Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Casey Anthony Case May Not be Over - New Charges Possible

Posted on 07/13/2011 7:10:03 AM PDT by MindBender26

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-164 next last
To: kelly4c
PS were you on the jury?

I was not on this jury, but I have been on four juries. 2 civil cases and 2 criminal cases including a rape case and a murder case.

I have actually been called to jury duty serve times since I first registered to vote at 18. Just lucky I guess. Some people never have to serve or even get called. In the rape case we concluded that a pilot for Continental Airlines raped a female member of his flight crew at a hotel in Downtown Cleveland. It was a case that was difficult to come to a decision on because we, as jurors where not privy to all the information. For example: It seems this guy was suspected of drugging her with ruffies. Everybody else knew he drugged her, including the media, but The prosecution was NOT allowed to present this part of the case because there was no evidence that the victim had drugs in her system. By the time she went to the hospital, she was back home in Houston and enough time had passed that there was no conclusive toxicology report. We did, however with the benefit of the remaining direct evidence and victim testimony, along with eyewitness accounts of what others saw and heard, we come to a decision of guilty of rape and he is now resides at the Grey Bar Motel.

The murder case was dismissed after the prosecution rested because the judge decided that there was not enough evidence to warrant the continuation of the case. The defendant in that case was later convicted of killing his mother and is spending life in prison. Every body on the jury, as well as the judge and the prosecution felt that the guy was at least involved in the murder, but they didn't have enough PROOF. Sound Familiar? Had the trial gone to the jury for a decision. There was no way we would have convicted. Yet, we thought (believed) he was involved. There was simply no proof to sustain a conviction after five days of the prosecutions case. After FOUR 10 hour days of deliberation we finally agreed to a unanimous verdict on all three indictments. Guilty on two counts, including rape. Not guilty on one count.

141 posted on 07/14/2011 9:22:21 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: GOYAKLA
A trial is an attempt at the equitable distribution of justice through a search for a truth. A jury has the responsibility of judging the truth based on the evidence that they are presented. It would be UNJUST to convict on evidence that leaves reasonable doubt.

In all reality the jury did what they had to do based on the evidence.

Why is it so hard for so many to understand that a decision of twelve individuals is hard to reach? A consensus of twelve is difficult, a unanimous decision is almost impossible. However through our system of FORCING a group of twelve people to decide unanimously on a case we have built the best legal system in the World.

We also have been able to secure the liberty of most people who are unjustly accused. This does lead to the vindication of some people who most certainly are guilty of the crimes they are accused. That assures that a truly innocent person has every opportunity to not be denied their liberty by the State.

It is certainly more just to allow a guilty person his liberty than to deny an innocent person of their liberty. That is the essence of our criminal justice system and why a person is presumed innocent of all charges until the state convinces a jury of their peers that the defendant is guilty.

Clear enough for you?

142 posted on 07/14/2011 9:41:59 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

Serve = seven


143 posted on 07/14/2011 9:43:44 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: GOYAKLA
If she had stayed in Ohio her whole life may have been different.

Maybe she just got crazy from the heat.

144 posted on 07/14/2011 9:49:13 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

“Clear enough for you?” NO!
You still did not answer my basic question!
Your multiple Treatises on this subject are boring the hell out of me so rather than “discuss” Truth vs Justice with you, I’ll withdraw from the field and let you battle on against the Windmills of Your Mind.
Without Truth there is no Justice! “cest la vie”
Stay safe and God Bless you and yours.


145 posted on 07/14/2011 9:56:28 AM PDT by GOYAKLA (Flush Congress in 2010 & 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

When she gets out Sunday and having spent a few years in PC she will definitely be in HEAT! I am going to lock up all my sons and Grandsons to bar any ANT’s catastrophes in my family. I have no females in my progeny, or it would be the same.
By the way I live within 10-12 miles of the ANTs.
Have a Great day!


146 posted on 07/14/2011 10:20:32 AM PDT by GOYAKLA (Flush Congress in 2010 & 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: GOYAKLA

That is funny!


147 posted on 07/14/2011 11:01:37 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: GOYAKLA

A court of law is among the last places to look for the truth! It is called a court of law, not a court of justice.


148 posted on 07/14/2011 11:09:34 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26

Thanks for posting this. Wouldn’t put anything past this sleazy defense team.


149 posted on 07/14/2011 11:30:06 AM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein; freekitty

Not saying this is happening here, but HLN was just reporting that the defense team was actually sending people out on various boards to (a) see how public opinion was going, and (b) influence it if possible. Sure are some hardliners here, regardless of who they might or might not be working for.


150 posted on 07/14/2011 12:01:26 PM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
What boards, Miz Serious? I'll be watching Nancy Grace tonight. She's showing jailhouse videos this week which are bizarre - even for this family. George and Cindy gullible? Or culpable?
151 posted on 07/14/2011 1:21:11 PM PDT by miss marmelstein (Casey Anthony is guilty as hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: miss marmelstein

The report wasn’t specific, other than “Facebook and message boards.” I listened to some of the tapes last night. Heavy duty ick factor. Since you watched, too, did you happen to notice how often Casey would say, “I’m telling the truth” or “I’m not lying to you” in those tapes? In general, I find that when someone says that a lot, they’re lying through their teeth. Yet the parents seemed to accept this? Or just scared to say that yes, they thought she was lying?


152 posted on 07/14/2011 3:18:55 PM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

I heard this woman on HLN say Zanny the Nanny would have a hard time getting Casey because Casey will say she can not identify her. That is complete and utter nonsense. It has been proven there was no actual nanny so how could Casey identify her? She can/t.

This lawsuit is about an innocent person who is unfortunate to have the same name Casey gave. Her life was destroyed because of the lies Casey told. The press should stick to the facts instead of coming up with bs theories that defy reality.


153 posted on 07/14/2011 3:38:36 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

This country is too steeped in manufactured answers. Reality needs to make a come back.

Knowledge sometimes makes a bloody entrance.


154 posted on 07/14/2011 3:44:33 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Jose Baez makes the opening statement “How can a mother not report her child for 30 days?”

Easy, Jose. She murdered her daughter.


155 posted on 07/14/2011 3:47:23 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

I find one of the hallmark traits of a pathological liar is when they say things like, “I never lie.” I know a pathological liar who is very fond of saying that even as she is lying to your face. Her family is similar to the Anthony’s in that she ran (often terrorized) the entire household and her parents let her. They seemed afraid of her even when she was still a fairly young child. When Cindy and George tiptoe around Casey when speaking to her in the jailhouse tapes I get a hint of that same dynamic in the family. Chicken or egg? I don’t know.


156 posted on 07/14/2011 3:47:30 PM PDT by An American In Dairyland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

So true. The media seems to be trying to re-write the whole story.


157 posted on 07/14/2011 3:48:53 PM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

Here is something that is puzzling me and maybe someone knows the answer for certain. A lawyer once told me that when in court a lawyer is always considered to be “sworn in” when speaking to the court, jury, etc. Because lawyers are officers of the court they do not have to be formally sworn in like witnesses are.

Jose said in open court that Casey was molested by her father and brother. That is fine in an opening statement so far as it went but wasn’t he obligated to put up some proof of that? Since he didn’t prove it at all weren’t those statements something akin to lying under oath?

The jury certainly took his words as true, honest, and factual and a large part of that is because he is a lawyer...an officer of the court. I’m wondering if he couldn’t be brought up by the bar on charges for this, too.


158 posted on 07/14/2011 3:56:10 PM PDT by An American In Dairyland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: An American In Dairyland

Casey was AWFUL to her parents, yet they both just tried to soothe her, like she was some delicate little flower. Or ticking time bomb? Either way—not normal. And yet—the jury seems to have been taken in, hook line and sinker.

Really, if you think about it, it’s a simple case. The prosecution connected all of the dots, all they had to do was deliberate, meaning, look over the evidence, talk it through, ask for a readback or two. I will always wonder what actually happened in that jury room to sway half the jury.


159 posted on 07/14/2011 3:56:36 PM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: An American In Dairyland

I’m not sure about that. Various commentators have indicated that he should not have done that, but no one mentioned anything about any legal problems over it. Maybe someone who knows more about the law could comment?

What seems more disturbing to me is, Baez might well have known not only that Caylee was dead, but where she was, connecting a few of my own dots. Leonard Padilla was just on HLN talking about the same thing, and he reached the same conclusion. I don’t know if anyone can ever prove that he knew, but if he knew, wasn’t he obligated to report it to the police?


160 posted on 07/14/2011 4:00:28 PM PDT by MizSterious (Apparently, there's no honor when it comes to someone else's retirement funds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-164 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson