If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why

[beccalecca1]

Who testified that he adored Caylee and never had a problem with her being around? I don't think Tony had anything against Caylee and I'm sure he thought she was a really cute kid, but he was a 20 something college guy. The relationship wasn't serious enough for him to change his lifestyle to accomodate Caylee. He didn't tell his roomates to clean up their act to make room for his girlfriend and her 2 year old daughter...instead he told FCA that Caylee couldn't sleep over night at his apartment. And I don't fault him for that, it wasn't because he didn't like Caylee, but because he knew it wasn't appropiate. Unlike RM who thought it was okay for Caylee to sleep in the same bed with him and FCA.

IMO, I don't think any person would tell their roommates that they're not allowed to live the lives they want to live because their roommate says so. I think the "not allowing Caylee to sleep over" bit wasn't because that's not what he wanted. It was because his roommates have rights to their share of the apartment, so instead of arguing over who's going to do what and when, it was just easier to not have Caylee at the place overnight exposed to the drug use, etc. Tony didn't use drugs. He testified to feeling like he loved Casey. I'm sure that if the relationship progressed and his lease was up, it would've logical that him, Casey, and Caylee would live together. It was just the situation at the time. I don't think this is nearly enough motive to murder your child. A relationship that was a couple of months old? It just seems too far fetched for me, especially given that Tony appeared to be truly interested in the relationship with both Casey and Caylee.

 

[Harmony 2]

In multi-tasking I missed some tidbits of testimony during the trial... Was the following presented?

Casey downloaded and saved the death penalty cartoon in a folder on July 8. She looked at it again on July 10. I have always been perplexed, if this was an accident, then why the concern or interest in this topic..

http://www.cfnews13.com/static/arti...casey-anthony-deposition-sandra-cawn-0413.pdf
On page 12 of Deputy Sandra Cawn's deposition she states the following about the anti-death penalty cartoon found on Casey's laptop:

To get back on topic, I did not agree with the verdict but I know every small detail in this case and a lot of it was not presented in court. I am not sure why it was not presented, prejudicial perhaps... I felt the pertinent information got lost in the minutae... The State could have done a better job at pounding on the crucial evidence...

This post is my opinion only...

 

[beccalecca1]

I (like many others) still have a problem with the duct tape, the lies and the many others things that point to obvious guilt of at "least" manslaughter.

I understand that.

IMO, the duct tape wasn't a clear point of evidence to anything. The area was flooded at some point before her body was found, so who knows the original position of the tape. And, on top of that, the tape was only sticking to the hair mat and RK testifying to moving the skull slightly to see if it was a skull (although he's made many other statements to what he did with the skull). So, with those to facts we can't draw a conclusion to where it was in the beginning (at least I can't). And, the lies were going on way before there was ever a question of where Caylee was. The lies are not a direct result of this single incident, so it's hard for me to consider that as part of the proof she's guilty of anything.

 

[WillChgo]

For me, all the evidence found in area A, all the evidence found in the trunk, and the computer forensics was a battle of the forensic experts. I feel both sides performed equally well, or close enough to equally, that reasonable doubt had to be applied.

Like most people, the 31 days of unacceptable behavior looks to be very, very, very bad for KC. If I had not witnessed first hand, bizarre bahavior from several of my relatives following untimely, and very sad deaths in our family, I would have had a very difficult time considering KC's behavior for 31 days could be explained by grief. The grief expert, although having a rather unique way of presenting testimony, made enough valid points that one could come around to believing it is possible that KC's behavior may have been caused by grief. Again for me, this possible explanation added to the equally possible explanations for the forensics by the defense experts, leaves me with reasonable doubt.
So I have to agree with the verdict.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

What I don't understand is the evidence found in the trunk. If six people and a trained dog smell a decomposing body how can this be ignored?

I know Baez' argument here: well six people didn't smell it- so they cancel each other out.

That is flawed logic. Just because someone doesn't smell something does not mean that it did not smell. Those that had the opportunity to open the trunk and smell it did so. So also did the defense witness who witnessed the smell two years after the liners had been removed from the trunk.

Not only was there a dead body in the trunk, but the hair with banding had to be from Caylee's decomposing body. There is no scientific evidence that banding can occur absent decomposition. The defense witness tried to find other causes for banding and failed to do so. This is not about two sides performing reasonably equally on the hair banding issue. IMO this is clear win for the prosecution.

How can there be reasonable doubt that Caylee's dead body was in Casey's trunk?

 

[theBritster]

I disagree with it. Why would duct tape be needed on her face if she died in an accident? I don't think the duct tape came unstuck from the bag and then restuck itself to her hair keeping her mandible intact. If that was done to stage a kidnapping why wasn't she actually reported kidnapped? The only reason that logically makes sense to me (I understand others may make sense of it a different way) is that she didn't call 911 because she couldn't let paramedics see the body. I just wish the jury would have taken more time. All jmo.

 

[Sustained]

Two differences with the Scott Petersen case:

1. It is easier to believe a husband killed his wife that a young attractive girl killed her daughter.

2. The fact that this case had more evidence than the Scott Petersen case made it harder, not easier to put all the pieces together. There were more sources of potential confusion in the Casey Anthony case.

I am not saying that the prosecution failed to prove their case. Where they failed is to instruct the jury in why Baez's attempt to bring confusion was not the same as reasonable doubt.

1. Maybe so, but I cite the Susan Smith, Darlie Routier, and Andrea Yates cases as evidence the contrary and I'm sure there are others.

2. More evidence that SP ... again true, but the SP jury deliberated for about a week looking at all of the evidence and put the puzzle together.
This jury spent 10 hours minus lunch & breaks ... no way they could do the due diligence that the evidence puzzle necessitated.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

I have a few questions for those who think the verdict was wrong.

We all know that OS is NOT evidence. So, if you don't believe Caylee died of a drowning, on the morning of the 16th, then when and where did KC murder Caylee, when did she whip up the chloroform, where did she buy the materials needed for making chloroform, when did she use the chloroform, when did she triple bag her, when did she put her in the trunk, how long did she drive around with her in the trunk, when did she place the duct tape on her mouth and place the heart shaped sticker, at what time and date did she throw her away like trash, when did she lay Caylee's decomposing body in the backyard where the cadaver dogs alerted, how long did the body sit out in the open where the dogs alerted, why did the odor intensify in the trunk after the removal of the source of the odor, how did a dissipating substance like chloroform exist in a trunk that had been opened numerous times, how did the one single solitary strand of hair with apparent decomp end up being in the trunk, why were all the maggots in the white trash bag if there was no food in the bag, why did the state not do further testing on the adipocere like substance to prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that it was indeed adipocere since such tests do exist, when was Caylee placed less than 20 feet from the road, why would KC place Caylee less than 20 feet from the road a quarter mile from her home if she was trying to cover up a murder, why were shorts belonging to Caylee that were way too small for her found in area A, how did KC manage to not leave one single solitary shred of evidence in area A that would tie her to the scene, how did a number of searchers from July 18th through late August when tropical storm Faye hit fail to locate Caylee when she was less than 20 feet from the road and less than 10 feet into the wooded area, and finally if the above questions were not answered and proven in court (which they were not) then how can you NOT have reasonable doubt? I do agree with the verdict because in my opinion there were way too many questions unanswered by the prosecution.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

 

[Peachy Keen]

I am still in shock over the NG verdict. I just don't understand it at all. When I add up all the circumstantial evidence, it is clear to me that FCA was responsible for Caylee's death.

IMO, there was no reason to hide the body unless she feared that the cause of death would be discovered.

She didn't report her daughter's disappearance, her mother did.

She lied to her parents about Caylee's whereabouts for 31 days & asked for one more day.

She was totally nonchalant with the 911 operator re: Caylee's "kidnapping".

She searched for "chloroform" & "how to make chloroform" IMO.

CA lied about doing the searches because she knew they were FCA's IMO.

The chloroform searches were deleted AFTER Caylee was reported missing.

She went on a date to Blockbuster w/ Tony the very night her daughter "drowned" & stayed in bed with him the next day and showed no concern over what happened to Caylee.

She partied the 31 days away including entering a hot body contest.

I believed the experts who testified that the car trunk smelled of decomposition, had high chloroform levels, and contained a hair with a death band.

She abandoned the car and it was hit on by cadaver dogs.

She lied to police about a kidnapping and lied about receiving a call from Caylee on July 15, 2008.

She led police to the Sawgrass apartments and later changed the story from the Sawgrass apts. to the park.

She led police on a wild goose chase to Universal to her non-existent office to find her non-existent phone to locate Zanny's non-existent number.

She showed no concern for Caylee when she called home from jail and her only interest was talking to Tony.

The duct tape and bags are linked to her house.

She had a different story for everyone who asked about Caylee.

She sat in jail for 3 years.

There was no evidence presented that anyone else was involved. The only thing I am hung up on is if she put the duct tape on to make it look like a kidnapping. Therefore I would have voted guilty of aggravated manslaughter because I do believe that FCA was responsible for Caylee's death whether accidentally or on purpose.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

IMO, I don't think any person would tell their roommates that they're not allowed to live the lives they want to live because their roommate says so. I think the "not allowing Caylee to sleep over" bit wasn't because that's not what he wanted. It was because his roommates have rights to their share of the apartment, so instead of arguing over who's going to do what and when, it was just easier to not have Caylee at the place overnight exposed to the drug use, etc. Tony didn't use drugs. He testified to feeling like he loved Casey. I'm sure that if the relationship progressed and his lease was up, it would've logical that him, Casey, and Caylee would live together. It was just the situation at the time. I don't think this is nearly enough motive to murder your child. A relationship that was a couple of months old? It just seems too far fetched for me, especially given that Tony appeared to be truly interested in the relationship with both Casey and Caylee.

IMHO I don't think there is ever enough motive to murder your child, but I will agree that it wasn't the entire motive. I think a few things came into play. I absolutely believe there was a fight with Cindy the night of the 15th and FCA wanted out of her parents home. No way to just move in with Tony with Caylee and after the fight there was no way she was going to give her mother what she wanted most...Caylee.

 

[dvdman]

So when do the lies end and the truth begins?
In Casey case the lies NEVER have ended since
day one.

Do you see my point? You cannnot and should not
believe anything she says. That in itself goes a long
to proving someones guilt in my opinion. Dr. G's testimony
in my opinion went a long way in clearing things up. If they
needed to cleared up to begin with. No accidental death has
EVER not been reported (911) to the authorities. What does
that leave you with?

I understand that.

IMO, the duct tape wasn't a clear point of evidence to anything. The area was flooded at some point before her body was found, so who knows the original position of the tape. And, on top of that, the tape was only sticking to the hair mat and RK testifying to moving the skull slightly to see if it was a skull (although he's made many other statements to what he did with the skull). So, with those to facts we can't draw a conclusion to where it was in the beginning (at least I can't). And, the lies were going on way before there was ever a question of where Caylee was. The lies are not a direct result of this single incident, so it's hard for me to consider that as part of the proof she's guilty of anything.

 

[WillChgo]

I understand that.IMO, the duct tape wasn't a clear point of evidence to anything. The area was flooded at some point before her body was found, so who knows the original position of the tape. And, on top of that, the tape was only sticking to the hair mat and RK testifying to moving the skull slightly to see if it was a skull (although he's made many other statements to what he did with the skull). So, with those to facts we can't draw a conclusion to where it was in the beginning (at least I can't). And, the lies were going on way before there was ever a question of where Caylee was. The lies are not a direct result of this single incident, so it's hard for me to consider that as part of the proof she's guilty of anything.

I agree that there is some questions about exactly where the duct tape was placed in the beginning. But this is not sufficient, IMO, to discount this as evidence of murder.

It was proven, IMO, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the duct tape belonged to the Anthony family.

The scenario that the duct tape was used to hold the bag together does not explain how it held the mandible in place and how it came to stick to Caylee's hair.

My recollection is that some of the hairs did not show banding indicating that it was placed prior to decomposition.

Even if Kronk moved the skull that does not disprove the evidence, IMO, beyond a reasonable doubt, that three large pieces of duct tape were placed by one of the Anthony's over Cayleee's head and face.

And give that IMO, it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee's body was in Casey's trunk, the circumstantial evidence strongly indicates that the member of the Anthony family who did so was Casey.

Why would anyone place duct tape on Caylee if it was "an accident that snowballed out of control?"

 

[beccalecca1]

IMHO I don't think there is ever enough motive to murder your child, but I will agree that it wasn't the entire motive. I think a few things came into play. I absolutely believe there was a fight with Cindy the night of the 15th and FCA wanted out of her parents home. No way to just move in with Tony with Caylee and after the fight there was no way she was going to give her mother what she wanted most...Caylee.

Sorry... the part you bolded was suppose to say "that wasn't nearly enough motive for Casey to murder her child"

There is never enough motive to murder your child in "normal" circumstances, although parents do sometimes.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

You realize, I hope, that the defense can ALWAYS find some paid "expert" to refute the prosecution's? This doesn't men that the two sides should cancel each other out on the forensics.

A "grief expert"?! This is where common sense must come into play. Do you know of anyone, or have you ever heard of anyone, who parties, carries on, shops, etc. after their child dies - even if that were in an accident? 100% of mothers don't act that way....unless of course they're happy that their child is gone.

I believe between the cross examinations by the defense, and the defense witnesses testimony, that they were successful in raising reasonable doubt to most if not all forensic evidence.

As for the grief, and the loss of a child, my cousin lost her 6 year old daughter to a brain tumor, and could not deal with it. My cousin felt it was all her fault her daughter died. She drank to forget, partied to forget, and then turned to drugs to forget. After nearly two years of this behavior she ended up in jail for a DUI. In jail, she dried out, and sought counseling, and after getting the help she needed now leads a normal productive life. During those two years however, she was not ready to get help, didn't want it, wouldn't accept it, and didn't feel she needed it. This tragedy in our family occurred many years ago, but it shows me that grief can make some of us act in abnormal ways.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

 

[dvdman]

Read the post from "Peachy Keen" and I believe she covered pretty well in my opinion. Sorry but if walks like duck, looks like duck....oh you know the rest. Casey is the duck like no other duck anyone in this world had ever seen. The sad thing is some (a few) people still believe she's innocent. OMG

I have a few questions for those who think the verdict was wrong.

We all know that OS is NOT evidence. So, if you don't believe Caylee died of a drowning, on the morning of the 16th, then when and where did KC murder Caylee, when did she whip up the chloroform, where did she buy the materials needed for making chloroform, when did she use the chloroform, when did she triple bag her, when did she put her in the trunk, how long did she drive around with her in the trunk, when did she place the duct tape on her mouth and place the heart shaped sticker, at what time and date did she throw her away like trash, when did she lay Caylee's decomposing body in the backyard where the cadaver dogs alerted, how long did the body sit out in the open where the dogs alerted, why did the odor intensify in the trunk after the removal of the source of the odor, how did a dissipating substance like chloroform exist in a trunk that had been opened numerous times, how did the one single solitary strand of hair with apparent decomp end up being in the trunk, why were all the maggots in the white trash bag if there was no food in the bag, why did the state not do further testing on the adipocere like substance to prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that it was indeed adipocere since such tests do exist, when was Caylee placed less than 20 feet from the road, why would KC place Caylee less than 20 feet from the road a quarter mile from her home if she was trying to cover up a murder, why were shorts belonging to Caylee that were way too small for her found in area A, how did KC manage to not leave one single solitary shred of evidence in area A that would tie her to the scene, how did a number of searchers from July 18th through late August when tropical storm Faye hit fail to locate Caylee when she was less than 20 feet from the road and less than 10 feet into the wooded area, and finally if the above questions were not answered and proven in court (which they were not) then how can you NOT have reasonable doubt? I do agree with the verdict because in my opinion there were way too many questions unanswered by the prosecution.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

 

[imagirlgeek]

I won't disagree but others had mentioned that you need to answer what exactly did she do to cause child neglect. Obviously the law isn't clear that simply not reporting your child missing = child neglect (thus the petitions for Caylee's Law) so what did she do that caused child neglect then? They already found her not guilty of actually murdering her child.

The legal definition of 'child neglect':

Child abuse and neglect are defined by Federal and State laws. The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) provides minimum standards that States must incorporate in their statutory definitions of child abuse and neglect. The CAPTA definition of "child abuse and neglect," at a minimum, refers to:

"Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse, or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm"

Specific to Florida:

Neglect
Citation: Ann. Stat. § 39.01

Neglect occurs when a child is deprived of, or is allowed to be deprived of, necessary food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment or a child is permitted to live in an environment when such deprivation or environment causes the child's physical, mental, or emotional health to be significantly impaired or to be in danger of being significantly impaired.

So, based on these statutes, whether she killed Caylee or it was an accident, by not calling 911, Caylee was 'deprived of medical treatment' when she was wrapped in trash bags and tossed into a swamp, right?

And based on her allegations of sexual abuse at the hands of both GA and Lee (which I find difficult to believe), she was also neglectful by permitting Caylee to live in an environment which could cause the child's physical, mental, or emotional health to be significantly impaired or to be in danger of being significantly impaired.

I can't remember if the jury choices were 'neglect' or 'abuse', I'll go look now. If they didn't have the option of neglect, I'll look up what the state considers to be 'abuse' and post it.

 

[NotRocketSighence]

1.) What reasonable explanation is there for Not reporting YOUR child (not George's, not Cindy's) missing?
2.) What reasonable explanation is there for saying Zanny kidnapped her?
3.) What reasonable explanation is there for borrowing a neighbor's shovel 2 days after you admit your child drowned?
4.) What reasonable explanation is there for driving around with trash (not garbage) in your truck all the while complaining of a smell?
5.) What reasonable explanation for the smell of Decomp to be in your truck at the same time your child has been kidnapped/drowned????
6.) What reasonable explanation is there to sit in jail for 2 1/2 years, telling police, family, etc, that someone kidnapped the baby and if I speak my family is in danger??? All the while your child drowned?
7.) What reasonable explanation is there to look up "How to make chloroform", 1 or 84 times???
8.) What reasonable explanation is there to have duct tape ANYWHERE on the skull/face of a child? Let alone a child that drowned?
9.) When is lieing about supporting your child, stealing, etc the equivalent to being a GOOD MOTHER????

9.) IN WHAT WORLD IS IT REASONABLE TO NOT HOLD THE SOLE PARENT OF A TODDLER ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE WELFARE OF THIER CHILD? AT WHAT POINT DOES A PARENT HAVE TO BE A PARENT???

I will take a stab at these. Don't shoot the messenger We all have to decide what is reasonable for ourselves.

1.) Caylee died by genuine accident or by questionable accident or within a time frame of other questionable things being found out. Drugs in her system for example, which would have ensured Casey was responsible for something. Casey panicked. Didn't want to risk going to jail and set about disposing of the body and going on with life as "normal" The time after gave her time to figure a story. Caylee was kidnapped and killed by the nanny who would never really be found because she didn't exist.
2.) It points the finger away from Casey and gives a possible story if/when the body is found. The fact Zanny was a made up person means no one would be charged.
3.) People borrow shovels for many genuine reasons all the time.
4.) Too lazy to dump it. Too squicked out by the maggots? People live with more filth in their homes and don't care to clean it up.
5.) Decomp could of been present even if Caylee died by genuine accident. The body didn't magic to the woods.
6.) I don't think she thought it would take 3 years to get to trial. Once you begin down a path of one lie, then another, then another, its impossible to do anything but come clean and admit you are a liar about everything that comes out of your mouth OR you dig your heels in and stick to your story no matter what. At some point her legal advice smacked her with some reality that no one believes it anyway so she may as well undig her heels. Admitting anything after she was arrested most likely would of led to charges of some sort and jail time.
7.) Curiosity. You would be surprised what the average person just decides to look up for very benign reasons other than curiosity from hearing it mentioned somewhere.
8.) Going with the accident theory, panicking, having a body to dispose of the body. Using duct tape to stop body fluids pouring out. To stop insects entering her body and laying eggs. Using a bunch of trash bags to further conceal her. The average person never has to deal with disposing of a body. I assume most who do want to dispose of it so they arent detected.
9.) Not excusing but Casey gave birth. Most of Caylee's care in every practical monetary sense appears to of come from Cindy. I imagine Casey was like a big sister to Caylee. Caring for her in the fun ways and the more responsible care was out of her hands. Every time Cindy testified about Caylee and her care, she came across as if Caylee was her own child. She had incredible detail about Caylees day to day care. I doubt Casey "had" to be. No excusing, not judging. Thank goodness Caylee had Cindy and George.

 

[beccalecca1]

So when do the lies end and the truth begins?
In Casey case the lies NEVER have ended since
day one.

Do you see my point? You cannnot and should not
believe anything she says. That in itself goes a long
to proving someones guilt in my opinion. Dr. G's testimony
in my opinion went along way in clearing things up. If they
needed to cleared up to begin with. No accidental death has
EVER not been reported (911) to the authorities. What does
that leave you with?

Dr. G's testimony was strictly the information she researched in her community of practice. And, in all honesty, all of the information she has available to her would naturally be reported.

I replayed her testimony many times because I just thought it would be odd for an expert, a medical expert at that, to state 100% on anything. It's hard to say something happens 100% of the time, especially when you're dealing with humans. But, I discovered she specifically stated that it was in her area, not 100% all the time.

I respect Dr. G. Don't get me wrong. I could understand why she would label this as homicide. But, that doesn't automatically equate to murder.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

I have two questions that I am very curious to know from people who agree with the verdict.

1. Do you believe FCA was with Caylee at the time of her death?

2. And if so, do you believe she was alone or with someone else?
(i.e. George and the drowning story)

 

[beccalecca1]

I agree that there is some questions about exactly where the duct tape was placed in the beginning. But this is not sufficient, IMO, to discount this as evidence of murder.

It was proven, IMO, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the duct tape belonged to the Anthony family.

The scenario that the duct tape was used to hold the bag together does not explain how it held the mandible in place and how it came to stick to Caylee's hair.

My recollection is that some of the hairs did not show banding indicating that it was placed prior to decomposition.

Even if Kronk moved the skull that does not disprove the evidence, IMO, beyond a reasonable doubt, that three large pieces of duct tape were placed by one of the Anthony's over Cayleee's head and face.

And give that IMO, it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee's body was in Casey's trunk, the circumstantial evidence strongly indicates that the member of the Anthony family who did so was Casey.

Why would anyone place duct tape on Caylee if it was "an accident that snowballed out of control?"

You are correct that BARD the tape belonged to the Anthony family. Who used it is the question.

I don't think it was proven that the tape held the mandible in place, especially since the mandible was still found in place after RK moved the skull. What was holding it in place then? The tape wasn't attached to the skull at that point. I believe it is certainly possible that the tape wasn't attached to the face at any point, attached to the hair maybe, and through the tearing of the bags, roots were able to grow around the undisturbed mandible/skull holding it in place.

And, I don't believe it was proven that Caylee's body was in the trunk. After listening to the evidence and seeing the pictures of the trunk and underside of the spare tire cover, I find it hard to believe there was decomposition fluids there. There wasn't enough staining, IMO.

 

[NotRocketSighence]

Dr. G's testimony
in my opinion went a long way in clearing things up. If they
needed to cleared up to begin with. No accidental death has
EVER not been reported (911) to the authorities. What does
that leave you with?

*respectfully snipped*

How would Dr G know of the accidents that aren't reported ? They aren't reported!

She had to of meant every death by accident she comes across was reported to 911. She can't state for a fact every accidental death.

I hate disputing what Dr G said because she was incredibly credible but this sentence never made sense when I heard her testify.