aquitted

[eweissenbach]

http://news.yahoo.com/casey-anthony-acquitted-murder-182149052.html

[vj1213]

unbelievable

[renrod]

My son once said, "Do you know how dumb the average person is? Well, half the people are dumber than that!

[foxmeadow]

unbelievable

How the hell did they disregard the defense' opening statement with regards to the death being a drowning? At least an admission that she (and George if you believe Baez) was present with the child when she died. Then the body was found in the woods. She should be at least guilty of manslaughter; or is that the way everyone in Florida disposes of dead children? The jury failed in it's duties because they were tired of being locked away from their families for more than a month. I guess a young childs death has little meaning as compared to getting back home. Even the "finger" in court receives a stiffer penalty.

[eremite06]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution. It's all about the "reasonable doubt." Do you think those gloating defense attorneys have a conscience or is it all about the fame and fortune?

[swrinfla]

Having been exposed ad nauseum to the trauma and drama of the Anthony Family since 2008, I studiously tried to avoid watching any portion of the trial! The few bits which I was "forced" to see on the late news each night persuaded me that neither side had a valid case; that a thoughtful jury would, of necessity, decide that there was "reasonable doubt."

That said, I am frankly rather shocked that there seems to have been absolutely no acknowledgement that Casey must have indeed had some negative impact on poor Caylee's future! A lesser charge than murder seemed to me inevitable!

I personally applaud the jurors for their forced dedication. May they never again be required to give up their personal freedoms just so they may have to make such a terribly difficult decision!

SWR
:beer3:

[pooh]

......

I personally applaud the jurors for their forced dedication. May they never again be required to give up their personal freedoms just so they may have to make such a terribly difficult decision!

SWR
:beer3:

My feelings, exactly, Steve. There are all sorts of jokes about jurors and their mental abilities...maybe those who joke have never been selected for that civic duty. If so, they might take exception to being characterized in such a fashion. I, too, applaud them for their time served. In the minds of the jurors, guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Frankly, I'm glad I wasn't part of that particular panel.

[Pturner]

Casey didn't do it. She had no connection with Callie's death. Apparently, that is reasonable to believe.




:cry:

[tkret]

Makes me wonder how ANYONE is ever convicted of first degree murder. This certainly may prove that the old adage "crime doesn't pay" is mistaken. This woman is going to become quite wealthy before too long.

[eweissenbach]

Actually does not surprise me. In the TOTV poll, 15 out of 88 votes were either innocent or not sure. That means about 1 out of 5 posters here would not convict. It takes 12 of 12 to convict.

[chuckinca]

Actually does not surprise me. In the TOTV poll, 15 out of 88 votes were either innocent or not sure. That means about 1 out of 5 posters here would not convict. It takes 12 of 12 to convict.


And it took 12 of 12 to agree on each of the not guilty verdicts.


.

[eweissenbach]

And it took 12 of 12 to agree on each of the not guilty verdicts.


.

Ever seen "Twelve Angry Men"?

[Pturner]

Ever seen "Twelve Angry Men"?

Ah yes, Hollywood's version of our justice system. In that movie, the audience was certain beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect did it. That movie played on and helped propagate the romantic and erroneous notion that a defendant must be found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Hurray for Hollywood. :posting:

[billmar]

Ah yes, Hollywood's version of our justice system. In that movie, the audience was certain beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect did it. That movie played on and helped propagate the romantic and erroneous notion that a defendant must be found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Hurray for Hollywood. :posting:

Good point.

[kentucky blue]

And it took 12 of 12 to agree on each of the not guilty verdicts.


.

As i heard somebody say today,"they found the only 12 people alive that still thinks the world is flat.":22yikes::confused::22yikes:

[katezbox]

Ah yes, Hollywood's version of our justice system. In that movie, the audience was certain beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect did it. That movie played on and helped propagate the romantic and erroneous notion that a defendant must be found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Hurray for Hollywood. :posting:

PT - I think Hollywood has a lot more impact here than that:

1. If Nancy Grace, a harpy if there ever was one, hadn't made created such a tidal wave over Caylee going missing, then perhaps the DA may have been able to try Casey without a capital murder charge. As it stood, there was too much of a spotlight on this for the state to lead with a lesser charge. As Dillywho has pointed out, what about all the other children that are missing? Where is the justice for them? The answer is in Nancy Grace's ratings based on Caylee's sweetness in her photos and videos.

2. People tend to believe that all crime scene evidence will be as clear as when it is shown on CSI. The prosecution had to meet ridiculous and impossible expectations.

3. Of course the defendant must be found guilty without any "reasonable doubt." When someone's life is at stake - reasonable gets to be a bit tougher. With a Ted Bundy and other serial killers, there is such a pattern that it is easier.

Do I believe she is connected with Caylee's death? Absolutely. Could I vote to convict her of felony murder based on the evidence presented? No.

My dad always told me that what goes around will come around. If you do a good deed - it will be paid back many times over - and vice versa. This likely is bad news for Casey.

[dillywho]

No one has asked anyone to agree with the verdict. I was as surprised as most anyone when the three "Not Guilty" verdicts came in. I did not expect a guilty on Count One, but could see the possibilty on one of the other two. I am certain that she knows what happened to her child and why. She has to live with whatever that is.

What disturbs me above and beyond all else, is the lynch-mob mentality, some of which is directed at the jurors by the way, and the lack of respect being shown for our court system. Maybe it does have flaws, but the basic concept is sound. Television and all the access to what it has to offer was not even a dream when the system was born, much less a reality. There were no Nancy Graces building hatred toward someone on a nightly basis. Many have said they don't want to read the books that will surely be written or the ensuing movies because of the money to be made, but I can assure you, Nancy Grace is a whole lot more interested in her own pocketbook than any of the little Caylee Anthonys or Trenton Ducketts. The same can be said for many of the others out there. She is not alone, just the worst of the lot.

These 12 (acutally 17) people were charged with a job and did it to the best of their ability and conscience. That is more than can be said for those who refuse to even serve. I fault them for their unwillingness to do so, but in light of this, who can really blame them? They just might be on to something. Self-preservation, perhaps? Maybe they just don't think it's worth the price if their decision has to be an unpopular one.

If anyone should be faulted for the verdicts, it should be the State. They failed to prove to these jurors that she was guilty of the charges. That was and is their job. The defense has to prove absolutely nothing.

We hold ourselves up to the rest of the world as the greatest nation in the world, all the while telling them that anyone in America is to be "presumed innocent until proven guilty" and that that is part of what makes us so great. The outrage and disrepect for the very system we claim to value so highly that is being broadcast around the world screams volumes to the contrary.

This is something I feel very strongly about. (Betcha couldn't have guess that, huh?) All the ones you see on tv trashing the verdicts and especially the jurors are no better than their perception of Casey. They just want their 15 minutes of fame. When asked why she came to Subrban Drive and Hope Spring Drive, one lady said, "I just wanted to say I had been here."

[graciegirl]

As i heard somebody say today,"they found the only 12 people alive that still thinks the world is flat.":22yikes::confused::22yikes:

I have to agree.

Angry and sad this morning, your humor is comforting.

[Maryland Girl]

I'm not an attorney, but it seemed to me there was a preponderance of evidence to convict, even if on a lesser charge. The defense threw in molestation and accidental drowning to create a reason to doubt-not the same as reasonable doubt. I don't believe the jury took time to thoroughly go through the evidence. The verdict came back too quickly for them to have done so. How could they not find Casey at least guilty of child neglect since she was the one responsible for her baby that was missing for 31 days while she 'conducted her own investigation.' People have had their children removed from their care for lesser offenses. That beautiful child, thrown out like garbage. It is so disgusting.

Even more disgusting was what the Chief Prosecutor said in his prepared remarks..they will now move on the prosecuting the 11 child deaths they have pending. I once heard that the character of a nation can be looked at in light of how they threat their young and their elderly. Each one of us can draw their own conclusion as to how our nation stacks up under such scrutiny.

[2BNTV]

Casey was found "not guilty" but I don't think she is innocent.

Like I said, I haven't followed every detail of this trial but this is what bothers me. I tend to think that any "normal parent" who is missing their child for even a short period of time would be frantic and trying to do everything in their power to find them.

My impression is that she is a very troubled individual who needs to get mental help in dealing with her issues.

It's too late for the adorable Caylee. So sad.

Just sayin...........

[ajbrown]

I just bumped into this when logging into my comcast account. Here is some insight from an alternate juror...

http://xfinity.comcast.net/video/inside-the-mind-of-a-casey-juror/2043051118/

[katezbox]

No one has asked anyone to agree with the verdict. I was as surprised as most anyone when the three "Not Guilty" verdicts came in. I did not expect a guilty on Count One, but could see the possibilty on one of the other two. I am certain that she knows what happened to her child and why. She has to live with whatever that is.

What disturbs me above and beyond all else, is the lynch-mob mentality, some of which is directed at the jurors by the way, and the lack of respect being shown for our court system. Maybe it does have flaws, but the basic concept is sound. Television and all the access to what it has to offer was not even a dream when the system was born, much less a reality. There were no Nancy Graces building hatred toward someone on a nightly basis. Many have said they don't want to read the books that will surely be written or the ensuing movies because of the money to be made, but I can assure you, Nancy Grace is a whole lot more interested in her own pocketbook than any of the little Caylee Anthonys or Trenton Ducketts. The same can be said for many of the others out there. She is not alone, just the worst of the lot.

These 12 (acutally 17) people were charged with a job and did it to the best of their ability and conscience. That is more than can be said for those who refuse to even serve. I fault them for their unwillingness to do so, but in light of this, who can really blame them? They just might be on to something. Self-preservation, perhaps? Maybe they just don't think it's worth the price if their decision has to be an unpopular one.

If anyone should be faulted for the verdicts, it should be the State. They failed to prove to these jurors that she was guilty of the charges. That was and is their job. The defense has to prove absolutely nothing.

We hold ourselves up to the rest of the world as the greatest nation in the world, all the while telling them that anyone in America is to be "presumed innocent until proven guilty" and that that is part of what makes us so great. The outrage and disrepect for the very system we claim to value so highly that is being broadcast around the world screams volumes to the contrary.

This is something I feel very strongly about. (Betcha couldn't have guess that, huh?) All the ones you see on tv trashing the verdicts and especially the jurors are no better than their perception of Casey. They just want their 15 minutes of fame. When asked why she came to Subrban Drive and Hope Spring Drive, one lady said, "I just wanted to say I had been here."

Dilly,

As you may have seen from my post - we seem to have dads that were made from good stuff! I think you have this absolutely right.

I too believe she was involved in whatever happened to little Caylee. But we will never know...

Kate

[Talk Host]

When I was in my teens, my father was the foreman on a jury for a murder trial in Wellsburg, WV.

When he finally came home, he said, "well, we let a murderer go free."

As a teen, I didn't understand. He explained that the prosecution's case was weaker than the defense case.

[EdV]

She was found not guilty but is and will always be a despicable excuse for a human being in my mind.

[senior citizen]

PT - I think Hollywood has a lot more impact here than that:

1. If Nancy Grace, a harpy if there ever was one, hadn't made created such a tidal wave over Caylee going missing, then perhaps the DA may have been able to try Casey without a capital murder charge. As it stood, there was too much of a spotlight on this for the state to lead with a lesser charge. As Dillywho has pointed out, what about all the other children that are missing? Where is the justice for them? The answer is in Nancy Grace's ratings based on Caylee's sweetness in her photos and videos.

2. People tend to believe that all crime scene evidence will be as clear as when it is shown on CSI. The prosecution had to meet ridiculous and impossible expectations.

3. Of course the defendant must be found guilty without any "reasonable doubt." When someone's life is at stake - reasonable gets to be a bit tougher. With a Ted Bundy and other serial killers, there is such a pattern that it is easier.

Do I believe she is connected with Caylee's death? Absolutely. Could I vote to convict her of felony murder based on the evidence presented? No.

My dad always told me that what goes around will come around. If you do a good deed - it will be paid back many times over - and vice versa. This likely is bad news for Casey.

I agree with everything you said.........such as re the serial killers.
Plus her Karma certainly will not put her on a happy life path.

I can always see both sides of an issue and believe it or not, do not feel hate as some people feel towards her. Her pattern began in childhood due to a dysfunctional family.......it doesn't matter if the house was perfect and everything was done "right".......something in that family was very wrong.
None of them were in touch with their true feelings. I found George "odd" when he was in jail visiting and said "HELLO BEAUTIFUL". Apparently, they had been estranged.........but then Casey told him he was a wonderful Dad.
Go figure. There are people who "say all the right things" or things they think they should say............but do not mean it.

[kentucky blue]

Dilly,



I too believe she was involved in whatever happened to little Caylee. But we will never know...

Kate

We will find out, she will get drunk at one of those nightclubs she hangs out at, and tell her "date" for the evening the whole story.She has got to tell somebody how she pulled off this despicable crime, and brag about getting away with it.It's only a matter of time before the entire story will come out, and there's not a damn thing anybody can do about it.Another jury, just like O.J.'s, where is the JUSTICE !!!!!:censored:

[festusrules]

I wonder how many of those jurors would like her to babysit with their kids or grandkids?

If it was an accident why did they not own up to it? Why did she end up in a swamp?

The jurors should be ashamed of themselves.


:mad:

[LittleDog]

Aren't charges still pending regarding her using Amy Huizingas check book and stealing from her Mother and grandparents? It would be hard to believe that she will get away with stealing money.

John

[Freeda]

Aren't charges still pending regarding her using Amy Huizingas check book and stealing from her Mother and grandparents? It would be hard to believe that she will get away with stealing money.

John

Good point. In all the attention to the murder case these other charges had faded from thought. Hopefully these will keep her confined for at least a while. Probably best for her, too.

On the verdict, it is just an example that the price of freedom for all of us, to minimize the even worse tragedy of imprisonment (or even execution) of the innocent, is that sometimes wrongdoers go free. It's not a perfect system, but it still is the best on earth.

[PennBF]

I finally get it..!! A poor baby has been killed so lets kill someone. It does
not matter if we can prove the person did it, it's more important that we kill
somone so we feel better. Hey, the mother has lied in her life so lets kill her
and that will make us feel better. Not sure if she killed her child but that is not important. What is important is that we kill someone so we feel better.
Can you believe 12 stupid people who heard all the evidence said we could not kill her. That is not good enough, we have to kill someone so even though those crazy people want evidence lets still kill the mother. That will make us feel better. Justice and law is not important. What is important is our feelings and we want to feel better so lets kill her.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.

I guess Jefferson was not ready to kill someone to feel better?:read:

[RichieLion]

I finally get it..!! A poor baby has been killed so lets kill someone. It does
not matter if we can prove the person did it, it's more important that we kill
somone so we feel better. Hey, the mother has lied in her life so lets kill her
and that will make us feel better. Not sure if she killed her child but that is not important. What is important is that we kill someone so we feel better.
Can you believe 12 stupid people who heard all the evidence said we could not kill her. That is not good enough, we have to kill someone so even though those crazy people want evidence lets still kill the mother. That will make us feel better. Justice and law is not important. What is important is our feelings and we want to feel better so lets kill her.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.

I guess Jefferson was not ready to kill someone to feel better?:read:

Where is all this coming from? Who the heck are you talking to?

[kentucky blue]

I finally get it..!! A poor baby has been killed so lets kill someone. It does
not matter if we can prove the person did it, it's more important that we kill
somone so we feel better. Hey, the mother has lied in her life so lets kill her
and that will make us feel better. Not sure if she killed her child but that is not important. What is important is that we kill someone so we feel better.
Can you believe 12 stupid people who heard all the evidence said we could not kill her. That is not good enough, we have to kill someone so even though those crazy people want evidence lets still kill the mother. That will make us feel better. Justice and law is not important. What is important is our feelings and we want to feel better so lets kill her.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.

I guess Jefferson was not ready to kill someone to feel better?:read:

Not one poster on this board said she should be killed,not one.You sound like you would have made a great juror in this case.Justice for Caylee was denied and tomorrow the killer goes free. We have been O'Jayed:mad:

[sandybill2]

I finally get it..!! A poor baby has been killed so lets kill someone. It does
not matter if we can prove the person did it, it's more important that we kill
somone so we feel better. Hey, the mother has lied in her life so lets kill her
and that will make us feel better. Not sure if she killed her child but that is not important. What is important is that we kill someone so we feel better.
Can you believe 12 stupid people who heard all the evidence said we could not kill her. That is not good enough, we have to kill someone so even though those crazy people want evidence lets still kill the mother. That will make us feel better. Justice and law is not important. What is important is our feelings and we want to feel better so lets kill her.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.


I guess Jefferson was not ready to kill someone to feel better?:read:

I thought I was obsessed by this trial---sounds like you need to take a deep breath-----go line dancing----or play a round of golf. I don't feel Caylee got justice BUT I never wanted to "kill" her mother----I just wanted some sort of justice-- and some answers -don't think it happened--don't think I will ever have answers. Just worries me that Casey may have more children---and with her lack of morality-- her sociopathic behaviour----- she waited 31 DAYS--- 31 DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! to tell anyone that Caylee was missing and she would not have admitted to that had her parents/brother not made her admit that Caylee was missing!!! How do you explain that?????

[Russ_Boston]

Not one poster on this board said she should be killed,not one.You sound like you would have made a great juror in this case.Justice for Caylee was denied and tomorrow the killer goes free. We have been O'Jayed:mad:

Not sure that's true. There are other threads on this subject where some thought she should receive the death penalty if convicted.

Justice for Caylee was only denied if the person being accused was the killer. I think she was but 12 people did not think the State proved their case. Good enough for me.

[PennBF]

It is kind of foolish to carry this any further. The last I read the State called for the death penalty. According to ABC when citizens were asked their opinion 85% said she was guilty. If the state wanted the death penalty and
most wanted her convicted I guess you could conclude a great majority wanted her "killed" in accordance with the state proposal. The jury of 12
said she had not been proved guilty and therefore should not die. They did not say she was innocent which is different. My point is that of the ones who want her "killed" as the state demanded it would only be so they feel better since the evidence, as per the jury was not there. :read:

[Russ_Boston]

Just FYI: Only 1 of the possible 'murder' charges carried a possible death penalty sentence. It wasn't 'either/or'.

[Mikeod]

It is kind of foolish to carry this any further. The last I read the State called for the death penalty. According to ABC when citizens were asked their opinion 85% said she was guilty. If the state wanted the death penalty and
most wanted her convicted I guess you could conclude a great majority wanted her "killed" in accordance with the state proposal. The jury of 12
said she had not been proved guilty and therefore should not die. They did not say she was innocent which is different. My point is that of the ones who want her "killed" as the state demanded it would only be so they feel better since the evidence, as per the jury was not there. :read:

The state brings indictments to the trial. While each charge carries potential sentences, the actual sentence is determined during the penalty phase if the defendant is convicted. In this case, there were three felony charges, each of which has potential sentences, including death. The state did not "demand" death. It presented charges, tried to prove them to be true, and would then, if it won, have entered the penalty phase to argue which sentence would be appropriate. But the state doesn't determine the sentence, the judge and jury do.

Frankly, I don't believe the state ever considered that the murder 1 charge would stick. In fact, I remember a retired judge commenting that he was surprised the trial judge did not summarily dismiss the murder 1 charge before handing the case to the jury, since the state provided no evidence that supported that charge.

[Pturner]

PT - I think Hollywood has a lot more impact here than that:

1. If Nancy Grace, a harpy if there ever was one, hadn't made created such a tidal wave over Caylee going missing, then perhaps the DA may have been able to try Casey without a capital murder charge. As it stood, there was too much of a spotlight on this for the state to lead with a lesser charge. As Dillywho has pointed out, what about all the other children that are missing? Where is the justice for them? The answer is in Nancy Grace's ratings based on Caylee's sweetness in her photos and videos.

2. People tend to believe that all crime scene evidence will be as clear as when it is shown on CSI. The prosecution had to meet ridiculous and impossible expectations.

3. Of course the defendant must be found guilty without any "reasonable doubt." When someone's life is at stake - reasonable gets to be a bit tougher. With a Ted Bundy and other serial killers, there is such a pattern that it is easier.

Do I believe she is connected with Caylee's death? Absolutely. Could I vote to convict her of felony murder based on the evidence presented? No.

My dad always told me that what goes around will come around. If you do a good deed - it will be paid back many times over - and vice versa. This likely is bad news for Casey.

Hi Kate,
We agree, especially on the your statement that I bolded. Premeditated murder clearly was not established. If she was "absolutely" connected with Caylee's death, she could have been convinced of manslaughter, i.e., causing Caylee's death by culpable negligence.

BTW, the last time I ever watched Nancy Grace was also the first time, many years ago. Regarding Hollywood's impact on the way people view our criminal justice system, we're also in agreement, which is why I commented on the movie, Twelve Angry Men.

[73Goat]

My son once said, "Do you know how dumb the average person is? Well, half the people are dumber than that!

Not exactly. If that were the median, then that would be true. It is not true of the average.

TOday's nitpick is brought to you by the letter 'g' and the number '9'.:smiley:

[CMANN]

I finally get it..!! A poor baby has been killed so lets kill someone. It does
not matter if we can prove the person did it, it's more important that we kill
somone so we feel better. Hey, the mother has lied in her life so lets kill her
and that will make us feel better. Not sure if she killed her child but that is not important. What is important is that we kill someone so we feel better.
Can you believe 12 stupid people who heard all the evidence said we could not kill her. That is not good enough, we have to kill someone so even though those crazy people want evidence lets still kill the mother. That will make us feel better. Justice and law is not important. What is important is our feelings and we want to feel better so lets kill her.

"I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
constitution." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789.

I guess Jefferson was not ready to kill someone to feel better?:read:


Well put.

[CMANN]

Not one poster on this board said she should be killed,not one.You sound like you would have made a great juror in this case.Justice for Caylee was denied and tomorrow the killer goes free. We have been O'Jayed:mad:

not one person is saying that she should be killed? We think they're complaining about? For the record it was Casey Anthony whose rights were being protected. The child is dead. That's a sin. But the jury in my humble opinion did their job based on the evidence presented. I watched every day.

[CMANN]

It is kind of foolish to carry this any further. The last I read the State called for the death penalty. According to ABC when citizens were asked their opinion 85% said she was guilty. If the state wanted the death penalty and
most wanted her convicted I guess you could conclude a great majority wanted her "killed" in accordance with the state proposal. The jury of 12
said she had not been proved guilty and therefore should not die. They did not say she was innocent which is different. My point is that of the ones who want her "killed" as the state demanded it would only be so they feel better since the evidence, as per the jury was not there. :read:

just so that nobody will think I'm taking sides, you are wrong.

The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. You can twist it anyway that makes you feel better but she was found to be innocent.

The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. She was not proven guilty.

[Freeda]

I checked, and found out that she pled guilty in 2010 to six felonies on the check charges; sentenced to fines and time served.

[CMANN]

[QUOTE=mikeod;368617]The state brings indictments to the trial. While each charge carries potential sentences, the actual sentence is determined during the penalty phase if the defendant is convicted. In this case, there were three felony charges, each of which has potential sentences, including death. The state did not "demand" death. It presented charges, tried to prove them to be true, and would then, if it won, have entered the penalty phase to argue which sentence would be appropriate. But the state doesn't determine the sentence, the judge and jury do.

Frankly, I don't believe the state ever considered that the murder 1 charge would stick. In fact, I remember a retired judge commenting that he was surprised the trial judge did not summarily dismiss the murder 1 charge before handing the case to the jury, since the state provided no evidence that supported that charge.[/QUOT

if the prosecution did not believe that the first-degree murder charge would stick then they clearly and intentionally over charged in this case. This could very well be why they lost.

[thistrucksforyou]

How the hell did they disregard the defense' opening statement with regards to the death being a drowning? At least an admission that she (and George if you believe Baez) was present with the child when she died. Then the body was found in the woods. She should be at least guilty of manslaughter; or is that the way everyone in Florida disposes of dead children? The jury failed in it's duties because they were tired of being locked away from their families for more than a month. I guess a young childs death has little meaning as compared to getting back home. Even the "finger" in court receives a stiffer penalty.

Like OJ....One with alot of guilt will fall in the end !

[Pturner]

just so that nobody will think I'm taking sides, you are wrong.

The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. You can twist it anyway that makes you feel better but she was found to be innocent.

The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. She was not proven guilty.

Hi CMANN,
The problem with Hollywood shortcuts is that they are misleading. It would be physically impossible for a defendant to actually be innocent until proven guilty, inasmuch as the alleged crime takes place before the trial.

The legal standard is that the accused is "presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law".

Innocence is a legal presumption in court, not a statement of the facts of the case. Indeed, the very reason our legal system has no mechanism for a verdict of innocent is because the presumption standard relieves the defense of any burden to prove a defendant innocent.

Yes, I suppose anyone can twist it anyway that makes them feel better, but she was not found to be innocent.

[CMANN]

Hi CMANN,
The problem with Hollywood shortcuts is that they are misleading. It would be physically impossible for a defendant to actually be innocent until proven guilty, inasmuch as the alleged crime takes place before the trial.

The legal standard is that the accused is "presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law".

Innocence is a legal presumption in court, not a statement of the facts of the case. Indeed, the very reason our legal system has no mechanism for a verdict of innocent is because the presumption standard relieves the defense of any burden to prove a defendant innocent.

Yes, I suppose anyone can twist it anyway that makes them feel better, but she was not found to be innocent.

You are aware I hope, that the defendant has no burden to prove anything.

Proving ones innocents is to prove that a thing did not happen. We all know that one cannot prove a negative. Thus the presumption of innocents UNTIL proven guilty.

The Constitution says in the Fifth Amendment, "no one may be placed in double jeopardy for crime for which he has already been tried and found innocent." By your standard you would be telling us that since this person was found not guilty because the government could not prove the case then she should be tried again.

I'm sorry, the child died. Very sorry. I'm very sorry if Casey got away with something. I am not, however sorry that our system of justice worked the way it was supposed to. There are other more efficient systems of law. Would you rather that we had one of those?

[Pturner]

You are aware I hope, that the defendant has no burden to prove anything.

Proving ones innocents is to prove that a thing did not happen. We all know that one cannot prove a negative. Thus the presumption of innocents UNTIL proven guilty.

The Constitution says in the Fifth Amendment, "no one may be placed in double jeopardy for crime for which he has already been tried and found innocent." By your standard you would be telling us that since this person was found not guilty because the government could not prove the case then she should be tried again.

I'm sorry, the child died. Very sorry. I'm very sorry if Casey got away with something. I am not, however sorry that our system of justice worked the way it was supposed to. There are other more efficient systems of law. Would you rather that we had one of those?

Yes, the defense does not have to prove anything. Not sure why you put words in my mouth about double jeopardy, or misquoted the Fifth Amendment. At any rate, for the record, the double-jeopardy clause states, "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...".

[Barefoot]

just so that nobody will think I'm taking sides, you are wrong. The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. You can twist it anyway that makes you feel better but she was found to be innocent. The defendant is innocent until proven guilty. She was not proven guilty.

The media is reporting that we are starting to hear from jury members. And some of the jurors are saying they do NOT think that Casey is innocent. But that they didn't have enough concrete evidence to vote her guilty.

[graciegirl]

You are aware I hope, that the defendant has no burden to prove anything.

Proving ones innocents is to prove that a thing did not happen. We all know that one cannot prove a negative. Thus the presumption of innocents UNTIL proven guilty.

The Constitution says in the Fifth Amendment, "no one may be placed in double jeopardy for crime for which he has already been tried and found innocent." By your standard you would be telling us that since this person was found not guilty because the government could not prove the case then she should be tried again.

I'm sorry, the child died. Very sorry. I'm very sorry if Casey got away with something. I am not, however sorry that our system of justice worked the way it was supposed to. There are other more efficient systems of law. Would you rather that we had one of those?

No.

I know in MY heart she is not innocent, because I have lived on this earth more than seven decades...and have seen a lot of ducks walking...

I know in my heart she is not innocent of her daughter's death.

I also know that she will do something else horribly wrong and the justice system will catch up with her.

I also know that a lot of OTHER people also see that she is not being punished as she should be.

This is my opinion.

She walked free. She IS guilty. That is MY opinion.

In the old days, being tried by a jury of your peers was more fair. NOW the general public, the jury pool, have this amazing ability to know what is happening all over the world, most of it, MOST of it, fairly reported to us by telecommunication of every kind. Now we are forced to choose a jury who are a bunch of people who are NOT aware of the happenings of the world in the same way as MOST of us,. We then choose people who choose not to be interested in life around them, and/or do not pay attention to the things that are happening. and this diminishes their ability to judge fairly,and intelligently, in my opinion.

Just twenty years ago I would not think any differently about a person who did not choose to use a computer. Now I think about how uninformed they are.

My opinion. ONLY mine.

[graciegirl]

Now I have to let my friend Karen kick me. Yesterday I said to her I would not post on here ever again and if I did she should kick me.

[red tail]

after watching this particular post evolve i have seen a lot of people on here in a different light than before. i hope its their emotions talking and not their true feelings.

[dillywho]

Like Gracie, I intended to give this a rest. Oh, well.

Do I like Casey..no. Do I think she is innocent..no, but they did not prove her guilty of murder. Do I think she is guilty of murder...I don't know, could be. Do I think she is in any way responsible for her death...absolutely, I just don't know how or to what extent other than it "happened on her watch".

The State did drop the ball in numerous ways. If you heard the States Attorney's press conference, he said that this was a "dry bones case" which are the most difficult to prove. All the more reason they should have had all their T's crossed and their I's dotted. He didn't like the verdict either, but accepted it without rancor. In its zeal to get the biggie, the State failed to charge her with child neglect. I believe she could have received a guilty verdict on this one. Caylee was in her care the last time she was apparently seen. I say apparently because someone else could have been present. Who knows? Child abuse and child neglect are not one in the same in legal definition. Maybe they should be, but they are not. She can't be punished for something that isn't even charged.

Brad Conway, one of the Anthony's former attorneys, pointed out that the State did not follow up on the allegations of sexual abuse by not talking to former school teachers, neighbors, other family members. They just kinda brushed it off thinking the jury would do the same. One juror even said that George seemed to be hiding something in all his testimonies. The jury didn't buy into his "suicide attempt", either but didn't say exactly why. My biggest flag on that is of why would he address Cindy as Cynthia Marie throughout? He usually referred to her as "my wife, Cindy". I have asked several others about this and it seems really strange to them as well. What guilt and failure was he talking about? The prosecution didn't even ask Cindy if Casey had ever told her anything regarding any sexual abuse. In all fairness, I'm not sure the defense did either. If not, they should have. They asked George, but that's all.

The State couldn't see past the chloroform. They relied on some unproven testing and didn't even check beyond her house and car when they didn't find any evidence (other than the air sampling) of it those places. What about her numerous boyfriends' houses and cars? Why weren't they asked if Casey ever mixed up anything at their houses or if they had ever seen anything really odd in her possession, if they wanted to build their case on it? There was never any evidence of purchase. They didn't ask if Caylee ever seemed unusally sleepy or lethargic since she seemed to be a very energetic child in videos? If Casey made it anywhere, someone should have known something. If she bought it, how and where, and did anyone ever see it? If the computer searches were done in mid-March, then why did she wait until June to kill her with it? Why wasn't DNA testing done on the maggots found in the car? That would have been more compelling than air testing since it is proven and accepted throughout the forensics community and courts.

It seemed that even Judge Perry had/has his doubts about her innocence. I think he knows or thinks he knows that she did something. He also knows that by law you cannot convict on that basis or on emotion. He even said so about the jurors when he denied the press's lawyer's request for the release of juror names. Just prior to sending them out to deliberate, he instructed the jury that they could not base their verdict on whether or not they liked someone, whether or not they approved or disapproved of that persons actions or lifestyle, their looks or age or race, or any other emotions, but only on the evidence that they would hear in court. Based on what some of them have said about what they think or thought, that's exactly what they did..followed instructions. As Judge Perry said, they didn't have access to what everyone else did such as television, papers, internet, etc. They weren't bombarded on a daily basis with all the hype and emotion. They were only allowed to hear what was permitted in their presence. (Pop Tarts, Judge Perry called them for having to be sent out so much so he could rule on the admissibility of testimony, etc.)

If Dr. G. had not ruled this a homicide in the first place and just left the cause as undetermined, this whole trial mess would have been avoided. They had plenty of other charges to use. If proof came to light at a later date that she did really intentionally kill her, then murder charges could have been made. Murder has no statute of limitations. Double jeopardy would not have been an issue. Now it is.

If lessons were learned by all (and I think there were many), then Caylee did not die for nothing. If Casey really is an outright killer that walked, then maybe there's a greater chance that the next one (and there will be another) won't because of this case and the mistakes made.

[sandybill2]

Just read on msn that "She" is not being released until July 17--not July 13--as originally reported. Also read that there is a new law that is being considered--called "Caylee's Law"---which will make it a felony NOT to report a missing child. Maybe, if passed, this law will help convict those involved of something other than "lying" when a child is thrown away like garbage. We can only hope.

[2BNTV]

Like Gracie, I intended to give this a rest. Oh, well.

Do I like Casey..no. Do I think she is innocent..no, but they did not prove her guilty of murder. Do I think she is guilty of murder...I don't know, could be. Do I think she is in any way responsible for her death...absolutely, I just don't know how or to what extent other than it "happened on her watch".

The State did drop the ball in numerous ways. If you heard the States Attorney's press conference, he said that this was a "dry bones case" which are the most difficult to prove. All the more reason they should have had all their T's crossed and their I's dotted. He didn't like the verdict either, but accepted it without rancor. In its zeal to get the biggie, the State failed to charge her with child neglect. I believe she could have received a guilty verdict on this one. Caylee was in her care the last time she was apparently seen. I say apparently because someone else could have been present. Who knows? Child abuse and child neglect are not one in the same in legal definition. Maybe they should be, but they are not. She can't be punished for something that isn't even charged.

Brad Conway, one of the Anthony's former attorneys, pointed out that the State did not follow up on the allegations of sexual abuse by not talking to former school teachers, neighbors, other family members. They just kinda brushed it off thinking the jury would do the same. One juror even said that George seemed to be hiding something in all his testimonies. The jury didn't buy into his "suicide attempt", either but didn't say exactly why. My biggest flag on that is of why would he address Cindy as Cynthia Marie throughout? He usually referred to her as "my wife, Cindy". I have asked several others about this and it seems really strange to them as well. What guilt and failure was he talking about? The prosecution didn't even ask Cindy if Casey had ever told her anything regarding any sexual abuse. In all fairness, I'm not sure the defense did either. If not, they should have. They asked George, but that's all.

The State couldn't see past the chloroform. They relied on some unproven testing and didn't even check beyond her house and car when they didn't find any evidence (other than the air sampling) of it those places. What about her numerous boyfriends' houses and cars? Why weren't they asked if Casey ever mixed up anything at their houses or if they had ever seen anything really odd in her possession, if they wanted to build their case on it? There was never any evidence of purchase. They didn't ask if Caylee ever seemed unusally sleepy or lethargic since she seemed to be a very energetic child in videos? If Casey made it anywhere, someone should have known something. If she bought it, how and where, and did anyone ever see it? If the computer searches were done in mid-March, then why did she wait until June to kill her with it? Why wasn't DNA testing done on the maggots found in the car? That would have been more compelling than air testing since it is proven and accepted throughout the forensics community and courts.

It seemed that even Judge Perry had/has his doubts about her innocence. I think he knows or thinks he knows that she did something. He also knows that by law you cannot convict on that basis or on emotion. He even said so about the jurors when he denied the press's lawyer's request for the release of juror names. Just prior to sending them out to deliberate, he instructed the jury that they could not base their verdict on whether or not they liked someone, whether or not they approved or disapproved of that persons actions or lifestyle, their looks or age or race, or any other emotions, but only on the evidence that they would hear in court. Based on what some of them have said about what they think or thought, that's exactly what they did..followed instructions. As Judge Perry said, they didn't have access to what everyone else did such as television, papers, internet, etc. They weren't bombarded on a daily basis with all the hype and emotion. They were only allowed to hear what was permitted in their presence. (Pop Tarts, Judge Perry called them for having to be sent out so much so he could rule on the admissibility of testimony, etc.)

If Dr. G. had not ruled this a homicide in the first place and just left the cause as undetermined, this whole trial mess would have been avoided. They had plenty of other charges to use. If proof came to light at a later date that she did really intentionally kill her, then murder charges could have been made. Murder has no statute of limitations. Double jeopardy would not have been an issue. Now it is.

If lessons were learned by all (and I think there were many), then Caylee did not die for nothing. If Casey really is an outright killer that walked, then maybe there's a greater chance that the next one (and there will be another) won't because of this case and the mistakes made.

Excellent post. :BigApplause:

My cousin watched every second of the OJ trial and said there was no way he could be convicted on the evidence presented. Casey was found "not guilty" based on the evidence presented.

IMHO - I think both were not innocent in their respective matters.

I too intend to let it rest.

[ilovetv]

One of the big unknowns is "who put the duct tape on Caylee's mouth/nose?". Not that I want Casey excused, but I keep thinking it's possible her father was the one who put the duct tape on the child. It is possible he had sexually abused his daughter, and maybe he moved on to do the same with the granddaughter....who was starting to tell about it and he wanted her silenced. He seems like a ticking time bomb, and as an experienced cop, he certainly knows how to mess up evidence and trails to it.

[bkcunningham1]

The thing that bothers me with the speculation that Casey was sexually abused and perhaps her father was abusing Caylee and she drowned on his watch is; why would Casey go about her merry way partying it up after she knew Caylee was dead? Why would she have covered up where she was with her mother and tell lie after lie about her whereabouts? Why would she get the new tattoo? I really don't think abuse in any form is justification for child abuse, child neglect, man slaughter, murder, et al. If she is that psychotic from abuse at the hands of her father, God help us all when she is released.

[ilovetv]

The thing that bothers me with the speculation that Casey was sexually abused and perhaps her father was abusing Caylee and she drowned on his watch is; why would Casey go about her merry way partying it up after she knew Caylee was dead? Why would she have covered up where she was with her mother and tell lie after lie about her whereabouts? Why would she get the new tattoo? I really don't think abuse in any form is justification for child abuse, child neglect, man slaughter, murder, et al. If she is that psychotic from abuse at the hands of her father, God help us all when she is released.

Drowning was not confirmed as a mode of death, but maybe the child died from suffocation from the 3 pieces of duct tape taped over her mouth and nose. Maybe, (and not to excuse Casey in the least) the father was keeping Casey quiet by threatening to accuse her and turn the evidence toward her if she were to report Caylee missing or found dead at the house. He could have had her pinned between a rock and a hard place for "knowing too much". I don't trust the dad at all (and I don't think Casey's innocent either). He seems expertly wily, and suicidally anxious.

[eremite06]

The duct tape was applied to make it look like an abduction by the "nanny." Chloroform was mentioned to Padilla's cohort, the blond woman, who was acting as Casey's bodyguard and stayed in the Anthony's home for 9 days. This was during the time she was on house arrest and bonded out, in '08.
These parents did nothing but badger and berate Casey her whole life. Casey often regressed to child-like behavior and saw her daughter as her replacement. She had a very contentious relationship with her mother and the child was used as a pawn on both sides. Cindy thought nothing of berating and embarrassing Casey in front of her friends. She wanted Casey to pay back the family for the medical bills incurred during Cayley's birth.

I think the Anthony family made this monster. More and more of this dysfunctional dynamic is starting to come out.

I want to know......What about that syringe found in Casey's car????

[senior citizen]

Like Gracie, I intended to give this a rest. Oh, well.

Do I like Casey..no. Do I think she is innocent..no, but they did not prove her guilty of murder. Do I think she is guilty of murder...I don't know, could be. Do I think she is in any way responsible for her death...absolutely, I just don't know how or to what extent other than it "happened on her watch".

The State did drop the ball in numerous ways. If you heard the States Attorney's press conference, he said that this was a "dry bones case" which are the most difficult to prove. All the more reason they should have had all their T's crossed and their I's dotted. He didn't like the verdict either, but accepted it without rancor. In its zeal to get the biggie, the State failed to charge her with child neglect. I believe she could have received a guilty verdict on this one. Caylee was in her care the last time she was apparently seen. I say apparently because someone else could have been present. Who knows? Child abuse and child neglect are not one in the same in legal definition. Maybe they should be, but they are not. She can't be punished for something that isn't even charged.

Brad Conway, one of the Anthony's former attorneys, pointed out that the State did not follow up on the allegations of sexual abuse by not talking to former school teachers, neighbors, other family members. They just kinda brushed it off thinking the jury would do the same. One juror even said that George seemed to be hiding something in all his testimonies. The jury didn't buy into his "suicide attempt", either but didn't say exactly why. My biggest flag on that is of why would he address Cindy as Cynthia Marie throughout? He usually referred to her as "my wife, Cindy". I have asked several others about this and it seems really strange to them as well. What guilt and failure was he talking about? The prosecution didn't even ask Cindy if Casey had ever told her anything regarding any sexual abuse. In all fairness, I'm not sure the defense did either. If not, they should have. They asked George, but that's all.

The State couldn't see past the chloroform. They relied on some unproven testing and didn't even check beyond her house and car when they didn't find any evidence (other than the air sampling) of it those places. What about her numerous boyfriends' houses and cars? Why weren't they asked if Casey ever mixed up anything at their houses or if they had ever seen anything really odd in her possession, if they wanted to build their case on it? There was never any evidence of purchase. They didn't ask if Caylee ever seemed unusally sleepy or lethargic since she seemed to be a very energetic child in videos? If Casey made it anywhere, someone should have known something. If she bought it, how and where, and did anyone ever see it? If the computer searches were done in mid-March, then why did she wait until June to kill her with it? Why wasn't DNA testing done on the maggots found in the car? That would have been more compelling than air testing since it is proven and accepted throughout the forensics community and courts.

It seemed that even Judge Perry had/has his doubts about her innocence. I think he knows or thinks he knows that she did something. He also knows that by law you cannot convict on that basis or on emotion. He even said so about the jurors when he denied the press's lawyer's request for the release of juror names. Just prior to sending them out to deliberate, he instructed the jury that they could not base their verdict on whether or not they liked someone, whether or not they approved or disapproved of that persons actions or lifestyle, their looks or age or race, or any other emotions, but only on the evidence that they would hear in court. Based on what some of them have said about what they think or thought, that's exactly what they did..followed instructions. As Judge Perry said, they didn't have access to what everyone else did such as television, papers, internet, etc. They weren't bombarded on a daily basis with all the hype and emotion. They were only allowed to hear what was permitted in their presence. (Pop Tarts, Judge Perry called them for having to be sent out so much so he could rule on the admissibility of testimony, etc.)

If Dr. G. had not ruled this a homicide in the first place and just left the cause as undetermined, this whole trial mess would have been avoided. They had plenty of other charges to use. If proof came to light at a later date that she did really intentionally kill her, then murder charges could have been made. Murder has no statute of limitations. Double jeopardy would not have been an issue. Now it is.

If lessons were learned by all (and I think there were many), then Caylee did not die for nothing. If Casey really is an outright killer that walked, then maybe there's a greater chance that the next one (and there will be another) won't because of this case and the mistakes made.


Very, very well written.........extremely insightful.

I have the same doubts about George Anthony.

I also thought she would, at the very least, be charged with child neglect.

Also, Dr. Drew, psychologist, recently asked the same question I did.

Why didn't either the prosecution or the defense bring up the fact that Casey had a seizure prior to all of this and was taken to the hospital??

There must have been some type of brain exam. She had also told a close friend that she felt she was going insane. Speculation is that the seizure was from drug use or heavy drinking......but who knows?

Again, no matter what fame or notoriety (or money) Casey gains, her daughter's death will haunt her for eternity.

I feel sorry for the judge, who said he can't even walk across the street to get his lunch now.....for fear of being attacked, I assume. To quote him, as we only saw him briefly on the news.......he said that some folks want to filet and pour salt into the wounds (of the jurists or whom ever was involved in the verdict). Hopefully all of those Orlando folks will settle down and become obsessed with another case, of which I can see there are many (in the Orlando Sentinel newspaper).

I can have reasonable doubt and "imagine" that perhaps George, afraid of Cindy, staged a kidnapping and it really did snowball out of control with the duct tape (which my husband thinks was to keep bugs and snakes out of the child's mouth) and heart shaped sticker........but perhaps didn't realize the extent of this coverup or how savvy the Orange County detectives really are.

It is quite possible she died in an accidental drowning....and they both panicked. But how much easier it would have been to call 911.

My husband thinks the child might have died of heat in a hot car trunk, forgotten by Casey while at the "club". ......again, a coverup by George....or perhaps a faked drowning and then the double coverup. Unless one of them eventually cracks, no one will ever know for sure.

Didn't she date several young police cadets or officers , who later resigned?
Why didn't the police check the site sooner...when the meter reader first alerted them to his suspicions. He was a suspcious character at at that and is down on record as having duct taped his own wife, according to her deposition..........so as Jose said, "Follow the duct tape". I can see why the jury was puzzled.

Even if she cut her long locks, bleached them blonde, went into a sort of witness protection program in Cheyenne Wyoming, she'd still be hunted down by the media. (Obviously she is not a witness; I just used that as an example...new identity, new location, etc.)

Also, why did not either the prosectution or the defense mention the traffic violation she had while driving Annie Downing/Dowling's car....with her friend seated beside her. She presented a fake i.d. to the police officer with the name of Zenaida Gonzalez on it. Later , she appeared in court and paid the fine, under the name of Zenaida Gonzalez. Early on, I thought that perhaps she had "multiple personalities" which could come from early child issues of incest or molestation. In other words, she compartmentalized her feelings and emotions by taking on different identities.......maybe the "real" Casey didn't even remember what she did .....

Why was a professor named Zenaida Gonzales' college office robbed right around the time this all came about.........her computer was stolen.

There are a lot of Zenaida Gonzales out there.

I guess we will never know for sure.

[senior citizen]

One of the big unknowns is "who put the duct tape on Caylee's mouth/nose?". Not that I want Casey excused, but I keep thinking it's possible her father was the one who put the duct tape on the child. It is possible he had sexually abused his daughter, and maybe he moved on to do the same with the granddaughter....who was starting to tell about it and he wanted her silenced. He seems like a ticking time bomb, and as an experienced cop, he certainly knows how to mess up evidence and trails to it.

It is possible. Very possible. That family had so many secrets.

However, my husband said that (when I mentioned something similar to him) "If Casey had been molested as a child, why would she even have her child in the same house with her father or brother?"

[senior citizen]

Very, very well written.........extremely insightful.

I have the same doubts about George Anthony.

I also thought she would, at the very least, be charged with child neglect.

Also, Dr. Drew, psychologist, recently asked the same question I did.

Why didn't either the prosecution or the defense bring up the fact that Casey had a seizure prior to all of this and was taken to the hospital??

There must have been some type of brain exam. She had also told a close friend that she felt she was going insane. Speculation is that the seizure was from drug use or heavy drinking......but who knows?

Again, no matter what fame or notoriety (or money) Casey gains, her daughter's death will haunt her for eternity.

I feel sorry for the judge, who said he can't even walk across the street to get his lunch now.....for fear of being attacked, I assume. To quote him, as we only saw him briefly on the news.......he said that some folks want to filet and pour salt into the wounds (of the jurists or whom ever was involved in the verdict). Hopefully all of those Orlando folks will settle down and become obsessed with another case, of which I can see there are many (in the Orlando Sentinel newspaper).

I can have reasonable doubt and "imagine" that perhaps George, afraid of Cindy, staged a kidnapping and it really did snowball out of control with the duct tape (which my husband thinks was to keep bugs and snakes out of the child's mouth) and heart shaped sticker........but perhaps didn't realize the extent of this coverup or how savvy the Orange County detectives really are.

It is quite possible she died in an accidental drowning....and they both panicked. But how much easier it would have been to call 911.

My husband thinks the child might have died of heat in a hot car trunk, forgotten by Casey while at the "club". ......again, a coverup by George....or perhaps a faked drowning and then the double coverup. Unless one of them eventually cracks, no one will ever know for sure.

Didn't she date several young police cadets or officers , who later resigned?
Why didn't the police check the site sooner...when the meter reader first alerted them to his suspicions. He was a suspcious character at at that and is down on record as having duct taped his own wife, according to her deposition..........so as Jose said, "Follow the duct tape". I can see why the jury was puzzled.

Even if she cut her long locks, bleached them blonde, went into a sort of witness protection program in Cheyenne Wyoming, she'd still be hunted down by the media. (Obviously she is not a witness; I just used that as an example...new identity, new location, etc.)

Also, why did not either the prosectution or the defense mention the traffic violation she had while driving Annie Downing/Dowling's car....with her friend seated beside her. She presented a fake i.d. to the police officer with the name of Zenaida Gonzalez on it. Later , she appeared in court and paid the fine, under the name of Zenaida Gonzalez. Early on, I thought that perhaps she had "multiple personalities" which could come from early child issues of incest or molestation. In other words, she compartmentalized her feelings and emotions by taking on different identities.......maybe the "real" Casey didn't even remember what she did .....

Why was a professor named Zenaida Gonzales' college office robbed right around the time this all came about.........her computer was stolen.

There are a lot of Zenaida Gonzales out there.

I guess we will never know for sure.


I should have said that the police did check on the many Zenaida Gonzales' out there, but what if the one filing charges against Casey is NOT the one she meant? Who owned that abandoned house they keep showing on TRU TV which was near the place Caylee was found? Once I read that the previous owners had a name similar to Zenaida Gonzales. Lots of gaps in the entire case.