Posted on 07/11/2011 6:04:29 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
Let them prove it... many people have reasonable doubt about their claims. /Sarc
Well by golly that proves how she died for sure! /s
I guess I did not word my question correctly. Of the Anthony and Peterson juries, which one was right? Would you advocate Peterson filing an appeal based on the Casey verdict? A man’s life is at stake here.
WHAT I SAID WAS that it was acceptable for the Medical Examiner to give her OPINION - because that is considered in a court of law - an EXPERT OPINION!
The post I was replying to indicated that the word "OPINION" meant that it was not evidence... that is untrue - My dh is an attorney and his clients pay lots of $$$ for experts' opinion.
But, since you wanted to talk about this..... what do you think it "proves" when someone does not call 911 (EVER) when their child drowns? Did you know that sometimes children can be revived after being underwater for quite a long time? You can google - child survives after drowning - sometimes the hospital can revive them.....Soooooo since the defense stated that Caylee died in this way - and she did not call 911 - I found that compelling testimony by the (expert) Medical Examiner.
Have a nice day :)
actually a PIECE of tape was stuck to her hair. The rest of it was...several feet away and the only dna found on it doesnt belong to her or her mother.
Well, here’s another “opinion”. When every juror who has spoken said the entire jury felt she was guilty the state obviously proved their case, this jury simply refused to do their job.
Notice how Anthony’s defenders won’t touch that little fact.
I know the evidence.....duct tape attached to her hair. so? doesn’t change the logical conclusion....I don’t know about you, but I have never seen duct tape just floating around the woods....it’ doesn’t grow there.
Cyn....the point is it is perfectly LEGAL and JUST to convict someone without knowing the cause of death. It is called circumstantial evidence and just as good as any other evidence. This is not a CSI show where the writer solves the case conclusively...this is real life. DNA evidence was all but degraded due to the dumping of the body...a hurricane and standing water degraded it. The body decomposed. Same thing happened in the Peterson case.....the jury LEGALLY convicted him. Had the Anthony jury done their job, she would be guilty as well. She was found not guilty in the eyes of the law....we the people have the right to our own opinion. Guilty.
The jury decided in each case on evidence they were allowed to see and on legal instructions they were given. I’ll leave the ultimate judgment to God. We were not in those juries in either case. We see a different case then they do.
>>Would you advocate Peterson filing an appeal based on the Casey verdict?<<
That would be absurd. Would you suggest that juries decide one case on the evidence or verdict given in another case?
They were both right. They are Juries. File appeals anytime you want. That is what Appeals Courts are for. Do not forget your right to remain silent.
Yep, we can, but when it begins to threaten others and accusations are made against jury members as to their purpose or reasoning it goes beyond just having an opinion. The vitriol spewed by many goes well beyond.
Here’s one of your comments. “Those jurors will be dodging this for the rest of their lives. Good.” Post 679
Wanting the jurors who saw a different case then we did, who spent 44 hours in the jury box, weeks in sequestration, and given specific legal instructions on how to decide the case and you want them to suffer? That’s not just having an opinion.
That’s the way I see it.
But our laws make this murder acceptable, just as was stated. It still remains a murder by definition.
I have a right to my opinion and to expect them to explain theirs....it’s called accountability. If you are insinuating that I would physically harm a juror, you have crossed a line. I expect them to live with the consequences of their choices, just like we all do in this life and the hereafter. If their neighbors no longer like them or tolerate them...so what? Shunning works for the Amish and it’s perfectly legal.
You misread the poster IMO...because the jurors ARE already dodging the fallout. It’s just the posters take..and they are right as far as I’m concerned. These jurors will be dodging the media etc. for a very long time...expecially if their names are released.
I think you’ll have a difficult time getting people to have concerns over the jurors being sequestered and such. They knew that going in.
There are as many fruitcakes out there as there are Casey Anthonys, who will take things over the edge...would be a good idea to discern those from those genuinely concerned about how this whole trial went down...and their rightful anger that it went as it did.
And for this thread...the scroll bar is your friend.
I also don't think there is any proof of threats. Unless people made them on Facebook, and if that's the case, police can follow up on that.
Hold on to that refusal to forgive and forget and check scripture on how that affects the “hereafter”. I’ll reference “forgive us our debts as we forgive others” just to get you started.
Get use to that...some more than others are quick to use that tactic. They are pretty well known for doing so...and then slowly slither away when called on it. They also avoid addressing the obvious when they have no arguement.
My view of the jury: They spent 44 hours in the jury box - listening to complicated evidence WITHOUT taking notes, They obviously did NOT understand the instructions ("we could not decide the punishment of death") - they NEVER asked for any evidence to be brought into the jury room to review it - they NEVER asked for any testimony to be re-read so they could consider it. They were lazy, misinformed, and deserve public scorn .
I agree with another poster that I highly doubt they have been threatened - its the scorn they cannot handle so they are trying to garner sentiment by claiming threats or magnifying things.
Yes, if the jurors' neighbors and co-workers are annoyed with the verdict, that's their right. People spoke out about the O.J. verdict for years.
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.