Media Interviews with Case Players (SA/DT) ***Merged**

tennisgirlsc

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
180
Reaction score
0
When a jury is sequestered, the pool becomes a puddle....no wait...a drop. How many educated, intelligent people can give up their lives for 2+ months!!!! No wonder, this jury ignored the obvious and went with the most "simple" explanation. This is of course my opinion ONLY.....
 

IfIMay

New Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Messages
982
Reaction score
3
Isn't this the guy who said this "experience" would be great study for the government class he teaches?
 

8paws

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
144
Reaction score
15
Still can't get over that maybe this was just a big conspiracy all along by this family to get their beloved daughter off. Too bad their beloved granddaughter will never receive the justice she deserves.

I feel this way too.
 

BlOnDe_GuRrL

New Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
952
Reaction score
0
If they did speak about the case among themselves, they obviously didn't "head JP's previous admonitions"
Wouldn't that be juror misconduct? Mistrial?
 

Omachka

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
771
Reaction score
0
I wanted Casey to be found guilty but I had the feeling that this would be the reason she would be found not guilty.

Without knowing HOW SHE DIED they COULDN'T by law convict her of killing Caylee. Look at the jury instructions:

"The death was caused by the criminal act of Casey Marie Anthony".

If they didn't know what the criminal act was they couldn't convict her. They obviously didn't believe the duct tape/chloroform theory so without that there was no proof of a killing only a death.

Respectfully... That's not true. You don't need to know how she died to know that the death was because of a criminal act. There have been lots of people found guilty when the actual cause of death wasn't known... even some when a body wasn't ever found.
 

mass928

New Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I think the Prosecution did an excellent job putting forth the evidence.. we all understood every nuance they were eluding to. However it appears this was all lost on this particular jury. I think the prosecution felt they didn't have to "dumb down" their explanations at all... obviously should have.. :(

Casey will get what she deserves some how some way.. Karma is a B*$#@!!!
 

darnudes

Inactive
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
20
I am trying to recall this incident....

Early in the trial, after a recess, HHJP read a question he stated he received from the jury....

I am not recalling WHAT the question was, but at the time, it concerned a LOT of people because the way the question was phrased insinuated that the jurors MUST be talking about case amongst themselves...and there were concerns it might cause a mistrial....

Does anyone recall this incident and what the "question" was?

They wanted to see the heart shaped sticker found at remains site, Mason was the one that complained and said they were talking about the case, ironic no?
 

sevin106

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have been "lurking" here for quite some time but have never posted. I have followed this case from the beginning and watched the trial and saw the same evidence the jury did. WTH were they thinking!!!!:maddening:

I IMPLORE the media to continue to show this beautiful child's face all over the TV so these jurors can look at her and have to live with the unjust decision that they made.
 

jon_burrows

New Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
2,261
Reaction score
3
Website
www.youtube.com
This is what I was afraid of, that the DT would make GA appear so sleazy that it would overshadow KC's actions. So the lies of GA and CA really played well into their daughter's defense. Congratulations to the Anthony's - you all seriously deserve each other.

This is exactly why GA/CA need to be prosecuted for perjury.

IMO
 

kjpaw

Active Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
144
Reaction score
153
It's not that they have to know how the person died, but they have to know it was a murder. The SA only gave two theories on it being a murder, the duct tape and chloroform. The DT gave the theory of an accident. This means the jury had three choices: she died by the duct tape, she died by the chloroform (or both) or she died by accident. If they didn't believe she died by the duct tape or chloroform there is absolutely nothing showing that Casey KILLED Caylee. The 31 days, the partying, the body in the trunk, the lying all of that doesn’t prove that she killed her, it just proves that she was a horrible mother, she lied and that she covered it up. I’m NOT saying I believe this, because I do believe that she was responsible but without the Duct Tape/Chloroform there is no proof that Caylee died by the hands of her mother.

Agreed, but there is duct tape. And again, the Laci Peterson case had far far less evidence of cause of death. I just don't want to believe that if you hide a body long enough that our society is so overwhelmed by CSI/forensic needs that we cannot convict on circumstantial evidence. Thanks for responding. I respect your response.
 

Who_What_When

Trying to keep an open mind...
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
550
Reaction score
0
Respectfully... That's not true. You don't need to know how she died to know that the death was because of a criminal act. There have been lots of people found guilty when the actual cause of death wasn't known... even some when a body wasn't ever found.

If you don't know the person was murdered how do you get pass "The death was caused by the criminal act of Casey Marie Anthony?"
 

lonetraveler

Crime Addict
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
16,084
Reaction score
30,543
I'm very curious about these statements about not being able to determine HOW she died. This is not the first time cause of death is undetermined in a homicide...but I guess my bottom line question is, do people discussing this line of failure (inability to prove HOW she died) know how Lacy Peterson died or do they believe Scott Peterson should have been found not guilty? Absolutely NO hostility on my part or being snarky, I am truly curious to hear from others why there was a need to determine the details of a death...was it only b/c the defense offered up a possible alternative? My feeling is that if people must know how a person died, then we may have difficulty ever proving a person guilty if the body is not discovered in time to recover forensic evidence....MOO. Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and my heart goes out to all of us as we have hoped for justice for Caylee...

I'm looking for a "positive take" on this verdict..............maybe I can be thankful that this jury was not serving on the Scott Peterson case.........Hey, I need something to hold on to...............:banghead:
 

AVMAURA

Army Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
This, IMO, is one of the problems with the U.S. Criminal Justice System: putting such important decisions in the hands of 12 (often) ill-informed, (often) uneducated people. Jurors often lack the critical thinking skills necessary to assess the evidence. It might not matter in some (or most) cases. But it does matter in cases that depend on complex forensic evidence. How about requiring jurors to meet some minimum threshold of competence?

Like having a few braincells
 

Who_What_When

Trying to keep an open mind...
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
550
Reaction score
0
Agreed, but there is duct tape. And again, the Laci Peterson case had far far less evidence of cause of death. I just don't want to believe that if you hide a body long enough that our society is so overwhelmed by CSI/forensic needs that we cannot convict on circumstantial evidence. Thanks for responding. I respect your response.

I'm guessing they didn't believe that the duct tape was used as the weapon. I don't want to believe that people can hide a body and get away with murder either and I would hope that's not true. I think every case is different but in this case there was a chance that it was an accident. I think that was the key. I think that the defense was smart to bring up the accident because it gave them another theory to go with. I think this stinks and I really really really hoped that she would have been found guilty and I'm so sick at the thought that she is going to go free.
 

Quiche

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
9,116
Reaction score
328
LOL-- google his name, he should be here soon, maybe he'll join in. :cool:
 

TexanMom

New Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
503
Reaction score
4
Isn't this the guy who said this "experience" would be great study for the government class he teaches?

I think so! I guess he can tell his students how great it was to set free a lying murderer!
 

AVMAURA

Army Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
Ok... so, let me get this right... had Casey been convicted on Murder 1 today and JB and all filed for an appeal, due to supposed jury tampering, it could get appealed and she could walk.
However, they found her NOT GUILTY on most charges, even if it is proven that the jury had pow wows at the bar every night, there is no appeal allowed by the state to retry her? That is insane!


America......got to love it
 
Top