2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

Status
Not open for further replies.

amysmom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
3,629
Reaction score
279
I didn't watch the whole interview.. i couldn't bear it. I believe someone posted that he thought Casey was a "nice person", "well spoken".. where did he get THAT from.. her jailhouse videos.. "just get me Tony's number".. you all are a huge waste... I can't "SHWALLOW"..

s&bbm

Greta made this comment right after talking about part 2 of his interview & right before CM was to come on after the break..Watching the repeat I came to the conclusion she was referring to CM & not the mystery foreman afterall.
 

BeachGirlFromPA

Always digging a little deeper....
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
1,400
Reaction score
0
He certainly remembered a lot of facts about the case without any notes when speaking to Greta, unfortunately I think most of those notes were about George.

Seems his biggest thing was George and he couldn't believe the chloroform theory. He did not trust anything George said, yet they convicted FCA of lying to police. One of them is lying and it was FCA they convicted of lying...

He also said he couldn't believe a dead body was in the trunk because NOT EVERYONE smelled it. Guess they didn't hear the tow yard guy who said when the car was totally closed up he could not smell it until he pressed his face against the glass and guess they didn't take into consideration that the car had been aired out for over 24 hours before LE even realized that they may not be looking for a MISSING CHILD. Guess those 400 pages of notes didn't contain any of that.

Guess it had to be 100% who smelled it.

He didn't believe the sexual abuse because there was no evidence, but I guess he believed she drowned in the pool with no evidence or any other speculation they came up with.

Guess those 400 pages of notes didn't contain any information that 100% of the time people report accidental drownings.

Guess those 400 pages of notes didn't contain the fact that people who are guilty lie to police.

Wonder if in those 400 pages of notes if there was anything about what FCA was doing for 31 days while her daughter was supposedly missing.

I could go on, but I have to calm down now.


I question that 400 figure. This jury was mentioned repeatedly as one of those who took the LEAST amount of notes, and this was reported by those who watched them in detail every single day. I guess he must have been invisible because none of the legal pundits or reporters saw him taking alot of notes.
 

Velouria

Active Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
30
Thanks for the links. He sounded intelligent but I noted that he mentioned GA being home on the 15th (also quoted in the link). GA was working the evening of the 15th. The 15th was the day of the visit to Mt. Dora and the video of Caylee.

The 16th was the day that GA was home in the morning to the early afternoon. I wonder how this info figured into their deliberations.

Me thinks this guy needs some of Cindy's Magical Memory Pills.
 

Baxter

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
641
Reaction score
24
I shut it off when he said Cindy searched for Choloroform and Chlorophyll, ugh, where was he in the rebuttal?? I have zero sympathy for them. Zero.

OMG Please tell me the foreperson did NOT say that.
Did they have earphones in and were listening to music when the state was putting on their case?
 

Chablis

Inactive
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
2,358
Reaction score
104
I burns me that they have any suspicion whatsoever about George. Just can't understand it as there was no evidence pointing toward George. NONE! Then they overlooked / ignored / downplayed all evidence that pointed to KC. Did they really not believe there had been a dead body in KC's car? Did they not wonder why she abandoned the car? Did they not recall the squirrel smell excuse? Did they not view the taped visit between George and KC?

I just don't get how they arrived at not guilty on manslaughter. Disturbing. Very disturbing that this witch will be walking out of jail soon.

The State, took air samples from a confirmed cleaned/aired out car, and said, hey this proves she killed her child with chloroform, and the state ignored the FBI's analysis that said the levels were consistent with cleaning products, and we know the car was clean. I am glad I live in this GREAT country where all I stated above is not enough to KILL someone.
 

TotallyObsessed

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2008
Messages
6,096
Reaction score
1
OMG Please tell me the foreperson did NOT say that.
Did they have earphones in and were listening to music when the state was putting on their case?

He also said it was reasonable to think that the boyfriend (Richardo) posted the chloroform picture and the next day Casey visited myspace, then googled chloroform one time to see what it was.

That's it. Simple.
 

TxLady2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
8,009
Reaction score
727
I think most everyone could have accepted their verdict even if they didn't agree with it -if they had taken some time to discuss the evidence. If they did discuss it, it must have been before they were suppose to. Some of the technical evidence - bugs, plant growth, etc was boring but necessary. This jury wanted to discuss GA being the guilty person instead of the one on trial. They were given proof that CA lied. They knew that casey was such a big liar, partied like there was no end for all of that time knowing her daughter was dead (no matter how she died, she knew Cayless was dead).
If they had gone over everything and still made the same verdit, I would not have liked it but would have at least thought they did the job the best they could. After receiving instructions on what they were to consider or not consider, they were given printed copies they could refer to. They were not to consider opening statements although they were impressed with JB's (that he did not prove) and just thought Linda's was ok. From the time they left the courtroom to deliberate, they had to select a foreman, have some meals, get their straw vote, talk in general, go over evidence and then reach a decision, and sign all of those papers ... How much time do you think they took?

So what did they talk about for 10+ hours, then? Do you think they sat around and talked about things other than the case?
Juries are not required to go over every piece of evidence and testimony when they are deliberating, only the things they may not be clear on. They did not need to discuss the bugs and other scientific things, unless they were not clear on it. If they had taken the time to reread all the testimony or look at all the evidence they would have been deliberating for a month.
I will repeat what I posted a few days ago somewhere, and I heard it from a well respected attorney. In 80% of trials, most jurors will have their minds made up by the end of the closing statements.
Their meals are brought to them in the jury room and they can eat while they are talking. They don't take long breaks, there is a restroom inside the jury room. It takes about 10 minutes at the most to select a foreperson. Somebody is nominated, they take a vote and it's done.
Judge Alex was asked right after the verdict what was the shortest time a jury had ever come back with a verdict and he said 4-1/2 minutes.
 

magnolia

War Eagle
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
88,246
Reaction score
1,094
Many many times after JB's opening statement I questioned why JB or ICA never pressed sexual assault charges against George. The answer came in the verdict.

They knew they could not press charges because they had no evidence. ICA sat in jail for 3 years - plenty of time for her or her attorney to press sexual assault charges against GA - but they wanted it the charges to be heard in court - but NOT proven in a situation where GA could defend himself in a timely manner before ICA's trial.

Confirms to me the A's were in on this strategy with ICA/JB and they all committed perjury.

I don't believe George committed perjury.He did not sexually abuse KC. He did not have a romantic relationship with K. Holloway. He was not a witness to a drowning accident.However,he told the truth in a deceptive kind of way. His goal was to lose credibility with the Jury. George played his part well.He should be given an Emmy for his performance. IMO
 

~n/t~

New Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Messages
17,672
Reaction score
73
I shut it off when he said Cindy searched for Choloroform and Chlorophyll, ugh, where was he in the rebuttal?? I have zero sympathy for them. Zero.

Also, he mentioned that there was one google search for chloroform. Testimony and evidence proved there were 84 hits. Furthermore, he referred to Ricardo's myspace as a reason Casey would look up chloroform. Did he not understand that the search was for "HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM"? Did he doze off or was he too busy making flirty eyes at Casey?
 

miimaa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
382
Website
Visit site
I shut it off when he said Cindy searched for Choloroform and Chlorophyll, ugh, where was he in the rebuttal?? I have zero sympathy for them. Zero.

So happy I didn't watch the interview because I would have been livid to hear that. Did they not hear testimony that Cindy was logged in to her work computer and could not have done those searches on the home computer? WTH!!!
 

~n/t~

New Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Messages
17,672
Reaction score
73
So what did they talk about for 10+ hours, then? Do you think they sat around and talked about things other than the case?
Juries are not required to go over every piece of evidence and testimony when they are deliberating, only the things they may not be clear on. They did not need to discuss the bugs and other scientific things, unless they were not clear on it. If they had taken the time to reread all the testimony or look at all the evidence they would have been deliberating for a month.
I will repeat what I posted a few days ago somewhere, and I heard it from a well respected attorney. In 80% of trials, most jurors will have their minds made up by the end of the closing statements.
Their meals are brought to them in the jury room and they can eat while they are talking. They don't take long breaks, there is a restroom inside the jury room. It takes about 10 minutes at the most to select a foreperson. Somebody is nominated, they take a vote and it's done.
Judge Alex was asked right after the verdict what was the shortest time a jury had ever come back with a verdict and he said 4-1/2 minutes.


Ummm, IIRC the case Judge Alex referred to was for a drug possession charge. Heck of a big difference, imo
 

ahoyhoy

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
560
Reaction score
0
I did not see ANY of the juror interviews (read transcripts), but the details y'all are discussing w/ #11 makes him sound like he ALSO ignored all the evidence---trying to 'fit' a theory with how 'nice' MCA 'looks'.

They couldn't take it, couldn't believe she would---so they ignored everything that made them 'uncomfortable' about her, and looked at the big, bad MEN. UGH!!!!

Also, I can't believe that NOT ONE was affected when George broke down for Caylee? They thought that was fake?
OF COURSE George was rude w/ Baez---wouldn't you be if accused of all that? The jury could not empathize at all with George having to deny being a molester in court & on t.v?

I am more & more convinced every day that they looked at her, decided she 'couldn't' have done it, and grasped at ANYTHING that would end the trial a.s.a.p. JMO, of course.

I wonder if HHJP will ever address this trial in an interview? After he retires, I hope---but I really need to hear what His Honor thought of this jury.
 

miimaa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
382
Website
Visit site
The State, took air samples from a confirmed cleaned/aired out car, and said, hey this proves she killed her child with chloroform, and the state ignored the FBI's analysis that said the levels were consistent with cleaning products, and we know the car was clean. I am glad I live in this GREAT country where all I stated above is not enough to KILL someone.

She should have been found guilty of manslaughter - not 1st degree. There was more evidence than just the chloroform in the car.
 

Rapunzel

New Member
Joined
May 13, 2011
Messages
449
Reaction score
0
Also, he mentioned that there was one google search for chloroform. Testimony and evidence proved there were 84 hits. Furthermore, he referred to Ricardo's myspace as a reason Casey would look up chloroform. Did he not understand that the search was for "HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM"? Did he doze off or was he too busy making flirty eyes at Casey?

While writing those 400 pages of notes, he must have missed some important testimony.
 

Rapunzel

New Member
Joined
May 13, 2011
Messages
449
Reaction score
0
So happy I didn't watch the interview because I would have been livid to hear that. Did they not hear testimony that Cindy was logged in to her work computer and could not have done those searches on the home computer? WTH!!!

Something else he missed in those 400 pages of notes. Seems like he did not hear any of the rebuttal testimony.
 

TxLady2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
8,009
Reaction score
727
I burns me that they have any suspicion whatsoever about George. Just can't understand it as there was no evidence pointing toward George. NONE! Then they overlooked / ignored / downplayed all evidence that pointed to KC. Did they really not believe there had been a dead body in KC's car? Did they not wonder why she abandoned the car? Did they not recall the squirrel smell excuse? Did they not view the taped visit between George and KC?

I just don't get how they arrived at not guilty on manslaughter. Disturbing. Very disturbing that this witch will be walking out of jail soon.

I don't think the jury heard anything about the dead squirrels, unless I missed it. As far as having suspicions about George, a number of people right here on WS had those same suspicions within the first year of this case, it was discussed at length, about both George and Lee. A lot of people wondered if one of them was the father of Caylee, and the FBI ran DNA analysis on both of them, but when Baez tried to bring that in, the state objected and it was ruled hearsay. There very rarely is any evidence of child molestation unless it's discovered and the child is taken to the hospital right then, or it's reported to DCF. I think there was a lot of things they never heard that people here know, and that is the problem. We are forgetting that they didn't follow this for 3 years, it was all new to them.
I agree with you on the manslaughter, though, it still puzzles me why they ignored the other charges except for the lying to LE.
 

sappysoul

Verified Expert
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
482
Reaction score
0
Ummm, IIRC the case Judge Alex referred to was for a drug possession charge. Heck of a big difference, imo

Yes, it was a drug charge and the trial was just a couple of days long. How anyone could compare the two is beyond me.
 

Dr.Fessel

New Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
10,903
Reaction score
24
He also said it was reasonable to think that the boyfriend (Richardo) posted the chloroform picture and the next day Casey visited myspace, then googled chloroform one time to see what it was.

That's it. Simple.

And how many times did Linda say "Did you type how to make chloroform into the google search bar?"

Reasonable juror 11, Casey see's a cartoon about Chloroform and the next day she googles "HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM"

Where is the reasonable in that?
 

kaki

New Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
848
Reaction score
1
s&bbm

Greta made this comment right after talking about part 2 of his interview & right before CM was to come on after the break..Watching the repeat I came to the conclusion she was referring to CM & not the mystery foreman afterall.

Thanks for clearing that up... I know i read that because it made my blood boil.. I stand corrected though.. :innocent: CM said it .. figures he would say something like that. Subtract one ridiculous, illogical utterence from the jury foreman then
 

miimaa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
382
Website
Visit site
I don't think the jury heard anything about the dead squirrels, unless I missed it. As far as having suspicions about George, a number of people right here on WS had those same suspicions within the first year of this case, it was discussed at length, about both George and Lee. A lot of people wondered if one of them was the father of Caylee, and the FBI ran DNA analysis on both of them, but when Baez tried to bring that in, the state objected and it was ruled hearsay. There very rarely is any evidence of child molestation unless it's discovered and the child is taken to the hospital right then, or it's reported to DCF. I think there was a lot of things they never heard that people here know, and that is the problem. We are forgetting that they didn't follow this for 3 years, it was all new to them.
I agree with you on the manslaughter, though, it still puzzles me why they ignored the other charges except for the lying to LE.

People may have had suspicions the first year but this was trial testimony and there was no evidence pointing to George being involved.

I thought I heard Amy Huizenga testify about a text msg from KC regarding the squirrel and the smell in the car.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top