

George had something to do with Caylee'd death....But casey didn't? :banghead:

I didn't say that. I said, or meant the jury found that he might have had something to do with it.
Truthfully, I don't know what happened, all I can do is speculate or have an opinion of what I might think happened.

 

[Whisperer]

The example being (just read) if you wake up in the morning and the streets, sidewalks and trees are wet, you may assume that it rained. That is reasonable. You don't have to know where, why or what time it rained to conclude that rain happened.

To think a helicopter/plane flew over your house and dropped hundreds of gallons of water in your neighborhood is not reasonable. It could have happened but it is not reasonable to think it did.

This is exactly the thinking processes used by the jury. They speculated unreasonably (and called it reasonable) that george could have killed caylee. so therefore casey is innocent.

 

[julie2]

The Scott Peterson jury found him guilty and they had no cause of death and nothing actually proving Scott was the killer! The cases are similar to me with the evidence. It's completely obvious they are both GUILTY! I just don't understand.

My biggest problem is the short amount of time the jury deliberated. It wasn't enough to actually go through everything. I would still be very unhappy if the jury had spent more time and came back with the same verdict, but I could have accepted it better.

 

[Whisperer]

I didn't say that. I said, or meant the jury found that he might have had something to do with it.
Truthfully, I don't know what happened, all I can do is speculate or have an opinion of what I might think happened.

Going with your thought...if the jury thought GA had something to do with it, how in the world does that exonerate casey?

 

[Whisperer]

The Scott Peterson jury found him guilty and they had no cause of death and nothing actually proving Scott was the killer! The cases are similar to me with the evidence. It's completely obvious they are both GUILTY! I just don't understand.

My biggest problem is the short amount of time the jury deliberated. It wasn't enough to actually go through everything. I would still be very unhappy if the jury had spent more time and came back with the same verdict, but I could have accepted it better.

The Scott P trial was held in a geographic local of reasonable and intelligent people...for the most part. I have been to many jury selections here, and it is hard pressed to not find educated/professional people seated.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

Hey. I'm not a mod, but I think we've experienced some significant thread drift here - myself included. Maybe we should drift back more to topic

I'll start. Looks like Hln has gone back to Octomom. Oh well. At least her kids are still alive. I am concerned however as they appear to have a pool

 

[CarolinaWoman]

Well said. This is what I am trying to say. They should have charged a lesser charge.

They did bring back a lesser charge ... four counts of GUILTY to lying to LEO. That's it ... The End ... bringing back a NOT GUILTY verdict on the other charges ... Not Guilty must equal innocent of murder, manslaughter, child abuse, et al. :banghead:

:cow:

 

[CarolinaWoman]

Hey. I'm not a mod, but I think we've experienced some significant thread drift here - myself included. Maybe we should drift back more to topic

I'll start. Looks like Hln has gone back to Octomom. Oh well. At least her kids are still alive. I am concerned however as they appear to have a pool

Is Octomom still on welfare?