Through a Juror's Eyes/What do those who haven't followed the case believe? (Merged)

[froginTtown]

I love the experiment... I feel the same way as one of them about JB...
In fact, when he cross examines, I get so aggravated/dizzy trying to figure out where he is going, that I throw my hands up and go back to cleaning the house...
sometimes I wonder if he does it on purpose, for an appeal on the grounds of an incompatant legal defense...

 

[SeekingJana]

My husband, who never follows any true crime case ( probably because he hears about them from me), really didn't know a THING about the death ( murder) of Kaylee Anthony.

So, we sat down and watched the opening statements together.

Afterwards he said " So, why don't they just save time and money and execute the B#$%^ now? She's the only one with a reason, the only one who is a compulsive liar, the only one who had to drag her baby to her boyfriend's apartment".
He was not serious about the " execute now" part, it's his humor, but he was serious that he believes the prosecution.

He also said the only thing missing from the defense theory is a bunch of hippies. In a van. Who worship Satan. And sacrifice babies.

I could have told him to keep watching- the baby-sacrificing hippies will probably show up at the defense table driving a bus to run over all of the other " good guys" in the case before long.

 

[carole]

My husband, who never follows any true crime case ( probably because he hears about them from me), really didn't know a THING about the death ( murder) of Kaylee Anthony.

So, we sat down and watched the opening statements together.

Afterwards he said " So, why don't they just save time and money and execute the B#$%^ now? She's the only one with a reason, the only one who is a compulsive liar, the only one who had to drag her baby to her boyfriend's apartment".
He was not serious about the " execute now" part, it's his humor, but he was serious that he believes the prosecution.

He also said the only thing missing from the defense theory is a bunch of hippies. In a van. Who worship Satan. And sacrifice babies.

I could have told him to keep watching- the baby-sacrificing hippies will probably show up at the defense table driving a bus to run over all of the other " good guys" in the case before long.

BBM

That one's already been used by Jeffrey MacDonald back in 1970 for his wife and daughters murders. Didn't work for him, he's been in prison a long, long time.

 

[OneLostGrl]

Why do you say that? I think it's completely possible that many people haven't followed this case.

I agree. During jury selection I had posted some links on my facebook and this one girl (my husbands friends daughter- 22 years old) actually commented and said she read my links and then searched the case on Google because she had never heard of it. I was shocked!

 

[MsFacetious]

I still don't buy the sexual abuse and believe that the jail letters were written when the DT was coming up with possible defense strategy. AL was on this team.
However, I think the jurors might be confused by ICA's crying when the sexual abuse by her father was brought up. I believe she was crying be because she can't even believe to what lengths they are going to in order to get her acquitted.

The letters accuse LEE of abusing her, of pulling her sports bra up and touching her when she was 12-15.

They say that George MIGHT have done something SIMILAR but when she was YOUNGER. (Elementary school.)


She had said to a friend/boyfriend she didn't want Lee around Caylee... but never said anything about not wanting George around her. Caylee got up with George each morning to eat breakfast and "use the facilities."


Now we have George abusing her from age 8.

Parts in her mouth at age 13.

Lee following in his father's footsteps but it didn't get that far.


This is mostly just quotes from the letters...

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-ta...letters-where-she-alleges-sexual-abuse-videos

If this was the plan when she wrote the letters... then somebody screwed up because the stories are different. My concern is whether the jury will even see the letters or know the accusations were different before.

I am concerned that the state is not going to do anything to refute the defense's stance. I think they should add that on... asking people if Casey mentioned any issue with her daughter being around her brother or father. I think the jury may wonder why if they don't.

I also do not understand when Casey was crying about the "in her mouth" comment Jose made in court. WHY did she hide her face into a person... a MAN of all people? I would have covered my face and put my head down. The last thing I would want while reliving my abuse would be to get closer to a man about the same age as my abuser. :waitasec:

Then again, I don't like many humans so I wouldn't be likely to get close to them anyway.

 

[6stringer]

I have followed this since it hit the news for the first time in July 08. may not know as much as some here, but have followed it closely. I have kept an open mind through out the entire process, and have not let the media, nor the sunshine laws dictate how I thought.

having said that,,,I see nothing that cant be explained in some way to create reasonable doubt. there is no smoking gun, no finger prints, and no magical DNA to tie ICA to this. This is how I have felt ever since documents began being "dumped". sure, LOTS of circumstancial stuff, and I do not doubt that she is guilty of something, but I cant be certain of what exactly that is. I dont think she will "walk" any time soon, but I also dont think she will get the DP, or LWOP

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

The letters accuse LEE of abusing her, of pulling her sports bra up and touching her when she was 12-15.

They say that George MIGHT have done something SIMILAR but when she was YOUNGER. (Elementary school.)


She had said to a friend/boyfriend she didn't want Lee around Caylee... but never said anything about not wanting George around her. Caylee got up with George each morning to eat breakfast and "use the facilities."


Now we have George abusing her from age 8.

Parts in her mouth at age 13.

Lee following in his father's footsteps but it didn't get that far.


This is mostly just quotes from the letters...

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-ta...letters-where-she-alleges-sexual-abuse-videos

If this was the plan when she wrote the letters... then somebody screwed up because the stories are different. My concern is whether the jury will even see the letters or know the accusations were different before.

I am concerned that the state is not going to do anything to refute the defense's stance. I think they should add that on... asking people if Casey mentioned any issue with her daughter being around her brother or father. I think the jury may wonder why if they don't.

I also do not understand when Casey was crying about the "in her mouth" comment Jose made in court. WHY did she hide her face into a person... a MAN of all people? I would have covered my face and put my head down. The last thing I would want while reliving my abuse would be to get closer to a man about the same age as my abuser. :waitasec:

Then again, I don't like many humans so I wouldn't be likely to get close to them anyway.

I agree with you....
Even if mst of the jurors on this case have never heard a word about it before now, I am still confident that the SA will bring to light the type of person ICA really is. Once the jurors are enlightened to the way ICA "acts", the jurors will see for themselves the performances ICA has been playing in the courtroom leaving what little credibility ICA had with this untainted jury tarnished for the duration of the trial.

 

[repairmom]

I haven't read this whole thread, yet, so I'm sorry if this has already been stated, but I am reminded of the Menendez Brothers defense.

They claimed sexual abuse after killing their parents for profit. They got a hung jury the first time around then got convicted on the second trial.

The key is that they HAD to take the stand, because the only evidence of their abuse was their word. It's the same thing here.

JB's opening is NOT evidence, and the only proof of ICA's story is her word, and even JB said she has lied her whole life. If she takes the stand, the SA will destroy her. If she doesn't then there will be no "proof" of her story.

I am scared some of the jury might fall for it, but people are more skeptical of this defense than they were in the late 80's and early 90's when all "victims" of sex abuse were taken at their word. People have become jaded at these accusations now, because people have made too many false claims ie: the Menendez Brothers.

I think in the end, the jury will see ICA is just making up another "story" and it will backfire on her making the jury even more angry that she would not only lie, but willingly throw her family under the bus.

I think in the end, this defense will prove she is the worst of the worst with no redeeming qualities and she will end up on death row.

BTW, ITA that this defense is working at this stage on people who know nothing, but it won't last. As the state builds it's case all doubt will fade and the jury will become furious at the DT for trying to fool them.

Also, it makes me sad whenever people use false allegations of sexual abuse as a defense because it harms REAL victims by casting doubt on their victimization.

Good thread!

 

[Intermezzo]

I had posted this in the sidebar but it fits here so...

My 65 yr old dad, who has a pool and grandchildren, called this afternoon at the lunch break....he has not followed too much and began watching with jury selection.
His points were that he thought after this a.m's testimony it appeared like she just didnt want her daughter anymore, that it was "cramping" her style. (mind you, 24 yrs ago, I was a 19 yr old mother so he's familiar with young, single moms)

He also stated that if the death was an accidental drowning that GA was involved in, there was no way that they would still have that pool up in their backyard. But even more far fetched to him was that an ex LE officer would ever try to cover up an accidental drowning.

good post.
Common Sense went out the window with Baez's opening statements.:twocents:

MY DH, and a few of his Male friends, who have not followed the case watched all day on Tuesday and a few hours yesterday..

By the end of the day they thought Baez was pathetic and that Casey is GUILTY.

 

[Jess1985]

PattyG to the rescue again.... :woohoo:

Casey Anthony Trial Day 13 - Part 1 (goes up to Part 22, which is the end of Tony's testimony.)

http://www.youtube.com/user/Sierra1947#g/u

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ4yJnbqgls&feature=channel_video_title

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! We will be sure to watch this!!

 

[Jess1985]

Jess
I'm glad that you've started this thread. I've noticed that in the past few months members from other parts of the board have come on over here to share their opinions. I think it's refreshing to read opinions that are new or even contrary to what I believe happened.

As you've stated the members that have been on this board from the very beginning of this case and have read the voluminous documents, countless depo's, pulled "all nighters", when doc. dumps would be published and on and on and on for nearly 3 years.
I lurk most of the time. I lurked for a long while prior to joining, and I still mainly just keep a low profile.

Your hubby never heard the 911 calls, the calls the defendant had with family directly after her arrest, the vids. of the jail visits, all of the things and mentioned above and then some.

You've given me an idea. I have a girlfriend/neighbor who is a wonderful Mama to her 3 youngsters. She barely has time brush her teeth, let alone follow this case. I'm going to do the exact same thing you did. She is a bright, intuitive, caring and loving person/friend. I know for certain she is much like your hubby and knows nothing about this case other than I've been following it since the get go. She teases me when she notices I'm sleep deprived but jittery at the same time due to all of the time I've spent researching and reading about this case, instead of sleeping. After she puts the her kidlets down for the night she has Mama alone for just a bit.
I'm hoping that she can squeeze in viewing just the OS. I let ya know what her feelings are.

Some of the members who have come on over may have been researching and sleuthing others cases. Their posts indicate that they have different levels of knowledge regarding this case, so asking someone here to do this "experiment" wouldn't work.

Ok I'm off to read your thread to see how the other members feelings and opinions.

Fond congrats to you on your first baby!

~please excuse spelling and grammar errors I keep forgetting to put it in my siggie~

Hi Wysteria :seeya:
My intentions on this thread are exactly as you have percieved them. We are going to be watching this trial together at night and on the weekends to keep updated. I followed the case, so I wont be adding my comments to him and I want him to act as a juror. I will try to give updates as much as possible..its going to be hard because I work two jobs, go to school full time, we are planning our wedding for August, and Chayse just turned 4 months!! I also have my mom watching the trial during the day, as she watches Chayse and keeps me updated...so I will ask her what her thoughts are throughout the trial as well.

Thanks for the congrats on my son...he sure is the best thing that has ever happened to me...and I can honestly say that I never knew what real love was until he was placed on my chest!!!

 

[comomx3]

A little different spin on this post. I have followed the case. Although I know she is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty- after reading all the evidence she's been proved guilty in my mind.

Here's what it would take to prove the DT opening statement- I would have to know why and who put duct tape on the baby, stuffed her in a bag and threw her on the side of the road. I would want to know what purpose GA and ICA had in NOT calling 911. It was an accident, accidents happened all the time. Finally, I would want to know how Roy Kronk got the body and reburied it? Those answers would determine whether or not I could take into consideration the role the alledged sexual abuse played into the days after this crime was committed.

 

[Jess1985]

A little different spin on this post. I have followed the case. Although I know she is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty- after reading all the evidence she's been proved guilty in my mind.

Here's what it would take to prove the DT opening statement- I would have to know why and who put duct tape on the baby, stuffed her in a bag and threw her on the side of the road. I would want to know what purpose GA and ICA had in NOT calling 911. It was an accident, accidents happened all the time. Finally, I would want to know how Roy Kronk got the body and reburied it? Those answers would determine whether or not I could take into consideration the role the alledged sexual abuse played into the days after this crime was committed.

I respectfully agree. There are questions that we will all have and I believe that they will eventually be answered....The key points that you have highlighted here could eventually change the outcome of the trial. I am right there with you in saying that although she is "innocent until proven guilty" the actions of her, the family, and the various things that have been released for us to read, and read, and read, and watch....have made it VERY hard for me to say that she is guilty. I guess my main reason for this thread was to see what others are thinking..and get input from people who have not followed the case...so we arent completely shocked at the end of the trial...as in...if they see it in a different light...sorry for babbling...does this even make sense?

 

[SeekingJana]

BBM

That one's already been used by Jeffrey MacDonald back in 1970 for his wife and daughters murders. Didn't work for him, he's been in prison a long, long time.

Yeah, Carole, he knew that. It was also an oblique reference to the Manson Gang killings..
He was only a child when the McDonald trial occurred, and was only a toddler when the Manson gang killed, but he is a very well- read man, with a photographic memory regarding history, especially American history. Both of the crimes are infamous in modern American history.

Point was, throw the kitchen sink in, and I doubt anyone is going to believe what Baez was/is trying to sell.

 

[mombomb]

My sister, who does not follow the case but knows that I do, just called to tell me that GA was lying through his teeth. She feels that JB is doing a great job at establishing doubt.

 

[Sairs]

Hi all - lurker from the UK here. I have read a bit about the case but not too much to be honest.

I watched the opening statements on You tube. Hearing the Prosecutor's version of events was damning enough - to then hear from the defence that in fact she did all that knowing that her child had 'drowned' was even more unbelievable.

I am a single mum to a 2 year old and if anything happened to him - anything at all, I would be crushed. There would be no way that I could carry on at all, let alone putting a 'brave face' on it.

Seemed more like a movie script to me to be honest!!

 

[Beatrice]

Why do you say that? I think it's completely possible that many people haven't followed this case.

Exactly! In terms of the jurors...I doubt any of them have followed this case for nearly 3 years like we all have. And of the few that knew some details their opinion would be "She's guilty" (IMO)

 

[AliceInPain]

I never followed this case, I do try now however, it has actually gone to court.
This is the first court case I follow, but when I tried follow the case before there were too many people too many incidents I got confused and stopped.
I am on the side of the jury. I have no idea...

 

[WillenFan21]

Interesting you made this.. My sister has been tuning into this stuff since I started watching it and is now into it too. She hasn't followed this case at all and thinks that something is up with George. I think she is starting to read up on it a little more.

 

[firefox62]

I am one who did not follow the case but am following this trial. At first I wondered how any mother could kill their child but after a few google searches I see how common it is. I'm trying now to stay open to the evidence like a juror would. Marcia Clark said today that getting 12 jurors to convict is hard. They only need reasonable doubt. I've been on 3 trials as a juror and in each case we went out of our way to be fair. I think w/the death penalty as a possibility they will go out of their way to consider anything that seems like reasonable doubt.