Casey Anthony Bombshell!

Marguerite

Active Member
I would be interested to watch this, if it didn't cost so much. Video is expensive to view, with the way Australian service providers charge for internet access. And I don't see this as worth the expense. I have been following the case in broad since it first broke in the news, I did know about it, I realise. It's just that there have, sadly, been a few cases of a girl going missing who later turns out to have been killed, generally by a parent figure. We have a similar case or three dozen here at the moment. One case is eerily familiar - the child was reported missing but had not actually been seen for two weeks before the reported missing date when the child apparently wandered out of the home during the night in her pyjamas. They found the body in the woods some months later, clearly having been buried. They have now charged the mother and stepfather with murder, claiming the death to have occurred well before the reported missing date and using mobile phone records to break the alibis and prove that both these people were near the burial site at a time they claimed they were not. And yes - we all saw the tears, the poor distraught mother whose baby was missing.

A sociopath is able to cry. I also believe they are able to feel sadness, grief, loss. I worked with a bloke I am convinced was a sociopath - he did some horrible things to me and to other people. He was vicious to animals (we worked with animals in the job) and was ruthless in going after what he wanted. But when his life came crashing down and all his plans fell apart, I saw a broken man. He thought he was in the room alone, he was a mess. Not sobbing, but the shoulder slump almost had me feeling sorry for him. But only almost. He was a man grieving for sure. But he was grieving what HE had lost, and very, very unhappy that all his actions had come back to bite him. He was sorry for himself, in other words. I watched him as he cleaned out his desk. Then a week later when I was sure he was gone for good (he had been the comeback king) I went out and bought champagne.

Whether there is anything impregnated in the tissue she is wielding - I doubt it would be needed. Right now she would be sad enough at the tangle of lies she is caught in and yes, she has lost her daughter who at some level, would have meant something to her. Even if her daughter's death was a deliberate premeditated act, there is still room for her to grieve also. And I think the girl's death is most likely not premeditated but at worst, an act of impulse. More likely, culpable neglect and long-term abuse. The abuse was definitely pre-meditated, but for a self-centred person would have been able to be justified and validated in a sick mind.

The duct tape - why would anyone put it on after death? If it covered her eyes I could understand post-mortem application. Or if it held her body together (stopping arms flopping for example). But to cover her mouth with it post-mortem? Doesn't make sense. For me, the duct tape over mouth and probably nose, seems to be damning. The heart sticker - an indication of regret, remorse perhaps, of confusion almost certainly.

I do feel sorry for the grandparents of the dead child. Who knows what they have been through, trying to raise their daughter? How many of us have been there, done the best we could with what we had, not had all the information or support we could have done with, and ended up anyway with a now-adult child who is far from a model citizen? And now they know their granddaughter is dead. Gone beyond their reach. All they have left is their daughter, however damaged she is. They may or may not believe her guilty, but she is all they have left and they perhaps are trying to salvage what they can. Whatever happens form here, I think they need to see justice done, for the sake of their granddaughter. And they need to know that they did not influence matters by their own actions.

The only thing I find more distressing than cases like this, are cases where children murder other children, for the thrill. In those cases I especially worry when the focus is intensely on the child murderer and their deed, and not on how such a child came to be what they are. Sometimes things just are, and sometimes there are deeper crimes that need to be brought into the light of day. But by the time someone is murdered, it is often too late to aim for redemption. Society just doesn't allow it.

Marg
 
H

HaoZi

Guest
Dr. G. continued to explain why she ruled Caylee's death a homicide."No child should have duct tape on their face when they die. There's no reason to put duct tape on the face after they die," said Dr. G.Dr. G. also testified that Caylee's toxicology tests were negative for chloroform and Xanax.

Marg, not sure if it makes a difference, but there's slideshows on that link, not just video.
 

donna723

Well-Known Member
Marg, they had a whole fleet of forensic computer experts who went all through the records on the hard drive of the familys computer. A few months before the child disappeared Casey had done Google searches on things like "chloroform", "neck breaking", and several other similar things. She had pulled up the page on "chloroform" something like 84 times! And on the day and time the searches were done, both parents were at work so she was the only one who could have done it. That's just one reason that they don't consider it an accident. And the duct tape over the girls mouth and nose was no "accident". And they've proven that the duct tape came from a roll of tape at the Anthonys home.

So far she's told four different stories about what happened. First it was that she had dropped the child off at the imaginary babysitter's house and this "babysitter" made off with her but Casey was looking for her herself and never told her parents and never called the police - for 31 days until Casey's mother called the police to report her missing! THEN ... the story changed to the little girl drown in the backyard pool and her father (a retired police officer), instead of calling "911", helped her to conceal and hide the body! THEN ... she told her brother that she had taken Caylee to a crowded public park and the imaginary babysitter and the imaginary babysitters sister held her down and forcibly took the child from her to "teach her a lesson because she was a bad mother", yet she didn't call police and nobody in this crowded park saw it! And next, they say they are going to claim that the meter reader who found the body in the woods was the one who put the body there and had moved it from somewhere else, but they've already proven about how long the body had been there from the forensic evidence so they may change their minds on that one.
 

klmno

Active Member
The part that does it for me (in addition to the obvious) is that the defense's story has more loop holes than swiss cheese and if this is the best defense they could think of, then they knew they really didn't have one.. If her father instigated a cover up, whether he or Casey actually hid the body, why would he do that? I can only think of 2 reasons the defense might come up with- 1 is somehow it would cover up the previous sexual abuse (supposedly) but I only say that because the defense has made that a part of the case- I can see NO way at all that it helps cover up any possible previous sexual abuse on Casey or why a grandfather would even have that thought upon finding his grandbaby just accidentally drowned- so I throw that out altogether. The other reason a father might suggest and instigate a cover up is to protect his daughter- Casey- that seems more plausible to me. However, the father isn't in there telling the jury that Casey couldn't have done it, that it was an accident and she or he or they both decided to cover it up out of panic. I could even believe that, possibly. But George isn't backing up the defense. That speaks tons to me. I can see the grandparents not going off at Casey the way they would if this was a stranger that had committed the crime. They are probably still in some level of shock and just feel numb. They are probably trying very hard to just go thru the motions required and tell the truth, as objectively as they can. OK- as an afterthought- maybe a 3rd reason a father would instigate a cover up is if he really wanted the grandbaby and his daughter both gone but there's no indication whatsoever that this would apply to George and the defense has never tried to indicate that.

They remind me of myself, in a way, when I had to testify about difficult child pulling the knife on me. I wasn't there to throw him away or seek the maximum penalty for him, but I wasn't going to lie and cover for him either. The only way I could resolve my own emotions and get thru it was to just tell the truth, whether some parts served my son or the prosecution. I can only imagine how extreme the magnitude would be in a case like this if difficult child/my situation was that difficult for me.

ETA: Now press defense attnys are saying they can't link Casey to the homocide- well that might have worked if that had been the original defense but it wasn't- the original defense's opening statement already linked Casey to the crime. There's no way to get out of Casey having some knowledge that her daughter was dead and she lied and partied afterwards so it's wayyyyyy too late to go back and say "ok, Caylee was murdered but that doesn't prove I'm guilty of anything".
 
Last edited:

Marguerite

Active Member
When the death penalty is on the table, defence gets desperate. They can only act within the limitations of the client's instructions and I'm thinking Casey is doing her utmost to try to weasel out of this with an "innocent" verdict, instead of accepting a plea bargain. It doesn't leave a lot of room for a defence team who have to be seen to be doing their utmost, however ridiculous it seems to the observer. Part of our adversarial legal system is the need for both sides to do their very best, but to also follow instructions.

One factor that I find very telling - Casey's father is a retired police officer. So whichever scenario is presented, why on earth would Casey not ask her father to use his contacts to help her find her baby, or sort the matter out. He could even have (possibly, theoretically) used his connections to get a possible accidental death judged as such. Baby grabbed by woman in the park? Get daddy's friends to help. Babysitter has taken the baby? Tell daddy, ask him to use his contacts to help find them. Baby drowned in pool? Accidents happen, daddy would have attended many such scenes. But baby suffocated in the boot of the car with duct tape over her face? That she couldn't get daddy's help with. Baby overdosed on sedatives/chloroform (which I said before, is nasty stuff, it knocks you around brain-wise a lot more than ether)? Again, how could you tell daddy? Especially if he doted on his granddaughter, saw her as a second chance.

I'm wondering if Casey used her daughter's existence as a bargaining chip with her parents. "Help me out of this mess and when they find her, you will still have access to her." When the grandparents were still hoping she was alive...

And now Cayleigh is dead, Casey, with all her flaws, is all they have left of the little girl. If the death penalty comes through, they lose their daughter as well. And people can and do rationalise stuff away when it is too difficult to deal with. "Surely it wasn't deliberate murder, surely it was just an accident, even though she shouldn't have been drugging her and putting her in the boot of the car just to save a few dollars on babysitting." The capacity for self-deception especially in a parent, is breathtaking.

This is going to take some time to play out. But play out it must, in all its gruesome detail. Because that is the legal system we have, and the one that is needed to determine justice for Cayleigh.

Marg
 

Shari

IsItFridayYet?
We had an 8 year old girl gomissing here between her backyard and her friend's. She was murdered by a then 11 year old who posed previously about wanting to know what it felt like to kill, and who killed simply for the experience. I agree, Marg...why aren't we digging into this to understand how it comes to this...
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
Malika -

I'm going to have to go with Donna on the rehabilitative state and her thoughts. While I would always hope there is a chance that anyone is redeemable and my faith would give it to a higher power - yes, I think with God all things are possible. But do I think men have the power to change a human like the ones that I dealt with or the ones that are in prison through rehabilitation offered in prison and/or therapy? After a certain point in a persons life? No. I do not think they are able to change. The mapping in their brains, their habits, their behaviors, their genetic code, even their will, their beings are what they are.

Some people answer to a different 'master'. Not everyones 'higher power' is (points up). There are evil people in the world, and when you meet one or more of them it doesn't take much for you to pick another out in a crowd. If you were to ask me if I think Casey Anthony is the personification of evil? No. I think she did an evil behavior, for a selfish reason, without caring and will pay for the rest of her life for it. I don't think she felt she would get caught, I think she thought she was brilliantly smart, had her crime planned out, I do not believe it was an accident after reading events leading up to the crime so I think it was a premeditated murder. Until that particular behavior - I do not belive that she was an evil person. Whatever changed in her mind she can't undo and now will forever be labled as an evil person, and people will try their best to rehabilitate her, and spend time on her, and talk to her, and get her to feel emotions ad nauseum - and in my humble opinion - it's a waste of time. the rest of her life if she gets a life sentence will be spent warehousing her body away from society. So she can't get to anyone else and ever harm anyone again. Susan Smith is a very infamous mother here in SC that drown her two children alive in the family car, then claimed a black man stole her car. It nearly ripped a small town a few miles from our house in half. She is a sociopath, a grand liar, an adultress who was having marital problems, and after serving only a few years in prison with some counseling under her belt has tried to appeal her sentence, by telling the court that she wasn't given adequate council ---and should be allowed OUT of prison because since she's been IN prison she's received GOD, and now wants to council other women who have murdered their children. yeah ----WOW - after what? 12 or 15 years in jail? This is what she thinks was enough time for her two boys' death, and she feels she is a good candidate for murder counselor? The state has her in isolation because it has been said if she ever gets into general population of our prison system? The inmate women will kill her. When this came up last year? It was so absurd people didn't even want it printed in the newspaper. No one wanted to hear her name. But she GOT her day in court, and she was told NEVER to come back to court and waste taxpayers money again. EVER. THAT WAS printed in the newspaper. I'm not making light of your thoughts but see what rehabilitation did for her? It gave her access to the law library where she planned and plotted HOW to get herself out of prison. kniving little self-serving person. There are a few more cases I can tell you about with people like her that are absolutely amazing in their narcissistic behavior that have killed, and then go to jail, spent 10-12 years and then turn around and basically say "I've done enough time - I should get out now." It's amazing the arrogance they have and invalue of a human life.

The only one that I think even deserves a mention is the guy recently who begged for a firing squad. I think he was in Colorado. Firing squads ARE still legal in a few states here in the US - but NOT commonly used and he had to beg the US Supreme court to uphold his choice. They did, and he was shot to death a week later. This was just last year. I think if I was going to have to go - this is how I'd ask to go too. No gas chamber, No lethal injection - just shoot me.
 

Malika

Well-Known Member
Everyone has their theory - it's amazing :) Mine is somewhere along the lines of Marguerite's - death arising out of long-term neglect/abuse which Casey justifies and minimise in her own mind. I don't understand the duct tape. But this simply does not speak to me of a calmly, meticulously planned crime. It speaks to me of random, chaotic actions carried out by someone who is deeply disturbed - how many people calmly steal from their friends without blinking an eye? Lie systematically, even when there is no need? Premeditation arises out of cunning calculation - I don't think that was Casey's case. Look how soon the body was discovered - because Casey had buried it in woods close to her home, well known to her. Who would carry a dead body around in the back of a car if they were acting with intelligent planning? As for the internet searches on neck breaking - this was on the boyfriend's computer and was probably him researching into wrestling. But who knows!
Why have we had no psychological input in the trial so far? Because Casey claims she is innocent? Has she been interviewed by psychiatrists?
The compassion I have for criminals arises out of the fact that they have to live with their crimes for the rest of their lives, as Star said. Some people justify their actions, lie to themselves and never face the truth. But they are still stuck in gaol, most of them, and that's not much of an enviable existence. Seems to me like it's a loser's game...
Is the two cents something I pay you, or you pay me? :)
 
H

HaoZi

Guest
Star, she would technically have a choice. Lethal injection is now first line in Florida, but they can still opt for Sparky if they want it.
 

Shari

IsItFridayYet?
Malika... Somewhere way back when was a similar thread about a mom with I think 3 little kids that she drowned while in some sort of unstable episode. I don't recall details...sorry, but I'm sure I could find info on the case. Anyway, someone posted that when she was medicated and stable, she was fully aware of what she did and had to live with that the rest of her life. If she wasn't medicated, then she didn't seem to know what she was doing... What more punishment would she really need? And in that case, I tended to agree.
I understand your point of view. But with a character like her, how would one ever trust she had truly changed? I mean, even Charles Manson behaves well in prison.
 

DDD

Well-Known Member
Truthfully I doubt we will ever "know" what really happened. It seems obvious that the Defense can't put Casey on the stand because everyone including the Defense knows that she is a habitual liar. There are no witnesses which is rather astounding since they live surrounded by neighbors and the final resting place is so nearby. I still can't picture that anyone would lay the decomposing child on the grass in the backyard...if the dogs are right....when they could be seen doing it. Evidently the decomp process does not take instantaneously so it could not have been right after death.

I know this is a little off topic but when I was in early elementary I had to have dental surgery. The use of chloroform was common. It smelled terrible, was placed over the nose and mouth, and put me to sleep quickly. When I woke up and for a few hours (as I recall) I could still smell it and felt nauseous. IF Casey used that method to put her daughter to sleep the little girl could have choked to death from vomit. DDD
 

Star*

call 911........call 911
I guess then you get into that almighty battle that splits even a country...is the death penalty good or is death row better? Granted there are some people that have been executed and later found to be innocent of crimes they did not commit. But the thought I would have sitting on a jury - THIS particular jury would be:

Would it be a better punishment for Cayce to sit in jail for the rest of her natural life, wake up every day, and think about the fact that she killed her daughter and now has to spend her life in a 4x8 cell in prison. Or if she is in fact a sociopath and has no emotions is there even a punishment that you could give her other than taking away her freedoms that would fit any crime to make her understand what she did was wrong? Furthermore. If the latter is true; why should tax payers foot the bill to keep her alive when there is not going to be any remorse or rehabilitation for her actions? Would putting her to death via lethal injection or the electric chair be putting her out of her misery or ours?

Then on the opposite side of thinking -
The death penalty - Is it just for Caylee's death? in my humble opinion- Nothing is just - she's dead. However if you take a life, there needs to be a punishment and if people continue to get away with murder (providing the defense can prove beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt Caycee is guilty) no justice is served for Caylee or anyone. If she does get the death penalty, she will appeal, she will sit in prison for ages and taxpayers will still foot her bill. IS sitting on death row with impending lethal injection or electrocution enough of a punishment for what she did if proven guilty? Does killing her make it just? If you were on the jury - could you walk away from that courtroom and say you felt nothing after your decision voting yes to put a young woman to death?

That's where I think all the dog and pony show comes in - this attorney has created so much reasonable doubt - that at this point it was mentioned on television last night that Caycee is even thinking there maybe a complete aquittal for her. I nearly fell out of bed. Makes me wonder IF she were to walk out of that courtroom - where on EARTH would she ever go - that someone would NOT want to harm her?
 

klmno

Active Member
Some on tv are saying she and the defense team have her backed in a corner- she has to either take the stand or conceed that the whole defense's opening argument was a lie because they have no other person to say it is true, or she takes the stand and shows her true colors under cross examination. Lies are a lot easier to pull off when you are telling them to family who loves you and wants to believe you than they are to objective people with no personal stake and they follow experts testifying to the opposite of what you're saying.

As far as the death penalty vs life imprisonment- I don't care as long as she never sees freedom again in her life. I figure whether she's in the general population, on death row, or kept in confinement she'll pay a huge price either way. I suppose she'll always have supportes who can't believe she could have possibly intentionally killed her baby and that gives a fair chance for her to prove either way. But one point made yesterday is that if they had a stranger or grown man sitting on trial for this, not many people would be trying so hard to poke holes in the evidence- thry would pretty much all come to the conclusion that this evidence can only point to intentional murder. What that tells me is that people are letting what they want to believe (that a mother couldn';t intentionally and willfully do this) interfere with looking at the evidence and adding it up. But I don't want to be judgemental so maybe I should back up and say that I just don't see how it could add up to anything else, although I did try to be neutral and objective early on. And I will be interested to see if the defense has anything to pull out that we aren't forseeing to cast more doubt on the prosecution's theory.

Funny thing about the defense saying that the superimposed photos/video would prejuduice the jury- you know darn good and well if it had shown that the duct tape couldn't cover both the nose and mouth, the defense attny would have made sure it got shown. So why would the same evidence be prejudicial if it shows the likelihood of guilt?

I do believe that Casey is living in her own little world and has extremely narcissistic and distorted thinking- and her choices have had a lot to do with the approach of the defense team. Unfortunately, I think she pushed her luck way too far with this approach.

One of the attnys on tv said she'd probably get 2nd degree because there isn't enough direct evidence for most juries to give 1st degree. I don't know- the prosecution had more than I thought they did but we haven't heard the defense yet. They better have something in their back pocket to pull out. By the people calling in the talk show, it didn't sound to me like there was a lot of reasonable doubt in the public's mind that this was more than an accidental death in a pool.

I'm not positive about this since I'm not an expert, but I would think that if Caylee had vomited in the trunk of the car, samples of the carpet would have indicated that. After all, they had samples from the car musch sooner than the 6 mos it took to find the body which didn't have a lot left on it to get evidence from. I won't get into the gory details, but if you saw the testimony coming out late yesterday afternoon, it seems to indicate that the evidence in the car pointed directly to, and only to, that Caylee died in the car and was there long enough for decompisition to be taking place at least a few days. There was nothing about what might have happened prior to death, except chloroform.
 
H

HaoZi

Guest
could you walk away from that courtroom and say you felt nothing after your decision voting yes to put a young woman to death?

If the evidence says she's guilty and I feel it was collected and processed correctly, I'd be beyond happy to not only sentence her but to carry it out myself. Witness are worth squat - I don't see where the defense has done anything to place doubt against the evidence, and today's CSI watching juries want the evidence and everything that goes with it.
 

DDD

Well-Known Member
I just remember something else that I wanted to share. Jose Baez has been criticized for his "rough edges" among other things. I watched a lengthly interview that featured his background. Guess what? He was a difficult child who dropped out of school in either 7th or 9th grade..I think 7th. Asked why? he simply said "I was a messed up kid". When he was 17 years old he found out his girlfriend was pg and decided to "man up". He joined the service (Navy, I think) and "grew up" so he could support his child. Once out of the service he applied for college and was accepted. When he graduated he still didn't know what he wanted to do but he was dating a girl who was going on to Law School so he decided to do the same.

Upon graduation he was offered a job with the State's Attorneys office, accepted the position, and within less than a month realized he didn't like law with-o personal interaction. He quit and walked accross the street and asked for a job with the Public Defenders's office. Once there he knew that was how he wanted to practice law. His goal is to eventually be able to focus on Pro Bono work.

I found it very interesting. It sure is proof that a difficult child can turn it around. DDD
 

klmno

Active Member
I hope and pray for the miracle that it will surely take to someday have my son helping a little dog give birth to her pups or neutering a tomcat or saving a kid's pet hamster, like he says he wants!! Who's the judge- Mathis maybe- that says he was in detention as a youth and look how he ended up?
 

Marcie Mac

Just Plain Ole Tired
If Fla is like Ca, you can only ask for the death penalty in a case IF there are extinuating services, like laying in wait, planning out before hand, and some others, death that results in a use of a gun, others which I forget.

DDD, omg, I totally forgot about the dentist office and being chloroformed - I had dental work as a child and remember that - but I don't remember a mask, more like it being on a cotton ball.

Marcie
 

TerryJ2

Well-Known Member
In regard to what it feels like to hand down a conviction or sentence, I've served jury duty several times, once for armed robbery. All of us jurors were friendly, and throughout the trial, were having a great time. We talked about going out for drinks together after the whole thing was over.

But once we decided that the defendent was guilty, and we heard the judge say it aloud (and in MN in 1980, they allowed the judges to read people's addresses aloud for whatever reason), it changed everything. The judge called us back later and read the sentence, despite the defense atty's protests. The judge said we put a lot of work into it and we deserved to have all of the information. He read us all of the other convictions that this guy had--which we did not know about, because they may have prejudiced us--and he gave the guy 5 or 6 yrs in jail.
I was very pleased that it all turned out that way, in regard to justice, but in regard to my fellow jurors, I no longer wanted to party. I realized I had a hand in changing someone's life and it was such a heavy feeling, like I was carrying a weight. It didn't matter that the guy deserved the amt of time he got; what mattered was that I had power, and it was a sobering experience.
I had a headache and just wanted to go home.
Interestingly, everyone else on the jury felt the same way. It was just so serious.
If I were to convict Casey Anthony, knowing she would get the death penalty, and I were convinced that she was guilty, I would still definitely convict her. But knowing the headache I got with-the armed robbery case, I'm thinking I'd be in bed for 3 wks after a death penalty case.
FWIW.
 
Top