Casey Anthony Trial

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by roseylovestosho

I don't understand...there are lesser charges she could have gotten...all the prosecution would've had to do is prove that Casey had SOME involvement in her death and given the amount of evidence against her...I'm sorry but here is what I'm having trouble with:

1) She doesn't report her daughter missing for 31 days
2) She LIES about her daughter's whereabouts aka Zanny the Nanny
3) THEN all of a sudden after lying about the whereabouts she says that her father and brother raped her?
4) The child is found six months later with HER BLANKET AND DUCT TAPE?

HOW CAN THIS WOMAN GET OFF WITH ONLY TWO YEARS?!

THAT IS MORE THAN ENOUGH EVIDENCE FOR AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE...it is HER RESPONSIBILITY AS A PARENT TO ENSURE THE WELL-BEING OF HER CHILD AND HER CHILD WENT MISSING FOR A MONTH BEFORE SHE EVEN OPENED A WORD ABOUT IT...AND IT WAS HER MOTHER WHO FORCED HER INTO TELLING THE POLICE ABOUT CAYLEE? HOW DOES THAT NOT PROVE NEGLECT?!?!

And I'm really tired of people saying there wasn't enough evidence...juries have convicted on far less.

I agree, I'm so upset about this.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by chachi

My quess is that they will bring charges on that or they should

They can't, the juriors found her not guilty of everything but lying, which makes no sense to me.

[roseylovestosho]

They found her guilty of lying...but no intent/motive? So she just lies for fun? Right.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

They can't, the juriors found her not guilty of everything but lying, which makes no sense to me.

wHY cant she be charged with that she wasnt charged with concealing a body

[Bitsy]

I watched the entire case. I even watched most of the jury selection. I've read all the evidence and watched all the interviews (police and FBI.) I wish the JURY had a chance to have ALL the evidence.

As for the chloroform in the car. ANY remnants means there was A LOT at one point. It dissipates very quickly. No cleaning product would leave any remnant of chloroform.

The smell of human decomposition was in the car. That is a fact the prosecution proved. Now, why didn't other people smell it early on? I have a guess...the smell was faint at first and as the fluid left in the trunk further decomposed, the smell became stronger. At first it was not noticeable to people in or near the car. As it decomposed more, the smell increased and anyone within a few feet of the car could smell it.

I could go on and on and on and on. I don't really feel like it though. People are going to have their own opinions...which they are entitled to. I feel my opinion is educated on the facts of the case...so of course I believe my opinion best.

[chachi]

She also wasnt charged with neglect which it seems they could charge her with now

[Nancy1999]

It's funny, I've seen several movies where the defense lawyer makes you "hate" the client, and calls them a lying tramp, or thief, but then they will say, "Sure you may hate my client, you may think they are the worse piece of garbage that ever lived, but they are not a murderer!!" and it always worked in the movies.

When Baez called her a lying slut, not the persecution, I wondered if he’s was trying to use this type of defense. Like we thought she was guilty because she had multiple boyfriends and partied a lot. That’s not why I thought she was guilty, I thought she was guilty because she lied about what happened to her child, you lie when you don’t want someone to know the truth.

[Bitsy]

I will add this. I disagree with the motive that the prosecution presented. I don't believe she killed her daughter because she wanted to party. (I believe she wanted to party more than she loved her daughter, but that is not the motive.)

Here is what I think the motive was: She and her mother had a VERY dysfunctional relationship. I've read or watched the police interviews with Jesse Grund (former fiance.) He tells about an argument that Lee said Casey and her mother had right before June 16th. Her mother threatened to take Caylee away from her....called her an unfit mother, etc. There are other witnesses that said the same thing, not just Jesse.

Anyhow, I think she killed Caylee to 1) punish her mother, 2) out of anger that her mother would try to take Caylee away from her...instead she took Caylee away from Cindy, 3) knew there would be LOTS of sympathy and attention to herself if her daughter was missing and then killed by a mysterious person.

There was plenty of evidence to show how dysfuntional this family is. There is plenty of evidence to show the anger Casey had at her mother regarding her mother's and Caylee's relationship. The prosecution decided to go the other route based on her partying for the 31 days.

Bottom line for me: I think she killed her daughter to punish her mother and to take Caylee away from Cindy.

[roseylovestosho]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

I will add this. I disagree with the motive that the prosecution presented. I don't believe she killed her daughter because she wanted to party. (I believe she wanted to party more than she loved her daughter, but that is not the motive.)

Here is what I think the motive was: She and her mother had a VERY dysfunctional relationship. I've read or watched the police interviews with Jesse Grund (former fiance.) He tells about an argument that Lee said Casey and her mother had right before June 16th. Her mother threatened to take Caylee away from her....called her an unfit mother, etc. There are other witnesses that said the same thing, not just Jesse.

Anyhow, I think she killed Caylee to 1) punish her mother, 2) out of anger that her mother would try to take Caylee away from her...instead she took Caylee away from Cindy, 3) knew there would be LOTS of sympathy and attention to herself if her daughter was missing and then killed by a mysterious person.

There was plenty of evidence to show how dysfuntional this family is. There is plenty of evidence to show the anger Casey had at her mother regarding her mother's and Caylee's relationship. The prosecution decided to go the other route based on her partying for the 31 days.

Bottom line for me: I think she killed her daughter to punish her mother and to take Caylee away from Cindy.

Well, the prosecution couldn't present this without Cindy actually testifying everything you just said...and as you saw Cindy was not about to mention any of that at all.

[Bitsy]

I was offended when Baez kept calling her a slut. NO ONE ever said that. There was no evidence of that. She liked to party, had boyfriends, etc....the prosecution even said in their closing that it is NORMAL for a young person to do that.

Baez fed them the reasonable doubt card...the jury ATE IT UP. Reasonable doubt is not "NO Doubt"...that is where I think the jury got confused.

I am so angry at the justice system and the jurors right now. But mostly, I am SAD about Caylee not getting justice. We have failed her.

[roseylovestosho]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

It's funny, I've seen several movies where the defense lawyer makes you "hate" the client, and calls them a lying tramp, or thief, but then they will say, "Sure you may hate my client, you may think they are the worse piece of garbage that ever lived, but they are not a murderer!!" and it always worked in the movies.

When Baez called her a lying slut, not the persecution, I wondered if he’s was trying to use this type of defense. Like we thought she was guilty because she had multiple boyfriends and partied a lot. That’s not why I thought she was guilty, I thought she was guilty because she lied about what happened to her child, you lie when you don’t want someone to know the truth.

I agree...I noticed the tactic right away. I think he was purposely trying to draw attention to her being this huge liar so that the jury can sit there and say...okay well we know she lies and she lied to the police so that's just part of who she is...and then charge her with lying...and that's it. Obviously worked.

[susan lynn]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

I will add this. I disagree with the motive that the prosecution presented. I don't believe she killed her daughter because she wanted to party. (I believe she wanted to party more than she loved her daughter, but that is not the motive.)

Here is what I think the motive was: She and her mother had a VERY dysfunctional relationship. I've read or watched the police interviews with Jesse Grund (former fiance.) He tells about an argument that Lee said Casey and her mother had right before June 16th. Her mother threatened to take Caylee away from her....called her an unfit mother, etc. There are other witnesses that said the same thing, not just Jesse.

Anyhow, I think she killed Caylee to 1) punish her mother, 2) out of anger that her mother would try to take Caylee away from her...instead she took Caylee away from Cindy, 3) knew there would be LOTS of sympathy and attention to herself if her daughter was missing and then killed by a mysterious person.

There was plenty of evidence to show how dysfuntional this family is. There is plenty of evidence to show the anger Casey had at her mother regarding her mother's and Caylee's relationship. The prosecution decided to go the other route based on her partying for the 31 days.

Bottom line for me: I think she killed her daughter to punish her mother and to take Caylee away from Cindy.

This is exactly what I have thought for a while. Casey was jealous and wanted to punish her mother and father because they showed love towards Caylee,

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by chachi

She also wasnt charged with neglect which it seems they could charge her with now

There's absolutely no proof of neglect. Negligent homicide is the choice they had, that she was negligent and it caused the death of her child. My own personal theory was she used her car truck for a babysitter, this would be negligent homicide. I wish the defense could have learned where Caylee stayed when Casey didn't take her to boyfriend’s houses, and she wasn't with grandparents. I believe Caylee died in the trunk, and decomposed there, I think there was plenty of evidence of that.

I don't think the law allows you to go back and charge her with anything, and really she wouldn't have even gotten 2 years for neglect (time served). Have you heard of this, or is this just what you'd like to see happen?

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by roseylovestosho

Well, the prosecution couldn't present this without Cindy actually testifying everything you just said...and as you saw Cindy was not about to mention any of that at all.

Yep, you are right. There are so many flaws in our system. I don't know if there is a better way, because letting some things in creates the opportunity for even more problems. It really frustrates me.

The truth doesn't matter. What is allowed in is all that matters. Ugh...so disappointed.

And of course, Cindy could get up there and lie about other things, but she couldn't be forced to tell the truth. Sigh.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by roseylovestosho

I agree...I noticed the tactic right away. I think he was purposely trying to draw attention to her being this huge liar so that the jury can sit there and say...okay well we know she lies and she lied to the police so that's just part of who she is...and then charge her with lying...and that's it. Obviously worked.

Now we're going to have to listen to how brilliant he was, one minute begging for a mistrial, and the next, he's gets an acquittal.