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

To: Jim from C-Town

There was proof. You have to understand who the people are and especially why they are there.

Casey Anthony is a liar which has been proven beyond a doubt. But that is not why she is on trial; even though the jury convicted her of lying.. For a moment forget that she is a liar and all the other labels applied to her. Casey is on trial for the murder of her daughter. Casey’s history is indicative of who she is. History is usually the best indicator of who a person is. When Caylee went missing, she told no one. For 31 days she told everyone her child was with a babysitter no one has ever seen or spoken too; including her own family. Regardless of what Casey may have been doing those 31 days; she chose not to sound the alarm that she was missing period. Casey was the last one seen with Calylee. I doubt seriously Caylee drowned due to the unprovoked video showing her parents and her stating it was just the latest theory made up by the press. This video was in evidence before Jose made his statement.

As for the car smelling of death. This was stated by several people who have had experience with that smell including her parents before it was brought up in court. There was chloroform found in the car and where the remains were found along with a needle. Casey abandoned the car in a parking lot when it started to smell. Caylees remains were found in a swamp near her house. Most everything found with the child, duct tape, laundry bag, blanket was proven to come from where Casey and Caylee lived at the time. Casey had access to all. Since Caylee was last seen with Casey; the arrows are pointing to Casey most likely having to do with the demise of her daughter.

Let’s look at Jose Baez. Jose is a street fighter. Nothing wrong with that. Jose knew better than anyone he had to sell the jury because that is all he had and it didn’t hurt a bit he got a jury that pretty much identified with his client. He did sell this jury but it was with innuendoes; not facts and it was not mere coincidence he mentioned he did not have to prove a thing or state facts on many occasions. Just a little tweak here and there to make it sound like reasonable doubt; which it was anything but. He also sold this jury by continual distractions. Everyday he was acting up about something; sometimes turning the court room into a circus. This was just as important as accusing her father of despicable acts. Why, all of it was designed to keep the jurors mind off his client’s guilt. I personally was waiting for him to take the wrap himself. He did one thing for sure. He kept the jurors off guard while making the prosecution look like bullies. I almost got caught up in it myself a couple of times.

Here is why i didn’t. Jeff Ashton, the prosecutor is an honorable guy. A guy that probably made good grades in school, etc. Unfortunately, all they could do was object. But he and his associate did present a very convincing case of Casey’s guilt circumstantial evidence or not. It may not have been theatrics like Jose who I might add again had nothing and as he told us many, many times he didn’t have to have anything. Jeff Ashton and his associates had one thing jose did not have and that was credibility. They didn’t have to lie. They laid the case out as it probably happened. Casey was with Caylee; something she never denied, had possession of the car, did not report the missing of her child; etc. There just wasn’t anyone else who had the motive to kill Caylee.

The jurors like so many jurors vote emotionally for whatever reason and they bought the defense’’s con job. By not reviewing any evidence; etc; they did a disservice to that little girl that should not have died.


63 posted on 07/13/2011 11:29:18 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: freekitty
You are condemning a group of people who swore to adjudicate the case to the best of their ability.

It doesn't matter a hill of beans what you believe happened or what they believe happened. They had to be convinced that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she did it. All the jurors believe it did not.

Twelve people are allot of people to convince. Every damn one of them where convinced that the state did not prove their case. rehashing any portion of the case is moot. She had the presumption of innocence and has been acquitted by a jury of her peers. She is as free as you or I.

66 posted on 07/13/2011 11:46:38 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

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