Posted on 07/11/2011 6:04:29 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
No time.
If I had been a juror, I would have considered NOT REPORTING a baby missing to be 'aggravating child abuse.'
The grandmother reported the baby missing after 31 days.
If you don’t have the time to follow the case, then maybe you shouldn’t be criticizing those who took the time.
Your statement is pathetic. No wonder people don't want to serve on juries.
...........this coming from a person who did not know the charge of manslaughter was available for the jury to select. Thr prosection did NOT fail to present their case. The lazy jurors did not wish to ask questions regarding the meaning of all those "confusing, time-consuming" stack of charges. Juror #3 proves that statement. They all wanted to get out of Dodge and begin cashing in their big buck$.
That was many years ago, she’s 31 now. I can’t even imagine what it’s like to never find your child. What a nightmare.
I agree with you there: my opinion (and yours) and $2.75 will get you a ticket on the MTA...
So we all who could be on a jury some day, could be in a court of law some day, care about a murdered child having justice some day should just shut the eff up?
Justice was surely not served. It just breaks my heart.
No. I am not criticizing anybody. It’s a fact that the prosecution failed to present its case adequately to the jury. It’s a fact that the defense was successful in creating reasonable doubt in the case. It’s also a fact that the jury rendered a decision based on the information it had, for whatever reason it made the decision.
These are the only real facts that matter.
I am with you on the mob attacking the jurors.
If anyone’s doorstep should be surrounded it should be the prosecutors’. They did not close the case. They could not even determine if the poor child was murdered, and they aim for the highest conviction possible.
In the summation the prosecutor said - Someone in that house murdered that girl. No wonder the jury didn’t convict.
12 jurors came to the conclusion that the prosecutors failed to prove their case. Lay off on the jury who are just regular people doing their civic duty and now being hounded.
From what I’ve heard they didn’t enjoy coming to their decision. Don’t see how they can personally enrich themselves when the verdict is so unpopular.
I also don’t know why the names of jurors have to be revealed and made public. If the judge, prosecution, and defense are satisfied with the jury that should be sufficient.
I have resisted weighing in on this topic, but I just can't help myself any longer! I have not seen a concise listing of evidence in this case. I am going to try to do so now, and ask others to add more, correct errors, or add detail. Many have said the case was circumstantial. There was however, both forensic and eyewitness evidence.
A website giving the definition of circumstantial evidence states the following:
“Books, movies, and television often perpetuate the belief that circumstantial evidence may not be used to convict a criminal of a crime. But this view is incorrect. In many cases, circumstantial evidence is the only evidence linking an accused to a crime; direct evidence may simply not exist.”
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Circumstantial+Evidence
With that in mind here goes:
1. Casey Anthony was shown to have executed internet searches for topics including chloroform and neck breaking that were evidence of premeditation.
2. Testimony indicated that Casey Anthony was the last person known to have seen Calyee Anthony alive on June 16, 2008.
3. Testimony stated that Casey Anthony borrowed a shovel on June 18, 2008 and returned it to the neighbor one hour later.
4. Casey's father testified that he detected a smell of a decaying body coming from Casey Anthony's trunk on July 15, 2008.
5. Later that same day, Casey told her mother that Caylee has been missing for a month and that the babysitter kidnapped her. The woman she named as the babysitter had no connection to the child.
6. Police testified that Caylee led them to where she said she last say her daughter. It turned out to be a vacant apartment.
7. Caylee’s body was found not far from the Anthony home with duct tape over her mouth, evidence that she was deliberately killed and did not die a as a result of an accident.
8. The duct tape and plastic bag found with Caylee’s body were consistent with those found at Casey Anthony's home.
9. State's expert testifies that high levels of chloroform were found in the trunk of Casey Anthony's car. The defense does not dispute this finding, but instead suggest that it was present due to chlorine from a pool transferred via a bathing suit.
10. The FBI expert testified that a hair found in the trunk likely came from a dead body due to post mortem banding at the root of the hair.
Like the OJ case, I do not believe there was a single bit of evidence offered of some other person killing this child. Instead, small doubts were planted in the jurors’ minds of the validity of the evidence. It is hard to accept, however, that all the evidence offered was incorrect, and using Occam’s razor, the jury should have LEAST found her guilt on the lesser charges of aggravated child abuse and aggravated manslaughter of a child.
The jury believed the hypothetical statements that the defense made. There was NO PROOF that Caylee died accidentally.
the prosecutor dropped the abuse charges
I never left my home state to live FL for any reason. Made several extended trips there while TDY in the military but have never had the urge to go there for any vacation or otherwise. Swamps, hot, humid weather and pissy natives have never been my idea of a good place to live.
nope. Not at all, but I hope it someday will for all these clowns in the circus wherein a little girl was murdered. Money played a role in the decision. At least a few knew how much more valuable a not guilty verdict was to them including the grandmother that did her level best and has to profit from the death. I hope they all rot with the profit they make, each and everyone of them. Justice will come. I believe that. So one now wants to convict her co-workers nary a trial but in reality knows the story value increases by inventing hysteria.
If you’re on a jury, you can’t let yourself be swayed by emotion.
Gotta live with the facts.
No, it was not a “fact” that the prosecution did not present a good case. It’s an opinion. An equally valid opinion is that the jury ignored the facts presented to them. I saw most of the trial, and it was a good case. Even good cases are wasted on stupid jurors, or on jurors that might be putting financial gain over fairly deciding a case.
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.