I was like you and followed at first, but I don’t believe 99-100% of what the media says, so I just wanted to wait until the trial. I really thought they’d break her & she plea, so I kinda halfway thought there wouldn’t be a trial.
I am not a trial junkie....I have been in many trials & for one know how tedious & boring they can be, so I figured I’d just get the summary at the end b/c I thought it would be a slam dunk case....but not long after it started, I caught a clip on the news & was like “wow”...something is odd here....now, I told my hubby way back in ‘08 that I thought her brother had probably molested her....something about his demeanor & his responses...It was only a judgement call on my part & I never got online and mentioned it because I it was a feeling I had & I would never want to spread something and bear false witness on something I didn’t really know. So I only said it to my husband, who tends to believe me because I am a pretty good judge of character MOST of the time...however, I never thought that about the dad....when that was mentioned in the trial (I don’t remember it being talked about before then, of course I wasn’t following closely)but, I told my hubby “Ah! I knew it!” Again, he didn’t admit it, but I STILL think, after seeing him on the stand, something fishy is there.
That judge was a joke to me. I never EVER have seen a trial where a judge would allow half the junk he did. Also, to me he was very unprofessional & caused some confusion himself which affects juries. Just my opinion.
I told my hubby this weekend, I said, from what I’ve seen there isn’t enough here to convict her on. I didn’t even see how they could get the least of murder charges, much less capital murder. My hubby went nuts on me! LOL.... He was fired up, saying I was crazy & on & on *sigh* ....
I also admit that I missed a couple of things. I never understood the whole meter reader story and never determined how many times “chloroform” was searched for or if the heart sticker was on the duck tape or not....
I was pregnant when all this happened in ‘08 so I could only take so much & was happy to shelve the story in my mind. I don’t remember them finding body in December of ‘08 because after the ‘08 elections, hubby decided we needed to take a break on politics/news in our house because I was 8 months pregnant then & he was concerned about my stress levels.
And baby is now about the age Caylee was in most of those pictures & the time of her death....I HAVE to look at it through “investigator” eyes instead of mommy eyes or else I couldn’t handle any of it all.
And some FReepers have had the nerve to attack my parenting because I don’t agree with them that we should attack the jury. It’s amazing to me. I debate liberals ALL THE TIME so I am used to the mud they sling, but was rather shocked at how FReepers have lowered themselves to some of the liberal tactics of name calling, mocking, ignoring facts, misquoting me & personal attacks. Thank you for being willing to engage in intelligent & honest debate.
You and I have not interacted in any posts before. Pleased to meet you, DrewsMum. Now, if I may, here is the problem.
I've read a number of your posts. You have REPEATEDLY stated you didn't follow the trial much and you asked for a lot of clarification of very basic facts and evidence. There is nothing at all wrong with that and it seems to me that trial-watching FReepers were happy to oblige.
HOWEVER, when you go on and on about how you think the prosecution did not prove its case, in light of the above facts, it grates on the nerves of FReepers who have given this case a tremendous amount of their time and paid very, very close attention to the facts and evidence, and who are heartsick at what they consider a true miscarriage of justice. Personally, I consider this verdict a travesty, and I work in the legal field. (Not an attorney.)
With all due respect, would you not concede that perhaps your evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the state's case might not be quite as accurate as that of persons who have watched and listened far more closely than you?
re: “............
I never thought that about the dad....when that was mentioned in the trial (I don’t remember it being talked about before then, of course I wasn’t following closely)but, I told my hubby “Ah! I knew it!” Again, he didn’t admit it, but I STILL think, after seeing him on the stand, something fishy is there.......”
http://www.wftv.com/pdf/24039447/detail.html
I really appreciate your attitude! I’m in the corner that believes the state proved the case- but I do understand how others can honestly disagree. Some disagree cause it’s fun to be a contrarian and they enjoy infuriating others as a way of life!
I think my interest in the case began because the Anthony’s live about 15 minutes from me. When Nancy Grace jumped on I stopped paying much attention because I always worry when I see her attached to a cause and I am unable to tolerate her personality.
I think SOME of the evidence was sketchy- for example it became clear that chloroform was NOT looked up 84 times- however- it was looked up and “how to make chloroform” was typed into google. The defense wanted us to believe Casey may have looked it up because of the boyfriend’s “win her with chloroform” entry...which may be true. The question for me was- once Casey discovered WHAT the substance was and what it could do- did she then look up how to make it? That was not discussed. The chronology might have made a difference.
Regardless- we have to live with this verdict and while I’ve had an emotional reaction initially I’m also willing to look at the whole picture rationally and listen to those who HONESTLY didn’t see the state’s case went beyond reasonable doubt.