Casey Anthony Trial

[cbtslave4u2]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

OJ didn't have to go to Florida!

BTW: she NEVER admitted to anything! that's why she has 4 guilty verdicts of lying to the police!

yes she did. "she drowned in the pool". is she lying AGAIN?!

[slave1987]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

Strange that other reasons didn't "spring" to mind! The one where you had every thing to do with covering up how the child died or that the grandfather was Caylee's biological father! Those would two reasons that you wouldn't want asked during a test which was supposed to "exclude" you from suspicion!

I was responding to someone who asked "If you have nothing to hide, why would you refuse to take a lie detector test to ensure you had nothing to do with the death of Caylee Anthony?"

Maybe you should read the whole post before commenting?

[slave1987]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

I can't believe people actually believe it a common thing to beat a lie detector! It takes skilled techniques to create a "false positive" or an incompetent detector operator. In this instance, I'm sure neither of those factors would be present to get less than an accurate reading. Forget about what you've read about a "thumbtack under the toe" or "biting your tongue" -- those are easily detected by a skilled operator.

I'm not saying that beating them is a common thing, but false positives can and do occur.

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by Damned

I don't care what ya'll think. The bitch should've gotten the death sentence. There is no way in hell that she should have been found not guilty. The evidence pointed to her, but the legal systems are fucked up and they'll ignore it. She deserves to be dead, for killing her daughter. Hate me all you want, I don't fucking care. She killed an innocent two year old, who had done NOTHING. Personally if my daughter had gone missing, I would have reported it immediately, not 31 days later. The bitch did kill Caylee, its obvious.

Even if you had been abusing your daughter for most of her life and you were starting to get the same feeling toward your grand-daughter (in this case, Caylee would be your biological daughter also!). I don't think so! Why are you so quick to eliminate the possibility that Casey's father had molested her and possibly fathered Caylee? You would say "There is no evidence of any of that being true!" Guess what? The jury said the exact same thing! "There is not a SINGLE shred of evidence that Casey Anthony caused the death of Caylee Anthony and we're not going live the rest of our lives thinking we made a big mistake by convicting her!" That's why the jury was unanimous in the decision. 100% of the jury didn't believe Casey caused Caylee's death!

If we convict people because we "think" they're guilty, then Damned is guilty of killing Caylee! I "think" you did it so it MUST be true! Remember one of the rights that we all hope is used to judge us:

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW BY A JURY OF OUR PEERS!

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by slave1987

I was responding to someone who asked "If you have nothing to hide, why would you refuse to take a lie detector test to ensure you had nothing to do with the death of Caylee Anthony?"

Maybe you should read the whole post before commenting?

Since I was the one who posted that question, maybe you need to read the whole post before commenting!

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by cbtslave4u2

yes she did. "she drowned in the pool". is she lying AGAIN?!

Where EXACTLY did Casey Anthony say in court, UNDER OATH OF PERJURY, that Caylee "drowned in the pool"???

Just because her defense attorney suggested it as what "may" have happened, it doesn't mean she "admitted" saying it herself! It doesn't work that way! (Also a very good reason Casey never took the stand)

Plus it would have happened in Casey's parents pool and in their presence so you would have to prove the "neglect" on Casey. She had no control over whether the proper safety precautions were in place for children around that pool. It would fall on the scumbag father (who should be sent to prison for his repeated child sexual abuses -- I wonder how long he would last in prison general population with a CHILD MOLESTER tag on him. Since he is an ex-cop, he might last a few days before he is literally torn apart!)

[nellybell]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

Even if you had been abusing your daughter for most of her life and you were starting to get the same feeling toward your grand-daughter (in this case, Caylee would be your biological daughter also!). I don't think so! Why are you so quick to eliminate the possibility that Casey's father had molested her and possibly fathered Caylee? You would say "There is no evidence of any of that being true!" Guess what? The jury said the exact same thing! "There is not a SINGLE shred of evidence that Casey Anthony caused the death of Caylee Anthony and we're not going live the rest of our lives thinking we made a big mistake by convicting her!" That's why the jury was unanimous in the decision. 100% of the jury didn't believe Casey caused Caylee's death!

If we convict people because we "think" they're guilty, then Damned is guilty of killing Caylee! I "think" you did it so it MUST be true! Remember one of the rights that we all hope is used to judge us:

INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW BY A JURY OF OUR PEERS!

You may possibly be ten times worse in trying to crucify Casey's dad than the media was to her. There is no proof that Casey's dad was also Caylee's. None. All you have is the word of a girl who had lied to the cops repeatedly. He may have had something to do with it, but no one will EVER know and your claim is completely unsubstanciated.

You only have some girl, who also never said that he touched her under oath because she never took the stand, Who is on trial for murdering her child and who has a history of saying and lying about anything to get out of trouble. You take her word as god though. However you completely shrug off the fact that there is rather damning evidence that she, at the very least, had something to so with it. Blinding hypocracy. Especially for being all about the solid evidence.

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by nellybell

You may possibly be ten times worse in trying to crucify Casey's dad than the media was to her. There is no proof that Casey's dad was also Caylee's. None. All you have is the word of a girl who had lied to the cops repeatedly. He may have had something to do with it, but no one will EVER know and your claim is completely unsubstanciated.

You only have some girl, who also never said that he touched her under oath because she never took the stand, Who is on trial for murdering her child and who has a history of saying and lying about anything to get out of trouble. You take her word as god though. However you completely shrug off the fact that there is rather damning evidence that she, at the very least, had something to so with it. Blinding hypocracy. Especially for being all about the solid evidence.

That is exactly the reasoning that SHOULD have been taken by this prosecution. There was not a single bit of evidence presented by the district attorney that Casey was the one who killed Caylee, that she knew when or where Caylee was killed or that Casey was the one who disposed of the child in the woods. No evidence that Casey had ever been in those woods her entire life! But, somehow, this 25-year old became a criminal mastermind, able to wipe any existence of her involvement in a murder quite easily. I think this kind of "cover-up" would be best accomplished by someone who is a serial killer OR someone who has investigated homicides before and knew what "things" the police look for in determining the guilty person. Oh, what do you know, Casey's Father was a homicide detective!

Since Caylee was born somewhere and appeared healthy in the all the photos I saw of the child when she was alive, she was at a doctor or delivered in a hospital so there is pretty good chance some blood or DNA was taken of Caylee at some time. Comparing the Father's (or Brother's) DNA against this would be a task worth pursuing (in the interest of excluding them as the biological father) and could be accomplish as long as the father or brother allowed it to take place. My guess is they would refuse and another court battle would ensue.

Until you've been mentally or physically abused, you can't understand the control it puts over a person. If you're told to lie, especially by the person who has been abusing you for most of your life, then you better do it or something "bad" will happen to you too! My suspicions were amplified when George and Cindy Anthony didn't hug each other after the verdict was read, didn't hug their own daughter and (thru their own attorney) felt the jury's verdict was "just"!

[cbtslave4u2]

in all honesty, with your arguement makes it very easy to kill someone. it isnt difficult to kill your daughter and leave no evidence if you take 10 minutes to think about it.

no fingerprints on duct tape? put surgical gloves on.

prevent markings on the tape? pull the tape out and begin to apply the tape to victim. cut the end you began with and had your fingers on. keep it for later to throw away. finish aping the face holding the roll of tape.

hair samples? kill her at home, there will be no incriminating hair evidence since you both live there.

transporting the body? put her in a large trash bag triple bag it so no decompsition gets out.

removal of signs of suffucation? wait a month to report her missing, her flesh would have fully rotted by then leaving no trace of oxygen deprivation

say mexican took her. say daddy raped me. say drowned in pool. go home.


THAT'S HOW IT HAPPENED! it is not complicated at all! it is sick, disgusting, and only something Stephen King would write but that is how you lwave no hard evidence!

[Bigbear]

Originally Posted by Memories for Life

I can't believe people actually believe it a common thing to beat a lie detector! It takes skilled techniques to create a "false positive" or an incompetent detector operator. In this instance, I'm sure neither of those factors would be present to get less than an accurate reading. Forget about what you've read about a "thumbtack under the toe" or "biting your tongue" -- those are easily detected by a skilled operator.

No people dont think that they are accurate but while taking a polygraph/lie detector if you become uncomfortable or upset because of any little thing you hair is messed up or your hungry it will pick it up and say you lying that has happened and thats why there inadmissible and arent normally used in criminal cases so if you dont know what your talking about SHUT UP and dont talk about it

[Bigbear]

Originally Posted by cbtslave4u2

yes she did. "she drowned in the pool". is she lying AGAIN?!

No she never admitted to anything that was her defense who said that not her she still hasnt said what happened that isnt a lie.

[cbtslave4u2]

Wrong! Her attorney just did an interview and said Casey told him she drowned in the pool. Did he lie in court? He was under oath. Shouldn't he go to prison for purjery?

[SlutPuppy]

I'm not going to get into it with anyone, but...

I personally think she did it. And if she didn't actually kill the little girl, then she knew about it, and just didn't give a fuck about her daughter anyway. If she drowned in the pool then it was an accident, but why try to cover it up? Why wait a month to report her missing? Why not call the police when it happened and tell them it was an accident?

I think she did it. BUT, I also understand why the jury ruled the way they did, as well as why she's going free. but yes, it is possible that she did it and it's very easy to cover up a murder, especially one of your child.

The only reason they didn't rule her guilty was because there was no hard DNA evidence. But all of her social interactions points to guilty, all her thoughts and emotional actions points to guilty, (If you were on trial for your kids murder wouldn't you be a little upset? If your kid went missing wouldn't you be upset? If you kid died wouldn't you be upset?).

Plus she wrote letters to other inmates, showing no remorse or anything. she was talking about changing her look and getting makeovers and stuff. Doesn't sound like someone who cares about their family at all...

That's my view on it.

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by Bigbear

No people dont think that they are accurate but while taking a polygraph/lie detector if you become uncomfortable or upset because of any little thing you hair is messed up or your hungry it will pick it up and say you lying that has happened and thats why there inadmissible and arent normally used in criminal cases so if you dont know what your talking about SHUT UP and dont talk about it

If you'll go back to the original post that started this lie-detector "debate"

http://www.getdare.com/bbs/showpost....2&postcount=88

you'll see it was the FBI and other law enforcement personnel that was offering the application of the tests. Don't you think the FBI would know whether a lie-detector test is admissible in court or not. The story NEVER said it was a court-ordered test. It was being offered by the bounty hunter who put up Casey's bail AND the FBI as an opportunity to eliminate George, Cindy and Lee Anthony as suspects in the case.

BTW: I do know what I'm talking about. My brother is a FBI instructor in Virginia and his wife is a Special Weapons Expert/Trainer. I've asked him about the methods used for lie-detection tests and how I described it earlier (visual, audio and stress tests are all run simultaneously) is the modern method while your description ("I'm hungry gives a false positive") hasn't been used since the 1970s! The tests are still not used in any court case but the modern method results in 90+% accuracy rate and are used to focused criminal investigations toward liars and away from honest people!

[Memories for Life]

Originally Posted by cbtslave4u2

Wrong! Her attorney just did an interview and said Casey told him she drowned in the pool. Did he lie in court? He was under oath. Shouldn't he go to prison for purjery?

You simply don't understand the US Legal system.

Casey Anthony NEVER testified UNDER OATH that Caylee drowned in the pool. End of story!

Her lawyer is bound under attorney-client privilege -- nothing he ever says about his client before, during or after the case is permissible in any court! The attorneys are never sworn under Oath in any trial -- but the judge has the right to determine if an attorney is misleading in his or her courtroom thus he/she has the option of holding an attorney in contempt and/or sending evidence to the State Law Board for disciplinary action and/or disbarment!