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.
And apparently Casey is not interested in talking to her Mother, who obviously perjured herself for her daughter...gotta love that kind of gratitude.
So what? That family has been completely and totally destroyed. Hopefully Casey has learned NOT to talk to people, other than her lawyers, while she is in jail! They record every single conversation. Just how long do you think it would take for something to be said which could create more hatred in the public? Casey can talk to her mother in PRIVATE after she is released.
Why would someone with "expertise in homicide investigations" NOT call the authorities when his granddaughter was missing and he was POSITIVE that the smell he smelled coming from Casey's trunk was the result of a dead body having been in there?
Do you really think someone with "expertise in homicide investigations" would have gone to the jail to visit his daughter and act like he knew already what was going on with Caylee?
He knew enough that he knew those conversations were being taped by the jail and would be used.
Three issues need to be considered when assessing the GA theory: 1.) Why would he cover up the accidental death? The only reason he would do so is if the death was the result of negligent homicide on Casey's part and he was trying to protect his daughter, which means she's still a criminal. 2.) Why wouldn't he dispose of the body more carefully? Even my dog knows that if you want to hide something well, you take it far away, dig a deep hole and throw it in there. Are you telling me my dog is smarter than a former homicide detective? 3.) The dynamic of the jail conversations. Take a look at these conversations between GA and CA starting at 4:10. You saying both of these people were there when Caylee died, and the GA forced Casey into helping him cover the whole thing up? Does the dynamic of this conversation sound like those things are hidden beneath the surface? Have you ever listened to wire taps of two criminals who conspired in a crime speaking to each other, even if they realize they are being recorded? It doesn't sound anything like this. Plus a detective knows the smartest thing to do when involved in a crime is to not say anything. Words are the biggest incriminators. Why would he do all of this talking?
I don't think that's true. I can suspect that I have 4 pens in my drawer based on the evidence of my memory, but that doesn't mean it's proven by any high standard.
I disagree. They put everything they had on the table. They believed they had a good case, albeit circumstantial. They were not banking, hoping for an emotional jury. They knew what they had going in. They had to proceed with this case with what they had. Justice for the death of this little girl demanded they proceed with what they had. They weren't presenting voodoo science. They were in there with solid circumstantial evidence. They could only go so far, and it wasn't enough for this jury.
The prosecutors and the police did nothing wrong, except for the cop who was fired for not pulling Caylee Anthony's body out of the water. I refuse to blame or discount the job the prosecution and the police did just because they didn't prevail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
That's my point. The evidence wasn't there so they were left hoping that an emotional jury would just convict anyway.
So if a jury had complete evidence that person was guilty and they found that the person was not guilty they did their duty because they were there and made a decision. We need to hold our jury to a higher level then that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
It's the jury's job to decide if the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Exactly. If one believes in the American justice system, then they must trust juries to take the evidence and decide whether it proves guilt or not.
I believe the biggest issue was the forensic case. If that sniffing machine was accepted procedure and chloroform was detected in the trunk and tied to the chloroform searches, it seems you have premeditation. But the jury and other experts didn't buy the sniffing machine as science. Personally, I believe she was guilty as can be but I have to respect the jury's decision. None of the defense made any sense, turning an accident into a murder makes no sense. The only way that works is if the theory was she was afraid of her family's reaction to an accident(maybe left the kid in the car in the sun) and tried to hide it. I don't buy it, I see the girl as pure evil.
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.
