Serena said:

RKJCNE said:

So the father denied both the prosecution and the defense's story than what the fuck is his story?

The more you look at this mess of a story the more he's gotta be involved in a big way.
Casey's mom is the one who was trying to figure things out, not him.
I agree with Juror number 3, he's gotta know the whole story too

I bet he almost got caught too which lead him to a suicidal state.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:37am]

The father wasn't on trial, so he didn't need 'a story'. Casey even talks about what a wonderful father and grandfather he was on the jailhouse tapes. If anything, it's the opposite...Cindy may have known where the body was at some point and George may have too, but he hasn't lied the way Cindy has in various depositions and on the stand. The State could charge her with perjury, but they probably won't do that for various reasons.

I'm well aware her father is not on trial, but maybe he should be? It's to my understanding that Cindy perjured herself to save her daughter, the Dad however if he did infact perjure he may have done so to protect himself. He's a big part of the tangles in the story.

MrSoulpower said:

Serena said:

I'm not sure about Florida, but here in Virginia, the jury has access to case records and files that the general public does not have access to, not even journalists like myself who cover the trial. Assuming that it's the same in Florida, the jury does have more access to relevant information than you, as someone who follow the trial on TV.

I'm not 'obsessed' with it, just wanted to learn more since I hadn't followed the case closely after Caylee was killed. But what I do find puzzling, is when people who didn't watch every day or haven't gone through ALL of the evidence or listened to ALL of the testimony, come out and try and say what was or wasn't there...

I came to my conclusion based on my experience as a crime/court reporter and my knowledge of the judicial system and how if works. I may not have watched everything, but I didn't have to in order to agree that the jury found Casey not guilty on the murder charges because prosecutors failed to provide the necessary evidence for a felony conviction. This is what many legal experts on TV said as well. You obviously believe that there was enough evidence for a guilty verdict, and I have asked you numerous times to provide such evidence ... but you have not. Referring to the prosecutors opening statement is not evidence. It's just a thesis.

Well, I'm not sure if the 'Sunshine Law' that Florida has makes a difference, but there was NOTHING that the jury had which wasn't a matter of public record.

I wasn't saying the OS were the evidence, but the answer to their 'theory'. If you don't know what the evidence and testimony was, how can you come to an educated conclusion? Since this was a circumstantial evidence case, it's all the pieces put together, there isn't ONE piece that proves what you're asking.

RKJCNE said:

Serena said:

I think the duct tape being stuck to her hair and holding her mandible in place was proof of that.

Ok that's a start, now prove Caylee died of suffocation and that Casey put the tape on her mouth.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:49am]

Prosecutors couldn't prove that. Serena won't be able to prove it either.

SUPRMAN said:

Serena said:

I think the duct tape being stuck to her hair and holding her mandible in place was proof of that.

But is the duct tape enough? I don't think so, not when you can't place it over her mouth and nose.

It it were just over Caylee's mouth, that wouldn't suffocate her.

There were 3 pieces stuck there, not just one, so there was plenty to cover her mouth and nose, especially when it's a little face.

MrSoulpower said:

RKJCNE said:

Ok that's a start, now prove Caylee died of suffocation and that Casey put the tape on her mouth.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:49am]

Prosecutors couldn't prove that. Serena won't be able to prove it either.

Exactly, emotions are so high that people can't see that this was a failed investigation and the prosecution did not have enough to go to trial with. People keep pointing out to me the point of the trial isn't to get the whole story, but that is the point of the investigation! Thus the investigation failed to find justice for Caylee, not the jury.

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

But is the duct tape enough? I don't think so, not when you can't place it over her mouth and nose.

It it were just over Caylee's mouth, that wouldn't suffocate her.

There were 3 pieces stuck there, not just one, so there was plenty to cover her mouth and nose, especially when it's a little face.

Yes that is true, but you still have to prove who put the duct tape on her face, and if the duct tape did infact suffocate her.

Serena said:

Well, I'm not sure if the 'Sunshine Law' that Florida has makes a difference, but there was NOTHING that the jury had which wasn't a matter of public record.

How can you be so sure of that? Again, assuming that Florida's law isn't different in this regard than Virginia law, the jury had access to more information. The files of a murder investigation are not public record. You can go to court and get a copy of the arrest record, which tells you little more than the charges and time and date of the arrest. But in most cases, especially in high profile homicide, the files are sealed from the public.

I wasn't saying the OS were the evidence, but the answer to their 'theory'.

I watched the opening statement. It gave a lot of promises the evidence did not live up to.

If you don't know what the evidence and testimony was, how can you come to an educated conclusion?

I never said that I don't know the evidence. I said I didn't watch the entire trial. I did my own research about what evidence prosecutors presented, and I agree with the jury and many legal experts that it wasn't enough for a felony conviction.

Since this was a circumstantial evidence case, it's all the pieces put together, there isn't ONE piece that proves what you're asking.

I didn't ask for ONE piece. I asked for a list of maybe ten pieces that prove Casy murdered her daughter. I've seen murderer's convicted on circumstantial evidence .. but in this case, the circumstantial evidence simply wasn't enough. It allowed for speculation and a thesis, but it wasn't enough for a felony conviction.

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

But is the duct tape enough? I don't think so, not when you can't place it over her mouth and nose.

It it were just over Caylee's mouth, that wouldn't suffocate her.

There were 3 pieces stuck there, not just one, so there was plenty to cover her mouth and nose, especially when it's a little face.

More speculation, no actual evidence.

RKJCNE said:

Serena said:

I think the duct tape being stuck to her hair and holding her mandible in place was proof of that.

Ok that's a start, now prove Caylee died of suffocation and that Casey put the tape on her mouth.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:49am]

Casey admitted she was the last person with the child until 'the nanny' kidnapped her, which was her story up until the opening day of the trial. The duct tape was a special brand that isn't even made anymore that she had access to. Can anyone say they saw her put it there? No, but since she was the last person with her...

RKJCNE said:

MrSoulpower said:

Prosecutors couldn't prove that. Serena won't be able to prove it either.

Exactly, emotions are so high that people can't see that this was a failed investigation and the prosecution did not have enough to go to trial with. People keep pointing out to me the point of the trial isn't to get the whole story, but that is the point of the investigation! Thus the investigation failed to find justice for Caylee, not the jury.

Exactly. The investigation's failure to gather enough evidence was the first problem.

The second problem was the prosecutors decision to charge her with First Degree murder based on the little evidence investigators had gathered for them.

An involuntary manslaughter charge may have turned out differently. But even in that case, there still is not enough evidence that links Casey to her daughter's death.

MrSoulpower said:

Serena said:

I think the duct tape being stuck to her hair and holding her mandible in place was proof of that.

No, it wasn't.

Where is the evidence that the duck tape was applied to Caylee's mouth before her death?

Where is the evidence that the duck tape caused Caylee's death?

Where is the evidence that Casey applied the duck tape on her daughter's face?

If you were a prosecutor, you'd fail, because you are not asking enough questions.

No it wasn't what? It WAS stuck in her decomposing hair and held the mandible in place, that was testified to.

I don't have all the answers, but the evidence presented was enough for me to agree with the Prosecution. You don't agree, but you don't know all of the evidence either, so you're coming to your conclusion based only on bits & pieces you've heard on the news.

Serena said:

RKJCNE said:

Ok that's a start, now prove Caylee died of suffocation and that Casey put the tape on her mouth.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:49am]

Casey admitted she was the last person with the child until 'the nanny' kidnapped her, which was her story up until the opening day of the trial. The duct tape was a special brand that isn't even made anymore that she had access to. Can anyone say they saw her put it there? No, but since she was the last person with her...

Yes, Casey admitted that. But Casey lied all the time. Now you are willing to believe her, because it confirms her theory? Either Casey is a patalogical liar and we cannot believe anything she says, or she is not. You can't have it both ways.

Maybe Caylee accidentally drowned in her grandparents pool, Casey's dad got rid of the body and Casey wanted to protect him. Of course that's just a theory, but it's equally valid as your theory. There is no solid evidence for either.

Dont know if this has been posted, I apologize if it already has.

Casey Anthony Juror: 'I Did Not Say She Was Innocent'

By Amber Goodhand - Radar Reporter

Juror number 3 is Jennifer Ford, a 32-year-old nurse in-training at St. Petersburg College, who said that acquitting Anthony of the murder charges in the death of her 2-year-old daughter Caylee in no way means that she believes Anthony is innocent.

"I did not say she was innocent," Ford told Nightline anchor Terry Moran Wednesday. "I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be."

The stunning verdict was delivered Tuesday when the jury of 12 found Anthony, 25, not guiltyaggravated manslaughter and aggravated child abuse.

"I'm not saying I believe the defense," Ford said. "Obviously, it wasn't proven so I'm not taking that and speculating at all. But it's easier for me logically to get from point A to point B" in considering the defense's arguments.

Ford said the prosecution "didn't even paint a picture for me to consider" in terms of how Casey could have killed her child.

Asked about Casey's actions following her daughter's death -- not reporting it for more than 30 days, partying in that time, and lying to investigators -- Ford said that "bad behavior is not enough to prove a crime."

Ford said Casey's father George Anthony "did not help the state's case," due to his testimony coming off as "dishonest" and "evasive."

She said the fact that he seemingly switched allegiances from the defense to the prosecution during the trial further damaged his credibility.

"I don't know if he had anything to do with it, but I think that he was there," she said. "He and Casey have something."

Ford admitted it didn't feel good letting Anthony walk: "It was a horrible decision to have to make, but I had to do it based on the law. "

She said that the death penalty implications further weighed on her decision to cast a "not guilty" vote.

"You have to prove it ... or else I'm a murderer too, and I'm not any better."

Ford said jury members didn't speak to the media right away "because we were sick to our stomach to get that verdict.

"We were crying and not just the women. It was emotional and we weren't ready. We wanted to do it with integrity and not contribute to the sensationalism of the trial."

But despite the emotional toll this trial took on the jury, Ford said they tried to stay positive.

"They picked a great bunch of people, such high integrity," Ford said. "And there was high morale. We all joked.

“We are like a big group of cousins."

While there's been controversy over Anthony's acquittal, she was found guilty on four counts of lying to law enforcement officers, but is expected to be released following her sentencing on Thursday, as she's already spent nearly three years in custody.

http://www.radaronline.co...s-innocent

MrSoulpower said:

Serena said:

Well, I'm not sure if the 'Sunshine Law' that Florida has makes a difference, but there was NOTHING that the jury had which wasn't a matter of public record.

How can you be so sure of that? Again, assuming that Florida's law isn't different in this regard than Virginia law, the jury had access to more information. The files of a murder investigation are not public record. You can go to court and get a copy of the arrest record, which tells you little more than the charges and time and date of the arrest. But in most cases, especially in high profile homicide, the files are sealed from the public.

I wasn't saying the OS were the evidence, but the answer to their 'theory'.

I watched the opening statement. It gave a lot of promises the evidence did not live up to.

If you don't know what the evidence and testimony was, how can you come to an educated conclusion?

I never said that I don't know the evidence. I said I didn't watch the entire trial. I did my own research about what evidence prosecutors presented, and I agree with the jury and many legal experts that it wasn't enough for a felony conviction.

Since this was a circumstantial evidence case, it's all the pieces put together, there isn't ONE piece that proves what you're asking.

I didn't ask for ONE piece. I asked for a list of maybe ten pieces that prove Casy murdered her daughter. I've seen murderer's convicted on circumstantial evidence .. but in this case, the circumstantial evidence simply wasn't enough. It allowed for speculation and a thesis, but it wasn't enough for a felony conviction.

At least I learned what the facts were myself and didn't just listen to the talking heads.

Anyway, I'm done with the thread and am off to cuddle kitties at the rescue shelter and get all of this evilness out of my mind for awhile.

eta: The jury was provided with the evidence that was presented in court, nothing more, nothing less. They did not get 'secret documents' of any kind, it's ALL public record...depositions, testimony,evidence, etc..

[Edited 7/7/11 8:17am]

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

But is the duct tape enough? I don't think so, not when you can't place it over her mouth and nose.

It it were just over Caylee's mouth, that wouldn't suffocate her.

There were 3 pieces stuck there, not just one, so there was plenty to cover her mouth and nose, especially when it's a little face.

Ok, three pieces, but there is no face to determine if those three strips were over her mouth or her nose and mouth. No way to tell without eyewitness testimony which we don't have.

Serena said:

No it wasn't what?

It wasn't proof that Casey applied the tape to her daughter's face and it wasn't proof that the tape caused Caylee's death.

It WAS stuck in her decomposing hair and held the mandible in place, that was testified to.

Correct, but that doesn't prove the above.

I don't have all the answers, but the evidence presented was enough for me to agree with the Prosecution.

You're entitled to that, and I admire your passion. But that doesn't make you an expert, and it doesn't make you right and the jury wrong, and it isn't enough for a felony conviction, no matter how many times you say it is.

You don't agree, but you don't know all of the evidence either, so you're coming to your conclusion based only on bits & pieces you've heard on the news.

No, I am coming to my conclusion based on what I heard on the news (which is exactly the same source that you base your conclusion on) and my knowledge of the law and my experience in homicide trials.

Serena said:

MrSoulpower said:

No, it wasn't.

Where is the evidence that the duck tape was applied to Caylee's mouth before her death?

Where is the evidence that the duck tape caused Caylee's death?

Where is the evidence that Casey applied the duck tape on her daughter's face?

If you were a prosecutor, you'd fail, because you are not asking enough questions.

No it wasn't what? It WAS stuck in her decomposing hair and held the mandible in place, that was testified to.

I don't have all the answers, but the evidence presented was enough for me to agree with the Prosecution. You don't agree, but you don't know all of the evidence either, so you're coming to your conclusion based only on bits & pieces you've heard on the news.

It seems to me you are the only one coming to a conclusion...

To me there isn't a conclusion only confusion.

Serena said:

RKJCNE said:

Ok that's a start, now prove Caylee died of suffocation and that Casey put the tape on her mouth.

[Edited 7/7/11 7:49am]

Casey admitted she was the last person with the child until 'the nanny' kidnapped her, which was her story up until the opening day of the trial. The duct tape was a special brand that isn't even made anymore that she had access to. Can anyone say they saw her put it there? No, but since she was the last person with her...

Did Casey testify that she was the last person with Caylee?

We don't know that she was or that she knows who the last person with Caylee was.

She lies too much.

SUPRMAN said:

Serena said:

There were 3 pieces stuck there, not just one, so there was plenty to cover her mouth and nose, especially when it's a little face.

Ok, three pieces, but there is no face to determine if those three strips were over her mouth or her nose and mouth. No way to tell without eyewitness testimony which we don't have.

I forgot to reply to this, in court, they did superimpose the tape over a picture of Caylee and it showed how it would have fit.

As the ME said, there's NO reason for duct tape to be across the face of a child, except to keep them quiet or intentionally suffocate them.

[Edited 7/7/11 8:28am]

Looking at pictures of this woman smiling after the verdict was read made me ill. Whether you did it or not, your fuckin daughter is dead, and you're carrying on like you won the Lotto.

Ok, one more post before I take off...

According to one of the jurors, they were split with different guilty verdicts:

"The six that voted guilty said it didn't matter at what point in time she came home and found out her daughter was missing," he said. "She had to report it in some way, shape or form, and that's where the negligence came in."

See, this is a big problem, wtf is that about? There was never any testimony saying that she came home and found her daughter missing, they just made that up! Casey told the police (and sat her ass in jail for 3 years using the same story. if ANYONE else was culpable, don't you think she would have got herself out of jail?) that she dropped Caylee off with the nanny somewhere between 9 - 1 that day. Even that was an hilarious excuse, what is she the cable guy that she has a 4 hour window and can't fucking remember exactly when she last saw her own child?!?

Serena said:

At least I learned what the facts were myself and didn't just listen to the talking heads.

No, you didn't. Because you continue to state that there was enough evidence for a guilty verdict, as if it was a fact, when there clearly wasn't. I have asked you numerous times to provide the evidence you are constantly referring to, but you are dodging the question.

The jury was provided with the evidence that was presented in court, nothing more, nothing less. They did not get 'secret documents' of any kind, it's ALL public record...depositions, testimony,evidence, etc..

And you can't even prove that ... No one was talking about "secret documents," but the police files that are sealed from the public. You clearly don't know what you are talking about and you clearly have no understanding of the law. All you have is the claim to fame to have watched most of the trial on TV and your opinion. Fortunately, more is needed to send someone on death row.

Serena said:

According to one of the jurors, they were split with different guilty verdicts:

"The six that voted guilty said it didn't matter at what point in time she came home and found out her daughter was missing," he said. "She had to report it in some way, shape or form, and that's where the negligence came in."

See, this is a big problem, wtf is that about? There was never any testimony saying that she came home and found her daughter missing, they just made that up!

Sure, six jurors unanimously make something up, just for the heck of it ..

Casey told the police (and sat her ass in jail for 3 years using the same story. if ANYONE else was culpable, don't you think she would have got herself out of jail?) that she dropped Caylee off with the nanny somewhere between 9 - 1 that day. Even that was an hilarious excuse, what is she the cable guy that she has a 4 hour window and can't fucking remember exactly when she last saw her own child?!?

None of this serves as evidence that she killed her child. Not even circumstantial evidence.

runphilrun said:

Looking at pictures of this woman smiling after the verdict was read made me ill. Whether you did it or not, your fuckin daughter is dead, and you're carrying on like you won the Lotto.

Well, in a way she did win the lottery. I'm pretty certain that she thought she was going to get a guilty verdict on at least one of the felony charges. Also, this ordeal lasted three years. It must be a great feeling to know it is finally over, either way. No matter if your child is dead or not. I understand that it was quite a relief for her and her defense team.

That said, they should have known better but to have a victory party in public. Casey's attorney found the right words in the press conference, but then they were seen hopping around and celebrating in a nearby bar. That was completely tasteless and they should have known better than that.

MrSoulpower said:

runphilrun said:

Looking at pictures of this woman smiling after the verdict was read made me ill. Whether you did it or not, your fuckin daughter is dead, and you're carrying on like you won the Lotto.

Well, in a way she did win the lottery. I'm pretty certain that she thought she was going to get a guilty verdict on at least one of the felony charges. Also, this ordeal lasted three years. It must be a great feeling to know it is finally over, either way. No matter if your child is dead or not. I understand that it was quite a relief for her and her defense team.

That said, they should have known better but to have a victory party in public. Casey's attorney found the right words in the press conference, but then they were seen hopping around and celebrating in a nearby bar. That was completely tasteless and they should have known better than that.

I know lots of people are outraged by this ruling... and IMO, I think she was responsible for her child's death. But it is also my belief that people like Anthony (in in some people's opinion - OJ Simpson) who practice deceit and get away with it do not usually learn anything by being in such a borderline situation. Eventually they will try something else at some point in their lives and get caught.

Still - the partying is not tasteful... especially when all is said and done, a 3 years old baby is dead.

[Edited 7/7/11 10:28am]

DiminutiveRocker said:

MrSoulpower said:

Well, in a way she did win the lottery. I'm pretty certain that she thought she was going to get a guilty verdict on at least one of the felony charges. Also, this ordeal lasted three years. It must be a great feeling to know it is finally over, either way. No matter if your child is dead or not. I understand that it was quite a relief for her and her defense team.

That said, they should have known better but to have a victory party in public. Casey's attorney found the right words in the press conference, but then they were seen hopping around and celebrating in a nearby bar. That was completely tasteless and they should have known better than that.

I know lots of people are outraged by this ruling... and IMO, I think she was responsible for her child's death. But it is also my belief that people like Anthony (in in some people's opinion - OJ Simpson) who practice deceit and get away with it do not usually learn anything by being in such a borderline situation. Eventually they will try something else at some point in their lives and get caught.

Still - the partying is not tasteful... especially when all is said and done, a 3 years old baby is dead.

[Edited 7/7/11 10:28am]

Yea, I can agree with that ... I'm not sure if she killed her child, but I do believe she's somewhat responsible.

I also think she her future will be far from easy, even though she'll walk. Most Americans consider her a babykiller, and it is not easy to live in that kind of climate, even if she gets a new identity and makes shitloads of money through a book deal.

Once all said is done, I'm sure this isn't the last we've heard of Casey Anthony ...

Serena said:

Ok, see this is one of the things the jury did wrong; Juror #3 who is on ABC tonight stated that they took the Death Penalty seriously & it weighed heavily on all their minds while deliberating. (paraphrased)

They were instructed NOT to consider ANY penalty yet, only the charges. Then, if they had decided on 1st degree, there would have been a Penalty Phase with additional testimony for a few days (meaning they would've been sequestered even longer). Then they would be tasked with deliberating on Death or Life Without Parole. If they had chosen one of the lesser charges, the judge would have sentenced the penalty accordingly.

THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THEIR INSTRUCTIONS.

I think there needs to be changes made to the Jury System, especially when you have a sequestered jury that is anxious to get back home & to work. They either need to have 'professional jurists' for complicated/scientific cases especially, or maybe a 'jury coach' who helps them through the deliberation process, like getting them started, helping them follow the complicated instructions from the judge, etc..

Here's a link to the Instructions:

http://insession.blogs.cn...ony-trial/

Being sequestered for a long trial is no picnic, believe me. I was sequested for almost 2 months during a very high-profile trial back in 1990. When I heard that the jury had found her not guilty, the first though in my head was, "Oh, the jury was fed up and they wanted to get the hell out of Dodge!" Ain't no way in hell that jury could have gone over all that evidence in 11 hours and come up with a convincing analysis. BULLSHIT!!! Hell, we took a friggin week to deliberate and went in hung and the judge sent our asses right back in to do it all over again. We finally came to a compromise just to get the hell home! That is one experience I will never forget and never want to do again. When you have to deal with so me folk who just don't think straignt, it can be verrrry challenging.

Oh, but one point I wanted to make is that I remember distinctly that the judge explicitly instructed us NOT to consider the penalty for any charge. What happended when we went in to deliverate? This one woman said, "Oh, we can't find him guilty on that charge because they'll send him up the river!"

Serena said:

Well, I'm not sure if the 'Sunshine Law' that Florida has makes a difference, but there was NOTHING that the jury had which wasn't a matter of public record.

I wasn't saying the OS were the evidence, but the answer to their 'theory'. If you don't know what the evidence and testimony was, how can you come to an educated conclusion? Since this was a circumstantial evidence case, it's all the pieces put together, there isn't ONE piece that proves what you're asking.

To me, that leaves room for reasonable doubt.

If there is reasonable doubt then she cannot be found guilty of the charges posted earlier in the thread (pre-meditated first-degree murder).

Have you ever served on a jury?

jone70 said:

Serena said:

Well, I'm not sure if the 'Sunshine Law' that Florida has makes a difference, but there was NOTHING that the jury had which wasn't a matter of public record.

I wasn't saying the OS were the evidence, but the answer to their 'theory'. If you don't know what the evidence and testimony was, how can you come to an educated conclusion? Since this was a circumstantial evidence case, it's all the pieces put together, there isn't ONE piece that proves what you're asking.

To me, that leaves room for reasonable doubt.

If there is reasonable doubt then she cannot be found guilty of the charges posted earlier in the thread (pre-meditated first-degree murder).

Have you ever served on a jury?

I doubt it, and I hope she never will.

Nothing against Serena, her passion is admirable, but her lack of objective judgment is troublesome for jury duty.

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

Ok, three pieces, but there is no face to determine if those three strips were over her mouth or her nose and mouth. No way to tell without eyewitness testimony which we don't have.

I forgot to reply to this, in court, they did superimpose the tape over a picture of Caylee and it showed how it would have fit.

As the ME said, there's NO reason for duct tape to be across the face of a child, except to keep them quiet or intentionally suffocate them.

[Edited 7/7/11 8:28am]

Thanx

Agreed.

But we don't know if the intent was to silence her or kill her. There is no known cause of death so we can't say the tape killed her. We can't even say who placed the tape over her mouth for sure.