mzsadii said:

She will have a day when she must strip away all the fake and look back in the mirror at her reflection and know each time what she did. It does aappear for now that she will not benefit from her actions. Even a porn company doesn't want to touch her, the alledged nanny is suing, and if the father ever comes forward; he/his family should do a wrongful death suit against her. THere no sence is writing a book, doing a movie, or interviewing because she will never tell the truth.

Hopefully this will happen! Casey told some people that the father died in a car wreck (none of her family ever knew the guy). Now a woman, who's son died and had told her about being with a girl when he was in Florida, has come out saying she'd like to find out if Caylee was her granddaughter or not. Whether or not she's a kook has yet to be determined, but it will be easy enough to prove if she submits to a DNA test. Keep your fingers crossed!

SUPRMAN said:

Serena said:

One big truck will come as soon as she has to sit for the deposition in the Gonzalez lawsuit scheduled for the 19th.

I'm still working my way down page 4, so I don't know if anyone posted about a tree that was yards away from where the remains were found was hit by lightning yesterday. The gods are not happy!

Yards away? Were they drunk?

So did you see my 10 points of evidence that you asked for (on pg 4 i think)?

lazycrockett said:

Serena said:

I haven't read all the way through the thread yet, so don't know if this info has already been posted, but Casey was served with a subpoena the other night for the defamation suit from Zenaida Gonzalez.

She will be deposed on the 19th and it will be recorded and maybe broadcast live on forthepeople.com . She has some other lawyer for this case, but Baez may slime on over to it. She'll have to answer a lot of questions that she won't want to and can't plead the 5th now.

She's also facing a $60-70k lien from the IRS on the $200k she and Baez received back in October from ABC for the pictures/videos of Caylee. Baez didn't take care of the taxes on it because he probably thought she'd never get out!

The search team that Cindy called for help, when A LOT of people traveled to Florida and spent hundreds of hours looking for Caylee will be filing suit against her to recover their costs.

The State has already filed against her to recover investigative and other costs, but has 60 days to get the numbers together.

Oops, forgot one more; Jessie Grund and his family will probably be suing her for defamation also after they accused him of killing Caylee at one point. (this was the guy she fingered as the father until paternity test proved her wrong, but she was pregnant before she slept with him)

[Edited 7/8/11 22:50pm]

N this even if she never wanted to will force her to write a book and go the media route. Its the only way to pay the debts that have magically appeared. Everyone is in it for the coin, and the seething public will go to the fountain and gorge themselves.

I really don't think she'll get a book out, but mom is reportedly working on one. I don't think many people care to read their lies. She might get offers for interviews, but I doubt the backlash will be worth it to whomever tries. I'm hoping she'll be shunned by everyone forever. Her old group of friends have already come out and said they want nothing to do with her. Even Cindy's brother said in emails to Cindy that he knew Casey killed Caylee and that Cindy should have been charged with obstruction and destroying evidence for trying to cover for her. (emails that were forwarded to police by him) Also of note, not ONE other family member, besides her parents, were ever in court except for Lee and that was only when he had to testify.

[Edited 7/9/11 1:36am]

SUPRMAN said:

Serena said:

I don't know how else I can explain it, the cause of death WAS DETERMINED TO BE HOMICIDE by the Medical Examiner. You do NOT have to prove the manner of death, nor should it have been considered for finding guilt. People are convicted all the time without anyone knowing how they killed someone, sometimes it's NEVER known, but their asses are still in prison.

I understand what the medical examiner said, but the trial said otherwise. No one during the trial could say how the child died. So how do we know it was homicide if there is no known cause of death? She could have died in her sleep. Calling it a homicide due to the presence of duct tape is an impossible reach. Even with threee pieces of tape, we don't know the child couldn't still breathe.

I agree you do not necessarily have to prove the manner of death in a murder trial.

But if there is no known cause of death, how can it be known that the death was a homicide?

The medical examiner was simply wrong because they could not substantiate that at trial.

Did you listen to the ME's testimony? If not, you can't fairly call her wrong without hearing everything she had to say explaining how she came to that conclusion.

I can't read this entire thread, but after reading a few pages here and there I want to say a couple things...

First, remember that regardless of how we may feel about the crime, what we think about the evidence, whether or not it was a good defense or bad prosecution, she had her day in criminal court and a jury of people just like us found her not guilty. That means a lot, and and its going to mean something different from one person to the next, but its still very important. That's how the system is supposed to work and its exactly how we would want it to work if any of us were every accused of a crime that went before a jury.

Second, I wonder what would happen if somebody could get a civil suit against her into the courts? Would be interesting to see how that turned out, but from what I understand of the evidence presented in the criminal case I'm not sure there's anybody who the courts would deem worthy of allowing a civil suit to move forward.

Serena said:

TonyVanDam said:

No Serena, you're dead wrong. Unlike Jennifer Ford, you do NOT know all of the facts because you were not a member of that specific jury. Therefore (almost) everything that you have shown in all of you posts in THIS very thread is pure speculations. But keep telling yourself that you know exactly what all 12 jurors did wrong.

Ok, whatever. Actually, I'm the one posting FACTS as opposed to speculation. I don't know how many times I have to say that I watched as 300+ pieces of the evidence were admitted during the trial. The SAME things that the jury heard were admitted, the only difference is they could physically touch them, but they didn't even go through the evidence during deliberations.

THE JURY HAD NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR EVIDENCE AVAILABLE TO THEM THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR YOU TO LEARN ABOUT, BESIDES WHAT I NOTED IN ANOTHER POST.

If you don't believe me, write Judge Perry and ask him if there was anything not presented during open court.

Maybe the disconnect is coming because some of you don't understand that every piece of evidence had to be testified to or stipulated as true by both sides before it could be entered. Thus, EVERYONE watching the trial knows exactly what was admitted.

[Edited 7/9/11 0:52am]

There is still a main reason why it took the jurors 10 hours to concluded that Casey Anthony was "not guilty". If those 300+ OR tons of evidences were ever good enough to show how Caylee was murder beyond any reasonable doubts, it would have instead taken the jurors a lot less than 10 hours (READ: within 2 hours tops TBH) to concluded that the verdict should be "guilty".

Just because the evidences were good enough to prove that Casey is a dumb lying slut does NOT and did NOT mean those evidences were good enough to show how Caylee was murdered.

MrSoulpower said:

.
Oh sure because all victims of drowning are found in 3 garbage bags inside a laundry bag with duct tape on their faces and thrown in a swamp. Yeah thanks for clearing that up for me. That along with decomp fluids plus chloroform, the smell of DEATH, and a strand of Caylee's hair with a DEATH BAND on it in the trunk!!! Oh don't forget 2 police dogs who both confirmed they smelled a dead body in the trunk, and 2 places in the back yard. Yeah that's fairly common in drowning cases..... Lmao you have got to be as delusional as Baez, Mason, and the bitch herself. Please dude, don't insult my intelligence.
[Edited 7/9/11 4:33am]

minneapolisFunq said:

it's not about her (Casey) being a threat to the public, it's about justice for a precious girl who was murdered by the one person charged to love and care for her above all else.
What? R u serious? What about taking her away from her grandparents who adored her, her great- grandparents who loved her, her whole family has lost her. The world has lost her. You have no idea what she could have contributed or done with her life. She was a human with a total and complete right to live and grow up separate from her mother, and it was not ANYONES right to take it from her, not even her OWN mother. What a sick and disgraceful comment!
[Edited 7/9/11 5:14am]

Serena said:

yes! What about when her dad tried to go in her trunk and she ran in front of him to make sure he would not open the trunk? She opened it and gave him the gas cans that she broke into the shed and stole a dew days before. She was in the trunk!

RKJCNE said:

NO! Because they were thowing shit to a wall to see what would stick. They knew that the evidence was overwhelming and had no chance so they had to find something. For almost 3 years she was in jail and her defense team was trying to find someone or something to pin it on. Her mother Cindy was charged (by Baez her lawyer) with digging up dirt on Jesse Grund (her ex fiancé) his father Richard ( who is a preacher, faith healer, and exorcist), Roy kronk (the meter reader who found the body) and caseys friends in the hopes of pinning it on one of them. She would email him what she would dig up and he would email her back "good job rosebud" lmao She even wrote in a email that she and Casey thought it was Richard Grund because of his crazy religious beliefs, and they thought she may have been used in ritual sacrifice! Omg!!! Needless to say she did not find anything and the grund family is suing. In 2009 there was a inmate a few cells down that was arrested on DUI that lost her son from a drowning, AND HER FATHER found him in the pool. They think that where this whole drowning theory came from, but she was a felon and would not be believed in court, and the defense fought it and it did not make it in. Serena is right in saying that the public had so much more evidence than this braindead jury. That was also over 500 pages of jailhouse letters Casey wrote to a fellow inmate that have her ADMITTING that she would medicate Caylee to knock her out with benedryl and chloroform. Plus she said something about "she was glad in a way that Caylee would never have deal with this horrible world, get her heartbroken, or be abused" or something to that effect. And it went on and on with highly incriminating info. Baez blocked inclusion of all the illicit letters. I'm telling you this woman is guilty as sin. Also I am really surprised that nobody would even entertain the thought that the jury was tampered with. Like the defense planted jurors, or that they were PAID OFF. Anyone who could overlook all of the evidence and only deliberate for 11 hours without asking to see any evidence or review testimony was coerced or paid off.

I was listening to the song precious by depeche mode tonight and started bawling about my own shattered innocence, personal losses in my life, but most of all I was thinking about little Caylee Anthony and the hell that poor child went through. None of us will ever know what she went through in those last moments in her life, or what any murdered child or person goes through. It's unspeakable, horrific. I just keep thinking she deserved so much more, and I keep thinking that we failed her, this world failed her. Although we could not have done anything more and it was her mother and family who put should have and could have done more, I can't help feeling terrible. This song is very healing for me right now. I guess god has the master plan. God bless Caylee Marie and all the discarded souls who deserved so much more. "angels with silver wings, should not know suffering"

lazycrockett said:

I don't think that Cindy knew what she was doing when she did it. At that point she was suspiscious because Casey was putting her off for 3 weeks telling her stories of why her and Caylee had not come home. "I'm in Tampa with zanny the nanny she had a car accident" ( who was proved NOT TO EXSIST, she admitted she made her up!!) or " we went to Jacksonville with Jeff thompkins" another fake made up person, (well she went to school and worked with someone of that name but the details of that person did not match the story she told, it was not him) but she did not know that Caylee was missing or "kidnapped by zanny the nanny" which is the first story she gave her parents and police. When he dad picked up the car at the tow yard there was no knowledge of anything being wrong. Her father knew something was up but her mom being the clueless enabler she always was tried to explain it away. I think as time went on she saw the writing on the wall and tried to cover up the crime to protect her daughter, but at that point I don't think she knew.

MrSoulpower said:

Yeah, like the jury could have never had a very big reason not to think so or ignore evidence right? Like a big fat check waved in their faces? Lol! All I know is this, Casey was worth slot more money out of jail than in jail. You don't think some unscrupulous business man could see that

TonyVanDam said:

Sorry my lap top is dead from lack of charger and I'm typing on a iPod touch so you can't scroll down to the bottom of the message to edit it on this darn thing. Lol I will have another charger early next week and correct it. Sorry for the error.

Purplealegria7 said:

I was listening to the song precious by depeche mode tonight and started bawling about my own shattered innocence, personal losses in my life, but most of all I was thinking about little Caylee Anthony and the hell that poor child went through. None of us will ever know what she went through in those last moments in her life, or what any murdered child or person goes through. It's unspeakable, horrific. I just keep thinking she deserved so much more, and I keep thinking that we failed her, this world failed her. Although we could not have done anything more and it was her mother and family who put should have and could have done more, I can't help feeling terrible. This song is very healing for me right now. I guess god has the master plan. God bless Caylee Marie and all the discarded souls who deserved so much more. "angels with silver wings, should not know suffering"

[Excerpt]

Angels with silver wings

Shouldn't know suffering

I wish I could take the pain for you

If God has a master plan

That only He understands

I hope its your eyes He's seeing through

Things get damaged

Things get broken

. . .

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

Yards away? Were they drunk?

So did you see my 10 points of evidence that you asked for (on pg 4 i think)?

I wasn't the one who asked, but yes, I saw them.

(Mr.Soulpower asked)

Serena said:

SUPRMAN said:

I understand what the medical examiner said, but the trial said otherwise. No one during the trial could say how the child died. So how do we know it was homicide if there is no known cause of death? She could have died in her sleep. Calling it a homicide due to the presence of duct tape is an impossible reach. Even with threee pieces of tape, we don't know the child couldn't still breathe.

I agree you do not necessarily have to prove the manner of death in a murder trial.

But if there is no known cause of death, how can it be known that the death was a homicide?

The medical examiner was simply wrong because they could not substantiate that at trial.

Did you listen to the ME's testimony? If not, you can't fairly call her wrong without hearing everything she had to say explaining how she came to that conclusion.

If she came to the conclusion that it was a homicide without having a cause of death then the ME is simply wrong.

They are a human being.

I did not listen to the ME's testimony but how does she conclude it was a homicide if she can't say how she died?

That's illogical.

The ME could have ruled the cause of death indeterminate or unknown. So why say it is a homicide when you can't say what caused the death?

Serena said:

mzsadii said:

She will have a day when she must strip away all the fake and look back in the mirror at her reflection and know each time what she did. It does aappear for now that she will not benefit from her actions. Even a porn company doesn't want to touch her, the alledged nanny is suing, and if the father ever comes forward; he/his family should do a wrongful death suit against her. THere no sence is writing a book, doing a movie, or interviewing because she will never tell the truth.

Hopefully this will happen! Casey told some people that the father died in a car wreck (none of her family ever knew the guy). Now a woman, who's son died and had told her about being with a girl when he was in Florida, has come out saying she'd like to find out if Caylee was her granddaughter or not. Whether or not she's a kook has yet to be determined, but it will be easy enough to prove if she submits to a DNA test. Keep your fingers crossed!

How do you sue for wrongful death, when there is no cause of death?

How do you prove it was a wrongful death and that Casey is responsible?

Simply saying Caylee was her child and is now dead isn't enough. Neither is the circumstantial evidence at trial.

And if the father is dead, who would have standing to sue? The woman who thinks Caylee may be her granddaughter has no standing to sue for wrongful death.

Cerebus said:

I can't read this entire thread, but after reading a few pages here and there I want to say a couple things...

First, remember that regardless of how we may feel about the crime, what we think about the evidence, whether or not it was a good defense or bad prosecution, she had her day in criminal court and a jury of people just like us found her not guilty. That means a lot, and and its going to mean something different from one person to the next, but its still very important. That's how the system is supposed to work and its exactly how we would want it to work if any of us were every accused of a crime that went before a jury.

Second, I wonder what would happen if somebody could get a civil suit against her into the courts? Would be interesting to see how that turned out, but from what I understand of the evidence presented in the criminal case I'm not sure there's anybody who the courts would deem worthy of allowing a civil suit to move forward.

It's not the court's call as to who could sue civilly. The law determines that.

I don't know who would have standing to sue for wrongful death.

The problem with suing for wrongful death is that the criminal trial ended with the cause of death being unknown.

You can't sue from wrongful death without showing how that person is responsible for the death of the decedent.

Saying Casey didn't report Caylee missing for 31 days doesn't show Casey killed Caylee.

Wrongful death can't simply be a second criminal trial.

Purplealegria7 said:

MrSoulpower said:

Relating to the murder, zero.

They can't even say for sure that Caylee was murdered. The only thing they can say for sure is that she's dead.

. Oh sure because all victims of drowning are found in 3 garbage bags inside a laundry bag with duct tape on their faces and thrown in a swamp. Yeah thanks for clearing that up for me. That along with decomp fluids plus chloroform, the smell of DEATH, and a strand of Caylee's hair with a DEATH BAND on it in the trunk!!! Oh don't forget 2 police dogs who both confirmed they smelled a dead body in the trunk, and 2 places in the back yard. Yeah that's fairly common in drowning cases......... Lmao you have got to be as delusional as Baez, Mason, and the bitch herself. Please dude, don't insult my intelligence. [Edited 7/9/11 4:33am]

What was the cause of death stated during the trial? Drowning? Nope.

No cause of death was established. It was a defense statement that suggested she drowned.

How do you know she drowned? You don't.

Your post doesn't make sense.

Purplealegria7 said:

RKJCNE said:

One thing I don't get is that the defence alleges that Anthony drowned... what happened after she drowned? Did they attempt to explain that at all?

NO! Because they were thowing shit to a wall to see what would stick. They knew that the evidence was overwhelming and had no chance so they had to find something. For almost 3 years she was in jail and her defense team was trying to find someone or something to pin it on. Her mother Cindy was charged (by Baez her lawyer) with digging up dirt on Jesse Grund (her ex fiancé) his father Richard ( who is a preacher, faith healer, and exorcist), Roy kronk (the meter reader who found the body) and caseys friends in the hopes of pinning it on one of them. She would email him what she would dig up and he would email her back "good job rosebud" lmao She even wrote in a email that she and Casey thought it was Richard Grund because of his crazy religious beliefs, and they thought she may have been used in ritual sacrifice! Omg!!! Needless to say she did not find anything and the grund family is suing. In 2009 there was a inmate a few cells down that was arrested on DUI that lost her son from a drowning, AND HER FATHER found him in the pool. They think that where this whole drowning theory came from, but she was a felon and would not be believed in court, and the defense fought it and it did not make it in. Serena is right in saying that the public had so much more evidence than this braindead jury. That was also over 500 pages of jailhouse letters Casey wrote to a fellow inmate that have her ADMITTING that she would medicate Caylee to knock her out with benedryl and chloroform. Plus she said something about "she was glad in a way that Caylee would never have deal with this horrible world, get her heartbroken, or be abused" or something to that effect. And it went on and on with highly incriminating info. Baez blocked inclusion of all the illicit letters. I'm telling you this woman is guilty as sin. Also I am really surprised that nobody would even entertain the thought that the jury was tampered with. Like the defense planted jurors, or that they were PAID OFF. Anyone who could overlook all of the evidence and only deliberate for 11 hours without asking to see any evidence or review testimony was coerced or paid off.

Really? Paid off by whom? To what end?

The deliberations were so short because they never had to ask if Casey murdered Caylee.

The prosecution never met the required elements for the jury to discuss the murder charges.

So if the elements aren't met, there is no way for the jury to say she is guilty of those charges.

Don't make it a conspiracy. It's not.

The prosecution bungled their case and someone who most people believe is guilty, is free.

Purplealegria7 said:

MrSoulpower said:

That's a valid question, but irrelevant in this trial. Casey was charged with First Degree Murder. If prosecutors were interested in hearing what happened after Caylee drowned, they could have asked. But my guess is that they did not want to give more validation to this claim at all, which is why they ignored it.

I think what most people don't understand is that the purpose of this trial was not to solve the mystery of what happened to Caylee Anthony. The sole purpose of this trial was to find out if her mother is guilty of premeditated murder. The jury didn't think so - case closed.

Yeah, like the jury could have never had a very big reason not to think so or ignore evidence right? Like a big fat check waved in their faces? Lol! All I know is this, Casey was worth slot more money out of jail than in jail. You don't think some unscrupulous business man could see that

And what does the unscrupulous businessman (Or course it's a corporate crook) get out of seeing Casey free?

And what does that unscrupulous businessman lose if he/she is/was discovered having attempted to tamper with the jury?

Sorry, but the law doesn't send all the guilty to jail just like it doesn't always set the innocent free.

SUPRMAN said:

Cerebus said:

I can't read this entire thread, but after reading a few pages here and there I want to say a couple things...

First, remember that regardless of how we may feel about the crime, what we think about the evidence, whether or not it was a good defense or bad prosecution, she had her day in criminal court and a jury of people just like us found her not guilty. That means a lot, and and its going to mean something different from one person to the next, but its still very important. That's how the system is supposed to work and its exactly how we would want it to work if any of us were every accused of a crime that went before a jury.

Second, I wonder what would happen if somebody could get a civil suit against her into the courts? Would be interesting to see how that turned out, but from what I understand of the evidence presented in the criminal case I'm not sure there's anybody who the courts would deem worthy of allowing a civil suit to move forward.

It's not the court's call as to who could sue civilly. The law determines that.

I don't know who would have standing to sue for wrongful death.

The problem with suing for wrongful death is that the criminal trial ended with the cause of death being unknown.

You can't sue from wrongful death without showing how that person is responsible for the death of the decedent.

Saying Casey didn't report Caylee missing for 31 days doesn't show Casey killed Caylee.

Wrongful death can't simply be a second criminal trial.

I was under the impression that if a court (judge) finds a civil suit frivolous or unwarranted that they can throw it out. For me, that falls in line with what you're saying about who would file the suit. I could be wrong, but I don't think there is anybody who could file a suit in this instance without looking like they were trying grab some cash or, like you say, try her again for the same crime.

However, even though I tried very hard to not bring this up, OJ was clearly tried again for the same crime, even if it was labeled as a "wrongful death" civil case. He was found innocent and then found guilty based on the same set of evidence. I do not find it even a little bit hard to believe that the exact same thing would happen in this case if there was some way for a civil trial to proceed.

Purplealegria7 said:

RKJCNE said:

One thing I don't get is that the defence alleges that Anthony drowned... what happened after she drowned? Did they attempt to explain that at all?

NO! Because they were thowing shit to a wall to see what would stick. They knew that the evidence was overwhelming and had no chance so they had to find something. For almost 3 years she was in jail and her defense team was trying to find someone or something to pin it on. Her mother Cindy was charged (by Baez her lawyer) with digging up dirt on Jesse Grund (her ex fiancé) his father Richard ( who is a preacher, faith healer, and exorcist), Roy kronk (the meter reader who found the body) and caseys friends in the hopes of pinning it on one of them. She would email him what she would dig up and he would email her back "good job rosebud" lmao She even wrote in a email that she and Casey thought it was Richard Grund because of his crazy religious beliefs, and they thought she may have been used in ritual sacrifice! Omg!!! Needless to say she did not find anything and the grund family is suing. In 2009 there was a inmate a few cells down that was arrested on DUI that lost her son from a drowning, AND HER FATHER found him in the pool. They think that where this whole drowning theory came from, but she was a felon and would not be believed in court, and the defense fought it and it did not make it in. Serena is right in saying that the public had so much more evidence than this braindead jury. That was also over 500 pages of jailhouse letters Casey wrote to a fellow inmate that have her ADMITTING that she would medicate Caylee to knock her out with benedryl and chloroform. Plus she said something about "she was glad in a way that Caylee would never have deal with this horrible world, get her heartbroken, or be abused" or something to that effect. And it went on and on with highly incriminating info. Baez blocked inclusion of all the illicit letters. I'm telling you this woman is guilty as sin. Also I am really surprised that nobody would even entertain the thought that the jury was tampered with. Like the defense planted jurors, or that they were PAID OFF. Anyone who could overlook all of the evidence and only deliberate for 11 hours without asking to see any evidence or review testimony was coerced or paid off.

I couldn't read past the second sentance...

What was this supposed overwhelming evidence?

^^^^^ sorry I'm typing on a iPod touch due to a dead laptop charger, so it's kinda hard to arrange my Paragraphs without it taking forever. I can't scroll down to edit or quote anyone, and It's a pain in the ass to cut and paste, so to answer you correctly would take too long. I'll wait to I get my new charger to answer. Sorry for the incoherent, run on paragraph. I'm still getting a hang of this tiny thing lol

SUPRMAN said:

Cerebus said:

I can't read this entire thread, but after reading a few pages here and there I want to say a couple things...

First, remember that regardless of how we may feel about the crime, what we think about the evidence, whether or not it was a good defense or bad prosecution, she had her day in criminal court and a jury of people just like us found her not guilty. That means a lot, and and its going to mean something different from one person to the next, but its still very important. That's how the system is supposed to work and its exactly how we would want it to work if any of us were every accused of a crime that went before a jury.

Second, I wonder what would happen if somebody could get a civil suit against her into the courts? Would be interesting to see how that turned out, but from what I understand of the evidence presented in the criminal case I'm not sure there's anybody who the courts would deem worthy of allowing a civil suit to move forward.

It's not the court's call as to who could sue civilly. The law determines that.

I don't know who would have standing to sue for wrongful death.

The problem with suing for wrongful death is that the criminal trial ended with the cause of death being unknown.

You can't sue from wrongful death without showing how that person is responsible for the death of the decedent.

Saying Casey didn't report Caylee missing for 31 days doesn't show Casey killed Caylee.

Wrongful death can't simply be a second criminal trial.

But that didn't stop people from filing a wrongful death suit against OJ Simpson, and look how that turned out. I actually think there are grounds for a wrongful death suit agianst Casey Anthony, but that ferakshow doesn't have any assets for anyone to collect on, so it would be pointless for anyone to file suit for any actual monetary damages.

Cerebus said:

SUPRMAN said:

It's not the court's call as to who could sue civilly. The law determines that.

I don't know who would have standing to sue for wrongful death.

The problem with suing for wrongful death is that the criminal trial ended with the cause of death being unknown.

You can't sue from wrongful death without showing how that person is responsible for the death of the decedent.

Saying Casey didn't report Caylee missing for 31 days doesn't show Casey killed Caylee.

Wrongful death can't simply be a second criminal trial.

I was under the impression that if a court (judge) finds a civil suit frivolous or unwarranted that they can throw it out. For me, that falls in line with what you're saying about who would file the suit. I could be wrong, but I don't think there is anybody who could file a suit in this instance without looking like they were trying grab some cash or, like you say, try her again for the same crime.

However, even though I tried very hard to not bring this up, OJ was clearly tried again for the same crime, even if it was labeled as a "wrongful death" civil case. He was found innocent and then found guilty based on the same set of evidence. I do not find it even a little bit hard to believe that the exact same thing would happen in this case if there was some way for a civil trial to proceed.

Understood regarding OJ.

But the difference is that in the OJ case, you had causes of death.

In the OJ wrongful death case, you didn't have to prove he actually killed them but that his actions led to their death.

Who would have standing to file a wrongful death claim? None of Caylee's grandparents can. Casey can, but she has to prove how she died and who killed her.

Caylee's father being absent from her life, would likely need a sympathetic court to allow him to bring a wrongful death claim.

In Caylee's case, not having a cause of death is problematic because if you can't say how she died, how you say it was wrongful?

if the jury came back in three minutes with a guilty on murder 1 they would have been genius in action... and a miscarriage of justice. is this the justice system you want in this country? sinsationalism makes lynchings justifiable as well as any reason for lynching.

KingBAD said:

if the jury came back in three minutes with a guilty on murder 1 they would have been genius in action... and a miscarriage of justice. is this the justice system you want in this country? sinsationalism makes lynchings justifiable as well as any reason for lynching.

You know, I'd rather live in a country where the justice system is innocent until proven guilty and there is a trial that you have to go through instead of one where people jump to conclusions. People aren't perfect, therefore nothing created by humans are not perfect either. There would be no such thing as a justice system that is perfect and therefore there will be some [truly] guilty people that are acquitted and some innocent people who are deemed guilty. I'd rather have this justice system than most justice systems out there, although I'm no expert.

There will always be imperfections in this world, and it's about how you deal with them as it comes your way as opposed to trying to fix and change them all.

I believe in God.. if she truly killed her child (as I don't know what happened personally, although I think that she more likely did it), then it will boomerang back at her. One way or another. We can't dwell on this or blame the jury or blame the prosecution because I am sure that they had the best intentions in mind. All we can do is move on and know that God and the Universe will deal with her. It's not our responsibility, all we can do is speculate and have opinions and theorize. This is all.

1. the beautiful life, was that of the child she no longer had

2. if your child has lived with you over 17 years

and has the ability to lie the this woman lied, and you think

it has nothing to do with you, you are deluded...

(she and her family lied throughout 7 months of pregnency

yet noone thinks the family can lie about other things)

3. the prosicution only served to try and make the case

personal against this woman... they were unprofessional

throughout the trial, and it wasn't waisted on the jury.

4. it doesnt't matter that the woman may be, or is guilty.

she was tried in the court of publlic oppinion 1st, in a court of law 2nd, and is being tried again and again on t.v.

because people let their egos run wild, thinking they knew better than the law...

that girl in italy

had dna and a print at he murder scene. her case was over turned because she was tried in the court of public oppinion.

'she was kissin her boyfriend' outside a murder scene.

these people are not like me, so whut i would do

and whut they did in these situations are two different things. and because they didn't do whut i would have

done don't make them guilty.........

i rest my case