Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The jury is entitled to acquit for whatever they want and believe or disbelieve or weight the allowed evidence in almost any they want. I as a result I don't know what more they wanted you would have to ask them that. All I am saying is that I do not think the jury was negligent, or unreasonable because I can see how reasonable people would come to the conclusion they came it.
And you base your opinion of the jury on what exactly? No evidence that the jury did the job it was asked to do. This jury did not ask any questions of the judge, did not ask to review testimony or evidence. Even a very intelligent college student need to review before a test and these jurors were no rocket scientists!
We keep repeating that CA waited 31 days to notify the police, but wasn't it actually her mother that finally did? If the child had no grandparents, the police woud never have been notified..think about that. Out of sight, out of mind, as far as the mother was concerned.
Exactly, Caylee would not have been missed since she also did not yet attend school. What kind of parent erases their child?
Exactly, Caylee would not have been missed since she also did not yet attend school. What kind of parent erases their child?
Actually, when you think about it, I imagine this isn't as rare as you would like to think. You wouldn't hear about it because no one misses the child and no one ever tells.
and who can forget the 911 call The car driven by the mother of missing Florida 2-year-old Caylee Anthony smelled "like there's been a dead body" in it, according to a 911 call made by the child's grandmother last week. then this same women proceeds to clean it out and spray it down with Fabreze.
Officer Yuri Mellich of the missing persons unit of the Orange County, Fla., Sheriff's Office called Anthony a "person of interest" after revealing that samples of hair of similar length and color to Caylee's were found in the trunk of a car owned by the Anthony family and last driven by Casey.
Plus, a police dog trained to seek out the decomposition of human bodies also alerted its handler to the car trunk.
How can a jury of 12 agree to be so incapable, at the very least, they could've been hung.
and who can forget the 911 call The car driven by the mother of missing Florida 2-year-old Caylee Anthony smelled "like there's been a dead body" in it, according to a 911 call made by the child's grandmother last week. then this same women proceeds to clean it out and spray it down with Fabreze.
Officer Yuri Mellich of the missing persons unit of the Orange County, Fla., Sheriff's Office called Anthony a "person of interest" after revealing that samples of hair of similar length and color to Caylee's were found in the trunk of a car owned by the Anthony family and last driven by Casey.
Plus, a police dog trained to seek out the decomposition of human bodies also alerted its handler to the car trunk.
How can a jury of 12 agree to be so incapable, at the very least, they could've been hung.
so grandma has been proven to have committed evidence tampering and lying on the stand-yet no charges filed.
only in america.
in 2009, blinkoncrime called it before it happened:
This for me, is the single biggest blow to the capital case against Casey. I have long stated I believe the defense is going to attempt the “confuse the jury of the guilty party” defense. Not new, not original, but in my opinion, in this case, prudent. The Anthony’s have no objection of course as they have a shot at getting their daughter out of prison and can keep their multiple income channels open.
The first salvo will be when Casey, through Baez, releases a statement, or in his opening remarks will point the finger at George, Cindy or both. (end)
outsmarting/confusing juries is as old as our criminal system to not self-incriminate. it doesn't always work, but it really helps when you have a jury anxious for a quick verdict,(after a long trial) not interesting in taking a lot of time sifting through all the evidence.
the one thing that the OJ trial and the casey trial had in common was that they both refused to testify in their own defense and were, of course, not subject to cross examination. maybe we should think about why we allow that in a murder trial? are we actually protecting our society as a whole with this policy? should bad laws be changed or kept in place?
i wish that somebody would at least file a civil suit in caylee's defense (not the grandparents!) to keep casey from keeping her ill-gotten profit that she is about to receive. i don't think OJ ever paid up, (even though he did lose) but there is always the possibility that their blood money can be confiscated. could we as a society at least find a way to stop killers from profiting from their crimes? could we do that much for the victims? after all, they start at an extreme disadvantage by NOT BEING ABLE to testify.
Last edited by floridasandy; 07-11-2011 at 06:24 AM..
Civil suits are coming, from Zenaida and EquiSearch, maybe more. OJ had the protection of a fat pension from his football days, plus he had children. Casey has no such protections.
so grandma has been proven to have committed evidence tampering and lying on the stand-yet no charges filed.
but it really helps when you have a jury anxious for a quick verdict,(after a long trial) not interesting in taking a lot of time sifting through all the evidence.
Actually, one of the jurors had a cruise scheduled for July 7th. He probably didn't care what the verdict would be just as long as he could get the hell out of there in time to board his ship!
As far as evidence tampering, Cindy did way more than Roy Krank and the defense hung Krank out to dry for it.
so grandma has been proven to have committed evidence tampering and lying on the stand-yet no charges filed.
only in america.
in 2009, blinkoncrime called it before it happened:
This for me, is the single biggest blow to the capital case against Casey. I have long stated I believe the defense is going to attempt the “confuse the jury of the guilty party” defense. Not new, not original, but in my opinion, in this case, prudent. The Anthony’s have no objection of course as they have a shot at getting their daughter out of prison and can keep their multiple income channels open.
The first salvo will be when Casey, through Baez, releases a statement, or in his opening remarks will point the finger at George, Cindy or both. (end)
outsmarting/confusing juries is as old as our criminal system to not self-incriminate. it doesn't always work, but it really helps when you have a jury anxious for a quick verdict,(after a long trial) not interesting in taking a lot of time sifting through all the evidence.
the one thing that the OJ trial and the casey trial had in common was that they both refused to testify in their own defense and were, of course, not subject to cross examination. maybe we should think about why we allow that in a murder trial? are we actually protecting our society as a whole with this policy? should bad laws be changed or kept in place?
i wish that somebody would at least file a civil suit in caylee's defense (not the grandparents!) to keep casey from keeping her ill-gotten profit that she is about to receive. i don't think OJ ever paid up, (even though he did lose) but there is always the possibility that their blood money can be confiscated. could we as a society at least find a way to stop killers from profiting from their crimes? could we do that much for the victims? after all, they start at an extreme disadvantage by NOT BEING ABLE to testify.
This the part that has bugged me. We will assume that this was at the advice of the attorneys and yet how can it be acceptable. An innocent person loses credibility when they forfeit their chance to speak in their own defense IMO. She never would have been able to deal well with a cross examination as she obviously cannot keep herself from lying and would most definitely have incriminated herself...beyond a reasonable doubt!
Good post and I agree that with such serious charges, a defendant should be ordered to the witness stand.
I believe Casey's release date from jail stands as July 13th but they released the date of the 17th to the press as a decoy. The objective being to quietly slip Casey out on the date as planned and then on Sunday, drive a few SUVs with tinted windows around in different directions for a short time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
