Casey Anthony

[R.D.]

She is only guilty if after a trial a jury of her peers says she is. Or she confesses.

But then you all should already know that. Or can I announce that Obama is guilty of say, forging a birth certificate and be done with it?

We know, we know.


There are no innocent people in jail and the guilty never walk free.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

She is only guilty if after a trial a jury of her peers says she is. Or she confesses.

But then you all should already know that. Or can I announce that Obama is guilty of say, forging a birth certificate and be done with it?

We know, we know.


There are no innocent people in jail and the guilty never walk free.

Either we are a Country of Laws with set rules or we are not. If you all can gleefully go about claiming someone is guilty of murder based on no trial then we all can, including the President. So which is it?

Is she innocent until proven guilty or shall we just lynch her and save the time? Why we could get rid of those pesky Judges and just live by rumor and mob rule. Hope you have lots of armed friends.

 

[Texas Writer]

Did he say that on the stand today?

No. It's from the same law enforcement statement they kept showing him . . . to refresh his memory. The same statement where he offers up that Casey didn't pack the bags that he retrieved from Tony Lazzaro's:

EE You, you said, you made mention that everything was so organized that it struck
you odd that it was your sister's bag?
LA Huh, yeah (affirmative) absolutely uhm, because knowing my sister and knowing
myseif, uhm, we are not organized. Uhm, when we pack, or even if we're at a
residence, I mean our stuff is ail over the piace. it's aii over the floor. If we're
packing we shove it into the bags. Uhm, it was, it's, if somebody toid me that my
sister packed that bag I would call them a liar.
EE You'd question it right off the bat?
LA Absolutely a hundred percent. It is my firm belief that someone else packed that
bag for her when I went to pick if up. It is my firm belief of that. Something that!
did not get to convey to you before because I probably just forgot.

http://humbleopinion.net76.net/interviews/lee anthony.pdf

And the next line is:

EE: She's just stealing her money back from the girl that stole it.

Since the defense didn't bring it up - the jury doesn't know - it is not evidence now.
Do you really want the jury to know cayse stole from her mother?
LINK

I don't care if the jury hears it or not. If it's the truth, then it's the truth.

I just don't understand why it was so important to the State to not let LA testify on his opinion of who packed those bags. What the hell difference does it make who packed the bags. They lost me there.

Now, I'm wondering how many members here think it's acceptable for family members to sell pictures and videos of their missing or supposed murdered loved ones?

 

[MaggieMae]

Daydreamer,

Serious question. Are you a friend of Casey Anthony?

The reason I ask it that it seems to me, you are pretty heavily invested in trying to make everyone else guilty, and for her to be innocent.

The Internet is awash with message boards and blogging about this case. We're most assuredly not the only ones who believe there is a rush to judgment about Casey Anthony's guilt.

 

[R.D.]

She is only guilty if after a trial a jury of her peers says she is. Or she confesses.

But then you all should already know that. Or can I announce that Obama is guilty of say, forging a birth certificate and be done with it?

We know, we know.


There are no innocent people in jail and the guilty never walk free.

Either we are a Country of Laws with set rules or we are not. If you all can gleefully go about claiming someone is guilty of murder based on no trial then we all can, including the President. So which is it?

Is she innocent until proven guilty or shall we just lynch her and save the time? Why we could get rid of those pesky Judges and just live by rumor and mob rule. Hope you have lots of armed friends.

And the rules are a jury will have the final say. Not that it is bad mojo for the rest of society to discuss and reach their own conclusions.

Come back when she is found not guilty (not found innocent mind you) when she is being denied her constitutional rights and we'll agree. But remember convicted felons tend to have a hard time of things. Yes she is already a convicted felon.

 

[MaggieMae]

The same mindset came into play with the OJ trial. You had loons who followed every word and who went into that trial with their own idea of what happened. No matter what happened, they had an answer for everything.

Media morons. Nobody knows what happened to that little girl except the little girl, who is dead, and her killer. What we see conjured up by people whose only knowledge comes from the media is just fantasy.

For once we can agree on something. Well said.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We know, we know.


There are no innocent people in jail and the guilty never walk free.

Either we are a Country of Laws with set rules or we are not. If you all can gleefully go about claiming someone is guilty of murder based on no trial then we all can, including the President. So which is it?

Is she innocent until proven guilty or shall we just lynch her and save the time? Why we could get rid of those pesky Judges and just live by rumor and mob rule. Hope you have lots of armed friends.

And the rules are a jury will have the final say. Not that it is bad mojo for the rest of society to discuss and reach their own conclusions.

Come back when she is found not guilty (not found innocent mind you) when she is being denied her constitutional rights and we'll agree. But remember convicted felons tend to have a hard time of things. Yes she is already a convicted felon.

Our legal systems is BASED on the concept that " one is INNOCENT till proven GUILTY" thus a not guilty verdict is an affirmation she is INNOCENT of the listed crimes.

Remind all these left of center people that I am free to announce that Obama is guilty of, well anything I want to claim he did. And so is society according to you.

 

[R.D.]

I don't care if the jury hears it or not. If it's the truth, then it's the truth.

I just don't understand why it was so important to the State to not let LA testify on his opinion of who packed those bags. What the hell difference does it make who packed the bags. They lost me there.

Now, I'm wondering how many members here think it's acceptable for family members to sell pictures and videos of their missing or supposed murdered loved ones?

Just for clarity, you think she is not guilty, right?

So why would you not care what the jury hears regarding her stealing from her mother?

LA can only state opinion regarding the bags, I suspect thats why.

 

[MaggieMae]

Shame, shame, SHAME on Judge Perry!!!!! If convicted, can Casey get a new trial--because of the judge's refusal to let her defense team have its say???
Pitiful, pitiful, pitiful. (ALMOST as pathetic as the way CNN/HLN is spinning this one.)

What are you talking about? CNN is showing the trial. If you listen to Nancy Grace or one of the talking heads, you may get any idea. The facts are coming down showing Casey a liar. She has lied from day one. If she gets on the stand, she will lie then also.

It isn't CNN, it's HLN (a CNN sister station) that covers the afternoon sessions live. TruTV does the morning sessions. However, both of them seem to cut for commercial at a crucial moment in the testimony and by the time we've all bought our year's supply of Proactive zit control, the live moment has been lost. Naturally we can go back and watch the video to catch it, but in the meantime, it seems to me that anything that might make it appear that a red flag favoring the defense has been raised, it's time for a commercial break. Both HLN, TruTV and almost all the media have (almost embarrassingly) projected Casey Anthony as being an evil she-demon from hell who callously murdered her child, duct-taped her mouth, stuffed her into a garbage bag and slung the bag into a snake-infested field (after carrying her decomposing body around in the trunk of her car for 31 days). Then went merrily around like a Lindsey Lohan wannabe, lying to her parents about here whereabouts all because she wanted to be "free."

Unless Casey suffers from multiple personality disorder, it just doesn't add up.

 

[Texas Writer]

I don't care if the jury hears it or not. If it's the truth, then it's the truth.

I just don't understand why it was so important to the State to not let LA testify on his opinion of who packed those bags. What the hell difference does it make who packed the bags. They lost me there.

Now, I'm wondering how many members here think it's acceptable for family members to sell pictures and videos of their missing or supposed murdered loved ones?

Just for clarity, you think she is not guilty, right?

So why would you not care what the jury hears regarding her stealing from her mother?

LA can only state opinion regarding the bags, I suspect thats why.

FOR THE RECORD.

No, I do not think Casey Anthony is innocent. I think she is guilty in not reporting, hiding the fact and covering up her daughter's death. I do think Caylee's death was accidental -- in which ever scenario you wanna lay out. If she was indeed drugging the child and had so in the past -- it's an unthinkable act of a Mother -- but I don't think she intentionally drugged her death. If you think her death was an accidental drowning -- as I do -- she still would not be guilty of murder. In the accidental drowning scenario, is she alone in her actions? Or should someone else be charged in the not reporting, hiding the fact and creating a cover up?

I don't care what the Jury hears -- as long as it's the truth.

I want the true facts to come out about Caylee's death and the true facts about the cover up to be uncovered.

The truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[R.D.]

Our legal systems is BASED on the concept that " one is INNOCENT till proven GUILTY" thus a not guilty verdict is an affirmation she is INNOCENT of the listed crimes.

Remind all these left of center people that I am free to announce that Obama is guilty of, well anything I want to claim he did. And so is society according to you.

If the prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the jury has no choice but to find the defendant not guilty, that does not necessarily mean innocent; it means the prosecution did not meet the standard of proof. I wouldn't be opposed to the addition of the finding in innocence

You can make any claim you like and just like with the BC stuff, people may laugh at you

 

[R.D.]

FOR THE RECORD.

No, I do not think Casey Anthony is innocent. I think she is guilty in not reporting, hiding the fact and covering up her daughter's death. I do think Caylee's death was accidental -- in which ever scenario you wanna lay out. If she was indeed drugging the child and had so in the past -- it's an unthinkable act of a Mother -- but I don't think she intentionally drugged her death. If you think her death was an accidental drowning -- as I do -- she still would not be guilty of murder. In the accidental drowning scenario, is she alone in her actions? Or should someone else be charged in the not reporting, hiding the fact and creating a cover up?

I don't care what the Jury hears -- as long as it's the truth.

I want the true facts to come out about Caylee's death and the true facts about the cover up to be uncovered.

The truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Here is where I get confused by you all

First, she is not on trial for covering up but for murder. Nothing else matters right now as far as the State and she is concerned, I am sure. So, yes, you think she is not guilty of the charge of murder ....why all the word play?

That said, you believe JB. Why can't the simple facts presented or not present in the trial be sufficient to discuss this case? Constantly bringing up things the jury does not know and will not be deliberating is useless imo.

We have to put ourselves in the jurys head, not them in our heads.

We all want the facts, but only one person holds those answers and she has been silent for years

 

[MaggieMae]

I'd like your link, because I distinctly remember George saying that Casey removed the gas cans from the trunk, and at that time they had words. So perhaps there's more to that particular piece of testimony? All I can find are videos of the testimony; no transcripts.

Also, maybe I just assumed George's car would be in the driveway (or the garage?). Is that not a natural assumption? If not, where was it?

LINK

I was responding in that last post that JB did not place George near the car as was suggested.

Yes, it's a natural assumption. I assume based on testimony garage over drive. She thinking he was at work didn't see his car in the garage and opened it. She was in the drive way

Thanks. Link doesn't work for me, but that's okay.

 

[MaggieMae]

If everyone is acting OMFGodish over the defense and their shit, I can't wait to see how the words are going to explode over the monitor when the prosecution gets started!

Don't you mean the defense? The prosecution is still up at bat.

 

[Texas Writer]

FOR THE RECORD.

No, I do not think Casey Anthony is innocent. I think she is guilty in not reporting, hiding the fact and covering up her daughter's death. I do think Caylee's death was accidental -- in which ever scenario you wanna lay out. If she was indeed drugging the child and had so in the past -- it's an unthinkable act of a Mother -- but I don't think she intentionally drugged her death. If you think her death was an accidental drowning -- as I do -- she still would not be guilty of murder. In the accidental drowning scenario, is she alone in her actions? Or should someone else be charged in the not reporting, hiding the fact and creating a cover up?

I don't care what the Jury hears -- as long as it's the truth.

I want the true facts to come out about Caylee's death and the true facts about the cover up to be uncovered.

The truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Here is where I get confused by you all

First, she is not on trial for covering up but for murder. Nothing else matters right now as far as the State and she is concerned, I am sure. So, yes, you think she is not guilty of the charge of murder ....why all the word play?

That said, you believe JB. Why can't the simple facts presented or not present in the trial be sufficient to discuss this case? Constantly bringing up things the jury does not know and will not be deliberating is useless imo.

We have to put ourselves in the jurys head, not them in our heads.

We all want the facts, but only one person holds those answers and she has been silent for years

We can't be sure that only one person hold those answers, can we? Because we haven't heard all the evidence yet. And I think I already stated -- but I just bolded it for you -- that I don't think she is guilty of murder. No word play.

No word play:

I DO NOT BELIEVE CASEY ANTHONY IS GUILTY OF MURDER.

 

[MaggieMae]

Casey killed Caylee. It was an accident. However, instead of fessing up to the accident and coming forward with the fact that she overdosed her daughter, Casey turned to her best friend since she learned to talk. She turned to a lie. That is how she has live her entire life. Now that lie has turned into a multitude of lies, even to the point of calling her own father a sexual abuser. Casey is a liar and a muderer.

Well then, let's just tell the judge and jury that and end this little fiasco.

You applauded the crank that dissed me when I said that

I don't think a blanket statement like that is anything but stupid at this point. If you said that too, then your dismissal was earned.

 

[MaggieMae]

Either we are a Country of Laws with set rules or we are not. If you all can gleefully go about claiming someone is guilty of murder based on no trial then we all can, including the President. So which is it?

Is she innocent until proven guilty or shall we just lynch her and save the time? Why we could get rid of those pesky Judges and just live by rumor and mob rule. Hope you have lots of armed friends.

And the rules are a jury will have the final say. Not that it is bad mojo for the rest of society to discuss and reach their own conclusions.

Come back when she is found not guilty (not found innocent mind you) when she is being denied her constitutional rights and we'll agree. But remember convicted felons tend to have a hard time of things. Yes she is already a convicted felon.

Our legal systems is BASED on the concept that " one is INNOCENT till proven GUILTY" thus a not guilty verdict is an affirmation she is INNOCENT of the listed crimes.

Remind all these left of center people that I am free to announce that Obama is guilty of, well anything I want to claim he did. And so is society according to you.

Go away.

 

[Dabs]

If everyone is acting OMFGodish over the defense and their shit, I can't wait to see how the words are going to explode over the monitor when the prosecution gets started!

Don't you mean the defense? The prosecution is still up at bat.

At this point in time, I'm not sure that the fuck I meant. People are screaming thru their monitors, acting like they are all involved and at the courthouse and ready to shoot each other!
Jesus H, I'd rather be at school with a zillion kids.

 

[R.D.]

Just for clarity, you think she is not guilty, right?

FOR THE RECORD.

No, I do not think Casey Anthony is innocent. I think she is guilty in not reporting, hiding the fact and covering up her daughter's death.

No word play:

I DO NOT BELIEVE CASEY ANTHONY IS GUILTY OF MURDER.

Thank you, thats my point

Everyone who agrees with you and/or claims no opinion is crying foul at media, pre-judging etc. It goes both ways clearly. So shouldn't we be discussing what is in the trial at this point?

 

[MaggieMae]

FOR THE RECORD.

No, I do not think Casey Anthony is innocent. I think she is guilty in not reporting, hiding the fact and covering up her daughter's death. I do think Caylee's death was accidental -- in which ever scenario you wanna lay out. If she was indeed drugging the child and had so in the past -- it's an unthinkable act of a Mother -- but I don't think she intentionally drugged her death. If you think her death was an accidental drowning -- as I do -- she still would not be guilty of murder. In the accidental drowning scenario, is she alone in her actions? Or should someone else be charged in the not reporting, hiding the fact and creating a cover up?

I don't care what the Jury hears -- as long as it's the truth.

I want the true facts to come out about Caylee's death and the true facts about the cover up to be uncovered.

The truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Here is where I get confused by you all

First, she is not on trial for covering up but for murder. Nothing else matters right now as far as the State and she is concerned, I am sure. So, yes, you think she is not guilty of the charge of murder ....why all the word play?

That said, you believe JB. Why can't the simple facts presented or not present in the trial be sufficient to discuss this case? Constantly bringing up things the jury does not know and will not be deliberating is useless imo.

We have to put ourselves in the jurys head, not them in our heads.

We all want the facts, but only one person holds those answers and she has been silent for years

The jury is hearing all these things related to the case, but not the "murder" because it's the job of defense counsel to do just that. So far except for the opening statement, the prosecution has produced no evidence of Casey's charge of murder in the first degree. If it can ultimately be proven that a coverup of Caylee's death occurred and Casey Anthony was a participant, the jury should return a murder two conviction, or less, or perhaps acquit her entirely of "murder" or even manslaughter. There would then be another trial, again if a coverup is proven, naming just about everyone in the family as co-conspirators.