The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree? #4

[MissJames]

Especially if they used a cheap paper tablet to draw on, then dropped it once or twice, grinning sheepishly at the jury while picking it up. Aww, isn't he just the cutest thing?

If they had wanted to understand it they would have asked to hear that testimony again. And again, if necessary. Dr. Vass just didn't have an audience open to considering it. They didn't like him or JA, simple. They weren't good ole boys and the jury resented their brains & edukashun.

And IMO, there is absolutely no way they deliberated 10 hrs..not even close to that.

ITA
Supposedly they came dressed up,which would indicate they anticipated being on camera . So they knew they would be wrapping it up ,but must have decided ,as a group,to forgo the media interviews. Gee,I wonder who pushed that idea <modsnip>

 

[MissJames]

Sometimes I think ONLY those with IQ's of 120 and above should be allowed on juries, IF the jury system stays in tact here. We don't have to do whole WAIS es on them, but there are plenty reliable quick short IQ tests out that can be administered.
Because a jury of your peers is all well and good but if they have no thinking and reasoning skills and in fact lack basic comprehension skills, is a jury system not one whole ridiculous laughing matter?

I understand the sentiment,but IMO common sense is needed and your IQ doesn't always guarantee that it will be used. LoneTraveler suggested some training and a test before anyone can sit on a jury.

 

[imagirlgeek]

This is the first trial I have ever watched. For the past several years I've been keeping an eye on politics, so the whole Casey Anthony thing was barely even a blip on my radar. I saw the occasional news clip of Casey being moved from home to jail, or jail to home, or a clip of CA and GA fighting off the protesters/media, but I didn't know much. My mother called me on the 2nd day of trial and said I should watch because she thought I would really enjoy it. I read a lot of true crime books. I've always found it fascinating. You know, what makes a seemingly normal person kill their mother and hide the body in a 5 gallon drum in the back of a rented storage unit? Or kill 30+ children and hide them in the crawlspace of their own house, then go on day by day with their normal everyday routine? What makes a mother smother her own baby, only to turn around and get pregnant again, and smother that one, and keep doing this 8 times?? And equally mind-blowing is what makes them think they can get away with it??

So here I am, over 2 months later STILL pouring over interviews and reports, STILL re-watching testimonies. I know in my core she killed that baby. IMO, the prosecution was great! I think it was a huge detriment to the trial process that the Anthony's were allowed to sit in the courtroom if they were also going to be witnesses. It seemed to me that the longer the trial went on, the more their testimonies degraded. And I think the DT was slimy, which I have proven to myself over and over by fact-checking JB. It's almost insulting the way JB obfuscated facts to discredit extremely valid testimony. I'm truly surprised at how blatantly shifty this trial appeared to be. Between JB's "Do now, ask forgiveness later" defense strategy, the lack of following through on any punishment for perjury against CA, and the obvious lack of understanding the jury had of the instructions, I'm uncomfortable with the results of past and future criminal trials. Granted I've only watched this one trial (I've been called for jury duty 3 times, never been picked), so maybe this was the exception and not the rule. I certainly hope so. But if it's not, it's no wonder we have innocent people going to prison and guilty people walking free. It doesn't seem to be about the truth at all, but about how you play the game. And THAT is seriously messed up. I don't think 'the system worked'...I think the system is broken...for the innocent and the guilty both. MOO

 

[Kavya01]

I understand the sentiment,but IMO common sense is needed and your IQ doesn't always guarantee that it will be used. LoneTraveler suggested some training and a test before anyone can sit on a jury.

IQ test to see if their verbal and performance quotients are sufficient to comprehend matters presented in trials then, and training and testing to see if they can apply the presented knowledge with common sense ?

 

[imagirlgeek]

imagirlgeek- do you have any insight on just how much chloroform we would be talking about here, for there to still be these levels of chloroform in the truck after 31 days, after also being aired out for some time in the garage? it is my understanding that chloroform is very volatile, correct? i'm just trying to get an estimate here of how much chloroform it would have been. i hope you understand my question here.

I don't know. But now I want to see if there is any way to get some really rough numbers based on the information in the report. But I really think that IF any numbers were able to be calculated, it would be more or less a guess since they didn't do the calibrated testing that would have given an actual amount. I'll see what I can dig up, and if there is anything worth posting, I'll report back.

 

[yolorado]

In addition to Dr Vass, there was KC herself who testified to the smell in her car by texting Amy that it smelled like death. She didn't say, "because I've been carrying Caylee around dead for a couple of days." Why would she say that when she was trying to protect herself from the consequences of being responsible for her daughters death? Instead, she told Amy that there had been a dead squirrel. Oh wait not just one, a couple of dead squirrels. Let's look at her statement to Amy. Why would she say this if she weren't trying to provide cover for herself? There was never any evidence of dead squirrels. Baez, in fact, insisted that there was no evidence of death in KC's car, none, nada, zip, zilch. It was just garbage. But KC said there was. Further testimony to the smell by KC was given when she dumped the car at Amscott and when she placed a bag of garbage in the trunk. Why would she do those things. She needed a car and if the car already smelled as she'd texted Amy, why put something in the back that might make it worse? I have an idea. With the later, she was giving herself more cover. With the former, she was showing us, in retrospect, just how much that car did smell like death. The junk yard guy smelled it. George smelled it. Cindy smelled it. Lee smelled it. A bunch of other people smelled it too. However the most convincing witness to the smell was KC herself. She smelled it first. She couldn't stand it but she needed an explanation other than the truth.

How on earth could the jury not get this, especially with Caylee's hair in the trunk with the death band? They seemed to WANT to blame anybody but KC. I'm telling you-sequestration coalesced these people into a unit and they went together, almost certainly behind one or two opinion leaders. Isolation apart from real life-sequestration is a problem for our system. There should be 12 voices in the jury room. In this case, I'm pretty sure there was just one. That's not the way it should be.

 

[yolorado]

imagirlgeek- do you have any insight on just how much chloroform we would be talking about here, for there to still be these levels of chloroform in the truck after 31 days, after also being aired out for some time in the garage? it is my understanding that chloroform is very volatile, correct? i'm just trying to get an estimate here of how much chloroform it would have been. i hope you understand my question here.

I'm not an expert but listening to what was said, I got the impression that testimony showed just HOW MUCH chloroform was there at one point to have left such residual amount. In addition to 31 days and aired out in the garage and Cindy cleaning it, it seems plausible that KC also tried very hard to clean it, so that so much was still there..... Wow! If I'd been on the jury, I wouldn't have need to think the chloroform did it, but the testimony probably would have convinced me it did.

 

[logicalgirl]

I don't know. But now I want to see if there is any way to get some really rough numbers based on the information in the report. But I really think that IF any numbers were able to be calculated, it would be more or less a guess since they didn't do the calibrated testing that would have given an actual amount. I'll see what I can dig up, and if there is anything worth posting, I'll report back.

You may want to look at Val's documents at thehinkymeter also. She did a huge work up on Dr. Vass and his work. Much of it is listened in their evidence list.

 

[com n sense]

If this was an accident..... (I will dig up links if asked)

Why was JB encouraging Cindy "rosebud" to continue her investigations on other people that may have been involved in Caylee's kidnapping via an email?
Why did Todd M. declare in court during a hearing that Jesse Grund was "essentially a suspect and the defense team has proof that Caylee's body was placed there after FKC was locked up?
Why did LKB say on 48 hours that "someone else killed that little girl"?
Why did the defense try to get evidence introduced at trial that RK used duct tape on one of his wives during a "kidnapping" (no proof and no charges were ever filed for Mr. kronk)?
Why did JB tell a reporter early on that the best thing that could happen is for Caylee to be returned. This was also when he stated that he was completely convinced of her innocence. So apparently he was convinced of her innocence when he thought Caylee was kidnapped and STILL convinced when she told him it was an accident.

None of this sounds like defense team thought it was an accident.

I hope whoever “buys” the death car will make it available for more testing. I don't need anymore proof but some may...

Absolutely Coco puff - The comment by Mason after the trial was a real truth teller - He stated that we may never know how the child died.
Thanks for telling us she did not drown at all Mason... I know how she died.
The murder weapon was wrapped around her head & face but the blind could not see..:banghead:

 

[EPfan]

I'm not an expert but listening to what was said, I got the impression that testimony showed just HOW MUCH chloroform was there at one point to have left such residual amount. In addition to 31 days and aired out in the garage and Cindy cleaning it, it seems plausible that KC also tried very hard to clean it, so that so much was still there..... Wow! If I'd been on the jury, I wouldn't have need to think the chloroform did it, but the testimony probably would have convinced me it did.

I don't think it would matter how much chloroform there was. The problem is to prove that KC either bought the ingredience to make it, or proof that she made the chloroform. You would have to have some sort of connection.

Chloroform could show up from cleaning prodects, and sometimes from a swimming pool with chemicals.

 

[MissJames]

I just thought the expert witnesses for the defense all came out looking silly (for lack of a better word that won't get me a T/O).

That's one of the biggest head scratchers to me. How did the Jurors put any faith in them?

By contrast the experts for the State were all so good! I just don't get it.

 

[margE]

I do not and never will agree with this verdict. I had a very strange feeling something like this was going to happen though. Too many strange things in the courtroom going on.
A couple that bothered me the most- Anyone else remember when JP asked JA "well why didn't she (KC) just kill her whole family? The other that really bothered me was when JP was reading the instructions to the jurors, he emphasized strongly--( I dont remember exactly how he said it)-- about the law whether you like it or not.. The way he said it struck me as very odd.

Of course there are other things that have already been mentioned here. But really it just makes me sick.

 

[Caligram]

For the jury who questioned the existence/quantity of the chloroform, insisting that there wasn't any that killed Caylee Marie. Okay, forget the chloroform. Yes, it's true that JA had said that he hoped it had been used on Caylee Marie before the duct tape. The reason, was that it would have been more humane for Caylee Marie to not be aware of her mommy applying those three deadly strips of duct tape over her tiny nose and mouth.
Let's say FCA didn't use the chloroform first, that would account for that fourth strip of duct tape found several yards away from the skull. That fourth strip must have been used to secure Caylee Marie's hands so she couldn't reach up and yank the tape off so she could breathe. Maybe the tape wasn't next to the skull as it had been dragged away by swamp critters while still attached to the tiny little hands of Caylee Marie. The jury didn't want to imagine anything so horrific. How could a mother do this to her child. Dump her in a swamp. Well, The snot-nose was dead, and stinking up mommy's car. What's a mother to do?
Oh, the poor jury. This is just too nasty, gross, who wants to imagine anything so horrific. Caylee Marie isn't suffering anymore. Let's just forget about all these nasty nauseating signs of child abuse.
The jury prefers the simple fairy tale JB told them. Caylee Marie drowned. Her mommy suffered because GA was doing bad things and stuck his "P" in FCA's mouth. Poor FCA, she was a victim. A victim. We can't say she is guilty now, so we will set her free with our ability to use "reasonable doubt". They did, FCA was set free, and poor little Caylee Marie, who would have been a six-year-old today had she lived, is still dead. The jury was escused so they could return to their lives.
Sadly, this is IMHO

 

[PeteyGirl]

I don't think it would matter how much chloroform there was. The problem is to prove that KC either bought the ingredience to make it, or proof that she made the chloroform. You would have to have some sort of connection.

Chloroform could show up from cleaning prodects, and sometimes from a swimming pool with chemicals.

BBM; not really. That would be like demanding proof of how a killer obtained a firearm to prove the killer killed with a gun. The presence of the chloroform is equivalent to the bullet holes.

That said, the chloroform issue was not one that convinced me either way, it was the good old fashioned lying and hiding the body that was much more compelling.

The Anthony pool used an alternative to chlorine anyway, as someone pointed out upthread (#3)

As has been discussed many times, chloroform is a volatile gas and dissipates very quickly. The peak (presence) of it determined by Vass months after the alleged use of it means there was a large enough quantity to begin with that it was still aerosolizing (sic) months later.

 

[askfornina]

BBM; not really. That would be like demanding proof of how a killer obtained a firearm to prove the killer killed with a gun. The presence of the chloroform is equivalent to the bullet holes.

That said, the chloroform issue was not one that convinced me either way, it was the good old fashioned lying and hiding the body that was much more compelling.

The Anthony pool used an alternative to chlorine anyway, as someone pointed out upthread (#3)

As has been discussed many times, chloroform is a volatile gas and dissipates very quickly. The peak (presence) of it determined by Vass months after the alleged use of it means there was a large enough quantity to begin with that it was still aerosolizing (sic) months later.

or, if could mean the chloroform was created/deposited there more recently than month/s before, is that not correct?

 

[PeteyGirl]

I don't think they understood the instructions either and wasn't going to take the time to ask any questions.

<<snipped just for this sentence>>

Made me think of an interesting "phenomenon". I'll wager the jury believed they understood the instructions perfectly. That's where the problem is.

Haven't you (the generic you ) ever met someone who insisted they understood something inside out and backward when it was clear they did not? Yet they continued to insist?

This was a complex, circumstantial case, complicated of course by media involvement. Complicated further by the given complexity of our legal system.

It would be proper for a jury to remain humble. They are just regular folks assigned by jury duty. For them to deliberate over such a complex case, while properly understanding the jury instructions IN SUCH A SHORT TIME tells me they THOUGHT they understood the instructions, shut the door on further understanding, and made their decision.

The few jurors who've spoken up reveal their lack of understanding in their explanation of how they stuck to the LAW. What "law" that was continues to elude me :crazy:

 

[PeteyGirl]

or, if could mean the chloroform was created/deposited there more recently than month/s before, is that not correct?

:innocent: of course. Someone could have come along, slipped past several layers of security to get to the evidence in police custody and sprinkled some chloroform in the trunk of the car.

 

[LambChop]

What I do not understand is if the juror's names were never released how did the media get their names so fast. JF claims they were calling her house before she arrived home. And somehow in between her having a dispute with her livein boyfriend and having to leave the residence she was able to talk about making a deal with ABC the very next day. This is what confuses me. How is it possible to set things up so fast when their ID's still have not been officially released? jmo

 

[LambChop]

or, if could mean the chloroform was created/deposited there more recently than month/s before, is that not correct?

We really do not know what was in that car when the A's brought it home and pulled it into their garage, stinking and smelling as it did. Most people would have left it outside to air out, but the A's brought it into the garage where the car is never parked. It's possible could have been a bottle of something in the trunk of the car that was slowly leaking a fluid and the A's "removed" it. We just don't know and will never know for sure. jmo

 

[askfornina]

We really do not know what was in that car when the A's brought it home and pulled it into their garage, stinking and smelling as it did. Most people would have left it outside to air out, but the A's brought it into the garage where the car is never parked. It's possible could have been a bottle of something in the trunk of the car that was slowly leaking a fluid and the A's "removed" it. We just don't know and will never know for sure. jmo

yes, i completely agree.