Sidebar Discussion

[MsMacGyver]

I think you are right about the sequestration. Maybe they picked the jury backwards. Maybe they should have started in Orlando to see if a jury could be put together. This was all over national news and if you are interested you will find it. I was in Orlando a number of times during these three years and no one seemed to be interested in what was going on at the time.

When I served on a jury the judge could not have been nicer. He did, however, tell us that if we had questions we needed to bring them to his attention by writing a note and giving it to the bailiff which he would read in court and then answer the question. I think JP would have been easy to talk to even if you had a private question.

A friend of mine was on a jury where one of the jurors admitted he lied during vior dire on a question. Being a paralegal and knowing it had to be reported, she asked to see the judge privately. The judge assured her she did the right thing and the person was removed. No one else came forward because they did not realize this person could have caused a big problem. jmo

That might be why they have the jurors write notes, it's always easier if you don't want to face someone to write them a note or letter.
I heard on HLN not too long ago, that a jury was made up of some former jurors and the reason they were chosen again was because they had done a good job before...it had to be a recent trial...I didn't know this could be done..
Was there any former jurors on the A trial and if not..there should have been..That to me would trump a jury consultant..No one likes that idea so how about requiring 2% of all jurys to contain former proven jurors?

 

[logicalgirl]

The jury instructions in this trial were very easy to understand, and I have no reason to believe that the jury didn't understand them. Also, as I've mentioned before, most of those pages of jury instructions were 'white space'. The instructions themselves weren't long and were easy to understand; they were written in simpler and more conversational style than many jury instructions I've read.

I think the jury understood them well and any 'questions' they had were for the lawyers about some of their evidence, not about the instructions.

You and I must have read a different set of jury instructions. I've giving them the benefit of the doubt as to why they did not review each piece of evidence and the testimony of each witness before coming to a decision. If you say they did clearly understand the instructions then I am back to being mystified as to why they did not participate in this trial at all.

 

[logicalgirl]

That is not true. I was on a jury and we had a question and that question was answered by the judge when we were called back into the courtroom and the judge read the question to the court. It would depend on the question but what the juror's here claim were questions regarding the penalty stage and the judge would have answered their questions because obviously they did not understand the jury instructions. How can you deliberate when you don't understand how you are suppose to do so? This was a big problem for this jury. jmo

I agree, and HHJP made it quite clear he would always make himself available for any questions they might have or any request for a review of evidence would be readily made available for them.

 

[MarthaM]

And just to follow that up: No, the prosectution wasn't perfect. But for a jury to aquit on all levels they either had to be stupid, corrupt, or totally confused. A reasonable, average human being could simply have not came back with NG on all counts. I'm sorry for those out there defending this jury saying the state didn't prove their case. They did. That's why the world went cattywonkers and still is over the verdict....:rocker:

I would have come back with the same verdict, and I'm neither stupid, corrupt, nor totally confused. On the contrary, I'm extremely bright, honest, and have excellent comprehension skills.

I don't know why you're sorry for those of us who are saying that the state didn't prove their case. I can see a lot of reasons why those who think they did prove it have that opinion, and don't feel sorry for them for thinking that way. It's just a different view and opinion of the case than the one I have. And that the jury had.

 

[logicalgirl]

I would have come back with the same verdict, and I'm neither stupid, corrupt, nor totally confused. On the contrary, I'm extremely bright, honest, and have excellent comprehension skills.

I don't know why you're sorry for those of us who are saying that the state didn't prove their case. I can see a lot of reasons why those who think they did prove it have that opinion, and don't feel sorry for them for thinking that way. It's just a different view and opinion of the case than the one I have. And that the jury had.

Well then there we have it. It make it easier if that is the answer.

 

[MarthaM]

You and I must have read a different set of jury instructions. I've giving them the benefit of the doubt as to why they did not review each piece of evidence and the testimony of each witness before coming to a decision. If you say they did clearly understand the instructions then I am back to being mystified as to why they did not participate in this trial at all.

These are the jury instructions that I'm aware of:


http://www.scribd.com/doc/59297005/Jury-Instructions-Casey-Anthony

Is there a different set out there?

 

[MsMacGyver]

I would have come back with the same verdict, and I'm neither stupid, corrupt, nor totally confused. On the contrary, I'm extremely bright, honest, and have excellent comprehension skills.

I don't know why you're sorry for those of us who are saying that the state didn't prove their case. I can see a lot of reasons why those who think they did prove it have that opinion, and don't feel sorry for them for thinking that way. It's just a different view and opinion of the case than the one I have. And that the jury had.

You seem very passionate about your ideas, no one can fault you for that. I respect everyones opinions here, whether I agree with them or not.

Maybe it's time for a bathroom break?

 

[Murphismo]

You seem very passionate about your ideas, no one can fault you for that. I respect everyones opinions here, whether I agree with them or not.

Maybe it's time for a bathroom break?

Or the dessert tray:loser:

 

[logicalgirl]

These are the jury instructions that I'm aware of:


http://www.scribd.com/doc/59297005/Jury-Instructions-Casey-Anthony

Is there a different set out there?

Yes, but one must persevere and actually read and digest that information I'd think.
Here's the thing - you are satisfied with the jury, their deliberations and their decision. I am not. And I'm not seeing anything to convince me otherwise.

I have lots of questions and no answers. You have no questions and believe you have all the answers. I'm not seeing common ground here for a discussion.:waitasec:

 

[MsMacGyver]

It's interesting to Google brainwashing which I believe JB used to a certain degree.

#6...Chanting Slogans
#5...Slipping BS into your subconscious
#4...Controlling what you watch and read
#3...Keeping you in line with shame
#2...Black and White choices
#1...Us vs Them

 

[LambChop]

I read the jury instructions. How much more premedated does it have to get to rip four pieces of duct tape off of a roll and place at least three on the face of your child? The fourth piece was found with skeletal remains from her arm. Three pieces on her face, one found 9 foot away with her arm bones. If Caylee was already deceased why was there a piece of duct tape found in the location of her arm bones? This is what the jury did not consider. How could they come to the conclusion KC was not guilty of responsibility in the death of her child? At this point the DP should have never been considered in their deliberations and it was inappropriate for them to do so. After the judge read it to them in court I doubt they touched it again.

When members of the jury admit they felt she was guilty they, themselves, have admitted they did not understand the process. jmo

 

[KarmaGet'em]

I read the jury instructions. How much more premedated does it have to get to rip four pieces of duct tape off of a roll and place at least three on the face of your child? The fourth piece was found with skeletal remains from her arm. Three pieces on her face, one found 9 foot away with her arm bones. If Caylee was already deceased why was there a piece of duct tape found in the location of her arm bones? This is what the jury did not consider. How could they come to the conclusion KC was not guilty of responsibility in the death of her child? At this point the DP should have never been considered in their deliberations and it was inappropriate for them to do so. After the judge read it to them in court I doubt they touched it again.

When members of the jury admit they felt she was guilty they, themselves, have admitted they did not understand the process. jmo

BBM - Here is my take on what happened with this piece of information - I don't think the jury caught on that there were 4 pieces of duct tape. Even JB and CM were misrepresenting that fact claiming only 3 pieces of duct tape in their CIC and/or closing args. I remember practically screaming at my computer that what they were saying was flat out wrong. I believe even one of the jurors that spoke out also led me to think that they did not understand the duct tape evidence. However, if the jury had asked to review that information during the deliberations they may have seen it differently. Sadly, they did not try.
IMO.

 

[rose222]

The jurors did not find KC guilty of even manslaughter so I don't believe the problem had anything to do with not being able to read and follow jury instructions.

 

[rotterdam]

The trial is over. And KC was not convicted except for the lying charges.
There are multiple factors when a conviction is not secured in any trial IMO. The Jury was just one of those factors.
May be the Jury was a major factor but definitely not the only one. It is like an airplane crash, generally there is a combination of major and minor factors that caused the crash but they all were instrumental/imperative for the end result.
I think having DP on the table was also a major factor. Somehow , it seems to raise the bar on reasonable doubt for a Jury even if there are lesser charges on the table.
DP is getting less and less popular IMO.
And I wonder if sometimes used by the prosecution to obtain a plea deal. I could not find any statistics but I strongly suspect DP cases have a lower conviction rate especially due to automatic appeals.
Bob Ward trial did not have DP on the table.
Anyway it is over.:deadhorse:

 

[marge_rita]

I read the jury instructions. How much more premedated does it have to get to rip four pieces of duct tape off of a roll and place at least three on the face of your child? The fourth piece was found with skeletal remains from her arm. Three pieces on her face, one found 9 foot away with her arm bones. If Caylee was already deceased why was there a piece of duct tape found in the location of her arm bones? This is what the jury did not consider. How could they come to the conclusion KC was not guilty of responsibility in the death of her child? At this point the DP should have never been considered in their deliberations and it was inappropriate for them to do so. After the judge read it to them in court I doubt they touched it again.

When members of the jury admit they felt she was guilty they, themselves, have admitted they did not understand the process. jmo

bbm
That's it. Very clear, very simple to understand.

imo

 

[strawberry]

You seem very passionate about your ideas, no one can fault you for that. I respect everyones opinions here, whether I agree with them or not.

Maybe it's time for a bathroom break?

BBM :lol:

 

[LambChop]

BBM - Here is my take on what happened with this piece of information - I don't think the jury caught on that there were 4 pieces of duct tape. Even JB and CM were misrepresenting that fact claiming only 3 pieces of duct tape in their CIC and/or closing args. I remember practically screaming at my computer that what they were saying was flat out wrong. I believe even one of the jurors that spoke out also led me to think that they did not understand the duct tape evidence. However, if the jury had asked to review that information during the deliberations they may have seen it differently. Sadly, they did not try.
IMO.

CM even stated one piece was found 9 foot from her skull but did not elaborate. That should have been made clear also by putting the recovery people back on the stand to clear that matter up. I think the jury did, indeed, miss that because CM's intention was to mislead them. There just was not enough focus on the duct tape, IMO. SA assumed the jury got it. Clearly the jury did not. jmo

 

[strawberry]

Yes, but one must persevere and actually read and digest that information I'd think.
Here's the thing - you are satisfied with the jury, their deliberations and their decision. I am not. And I'm not seeing anything to convince me otherwise.

I have lots of questions and no answers. You have no questions and believe you have all the answers. I'm not seeing common ground here for a discussion.:waitasec:

:grouphug:

 

[PeteyGirl]

I can see a lot of reasons why those who think they did prove it have that opinion, and don't feel sorry for them for thinking that way. It's just a different view and opinion of the case than the one I have. And that the jury had.

Opinions are either superior or inferior when compared to facts.

Virtually every pre-Classical culture from China to the Norse/Germanic people had a solid, enduring cosmology that included a flat Earth (a flat "round" in some cultures, the Chinese believed the Earth was a "square" floating in a spherical cosmos).

Yes, with the evidence presented in this case, the "opinion" it was insufficient to even prove neglect is as outrageous as a flat Earth. I'm glad to know I live in a society where most of the people are willing to make those connections instead of collapsing into a stew of insensate over-relativity.

 

[LambChop]

You seem very passionate about your ideas, no one can fault you for that. I respect everyones opinions here, whether I agree with them or not.

Maybe it's time for a bathroom break?

Okay, I'm in. Do we need to set our watches???? jmo