Replies

I did not in any way give an opinion that I thought it was a cover up.
I simply, when asked what could possibly be an explanation for the tape being there...When you take things out of context you end up thinking the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Casey murdered Caylee.

Wow--your perception of reality is second only to Casey Anthony's twisted truth. Nobody asked you to offer alternate fantasy ideas. Nobody took your post out of context. In post # 583 I stated: NO ACCIDENT results in duct tape covering the mouth and nose of a toddler.

You replied by arguing: But trying to cover up an accident might.

To reiterate: nonsensical foolery does not equal reasonable doubt, and your credibility is in the toilet.

>>To reiterate: nonsensical foolery does not equal reasonable doubt, and your credibility is in the toilet.<<

If you can’t prove what the crime was you can’t convict. Feelings are not a legal basis for deciding a case. The prosecution did not prove it’s case. If you want to rely on junk science to convict that’s your right I suppose.

Isn’t it interesting that tonight on Greta Jeff Ashton when asked if he thought the duct tape could have moved from one place to another he answered that yes it could have because there was flooding and other movement of the corpse. Sounds like even he had "reasonable doubt" about the duct tape being put there by Casey or being the cause of death.

Is it any wonder that the jury sensed "reasonable doubt"?