Caylee Chat IV: Casey Found "Not Guilty"

[Komak]

I will agree that many of the posters on here are VERY knowledgeable about the case but I didn't think the prosecution did a bad job, at all. I wasn't impressed with the job Baez did and I just wondering, now, if his case was more on the jurors' intellectual level? He did talk a bit about doubt in his closing - 'if the jurors had any doubt' and it seems that stuck with them. I really fail to see HOW they managed to disregard the prosecution's closings, which I thought were a wonderful summing-up, and made a lot of sense. The problem is (I think) that the prosecution was not able to show the EXACT who/what/when/how/why. They had a beautifully constructed circumstancial evidence case: it made PERFECT SENSE to me. ALL of the evidence pointed to Casey and only Casey but that wasn't good enough for the jury. Where was their common sense?

I hope that Casey is reviled where ever she goes. Unfortunately she will most likely profit from her evil. We have to hope for karma now.

Oh I totally agree..Baez, really didn't have to do anything major, no major Matlock moves...nothing...he is mediocre at best...but I really was having doubts about half way through this trial that she would be found guilty.

I think your right...Baez talked at their level...I often wonder if the early twenties kid who only watched the TV when he was playing video games made it to the jury? Need I say more?

And I truly think that NOT knowing the whole story, and cramming it in within three weeks...probably brought out a totally different perspective of Casey than the Casey we all hate...Perspective is everything...they never saw what we all do...and what they saw they saw differently....

[Komak]

I've actually spent a bit of time thinking about this today. Normally I'm just a person who has followed this case since those first insane days during which Casey led the investigators on a merry chase (and through all the familial insane denials and other craziness). However, had I been a jury member, I would've been given very specific instructions about what my job and role as a juror was to be. EVEN after all I've read here and other sites, my focus would've been on what information was given to me by the prosecution and defense--and when I say "information," I mean evidence (not, say a pretty closing argument). Say my fellow jurors and I go into final deliberations and Juror #5 says, "Based on the evidence we've been presented, it's equally likely that X happened." (I'm making this up, of course--I have no idea what kind of conversations the jurors had.) If I agreed with Juror #5, under that kind of reasoning, I could not in good conscience as a citizen and juror agree that the State had proven its case against Casey beyond a reasonable doubt. And consider: I have not, as a hypothetical juror, been tasked with getting justice for Caylee--I have been tasked with deciding whether the State has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Bravo Bravo...but of course you make my point so much more eloquently...I have no hard feelings towards the jury... I hate the results but in a way.... they straightforwardly apparently all came to the same conclusion.... Someone sitting in the same position who was really not guilty...would have wanted the same due dilligence... it boils down to the case of the prosecution and the lack of case of the defense...My fault finding lies with the prosecutor...but thats just me..

[Star Sizu]

someone please explain how this shit happened? how this baby killer is walking??? *takes a drink*

The Jury watched too much CSI and expected a actual "smoking gun" to show Casey's link to the death.
They choose to ignore fact, that Mother will kill their child, and live in a fantasy land, where this does not happen daily.
They did not believe nor review any of the evidence shown by the state while in deliberation.

[Apostle of Chaos]

Well guys, I hes ard it at work today, and everyone, including my customer (I work retail) were stunned. Every single one thought she'd get convicted of something!

Sure, she got convicted of Lying to the cops, but really? That's it?
I really, really, really hope she has to serve the remainder of her sentence in general, and experiences some prison justice, or at the very least a whackjob gets lucky when she gets released.

[OMalley]

I can understand that, @Lizard. At issue here is, the evidence is circumstancial. But (IMO) the evidence is cohesive; it hangs together. I'm still not sure how the jury didn't see that. They chose to believe a hypothesis that was presented with NO supporting evidence. I'm still wondering if they did not understand what is meant by reasonable doubt.

[Lizard]

The Jury watched too much CSI and expected a actual "smoking gun" to show Casey's link to the death.
They choose to ignore fact, that Mother will kill their child, and live in a fantasy land, where this does not happen daily.
They did not believe nor review any of the evidence shown by the state while in deliberation.

Disagree. While I don't know the actual instruction given to the jurors, they were given instructions about what it was they were to do, and considering that it took so short a time and all were in agreement, then it's pretty clear that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. There ARE mothers who both kill their children and live in a fantasy land, and Diane Downs was sent to prison long before CSI hit TV.

[OMalley]

The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
If the jurors or judge have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty.
The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty and that it is beyond dispute that any reasonable alternative is possible. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no Reasonable Doubt is possible from the evidence presented.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof that must be met in any trial. In civil litigation, the standard of proof is either proof by a preponderance of the evidence or proof by clear and convincing evidence. These are lower burdens of proof. A preponderance of the evidence simply means that one side has more evidence in its favor than the other, even by the smallest degree. Clear and Convincing Proof is evidence that establishes a high probability that the fact sought to be proved is true. The main reason that the high proof standard of reasonable doubt is used in criminal trials is that such proceedings can result in the deprivation of a defendant's liberty or even in his or her death. These outcomes are far more severe than in civil trials, in which money damages are the common remedy.


the bolding is from me

[Lizard]

Even today, I think it's possible that Caylee died on accident. The pool. Chloroform meant to knock her out but killing her instead. Too much Benadryl. The duct tape? Well, because once you have a dead body, bugs start crawling in the orifices and shit starts seeping out. It's not that I think that Casey is angel innocent on this; it's that the prosecution was unable to prove PREMEDITATED MURDER.

Look, I don't want to argue every nuance of this case (we'll be here for the next 10 years). I'm merely saying that I can understand how a jury could acquit her. I'm sure as hell NOT saying I like it.

[OMalley]

That's another thing, @Lizard: the short deliberations. This struck me as odd given the WEEKS of testimony they heard & the amount of evidence that was shown. They didn't take many notes yet they didn't have any questions...strange, I thought.

It must've taken a few hours at least to go through the pages & pages of jury instructions. Oh to have been a fly on the wall in that room.

[Komak]

I can understand that, @Lizard. At issue here is, the evidence is circumstancial. But (IMO) the evidence is cohesive; it hangs together. I'm still not sure how the jury didn't see that. They chose to believe a hypothesis that was presented with NO supporting evidence. I'm still wondering if they did not understand what is meant by reasonable doubt.

I see your point, would they have had to chose the defenses hypothesis, to NOT chose to believe the circumstancial..is it really one or the other..."wins"? I don't know if the prosecution glued that circumstancial evidence together...I don't think that a totally "Casey story blind" jury, would draw the same cohesiveness of what was presented.... I hope some of them talk...

I wonder if some of them...after seeing the huge headlines and how big a deal this case is...not to mention, once they research it a little more themselves now..I wonder if some of them will doubt what they decided?

[Lizard]

The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution: that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Exactly. There are other LOGICAL explanations for Caylee's death, and the existing evidence does not rule them out. None of the other explanations make Casey out to be a better person, but they don't involve premeditation.

[Lizard]

That's another thing, @Lizard: the short deliberations. This struck me as odd given the WEEKS of testimony they heard & the amount of evidence that was shown. They didn't take many notes yet they didn't have any questions...strange, I thought.

It must've taken a few hours at least to go through the pages & pages of jury instructions. Oh to have been a fly on the wall in that room.

What's your explanation?

[Lizard]

I have an open can of paint in the kitchen hollering at me from the kitchen, so I'm REALLY going to have to go now. However, I just wanted to say: my intention was not to start a fight, and I actually DO think Casey Anthony is going to get what she deserves (in THIS life). I just don't believe that being pissed off at the jurors is appropriate, considering what it is that jurors are expected to do (and their pay is FOR SHIT).

[OMalley]

Even today, I think it's possible that Caylee died on accident. The pool. Chloroform meant to knock her out but killing her instead. Too much Benadryl. The duct tape? Well, because once you have a dead body, bugs start crawling in the orifices and shit starts seeping out. It's not that I think that Casey is angel innocent on this; it's that the prosecution was unable to prove PREMEDITATED MURDER.

Look, I don't want to argue every nuance of this case (we'll be here for the next 10 years). I'm merely saying that I can understand how a jury could acquit her. I'm sure as hell NOT saying I like it.

I'm not trying to start shit; I'm enjoying the mental exercise. I don't understand how a jury could acquit her. I've said before: I think that your average person has a really hard time believing that a woman could severly mistreat or kill her child. When the woman is attractive, white, middle class, that makes it harder. Still I felt the prosecution painted a pretty clear picture of the kind of person Casey Anthony is and did a good job of telling the story.

My feeling is, if it was a pool accident, why sit in jail for 3 years & risk getting the DP, instead of just saying so. She wouldn't have been punished. That she never reported the accident and displayed no grief for 31 days is what makes this look like an unlikey scenario. As for the accidental chlorforming: that's felony murder (I think). Even though it was an accident, if the death occurred while she was abusing the child, that's a felony. I thought it might've happened that way too at first - now I'm not so sure.

As far as the tape being applied post mortem - not sure. The evidence wasn't conclusive on that point, was it? Of course if it was applied while Caylee was alive, that is premeditation right there.

[OMalley]

Exactly. There are other LOGICAL explanations for Caylee's death, and the existing evidence does not rule them out. None of the other explanations make Casey out to be a better person, but they don't involve premeditation.

But I didn't think the other explanations were logical. In fact they defied logic; they didn't apply to how most people would reasonably act; they didn't make sense.

[OMalley]

What's your explanation?

I don't have an explanation for why the deliberations were so seemingly short. I'm curious.

[Lizard]

But I didn't think the other explanations were logical. In fact they defied logic; they didn't apply to how most people would reasonably act; they didn't make sense.

No reasonable person kills her daughter, parties for the next month, and then lies to police.

[witzah]

I say let's hope for Donna MacLean to get positive dna results proving her dead son fathered caylee, so she can then sue the pants off of KC civilly for loss of consortium.



Now that she's out, she's no longer judgment proof...I guarantee we will hear more from Ms. McLean.



If the dna shows a match, she'll get an attorney to take her case and we'll have that civil case we were looking for. We know GA and CA wont sue civilly, so maybe paternal grandparents will if dna shows the link.



The easier burden in a civil suit could help significantly ...hence, OJ's loss civilly to the Goldmans. Heck, Ms. McLean could even settle with KC for her publicity proceeds.



I kind of like the thought of another trial though.

[Apostle of Chaos]

You know, just wanted to add one more thing before I head to bed, if it's possible, I'd love if we could some how get Ashton to join this thread, and give us his view of the entire thing. It'd be interesting to hear exactly where he felt everything went wrong, and what his views of the jury are, (I mean his personal views, not what he said in his statement to the press) and what the states plans are now (if any).

[BreakTheSilence]

Guys, I know its not much consolation, but here is a survey asking for people to say if they agree or disagree with the verdict. Its overwhelmingly saying people don't agree with it. And its from an Orlando newspaper. This may be a small way to express our outrage to the 12 idiots who set this baby killer free.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...11,0,4797.poll

[Lizard]

I'm not trying to start shit; I'm enjoying the mental exercise. I don't understand how a jury could acquit her. I've said before: I think that your average person has a really hard time believing that a woman could severly mistreat or kill her child. When the woman is attractive, white, middle class, that makes it harder. Still I felt the prosecution painted a pretty clear picture of the kind of person Casey Anthony is and did a good job of telling the story.

My feeling is, if it was a pool accident, why sit in jail for 3 years & risk getting the DP, instead of just saying so. She wouldn't have been punished. That she never reported the accident and displayed no grief for 31 days is what makes this look like an unlikey scenario. As for the accidental cholorforming: that's felony murder (I think). Even though it was an accident, if the death occurred while she was abusing the child, that's a felony. I thought it might've happened that way too at first - now I'm not so sure.

As far as the tape being applied post mortem - not sure. The evidence wasn't conclusive on that point, was it? Of course if it was while Caylee was alive, that is premeditation right there.

The prosecution told *A* good story. Unfortunately, it's not the ONLY story that could apply here. Wisely, CA's defense made her keep her fucking mouth shut.

[Lizard]

Guys, I know its not much consolation, but here is a survey asking for people to say if they agree or disagree with the verdict. Its overwhelmingly saying people don't agree with it. And its from an Orlando newspaper. This may be a small way to express our outrage to the 12 idiots who set this baby killer free.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...11,0,4797.poll

Considering I wasn't seated as a juror on this case, I can't imagine why I'd log on to vote against their decision when I wasn't in their shoes.

[Chabunagung]

Silva, she should be treated to a tubal ligation before she hits the streets again...!

[Lizard]

Silva, she should be treated to a tubal ligation before she hits the streets again...!

Pffft. Fuck that. Let her pop 'em out. Let's give them to silva. :)

[solange82200]

Exactly. There are other LOGICAL explanations for Caylee's death, and the existing evidence does not rule them out. None of the other explanations make Casey out to be a better person, but they don't involve premeditation.

So what about premeditation? What about 2nd degree murder and manslaughter? If there is no premeditation, then she should be charge with those.

And dont forget, if she dies accidentally because Casey tried to knock her out with something, it is still considered FELONY murder. That is what is the outrage of most people, that she was not found guilty in ANY death involved charge. So we can argue about proof of first degree murder and death penalties, but the fact of the matter is there should be no question that she should have at least go 2nd degree, MAYBE manslaughter at the LEAST

[OMalley]

I have an open can of paint in the kitchen hollering at me from the kitchen, so I'm REALLY going to have to go now. However, I just wanted to say: my intention was not to start a fight, and I actually DO think Casey Anthony is going to get what she deserves (in THIS life). I just don't believe that being pissed off at the jurors is appropriate, considering what it is that jurors are expected to do (and their pay is FOR SHIT).

What color are you painting?

I hate poor sportsmanship and that's a bit how I feel: like I lost the game & am being a poor sport. I just truly don't understand the jury's decision - I hope at some point they may decide to clarify. But they did do their job, gave away 6 weeks of their lives...I just wish they'd done a better job! I do believe that I wanted this justice for Caylee more than she needs it: she is above & beyond it.

[gentlenurse82]

I have a couple cents to throw in the bucket. As I was thinking things over today, I came to the conclusion that Casey Anthony is probably not going to stay out of prison for long. Killing Caylee was obviously the pinnacle of her criminal activity, but even aside from that, look at the kind of person she is. Forging tons of checks, living only for parties, sex and alcohol...... I strongly doubt she'll have the moral uprightness to lead any decent kind of life, because she's not a decent person. 20 years from now she'll probably be one of those crusty nasties you see on "Faces of Meth". Where Casey goes, trouble will be sure to follow.

[solange82200]

Considering I wasn't seated as a juror on this case, I can't imagine why I'd log on to vote against their decision when I wasn't in their shoes.

Does the jury know something we dont? No. We watched everything they did, so I see nothing wrong with saying we arent satisfied. This is OUR system too, our money being spent, our collective need for justice as a society. You damn well better believe I will voice my dissatisfaction. Now those who agree can voice their satisfaction also, but no one is going to tell me I cant say this is the biggest bunch of bullshit ive ever seen

[OMalley]

No reasonable person kills her daughter, parties for the next month, and then lies to police.

No, but a criminal would. And that is what I believe Casey is.

[crazyshit]

If someone wants to PM me with their number - I would love to talk.

Can't sleep and am wondering how we can wake up tomorrow knowing it's over, she's free and there is nothing that can be done about it.