I agree with you once again Rubicon.:wave:

You are right Jeanne, as usual, and that is what breaks my heart.

CMANN I have to agree with that. I am ahead of the evidence. Touche'

Lord have mercy
 

How does she keep all those lies straight!....Wonder what was going thru that little brain of Casey's while she was listening to her testimony to the detectives...She certainly had an opener when the detectives suggested if it was a drowning, to tell them and they would protect her from whatever she fears...Liar, liar, pants on fire!

There is no question but that if Casey was being prosecuted for being a liar (that is, lying to her family, friends, etc -- she IS being prosecuted for lying to the police officers, and on those charges I think she has very little, if any, chance of being acquitted), she would be convicted. When I hear the things she lied about but consider them in the context of the testimony from so many about what a great and loving mother Casey was, there is a disconnect that I think may puzzle some of the jurors, also. If it does, that will probably save her from the death sentence.

The question still is, and will be when the jury is deliberating, not as to whether she lied, but as to whether she was lying to cover up a murder, versus to cover up a drowning which foolishly had been made (in order to avoid possible prosecution of her - or also George, perhaps - could that have been in his mind, depending on how the drowning had happened? - for negligent homicide, which Casey will apparently say that her father told her could happen - and, remember, he was a police detective, so she would likely have believed his opinion, if he had advised this) to appear to be a murder (by the alleged, but later shown to be fictitious, nanny who Casey initially claimed to have abducted Caylee) .

By the time Casey was arrested, all of the evidence that made it appear that Caylee had been murdered (whether she was, in fact, or not) was already in existence, so it was really too late for Casey, or anyone else, to unring that bell; so I'm thinking that she will probably say she panicked and lied because she thought that the drowning would not be believed, because of the things that had been done to try to cover it up; and, of course, in retrospect the persistent lying just made it worse, and allowed for more charges against her; and makes it even more difficult to now prove that it was an accidental drowning.

It is going to be fascinating to see what she says when she testifies.

Some info I've seen online of some people with lipreading skills said that some of the comments she was making a few days ago when she was angry before or during the breaks in her mother's testimony were statements like "hurts me ... she's here to protect him ... she's never protected me (lawyer mentions giving Cindy a chance) .. she's been given a chance for 3 years ... did nothing ... and everyone will help him ... and I can't help __(? missing word)... that hurts so bad." (Now, how accurate this info is I don't know - I didn't attempt to match the words to her inaudible speaking on the video - but some said that when they replayed the video of these statements, the words matched what she was saying). Regardless, even if these were, in fact, Casey's statements to her attorney, were they genuine (which I think fits with her apparent intended testimony of being abused) or was she 'puffing' in order to (in her mind) save face and keep her attorneys aligned with her story?

I still feel, and I think that this is some of the evidence that most favors the defense, that the fact that Casey had allowed Caylee to sleep with her and a casual (or ANY) boyfriend, as testified to by the boyfriend, plus her claim to one boyfriend, also testified to by him (at a time when she was not being accused, and in need of manufacturing such a claim) that her brother had attempted to fondle her breasts, makes me think Casey had probably been sexually abused. (And if the brother had done that, where did he learn that unnatural, between a brother and sister, behavior?) That was the only statement she made to her boyfriend about the subject, according to him, but I have read that abuse victims who have learned to repress and deny this information may only be able to reveal it in 'layers' over time - ie, telling a small part, then more parts as they become trusting of the person in whom they are confiding.

If George did sexually abuse Casey, that would make him, to me, sociopathic and capable of other wrong things. That type of relationship could also cause an unnatural reliance or willingness of Casey to go along with other direction from George.

How the sexual abuse allegations which Baez told us in his opening will be made (and it will have to come, apparently, from Casey testifying) will tie into the whole case, and (if believed by the jury) perhaps be explanative of some of Casey's lying and other conduct remains to be seen.

These are just some thoughts, hurriedly thought out - even I may not agree with them all tomorrow! It all remains to be seen. It's way too soon to make a final judgment about it all.

Hi Freeda
 

You know of course, Susan Smith, loved her children also, but she wanted a relationship more than her children, they seemed to be in the way....There seems to be some corrilation to C. Anthony case....

Your spot on jebartle

You're so right; the Susan Smith case does come to mind to me, too.

I think it is very probable that Casey will be convicted, although from what I've heard so far I would have to acquit of murder based on reasonable doubt, even though I am not at all sure that Casey didn't murder Caylee.

My thoughts center on the idea that I believe the defense may cause some reasonable doubt or evidence of some sort of diminished capacity which may cause the jury to spare her from the death penalty; but probably not from conviction of murder.

And there is some chance, depending on the evidence, that the drowning scenario will be believed; I've just tried to point out some evidence which could possibly be seen by the jury as supporting that theory, if they find it at all plausible. If the drowning evidence was believed by at least some of the jurors, it could cause a hung jury (requiring a new trial), conviction on an offense less than murder 1 (as a compromise verdict; and thus no death penalty eligibility), or, if all jurors could agree to the drowning evidence creating at least reasonable doubt of her having murdered Caylee, she could be acquitted of the murder charges, even though she would still be guilty on the charges of lying to police officers. The jury would not have to actually believe the drowning was 'probable'; they would have to acquit on murder if they had reasonable doubt about murder because of the drowning evidence, even if they believed that murder 'probably' occurred; because 'probably' is not enough to convict.

Another possibility, and I think it is a substantial one, is that the jurors will think that Casey accidently killed Caylee in some other way that she has never owned up to (one of the most logical being that she may have accidently oversedated Caylee with something like chloroform when she was just trying to keep her asleep so that she could go out with friends - which could be a lesser offense, but not premeditated murder), and then made up all the lies, applied the duct tape to the remains, (to make it look like a murder, in case the remains were found) etc., to cover it up and try to make it look like Caylee had been abducted (and murdered) by her (nonexistent) nanny. Again, if the jury thinks this, the proof of all of the lies will not change the fact that they have to acquit her of murder 1. We know that Casey had lied about many things, for years before Caylee ever died - such as, for years, making her parents with whom she lived believe she had a job at Universal, had a nanny for Caylee for while she was at work at Universal, etc; so lying, for some reason, was apparently a way of life for her. It still doesn't make her a murderer.

In Susan Smith's case, also, there was evidence of years of sexual abuse and mental turmoil, and though she even ended up admitting that she simply drove her two alive, awake, and seatbelted-in children (whom she had at first claimed had been abducted by a male stranger) into the water and let them drown (and I think in the balance of things that method of murder is even more ghastly, violent and merciless than what I think the Anthony jury will, if they convict her, probably think that Casey did - which will probably be, from the circumstantial evidence, that she sedated Caylee with chloroform/something similar and then sealed off her unconscious child's air supply with duct tape - although it is my understanding that there will be no forensic evidence of cause of death, due to the state that the remains were in when found), the jury spared Susan the death penalty and gave her life to serve. She is eligible for parole eventually although I doubt (and hope not) that she will ever be released.

More To Ponder
 

Unlike Susan Smith, even after 3 years, they have never been able to break her. Why? How has she managed to keep her mouth shut, lawyer or no lawyer. Most people, when pushed or angered enough, will finally blurt out what they did or something. Not her.

How can they apply the death penalty if they cannot conclusively determine the cause of death? The ME stated in her press conference that she could not determine the cause of death. That being the case, when was the duct tape wrapped around the head -- before or after death? Couldn't the defense claim that it was all part of the "cover-up story" in case the body was found when Casey was claiming a kidnapping (her original story before it started to unravel) so it could be blamed on the "kidnapper"?

Like Freeda says, there is still room for doubt. Some of the analysts pointed out that in one of the jail tapes played in court today, George and Casey both talked about Caylee in the past tense. Does it mean anything? They kinda gave it a maybe yes, maybe no. I noticed also, that at one time on the tape before they knew why Casey left the conversation abruptly, Cindy told George to "get over here and sit down". He was apparently trying to find out where she went and why. (Casey had to be led out anytime another inmate was brought into the area where Casey was on the jail phone and was then brought back when they were gone.) I still think Cindy was/is very controlling.

What a mess!:loco:

You are right, WHAT A MESS and so incomprehensible to most of us. It seems that Casey's pathology, her obvious inability to be normal and not lie, her probable sociopathy would have been a better defense, but unfortunately conditions like that are hard to prove, and to the lay person appear as severe character flaws. I have no compassion for Casey, nor any understanding either. I am baffled. It must be awful to BE her.

Unfortunately, in her case, I don't think it is awful to BE her. I don't think she thinks so either. I'm not sure she has that capacity. Figuring her out is like trying to work a Rubic Cube (don't know if that's how to spell it) or one of those tee-thingy's at Cracker Barrel. Wait! Those can be solved....I'm not sure what she's about or if anyone will ever truly know.

Ever have your head feel like someone just dropped a couple of marbles in a can and is rolling the can around?

Death is so much sadder when it involves a child for any reason, but is so much worse when it happens so needlessly.

The one thing that we know for certain is that Casey is a habitual liar. The level of detail she fabricates in her stories is incredible and makes them seem so real. She even seems to believe her own lies. I don't think that any of her stories, including the sexual abuse and drowning, can be believed. And I don't think the jury will believe anything she says if she takes the stand in her own defence. She tells whatever lie she thinks will "save her skin" at the time.

Did you see all the people racing through the halls of the courthouse this morning to get a seat? I just found a channel on Canadian TV that has the court case live all day. I wish I didn't find this case so fascinating. It is similar to the OJ Trial ... it's difficult to not watch it!

I agree Bare. Helene was watching it for the first week and giving me reports and I was drawn in. It is difficult not to watch.

This morning they showed a tape of Casey talking to her parents in August 2008. Supposedly two months after Caylee drowned. Casey insists to her parents that all she wants is Caylee's safe return. Casey gets very emotional about her time in jail, and goes on to say "I'm the victim here". In Casey's mind, it is always all about her. And she'll fabricate any story at all to try to save her own skin. I really don't understand how the Defense expects the jurors to believe Casey's stories now about sexual abuse and drowning.

I wonder when it will be decided if Casey is to take the stand. Do they have to notify the Court ahead of time?

I listened to each jail visit tape with her brother, and parents. She knew her daughter was dead and was able to continue the lies. I listened to the taped interviews with the detectives. Why would a jury choose to believe Casey now, even if she did take the stand? The woman is one of the best liars I have ever heard. I feel for her family, she and her attorney threw them under the bus to safe her own pathetic life! That is a callousness and lack of humanity that makes the Death Penalty reasonable for her fate. I pray there is justice given to Caylee.