No....it was the Medical Examiner's job....and she said that it couldn't be determined.
So are you asking them to be superior to the expert?
And forget any wild theories that the defense threw out there to blow smoke. They, ultimately, were immaterial.
It came down to:
When did she die?...We don't know.
Where did she die?...We don't know.
How did she die?...We don't know.
Even the prosecutor, in his summation said :" Somebody in that house killed that child!"
Well, sir, if you don't know which one, why are you asking us to send her to the death chamber?
The State filed higher charges than the evidence could support.
Had they gone for gross negligence (for the 31 missing days) they would have gotten it.
Yes.....that is less than what she deserved....but it is more than what she got.
So save your ire for the prosecution. They failed....not the jurors.
Please see post #75
It comes down to ...was a murder committed.
The answer is most definitely - yes.
The next question is....who did it.
Again - a no brainer considering the evidence.
There are murderers sitting in jail now despite the fact they hid bodies so well they were never found - or bodies were so decomposed that official cause could not be determined.
Those juries managed to spend time using their common sense.
Convictions are attained all the time with no body at all. Case in point, Scott Peterson. One consumate liar there also. Now, tonight, we hear a female who stayed 8 days with Casey, saying she discussed chloroform before Caylee’s body was found. She will guest on Dr. Drew tomorrow night.
Incorrect. The medical examiner knew the cause of death. It was homicide by undetermined means. It was the manner of death that could not be determined, because there was no corpse left to examine.
BTW, whose fault was that?
"No....it was the Medical Examiner's job....and she said that it couldn't be determined."
"So are you asking them to be superior to the expert?"
The jury did not need to find a specific cause of death. They only needed to be convinced that a murder happened. Finding a body with duct tape wrapped around the head, in a bag, in a swamp, is enough for any reasonable person.
"It came down to:..."
But it shouldn't come down to those things. That's where the jury went wrong. They didn't have to answer every possible question.
"Even the prosecutor, in his summation said :" Somebody in that house killed that child!"
And as you know very well, he didn't just stop there. He explained which one.
"So save your ire for the prosecution. They failed....not the jurors."
No, it was the jurors.
Exactly right.
The prosecution was much too ambitious. They wrote a check they couldn’t cash.
There have only been two women executed in Florida, and both were serial killers.
Sadly, mothers kill their children too often, yet are never given the death penalty.
This case had a political element to it, probably because of the media attention.
They should have simply pursued manslaughter ONLY, not as a fallback to Murder 1 with death. The jurors couldn’t shake that.