Casey Anthony Got Off

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by savafan

This hasn't been proven.

The FBI forensics expert testified that his tests revealed chloroform in the trunk:

Rickenbach, however, remained steadfast that chloroform was found inside the trunk – a constant theme among the testimony of prosecution experts during the trial.

“Residues of chloroform were detected on that specimen,” said Rickenbach, referring to a carpet sample taken from the trunk.

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-nat...-of-chloroform

Why have you chosen not to believe him?

[Slyder]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The FBI forensics expert testified that his tests revealed chloroform in the trunk:

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-nat...-of-chloroform

Why have you chosen not to believe him?

Didn't cadaver dogs hit on the trunk too?

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Slyder

Didn't cadaver dogs hit on the trunk too?

Absolutely

http://www.people.com/people/article...500758,00.html

I honestly can't see how any juror can say that evidence was lacking for a manslaughter conviction

[RedFanAlways1966]

Cindy Anthony's claim that she carried out the many chloroform searches occurred at a time when her time card as a nurse showed that she was working. Cindy Anthony claims she left work early on those days.

Sounds like someone should be fired for falsifying a time card. Of course she probably was at work. Is it too long of time for the hospital to have video evidence? If so and she was seen at the hospital on video, then proceed with the perjury charge.

[RBA]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The FBI forensics expert testified that his tests revealed chloroform in the trunk:

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-nat...-of-chloroform

Why have you chosen not to believe him?

Dr. Michael Sigman, a chemistry professor at the University of Central Florida, testified Wednesday that the trunk of Casey’s Pontiac Sunfire showed tracess of gasoline, chloroform and other chemicals. Those chemicals are associated with human decomposition, but they are also linked to onions, cabbages and Chlorox. The doctor testified that the compounds “gave very low responses”.
He told the defense attorney, “I cannot conclusively determine that there had been human remains in the trunk of the car.”

http://earsucker.com/2011/casey-anth...ing-to-expert/

I am not an expert in chloroform, but isn't it use to knock people out and not kill them? This is what I learned by wathing TV/Movies. However, I think Casey Anthony did use it. I think she was using it to knock her child out so she can go out partying. But something went wrong with her plan.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by RBA

I am not an expert in chloroform, but isn't it use to knock people out and not kill them? This is what I learned by wathing TV/Movies. However, I think Casey Anthony did use it. I think she was using it to knock her child out so she can go out partying. But something went wrong with her plan.

I think that's very plausible hence a manslaughter or Murder 2 conviction. I don't understand the jury aquitting on all the charges of being responsible for this kid's death

[RBA]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I think that's very plausible hence a manslaughter or Murder 2 conviction. I don't understand the jury aquitting on all the charges of being responsible for this kid's death

And I don't understand the prosecution going for Murder 1 and the Death Penalty. I think the media (Nancy Grace) and social media got the best of them.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by RBA

And I don't understand the prosecution going for Murder 1 and the Death Penalty. I think the media (Nancy Grace) and social media got the best of them.

They can go for whatever they want but that didn't limit what the jury could come back with.

[top6]

I didn't follow this case one way or the other, but these sort of personal attacks on the jurors are disgusting.

I put people who would personally attack a juror for rendering a verdict that they disagree with on the same level as people who would yell at soldiers returning from war because they don't like U.S. foreign policy. It's disgusting, it's un-American (as much as I usually hate that phrase), and the people doing it are as bad as that Reverend Phelps creep.

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The first jurors who've been given interviews.

You admit you haven't followed this closely. Was it news to you that Cindy Anthony was at work when she claimed to have been using Casey's computer for chloroform searches?

As I understand it, there was a major issue as to whether someone other that Casey had performed the web search, and therefore it was not unreasonable for the jury to feel that the web search issue was not significant. Particularly when there was also a major issue as to whether chloroform was even involved in the death. In any event, I was responding to the staement in post #46 that it was an established fact that Casey had performed this search. It wasn't.

Just curious- is there anybody here who can say they followed this case closely?

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by WMR

Pretty much this exactly.

That they didn't find her guilty of Felony Child Abuse and Manslaughter at the MINIMUM is appalling.

Just curious- what is the applicable Abuse Law and what was the judge's charge on this issue?

[fearofpopvol1]

Originally Posted by top6

I didn't follow this case one way or the other, but these sort of personal attacks on the jurors are disgusting.

I put people who would personally attack a juror for rendering a verdict that they disagree with on the same level as people who would yell at soldiers returning from war because they don't like U.S. foreign policy. It's disgusting, it's un-American (as much as I usually hate that phrase), and the people doing it are as bad as that Reverend Phelps creep.

I agree with this 100%. I think it's okay to disagree with a jury's finding, but to verbally attack them in the manner that some have is disgusting.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Mutaman

As I understand it, there was a major issue as to whether someone other that Casey had performed the web search, and therefore it was not unreasonable for the jury to feel that the web search issue was not significant. Particularly when there was also a major issue as to whether chloroform was even involved in the death. In any event, I was responding to the staement in post #46 that it was an established fact that Casey had performed this search. It wasn't.

Just curious- is there anybody here who can say they followed this case closely?

Who else could have done the search? 2 yr old Caylee?

My staff had it on all day at work so yes, I'd say I do qualify as someone who watched it closely.

These are the facts as I understand them:

Casey's computer did a lot of searches for chloroform and there's evidence that chloroform and a dead body was in the trunk of her car.

Do you doubt any of those facts?

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

My staff had it on all day at work so yes, I'd say I do qualify as someone who watched it closely.

You watch TV at work? You let your staff watch TV at work?

[Mutaman]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

Who else could have done the search? 2 yr old Caylee?
?

See post # 48