| Posted By |
Message |
lvdolphins
My Loves!
Member since 5/05 46292 total posts
Name:
|
CA case interview on ABC right now!
Interviewing one of the jurors..
|
Posted 7/6/11 10:04 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
Salason
♥
Member since 6/05 9878 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
I'm watching too...
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:04 PM |
| |
|
FL Nana
LIF Infant
Member since 6/11 223 total posts
Name:
Tessie
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Me too! Thanks for posting so I got reminded.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:05 PM |
| |
|
ElizaRags35
My 2 Girls
Member since 2/09 20494 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Thanks! Watching now...
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:06 PM |
| |
|
MamaLeen
:)
Member since 10/09 4594 total posts
Name:
E
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
I'm watching too. 
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:07 PM |
| |
|
|
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
this woman sounds like a huge idiot.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:08 PM |
| |
|
Mrs213
????????
Member since 2/09 18986 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
I have it on. I have no idea what the public expects to get out of this...
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:08 PM |
| |
|
MamaLeen
:)
Member since 10/09 4594 total posts
Name:
E
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by LadyBugN2Buggies
this woman sounds like a huge idiot.
That is exactly what I was thinking!!!!! 
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:08 PM |
| |
|
partyof6
b nice like u want ur kidz 2
Member since 7/06 7752 total posts
Name:
jeannine
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Tell me how she keeps talking about speculation but she can speculate that george was there and has something to do with something? His suicide note says he doesn't know what ha
Happen, *** am I missing?
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:09 PM |
| |
|
|
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by Mrs213
I have it on. I have no idea what the public expects to get out of this...
answers, some sort of reasoning....anything. I think most feel they need answers, or deserve answers.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:10 PM |
| |
|
|
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by MamaLeen
Posted by LadyBugN2Buggies
this woman sounds like a huge idiot.
That is exactly what I was thinking!!!!!
I thought I'd get flamed for saying that, too!
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:11 PM |
| |
|
teaforthree
My Handsome Boy!
Member since 12/10 2549 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by MamaLeen
Posted by LadyBugN2Buggies
this woman sounds like a huge idiot.
That is exactly what I was thinking!!!!!
Amen... she can't even put a sentence together.
How did both sides agree on HER?
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:12 PM |
| |
|
ItsaJoya19
my cup runneth over
Member since 1/10 2949 total posts
Name:
E
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
omg i can't even deal with the smile on Baez's stupid face. he obviously only cares about himself and his little "sl*t" Casey. Does he realize his "notoriety" comes at the expense of a defenseless, beautiful child? 
There's still a little girl who will never have the chance to grow up and get a job, get married, and have children. Casey took that from her. And now, in the very near future, this monster will get a second chance at what she took from her sweet baby. 
I just don't understand how he could sit there and continue the lies for her.
Message edited 7/6/2011 10:33:45 PM.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:33 PM |
| |
|
Mrs213
????????
Member since 2/09 18986 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by LadyBugN2Buggies
Posted by Mrs213
I have it on. I have no idea what the public expects to get out of this...
answers, some sort of reasoning....anything. I think most feel they need answers, or deserve answers.
Right but the answer that there wasn't enough evidence to PROVE that she did do it. If there is any possibility that she did not do it then you are not allowed to find them guilty. It's the way our judicial system works. Sometimes guilty people walk. Seems to be a lot of confusion about the judicial system. I had a feeling all along she would be found not guilty, in fact a guilty verdict would have surprised me...
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:33 PM |
| |
|
FL Nana
LIF Infant
Member since 6/11 223 total posts
Name:
Tessie
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by partyof6
Tell me how she keeps talking about speculation but she can speculate that george was there and has something to do with something? His suicide note says he doesn't know what ha
Happen, *** am I missing?
I am still confused how they did not convict her on manslaughter or child abuse. This juror is annoying and Baez is a jerk
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:36 PM |
| |
|
CrankyPants
I'm cranky
Member since 7/06 18178 total posts
Name:
Mama Cranky
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
I think Jose Baez is so creepy. He thanked his mom and is saying her did it because he loves her so much. What the heck does that have to do with anything?
I find it so inappropriate.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:38 PM |
| |
|
ElizaRags35
My 2 Girls
Member since 2/09 20494 total posts
Name:
Me
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by CrankyPants
I think Jose Baez is so creepy. He thanked his mom and is saying her did it because he loves her so much. What the heck does that have to do with anything?
I find it so inappropriate.
I completely agree! What was this? The Oscars?? If so, give CA the Best Actress... 
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:40 PM |
| |
|
cateyemm
Twins!
Member since 7/10 8027 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by CrankyPants
I think Jose Baez is so creepy. He thanked his mom and is saying her did it because he loves her so much. What the heck does that have to do with anything?
I find it so inappropriate.
Seriously. And when BW asked him what he said, he exaggerated his translation. I'm sure thats not the only thing he's exaggerated.
|
| Posted 7/6/11 10:42 PM |
| |
|
lcherian
He is the reason!
Member since 2/06 2512 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
i think this jury overanalyzed the reasonable doubt standard. ng said it perfectly:
"The single biggest weakness was the state didn’t have a cause of death. That is not required - there have been many, many cases with murder 1 convictions without any body. But the fact that the defendant can get rid of a body or let a body (be) hidden for so long that you cannot determine a cause of death is not a reason a defendant should get a benefit or a gold star or A-plus. I think the fact they didn’t have a cause of death hurt them because the jury could not understand the case or take it in. Juries have been watching too much "CSI" - they want murder weapon, DNA, fingerprints. In this case, there was no blood, no murder weapon. They wanted things that didn’t exist. They wanted a murder weapon – the murder weapon was tot mom’s hands. I also think the jury didn’t understand the law or felony murder. All said, it was a bad jury and I do not think it reflects on the case the state put up."
|
| Posted 7/7/11 8:33 AM |
| |
|
Goobster
:)
Member since 5/07 27557 total posts
Name:
:)
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by lcherian
i think this jury overanalyzed the reasonable doubt standard. ng said it perfectly:
"The single biggest weakness was the state didn’t have a cause of death. That is not required - there have been many, many cases with murder 1 convictions without any body. But the fact that the defendant can get rid of a body or let a body (be) hidden for so long that you cannot determine a cause of death is not a reason a defendant should get a benefit or a gold star or A-plus. I think the fact they didn’t have a cause of death hurt them because the jury could not understand the case or take it in. Juries have been watching too much "CSI" - they want murder weapon, DNA, fingerprints. In this case, there was no blood, no murder weapon. They wanted things that didn’t exist. They wanted a murder weapon – the murder weapon was tot mom’s hands. I also think the jury didn’t understand the law or felony murder. All said, it was a bad jury and I do not think it reflects on the case the state put up."
I am no law expert but I agree with this. She literally got away with murder.
|
| Posted 7/7/11 8:49 AM |
| |
|
pnm1654
Mommy to 2 boys!
Member since 5/05 4565 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by lcherian
i think this jury overanalyzed the reasonable doubt standard. ng said it perfectly:
"The single biggest weakness was the state didn’t have a cause of death. That is not required - there have been many, many cases with murder 1 convictions without any body. But the fact that the defendant can get rid of a body or let a body (be) hidden for so long that you cannot determine a cause of death is not a reason a defendant should get a benefit or a gold star or A-plus. I think the fact they didn’t have a cause of death hurt them because the jury could not understand the case or take it in. Juries have been watching too much "CSI" - they want murder weapon, DNA, fingerprints. In this case, there was no blood, no murder weapon. They wanted things that didn’t exist. They wanted a murder weapon – the murder weapon was tot mom’s hands. I also think the jury didn’t understand the law or felony murder. All said, it was a bad jury and I do not think it reflects on the case the state put up."
I agree with this.
|
| Posted 7/7/11 8:50 AM |
| |
|
Aries14
Can't plan life...
Member since 8/08 2860 total posts
Name:
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by lcherian
i think this jury overanalyzed the reasonable doubt standard. ng said it perfectly:
"The single biggest weakness was the state didn’t have a cause of death. That is not required - there have been many, many cases with murder 1 convictions without any body. But the fact that the defendant can get rid of a body or let a body (be) hidden for so long that you cannot determine a cause of death is not a reason a defendant should get a benefit or a gold star or A-plus. I think the fact they didn’t have a cause of death hurt them because the jury could not understand the case or take it in. Juries have been watching too much "CSI" - they want murder weapon, DNA, fingerprints. In this case, there was no blood, no murder weapon. They wanted things that didn’t exist. They wanted a murder weapon – the murder weapon was tot mom’s hands. I also think the jury didn’t understand the law or felony murder. All said, it was a bad jury and I do not think it reflects on the case the state put up."
This is incorrect. It was not a "bad jury". Legally - they got the verdict right. (Morally is a different story). I do agree that juries these days want all ducks in a row and that maybe TV shows do ruin it for some bc they think that every case has to have a weapon, DNA, etc. But it wasnt just that there was no weapon - they couldn't even tell the cause of death! And their were so many 'possiblities' and 'theories' of what happened that honestly how COULD they 100% say for sure what happened.
|
| Posted 7/7/11 8:57 AM |
| |
|
Goobster
:)
Member since 5/07 27557 total posts
Name:
:)
|
Re: CA case interview on ABC right now!
Posted by Aries14
Posted by lcherian
i think this jury overanalyzed the reasonable doubt standard. ng said it perfectly:
"The single biggest weakness was the state didn’t have a cause of death. That is not required - there have been many, many cases with murder 1 convictions without any body. But the fact that the defendant can get rid of a body or let a body (be) hidden for so long that you cannot determine a cause of death is not a reason a defendant should get a benefit or a gold star or A-plus. I think the fact they didn’t have a cause of death hurt them because the jury could not understand the case or take it in. Juries have been watching too much "CSI" - they want murder weapon, DNA, fingerprints. In this case, there was no blood, no murder weapon. They wanted things that didn’t exist. They wanted a murder weapon – the murder weapon was tot mom’s hands. I also think the jury didn’t understand the law or felony murder. All said, it was a bad jury and I do not think it reflects on the case the state put up."
This is incorrect. It was not a "bad jury". Legally - they got the verdict right. (Morally is a different story). I do agree that juries these days want all ducks in a row and that maybe TV shows do ruin it for some bc they think that every case has to have a weapon, DNA, etc. But it wasnt just that there was no weapon - they couldn't even tell the cause of death! And their were so many 'possiblities' and 'theories' of what happened that honestly how COULD they 100% say for sure what happened.
Well of course they couldnt tell teh cause of death. That monster lied to the police, kept VITAL information from the police, hid the body, didn't report her missing for 31 days, until her body rotted and was eaten away. Why does that then become HELPFUL to her case? Her own lawyer admitted the child drowned. So b/c her attorney told her lie about George dumping Caylees body in the woods, this animal was free to walk??????
Message edited 7/7/2011 9:04:13 AM.
|
| Posted 7/7/11 9:02 AM |
| |
|
