For those who agree with the verdict...help me understand.

Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by mrsu, Jul 5, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cluciano63

    cluciano63 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    41,200
    Likes Received:
    27,175
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And on the other hand, if the jury spent weeks deliberating and came out with the same verdict, many people would still be blaming the jury, saying how could they look at the case so closely and find her not guilty? I don't think there is any length of deliberation that was going to justify a "not guilty" verdict for most people. The jurors speaking out, well, that is their own choice and they are coming off badly from what I read...all I know is I was never confident she would be convicted. Nothing to do with what my own thoughts and feelings are, but I didn't find proof in the trial, JMO.
     
  2. cityslick

    cityslick New Member

    Messages:
    7,230
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because when things don't go the way you wanted it to go, you criticize every aspect that went into that decision. If the verdict was guilty and they deliberated for only 4 hours, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't hear a peep about it. Just like if it was guilty and JA and LDB were doing high fives afterwards, you wouldn't hear a peep about that either.

    People are angry, they are going to lash out on anything and everything. Most people do that with anything, it's called human nature.
     
  3. grandmaj

    grandmaj Former Member

    Messages:
    43,414
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you have an opinion about Agreeing with the verdict then voice it. HOWEVER THIS IS NOT A THREAD TO COMPLAIN ABOUT, TALK ABOUT OR OTHERWISH BASH OTHER POSTERS! 10-4?
     
  4. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Clearly, there has been a misunderstanding. Dr. G did not say Caylee died from suffocation with duct tape. Dr. G. did not say Caylee died with chloroform overdose. In fact, Dr. did not say how Caylee died, because she couldn't find that out. She did say that the 'manner' was homicide (which doesn't mean murder).

    So when I question how the duct tape held the mandible in place if it wasn't attached to the mandible, it is NOT me questioning Dr. G's ability to do her job. It is me questioning that simple fact, how does something assist in adhering objects if it's not sticking to the object??
     
  5. gladiatorqueen

    gladiatorqueen New Member

    Messages:
    254
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree wholeheartedly but don't have the level of patience you seem to have in spades to calmly keep going over that point. Kudos to you!
     
  6. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you! That's exactly what I was asking, you just said it better.
     
  7. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Snipped


    The key word in all of this is every piece of science the SA entered into evidence *could* be consistent with many things, including a dead body. These *could* be's hurt the SA IMO. Nothing was definite. Nothing.
     
  8. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I am confused by the inference that she was chloroformed, or that this was chloroform in it's purest form.

    My understanding is that chloroform is highly volatile. If you have chloroform and you spill it, it evaporates quite rapidly (probably pretty close to rubbing alcohol, but that's JMO).

    What would be keeping the chloroform in the trunk after being aired out if it was pure chloroform? I can see that if it was cleaning product with chloroform as a ingredient, maybe the other chemicals the the product helped bind the chloroform to something, preventing it from being released so rapidly.

    I don't believe the chloroform was bound to decompositional fluid. I just have a really hard time believing that without seeing some major staining in the trunk, or even the underside of the spare tire cover. And, I don't believe anyone could "clean" the trunk and get rid of the staining or fluids.
     
  9. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Febreeze released a statement when this case came out that there is no chloroform in their product. So, Febreeze just couldn't pull that off.
     
  10. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think what helped the jury come to their decision at that point was the expert in grief. It is true that people grieve in many different forms. The expert isn't the first to claim that. And, it is true that many different behaviors fall under the umbrella of grief. That's probably what helped the jury come to the conclusion that she suffered abnormal grief and it wasn't guilty behavior.
     
  11. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lol... thanks!

    If I'm going to get imposing questions to answer, the other side is too. :crazy:
     
  12. grandmaj

    grandmaj Former Member

    Messages:
    43,414
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0


    THIS IS NOT A THREAD TO COMPLAIN ABOUT, TALK ABOUT OR OTHERWISH BASH OTHER POSTERS!


    Leave words like The posters that ignore this information, what some posters don't get, I'm annoyed with other posters.

    Make your point without discussing "your fellow posters" !
     
  13. logicalgirl

    logicalgirl Peace Hawk

    Messages:
    16,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh.....I see! Well why not say this in the beginning? NOT having a conversation - well that's makes this easy - I'll be on my way then. :great:
     
  14. WillChgo

    WillChgo New Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for responding to my post,

    There is a lot of emotion on both sides and need to justify and support their beliefs. Along that comes a lot of repetition of the same points. That is the nature of blogposts.

    This was a complicated and confusing circumstantial evidence case. There was no smoking gun. Some of the defense's science and evidence suggests that alternative scenarios could have been possible.

    I haven't read carefully each and every post. But of all the arguments that I have read, examined in the context of the totality of the evidence, none have dissuaded me that Casey was guilty of first degree murder, much less that was she was guilty of at least manslaughter.

    The types of debates and nitpicking over the evidence we are having here should have happened in the jury room. Given the jury and foreman's interviews there is no evidence that they happened.
     
  15. beccalecca1

    beccalecca1 New Member

    Messages:
    856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I read a post a while back, I think on this thread, that we were deliberating more then the jury were. I do agree with that, but it could be because the jury was made up of more "not guilty" people then "guilty".
     
  16. leighg

    leighg New Member

    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think I read in the foreman's interview he said the first vote was 10-2 in favor of not guilty so the consensus was there early on.
     
  17. WillChgo

    WillChgo New Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean definite, which in my mind implies no doubt.

    IMO there WAS definite evidence of a decomposing body in Casey's trunk and evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that that decomposing body was Caylee's.
     
  18. WillChgo

    WillChgo New Member

    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In the Websleuth community, and I may add in the U.S., there are a lot more "guilty" people, hence the anger and frustration.
     
  19. kelian36

    kelian36 Former Member

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And just as important he said the second vote was 6-6 --manslaughter.
     
  20. cluciano63

    cluciano63 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    41,200
    Likes Received:
    27,175
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think the prosecution took the defense and their theories too lightly. Because to the state the things JB was alleging came off as so ludicrous and unbelieveable, they did not bother to refute them in any meaningful way. I don't know if reading the jury is something an experienced prosecutor should be able to do well, but in this case, it appears (JMO) that the state was not reading this jury at all. I.e. if even a few jurors seemed to be listening intently to Jose, the state should have paid more attention and addressed the issues he covered in another way. I don't know, I just felt as though the state did not take the defense seriously at all, and that is always a mistake. America loves the underdog, that is a famous saying, and clearly, they saw that to be JB.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice