Discussion in 'Caylee Anthony 2 years old' started by JBean, Nov 30, 2009.
This is for Q&A. stay on topic please.
:waitasec: Ok color me confused.
See it's all this talking in circles that confuses matters. In your words quote me. I never said anything about dis positive evidence.
The basis of what you are trying to argue is that because Casey had no plan for disposal it works against premed. I'm saying that I disagree with that assessment because a clear definitive plan for disposal is not required for premed murder as in the linked case I gave. The woman in that case had ample time to form premed, but the plan to dispose of the body was done in a rush as an after thought to get rid of the evidence after the fact. Much like I think it was in this case.
In fact I would say any plan for disposal helps a premed claim no matter how elaborate or simple. Premed does not require the crime genius of a Professor Moriarty. It can happen in mere moments and the disposal of the body indicates that someone was trying to dispose of the evidence as well. Which to me works against a possible accident theory. Not saying it out right proves an accident theory wrong but, if it were truly an accident Casey is just a poor victim here and would have no need to wrap duct, double plastic bag, use another bag, and dump her body in the woods.
Further more I would say People v. Scott 176 Cal. App. 2d 458 pretty much proves that circumstantial evidence is more then enough for a conviction. Now right now a G or NG verdict is pure speculation because we are not a jury and this is not a court room. However that being said Casey can be convicted on the evidence currently in view. Whether that conviction would be a wrongful conviction is another matter of opinion.
I would be interested to hear Rhornsby's thoughts on the disposal of Caylee. Given the evidence found in Casey's trunk (hair evidence, dog hits, entomological evidence, napkins with grave wax, ect, ect), the way in which Caylee was disposed of(duct tape, triple bagged) and the forensic evidence indicating the time line in which the body was placed.
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4502853&postcount=620"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby[/ame]
Re: above post, If premeditation can happen in the blink of an eye, how does that relate to the disposal of the body? Premeditation that happens in seconds, doesn't necessarily have plans for the disposal of the body. People have acted out without thinking of what will follow. I feel the disposal method, fits her personality to a tee.
Please remember our Terms of Service.
No speculating on who a poster is in real life. If you do this you will be giving a long time out or even banned.
First, I would just say you both could be correct. When it comes to what constitutes enough premeditation, the case law basically leaves it to the trier of fact (jury) if their is some evidence suggesting premeditation. So it sounds like the two of you are having a classic juror debate - not one the case law will settle one way or the other.
As for the evidence you have mentioned, I think it is very strong circumstantial evidence that suggests guilt of something (interesting fact: DNA is actually circumstantial evidence by definition).
Finally, please don't get me started on the manner in which the body was disposed. I just cannot imagine that it was done alone - I PERSONALLY think someone else had to have assisted. But that is just my PERSONAL intuition.
Mr. Hornsby, I find that interesting that you don't think Casey disposed of Caylee's body alone, are you leaning towards a family member or a friend? I do think there are some people that believe George may have helped, but I'm not going there, thought about it, but am having trouble thinking that as a possibility. IMO
Mr. Hornsby. I think this got lost in the last thread. Would appreciate your thoughts.........
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4503068&postcount=625"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Q&A Thread for R Hornsby[/ame]
You posted: "What your basically trying to say is that because Casey didn't have a definitive "plan" for disposal she couldn't have a "plan" for murder."
As I previously stated, what you posted is 'incorrect'. I've neither said nor implied that if the alleged disposal of Caylee's body by Casey were true, it would foreclose (reference your words: "could not have a plan') on Casey having committed a premeditated murder.
(I hold my position to be clear. If you still have a question on this topic, I suggest you offer it to Mr. Hornsby.)
Question: I am still working to understand why premeditation has to include a pre-plan for the disposal of a body. Will the prosecution be able to bring in testimony about the cheque fraud, theft of grandma's cheques, grandfather's care money, etc as a basis for showing that Casey never thought out the consequences of her actions? Casey seemed to be so much the 10 minute kind of girl who just did what she wanted to do to achieve her "goal" including killing Caylee. Why must we believe she thought about disposal until she had to - i.e. the overwhelming smell. To me her actions of carrying the body around in her trunk until she had to deal with it seems typical of the way she handled everything. Could you please comment and thank you in advance.
It's interesting that you mention a second person involved. I've always kind of thought that myself, but after looking more at Casey's character I just don't see her trusting anyone enough (except Cindy or Lee) to do that.
Despite what I personally think about Cindy's character and her moral compass I just don't see her tossing Caylee out like trash. The only other person she trusted enough was Lee. Yeah he is a bit off and has said some rather....odd things, but I don't think he'd have it in him.
Also I think given Casey's character if someone else was involved she would toss them under the bus in a heart beat.
In terms of the circumstantial evidence in this case I think it's as strong or stronger then People v. Scott 176 Cal. App. 2d 458. This case unlike that one has a body.
Thank you for your response and your participation on the forum btw.
So you were at Florida when Nebraska beat them 62-24 in the 96 Fiesta Bowl for the National Title? Sorry my brother went to FU and I always have to toss that game at him.
Premed does not have to include a pre-plan of the disposal of the body. It could include it but its not required for premed to occur according to jury instructions.
Ding ding ding ding! ITA with the bolded part. I just posted on another thread about this exact thing. The disposal method fits her M.O. perfectly! Leave things to the last possible second and only explain or deal with things when pressed into a corner. Like the day before graduation, or at the end of the hall at universal.
I also don't get how a jury is expected to infer or consider how the lame disposal method makes premeditated murder less likely, yet they're supposedly prohibited from making inferences as to her guilt. :waitasec: The defense is going to have to commit to something....either the body was or wasn't in the car, and go from there.
I'd like to get Mr.Hornsby's take on this. Would you attack the forensics, dog hits and testimony about a body being in the car in the first place, or would you try to give an alternate theory as to why the body was in the car?
BBM. Sorry for ignoring your request not to get you started...my curiosity is getting the better of my manners. What makes you think someone else assisted? Women have been lugging heavy children around as if they have super human strength for centuries -- so carrying her into the woods would not be physically impossible. Is there something else that makes you think she had help?
I apologize in advance to those who my blunt language is about to offend, so turn away if you are squeamish.
Forensically, her car was fairly clean. There seems to be a complete lack of fingerprint evidence that should still be available (home test: go tear off a piece of duct tape and
see how often and firmly your fingers touch the tape side).
And lets talk superhuman strength, imagine a dead limp body. It cannot be easy to maneuver and even harder to get inside a small bag. And based on the evidence, when she finally disposed of the body it was already decaying, which means there would have been bodily fluid. Someone was bright enough to either think in advance, or get the original laundry bag into black plastic bags - that takes two people.
Okay, I got started and i am finished because i just know someone helped her - someone with law enforcement experience is my guess.
Hmm - to someone giving her help with the body. I can see it if it was an adult, but a small child? As a mother she would be very used to lifting her up and into chairs, her car seat - and had you thought about if she bagged her immediately? If Caylee's death happened in the house or the back yard, do you think her first thought was to hide the body? In a garbage bag - or rather two because everyone knows one garbage bag will break it whatever is in it is heavy - then the white bag to make carrying it easier - a heavy garbage bag is hard to manage - slips, etc. And in her trunk, if someone saw a white laundry bag, it would seem more plausible than a large garbage bag. Is just the handling of the baby the only reason why you think she had help? Caylee was small - only 30 or 40 lbs.
The only thing prominent about me is the rate at which I am going bald...
Most people seem to think that Caylee was placed into the two black trash bags, and then into the laundry bag. I think the reason for this is that the M.E.'s report states that some of Caylee's bones were inside the trash bags.
What led you to believe she was placed in the trashbags, and then into the laundry bag?
ETA: Also: Present inside this laundry bag are two fragments of black,gnarled plastic consistent with the black trash bags
For reference, M.E. Report: http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/06/19/6440.6475.pdf
Meh...I respect your opinion, but
I'm a 5'7" 120lb woman and I've done all sorts of things involving couches, pianos, drunk friends (who were also leaking fluids), etc. Nothing superhuman about it, IMO. Only takes determination, and I think the motivation to hide a dead body would be pretty fortifying.
And Caylee was tiny.
Question: in case you missed it earlier, how would you argue the body in the car issue...A)body was never in car, or B)something else?
I weigh 100lbs soaking wet and haul 50lb bags of dogfood all the time when working with the dogs.
Casey could do that by herself without any issue.
Adrenaline helps a bit too.
Counselor (young grasshopper), you're a real treat, and a superbly principled treat to boot.
(Tip of my hat ... BTW ... If you were defending Casey, would a former bounty hunter qualify as having law enforcement experience? Though I suspect you have another person in mind.)
Separate names with a comma.