Casey Anthony trial starts today...*Found not guilty*

[peplaw06]

With the specialist now involved in jury selecting it is a wonder anyone is convicted. You have people that are trained to review a jurors profile and determine if they would be pro prosecution or pro defense. I thought it was supposed to be based on evidence. Not based on how much common sense someone does not have. Apparently this jury was eat up with the dumb you know what.

Juries should be picked out of hat. Given them a short interview to determine if they are convicted felons. Then give then an IQ test to determine if they have the mental capacity to process information. You know the questions. If two trains leave the station at the same time, one at 50 mph and one at 100 mph. How long will it take the train traveling 50 mph to go 100 miles. How long will it take the train going 100 mph. This question probably would have discounted most of the people that made up this jury. At least there won't be a tainted jury pool as to which way their profile says they should repond.

Worst. Idea. Ever.

 

[JustDezIt]

What I would like to know is can anyone prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that her father DIDNT do it? I dont believe he did, but if if you cant rule him out then that provides enough reasonable doubt in my opinion.

For instance, Say casey knew her Dad did it and didnt report it.

1. Caylee last seen with Casey
2. Caylee dies, George admits it to Casey, Casey doesnt report it
3. Casey parties and tells NO ONE caylee is dead or missing
4. 30 days later her mom calls 911
5. Now its the babysitter that took her. That's the story. That is the explanation. Casey knows where Caylee is, with the babysitter.
6. Babysitter doesn't exist and there never was a babysitter, turns out Casey was covering for George.
7. Caylee's skeleton is found near the Anthony home wrapped in a blanket from the home, inside a bag from the home, ducttape over the face from the home, clothes from George's home.
7. That right there should be enough. If you're the know the last person with the baby and your explanation is a flat out lie, you could be guilty of covering for the murderer
8. HANG DA' MAN!!!!!

Would he really pin his murder on her?

• Caylee's mother tells police that it smells like a dead body has been in the car.
• George Anthonywho was once a homicide detective in Ohio, told investigators he feared the smell of rotting flesh in the car was coming from his daughter or granddaughter.
• The manager at the tow yard, where the car was stowed for several weeks, also testified to the smell.
• Orange County Deputy Jason Forgey, whose K-9 partner, Gerus, is trained to detect human decomposition, said the smell of death, which he is familiar with, was obvious from Anthony's car. "I smelled it. Clear as day," he said.

The State of Floriday FAILED !!!

And before you claim he was grieving, he did cheat on his wife during this time period and try to commit suicide.

This is clearly hypothetical, and I dont wish to argue with anyone. I'm just saying, is there evidence to disprove this? So how can she be convicted if its possible he did it?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

What I would like to know is can anyone prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that her father DIDNT do it? I dont believe he did, but if if you cant rule him out then that provides enough reasonable doubt in my opinion.

For instance, Say casey knew her Dad did it and didnt report it.

This is clearly hypothetical, and I dont wish to argue with anyone. I'm just saying, is there evidence to disprove this? So how can she be convicted if its possible he did it?

Not sure that's the way it works..

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Honestly, the biggest question i have is how the State Attorney or the DA even allowed this case to go to trial with the BS they spewed out during.

They had no idea how the remains got in the woods, who put them there, where Caley was at any point in time pretty much, if she was ever in the car that smelled supposedly, etc, etc..

The whole time im sitting there like.. how much effort did these guys even put into the case?

Any clue as to if there was any initial plea negotiations?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

That was proven beyond all doubt



That depends entirely on what your definition of proof is. I was convinced by the evidence enough to bet everything I own on her guilt. There was no reasonable doubt in my mind that she didnt do it.

was that the evidence of Nancy Grace's spin on the evidence.

I read a lot about the matter today and from what I can see, nothing pins her to the death, the pathologist could not rule out accidental death. If the pathologist has doubt, how can you not expect a jury to have doubt?

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

Like I said, in this case the DA likely felt confident because he, like everyone else, looked at the evidence and thought "slam dunk". Is it the prosecution's fault? Yes, they should have realized that they would likely need DNA, a murder weapon or eye witnesses. That doesnt mean the case is any less obvious.

I usually disagree with you on most intellectual topics. Even in this thread I disagree with you. But this part makes sense.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

One of those coincidences that isn't a coincidence after you read how the evidence contextualizes itself around the fact this bar-hopping bimbo murdered her daughter--then got a soft jury and a slick lawyer.

I see you bought into the prosecution strategy, let's demonize her and forget we have no real evidence or even evidence the death was not accidental, she like to score, did body shots ergo she must be guilty

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

was that the evidence of Nancy Grace's spin on the evidence.

I read a lot about the matter today and from what I can see, nothing pins her to the death, the pathologist could not rule out accidental death. If the pathologist has doubt, how can you not expect a jury to have doubt?

Then why would she not report her daughter missing and also lie about some fictitious nanny?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I know about as much about this case and the evidence as you do, so take this for what it's worth.

But I've been hearing that the medical experts couldn't even pinpoint a cause of death... I don't see how you could convict anyone of wrongdoing when there's a dead child but no one knows how the child died. There are hundreds of ways a child could die. Was it strange that Casey was out partying for 30 days or whatever after Caylee went missing? Sure. But acting strangely doesn't mean she killed her.

Sad story though, for sure... all the way around.

this

all her partying shows is that she was an atrocious mother, not that she killed her child

only a moron tries a murder case without evidence as to how the child died

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Then why would she not report her daughter missing and also lie about some fictitious nanny?

ok the nanny line seems random

she was not mother of the year, again doesn't prove she killed the kid

 

[theogt]

As a sort of reminder to people: (1) you did not see the trial day in and day out or the evidence presented on both sides, and (2) the verdict was UNANIMOUS, all 12 jurors agreed that she should not be convicted.

The more I read of the evidence, the more I think the case against her was pretty shoddy, even if it seems obvious it was her.

 

[JustDezIt]

ok the nanny line seems random

she was not mother of the year, again doesn't prove she killed the kid

to me it just seems that this case was the rare, we know damn sure she did it but just cant quite prove it thoroughly enough. looking at it with emotion, she did it. looking at it by the letter of the law, it wasnt proven she did it.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

I see you bought into the prosecution strategy, let's demonize her and forget we have no real evidence or even evidence the death was not accidental, she like to score, did body shots ergo she must be guilty

But why didn't she report her child missing?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

But why didn't she report her child missing?

ask her, how am I supposed to know, maybe she was glad not to have her around, maybe she figured a family member was looking after her, I wouldn't do that, hell I freak out if mine is two rows from me in a store and I can't see him for 30 seconds but that is me

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

to me it just seems that this case was the rare, we know damn sure she did it but just cant quite prove it thoroughly enough. looking at it with emotion, she did it. looking at it by the letter of the law, it wasnt proven she did it.

true, legally there were bigger holes in the case than in a piece of swiss cheese

 

[casmith07]

As a sort of reminder to people: (1) you did not see the trial day in and day out or the evidence presented on both sides, and (2) the verdict was UNANIMOUS, all 12 jurors agreed that she should not be convicted.

The more I read of the evidence, the more I think the case against her was pretty shoddy, even if it seems obvious it was her.

Keep reading. You'll be astonished the government even took this crap to trial.

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

to me it just seems that this case was the rare, we know damn sure she did it but just cant quite prove it thoroughly enough. looking at it with emotion, she did it. looking at it by the letter of the law, it wasnt proven she did it.

In my view, even as a defense-minded person, the graphic details like the duct tape and the chemicals used (that they had used to bury previous pets) tells me someone was covering something up. (*cough a murder)

If she's the mother, and her daughter is missing, where is the missing child report?

Denial is often just a form of one exacerbating deception. This person, and her attorney, got away with a soft jury and someone covered something up.

The saddest part of this is, her fame from this will make her rich with her new books about how she will catch the real killers, et cetera.

 

[casmith07]

Not sure that's the way it works..

It isn't the way it works. The burden of proof rests solely with the government. The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was committed.

Invoking the father as the one who actually did it is merely part of the defense. All the defense is trying to do, at a most basic level, is poke holes in the government's argument. You poke enough of them, and you raise a reasonable doubt, and the jury cannot convict based on the instructions before deliberation.

Reading a lot of the stuff that people have been saying today makes it more apparent to me why lawyers get paid a lot to do what they do.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

It isn't the way it works. The burden of proof rests solely with the government. The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was committed.

Invoking the father as the one who actually did it is merely part of the defense. All the defense is trying to do, at a most basic level, is poke holes in the government's argument. You poke enough of them, and you raise a reasonable doubt, and the jury cannot convict based on the instructions before deliberation.

Reading a lot of the stuff that people have been saying today makes it more apparent to me why lawyers get paid a lot to do what they do.

thank you

 

[CowboyMcCoy]

ask her, how am I supposed to know, maybe she was glad not to have her around, maybe she figured a family member was looking after her, I wouldn't do that, hell I freak out if mine is two rows from me in a store and I can't see him for 30 seconds but that is me

Fact: She did not--for over a month.