Posted on 07/06/2011 6:31:34 PM PDT by Hojczyk
Casey Anthony juror Jennifer Ford said today that she and the other jurors cried and were "sick to our stomachs" after voting to acquit Casey Anthony of charges that she killed her 2-year-old daughter Caylee.
"I did not say she was innocent," said Ford, who had previously only been identified as juror number 3. "I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be."
The jury's jaw dropping not guilty verdict shocked court observers, but it was also a difficult moment for the panel, Ford said in an exclusive interview with ABC News. No one from the jury was willing to come out and talk to the media in the hours after the verdict.
"Everyone wonders why we didn't speak to the media right away," Ford said. "It was because we were sick to our stomach to get that verdict. We were crying and not just the women. It was emotional and we weren't ready. We wanted to do it with integrity and not contribute to the sensationalism of the trial."
Instead of murder, Casey Anthony, 25, was found guilty of four counts of lying to law enforcement and could be released from jail as early as Thursday.
Ford praised the jurors.
"They picked a great bunch of people, such high integrity. And there was high morale," she said. "We all joked. We are like a big group of cousins."
Casey Anthony Prosecutor: 'All Came Down to Cause of Death'
Earlier today, the prosecutor and an alternate juror agreed on why the jury had refused to convict Anthony: They couldn't prove how little Caylee Anthony died.
"It all came down to the evidence," said Florida state attorney Jeff Ashton on "The View."
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
You’re right.
But none of that would matter if the baby drowned herself in the pool - would it?
IMHO the judge made a mistake when he let the defense introduce the accusation of incest without demanding the defense to substantiate the claim.
In allowing the defense to keep pounding the incest accusation he handed them a gift that probably led to the not guilty verdict.
The defense worked the whole trial to cast suspicion on the father and it obviously worked. We are already hearing jurors say they did not trust the father - that they think he was hiding something.
For jurors who were looking for an out or didn’t want to deal with sending a young woman to prison for life, the defense attorney gave them something to hang their hats on.
Now they can pretend they had a valid reason to duck the guilty verdict.
I think the jurors will be plagued by their bad decisions and sorry conduct the rest of their lives. Nightmares will be the least of it.
"They didn't find a body....they found a skull."
The body was skeletonized. We all know that. Don't parse words.
"A skull that had been tampered with by the meter reader."
Even if true, and it's only speculation, what is that supposed to change? That makes it an accidental death? Be serious.
"The only thing that could be said _with certainty_ was that duct tape was found with the remains."
"As to where the tape was placed on the body was pure supposition.
Certainty isn't required. Beyond a reasonable doubt, remember? And no, the tape was wrapped around the head. There was testimony about the fact the tape was what kept the jawbone and the skull together.
"Yeah....it's a shame that the evidence was lost in that fetid swamp....but lost it was."
Sure, some potential evidence was lost. But there was still enough evidence to prove a murder, and that Casey did it.
Yep. The Scott Peterson jury actually took their time going through all the evidence. They asked questions and wanted to view parts of testimony and evidence. They also had no cause of death and only the decomposed torso of Laci-—months after she went missing. Yet, as you pointed out, they actually pieced together all the circumstantial evidence and came to the logical conclusion.
This jury did not. They didn’t see a smoking gun or even a gun at all. They expected some CSI moment, which never came. They knew there was a dead baby, but because the baby was so badly decomposed, there was no cause of death. The duct tape on the baby’s skull, inside plastic bags, and tossed in the swamp like garbage apparently weren’t compelling enough. The smell of decomposition coming from HER car—noticed by multiple people—and the fact that HER child was missing for 30 days without her reporting it wasn’t compelling enough for this jury. However, the defense mentioning that she was a good mother, that Caylee most likely drowned in the pool WAS compelling to them.
To hear that alternate say that he didn’t even believe about the decomp smell in the car told me enough about this jury. I wonder if the judge had allowed them to smell those air samples from the trunk, if this jury would still think that wasn’t enough.
The fact that the REASON they didn’t have the cause of death they were seeking was because the woman on trial was the very one that did every thing she could to hinder the investigation, seems to have escaped their attention. Casey definitely had a jury of her peers. *sigh*
The prosecution went to great pains to demonstrate that the duct tape, if properly placed, was just wide enough to cover both mouth and nose.
Covering mouth and nose is murder....covering the mouth but leaving the nose exposed is an attempt at silencing. So that the skull was tampered with and the position of the tape now indeterminable means a great deal indeed.
Hey, if a small child had to be brutally murdered by her own mother in order to bring this mutual admiration society together, it was worth it!
Mark Fuhrman lied during the OJ trial. He isn’t exactly anyone with any credibility.
“In another interview, Fuhrman talked about gang members and was quoted as saying, “Yeah we work with niggers and gangs. You can take one of these niggers, drag ‘em into the alley and beat the shit out of them and kick them. You can see them twitch. It really relieves your tension.” He went on to say “we had them begging that they’d never be gang members again, begging us.” He said that he would tell them, “You do what you’re told, understand, nigger?”[3”:
Mark Fuhrman:
On July 5, 1996, Lungren announced that he would file perjury charges against Fuhrman and soon thereafter offered Fuhrman a plea bargain. On October 2, Fuhrman accepted the deal and pleaded no contest to the charges. He was sentenced to three years’ probation and fined $200. As a result, Fuhrman is a convicted felon
How do you know it was 1st degree murder? Could it have been 2nd degree? Could it have been simple manslaughter?
The child's body is found in bag, dumped in a field, with duct tape wrapped around the head. Call me naive, but I think the crime we're looking at here is pretty obvious.
The crime there would be abuse of a corpse. Was she even charged with that crime?
The problem to me was bad police work and prosecutors going for 1st degree (a capital crime in Florida) instead of going for manslaughter and abuse of a corpse. They probably could have gotten convictions on those.
That would explain why Vivid Video pulled their offer so quickly.
I’ll have to find it but last night I read a quote from a juror (not sure if it is this particular one) who said “if we had sent Casey to death we’d be murderers too”. In other words, she would not convict because Casey Anthony could have faced the death penalty.
That tells me right there that juror had to have lied when she became death penalty qualified. In order to do so a person has to swear that they will be able to sentence a person to death and will also NOT take into consideration the possible punishment a defendant may face if convicted.
I have a feeling there was quite a bit of juror error in this trial and I hope the prosecutors office looks into it. While Caley may never receive justice, too many people believe this jury made an incredibly wrong decision and are demanding to know how they could possible reach such given the preponderance of evidence pointing to guilt.
Judge Perry seems to be a well grounded, intelligent jurist who has both respect for the law and a strong sense of control in his court room. He is very aware of the public’s anger over this verdict and the questions people are asking. I can’t see him not pushing for an investigation if credible evidence of jury misconduct is brought to his attention.
I agree, it was akin to letting in the "that word" at the O.J. trial. It was all they focused on. The other mistake was in not granting the prosecution their peremptory challenge to the dame who "didn't want to judge people." Sorry lady, that is what you are there for.
So for those who say "the system worked," I say NO, the system DID not work, and here are just two examples. It is also supposed that the jury will be composed of people with I.Q.s higher than plant life.
Yes, I am sure they knew there was a huge amount of sensationalism. I heard that one juror hired a publicist before the trial began. Isn’t that interesting? So he gave his name out and was getting ready for a big story after the verdict.
Now that I think about it, he might have thought the story would be a whole lot BIGGER if he deemed her not guilty!
Really, he contacted a publicist before the trial? That sounds like he might have a motive.....
Could you give a summation of what Furham said to him? I’ve seen this alternate juror and can’t believe he’s capable of breathing without instructions and assistance. I’ve been waiting for someone to take him to the woodshed but keep missing it.
Our newspaper today reported that at the first ballot on the manslaughter charge there were 6 for guilty and 6 non-guilty.
The jury only debated the charges for about 11 hours and in that time the 6 pro-guilty changed to not-guilty.
That confirms my view that they seemed to be in a rush to finish up and get back home. Who gives up a guilty vote in such a short time in a capital case like this?
They must have had a strong foreman pushing the not-guilty verdict to end the dabate so quickly.
I can’t remember the details because the last 48 hours are just one big blur. I do remember him saying it was a “ridiculous” verdict.
You know, not only that but if this jury really still believed her to be guilty after the trial but felt the state had some questions to answer - why not hang the jury so the state can get their case tightened up for another trial?
Instead, they not only allow a person they know killed a 2 year old walk free, they assure she can’t be retried for the murder because they were stupid/tired/ignorant and could not come up with a verdict. Not to mention some comments we are hearing out of the jury that is beginning to make us wonder if there was jury misconduct during this trial.
I hope Judge Perry and the State are taking a good look at what took place during deliberations and in fact, throughout the entire trial.
oh no.. not you too Rush.
That’s what was the most shocking thing to me. I understand there being a bunch of idiots on the jury...but I found it hard to believe that there wasn’t one person in that room that didn’t dig their heels in and say manslaughter is the bare minimum and hang the jury.
I can tell you this...if my child was missing for 30 days and I had not reported it, and then his body was found in the lake in our neighborhood with duct tape on his face traced to the roll in my house, wrapped in a laundry bag and blanket from my house, his post-mortem hair in my trunk, and multiple searches for chloroform on my computer and chloroform samples in my car, with a cadaver dog making a hit on it as well, and I had lied and lied and lied and lied to the authorities....in the great state of Georgia, I’d be sitting on death row. And deservedly so.
You, too! So have I. BOR is more sane on this than Hannity (or Levin) and certainly Whorealdo and Shep... I’ve tuned off Fox and tuned in HLN.....
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.