Casey Anthony

[oldsalt]

From what I have been able to pick up here and there, I would say none of those things point directly to her having been the murderer. I think she did it too or at least played a part in covering up Caylee's death, but I'd say if the defense even puts in a mediocre performance she walks.

Immie

I believe the only place she'll be walking to, is a prison cell. I don't see how it's possible to find her not guilty. Every single piece of everything that was brought forth, leads straight back to Casey.
The red heart sticker over the mouth...come on...that alone speaks volumes!

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

 

[Immanuel]

It seems some don't think a person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence........

Not true, if you mean me. However, I think in this case, the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away and that is all that the defense must do. They don't have to find the real killer... um if it is not Casey.

As I said, I have not watched the trial, but from what I have seen the prosecution has not done their job very well. We will just have to wait and see.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

I believe the only place she'll be walking to, is a prison cell. I don't see how it's possible to find her not guilty. Every single piece of everything that was brought forth, leads straight back to Casey.
The red heart sticker over the mouth...come on...that alone speaks volumes!

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

 

[oldsalt]

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

did you miss the defenses opening?

 

[Immanuel]

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

did you miss the defenses opening?

You just made the claim that they have already discarded the option that someone else killed Caylee. Are you saying the defense has stipulated that Casey killed Caylee and now they are just arguing over... well hell if the defense has stipulated that Casey killed Caylee then what the hell are they arguing about? Fry her ass!

Immie

 

[oldsalt]

It seems some don't think a person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence........

Not true, if you mean me. However, I think in this case, the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away and that is all that the defense must do. They don't have to find the real killer... um if it is not Casey.

As I said, I have not watched the trial, but from what I have seen the prosecution has not done their job very well. We will just have to wait and see.

Immie

Um, apparently you DID miss the DT's opening statement. They profess to know Caylee drowned in the family pool, an accident. According to them, they don't really have to explain away anything. Caylee is dead from an accident. And yes, the trial is still going to have to go on, because ICA, apparently, at this point, is the ONLY witness they have to testify to their so-called story, and she's a pathological liar. Doesn't look good for ICA, nor should it, based upon the evidence.

 

[oldsalt]

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

did you miss the defenses opening?

You just made the claim that they have already discarded the option that someone else killed Caylee. Are you saying the defense has stipulated that Casey killed Caylee and now they are just arguing over... well hell if the defense has stipulated that Casey killed Caylee then what the hell are they arguing about? Fry her ass!

Immie

You're debating with me without some crucial info.

 

[KissMy]

From what I have been able to pick up here and there, I would say none of those things point directly to her having been the murderer. I think she did it too or at least played a part in covering up Caylee's death, but I'd say if the defense even puts in a mediocre performance she walks.

Immie

I believe the only place she'll be walking to, is a prison cell. I don't see how it's possible to find her not guilty. Every single piece of everything that was brought forth, leads straight back to Casey.
The red heart sticker over the mouth...come on...that alone speaks volumes!

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

There is enough evidence to convict Casey. Chloroform & evidence of a dead body was found in Casey's trunk. Casey's computer showed searches for "neck breaking" and "how to make chloroform". The defense alleged that Casey panicked after Caylee drowned. So Casey had to be involved in discarding her daughters body.

Casey lies nonstop & only shows emotion for herself but none for her dead child. That is the definition of a psychopath. She shows agitated, erratic behavior. Intentionally or subconsciously the T-Shirt Casey placed Caylee's dead body explains the way Casey viewed her child. "BIG TROUBLE comes in small packages"

 

[R.D.]

From what I have been able to pick up here and there, I would say none of those things point directly to her having been the murderer. I think she did it too or at least played a part in covering up Caylee's death, but I'd say if the defense even puts in a mediocre performance she walks.

Immie

The evidence is compelling. The computer held search terms like chloroform, neck breaking, head trauma, ruptured spleen.. This, combined with all of her other antics are quite believable. The prosecution team was solid even though they didn't produce proof she killed her daughter.

She won't walk in any case.

Wait a minute! Isn't that exactly what they MUST do to convict?

The evidence that Caylee was murdered is solid, but you say right here that the Prosecution Team has not produced proof that Casey killed her daughter. That is what Casey is on trial for. If the Prosecution Team has not produced proof that Casey killed her daughter then Casey must without a doubt be found not guilty.

Jurors cannot decide based upon their gut feelings. By your own words, you agree with me and if that is the case you would be required to vote not guilty. At least that is how I understand our laws.

Immie

I could be wrong but I think Sarah meant no "smoking gun" proof

There is also no proof of abuse, a drowning,a Kronk cover up, George cover up, dead squires, food in the trunk, or a memorial tattoo but you will take that as evidence for benefit of doubt.

Beyond a reasonable doubt is not about gut feelings

 

[Dude111]

It is so sad when a baby dies there is THIS MUCH LYING

Very sad indeed!

 

[Sarah G]

From what I have been able to pick up here and there, I would say none of those things point directly to her having been the murderer. I think she did it too or at least played a part in covering up Caylee's death, but I'd say if the defense even puts in a mediocre performance she walks.

Immie

The evidence is compelling. The computer held search terms like chloroform, neck breaking, head trauma, ruptured spleen.. This, combined with all of her other antics are quite believable. The prosecution team was solid even though they didn't produce proof she killed her daughter.

She won't walk in any case.

Wait a minute! Isn't that exactly what they MUST do to convict?

The evidence that Caylee was murdered is solid, but you say right here that the Prosecution Team has not produced proof that Casey killed her daughter. That is what Casey is on trial for. If the Prosecution Team has not produced proof that Casey killed her daughter then Casey must without a doubt be found not guilty.

Jurors cannot decide based upon their gut feelings. By your own words, you agree with me and if that is the case you would be required to vote not guilty. At least that is how I understand our laws.

Immie

Circumstantial evidence can convict her.

In the United States, the law shows no distinction between circumstantial and direct evidence in terms of which has more weight or importance. Both types of evidence may be enough to establish the defendant’s guilt, depending on how the jury finds the facts of the case.

Direct Evidence

 

[R.D.]

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

Yes they did.

The defense is she accidentally drowned. That George orchestrated the cover up. The trial is because the State knows otherwise.

I don't think a confession was signed, because she is lying and no plea was offered.

Regarding the sticker, the defense again denies the existence of the sticker. Too late now for them to place blame on someone else. Same goes for the evidence of a corpse in the car - they claim there never was a body in the car.

The defense is all over the place, it will be very interesting to watch

 

[R.D.]

It is so sad when a baby dies there is THIS MUCH LYING

Very sad indeed!

Yes it is. It's even sadder that a baby is murdered.

 

[Dude111]

Yes no question about that!

Give this baby respect and admit what happend!!!

 

[Sarah G]

They already discarded that option. Remember, the swimming pool did it. Motive, opportunity and evidence point to ICA. They'll convict her.

Really, they already discarded the option that someone else may have killed Caylee?

If so, why is the trial going on?

Did Casey sign a confession?

Immie

Yes they did.

The defense is she accidentally drowned. That George orchestrated the cover up. The trial is because the State knows otherwise.

I don't think a confession was signed, because she is lying and no plea was offered.

Regarding the sticker, the defense again denies the existence of the sticker. Too late now for them to place blame on someone else. Same goes for the evidence of a corpse in the car - they claim there never was a body in the car.

The defense is all over the place, it will be very interesting to watch

It is interesting to watch.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There have been more than 2,000 children murdered in the United States since Casey Anthony disappeared.

And yet, I haven't seen any threads about them.

I wonder why...

Missing white woman syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Immanuel]

It seems some don't think a person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence........

Not true, if you mean me. However, I think in this case, the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away and that is all that the defense must do. They don't have to find the real killer... um if it is not Casey.

As I said, I have not watched the trial, but from what I have seen the prosecution has not done their job very well. We will just have to wait and see.

Immie

Um, apparently you DID miss the DT's opening statement. They profess to know Caylee drowned in the family pool, an accident. According to them, they don't really have to explain away anything. Caylee is dead from an accident. And yes, the trial is still going to have to go on, because ICA, apparently, at this point, is the ONLY witness they have to testify to their so-called story, and she's a pathological liar. Doesn't look good for ICA, nor should it, based upon the evidence.

Okay, here is the point you seem not to understand. The trial is about whether or not Casey murdered Caylee. The Prosecution MUST prove that Casey murdered Caylee. The prosecution has spent 19 days trying to prove that Casey murdered Caylee. From everything I have seen, they have failed horribly. And if they failed, then she walks.

The Prosecution must prove that Caylee was murdered by Casey. The defense need only raise doubt in the minds of the jury that it was Casey that murdered Caylee which since there is no direct evidence linking Casey to the crime, it seems to me that they do not need to try very hard to achieve.

In opening statements the defense stated that Caylee drowned in the pool. The prosecution has proven that Caylee was murdered, but they have not proven that it was Casey that did it and the defense does not need to prove who killed her. They only need to raise reasonable doubt that it was Casey who did it.

That was why OJ walked. His defense team did not try to prove who murdered Nicole and Ron only raise doubts that it was OJ.

Oh, and they profess to know that she died in the pool. None of that has yet been introduced into evidence. The defense doesn't even need to mention the pool in their arguments if they don't want to.

The odor in the car? She forgot hamburger in her trunk for several days. It spoiled and the car still reeks.

The sticker and duct tape? No proof that it was Casey that put it on Caylee's mouth and suffocated her.

The tatoos? Makes the prosecution appear desperate.

The hair proved nothing.

What evidence besides "she's a pathological liar" do you point to that says... Casey Anthony killed her daughter and no one else possibly could have done it?

One of the red flags I feel is that Caylee was missing for so long. That leads me to suspicion of Casey, but, I have not heard anything that proves that it means that she murdered her daughter.

And for the record, I'm not saying you are wrong that she will be convicted. Only that from what I have heard, the prosecution has failed miserably. We can only wait to hear what the jury has to say about that.

Immie

 

[oldsalt]

Actually, the point you're missing is what the DT said in the opening. I understand why ICA is where she is, and what she's charged with. I believe the PT has done a good job, and will continue to do so. I think the DT has been it's own biggest hindrance.

 

[Dabs]

But for whatever idiot got on the stand and says the foul odor was a pizza or rotted hamburger, there are experts who have proof that there was indeed a dead body in the trunk of that car. They found decomp fluid, the hair that was found in the trunk, it matched Caylee's and they even had one expert say there was a "stain" that was in the shape of a small child lying in a fetal position- in the trunk of Casey's car.
As for the red heart stickers, who in the hell is going to put one of those across that baby girl's mouth, if they didn't have feelings for her??
Not some stranger, not a meter reader....it had to be someone who lived in that home, and had access to those heart stickers. Which btw, those stickers were among Casey's belongings.

 

[Immanuel]

I believe the only place she'll be walking to, is a prison cell. I don't see how it's possible to find her not guilty. Every single piece of everything that was brought forth, leads straight back to Casey.
The red heart sticker over the mouth...come on...that alone speaks volumes!

How does the red heart sticker prove that Casey killed Caylee.

A good defense lawyer can place enough doubt in the hearts of the jury that the sticker could have been placed their by any number of people including either one of the grandparents.

How does the red heart sticker prove that Caylee did not drown in the pool? Casey could have pulled Caylee out of the pool and put the sticker over her mouth after she was dead... now how they explain the duct tape and the sticker and the idea that she drowned in the pool is something a little more touchy, but it does not definitively point back to Casey in either case.

Note: I'm only raising questions. It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence can all be explained away which will allow Casey to walk the way I see it. I'm not saying Casey did not kill Caylee, but all the defense needs to do is convince the jury that someone else may have killed Caylee and Casey walks.

Immie

There is enough evidence to convict Casey. Chloroform & evidence of a dead body was found in Casey's trunk. Casey's computer showed searches for "neck breaking" and "how to make chloroform". The defense alleged that Casey panicked after Caylee drowned. So Casey had to be involved in discarding her daughters body.

Casey lies nonstop & only shows emotion for herself but none for her dead child. That is the definition of a psychopath. She shows agitated, erratic behavior. Intentionally or subconsciously the T-Shirt Casey placed Caylee's dead body explains the way Casey viewed her child. "BIG TROUBLE comes in small packages"

Has the prosecution proven that Casey made those searches? Could someone else have had access to her computer?

And the T-Shirt? Have they proven it was Casey that put her in the T-Shirt after she died?

The prosecution has presented their case. Evidently they have proven Caylee was murdered. Now all the defense has to do is raise reasonable doubt that Casey was the killer. All they need to do is convince the jury that grandpa might have killed Caylee and tried to blame Casey.

Grandpa used Casey's computer to search for Chloroform and neck breaking because he had abused her and was afraid of being caught. He killed Caylee and placed her in Casey's car. He later discarded the body. Casey found out about it. He threatened to kill her thus her silence for 31 days. Being afraid of her father, Casey attempted to claim that Caylee drowned in the pool.

Would she be lying? I think so... but she only needs to raise reasonable doubt to save her ass. What do I think? She's a cold hearted Bitch who murdered her daughter. I simply don't think the prosecution has done its job to prove that.

Immie