<p>So then how did you come up with your theory? Why do you think that Caylee drowned?</p>
<p>She also should have been charged with improper handling of a dead body. A guilty charge there would have shown that the jury didn’t believe the Geo story.</p>
<p>Juries can’t charge someone of something they aren’t charged with</p>
<p>The way most kids drown. Parent is forgetful and forgets to lock a door and the child wanders to the pool and drowns.</p>
<p>In this situation its possible that she left her child unattended near the pool to go do something else. Which IMHO is pretty negligent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re right but it seems odd she was not charged with improper disposal of a body, since there were some lesser charges like lying to a law enforcement officer. In case she were to claim it was an accidental death (which is what they did claim), then at least the manner of disposal of the body (which can be linked to her given what was found with the body, not to mention she claims the child did die by accident and they got rid of her and made it look like a murder) should have been in the charges. Perhaps they went too far to go after capital murder when some of these other charges may have been easier to prove? Just thinking.</p>
<p>jsanche…they did not prove the child drowned. There are many things that could happen to a child…she could have been accidentally run over by the family car and so on and so forth. Anyone can make up a story of accidents that can befall a toddler.</p>
<p>Lying to a PO is a non-issue IMHO.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL…this is rather funny that you call it a “non-issue” when a court of law just found her guilty of these charges which are indeed against the law!</p>
<p>This was a particularly egregious case of lying to a law enforcement officer because it wasn’t simply denying things, but outright misleading them with stories like the child was taken by a nanny and that Casey worked where she did not work, etc.</p>
<p>I was so happy to see the jury found the prosecution was not able to prove Casey’s guilt, because they did not. I do find it frightening that so many (including abhorrent television commentators like Nancy Grace) are ready to convict a person based on a story–because that is all the the entire case rested on–a story, backed up by videos of Casey partying. Jose Baez rose to the occasion in his closing remarks and in fact did a masterful job during the entire trial winning the jury over to his side. I believe Casey is a survivor of child abuse. Most psychiatrists attempted to say (before they were shut down by loud-mouth commentators) that Casey’s behavior is and always has been consistent with abuse. The family is obviously enmeshed and I agree with Dr. Keith Ablow (sp?) whom I saw on tv trying to get out his opinion that it is George Anthony who has a lot of explaining to do. I think Baez in his closing was absolutely correct that if the prosecution had spent time covering all angles (i.e. George) instead of being so intent on proclaiming Casey guilty there may have been more justice for Caylee in the end.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Follow the logic… Innocent until proven guilty. When proven not guilty the court merely reaffirms the original innocence.</p>
<p>Legally. Sure, she may have done it but according to law and tradition and the American way she is innocent…</p>
<p>It has no real bearing on her being guilty of murder.</p>
<p>Lying to a PO does not change the physical evidence one iota.</p>
<p>*The way most kids drown. Parent is forgetful and forgets to lock a door and the child wanders to the pool and drowns.</p>
<p>In this situation its possible that she left her child unattended near the pool to go do something else. Which IMHO is pretty negligent. *</p>
<p>Yes…it is possible that Casey put the ladder up, got distracted, and Caylee got in the pool. Casey didn’t want to be blamed so, she </p>
<p>If that’s true, the Casey/defense claim is…</p>
<p>Cindy left the ladder up…so Cindy is to blame</p>
<p>Geo found the body…and agreed to hide it.</p>
<p>I don’t see how she can go back and live at home with Geo there. George is furious about the accusations and both parents must be livid about this either way…if it was a drowning, Casey shouldn’t have put the family thru this…and if it wasn’t she’s evil.</p>
<p>The jury refuses to be interviewed…they don’t want to have their faces/names known.</p>
<p>*Juries can’t charge someone of something they aren’t charged with *</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>Juries don’t “charge” ever… The prosecution does…and she should have been charged with improper handling of a body .</p>
<p>Also it is interesting that even here people seem to believe that the defense has to “prove” anything. Their job is to poke holes in the prosecutions theory and raise reasonable doubt. Period. It is the prosecution’s job to “prove” guilt.</p>
<p>In her situation (On trial for your freedom or life), the only person you can think about is yourself. Everybody else is expendable.</p>
<p>So I’m honestly not surprised she blamed it on her parents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Throughout the trial I watched various people’s reactions to questioning and thought, “I wonder what I body-language expert would say about that.” I hope someone does a behavioral analysis of the trial tapes and suggests some theories about who was lying about what. I know it’s meaningless at this point, but it would be fascinating anyway.</p>
<p>Overall, the defense team did an excellent job of repeatedly making it clear that the burden is on the prosecution to prove everything beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution, in my opinion, did not go after Casey with the right charges. The first degree murder charge was a huge stretch, and the prosecution’s only hope was that emotion ruled the deliberation room and not fact, logic, and reason. Therefore, if they could not prove the circumstances of the murder or give any hard evidence, the lesser charge of 2nd degree also gets thrown out the window. This case was a murder trial, and the other charges of abuse/manslaughter were going to have a hard time getting a guilty verdict if they could not prove Count 1. </p>
<p>Victory for the legal system. Innocent until proven guilty, and all I have to say to the prosecution is where’s your proof? Where’s the evidence for chloroform? Where’s the evidence that it was in fact Caylee’s body in the car? Where’s your cause of death?</p>
<p>If it is true that it was an accidental drowning (hypothetically speaking, going by Casey’s claim), why would it not come out as such until the opening statement of the trial? Once she was up for capital murder, wouldn’t she have told her parents at that juncture that the child accidentally drowned? Why was it that the defense never claimed this either in all the time leading up to the trial?</p>
<p>Has anyone else thought that maybe the police should have waited longer to arrest Casey? I wonder if they had let her go a few more months but spied on her, interviewing her friends and such, that eventually she would have spilled the beans.</p>
<p>yeah, whatever reason they decided they had a death penalty case with THIS kind of lack of evidence? The fact that the PA was laughing at the defense attorney during summation? It reminded me of a junior high boy.</p>
<p>Not an effective technique.</p>
<p>Best case, they should have gone for negligent homicide (whatever that is actually called in legal terms), and I bet she would have pled out on it. Saved the state a bundle in money, time and embarrasment.</p>
<p>For me, I would really question that office. Who on earth decided this was a death penatly case? (Personally I’m opposed to the death penalty, since I do not think the best way to teach people not to kill is to kill people.)</p>
<p>P.S. where were all of you on Saturday when I said there was too much reasonable doubt to convict and was accused of being crazy and inattentive?</p>