Casey Anthony trial...

[zoebartlett]

About the death penalty...

I used to be neutral about the death penalty until almost 2 years ago. Then there was a case involving people I care about, and I'm definitely for the death penalty now. I believe in an eye for an eye.

 

[Amber St. Clare]

(BTW if anyone followed the Darlie Routier case, her husband is finally divorcing her.)

What's your opinion on this case?

 

[mary poppins]

Just to clarify, Krystal Holloway goes by the name River Cruz (Hispanic spelling) not River Cruise (as in we went on a cruise) because her father called her River and her mother's maiden name is Cruz. Supposedly that's all. Sounds like a stripper name, but she definitely doesn't look like stripper material.

The following charges are pending against Casey Anthony:

* First-degree murder
* Aggravated child abuse
* Aggravated manslaughter of a child
* 4 counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer:
o That she worked at Universal Orlando in 2008,
o That she left Caylee with a babysitter named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez,
o That she told Jeffrey Hopkins and Juliette Lewis that Caylee was missing,
o That she received a phone call from Caylee on July 15, 2008.

The prosecution has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable the statutory elements of each charge. The jury must determine that each element of a particular crime is met before convicting. Emotions are flying high among commentators on PS and elsewhere, but it just boils down to the facts that can be presented and the law. The prosecution doesn't have much, if any, direct connections here. It's all suppositions and inferences. The prosecution is asking the jury to make a lot of leaps based on gaps in facts. Should be interesting to see what happens, especially with Cindy's testimony about the timing of internet searches of chloroform in light of her employer's records.

Italia, your response indicates that my comment warrants clarification.

With all due respect, most of what you just mentioned has been discussed and highlighted in the 10+ pages prior to this, including a legal flow chart laying out what the charges are and what the penalties of said charges could be if the jury concludes her guilty of the various crimes. I would considered us all well versed on those issues, emotions aside.

The flowchart you posted did not contain the statutory elements of each charge. In addition, the link to the flowchart does not work and was not working at the time I posted. Therefore, I listed the charges. The statutes were very long, some included a lot of irrelevant portions and would have taken a long time to post. I referenced the statutes and charges so any curious or interested person could look up the exact elements and consider them in light of the standard of proof, burden of proof and circumstantial nature.

Also note that when I originally posted, Cindy Anthony testified that she conducted the computer searches in question. Flimsy story as it may be, it had the significant potential of removing the intent element from applying to Casey. Cindy's employer had not yet testified and the associated records were not in evidence. That made knowing the elements of the other charges even more important. Indeed, yesterday a commentator who is a former prosecutor said that prior to the employer's testimony, first degree murder was off the table. Everyone is entitled to an opinion though.

I don't think you're in position to speak for everyone and their level of knowledge or understanding of the issues in this case.

Where you see giant leaps, I see stepping stones. We certainly don't have to agree on that, this case has always been circumstantial--no one was expected the smoking gun, Perry Mason moment.

I didn't say giant leaps. I said a lot of leaps, as in assumptions or the gaps in between the stepping stones, which to me would be the elements. I think you're comment is going to a distance idea, as in the stretch required for each assumption to bring each portion the circumstantial evidence together to draw a conclusion. Either way, they are gaps which, regardless of size, can lead to inability to prove a case. Conflicting evidence or missing evidence can cause a gap, in which case the state does not meet its burden. There is a lot of conflicting and missing evidence for this jury to consider. The members of the jury are certainly not in an enviable position.

But, in my opinion, the the prosecution has laid out a compelling case where the nuts and bolts do fit together and create a plausible scenario, in which no one BUT Casey Anthony had the opportunity or vested interest in seeing this little girl dead. The only vertical leaps, again in my opinion, were posed by the defense--and they never followed through.

As has previously been stated, the prosecution must prove it's case "beyond a reasonable doubt," not just pose "a plausible scenario." It is a very high standard and it must be met for each element of a crime charged. I'm not sure what you are referring to as a "vertical leap." Based on this and your prior posts, it seems you think the defense did not prove the theories it set forth, i.e. didn't meet the hurdles, hence "vertical". The defense doesn't have to prove anything. I would agree that the defense certainly seems to have undermined its position and credibility by setting forth several and conflicting alternate scenarios. But the suggestions are there for the jury to consider and prevent stepping to or securely on the next stone.

After closing arguments, the jury will receive instructions to clarify the legal issues, meaning of "beyond a reasonable doubt," and the elements of each crime Casey is charged with. I don't know whether the television audience will hear that part, so I'm trying to attach a rather large document containing Florida's pattern (standard) jury instructions for those who want to check them out.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/entireversion/onlinejurryinstructions.pdf

Now, let's address the emotional aspects of this case and the effect it's had on the people following it--myself, obviously, included. Let us not forget that a two year old child was duct taped, triple bagged, and thrown in a swamp where animals gnawed on her bones for six months, all the while her own mother was in hot body contests, crying about being in prison, getting tattoo's and holing up in her boyfriends bed. Someone needs to be emotional about this, because the child's own mother is not. This case needs to remain visceral for people, so that the real atrocity of this crime isn't lost in the sensationalism of it. People are angry, furious that this little girl's life amounted to nothing more than a bag of garbage on the side of the road. It's hard not to be emotional about that, and those are the facts, no matter what side you fall on.

I am certainly not unsympathetic to Caylee's plight or the emotional impact this situation has on the entire Anthony family as well as others involved in this case, including other witnesses and the jury. In addition, I do not lack understanding of the general public's view of the case.

My comment about emotions was in reference to others' summary, negative emotional comments about the defendant and defense counsel, and that being a basis to convict. Perhaps they were just flippant remarks. I would hope so. I believe the judicial process is important and should not be taken lightly. Again, the decision regarding whether to convict is based on the facts and the law presented at trial, not emotions towards the defendant or defense counsel. The jury will receive those pattern instructions, also.

Information obtained by tabloid television, Nancy Grace and the book Mommy's Little Girl is not relevant, but is frequently cited in this thread in response to people's questions about the trial.

 

[megumic]

Can't wait for closing arguments tomorrow morning. Highlight of my July, considering the rest will be spent studying for the dang bar!

 

[JewelFreak]

Good luck, Megumic. No fun way to spend the summer!

It amazed me that Judge Perry felt he needed to make an order that in closing arguments you can't argue facts not in evidence. Law 101. I doubt any judge has ever needed to explain kindergarten-level law to an atty before -- but he's done it for Baez throughout the trial, in addition to occasionally telling him how to ask a question after multiple sustained objections. The guy is a moron!

With all the charges & all the evidence I'm thinking it will be quite a long deliberation. Agree?

--- Laurie

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Mary Poppins I won't be quoting the entire thing you just said for the sake of space...

I get what you're saying. Totally, 100%, with you.

The flow chart, when it worked--it must have been pulled, sorry about that--explained WHAT the Jury had to agree Casey was guilty of, in order to find her guilty of that particular charge. It included all the charges, the possible sentences, and the time she could incur if found guilty.

In Florida, the statute is, that if a person is found guilty of "aggravated child abuse resulting in the death of a minor" it becomes a first degree felony murder punishable by death. So while we can all say the premeditation of this crime is thready, even if for just a moment--especially following Cindy's bombshell lie--there is a loop hole that the Jurists can use to still punish her to maximum extent of the law.

You said leaps. Okay. Fine. You right. But, it's essentially the same thing, and the verbiage doesn't change the message. You're seeing a very circumstantial case with holes between crucial events. I'm seeing a case where XY and Z happened...so what are the chances that this girl is really innocent and anyone else had a hand in this? What are the chances that "someone" researched chloroform, elevated chloroform levels were found in "that someone's" car along with the smell of decomp, "that someone's" child is missing and not reported because a fake babysitter stole her, and then "that someone's" child is later found, thrown in the woods the same way that someone buried their pets? All circumstantial, I'll give you that, but what are the real world chances all those circumstances or coincidences happened to one single person? I'm guess it's in the millions to one.

The defense does not have to prove anything, obviously, but what they claim, also, cannot be taken as gospel, cannot even be addressed in closing since there is no evidence of it. When Baez opened that Pandora's box, they took a burden--legally or not-- and now they owed the Jury the understanding of that, a reason why it was true. Because, let us not forget, the Jury isn't full of legal eagles, it's full of real, flesh and blood people...moms, dads, grandparents...real people who have the natural inclination to want things proven and explained, not just firework statements left hanging in the air. Simply saying something doesn't make it true, and without the facts to back it up, they're just words and theories.

Now, I know you're going to say, "But they'll be told, the prosecution has prove everything! The jury will be told that the defense owes them nothing!"...and you're right, they will be told just that. But, as a human being, can you really leave everything behind--everything you heard to confuse you with no viable proof to back it up--could you? Maybe. But maybe, even if you really, really wanted to forget it, it would fester in the back of your mind. For me, it absolutely would.

My comment on vertical leaps was based on that fact. If you follow the defenses theory, you have to jump from one scenario to another. You have to believe that a loving grandfather, an ex-police office, would find his dead granddaughter, duct tape her, throw her in the woods, a meter reader would have to come along, find the remains, take them home, store them, put them back, call the cops a bunch of time... It's a crazy set of circumstances. It's to believe that little girl, Caylee, could have so much bad luck, fall into so many corrupt hands. The bad luck of having a mother who feared the consequences of accident so viscerally that she'd agree to throw her daughter away, an imaginative nanny who could be the fall guy, a father willing to comply, a dirty meter man...those are the leaps, because all of that had to happen before any of it could happen.

If you're a legal purist, following only the letter of the law, I am impressed, I could never do that. But this is a forum. It's not a court of law, and we can work a little differently, discuss a little differently, we're not under the same microscope. We can say Baez is a moron and Casey is a b**** and that's fine. I, however, don't recall a place where anyone said "I hate Casey, convict her"...we've discussed at length why we feel she's guilty of the charges and would like to see her found guilty. Likewise, I don't recall anyone saying "Baez is dumb, she should be put to death for hiring him"...we've discussed at length why some of us feel that he was inadequate to try this case. Those are opinions, this is a conversation, the two go hand in hand. I'm sorry if flippant comments have offended you, but that's the risk always run when a hot bed topic is being dissected for everyone to weigh in on...you're not going to like everything you hear, but that doesn't make it less valid than your own thoughts and opinions.

Did you read the book, Mommy's Little Girl? I did. I can say, for certain, that it wasn't a tabloid rag. No opinions were really rendered, but the facts of what happened to Caylee were stated. The author went in tandem to the investigation, she followed the timeline and reveled what was discovered. That's all.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Jeff Ashton just set that court room on fire.

Casey Anthony is going to have a severe stress break down.

 

[lizzyann]

OMG Italia! What happened?! I'm watching cartoons with my DS!!!! Fill us in!

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Jeff Ashton basically said everything we've speculated all along...

Caylee interfered with the life, the Bella Vita, Casey wanted. Caylee was getting bigger, older, learning to share her experiences and verbalize the sort of parenting Casey did when they were alone and that that fact, that pending comeuppance, dampened Casey's life. That Casey, all along, had constructed the sort of circumstances that allowed her the balance to party and parent--from her job requiring her to work nights, to the babysitter, and so forth. But the time had come, Casey had to make a choice between being a mother and being a 22 year old girl, and she chose the latter. He even referenced the "countdown" to the decision, in terms of a clock Casey had posted on her Myspace wall.

IMO, it resonated, it was made sense. It took everything we know, and gave us a reason for it working out like it did.

He very smoothly laid out the evidence. The reason for the three pieces of duct tape, to entirely smother the Caylee, cutting off her air supply and killing her. He discussed Casey's actions in the following month...the parting, the celebration of her freedom, the way she bought herself time.

It was brilliance.

 

[JewelFreak]

Superb closing by Ashton. So far Baez's has been heavy going but I'm polishing silver while I watch it, making it a constructive experience. His points about the people who didn't smell decomp in the car could be something to hang a lesser conviction on if a juror is looking for it, but I'm sure Ashton will take care of them in his next turn.

I'm dumb! Always thought I was reasonably intelligent but I never thought about Caylee's learning to talk as the reason she had to die NOW. Duh, Laurie!

Through the trial I've thought it possible it could have been an accident -- that Casey chloroformed Caylee as she xanaxed her & she o.d.'d, then Casey dealt w/it in her characteristic lying fashion. Brilliant of the prosecution to put the computer analyst on the stand last to nail her computer searches down. The "neck-breaking" & "household weapons" tell the story: she was looking for ways to kill her kid. No way to evade that, though I'm sure Baez will try some weasely idea.

And Casey sits, looking like Juliet, tragic & victimized. Oh yeah.

--- Laurie

 

[Italiahaircolor]

My guess is that Caylee was getting older. At 3 years old, Caylee would have been able to verbally express Casey's "parenting" style...Mommy doesn't go to work, who is Zanny...it was getting to the point where Casey would have either had to stand up and be the parent/bread winner she pretended to be, or she would have had to own her shortcomings. She wasn't prepared or willing to do either. The social circle she was running in wasn't showing signs of stopping or slowing down...they were young kids ready to party, not parent. The men she associated with were going to school to be club promoters. She wanted that life for herself and to be part of that, she wasn't prepared for motherhood. When Caylee was a baby, it was easier to pull off the balance, but those days were winding down. She made a decision.

I had suspected the whole "Caylee getting older" thing from the beginning. Always in the back of my mind, along with a lot of other reasons why maybe this happened like it did, but that was always my gut feeling for why Caylee had to die now.

Baez, well, he's trying today. He's attempting to visibly punch holes in the case with his show-boards. But, IMO, he took it way too long. The jury, while they're probably running on adrenaline because it's almost their time, probably zoned in and out of what he was saying. It's easier to sit through a two hour movie than a four hour movie, you know?

I was totally floored when Baez made the comment about how, when a child is being abused, everyone knows--so since no one thought Caylee was abused, she must not have been. He made that statement like it was blanket fact...where, it is my belief, that child abuse isn't always a glaringly obvious thing. It can happen quietly, and sometimes people don't know. I doubt I'm the only one who thinks that way, and it may have cost him some points with the jury, especially if anyone on there has the ability to speak about knowing someone who was abused having NO idea it was happening.

I also started to wonder something else today....a little late, obviously...but it's bugging me....

I always assumed Casey didn't hand Caylee over because the relationship with her mother was contentious. Giving her daughter to Cindy would be like admitting weakness, and give Cindy the upper hand. But I'm wondering now if Casey didn't give Caylee away because she feared, if she did so, she'd be rendered insignificant. There'd be no reason to keep Casey in the house, no reason to keep covering her living expenses, and cleaning up her mistakes...because George and Cindy would have what they wanted, they'd have Caylee. Casey would lose out on her parents.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Oh, great move by the judge! Now the jury will be fresh in the morning for the prosecution rebuttal.

 

[JewelFreak]

I always assumed Casey didn't hand Caylee over because the relationship with her mother was contentious. Giving her daughter to Cindy would be like admitting weakness, and give Cindy the upper hand. But I'm wondering now if Casey didn't give Caylee away because she feared, if she did so, she'd be rendered insignificant. There'd be no reason to keep Casey in the house, no reason to keep covering her living expenses, and cleaning up her mistakes...because George and Cindy would have what they wanted, they'd have Caylee. Casey would lose out on her parents.

They would never have stopped throwing it in her face, Italia, and she knew that. She had their number all her life -- manipulated them beautifully & she was aware of how they'd make her pay. You're right, no more goodies AND a lot of lectures & sarcastic comments. Forever. Narcissists can't handle not being admired.

 

[VapidLapid]

Havent loked at this thread in a few days; the subject makes me sick and I have nightmares about it. I only looked back in when I started reading an article on cnn.com about some boy kept in a cage and killed and encased in cement and when I got to the part about his step mother making him write out the reasons he thought he was in the cage while everyone else was out playing I just got sick and stopped reading hoping not to hear more about it while hoping also that they get, so much, what they have coming. But I started thinking then that caylee was getting to the age where she could casually inform on what was happening in her world, and so was becoming a threat.

So I also started thinking that kids should have some kind of invisible underground movement, a not so secret society of children that gives them a chance to communicate to appropriate authorities through an invisible chain. I mean the ubiquitous neighbors kid sees through the privet tells older sibling who tells friend from school who tells counselor who tells protective services. Obviously this would be ad hoc and essentially informal, and would need to be for kids to feel safe with it, but couldnt there be a program that kids are told about in school a few times every year that makes it easy for them to say if they think someone else might be unsafe? That lets the information filter up through the community of kids so they are in some kind of control of what's said in their names? Would it be enough to go into schools and talk to kids assembly like and encourage them to organize their own network? I dont have a kid so I dont know what is already happening, but this 12 year old boy starving in a dog cage writing notes that he is in the cage and hungry because he still hopes his real mother will come back for him was heartbreaking.

Sorry Ive gone off subject. One small thought. Given how casey takes a fragment of truth and spins a larger deceit from it, I am considering the possibility that SHE may have molested LEE if there was any molestation at all.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Sorry Ive gone off subject. One small thought. Given how casey takes a fragment of truth and spins a larger deceit from it, I am considering the possibility that SHE may have molested LEE if there was any molestation at all.

I think if anything like that happened, and I'm not saying it did--there is no evidence that anything occurred, other than Baez claiming it did, and Casey claiming it it did...

BUT...

I would think, if it happened, it may have been mutual experimentation. No way is 100 pound Casey over to overpower Lee and molest him against his will. Depending on their ages, and they are close in age, it could have been curiosity that kind of took that left hand turned. It gross, and I want to throw up thinking about it...but Casey does, as you said, take a small bit of truth and then construct a huge lie out of it.

Actually, when the FBI asked Lee point blank, have you ever molested Casey his response was I don't want to talk about that now. That does strike me as odd, since I'd imagine the natural response if there was no hanky panky going on would be HELL NO. But that wasn't the case.

But, who knows. That family is so shrouded in lies and cover ups and more lies. At the end of the day, does any of that even matter? Kind of like George's supposed affair...does it matter? Does it change anything or reason away anything? No. Not at all.

Casey could have been a good mother, because or in spite, of her own upbringing. She could have wanted different things for her own child, and put in the work to see that happen. She could have been a single mother on food stamps leaning on the YWCA, working her fingers to the bone to bring home minimum wage and never asked George and Cindy for a single red cent. She could have loved Caylee so fiercely that and protected her from the big, bad monsters she claims lived in that house. But, she didn't. And Caylee is dead. George didn't kill her, whether he had an affair or not...Lee didn't kill her, whether they messed around or not...Cindy didn't kill her, whether she was a tough mother or not...CASEY KILLED CAYLEE, no one else. So, nothing else matters. It just muddies the water, which is what reasonable doubt it essentially is, but it doesn't matter when you're looking ONLY at the major issue.

 

[JewelFreak]

Jeff Ashton was excellent as always this a.m. I have a hard time listening to his colleague, Linda Whatsit. I don't like her. Her voice is sharp, for one thing, and holy cow, it takes her twice as long as anyone else to say something -- those loooong pauses between sentences. Kept thinking, "Spit it out already!" Even agreeing with what she said, I found myself thinking I'd do the opposite, just not to cooperate with her. Unusually strong reaction on my part.

Well, now we wait. I expect a long deliberation. Don't have twitter, so I'll be checking the computer or tv about 100 times a day!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I actually thought Linda D-B did a great job. I actually had tears a couple of times from her final summary. Overall, the prosecution did an excellent job with the rebuttal. I don't see how they can come to any conclusion other than 1st degree, unless they disregard what they are supposed to be doing.

 

[Sha]

Interesting takes on the rebuttal. I'm sorry I missed it. What were the pain points that came out? How long did it take? What was Casey's reaction during it?

 

[texaskj]

(BTW if anyone followed the Darlie Routier case, her husband is finally divorcing her.)

What's your opinion on this case?

Amber, sorry it's taken so long to reply; I spent most of the weekend sweating to death doing yard work. And taking a LOT of breaks.
I think the whole Darlie Routier case smells worse than a week-old flounder. There's so many cases that may have been solved (Jonbenet Ramsey) if the local police department could check their egos at the door and call for help. I don't know that the Rowlett PD was negligent in this case, but there's also a lot of unanswered questions. What should happen, and probably never will, is for the state to try her on the murder of Devon to get some more things out in the open.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Interesting takes on the rebuttal. I'm sorry I missed it. What were the pain points that came out? How long did it take? What was Casey's reaction during it?

Today was basically the prosecution talking about who exactly benefited from the death of Caylee Anthony. They played audio, showed pictures, video of Casey's pure selfishness to hit the point home--she didn't care about anyone but herself. It was pretty powerful.

Casey sat there--pursed lips, mouthing things, crying--totally status quo, same as every other day. She didn't have any real melt down's today, but still waters run deep. She has to sit at the courthouse, all day alone, while the jury is deliberating. She has ZERO distractions from the fact that 12 strangers are deciding whether she lives or dies. I can imagine that it during her time alone that she has her crying jags, and freak outs and melt downs.

I also really liked Linda D-B's closing. Woman to woman, it was pretty powerful. She got up and talked about being a mother and what it takes to be a good mother. It was different coming from a woman. Jeff Ashton was awesome, all day long...but she was really good too.

At one point, she started talking about how the ONLY reason Caylee was well feed, dressed cute, had a roof over her head and toys to play with, was because of George and Cindy Anthony provided her with those things. That they loved that little girl more than anything in this whole world, and she was their life. That Casey didn't provide those things for Caylee, she only enjoyed the benefit's of them. That, to me, was really emotional.

 

[JewelFreak]

Italia, when did the drowning excuse first show up?

A few people have mentioned that the police should have done a diatom test on the bones & the pool water -- a match would be proof of drowning. It would need to have been done early, before the pool water was changed or added to. Defense didn't do it either (the famous Werner Spitz, whom I've seen testify elsewhere -- a big bag of ego every time -- didn't order one) but it had been a while by the time they got into the act.

Didn't the drowning story come up some time after Casey was charged w/murder? It wasn't immediately after the skeleton was found & she put into the clink again, was it?

--- Laurie

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Italia, when did the drowning excuse first show up?

A few people have mentioned that the police should have done a diatom test on the bones & the pool water -- a match would be proof of drowning. It would need to have been done early, before the pool water was changed or added to. Defense didn't do it either (the famous Werner Spitz, whom I've seen testify elsewhere -- a big bag of ego every time -- didn't order one) but it had been a while by the time they got into the act.

Didn't the drowning story come up some time after Casey was charged w/murder? It wasn't immediately after the skeleton was found & she put into the clink again, was it?

--- Laurie

The first time I remember a drowning being brought up was when Casey was first in jail, and Caylee was still "missing but alive". It was sort of an "in and out" theory, I mean, they were speculating that maybe Casey sold Caylee, maybe Casey was covering for someone...all sorts of suspicions were being bounced around. But, yes, the drowning was considered by the journalists trying to get to the bottom of things--I mean--this is Florida after all and pool drownings are the number one cause of death for children.

There is video of this out there somewhere...but Cindy said to Casey, in jail, "they're saying Caylee is dead...that she drown in the pool" and Casey said "surprise, surprise" with George sitting right there, he didn't even flinch when Cindy said it...and Casey totally blew it off like it was a stupid rumor.

I don't think the defense wanted to prove anything even if they could (and yes, everyone, I know they don't have to prove anything!). I don't think they ever investigated the drowning because it would have been proven that she didn't drown--and poof, there goes reasonable doubt. Anything they found, good, bad or indifferent, had to be turned over to the prosecution. So, if they were really going to run with the drowning/accidental death thing, they couldn't run the risk of it being proved factually incorrect. Right?

And that, IMO, is why it's BS. Like Jeff Ashton said, you don't take an accident and make it look like first degree murder. You don't make someone sit in jail for three years, facing the DP, when there is a test that can be done to exonerate her. It just defies common sense.

Listen, if I were a mother and this happened to me--my baby drown in the pool--first of all, you'd have to physically pick me up off the floor, because I'd be devastated, way too devastated to figure out how to cover it up--but that's beside the point. If I were a mother, and that was my dead baby, and my baby really died in the pool--but no one believed me--you'd bet I'd be screaming, at the top of my lungs, for someone to run that test, for someone do whatever it took. I'd be owning my mistakes from day one and no way would I take it this far before telling "the truth"...

My point is...if something could have been done, but wasn't...it's a further indicator of her guilt.

 

[Sha]

Interesting takes on the rebuttal. I'm sorry I missed it. What were the pain points that came out? How long did it take? What was Casey's reaction during it?

Today was basically the prosecution talking about who exactly benefited from the death of Caylee Anthony. They played audio, showed pictures, video of Casey's pure selfishness to hit the point home--she didn't care about anyone but herself. It was pretty powerful.

Casey sat there--pursed lips, mouthing things, crying--totally status quo, same as every other day. She didn't have any real melt down's today, but still waters run deep. She has to sit at the courthouse, all day alone, while the jury is deliberating. She has ZERO distractions from the fact that 12 strangers are deciding whether she lives or dies. I can imagine that it during her time alone that she has her crying jags, and freak outs and melt downs.

I also really liked Linda D-B's closing. Woman to woman, it was pretty powerful. She got up and talked about being a mother and what it takes to be a good mother. It was different coming from a woman. Jeff Ashton was awesome, all day long...but she was really good too.

At one point, she started talking about how the ONLY reason Caylee was well feed, dressed cute, had a roof over her head and toys to play with, was because of George and Cindy Anthony provided her with those things. That they loved that little girl more than anything in this whole world, and she was their life. That Casey didn't provide those things for Caylee, she only enjoyed the benefit's of them. That, to me, was really emotional.

Thanks! I saw a few clips on HLN last night and thought she was really good too.

 

[tyty333]

One of the reporters said that 3 of the jurors are dressed up more than usual today...1 has a suit on, 1 has a tie on and
1 has a sports jacket on. Maybe today will be the day!!!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

One of the reporters said that 3 of the jurors are dressed up more than usual today...1 has a suit on, 1 has a tie on and
1 has a sports jacket on. Maybe today will be the day!!!

I think that quote may have been from yesterday. They did say it in regard to yesterday, but it is possible they are just being prepared for whenever the verdict is reached.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

I am on twitter following Vinnie Politan, and although the jurors have ventured into 7 hours of deliberation...he made a point of saying they are "dressed up"...

 

[JewelFreak]

I never believed the drowning excuse -- too dumb for words. (I saw the video you mentioned.) Last night Dr. Baden said the police or prosecution should have done the test to disprove the claims. He couldn't understand why they didn't. But the diatoms would match the pool water only if it hadn't been changed -- & it was too late by the time the defense got the skeleton.

When did Baez (not reporters fantasizing) start yakking that it was a drowning? Before that, there was no reason for police & prosecution to check -- clearly a homicide. I can't remember when he came up with this wacky idea but think it was too late for the prosecution to test it too -- just wondered.

It would sure surprise me to see a verdict today. No sooner than tomorrow & maybe quite a bit longer. A lot of people on that jury were reluctant in voir dire to approve the DP so may not want to go for murder 1. There may be arguments going on for a bit. Not the best prosecution jury in the world. I hope they can grow some common sense & backbone in time.

--- Laurie

 

[shihtzulover]

I just heard that they have a verdict! We're supposed to hear in the next half hour or so.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

We have a verdict!!!!

 

[megumic]

We have a verdict!!!!

Woooo! Sitting on the edge of my couch waiting....