Useful Links

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R

Like Purron, I would have a hard time with this case if on the jury. I would have a hard time deciding because honestly, at present I am not sure if the evidence proves she did it beyond a reasonable doubt. It really doesn't seem as "open-and-shut" as I had thought it would be, prior to the trial. But then, if I was on the jury I'd have listened to more of it and I'd have a better idea of what the evidence includes and doesn't include.

If I decided she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then the death penalty wouldn't deter me from making my decision.

Can you bring up one reason you think she's not guilty? It was either George or Casey so do you think George did it? Was George out at the clubs after the death? Do you think it's normal that a Mother wouldn't report her daughter missing after a month? If she wasn't guilty she would have taken the stand and testified.

Sheeeesh! What more do you need. Now show us some evidence that points to not guilty.

W2R · 07-04-2011, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73ss454

Can you bring up one reason you think she's not guilty?

Innocent until proven guilty? I think the burden of proof is upon the prosecution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73ss454

It was either George or Casey so do you think George did it?

I don't see why we should think that it was either George or Casey - - guess I just don't know as much about the case as you do.

If the evidence proves that she did it, then I am with you 100% - - she deserves no mercy.

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:18 PM

The Defense said that the baby drowned in the back yard pool and George found her. So it's either George who covered it up or Casey that killed her.

I don't see one thing that says she didn't do it.

I can see having a hard time convicting her with a death penalty but IMHO she's guilty and I voted that way.

W2R · 07-04-2011, 07:23 PM

Maybe neither story is the truth. I have no clue! I am pretty sure that Casey is a habitual liar. Maybe I just didn't hear enough of the trial to know of all the evidence.

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R

Maybe neither story is the truth. I have no clue! I am pretty sure that Casey is a habitual liar. Maybe I just didn't hear enough of the trial to know of all the evidence.

No it was one of them and the trial was based on that fact and the defense is trying to use George as a scape goat.

I can't imagine anyone who listened to the trial saying there's a reasonable doubt. I'd love to hear what anyone would base the doubt on.

aaronc879 · 07-04-2011, 07:27 PM

Despite what the law says, I couldn't send someone to prison for the rest of their life(let alone the death penalty) if I had ANY doubt at all. I would rather let every murderer roam the streets than send even 1 innocent person to prison for life. YMMV

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879

Despite what the law says, I couldn't send someone to prison for the rest of their life(let alone the death penalty) if I had ANY doubt at all. I would rather let every murderer roam the streets than send even 1 innocent person to prison for life. YMMV

I'm with you, luckly there's no doubt in this case.

aaronc879 · 07-04-2011, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73ss454

I'm with you, luckly there's no doubt in this case.

I was just making a general statement. I haven't followed this case closely enough to say there is or isn't doubt. It seems as though everything is circumstantial. No solid, undeniable proof.

W2R · 07-04-2011, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879

I was just making a general statement. I haven't followed this case closely enough to say there is or isn't doubt. It seems as though everything is circumstantial. No solid, undeniable proof.

That's what bothers me about the case, too.

I do feel pretty sure that she will be convicted on all counts.

Mulligan · 07-04-2011, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879

I was just making a general statement. I haven't followed this case closely enough to say there is or isn't doubt. It seems as though everything is circumstantial. No solid, undeniable proof.

I agree it is mostly circumstantial, but pretty convincing though from what I saw. I am fine with life or death penalty. They now say from what I've read it's cheaper to just keep them in jail for life, than deal with the constant cost of appeals and lawyer fees for death row prisoners.

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R

That's what bothers me about the case, too.

I do feel pretty sure that she will be convicted on all counts.

What bothers me about the case is the baby lying in the swamp.

73ss454 · 07-04-2011, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaronc879

I was just making a general statement. I haven't followed this case closely enough to say there is or isn't doubt. It seems as though everything is circumstantial. No solid, undeniable proof.

I guess you need a picture of Casey putting the duct tape over her daughters nose and mouth. If you watched the trial there would be no doubt.

easysurfer · 07-04-2011, 08:03 PM

I served on a jury before. Wasn't a murder trial but a malpractice case. There were light moments (and an embarassing moment for me). But overall, it was sad. We as a juror voted what we felt was right, but when done..my feeling was..okay..hopefully justice is served, now I we wish to get the h*ll out of here...One side wins, the other side feels devastated...no fun.

Jokingly, as the saying goes... a juror is selected to decided who has the better lawyer

easysurfer · 07-04-2011, 08:06 PM

My gut feeling says guilty. Yet, on circumstantial evidence only. I read where in the Scott Peterson case, had the bodies not washed ashore, it may have been dificult to convict as without that hard evidence, the case was nothing but circumstantial.

East Texas · 07-04-2011, 08:49 PM

It seems copying in Judge Perry's published written instructions is against the TOS. Sorry about that....

First Degree Murder or Felony Murder.

obgyn65 · 07-04-2011, 09:27 PM

I don't know enough about his case to be able to make any judgement.

East Texas · 07-04-2011, 10:04 PM

IMO: Ashton and Dane-Burdick consistently had excellent preparation and presentation, whether it be on direct or cross. Baez came across as not being prepared and not adequately prepping his defense witnesses - some of whom helped the prosecution more than the defense. Mason came in at such odd times it did not help offset Baez's style. That being said, both prosecution and defense had excellent closing arguments and Dane-Burdick had an outstanding rebuttal.

I agree with easysurfer - the best lawyer wins.

harley · 07-04-2011, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumquat

Actually I had no idea. I'm Canadian and I guess the news here doesn't include all US trials. I did google and find out what you're talking abot. I have no opinion.

I'm a US citizen, and I had no idea either until today. I don't do network news, and I guess this story didn't make it into the blogs and websites I read. DD and some friends were visiting for the 4th and were talking about it. Before that I'd never heard of her. Can't vote, no opinion, wouldn't hang someone from a quick Google search. Hopefully justice will be done.

scrabbler1 · 07-04-2011, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet

I think I do not care.

We surely needed a "I don't give a crap" choice in the poll so that those of us who change the channel whenever this item is on TV could answer it. Same for those who live outside of the US who are lucky enough to not be swamped with this endless coverage (i.e. media circus).