Closing arguments on Anthony trial
- Thread starter skyraider
- Start date
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Don't take this wrong but what is getting better?
The country is glued to their TVs because of the coverage of the trial due to the fight for ratings - even fox of all places has 'breaking news' specials.
I don't like to see people making money off of kids dying and this is exactly what is going on. The media that everyone seems to be so critical about are playing up this as an important thing for all of us when in fact it is really sad because no one can say for sure what happened and no one can bring the kid back.
The country is glued to their TVs because of the coverage of the trial due to the fight for ratings - even fox of all places has 'breaking news' specials.
I don't like to see people making money off of kids dying and this is exactly what is going on. The media that everyone seems to be so critical about are playing up this as an important thing for all of us when in fact it is really sad because no one can say for sure what happened and no one can bring the kid back.
Well, gee whiz, Debbie Downer
Well we will all see soon. It is my belief from what I have watched and read, that unfortunatly the State of Florida did not prove their case. All personal feelings and opinions aside, if that case is truely judged on presented evidence, there is no hope of a first degree murder conviction. There were more questions raised than answered, and beyond a reasonable doubt was not achieved. Just my cents and I sure would not want to be on the jury right now.
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
greg334
Veteran Expediter
I'm with you on that ts. The state should have never tried the case to begin with and I think with the hoppla that was made by the media, they decided to go forward not because they had a good chance but because of public opinion against them.
As for other posts, it is sad that this case has mesmerized the public and it looks like I may be one of the few who can see how the country feeds off of the jerry springer type media circus to grasp at the "entertainment" value of a kid's death.
As for other posts, it is sad that this case has mesmerized the public and it looks like I may be one of the few who can see how the country feeds off of the jerry springer type media circus to grasp at the "entertainment" value of a kid's death.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
From what the "legal experts" are saying on the talk news radio showes, she walks...no conviction...and then you have the camp that saues if she is convicted, it won't be 1st degree murder and any conviction at all will be appealed based on how the jdge handled alot of the defense evidence and testimony that he wouldn't let in and there is even some that think he was perjudicial against the defense.....
Personally I think she is a guilty as sin, but she walks....
As for people being over the top interested and news oragnizations filling that need of the people, "if it bleeds, it leads"..its as it always has been and always will be....
Personally I think she is a guilty as sin, but she walks....
As for people being over the top interested and news oragnizations filling that need of the people, "if it bleeds, it leads"..its as it always has been and always will be....
It's not the kind of story that I would normally be interested in [too upset by child abuse], but this one is just fascinating: a sociopath, defended by an amateur - it's mind boggling!
Most mothers who kill are delusional for whatever reason, psychosis, religious mania, drugs - but Casey Anthony is in no way mentally impaired - except that she continues to try to lie her way out of everything. When the lies are exposed, she simply produces another lie - it's incredible, the way she just changes her story without missing a beat. 'Not going for the imaginary nanny? Ok, it was my father who found the baby drowned, and he took care of it'.
It's a rare chance to see a sociopath in action, because they look so much like the rest of us, and they're generally smart enough to avoid getting caught.
It's also interesting to watch her defense attorney try to explain away all the circumstantial evidence [and there's a lot of it]. His opening statement made claims that he never produced an iota of proof to back up - how bizarre is that?
I believe she is guilty, and I think the jury will conclude the same thing. There just isn't any other rational explanation that fits the facts, right?
Most mothers who kill are delusional for whatever reason, psychosis, religious mania, drugs - but Casey Anthony is in no way mentally impaired - except that she continues to try to lie her way out of everything. When the lies are exposed, she simply produces another lie - it's incredible, the way she just changes her story without missing a beat. 'Not going for the imaginary nanny? Ok, it was my father who found the baby drowned, and he took care of it'.
It's a rare chance to see a sociopath in action, because they look so much like the rest of us, and they're generally smart enough to avoid getting caught.
It's also interesting to watch her defense attorney try to explain away all the circumstantial evidence [and there's a lot of it]. His opening statement made claims that he never produced an iota of proof to back up - how bizarre is that?
I believe she is guilty, and I think the jury will conclude the same thing. There just isn't any other rational explanation that fits the facts, right?
Brisco
Expert Expediter
Not sure if some of us here were watching the same trial or not.............
Some say that Judge Melvin leaned towards the Prosecution....What??????
It may seemed that way in a sense cause he had to hold Jose's little hand through most of the trial, but to think he was leaning towards the prosecution with some of his rulings is absolutely absurd.
Hate to say this, but I too was one that became totally engrossed in this trial also. I've got 2 new businesses I've been trying to get going, one on my own alone, and this trial has put me behind. Sure, I've been there working on 'em, but the TV and/or Computer has had this dang Trial tuned in. So, if something came up, I dropped a lot of whatever it was I was doing and sat there to watch it for a while!!
Back to Jose Baez......Guy is a total INEPT Attorney. Disfunctional is probably the best way to put it. It may LOOK LIKE Judge Melvin was against him, but truth is, Every "OverRuled" call made against Jose was clearly called for.
Can't wait til the "Contempt of Court" proceedings are started against this Guy after the trial is over with. Disbarment would be perfect for Jose Baez, and sanctions against Chaney Mason would be a good call too.
Casey Anthony WILL NOT WALK........mark my words here tonight. If she does, there is something seriously wrong with our legal system. Despite not having the "smoking gun", the actual cause of death, the Prosecution put on a near perfect case against her. Having that little Joke of a Defense Attorney is what has made this trial a big circus event.
Chef said:
What're you listening to??? NPR??? I haven't been listening to "Radio" talk shows, but have been flipping through channels on the TV all night, every night, (HLN-FOX-MSNBC-CNN) and she is considered GUILTY on all the talk shows except MSNBC where almost all the Talkies are saying she's innocent. That's far left bleeding heart liberalism for ya.
Greg said:
Don't agree with ya here.......
Are they making money??? I'll tell you what, back when it first started and TruTV quit airing it at 2PM my time,and HLN was taking over til 4PM, HLN was absolutely ridiculous when it came to commercials. It was like 4 minutes of Live Trial, then 8 minutes of commercials. This went on for the first couple of weeks. Were they in for the $$$$?? Of Course, but it eased off the last couple of weeks.
I don't agree with the opinion of "making money off kids dying". I look at it as possibly they are making money off avenging and seeking justice over a kids death. The trial is not about the actual death of little Caylee Anthony, the Trial is about seeking Justice for Caylees death. If it means finding her own Mother guilty and then taking her out back and shooting her between the eyes, then so be it.
Some say that Judge Melvin leaned towards the Prosecution....What??????
It may seemed that way in a sense cause he had to hold Jose's little hand through most of the trial, but to think he was leaning towards the prosecution with some of his rulings is absolutely absurd.
Hate to say this, but I too was one that became totally engrossed in this trial also. I've got 2 new businesses I've been trying to get going, one on my own alone, and this trial has put me behind. Sure, I've been there working on 'em, but the TV and/or Computer has had this dang Trial tuned in. So, if something came up, I dropped a lot of whatever it was I was doing and sat there to watch it for a while!!
Back to Jose Baez......Guy is a total INEPT Attorney. Disfunctional is probably the best way to put it. It may LOOK LIKE Judge Melvin was against him, but truth is, Every "OverRuled" call made against Jose was clearly called for.
Can't wait til the "Contempt of Court" proceedings are started against this Guy after the trial is over with. Disbarment would be perfect for Jose Baez, and sanctions against Chaney Mason would be a good call too.
Casey Anthony WILL NOT WALK........mark my words here tonight. If she does, there is something seriously wrong with our legal system. Despite not having the "smoking gun", the actual cause of death, the Prosecution put on a near perfect case against her. Having that little Joke of a Defense Attorney is what has made this trial a big circus event.
Chef said:
What're you listening to??? NPR??? I haven't been listening to "Radio" talk shows, but have been flipping through channels on the TV all night, every night, (HLN-FOX-MSNBC-CNN) and she is considered GUILTY on all the talk shows except MSNBC where almost all the Talkies are saying she's innocent. That's far left bleeding heart liberalism for ya.
Greg said:
Don't agree with ya here.......
Are they making money??? I'll tell you what, back when it first started and TruTV quit airing it at 2PM my time,and HLN was taking over til 4PM, HLN was absolutely ridiculous when it came to commercials. It was like 4 minutes of Live Trial, then 8 minutes of commercials. This went on for the first couple of weeks. Were they in for the $$$$?? Of Course, but it eased off the last couple of weeks.
I don't agree with the opinion of "making money off kids dying". I look at it as possibly they are making money off avenging and seeking justice over a kids death. The trial is not about the actual death of little Caylee Anthony, the Trial is about seeking Justice for Caylees death. If it means finding her own Mother guilty and then taking her out back and shooting her between the eyes, then so be it.
Last edited:
Regardless of conviction or no conviction, all of the immediately family members will have a daily living *ell over their granddaughter forever and ever. The holidays through the years may push them over the edge and maybe someone will confess outright. This trial may end today, but it will never end for the family. The guilt trips on each one of them will never end.IMHO
greg334
Veteran Expediter
There is so much more out there that could be real news.
With that said, I think that the ineptness of her lead lawyer is going to be grounds for an appeal and because this is a capital case, she will have a lot of help to get her conviction overturned or her sentence reduced. The mistakes he has made - even not showing up - can help her a lot later on.
The only thing that I can see out of this mess that is actually positive is the light it shines on evidence handling and the differing opinions that have been popping up in the professional science world about the evidence in a case that should not have moved forwarded.
For many who see another issue that I see ... the cost of the state to pursue this at great expense to the tax payer should be an issue when there isn't enough hard evidence and a wide range of differing opinions from "experts" that can't even guarantee a conviction, let alone a possible death sentence.
IF she isn't convicted, I would think that the prosecutor and his/her staff needs to be fired along with the state forensic people who screwed up the case.
Otherwise it is sad that the media is making money off of a dead little girl and that's my complaint.
With that said, I think that the ineptness of her lead lawyer is going to be grounds for an appeal and because this is a capital case, she will have a lot of help to get her conviction overturned or her sentence reduced. The mistakes he has made - even not showing up - can help her a lot later on.
The only thing that I can see out of this mess that is actually positive is the light it shines on evidence handling and the differing opinions that have been popping up in the professional science world about the evidence in a case that should not have moved forwarded.
For many who see another issue that I see ... the cost of the state to pursue this at great expense to the tax payer should be an issue when there isn't enough hard evidence and a wide range of differing opinions from "experts" that can't even guarantee a conviction, let alone a possible death sentence.
IF she isn't convicted, I would think that the prosecutor and his/her staff needs to be fired along with the state forensic people who screwed up the case.
Otherwise it is sad that the media is making money off of a dead little girl and that's my complaint.
Why would her lawyer be disbarred? Look at what he has to work with, practically nothing. His job is to convince one member of the jury that there is some doubt, nothing more. And based on the OJ trial, there's plenty of dopes out there.
So throw a bunch of theories out there and see if one will work on a juror. It's not his job to prove any of them, and with his client not testifying he knew there was no worry of cross examination.
So throw a bunch of theories out there and see if one will work on a juror. It's not his job to prove any of them, and with his client not testifying he knew there was no worry of cross examination.
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
Question ....
Is there a time limit attached to the jury having to make a decision?
Why I ask is because I have been watching In Session - and they seem to be astounded that the jury is still out after (IMO)only 8.5 hours.
From the tone of this "program" & its callers - there is no need for a jury.
Is there a time limit attached to the jury having to make a decision?
Why I ask is because I have been watching In Session - and they seem to be astounded that the jury is still out after (IMO)only 8.5 hours.
From the tone of this "program" & its callers - there is no need for a jury.
This whole thing reminds me of the Jon Benet Ramsey case and its still not solved since 1996.
EnglishLady
Veteran Expediter
Did you see the reporters and Court Spokesperson session?
The spokesperson explained what happens if First Degree is found and what will happen if the lesser charges are found.
Not once did she talk about if Anthony is found innocent.
Unbelievable
(Not saying it is what I hope for btw - just saying it seems unprofessional)
The spokesperson explained what happens if First Degree is found and what will happen if the lesser charges are found.
Not once did she talk about if Anthony is found innocent.
Unbelievable
(Not saying it is what I hope for btw - just saying it seems unprofessional)
HLN's coverage is the worst. The banner during the trial reads "Justice for Caylee". Huh? What if the mother was innocent? How is that justice for the dead child?
No wonder I don't watch tv
No wonder I don't watch tv
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Nope, they can deliberate for weeks but if I remember right, the judge can set a time limit on how much time they have if they can't come to an agreement.
EnglishLady said:
Why? This is the issue I have, the public wants to see her hang but our system needs to work. 8 hours isn't a long time for a case like this and if they render a verdict in less than ten hours, it looks like they either had their mind made up and the defense should poll the jury or they didn't see the case as beyond that reasonable doubt.
EnglishLady said:
Well I think these are the same people who feel that reporting 24/7 on the case is the only thing that they have to look forward to.
Nope, turn it off when it comes on.
EnglishLady said:
Well she doesn't have to. They can't retry her in state court and the feds unless they have a really good and valid reason can't do a thing about it so she walks.
I expect her to be convicted but that conviction will be overturned and the case end.
Why would her lawyer be disbarred? Look at what he has to work with, practically nothing. His job is to convince one member of the jury that there is some doubt, nothing more. And based on the OJ trial, there's plenty of dopes out there.
So throw a bunch of theories out there and see if one will work on a juror. It's not his job to prove any of them, and with his client not testifying he knew there was no worry of cross examination.
The judge [who was pretty impressive too] had to cite numerous violations of law and the judge's rules on Baez' part. I'm betting he will be up before the state Bar to explain as soon as his presence is no longer required in court. He SERIOUSLY ticked off the judge, many times over, and the judge saved it up, rather than call a mistrial.
PS Sue: no time limit, but I read somewhere that one jury member has a cruise booked later this week....
I'll take that bet Cheri. Oh, 1 cream and half a sugar.