Did the jury get it wrong, or...

[R.U.Kidding!]

I see. So we should convict people because we feel like they are the killer even if the evidence doesn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? And because we want "somebody" to pay and bring justice to the victim? Okey dokey then.

EH!!!! Yeah--kinda like THIS jury did (IN REVERSE) Acquit people because they felt like they were the Victim even when the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt, they were at least guilty of Aggravated Manslaughter And because they were to damn lazy to take the time to look at one PIECE OF EVIDENCE OR Ask ONE PERTINENT QUESTION!!! Yeah--OKEY dokey then.:banghead:

 

[gladiatorqueen]

And, please feel free to clarify your earlier comment on doctoring vs. editing. Were you claiming that the tapes had been falsified or are you merely stating the obvious, that they were edited for broadcast?

No need to clarify. I used the word EDIT. I made no other claims. Cheers.

 

[gxm]

No need to clarify. I used the word EDIT. I made no other claims. Cheers.

In response to a question asking "Are you saying the audio on these videotapes was doctored ?" You replied. "Edited, yes."

As doctoring and editing are not completely interchangeable, I thought clarification necessary. So the tapes were not doctored, as in falsified, merely edited which is common in broadcasting. Just making sure we are all on the same page. Thanks.

 

[Cherry Ames]

It is very erroneous to think that the jury's job is to stand up for Caylee. It is their job to interpret the evidence presented and come up with a verdict. As cold as that sounds, it is what is expected of them.

And why didn't they do that? Why did they ignore the evidence completely?

 

[Cherry Ames]

I have to say I could almost agree with your mom!! And I've followed the case since day 31!!

And you base all that on what?

 

[jon_burrows]

You're kidding, right? Treated them the same way??? He was in charge of the schedule and took into account their sequestration and tried to make them more comfortable. He didn't act smarmy like Jose did, when he addressed them it was mostly to ask if they had followed his previous admonitions. How you can compare Judge Perry to Jose's smirky phony "good mornings" is beyond me.... Plus, it isn;t just the good mornings, it was the fact that he was selling a story that was obviously ridiculous and insulting to anyone's intelligence. Even those who believe in the accidental drowning dont really believe that Kronk took home the skull for a playdate, and that George decided to frame his daughter for a murder that didnt even happen (by calling in some gas cans that the cops never even saw, yet were supposed to somehow connect the duct tape to the scene)? Im starting to get a little annoyed with this game where everything people say is somehow a result of some kind of biased or something. Isn't it just possible that Jose is a typical slimy defense attorney, and hence people don't like him?

BBM- I honestly don't believe the jury understood what those words meant.

ITA with your post.

IMO

 

[Pink Panther]

The jury got it wrong alright but the SA was very arrogant in their assumptions imo. They presented evidence expecting the jury to be investigators piecing information together. They failed to narrate a scenario. That's why Casey is out and about today.

jmo

 

[Who_What_When]

You're kidding, right? Treated them the same way??? He was in charge of the schedule and took into account their sequestration and tried to make them more comfortable. He didn't act smarmy like Jose did, when he addressed them it was mostly to ask if they had followed his previous admonitions. How you can compare Judge Perry to Jose's smirky phony "good mornings" is beyond me.... Plus, it isn;t just the good mornings, it was the fact that he was selling a story that was obviously ridiculous and insulting to anyone's intelligence. Even those who believe in the accidental drowning dont really believe that Kronk took home the skull for a playdate, and that George decided to frame his daughter for a murder that didnt even happen (by calling in some gas cans that the cops never even saw, yet were supposed to somehow connect the duct tape to the scene)? Im starting to get a little annoyed with this game where everything people say is somehow a result of some kind of biased or something. Isn't it just possible that Jose is a typical slimy defense attorney, and hence people don't like him?

You’re the one who said that you would have been insulted by Jose being overly friendly to the jury by him saying "good morning", so yes I was asking how that's different then the judge or any other person in this trial who was overly friendly to the jury? The only difference I can see is that you don’t like Jose, but that doesn’t mean that everyone felt the same way. I personally didn’t care for him but I never felt insulted by his “good mornings”. I expected all of them to go out of there way to be friendly with the jury since they are the group that will determine the faith of their case.

I too am getting tired; I’m tired of being slammed because some of us have a difference of opinion. It seems to me that if we don't follow along or agree with the majority then we get told that we didn’t watch the same trial, we didn’t read all the documents, we don’t understand reasonable doubt, etc. Which for many of us, is completely unfair and inaccurate. Indeed, very tiring.

 

[Caligram]

This jury did not give enough weight to the evidence from the prosecution. Their minds closed after JB, acting like a barker in a side show, presented his deliberately deceitful nasty opening statement. Disgusting. Outrageous. Malicious. He got their attention with pointing to GA as the evil grandfather of Caylee who sexually abused FCA. Think, JB's opening statement prompted closed minds. It is too bad the jury found such incredible garbage so fascinating that they could not focus on the forensic evidence which would have made them change direction. This jury fell for the DT's garbage, overlooking the fact that Caylee Marie was murdered, duct taped, and dumped like garbage. The dead Caylee Marie left evidence in FCA's trunk, but that evidence was not even taken into consideration as clues to what happened after Caylee Marie was murdered.
This jury failed. They were wined and dined, treated well, and left ASAP. Justice done? No.
I assume that some of the DT and jurors are now posting here and defending the jury. That is their right. It's a free country. But, a now free FCA should not have gotten away with murder.

This is my heartfelt opinion. I won't keep coming back to this thread to keep defending my post against those who disagree. This is a hot topic, very sensitive for those of us who have followed this case for three long years. Another thing to dwell upon, Caylee Maire will be part of a legal case history and issues for years. Many will continue to search her name on the internet. Along with her sweet innocent face in pictures will come the inevitable tags: sexual abuse, peni#. Her own mother wasn't merely satisfied to dump her like garbage, she heaped more garbage upon the name and memory of Caylee Marie to save her own worthless azz.

 

[cluciano63]

The intellect, attention span and curiousity of the average American person is often overrated, I believe. All I need to do is take a look at the popularity of reality shows to tell me that we as a country are not all that intellectual. I think assuming that the jurors would be up to the level of understanding the way the state presented its case, vs. the KISS method used by JB, was a mistake.

We here at WS are interested in crime, legal issues, mysteries, and facts, but the average Joe or Jane is not, except how they may pertain to themselves. JMO

 

[Who_What_When]

The jury got it wrong alright but the SA was very arrogant in their assumptions imo. They presented evidence expecting the jury to be investigators piecing information together. They failed to narrate a scenario. That's why Casey is out and about today.
jmo

BBM. ITA! There were too many leaps to be made and in the end they should have brought all of it together. IMO if they did we would have had a different outcome. Although I think they did a good job, I think they were too confident and were swayed by the public's opinion of Casey's guilt and they just assumed she would be found guilty.

As for the jury getting it wrong, the way it was presented I think they were wrong on manslaughter and child abuse charges but I personally don't think the SA proved murder 1.

 

[3doglady]

The intellect, attention span and curiousity of the average American person is often overrated, I believe. All I need to do is take a look at the popularity of reality shows to tell me that we as a country are not all that intellectual. I think assuming that the jurors would be up to the level of understanding the way the state presented its case, vs. the KISS method used by JB, was a mistake.

We here at WS are interested in crime, legal issues, mysteries, and facts, but the average Joe or Jane is not, except how they may pertain to themselves. JMO

Sadly I agree. The two who have given interviews were definitely all about themselves. I keep waiting for one juror to step forward that can make sense and give valid reasons for their verdict. At least tell us what the dynamics in that jury room were. Unfortunately that probably will not happen.

 

[Solange82200]

In response to a question asking "Are you saying the audio on these videotapes was doctored ?" You replied. "Edited, yes."

As doctoring and editing are not completely interchangeable, I thought clarification necessary. So the tapes were not doctored, as in falsified, merely edited which is common in broadcasting. Just making sure we are all on the same page. Thanks.

Or... just maybe... Juror 3 is really a <modsnip>, just like she seems to be. No matter what "editing" you do to her interview, or what you think is left out, she did not do a good job reassuring that they reached the right verdict.

Nothing is anyone's fault it seems. Caylee's death is the fault of everyone BUT her mother. The juror's verdict is the fault of the prosecutors, even though before the verdict every legal expert was singing their praises. The jurors' stupid comments are the fault of media "editing" to make them look bad. Can we stop making excuses for everyone's bad or stupid decisions?

 

[1tasha]

The intellect, attention span and curiousity of the average American person is often overrated, I believe.

Oh c'mon clu by whom?

 

[Dr.Fessel]

BBM. ITA! There were too many leaps to be made and in the end they should have brought all of it together. IMO if they did we would have had a different outcome. Although I think they did a good job, I think they were too confident and were swayed by the public's opinion of Casey's guilt and they just assumed she would be found guilty.

As for the jury getting it wrong, the way it was presented I think they were wrong on manslaughter and child abuse charges but I personally don't think the SA proved murder 1.

I heard Casey with her own mouth say she was the last known person with Caylee.

I heard Casey try to lie and say it was a kidnapping.

I heard Lee say Casey said it was because she was a spiteful ***** that they could not see Caylee.

I heard the SA give the motive for the murder. Cindy would not let her give up custody of Caylee, Casey had to be a Mom. Now the jury did have to connect a dot on their own because the judge would not let the stolen checks from her mother in without Cindy admitting they had a fight that night. But they heard Cindy threaten Casey with turning her in to cops for theft if she did not do what she wanted. Not much of a stretch to see that Cindy would turn her in if she ever tried to stop being a mom and give up Caylee. Cindy needed a babysitter for while she was at work and Casey was it.

I heard the state say how she put the duct tape on and what 3 pieces meant.

I heard the 6 people say the trunk smelled like a dead body had been in it.

I heard how she was bagged up with stuff from the house.

I saw her on the video without Caylee the day she died.

 

[Salem]

If you wish to continue discussing the jury verdict, please go here: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145081"]If you agree with the verdict,let us know why part 2 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Thanks,

Salem