Posted on 07/05/2011 7:27:58 AM PDT by freebird5850
Morning all, didn't see a thread for today so I created one.
Because he is Casey’s dad and was Caylee’s grandpa? Most 2-yr-olds have trouble with pronouncing “r”s, so she said, “Papa Joe”. Many kids call their grandpas “Papa” combined with their first names.
even weirder is Caylee
Casey + Lee = Caylee
how freaky weird is that?
I feel Baez indicated exactly what happened here, in this case.
This was a Death Penalty case. These jurors, rightly, were going to play no part in the execution of another human being...that, along with no real hard evidence, set Casey free.
On a side note: I wonder, just how many people, frothing at the mouth to kill Casey, have participated in the murder of their own children...both fathers and mothers. Just because they “legally” killed them before or immediately after they were born...it is still murder. Yet, I know several people who have killed their children and who desired this young girl to be executed for doing the same exact thing.
Rush and Levin too? Damn. I watched about 2 min. of Hannity last night before I got ill. Indistinguishable from Geraldo (who was drooling over the "brilliance" of Baez, not surprisingly). One thing's certain -- those fools wouldn't be playing the "ain't American justice great?!" card if one of their loved ones were murdered and the perp were acquitted with the same evidence presented.
I heard the judge asked the jury each day if they had adhered to the rules.
Excellent points. I guess the effort to dazzle with forensics went too far. I know the smell of human dead bodies from nursing over 20 years ago- I can smell it this instant..(in my mind if that makes sense) and I know the way K-9’s are trained- I completely believe there was a dead body in the car- but the fellow from Oak Ridge may have gone over the heads of the jury.
Perhaps the prosecution should have stuck to old-fashioned circumstantial instead of 21st century. Told the story instead of told the forensics.
I will be interested in the future of the technology introduced in this trial.
Jeff Ashton was the first prosecutor to use DNA as evidence many years ago- and he was ridiculed then too..
The defense was effective in using smoke and mirros and confusion.
I just heard something pretty interesting- which may or may NOT mean anything. The alternate juror who has spoken out said “WE ALL believed...”
Question- since he was NOT part of deliberations and was removed from the 12 who decided, how could he have known what they ALL believed? Of course it’s possible they all got on the phone with each other AFTER the verdict- but still...it struck me as odd.
In hindsight, I wonder if the prosecutors wish they had re-offered her a plea bargain in exchange for the truth?
I listened to Hannity on the radio yesterday defending it but when he started listing out the preponderance of circumstantial evidence he faltered realizing he was making his own case against himself.
The first 10 minutes ...I bet others here heard that too.
I thought...”you damn fool...what are you gonna say now”....so he brings up The Great One to bolster that he must be right...
coulda been an epiphany
ROFL! I swear to GOD yesterday after this verdict began to become real I called my son and said- we’re now in the twilight zone AND WTH just happened? Is this some kind of mind control game that’s just been perpetrated on the country? Honestly- it’s that bizarre to me! One thing that’s fascinating though- we can learn so much about how and why we come to conclusions we do- and how much and what kind of information we use to reach them.
We have Rush, Mark Levin and Hannity in complete agreement with Alan Dershowitz and Geraldo. How often are you going to see that? LOL!
P.S. I’m not a believer in conspiracies, except under very rare circumstances in which Mob Boss A co-operates for a brief time with Mob Boss B.
I found Simms to be particularly annoying during the trial and even more after. I haven’t been able to get past her very obvious nose job either.
I wonder if she would like to take darling Casey home with her.
That is interesting especially when the judge asked the jury each day if they had adhered to the rules of not discussing.
Exactly- as I said- it could be they all spoke with each other immediately after being released- but I’d like an explanation. Beyond a reasonable doubt.
I think the first hint that this jury had probably made up it’s mind early is the report that almost no one took notes. This trial had so many facts to keep track of It was hard to believe that these jurors could remember everything.
My theory: Mom used drugs and the trunk of her car to ‘babysit’ Caylee while visiting clubs or the boyfriend. Mom came out one night and the child was dead. Mom decided to concoct a missing child theory and turned the accident into a murder. Just a theory.
This was a Death Penalty case. These jurors, rightly, were going to play no part in the execution of another human being...that, along with no real hard evidence, set Casey free.
How do you explain the following then?
Aggravated Child Abuse: Not Guilty
Aggravated Manslaughter: Not Guilty
To believe Casey Anthony was not guilty of any of the above offenses, let alone 1st degree murder, would require someone to suspend all level of common sense. Let's face it, this jury was filled with a bunch of idiots...and this does not bode well for our nation's future.
:)
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.