Page 72 of 102 FirstFirst ... 226268697071727374757682 ... LastLast
Results 1,066 to 1,080 of 1527
Like Tree35Likes

Thread: Casey Anthony's Trial Begins

  1. #1066
    Elite Member Dean James's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Methtopia
    Posts
    4,464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greysfang View Post
    That P.O.W. pic has to be photshopped. Please tell me it is.
    It's photoshopped. I think the legs are real but that's not her ass. She was probably wearing undies or hot pants and they got their pixels rearranged.
    Baby, by the time you have kids and they're in school, no one will care about you.

  2. #1067
    Elite Member VenusInFauxFurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Back in the boxed wine.
    Posts
    21,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mel1973 View Post
    But how long do you think he's going to be able to keep a muzzle on that bitch once she's free???
    Bitch will milk the interest in her best attention whoredom manner.
    When your daughter plays "House," she pretends to be an annoying doctor with a pill-addiction and a limp.

  3. #1068
    Elite Member MsChiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    ♥In your heart ♥
    Posts
    5,752

    Default

    I just read about this on twitter: Casey Anthony lightning: Lightning strikes tree near site of Caylee's remains - KFOR

    Eeeeeeerie!


    storms rolling in to the Anthony's neigborhood






    (these pics are from websleuths)

  4. #1069
    Elite Member greysfang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Burning Down Your Windmill
    Posts
    48,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MsChiff View Post
    Should have struck the Anthony house.
    FUCK YOU AND GIVE ME MY GODDAMN VENTI TWO PUMP LIGHT WHIP MOCHA YOU COCKSUCKING WHORE BEFORE I PUNCH YOU IN THE MOUTH. I just get unpleasant in my car. - Deej

    http://www.gossiprocks.com/forum/signaturepics/sigpic4098_9.gif Healthy is merely the slowest possible rate at which one can die.

  5. #1070
    Elite Member MrsMarsters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    HELL
    Posts
    7,238

    Default

    I don't know. Last week the woman was told by the Anthony's attorney that she needed to provide her son's DNA to compare, and she said she did not have any DNA from her deceased son. I don't know if anything has changed, but she'll never know I'm sure if Casey was her grandchild.

    I am not sure who the juror member was suppose to be talking too. Judge Perry said that the media TRIED to contact the jurors and families before and during the trial. Who knows if they actually made contacts. You have people blaming Judge Perry saying he tried to hard for a mistrial, and that he just wanted the case over with.

    This trial has driven so many people insane.
    Life will break you. Nobody can protect you from that, and living alone won't either, for solitude will also break you with its yearning. You have to love. You have to feel. Horrible isn't it? It makes you so vulnerable.

  6. #1071
    Elite Member MontanaMama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Evading P6 & P7
    Posts
    13,259

    Default

    I thought Judge Perry was top notch. Grandma X was the birth parent of the man, her DNA would suffice to show a blood linkage.
    If i hear one more personal attack, i will type while drunk, then you can cry! - Bugdoll
    (716): I'd call her a cunt, but she doesn't seem to have the depth or warmth
    Quote Originally Posted by shedevilang View Post
    (Replying to MontanaMama) This is some of the smartest shit I ever read

  7. #1072
    Elite Member JadeStar70's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    BFE, Iowa
    Posts
    7,549

    Default

    Well, if Belvin wanted a mistrial bad enough, all he would have had to do was agree to one of the 100 times Baez asked for one.

  8. #1073
    Elite Member cmmdee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Eva's Love Den
    Posts
    25,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greysfang View Post
    Should have struck the Anthony house.
    No, no, Greys. Not until Casey gets there

    Quote Originally Posted by MontanaMama View Post
    I thought Judge Perry was top notch.
    I liked him too.

    You gotta wonder if the outcome woulda been granted had a mistrial been granted.

    Too late now though. The baby killer felon will soon walk among us.

  9. #1074
    Elite Member MsChiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    ♥In your heart ♥
    Posts
    5,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cmmdee View Post
    No, no, Greys. Not until Casey gets there

  10. #1075
    Elite Member NoNoRehab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    LYNWOOD JAIL
    Posts
    2,738

    Default

    well maybe it's the waterworks that are stopping you from seeing things clearly because i don't understand how you reached that conclusion from what the jury decided. that's quite the creative, and dramatic, leap.
    Based on what someone reported one of the jurors said in an interview, i.e. that the defense's explanation of Casey's behavior just made more sense to them than the prosecution's. How else would you interpret that, if not that the jurors believed that partying it up the same day you allegedly find your kid dead in a pool and then spending a month creating elaborate lies over the kid's disappearance is normal? They apparently thought that was more common sense and relatable than believing that the elaborate lies and cover-up was a cover for murder.

    I stand by my statement: I don't know how any parent could ever think Casey's behavior was just "common sense," whether you believe Caylee died accidentally or deliberately.

    The jury was never ordered not to consider the drowning a viable alternative theory of Caylee's death. The drowning theory was just as viable as anything the prosecution presented.
    It was not, because the defense offered no testimony or evidence in regards to the drowning theory. The defense threw out a random theory in opening arguments and then didn't substantiate it with testimony or evidence, vs. the state which offered testimony and evidence for its theory. Now whether that was persuasive evidence and testimony is one thing, but it can't be compared to the defense just dropping a claim in opening. Those things are not supposed to be considered equally by a jury.

    A defense lawyer cannot use arguments to testify in place of the defendant or any other witness - the jurors should not have considered the drowning theory unless Casey (or someone else) gave it on the stand. (And in closing Baez said something like, "What happened to Caylee? How did she die? We'll never know," so he basically abandoned it anyway). Opening statements are to give the jurors an overview of your case and a roadmap regarding the evidence and testimony you're going to present: attorneys cannot use it for inflammatory rhetoric or wild theories that they can't get in via witnesses or evidence. Jurors are tasked to look at the evidence and testimony above all, not listen to opening and closing arguments and then tune out the rest.

    [quote[Don't blame the jury for a bad prosecution. That's so lazy. They couldn't help it if the DA couldn't make a case and decided to attach the DP to a manslaughter (at best) case.[/quote]

    People can very damn well blame the jury when we find out information that points to them not doing their job.

    I think the jury took the case very seriously.
    A jury that doesn't request a single piece of evidence during deliberations in a murder case with a ton of exhibits is a lazy jury not taking the case seriously. Period. End of story. There is no other way to interpret that.

    Jurors cannot deliberate during the trial, so the fact that this jury allegedly used deliberations to not look at any evidence and just to do housekeeping tasks because they had already come to a decision is a perversion of the criminal justice system. Every day and at every recess a judge reminds a jury not to evaluate and discuss the case until deliberations, so they can't make a case that they just didn't know.

    I'm impressed that they didn't fall victim to public sentiment and realized that you simply can't put a person to death over Google searches and Hot Bod contests.
    You're confusing the verdict with sentencing. They are two different processes and two different deliberations. The jurors' rejection of felony murder was not a rejection of the death penalty, since they could convict on murder yet still spare her the death penalty in sentencing if they wanted to. Or they could have convicted on the lesser charges and taken the death penalty off the table completely. It's not an either/or.
    "Don't trust nobody, and 'nobody' meaning Jay Leno in particular." -Chris Rock

  11. #1076
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    53,574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post
    The defense threw out a random theory in opening arguments and then didn't substantiate it with testimony or evidence
    They don't have to. That's not how the justice system works. All they have to do is introduce reasonable doubt. Yes, Casey was a liar but that does not prove that she is guilty. It's the prosecution's job to prove guilt and they did not do so.

    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

    -- Stephen Hawking

  12. #1077
    Elite Member MrsMarsters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    HELL
    Posts
    7,238

    Default

    I can't blame the prosecution for evidence they did not have. Scott Peterson was convicted for a lot less (not that I necessarily agree). Juror #3 did not seem to fully understand what was being discussed.
    Life will break you. Nobody can protect you from that, and living alone won't either, for solitude will also break you with its yearning. You have to love. You have to feel. Horrible isn't it? It makes you so vulnerable.

  13. #1078
    Elite Member NoNoRehab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    LYNWOOD JAIL
    Posts
    2,738

    Default

    They don't have to. That's not how the justice system works. All they have to do is introduce reasonable doubt. Yes, Casey was a liar but that does not prove that she is guilty
    The defense doesn't have to prove a theory, but at the same time they cannot throw up unsubstantiated theories unless they're prepared to offer evidence or testimony in support. A defense attorney can't randomly start accusing other people of crimes, for example.

    The burden of proof is on the prosecution but that doesn't translate to proving a negative and it doesn't mean the defense is given free reign to just throw anything out there, seeing if it will stick. The defense can't throw out a scenario unless it's prepared to offer witnesses or evidence to support the scenario. The burden of proof is on the state but the flipside of that is that defense attorneys are in many ways under more restrictions than the prosecution when it comes to presenting a case.

    It's the prosecution's job to prove guilt and they did not do so.
    Maybe, maybe not. They may have indeed presented a case beyond reasonable doubt, but the nasty secret of the justice system is that the jurors are not always reasonable people. Everybody wants to imagine juries or full of serious, contemplative, fair people and maybe some of those slip through, but more often those people either don't have time for jury duty or they get weeded out by either side in voir dire. And with high-profile cases like this, it's almost impossible to weed out the famewhores who will start shopping for 5-figure media deals within a day of the verdict.

    I find it amusing that so many are so hesitant to even consider that a jury might get it wrong. Trust me, there are plenty of examples of excellent prosecutions that resulted in acquittals, and excellent defenses that resulted in convictions. (And some of those convictions are on death row as we speak.)

    If Casey Anthony had the same attorney (who is terrible, acquittal or no, even the worst lawyers luck out on a verdict once in awhile) but she wasn't a young, middle class white woman, I'm guessing the outcome would have been very different. And if this wasn't a high profile case where the jurors know they can make profit, the outcome would also probably be different.
    "Don't trust nobody, and 'nobody' meaning Jay Leno in particular." -Chris Rock

  14. #1079
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,576

    Default

    I don't know what I think anymore. I think the state's worst case was to overreach on the charges in the first place. And maybe the jury failed to understand what their task was. It seems like they knew Casey was guilty of something, but didn't know what that something was, so felt that they could not convict at all. Perhaps that was the right decision, or maybe just a reasonable one?

  15. #1080
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    32,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post

    Maybe, maybe not. They may have indeed presented a case beyond reasonable doubt, but the nasty secret of the justice system is that the jurors are not always reasonable people. Everybody wants to imagine juries or full of serious, contemplative, fair people and maybe some of those slip through, but more often those people either don't have time for jury duty or they get weeded out by either side in voir dire. And with high-profile cases like this, it's almost impossible to weed out the famewhores who will start shopping for 5-figure media deals within a day of the verdict.
    It's not a secret. You get a jury of your peers. Most people are stupid assholes, ergo jurors are mostly stupid assholes.

    This case is more about the prosecution failing than the jurors being incorrect. The state couldn't make it's case, period. They had burden of proof, and Anthony had presumption of innocence.
    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Josef Fritzl cellar trial begins
    By Honey in forum News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 18th, 2009, 07:56 AM
  2. Civil trial of Keanu Reeves begins in LA
    By celeb_2006 in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: November 7th, 2008, 04:24 PM
  3. Dutch 'HIV attack' trial begins
    By Honey in forum News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 13th, 2008, 10:23 PM
  4. R Kelly's trial finally begins
    By ana-mish-ana in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 9th, 2008, 02:35 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 16th, 2007, 06:54 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •