Replies

"Surely, in order to ascertain that someone was murdered, you would have to know what the person died of?"

No, you wouldn't. Not if the circumstances otherwise tell you that the death was the act of another person. You don't necessarily require a medical diagnosis. That's part of the fundamental misunderstanding that let the jury make this mistake.

"Surely, in order to ascertain that someone was murdered, you would have to know what the person died of?"

No, you wouldn't. Not if the circumstances otherwise tell you that the death was the act of another person. You don't necessarily require a medical diagnosis. That's part of the fundamental misunderstanding that let the jury make this mistake.

In a case like this where there is only a skeleton where nothing about it points to particular cause of death, circumstances would have to be very compelling, such as in cases where the remains are found on property where the accused controls access to the property, like a home, storage facility, etc., and motive would have to be very compelling, such as spouse wanting a divorce, standing to gain financially, etc. Actually, with the manner of death given as homicide and cause undetermined in the ME report, being based on the circumstances, according to the ME report itself, actually makes the manner of death in the ME report circumstantial evidence, not physical. Without that circumstantial manner of death determination, the death would not have been ruled a homicide and there could have be no homicide charge filed against the defendant.

The motive theorized by the prosecution in this case was that the mother felt the child was inhibiting her fun, but they presented nothing to support a transition from the happy times presented in photographic evidence to the point of wanting to commit murder. Also, there was no evidence that pointed to her somehow losing the help of her parents in raising the child, like an ultimatum to never bring Caylee back to their house. Motive therefore was impossible for jurors to feel 100% certain about, even though it was plausible.

The prosecution demonstrated by Casey's own words that child went ‘missing’ in her custody. AND no 2 + year old climbs into trash bags and a laundry bag from her home and makes her way down to the swamp garbage dump / pet cemetery, less than a mile from her home all by her self. Oh, and let us not ignore that Casey even told the investigators that ‘Zanny’ the ‘Nanny’ took her. This defendant ‘confessed’ to this crime and the people sleep.

Now the ‘state’ is going to have to pass a law that it is a felony IF a parent/care giver does not report their child missing within 48 hours or an ‘accidental’ death in 2 hours. Boy we have come a long way.