Casey Anthony Trial

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by TammyJM

I don't think that her color affected them as much as the fact that a few of them have had their own issues with the law and there was one (possibly 2...can't remember) that dropped out of highschool like Casey. They decided early on that she was a victim within her own family so, again, Casey is not made to take responsibility....more people babying her.

I am sure you are right about that. I did think many times during the trial though that if she were a black woman, most of us would never have heard about her.

[Bitsy]

Originally Posted by TammyJM

What's ironic is that people use that excuse about minoirites commiting more crimes, but yet, who are the majority of people that are serial killers?? Yep, NOT minorites.

(sorry...a bit off topic.)

You are right.

[shamrocks]

Originally Posted by roseylovestosho

Please, I hope you guys don't take this the wrong way it's not my intention--but it's well documented that death throw is racially and ethnically biased. In other words, non-whites are put on death row at a higher rate than whites (non-hispanics) do you guys feel that may have played a role in it? And PLEASE I am not trying to offend anyone by this so please don' t take me the wrong way!

I agree, if this was a black woman 1st off it would more than likely not have made national news and she would have been sentenced to life. I don’t think that any woman regardless of color gets sentenced to death too often. I think it is harder for people to put a woman to death. That is why they should have not gone for the death penalty .

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by TammyJM

I don't think that her color affected them as much as the fact that a few of them have had their own issues with the law and there was one (possibly 2...can't remember) that dropped out of highschool like Casey. They decided early on that she was a victim within her own family so, again, Casey is not made to take responsibility....more people babying her.

That stuff about being molested by her father and brother should never have been considered since it was merely mentioned and never proven. I think it is a disgrace that the court allowed that attorney to do that. In my opinion, an attorney should not be allowed to make statements that are prejudicial and not back them up. I hope to God they did not use that as their reason for letting her off.

IF they did, they did not follow the law.

[roseylovestosho]

Usually statistics show that blacks and hispanics are more likely to commit a crime. However, these studies ignore income level. When taking income level into account they find that blacks and hispanics are no more likely to commit a crime than whites once you take income level into account. In other words, it is poor people in general who are more likely to be involved in a crime and race/ethnicity has nothing to do with it. That is why it's disturbing to see that blacks/hispanics are more likely to get the death penalty...that's the part that seems biased to me.

Either way, I hope the jurors read online how much they are being flamed.

[roseylovestosho]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

That stuff about being molested by her father and brother should never have been considered since it was merely mentioned and never proven. I think it is a disgrace that the court allowed that attorney to do that. In my opinion, an attorney should not be allowed to make statements that are prejudicial and not back them up. I hope to God they did not use that as their reason for letting her off.

IF they did, they did not follow the law.

I think because there was no evidence of it, Baez was not allowed to talk about the alleged rape/incest in his closing arguments. But regardless, I don't think the jury can "un"hear so to speak, what Baez said during court...

[gidget529]

Originally Posted by Bitsy

A few other things that bothered me....

The defense table SHOULD not have faced the jury. That was SO prejudicial. They had to look at her sitting in a lowered chair, appearing all young and tiny, watching her cry, dressed in pastels and ruffles for 6 weeks. Give me a break.

Also, I do NOT think that there should be media and an audience in the courtroom. It added unnecessary pressure to the jury. Some cases should have a closed court room. They can still televise it, but they jury wouldn't be privy to it.

(I'm sure you can't tell that I am completely worked up over this now!!!! Time for a sidebar.)

I gotta agree w you again. This was very prejudicial to grant this request. It will probably be something interesting discussed in psychology classes - did facing the jury get them to psychologically connect w her?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

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?

Well she admitted Caylee drowned in the pool amd she should have been supervised so she could not get to the pool alone the fact that she didnt is negligence that she admitted to

[chachi]

Okay about the duct tape. If it were accidental casey could put it on there to look like someone murdered her, Roy Kronk couldve put it there or there was bunches of trash around the area and the duct tape could have came from there and attached it self to the skull. They even said only one tiny piece was even attached to the skull. The duct tape wasnt the smoking gun that would lead me to believe she did it. That was the problem with the evidence it was all circumstantial and there was no smoking gun that lead you to believe Casey did it. The prosecution put forth evidence and the defense would come right back and put holes in their evidence

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by chachi

Well she admitted Caylee drowned in the pool amd she should have been supervised so she could not get to the pool alone the fact that she didnt is negligence that she admitted to

I don't think she ever told the police that, she may or may not have told her lawyer that, but I’m not sure that’s her story now. Remember when she was talking to parents while in jail, her mom said, “Oh now someone thinks Caylee drowned in a pool”, and Casey said, “It figures”. So at that time she still hadn’t said anything about a drowning, and was still talking about the kidnapping.

The negligence has to be very extreme such as leaving a child home alone, and even then parents don’t get much time. Really, I wish I could believe she is not guilty, I don’t hate her, but I do have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach, and I wish it would go away. I really wish I could believe she didn’t do it, I went into this thinking that, I think the media always blows things out of proportion, but I don’t think they did, and I didn't watch that much media, only the actual case on the computer. The case is so bizarre you don’t have to embelish, the facts are bad enough. To me, the fact is a mother should know or be responsible for her child, and have to tell authorities where that child is or will be held accountable. If she had told police where the body was, they might been able to find lots more evidence, such as drugs in the body, or DNA or the duct tape. Has she admitted she hid the body or is she blaming daddy for that too?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I don't think she ever told the police that, she may or may not have told her lawyer that, but I’m not sure that’s her story now. Remember when she was talking to parents while in jail, her mom said, “Oh now someone thinks Caylee drowned in a pool”, and Casey said, “It figures”. So at that time she still hadn’t said anything about a drowning, and was still talking about the kidnapping.

The negligence has to be very extreme such as leaving a child home alone, and even then parents don’t get much time. Really, I wish I could believe she is not guilty, I don’t hate her, but I do have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach, and I wish it would go away. I really wish I could believe she didn’t do it, I went into this thinking that, I think the media always blows things out of proportion, but I don’t think they did, and I didn't watch that much media, only the actual case on the computer. The case is so bizarre you don’t have to embelish, the facts are bad enough. To me, the fact is a mother should know or be responsible for her child, and have to tell authorities where that child is or will be held accountable. If she had told police where the body was, they might been able to find lots more evidence, such as drugs in the body, or DNA or the duct tape. Has she admitted she hid the body or is she blaming daddy for that too?

Oh I agree with you I believe she did it. I just think the defense proved reasonable doubt that she didnt do it. I really want to hear what the jurors have to say but one of the alternates said she agreed with the verdict and the prosecution didnt prove its case and thats why she felt the verdict went the way it did.

[roseylovestosho]

Is it terrible that I plan on following her on the news and hope she falls on her face? I know it's not very nice of me but when I heard the verdict on my computer yesterday I almost threw my computer against the wall. I didn't think I was THAT emotionally invested in the trial until I heard the verdict...that really ripped me to shreds...and also I think what further infuriated me was the fact that a couple of days ago I witnessed a man assaulting a woman outside of my apartment window...and the police didn't get here on time and I wasn't able to get a license plate...I think the helplessness I felt in helping that poor battered woman was amplified when I saw Casey's verdict.

[citygirl123]

I was just asked on fb to vote yes that I agreed with the jury saying she didn't kill her daughter or no, I don't agree. This was my response. What do you think?

"Not sure how to vote on this. I don't think the jury said she didn't kill her daughter, I think they may be saying that there is not enough evidence to convict. I vote for the jury. Jurys are sequestered and asked not to talk so they do not form opinions before their decision. The media has done nothing but talk and form opinions for months. The media also moves toward sensational, sensational, hype, hype, hype! It is no wonder the public is outraged. I believe Ms. Anthony is not innocent, but beyond that...do we really know what happened?"

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by chachi

Okay about the duct tape. If it were accidental casey could put it on there to look like someone murdered her, Roy Kronk couldve put it there or there was bunches of trash around the area and the duct tape could have came from there and attached it self to the skull. They even said only one tiny piece was even attached to the skull. The duct tape wasnt the smoking gun that would lead me to believe she did it. That was the problem with the evidence it was all circumstantial and there was no smoking gun that lead you to believe Casey did it. The prosecution put forth evidence and the defense would come right back and put holes in their evidence

Okay, why would Casey want it to look like a murder? Not arguing with you, but I would really like to understand why people think this. To me it's not logical. You don’t get into that much trouble if you child accidently drowns in a pool. It happens all the time here, and they usually don’t even take it to court. Also, how could Kronk get the very same duct tape that her dad has. It was special tape made in very limited quantities and George bought some and kept it in his garage, and they found he used it to hang up flyers and it was on gas can. He would have never used it to hang up flyers if he had used it on the body, as a police officer he knows that duct tape can be traced. So the tape can be connected to Dad and the garage, but not to Kronk. Casey as we know had access to dad's garage, and neighbor told of her backing her care into garage one day when she wanted to borrow the shovel.

Who said there was only one tiny piece of tape left on the skull, I hadn't heard this. If that's true I could more easily understand your point, but from everything I heard there were three pieces on the skull. The reason they had the animated drawing that we weren't allowed to see is so that jurors could see exactly where the tape was placed when Casey still had skin, just seeing it on the skull didn't give them as much information. Prosecutor said mouth, nose and jaw.

Anyway, I think you have done a great job explaining how the jurors might have thought, and I'm just surprised that there wasn't someone on the jury who would argue these points with them. They just didn't deliberate long enough. I mean, there doesn't have to be a "smoking gun" to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. There doesn't even have to be a body found, most cases are circumstantial, and through logic and reasoning we can deduct the most likely case. So in my opinion, missing child + mom lied = mom’s guilty. Maybe it's too simplistic, but the story the defense gave wasn't at all believable. I’ve known lots of women who were abused as children and it doesn’t make them liars. In fact, she’s also done a great disservice to all those women who were molested as children.

[Rhetts_mama]

Surprise, surprise. The jurors are beginning to tell their stories, for a price.

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk...letter_TMZ.pdf

Add a few more people to the list of those who's lives are going to be made better by the death of Caylee. I'm so disgusted right now.