Reasonable Doubt: NOT GUILTY

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Being a liar and a sorry excuse for a mother does not mean she is guilty of murder.

Just saying; I was not on the jury to hear all of the facts of the case.

I think that just about sums it all up. I can just imagine the pucker factor for the defense lawyer making that argument to the jury. But cut through everything and there just wasn't anything there that she actually did it. Circumstantial evidence has to preclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and obviously the jury thought that there was presented a resaonable hypothesis. It just wasn't a strong case....sorry, but that's the way I always saw it. DO I think she was complicit? you betcha, I think what happened is that she wanted to go out, she drugged the child with chloroform like she had done before, something went wrong, the child died and she panicked, and so on..... My hypotheses was every bit as reasonable as the states, and my hypothesis would support a negligent homicide verdict, which was not what she was tried for. The prosecution had an impossible task. They would have been crucified had they tried her on a Negligent homicide instead of capital murder. But you know what? had they done so, I bet they would have gotten a conviction.

Instead of being angry because she was acquitted, rejoice in the fact that we have a pretty good criminal justice system, that in spite of what anyone thinks, gets it right the vast majority of the time.

 

[badguybuster]

I was not shocked after listening to closing statements. The defense did a bang up job debunking the prosecutor who kinda phoned it in

 

[feralmerril]

What happens now? Can casey sue for time spent in jail? Can george sue jose for deflamnation of character? Did george and cindy originaly hire jose to defend casey? At what point did that backfire when jose decided to throw george to the wolves? Is george and cindy still respondsable to pay jose`s bill as much as possible? Is their a good chance cindy will do time for lieing and muddying the water hopeing to save caseys life? Odds are she will get time and casey wont for same charges of lieing to the police. Why wasnt Lee at the verdict?
I would have thought the state should have backed off on 1st degree if they didnt have enough and went for charges that were sure of sticking.
Why do I get the feeling that had she been found guilty on all charges that the same people that is now proud of the system, still say they are proud of the system that found her guilty. If so, would we call it a win/win or a lose/lose? Or does it matter or care at all? God will be the final judge for eternity. I highly suspect every action or thought we all make must be on video in the here after. In fact I belive that is in the bible in better words.
I guess looking back at it the state should have went for child neglect and every lesser charge, hold off on murder so they could prosicute at a later time if they found more, or if the killer made a latter mistake.
I am surprised we have anyone in jail! Am I close in betting jose took this case almost pro bonno knowing if won he would be able to write his own ticket the rest of his life?

 

[geoff40]

I think its unlikely to get a murder or manslaughter conviction without knowing/proving a cause of death. I know its a hard pill to swallow, but I think if the jury followed the law, they did all they could do.

Put yourself in a juror's seat: someone before you is accused of murder, but the prosecution can't even tell you what caused the death of the victim. Is there a victim at all? I am surprised it took them 2 days to come back in.

 

[JcMack]

Frankly, the whole thing disgusts me. This broad should be dead. You all should invite her over to watch your kids, if you think justice was served.

 

[Indiana George]

Personally, I wasn't on the jury (actually didn't follow it at all - too much like work), so I have no idea what the verdict should have been.

Excellent point, counselor.

 

[Indiana George]

My thanks to the members of the bar associations for weighing in on this one.

Your insight, experience and explanations are appreciated.

 

[ancient-one]

Going out in public and seeing and listening to some of the people that could be on your jury is a very good crime prevention tool.

 

[diamonback68]

My question is where is the justice for little Caylee? Is it that no one let her down, she just found some way to put herself in bag and lay down in a swamp to die? Where was her primary care giver, why is she free? Why was no one looking out for this child. Where is Caylee's justice, it will NEVER be written?

 

[Indiana George]

I will stand behind the jury 100%. They had a job to do and they did it to the best of their ability. If we believe in the constitution we have to stand behind the jury's decision and move on. Don

Agreed. Thank you, Don.

 

[Erich]

Where is Caylee's justice?

Dick, there is no guarantee of justice in this world. Sorry to say, but it's true.

 

[jimmyj]

If I learned anything from my career: "you never know what a judge or jury will decide".

A jury of your peers: Is it really?--example: if you (a street cop) violate a rule/regulation is it patrol officers (street cops) on the panel or supervisors and office personel??

 

[mod34]

You might want to check the news.

I think he/she meant that judement day and the associated "conviction" would happen during the trip to the "pearly gates".

 

[diamonback68]

Dick, there is no guarantee of justice in this world. Sorry to say, but it's true.

Erich, you are probably right, but we say "justice for all", or is it just for those that get a blind jury?

 

[pharmer]

Dick, there is no guarantee of justice in this world. Sorry to say, but it's true.

Absolutely. And the truth has absolutely NOTHING to do with what happens in a courtroom. Joe

 

[feralmerril]

jimmyj: This guy was up for stealing a horse. Judge asked him did he want him to judge him or a jury of his peers. The hoss thief asked him what that meant. Judge told him that meant 12 people just like himself. The rustler said, judge you judge me. I dont want 12 horse thiefs judgeing me!

 

[The Big D]

Sooooo, in Florida you can claim your child is "missing" after 31 days and then claim the "Nanny Zanny" (who is imaginary, btw) kidnapped her...and then claim it was a "pool accident"...and then walk away essentially scot free?

Every child killer and kidnapper is now making his/her way to Florida.

Wow! Simply WOW!!!

Be safe.

 

[Social Outcast]

Indeed, as we all will.

NO, we "all" won't.

 

[PHB]

Weather you agree or disagree with the jury the facts are they could not prove she did anything but lie. I do not agree with the jury but facts are facts. "Just rememberer we all will answer for our lives at the end"

 

[rburg]

I have a lot of thoughts on this one. Yes, the jury probably came to the correct decision. She's innocent until proven guilty. They didn't do that.

If you have anger on the subject, don't direct it toward the jury, express it against the prosecutor or the investigators. They're the ones who didn't find the convincing evidence, or present it in a way that convinced the jury. If it didn't exist, they jury came to the correct decision.

I've been on juries. I never criticize their decision. I may not understand it, but I won't say they're wrong. Saying they're stupid only illustrates the stupidity of the person saying it. My experience in the jury setting is they work hard to come to the right decision. The jurors I've had the pleasure of associating with weren't stupid (a few were), but instead they worked hard, listened to the testimony under adverse and unfamiliar conditions, and did the best they could. They're drafted to do a job they'd really rather not do. Holding them responsible for someone else failing to convince them isn't reasonable.

All any of you know about this case is what the media tells you and what they've commented on. Even those who for whatever reason listened to some of the testimony didn't have the advantage of seeing it first hand, from the jury box. It does make a difference. The main stream media had her convicted and executed. They had and used unlimited resources for 3 years trying their best to convict her on TV. They did a very good job based on what some of our posters here have expressed.

But saying she was guilty when you only know what the media tells you to believe shows both how powerful they are and how weak minded people are. Think for yourself, don't swallow the media lies.

Her attorney has this century's Perry Mason award for excellence. He took a loser of a case and won it. Against all odds, and the Main Stream Media, the state of Florida, and all the weak minded individuals who believed their nonsense.

Thank God there were 12 folks who did their job as instructed. The idea they would come back that fast and all agreed is a strong indicator the state didn't do their job.