Caylee & JonBenet

I don't see any similarities either. Yes, she did say she was a spiteful biotch to Lee. What she said was Cindy should have done this a long time ago not herself. She was referring to calling the police but much longer ago because she was discussing her thefts at the time. In her mind it's Cindy's fault for not having done something to stop her and it led to this.IMO
That is Casey's reality and perhaps the rationalization those new doc's are going to build upon.




Novice Seeker
 
Hello, everybody!

Some of you may know me from the JonBenet forum. But I confess that I don't really know much about this case. So, I thought it might help if I could gain a little more knowledge.

But I have my own reasons. What inspired me was a blurb on TV the other night. In in, it was stated that the case against Casey is purely circumstantial. I knew that, but it illustrated the difference between the approach law enforcement in Boulder took vs. the approach they take just about every place else.

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this:

--the police arrested Casey before they even found a body;

--there are no eyewitnesses, no confession, no DNA, nothing at all that would be considered a classic "smoking gun;"

--the prosecutor in this case cared more about a little girl's death than about hurting the suspect's feelings or their politcal careers or the town's reputation;

--Casey cannot afford high-price, politically connected lawyers;

--the evidence against Casey is mostly anecdotal;

--Casey had no known history of violence, mental illness, etc.

See, over on the forum where I'm so well-known, this is the perfect counterpoint to some, who claim that literally every single case must have a "smoking gun" in order to get a conviction, that there's no such thing as putting together circumstantial evidence into a totality, that probable cause is a very easy thing to establish, etc.

By their own logic, then, Casey has been railroaded six ways to Sunday. To me, the way this case was handled vs. the JonBenet case is night and day, but that's about the ONLY difference.

But, as I said, I don't know that much. I am your empty cup. Fill me, baby!

BBM

Those people would make awful jurors.

Perhaps you should find a summary of jury instructions somewhere and post them for them. Or the LEGAL definition of "Reasonable Doubt".

I can see someone having trouble recommending the DP for someone without a "smoking gun", but not to convict beyond a "reasonable doubt". That's just uneducated.
 
Some of you guys should stop by the JBR board every now and then. :D We're a pretty active bunch over there, especially for a 15-year-old case.

I agree with everyone who says that the biggest "smoking gun" is the 31 days. Did Casey think that no one would ever wonder what happened to Caylee? That years would go by, and no one would ask where her daughter was? That 31 days is going to be a huge hurdle for the defense to get over. Also if Casey is found guilty, is she eligible for DP?
Some of us used to, you might recognize me, Solace, claudicici, and joeskidbeck from there...
 
Some of us used to, you might recognize me, Solace, claudicici, and joeskidbeck from there...

and me....even though I don't post much these days because I fear my head may explode between this case and that one
 
The lies, wild goose chase, and the 31 days until the child was reported missing makes the two cases incomparable IMO

Thanks, my2sense. Yeah, with the Ramseys, the lies didn't really start until AFTERWARDS.
 
This case has a certain smell that JonBenet's case doesn't have. As well as duct tape and a stain in the trunk. Three smoking guns...

In your opinion. I can make similar arguments about certain things in JonBenet's case. I don't disagree with what you say, but from a legal standpoint, a first-year law student could rip apart the "smell" story, IF not for the context surrounding it. That's my argument.

And there was duct tape on JonBenet, too.
 
BTW, circumstantial evidence has the same weight in a trial as direct evidence.

Yes, Bee Charmer! That's the point I'm trying to make here! It's not me you have to tell that to; it's the rumdums in Boulder who call themselves prosecutors!
 
Welcome over here!! I read and follow along on the Ramsey case when I get a few minutes and love your observations!!

Thanks, Nana. But here, I am but a humble learner.

A word of warning...if you have high blood pressure, you might want to remember that this case will cause your bp to go out the top of your head,lol....literally.
It is maddening!! But stay with us please as we need probing minds like yours,IMO.:seeya::rocker:

nana, I PASSED "out the top of my head" about three years ago!
 
SD, I think it's clear that the Ramseys were given a lot more leeway than Casey, but OTOH there is definitely more circumstantial evidence pointing to Casey than to the Ramseys.

I don't know about that, AZlawyer. But I suppose that's why I'm here.
 
Welcome SD!:seeya: Since not much new has been happening with the JonBenet case lately, you can find me and Solace hanging out here. Come join us! This case, unlike the Ramsey's, is going to trial in just over a month...

So THIS is where you guys went! I'm thinking about joining, but you've seen what ONE case has done to me!

Biggest difference between Casey Anthony and the Ramsey's (despite the fact that both are liars), is that the correct perp has been caught in this case, she doesn't have high-priced lawyers, and the victim will get justice!!! Also, Florida LE and prosecutors appears far more unbiased and competent than those in Boulder, CO!

Yeah, that's what I was trying to find out.
 
Moms with new babies grieve when they have to go back to work, don't they?

--snipped--

One of the hardest days of my life was the day I had to return to work! I cried the night before as if I were the baby. I felt like someone had cut out my heart! I was miserable for months. ...and I didn't even have to leave her at daycare or with a babysitter. My mother in law was coming every day to watch her!

But not Casey. Nope. She took advantage of every opportunity to get rid of Caylee, to the point of pretending to go to work. Then of course she got rid of her for good. No one can convince me she loved her daughter.
 
Hi SD, I'm glad you are here, but hang in there with JB. John needs to be haunted by her murder the rest of his miserable life.
 


<snip>
BTW, circumstantial evidence has the same weight in a trial as direct evidence.

Actually, that is incorrect. In an entirely circumstantial case, the State must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. If the State is unable to do so, the judge must dismiss the charge.

In a direct evidence case (meaning a confession, video, eye witness, etc.) a judge can never dismiss the charge and it must always go the jury.
 
Mr. Hornsby ... if I may ... what do you see as the bullet points of this case, for the State and the Defense ... what do you see as legal obsticles for either side?
 
Brent Huck's case was very similar to KC's. It was entirely circumstantial. There was no cause of death. The evidence against Huck was an unusual kind of rope and dog hair. Huck was convicted and his conviction has withstood appeal. But, Huck's was not a death penalty case.

SuperDave,

KC was charged with First Degree murder before Caylee's remains were found, so deciding Caylee's murder was preplanned wasn't based on the duct tape. I'm thinking the chloroform has to be the wild card that led to KC initially being charged with First Degree.

The prosecutors in Orlando are definitely more gutsy than those in Boulder. But, I think the superstar experts brought into KC's case also made a difference. Read Glenn Puitt's articles or the trial transcripts from Brookey West's trial in Nevada. (Puitt was the local reporter extraordinaire.) Neal Haskell was the entomologist that testified for the prosecution in Brookey West's case and with bugs (the EXACT SAME SPECIES found in the white trash bag from KC's trunk...don't let the DT's smoke and mirror tactics fool ya, they ARE the same species of flies found with West's victim), Dr. Haskell established that West had all of her tools lined up in advance of doing the murder.

We have seen the reports and depositions, BUT, we haven't yet heard the experts explain to us what those reports mean.

I believe that Casey planned Caylee's murder in advance, no rage and no accident. It is my opinion that the reports we have already seen contain the evidence to show it.
 
Also JonBenet's murder happened when the idea of a "mom" or "people of a certain class" doing nasty deeds was unthinkable.

These days we are being bombarded and tweeted information 14/7 proving that "moms" and "rich people" can be just as "bad" as anybody. People have lost some of the illusions they used to have.

imo
 
Also JonBenet's murder happened when the idea of a "mom" or "people of a certain class" doing nasty deeds was unthinkable.

These days we are being bombarded and tweeted information 14/7 proving that "moms" and "rich people" can be just as "bad" as anybody. People have lost some of the illusions they used to have.

imo

Susan Smith murdered her two sons in 1994 and the OJ Simpson Trial had ended in 1995, so I think Americans were aware that mothers and wealthy people were capable of committing heinous crimes before JonBenet's murder.
 
And SuperDave, keep this in mind, when people say she stole from her family. Here is one small example, just to give you an idea of her 'personality.'

Her grandfather is an invalid and lives in a nursing home. Her grandparents are on a fixed income and have a small account they use to help pay for his living expenses there.

Her grandparents gave her a $25 check for her birthday. So Casey, being the sociopath that she is, used that small gift from them to get their routing number so she could steal 250 bucks from their account to pay her cell phone bill. She stole from her invalid grandfather to pay her cell phone bill. That is who Casey Anthony is.

ETA: Yes, it's true that stealing does not make her a killer. But stealing from your dying grandfather makes you a cold hearted loser if nothing else.

Actually, it was 340+. He had 14,000 in his account. KC was heard talking to Tony the morning of the 16th at her home (by her mother) telling Tony about $14,000. I really think she was planning on getting that money somehow.
 
There really is not just as much evidence to suggest that the Ramsey's are innocent, but this is for another Board and I will stop there.

Your post on the Anthony case was very good and thank you.

Solace

You are right Solace. The only 'evidence' of an intruder in the Ramsey case is self-created 'evidence.'

The only difference is that, since PR was an adult and Casey is rather a child, PR was smart enough to invent a kidnapper who could not be traced. Casey was stupid and created a name and whole history for her child's kidnapper.

Both used duct-tape to, in my opinion, make it look like a kidnapping for whenever their children were found.

Another key difference is the fact that PR desperately loved JBR to the point of obsession and she felt enmeshed with the poor little girl. The child was her whole life. I still believe it was a horrible accident.

With Casey, her kid was in the way. It seems far less likely that Caylee was killed by accident.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
738
Total visitors
813

Forum statistics

Threads
589,922
Messages
17,927,694
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top