Anyone following the Casey Anthony trial

[triforcharity]

Many people have been found guilty of 1st degree murder just from placing them at the murder scene at the time of death. A putrid smell in Casey's car trunk does just that.

No, it most certainly does not do just that. Prove the murder scene was the trunk. You can't do it.

The child being in Casey's custody also suggests strongly that she was at the murder scene at the time of death - unless she has an alibi.

What murder scene? There was no murder scene defined.

Did Casey have an alibi?

No.

 

[triforcharity]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=712&pictureid=4656[/qimg]

Skyline Chili, where morons meet for meals...we even have a drive thru.
Ask about our "missing finger wendy's special"
​

Notice in the background they are watching Nancy Grace? No wonder they are convinced of Casey's guilt.

Ain't that the damn truth. I would have paid $1,000 to see her reaction at the very moment the court reporter said "not guilty".

 

[triforcharity]

Is there a way for Casey to sue Nancy Grace/the tv company. It seems they had her guilty the whole 3 years. She was given trial by tv show and presumed guilty, the biased reporting etc.
(Not that I want that, I just wondered if it could be done?)

Possibly, but not likely. If she continues to use photos of her that become licensed, they would be liable. But, not NG individually.

 

[triforcharity]

....Sometimes a jury needs all the FACTUAL information.
It's also good for a judge to know whether a particular case stands on it's own merits.

You ever heard of the words "fair and impartial" in regards to a jury? Do you understand what that means?

 

[Justinian2]

What on earth are you talking about? How could it be the case that an unrelated incident can somehow substantiate an otherwise insufficient prosecution?

For example: The jury concludes that the prosecution has failed to demonstrate that Mr. Smith was anywhere near the scene of the crime at the time the murder took place. However, upon hearing that Mr. Smith got busted for a DUI 5 years ago, the jury now believes beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Smith was definitely there during the murder.

Is this how you think it would work?

A couple of months ago one of the documentary shows (20-20?) was telling the story of a serial killer that killed in LA and NYC over a period of several years. He kept going to court for various things including rape. He kept getting off or got short sentences. However, when they put it all together years later, they discovered that he was a serial killer that had killed several. If they had convicted him that first time several lives would have been saved. It was only because the judge allowed his prior history of rape, assaults, attempted murder and the MO of the serial murders, that the jurists put it all together and convicted him of several serial murders. It took the aggregate evidence against him to convict.

We can't make the laws so simplistic that we dumb the courts down.

There are times when the total information should be reviewed and times when it is prejudicial. I can't summarize it; judges just have to become more intelligent.

 

[Justinian2]

You ever heard of the words "fair and impartial" in regards to a jury? Do you understand what that means?

A good computer program has millions of lines of well tested code. That's one line of code. We shouldn't dumb down courts, judges and juries by over simplifying.

 

[Justinian2]

No, it most certainly does not do just that. Prove the murder scene was the trunk. You can't do it..

What murder scene? There was no murder scene defined.

The odor in the trunk along with a hair would have placed the dead girl in Casey's trunk. A putrid odor alone doesn't convict because you can't prove the odor was from the victim's body. It is, however, very suspicious. A dead body gives off a powerful smell that is so strong it causes your eyes to water even if you are holding your breath (a tenant died of natural causes). It is a smell you never forget.

No.

No alibi. Interesting... Rather thin defense.

 

[triforcharity]

A good computer program has millions of lines of well tested code. That's one line of code. We shouldn't dumb down courts, judges and juries by over simplifying.

Not sure what a computer code has to do with the price of tea in China, but I will attempt to respond to this assinine comment.

The term "fair and impartial" is kinda the bedrock of the 6th Amendment of the US Constitution. Perhaps you should go google that.

 

[triforcharity]

The odor in the trunk along with a hair would have placed the dead girl in Casey's trunk. A putrid odor alone doesn't convict because you can't prove the odor was from the victim's body. It is, however, very suspicious. A dead body gives off a powerful smell that is so strong it causes your eyes to water even if you are holding your breath (a tenant died of natural causes). It is a smell you never forget.

And this proves that is where she was killed? Interesting.....

No alibi. Interesting... Rather thin defense.

But yet, A-It worked, and B-It doesn't matter if she had an alibi. The defense didn't have to prove anything.

 

[NotJesus]

A couple of months ago one of the documentary shows (20-20?) was telling the story of a serial killer that killed in LA and NYC over a period of several years. He kept going to court for various things including rape. He kept getting off or got short sentences. However, when they put it all together years later, they discovered that he was a serial killer that had killed several. If they had convicted him that first time several lives would have been saved. It was only because the judge allowed his prior history of rape, assaults, attempted murder and the MO of the serial murders, that the jurists put it all together and convicted him of several serial murders. It took the aggregate evidence against him to convict.

Without specific information about the case, your little story is worthless.

 

[I Am The Scum]

The odor in the trunk along with a hair would have placed the dead girl in Casey's trunk. A putrid odor alone doesn't convict because you can't prove the odor was from the victim's body. It is, however, very suspicious. A dead body gives off a powerful smell that is so strong it causes your eyes to water even if you are holding your breath (a tenant died of natural causes). It is a smell you never forget.

You appear to be operating under the assumption that it is the prosecution's job to prove that the defendant is likely to be guilty. This is incorrect. The prosecution must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[CORed]

Good grief. I'd be willing to bet that the jurors in this case are smart enough to not want to eat a half-gallon of greasy chili dumped atop a pile of spaghetti noodles in the first place. Skyline Chili is nasty.

In light of the jurors' courageous verdict, Skyline Chili has decided to help keep them safe from food poisoning.

 

[Mikey T]

Here are a couple of scenarios as to what the jury had to deal with:

Casey was shown to be a good mother by all of the witness testimony. There were never any prior child abuse charges or suspicions; the child, Caylee, was well clothed, well fed, etc. Of course the grandmother and grandfather provided the financial means to do this but never the less Casey all in all treated her daughter well and they had an "amazing" relationship according to one witness.

It was shown that there was a definite dysfunction within the family. Cindy, Casey's mother, was shown to be an overbearing mother in many respects but at the same time she enabled Casey's dishonest behavior long before the child died. Casey was pregnant for 7 and half months before telling Cindy and her father George. Casey's parents kept it hush-hush until the birth and her brother was kept out of the loop as well. There is early precedent that this family kept secrets and encouraged this dishonest behavior; this is what Casey was brought up with.

There was testimony in which Cindy was rather hard on Casey and her responsibilities as a mother. Casey seemed desperate not to disappoint her mother and went to great extremes to come across in a good light. Lying about two jobs, one of which her parents knew was a lie. Cindy never called her on this fact, again enabling this behavior. Cindy took care of the child quite often and told Casey at one point she would take custody if Casey didn't get it together. There was a fear by Casey to not disappoint her mother; there was pressure to get her act together and to prove her wrong.

Cut to the day Caylee died and one possible scenario.

George, Casey’s father, left for work early afternoon leaving the home empty. Casey had left earlier with her daughter but it was shown she never left the area, known because of cell phone tower records. Casey came back home after George left. Caylee was asking her mother to go swimming so Casey took her swimming for 20 minutes or so then took Caylee back into the home, but Casey forgot to put the ladder to the pool away. At some point Casey possibly took a nap, smoked a joint, or got distracted around the home. Eventually Casey noticed that Caylee was missing and searched the home. Walking outside she sees her daughter floating in the pool and dead. Casey knows it is her fault that she forgot to put the ladder away and completely loses her mind. What will her mother and father say? How can she live with this guilt? She goes back to what she's learned her whole life, lie and pretend it didn't happen.

At this point Casey has two options, face the wrath of her mother and family and call 911 or try to hide the fact that she was completely irresponsible. She chose to hide her mistake. Casey then gathered the body and put Caylee in the trunk. Casey closed her mind to the reality of what just happened and entered her fantasy world; she needed to be comforted by her new boyfriend to make the pain go away. What she demonstrated is beyond denial but I never said we were dealing with a mentally stable person.

After a couple of days, Casey knew she needed to get the body of her daughter out of the trunk, she had to face the fact that if she wanted to hide this from her mother, the body needed to be disposed of. It was the middle of June and the temperatures in the trunk expedited the decomposition of the body and were already starting to smell. Casey went to her home while her parents were at work. She notices that body fluid was starting to seep out of the mouth and nose so she took duct tape and placed it over the face to keep the fluids from leaking. She finished packing the body in a blanket, plastic bags, duct tape, and the laundry bag. Casey went to the neighbors to borrow a shovel and planned to bury the child in the back yard next to the play house. Upon realizing that this was probably not the best idea she returned the shovel to the neighbor. Casey in a panic decided to dispose the body in the woods nearby the home. A few days later, by sheer luck, there was a tropical storm that hit the area and submerged the area in water for several months.

One thing that always struck me was why Casey not picked up her car that had run out of gas on June 28th and it was left in the parking lot of a shopping center. This is what led to her being discovered by her parents that she was not where she said she was. My take, the car smelled of decomposition and if she went to get the car, the smell would remind her of reality so she subconsciously avoided going back to the car.

Out of sight, out of mind, hoping to hold off her mother for as long as she could and remain in her fantasy world.

The continued lie after the child was reported missing were a self-defense mechanism to keep the fantasy alive and avoid having to face the wrath and disappointment of her mother and to avoid her feelings of guilt. She felt she deserved to be punished for her mistake, even willing to take a 1st degree murder wrap for it, but couldn’t admit to herself or to her mother that it was her fault that Caylee died due to her irresponsibility.

OR…..


Casey wanted to hang out with her boyfriend and took chloroform or gave her some drugs to temporarily put her daughter to sleep. The child accidentally died, yet still its felony murder.

OR….


Casey premeditated the death of her daughter so she could be free. 1st degree murder.


Any scenario, Casey has some metal health issues, but the evidence presented by the prosecution shows any one of my scenarios is possible. Obviously the jury thought so as well.

 

[Justinian2]

Here are a couple of scenarios as to what the jury had to deal with:

[...]

I didn't quote your whole statement as it appears immediately above. That answers some questions. Thank you.

The plausible scenario that you describe is one where the defense makes the defendant likable and her actions understandable. What weak willed person hasn't been tempted to act the way Casey acted?

She was painted as a person suppressed by the wicked witch (her mother). She made an innocent mistake and then covered it up because she was afraid.

The guilty Casey just left the stairs to the pool up. Her daughter climbed the stairs and drowned. We can understand that. Meanwhile, the innocent Amanda Knox was described as a person that killed in a Satanic Sex ritual. That's bad! We can't understand that!. So the guilty person gets out early and the innocent person gets 26 years (hopefully reduced).

It's probably a truth that the more understandable and likeable we make the defendant, the more likely they are to get off.

I can also understand what happened. When I was two years old, I wandered out the door of my grandparents and into a busy street. Fortunately, a responsible driver stopped her car and picked me up.

But does that make it right? She covered up the evidence; she disposed of the body. Anybody else who does that is libel to have the book thrown at them. Anybody that the court and jury don't like could have been charged with first degree murder and put to death. This is too capricious and inexact. Our legal system and others need to come out of the dark ages where a guilty person goes free and the unlikable, or those stoned by the media, get executed.

 

[iknownothing]

Anybody that the court and jury don't like could have been charged with first degree murder and put to death. This is too capricious and inexact. Our legal system and others need to come out of the dark ages where a guilty person goes free and the unlikable, or those stoned by the media, get executed.

Except that the jury didn't seem to like her, and one juror said they were sick to their stomachs over acquitting her. And she was "stoned by the media."

This really has nothing to do with Amanda Knox.

 

[Justinian2]

I am not simply criticizing the verdict within the known parameters of our judicial system; I am also stepping outside the confines of our government sponsored legal system and discussing ways it could be improved.

I understand that there are those among you that think the USA has the worlds' best justice system. I am exercising my 1st amendment right to be legally in contempt of our system. I know how the system works. I believe I also know how it can work better.

The two questions I pose are:
1.) Did our legal system work as it is supposed to in determining that Casey was innocent?
2.) Does our legal system need considerable improvement?

 

[Justinian2]

Except that the jury didn't seem to like her, and one juror said they were sick to their stomachs over acquitting her. And she was "stoned by the media."

This really has nothing to do with Amanda Knox.

Everything can be put into order by comparisons made between two things. Programmers call it a "bubble sort".

If the jury didn't like her, why did she get off? Perhaps the jury thought hers is a justifiable mistake?

 

[Garrette]

It is cases like these that begin to revive my faith in the American judicial system. Massive kudos to the jurors.

I think it's time I finally do what I have been threatening to do for a long time and make my children watch 12 Angry Men.

And though it doesn't match the original, the remake is worth a viewing, too.

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

It is cases like these that begin to revive my faith in the American judicial system. Massive kudos to the jurors.

I think it's time I finally do what I have been threatening to do for a long time and make my children watch 12 Angry Men.

And though it doesn't match the original, the remake is worth a viewing, too.

Yeah, nothing beats that original movie. It is one of my all-time favorites.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Mikey T,

Good comment (message #593). Do you think that the evidence would have supported a charge of involuntary manslaughter?