Imperfect Justice-Prosecuting Casey Anthony by Jeff Ashton

[MarthaM]

I was just over on Amazon looking around, and I see that Imperfect Justice has dropped to 147. But I'm sure it'll jump back up into the top 100 when it gets more publicity, and definitely in the days right before it's released.

And I see that the price has gone up to $17.81? I'm pretty sure that when I first looked at it the other day, it was $16-something. I don't order books online so I didn't know that the price doesn't stay the same.

 

[GiantPickle]

im looking forward to the release as well... my birthday is september 13th and have been hinting to hubby i want a kindle... of course by next week the hints will be full blown "I WANT A KINDLE" signs all over the house (lol) and its still possible he wont get my "hints." oh well, thinking i might just be better off getting one for myself next week....

anyway, congrats to JA! cannot wait to read your book on my new kindle!!

I have a kindle you can have....hubby DIDN'T listen to my comments about hating the very concept of a kindle and the love I have for a physical book in my hand (the way it feels, smells, where I bend pages etc).

 

[jon_burrows]

I hope CA's 'My Caylee is Missing' post is included in the book. I don't think anyone could walk away after reading that thinking FCA was a good mother or sincere (as one juror put it). It also shows that CA knew she didn't have a job and FCA was an unfit mother.

I would also like to see one or all of the detectives write a book. The As become less marketable if truthful books flood the market. I don't think any of the As are capable of telling the truth, apologizing to the people they tried to set up, or take any responsibility for their atrocious actions.

A book written by Tim Miller would be nice too.

IMO

 

[lowens1975]

I think the sequestered jury felt it was just a little too much for them to go through the process of deliberation. It appears all they wanted to do was go home. Those that have appeared before the cameras removed all doubt about that. jmo

IMO, There is probably a difference between a mere belief that someone should get the death penalty and actually having to make the decision to hand over a DP verdict knowing that a person will be put to death because of it. I'm guessing, I've never had to. But I agree, they didn't spend any time going over the evidence or deliberating about it or testimony. It reminds me of a old saying "When in doubt, don't." Hopefully, JA will share his thoughts on what he believes made them vote the way they did and then leave town the same day without a backward glance.

 

[tsitra01]

I was just over on Amazon looking around, and I see that Imperfect Justice has dropped to 147. But I'm sure it'll jump back up into the top 100 when it gets more publicity, and definitely in the days right before it's released.

And I see that the price has gone up to $17.81? I'm pretty sure that when I first looked at it the other day, it was $16-something. I don't order books online so I didn't know that the price doesn't stay the same.

Martha, I just bought the book at Amazon for $12.99 half hr. Ago.

 

[MarthaM]

Martha, I just bought the book at Amazon for $12.99 half hr. Ago.

Maybe that's the Kindle version, not the actual hardcover? I don't do Kindle, so I was referring to the changes in price on the regular book.

 

[logicalgirl]

IMO, There is probably a difference between a mere belief that someone should get the death penalty and actually having to make the decision to hand over a DP verdict knowing that a person will be put to death because of it. I'm guessing, I've never had to. But I agree, they didn't spend any time going over the evidence or deliberating about it or testimony. It reminds me of a old saying "When in doubt, don't." Hopefully, JA will share his thoughts on what he believes made them vote the way they did and then leave town the same day without a backward glance.

None of the charges HAD to have a death penalty verdict attached to it - the most severe charge could just have easily had a LWOP - it was an EITHER/OR - but the point of this jury decision was they were ONLY there to decide guilt or innocence on a number of charges.

I think the jury wanted to go home. They did not want to have to sit through another month of the penalty phase if they voted guilty.

 

[deanna82437]

Maybe that's the Kindle version, not the actual hardcover? I don't do Kindle, so I was referring to the changes in price on the regular book.

That is the price for the Kindle version. Just bought it myself from Amazon. I had previously purchased the hardcover from B&N, so will have both. :loser:

 

[deanna82437]

BTW, the prices have changed. My purchase through B&N for the hardcopy on the day it was first announced was $14.57 with 3.99 for s/h.

 

[Aedrys]

The only one who lost in this trial was Caylee. All the SA's did the best job they could to present the evidence and whatever happened with the jury happened. Ms. A made it through with barely a scratch. Caylee, however, will be remembered as dying while on her mother's watch regardless of the different opinions of how she died. She is gone. Her DT appeared to be very proud of what they had done.....my guess would be after about a week or so reality set in.

It was never a game for SA, never. It is their job and victums depend on SA to help then get closure and justice for the victum. Give credit to the defense if they did a good job but respect the fact that the State did their job, as they do for every case that comes through their office. jmo

I agree. I finally realized why putting this case into winners and losers hurts so much for me. If JA lost, he failed Caylee. And I just don't believe that. He and the rest of the SA fought HARD for that little girl. So hard. They fought when her own family tossed her aside for her murderer mother. And I don't care what the acquittal means, she is and always will be a murderer to me.

It's not their fault the jury couldn't put it together and make a good decision. I do put the entire blame on the jury. THEY are the ones who failed Caylee, not the prosecution. I have watched other cases before too, so it's not like I'm starry eyed or not wanting to see the prosecution in a less than favorable light. But I watched them for three years and a trial, trying to their damnedest to give Caylee justice, and I do not consider that a failure. I only hope that if I ever have to deal with an SA's office, that they fight just as hard as this prosecution did for Caylee.

I really hope Jeff Ashton doesn't consider this a failure. It wasn't, and I won't ever view the prosecution as a bunch of losers like some do here. Baez is NOT and never will be a winner. This case was like the lottery, and he just got plain LUCKY. I felt like the devil danced in the courthouse when that acquittal came down. I still can't get over it.

I do hope Jeff Ashton does address the outcome of the trial in his new book, though. I do want to know what his thoughts are. But I cannot, and will not, ever say this was a failure on the part of the prosecution. They were all Caylee had and gave it their absolute best. They just got unlucky with having the worst jury of all time make the worst decision of all time.

 

[rotterdam]

I agree. I finally realized why putting this case into winners and losers hurts so much for me. If JA lost, he failed Caylee. And I just don't believe that. He and the rest of the SA fought HARD for that little girl. So hard. They fought when her own family tossed her aside for her murderer mother. And I don't care what the acquittal means, she is and always will be a murderer to me.

It's not their fault the jury couldn't put it together and make a good decision. I do put the entire blame on the jury. THEY are the ones who failed Caylee, not the prosecution. I have watched other cases before too, so it's not like I'm starry eyed or not wanting to see the prosecution in a less than favorable light. But I watched them for three years and a trial, trying to their damnedest to give Caylee justice, and I do not consider that a failure. I only hope that if I ever have to deal with an SA's office, that they fight just as hard as this prosecution did for Caylee.

I really hope Jeff Ashton doesn't consider this a failure. It wasn't, and I won't ever view the prosecution as a bunch of losers like some do here. Baez is NOT and never will be a winner. This case was like the lottery, and he just got plain LUCKY. I felt like the devil danced in the courthouse when that acquittal came down. I still can't get over it.

I do hope Jeff Ashton does address the outcome of the trial in his new book, though. I do want to know what his thoughts are. But I cannot, and will not, ever say this was a failure on the part of the prosecution. They were all Caylee had and gave it their absolute best. They just got unlucky with having the worst jury of all time make the worst decision of all time.

Jeff Ashton strikes me as an analytical person so I think we will not be disappointed in his book rehashing the trial.
I also think that luck did not have too much to do with the verdict. The DT used/had many more resources than the prosecution. Amy Singer and her merry band comes to mind. They played the jury like a fine fiddle.
However, there are more things at play here resulting at a NG. It was a combination of various factors, the jury was just one of them IMO.
Hopefully Jeff will dissect/analyze all those factors in his book.
And as a seasoned prosecutor, I doubt that he would look at the trial as a personal failure.
Nobody "wins" all the time.
Just retrace his steps and analyze/determine if some things could have been done differently. Personally I think that HHJP due to budget constraints, was too much in a rush, and haste makes waste. But again that was just one of the factors that benefited DT IMO.

 

[gladiatorqueen]

Jeff Ashton strikes me as an analytical person so I think we will not be disappointed in his book rehashing the trial.
I also think that luck did not have too much to do with the verdict. The DT used/had many more resources than the prosecution. Amy Singer and her merry band comes to mind. They played the jury like a fine fiddle.
However, there are more things at play here resulting at a NG. It was a combination of various factors, the jury was just one of them IMO.
Hopefully Jeff will dissect/analyze all those factors in his book.
And as a seasoned prosecutor, I doubt that he would look at the trial as a personal failure.
Nobody "wins" all the time.
Just retrace his steps and analyze/determine if some things could have been done different. Personally I think the HHJP due to budget restraints, was too much in a rush, and haste makes waste. But again that was just one of the factors that benefited DT IMO.

I really appreciated this post. I find the idea that the NG verdict was the entire fault of 12 people -- the jury, to be frustrating. It isn't logical to me that this would actually be the case. I think your scenario makes much more sense and I do sincerely hope JA's intention is to shed light on this process rather than to point or deflect blame.

I personally wish he would take more time to consider and reflect on this trial rather than rush to get it out because it's an opportune time financially.

Part of a lawyer's strategy, IMO, is to sway the jury whether we would all like to believe that or not. There have been many innocent people who have been given a guilty verdict. Do we call the jury stupid in those cases or can we be willing to accept that the purpose of a trial is for both the prosecutor and defense to convince a jury to either convict or acquit? A jury is made up of people like you and me, and since we are all human we most certainly can be swayed--often unconsciously, and if there are any cracks in a theory then that can ultimately lead to an acquittal. I think that is what happened in this case.

I am very interested to read JA's book to discover his assessment of the trial, but I would be interested in reading a book by the defense to learn what strategies they used, why and how they believe this may have have lead to a NG verdict. JMOO.

 

[LambChop]

JA was 1/3 of the team. Still not sure why the jury did not get it because it seemed pretty clear to me. And I don't understand the custodial issue. KC was always responsible for the welfare of her child. If the child was left with someone else she did not trust that is still her responsibility. And did the jury not figure out that because KC was charged that she was the custodial parent and that was already established by LE. That was always obvious to me so I'm not sure why the jury had such a problem with it. jmo

 

[jaleigh]

That is the price for the Kindle version. Just bought it myself from Amazon. I had previously purchased the hardcover from B&N, so will have both. :loser:

I did the same thing; I bought both. I love my Kindle yet sometimes need the feel of paper, especially when referencing and researching.

mo

 

[AngelWings444]

Jeff Ashton strikes me as an analytical person so I think we will not be disappointed in his book rehashing the trial.
I also think that luck did not have too much to do with the verdict. The DT used/had many more resources than the prosecution. Amy Singer and her merry band comes to mind. They played the jury like a fine fiddle.
However, there are more things at play here resulting at a NG. It was a combination of various factors, the jury was just one of them IMO.
Hopefully Jeff will dissect/analyze all those factors in his book.
And as a seasoned prosecutor, I doubt that he would look at the trial as a personal failure.
Nobody "wins" all the time.
Just retrace his steps and analyze/determine if some things could have been done differently. Personally I think that HHJP due to budget constraints, was too much in a rush, and haste makes waste. But again that was just one of the factors that benefited DT IMO.

Good post. I also wonder, if JA thinks, by allowing Baez to learn the law and "practice" inside the courtroom, helped the defense? To me, it seemed like this was a huge error on the side of the judge.

 

[MissJames]

Jeff Ashton strikes me as an analytical person so I think we will not be disappointed in his book rehashing the trial.
I also think that luck did not have too much to do with the verdict. The DT used/had many more resources than the prosecution. Amy Singer and her merry band comes to mind. They played the jury like a fine fiddle.
However, there are more things at play here resulting at a NG. It was a combination of various factors, the jury was just one of them IMO.
Hopefully Jeff will dissect/analyze all those factors in his book.
And as a seasoned prosecutor, I doubt that he would look at the trial as a personal failure.
Nobody "wins" all the time.
Just retrace his steps and analyze/determine if some things could have been done differently. Personally I think that HHJP due to budget constraints, was too much in a rush, and haste makes waste. But again that was just one of the factors that benefited DT IMO.

Well,I guess the rush job did save the State money in the long run. They won't have the expense of housing Casey for the rest of her life or the appeals process if she got the DP.
And HHJP's other big concern,overturning the verdict ,is a moot point,also.:banghead:

 

[MissJames]

Good post. I also wonder, if JA thinks, by allowing Baez to learn the law and "practice" inside the courtroom, helped the defense? To me, it seemed like this was a huge error on the side of the judge.

It was the perfect storm . I expected all these issues to help the State. Go figure.

 

[jon_burrows]

Well,I guess the rush job did save the State money in the long run. They won't have the expense of housing Casey for the rest of her life or the appeals process if she got the DP.
And HHJP's other big concern,overturning the verdict ,is a moot point,also.:banghead:

...unless she kills again.

IMO

 

[Anakerie]

...unless she kills again.

IMO

If she were to kill again, I don't think she'd be so lucky to get another Pinelas 12..

 

[believe09]

Since the conversation has turned to worthwhile if one is a winner and not worthwhile if he is not - let me rephrase this.

Two lawyers at trial. One "for" me and one "against" me. Who would I chose to defend me?

Without question - Jeff Ashton. If I ended up with Baez as my lawyer, I'd have fired him and represented myself. IMO.

Look at what Baez accomplished however against the juggernaut of the SA.