"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #2

[cecybeans]

Duct tape.
Naked.
Woods.

I think they would equally point to someone who suffocated a baby in the back of a car with duct tape and dumped them right down the block from home. Or someone who wanted to make it look like a kidnapping (particularly when the victim's mother swore to LE it was a kidnapping). All three of those facts could point to any type of killer IF there was any cause to believe she had been in the company of anyone but her mother and IF her mother's car did not smell like death.

We could assume that is the m.o. for space aliens as well but so far in this case nobody has given reasonable evidence to show they were in the vicinity.

The fact that the bodies some children attacked by predators have been found naked in the woods, perhaps bound with duct tape, also does not indicate that it is a reliable indication that a predator was involved, imo. I'd have to see percentages to think that is a typical m.o.

 

[cecybeans]

"DP can result anyway."

That is another falsehood.

In your humble opinion.

 

[notthatsmart]

Pathological liars do not believe their own lies. It is just what they do to manipulate others for their own purposes. Devious is her middle name.
Of course she knows what happened to Caylee- otherwise why would she NEED to lie...

I think first we need to prove she lied. I know there are charges, but I dont think there is any proof yet. I think we also need a professional to tell us that she is a pathological liar. I am not sure.

Dont think the defense is going to go along with this lying theory that everyone has dreamed up. Its not going to be that easy. The State will have to prove it.

 

[ZsaZsa]

You are right. The problem some people have is slavishness to the letter of the law. I personally do not care if the right thing (justice for caylee) is achieved in the technical 'wrong' way. The legal system is not fool proof and the point of it all is for justice, not just following procedure for heaven's sake.

The system is here for everyone, not just legal professionals who are often out of touch with the spirit with which our system was founded. Kinda sad, but I trust the jury to do the right thing.

Amen. This obsession with protecting the perp's rights and trying to explain her actions away with feeble theories is frankly very upsetting and insults the reader's 's intelligence- thank God there are plenty of people around willing to fight for Caylee's voice to be heard from the grave. The intent of our legal system was to protect us all, not only criminals. It is not working against the letter of the law to use common sense and reason to judge a case or a person.

 

[Jolynna]

Is Casey charged with culpable negligence?

Yes, she is.

She's charged with first degree murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child and 4 counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer (http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1014/17715453.pdf)

Count Three (aggravated manslaughter of a child): CASEY MARIE ANTHONY, between the 15th day of June 1008 and the 16th day of July 2008, in said County and State, did willfully and by culpable negligence, while a caregiver to CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY, a child under 18 years of age, did fail or omit to provide CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY with the care, supervision and services necessary to maintain CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY'S physical and mental health or fail to make a reasonable effort to protect CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY from abuse, neglect or exploitation by another person, and by doing so brought about the death of CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY. (page 2 of the link, provided above,to the 'Indictment of Casey Marie Anthony.)

 

[cecybeans]

I think first we need to prove she lied. I know there are charges, but I dont think there is any proof yet. I think we also need a professional to tell us that she is a pathological liar. I am not sure.

Dont think the defense is going to go along with this lying theory that everyone has dreamed up. Its not going to be that easy. The State will have to prove it.

Well, we can certainly start with the interviews of her family, in which they admit she has lied for years, everyone from her own parents and brother to grandmother and uncle. Then the testimony of her friends or acquaintances, for which the words "diabolical liar" seem to be pretty much the consensus. KC admitted in her own words to LE that she lied to them during her Universal Studios questioning. We have a video of her cashing someone else's check - if that's not lying, I don't know what is. A lot of psychological professionals have weighed in here and they seem to be convinced her lying is pathological in nature, so I'll bow to their experience.

I think the SA will not have a hard time proving she's an inveterate liar. The defense ought to count on the fact she is, because her story, if it isn't a lie, is just ludicrously indefensible.

 

[ZsaZsa]

You should really read Dr Haskell's report on when death likely occurred. I interpret it differently than you. Lets both go back and read it again for the 10th time. I see it happening much later.

Unless you are an expert entomologist, then it doesn't matter when you 'see it happening'- I quoted Dr Haskell's own words on his Summary of Conclusions regarding his opinion as to the date of death.
He states the date as the later portion of June into July , so that is not open to interpretation.

 

[TinaD]

I think the psycologist or psycharatist say that there is no way to tell if someone is a patholicgal liar without acutally examining themselves. You cant really do it from television.

I think the logical reason is what she told them in the first place and that is that the nanny took caylee. It is the only story so far that makes sense.

For goodness sake, there is NO evidence of a "nanny"!!

And as for lies, how about the statement from KC that she worked at Universal?? A total lie!!

 

[ZsaZsa]

I think first we need to prove she lied. I know there are charges, but I dont think there is any proof yet. I think we also need a professional to tell us that she is a pathological liar. I am not sure.

Dont think the defense is going to go along with this lying theory that everyone has dreamed up. Its not going to be that easy. The State will have to prove it.

Was she ever willing to take a Polygraph exam?

 

[ZsaZsa]

For goodness sake, there is NO evidence of a "nanny"!!

And as for lies, how about the statement from KC that she worked at Universal?? A total lie!!

Judge Strickland summed Miss Anthony up pretty quickly when he said that she and the truth were strangers. Didn't need a Psychiatrist to do it either.

 

[Wudge]

In your humble opinion.

No. It's fact.

In Florida, the death penalty is not available for felony murder.

 

[Wudge]

Yes, she is.

She's charged with first degree murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child and 4 counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer (http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1014/17715453.pdf)

Count Three (aggravated manslaughter of a child): CASEY MARIE ANTHONY, between the 15th day of June 1008 and the 16th day of July 2008, in said County and State, did willfully and by culpable negligence, while a caregiver to CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY, a child under 18 years of age, did fail or omit to provide CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY with the care, supervision and services necessary to maintain CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY'S physical and mental health or fail to make a reasonable effort to protect CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY from abuse, neglect or exploitation by another person, and by doing so brought about the death of CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY. (page 2 of the link, provided above,to the 'Indictment of Casey Marie Anthony.)

Florida's culpable negligence statute is 784.05.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I think first we need to prove she lied. I know there are charges, but I dont think there is any proof yet. I think we also need a professional to tell us that she is a pathological liar. I am not sure.

Dont think the defense is going to go along with this lying theory that everyone has dreamed up. Its not going to be that easy. The State will have to prove it.

I Really hope the Defense goes with that line - it will be such a bad move- the SA could have a line of people who will corroborate the fact that she lies habitually.

 

[Friday]

Resp Snipped

QUOTE=Wudge;4437491

"How people come-up with such incredibly erroneous notions is just mind-boggling to me."


Of course, our erroneous notions frequently boggle your mind, Wudge! We are ordinary citizens, not criminal lawyers, and so we naturally cherish the naive delusion that the Rules of Law actually exist to aid in the Pursuit of Justice--like a Noble Partnership.

In another post you said something that has stuck in my mind ever since. You said, "As regards holding a prejudice in this case, I do have a prejudice. Truth be told, I have the same prejudice in every case. For in every case, I hold defendants or suspects or persons of interest to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a Court of law.

That is a prejudice our Constitution affords everyone, but not all assessors of evidence care enough about our Constitution to give individuals that prejudice.


I would like to suggest that, perhaps, we who are the "assessors of evidence" revere our Constitution but are also aware that evidence constituting irrefutable proof of guilt can now be deemed inadmissible and withheld from trial for reasons that were not valid, or even dreamed of, by the creators of our Constitution or even by our grandfathers.

We may revere our Constitution but perhaps we also wonder how and when defense lawyers persuaded the courts to uphold new laws that seem to offer ever-increasing protections to a killer without regard to his victims and without concern for us--the members of society who he will prey upon again because his rights require that we acquit him.

Perhaps we, who are the assessors of evidence, actually place so much importance on "evidence" that we truly deplore the fact that defense attorneys may succeed in withholding evidence from us with excuses such as "unduly prejudicial" or "the videotape showing the defendant committing the murder is inadmissible because the defendant had an expectation of privacy at the time." In fact, we put so much importance on evidence that if the Prosecutors were trying to withhold it from us, we would be every bit as antagonized, if not more so.

I don't doubt that some assessors of evidence fail to properly perform their role in a criminal trial, but I don't think that's because they don't care enough about our Constitution. Quite the contrary. I think it's because they harbor an unshakeable, naive, cherished, misconception that the true purpose of a trial is to discover the truth, the entire truth, based on the evidence…all of the evidence, so they can reach a verdict that is correct and fair. And that in doing that, justice will be served.

My reason for taking the time to write this post isn't because I expect you to agree with a word of it, but rather to remind you that our longing for justice is every bit as great as yours, and every bit as high-minded.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I think first we need to prove she lied. I know there are charges, but I dont think there is any proof yet. I think we also need a professional to tell us that she is a pathological liar. I am not sure.

Dont think the defense is going to go along with this lying theory that everyone has dreamed up. Its not going to be that easy. The State will have to prove it.

Well we know for a fact she lied about working at universal, and dropping caylee off at zanny, she lied about zanny living at sawgrass (apt was vacant for months) she lied about zanny living at a place she pointed out to LE which turned out to be a retirement home of some sort. She lied about working with zanny, jeffrey hopkins, and Julliette Louis (sp?). She also lied to her parents about employment and to her boyfriends about almost everything. She certainly does lie with about every communication we've ever seen or heard from her - jail phone calls, texts, etc. Note: These are the lies that are proven to be lies based on her LE interviews, records at the apartment building, managers at universal, and her parents/friends LE interviews.

Not sure they can or need to prove a negative and 'prove' that zanny doesn't exist, but any reasonable person will not take casey's word on this.She doesn't have a good record of being honest. She can't/won't tell anyone where she was taking caylee for 2 years - where was the house or apt? who lived there? See what I mean?

 

[Cat13067]

I was not the person who brought neglect up. That fact aside, others believe the evidence supports neglect, not aggravated child abuse much less murder one.

You were on the neglect wagon train. The others... meaning who? Jose Baez? I live in Florida and I can assure you KC will be found guilty of Murder One.

 

[Jolynna]

Florida's culpable negligence statute is 784.05.

Also covered by Florida Crimes Code Section 782.07 - Homicide - Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.

A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

http://law.onecle.com/florida/crimes/782.07.html

KC's indictment spells it out, (http://www.wftv.com/download/2008/1014/17715453.pdf page 2, Count Three)

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

My reason for taking the time to write this post isn't because I expect you to agree with a word of it, but rather to remind you that our longing for justice is every bit as great as yours, and every bit as high-minded.

You're right. I don't agree.

FWIW

 

[Wudge]

Also covered by Florida Crimes Code Section 782.07 - Homicide - Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.

A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

http://law.onecle.com/florida/crimes/782.07.html

You will want to marry this post with the words in your earlier post which read: "did willfully and by culpable negligence".

What evidence proves "did willfully and by culpable negligence"?

 

[Cat13067]

Florida's culpable negligence statute is 784.05.

I think Count One-Murder One should put KC on death row all the other counts are just icing on the cake.