• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Anyone following the Casey Anthony trial

mortimer said:
Throwing her parents (especially her dad) under the bus, after all the support they gave her, is particularly vile.

So, which hot young murderer would you rather spend time with, Casey Anthony or Foxy Knoxy?
Click to expand...

What tools am I allowed to bring?
 
mortimer said:
Throwing her parents (especially her dad) under the bus, after all the support they gave her, is particularly vile.
Click to expand...

Incredibly, (if he still supports his daughter anyway) he pretty much as no choice but to not deny any of it - at least in any way that might get back to the jury.
 
mortimer said:
Throwing her parents (especially her dad) under the bus, after all the support they gave her, is particularly vile.

So, which hot young murderer would you rather spend time with, Casey Anthony or Foxy Knoxy?
Click to expand...

What I wonder is why the Knoxtards don't come up with some bizarre theory about this case? Or can they only handle one CT at a time?
 
So what's this all about for us outsiders? Is this person some kind of TV personality
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
What I wonder is why the Knoxtards don't come up with some bizarre theory about this case?...
Click to expand...

Oh, but you have. And you, mortimer, (and possibly Tranewreck, if I'm catching the allusion correctly) dutifully parrot it. Namely, Amanda Knox couldn't possibly be innocent because Casey Anthony is so obviously guilty.

Hard to argue with that logic.
 
Can anyone here who has criticized the Anthony defense come up with a better one? Let's face it, what is known about the facts and circumstances are extraordinarily damning in this case. And doesn't leave them a lot of wriggle room.

I'm speculating that the defense has attempted to cop some sort of manslaughter plea. And were rebuffed by the prosecution.

If my guess happens to be correct, and the defense had no choice but to do the best with what they've got, what alternative story can you suggest for the defense to have presented at trial that would have been of benefit to the defendant?

Other than plead guilty and beg for mercy (which she wouldn't get, anyway) what else could they have done?
 
Moon-Spinner said:
I see what you're saying, but it seems that the jury would at least LIKE to see some evidence of drowning (autopsy report),
Click to expand...

Is there a different cause of death known? If not, then the prosecution needs to show that drowning is an unreasonable explanation (that's doable, but that's the prosecution's job; if they don't provide evidence that it did not occur by drowning, then drowning is a reasonable explanation for death)



and how will that explain the evidence of duct tape on Caylee's face (I'm sure the defense has an alternate explanation for it).
Click to expand...

I would assume so.


The deck was already stacked against Casey with all the media reports, and I never try to draw comclusions before I hear all sides, but this is not helping me believe her side much at all.
Click to expand...

Only if the jury acts improperly.

Seriously, as I said, it really is the prosecutions job to DISPROVE their explanation. Because if they can't, the defense is going to remind the jury that they MUST acquit. It is not sufficient to conclude that "the mother murdered her" is a more likely explanation than "she drowned." "She drowned" can't even be a reasonable possibility.

Of course I'm not in that courtroom to witness everything that transpires, and we'll only get snippets in the news, So it will be hard to place myself on the jury (It's still hard to believe that the people sitting on the jury haven't already reached their verdict either).
Click to expand...

My interpretation based solely on their tactics is that the defense is going to strongly emphasize the "beyond a reasonable doubt" aspect of their standard. They'll try to create a scenario that involves death by drowning and challenge them to rule it out. In the end, they will remind them that if they have any doubt at all that the drowning explanation is wrong, then they must acquit.

And you underestimate people. I could easily serve on the jury, because the extent of what I know about the case is what I have said here - it involves hearing what the defense is using as its argument.
 
Last edited:
lane99 said:
Oh, but you have. And you, mortimer, (and possibly Tranewreck, if I'm catching the allusion correctly) dutifully parrot it. Namely, Amanda Knox couldn't possibly be innocent because Casey Anthony is so obviously guilty.

Hard to argue with that logic.
Click to expand...

I may be presumptuous in calling Anthony a murderer, as she isn't until so convicted. Knox is definitely a murderer, as in, one who has been convicted of murder.

Whether either are killers, I have made no claim. I have not really followed either case that closely, just some cursory reading here, and what I get from the national media.
 
What does Nancy Grace have to do with this case?

I confess I never watch her.

ETA: Given what I've read about the case, I also think Anthony is guilty as hell.
 
Last edited:
AdMan said:
What does Nancy Grace have to do with this case?

I confess I never watch her.

ETA: Given what I've read about the case, I also think Anthony is guilty as hell.
Click to expand...

Nancy Grace has been beating the drum on this case hard since the little kid went missing.
 
EvilSmurf said:
Nancy Grace has been beating the drum on this case hard since the little kid went missing.
Click to expand...

Yes, as she has with other high-profile cases, like the Scott Peterson case.

I could be wrong, but if this Anthony crime had the same exact situation, but those involved were black, and the child was unnattractive, I really doubt she would be the same "champion" for the cause.
 
mortimer said:
I may be presumptuous in calling Anthony a murderer, as she isn't until so convicted. Knox is definitely a murderer, as in, one who has been convicted of murder.
Click to expand...

Oh no, no ,no. Have you learned nothing about the Italian justice system? Even though you are "convicted" of murder, you're not really "convicted convicted" until the pope blesses the verdict with holy water. Or something like that. The things you can learn from the Knox CT forum!
 
I'm really kind of surprised how small this courtroom is. I mean, I have been in much better courtrooms when only charged with a misdemeanor. If I were facing the death penalty, I would hope they could find a more appropriate venue on which to hang my head.

Not sure where they hide Casey, but she doesn't get much face time.

couom.png



Tickets must cost a fortune.
 
AdMan said:
What does Nancy Grace have to do with this case?
Click to expand...

It's that thing where an American TV personality concentrates so much energy and time on a topic or person to where that topic or person cannot even be mentioned without also mentioning the TV personality. It's a very stupid TV marketing ploy, but it's also very effective.

...but even though Nancy Grace cares more about ratings than any trial, Casey Anthony killed her daughter and needs to go to jail. Her defense has gotten to the point where they're just trying to create doubt in the mind of ONE juror. Her lawyers are doing the old Justice System Shuffle right now. :rolleyes:
 
lane99 said:
Although this is not how I read your post (#20), if this is what you actually meant, then fair enough.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I didn't really mean it that way. It was more of a flippant remark. I have no position one way or the other on either's actual guilt, other than to say I trust the U.S. legal system more than Italy's, and that may be a result of familiarity.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom