toddler Casey trial...guilty r not..ur view

[Yuriatin]

Re: NANCY GRACE MUSSI A GO HA HEART ATTAK

Yes - there are laws here against this - but it depends on the state you're in.

In Casey's situation - she will be able to profit off this case. There is no law against it.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Yuri_</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She's sure to make big bux. Soooooo nasty - so disgusting.

Even the Judge will prolly get rich offa this one. <span style="font-style: italic">(I did like how he ran his court room tho)</span>

Anyway - I'm sure she'll get time served. </div></div>

is there any law int he US about making money off a crime?

in canada there is </div></div>

[X]

Re: NOT GUILTY

apparently she was accused of killing her daughter, but how?
Seems there was speculation , even by the prosecution.. If they did state exactly how this was done, didnt see that in the media..
Too much Nancy Graces making overly emotional, vague expressions on this.

- On this day, she was feeling that way.. the child did this, the mom did that, afterwards she did this , dat and this.. FullStop.

Not saying it wasnt done, but in all the bombarding i got of this case, I didnt get one clear detail of wat was supposed to have happened.

[Wendy]

Re: NANCY GRACE MUSSI A GO HA HEART ATTAK

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Yuri_</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She's sure to make big bux. Soooooo nasty - so disgusting.

Even the Judge will prolly get rich offa this one. <span style="font-style: italic">(I did like how he ran his court room tho)</span>

Anyway - I'm sure she'll get time served. </div></div>

is there any law int he US about making money off a crime?

in canada there is </div></div>

As far as I know, the law goes into effect IF you are convicted. As an acquitted defendant she can roll in the dough

[Yuriatin]

Re: NOT GUILTY

The prosecution actually, did spell out how they thought the child was killed.

The defense also spelled out, how they felt the child died.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pleXxed</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I didnt get one clear detail of wat was supposed to have happened.
</div></div>

[RichD]

Re: NOT GUILTY

I dont have a clear understanding of what was supposed to have happened either.

i caught a little bit of the prosecutors closing talking about duct tape..did not know if this was factual or speculative

[Wendy]

Re: NOT GUILTY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pleXxed</div><div class="ubbcode-body">apparently she was accused of killing her daughter, but how?
Seems there was speculation , even by the prosecution.. If they did state exactly how this was done, didnt see that in the media..
Too much Nancy Graces making overly emotional, vague expressions on this.

- On this day, she was feeling that way.. the child did this, the mom did that, afterwards she did this , dat and this.. FullStop.

Not saying it wasnt done, but in all the bombarding i got of this case, I didnt get one clear detail of wat was supposed to have happened.
</div></div>

Understan X.. but will all a dat, there was far more detail presented that with 1.3 ounce of common sense you can find her liable for the death of that child. Why are you telling the cops a fictitious Nanny run wey did har if you are truly innocent

[Wendy]

Re: NOT GUILTY

Anyway ...it is cases like these that cause Law schools/professors to go back to the drawing board. Dem review all di mistakes weh prosecution mek an mek sure dem students noh do dat crap inna di real world. In the erea of DNA dem coulda did do betta dan di case weh dem present..but mi still belive dem had desent case gainst Casey.

[evanovitch]

timeline of case....

Casey lived at home wid har parents wid har dawta...it would seem that the parents doted on dem granddawta...

Casey left out wid har dawta one morning and the dawta was neva seen again

Casey went on a frenzy of social outings...partying nightly, staying away from parents' it would seem...culminated wid har tattooing that she was 'living la vida loca' somewhere on har body

parents stawted asking where was the granddawta

har story kept changing

she was with a babysitter, i guess , showing y Casey was free to party..begs the ? y she juss neva leff di baby at the parents' house

then the story went to Casey couldnt find di babysitter

Mother then said dis is foolishness and if the child was kidnapped someting must be done

mother called police and reported child missing

police went to casey

casey gave them name of supposed baby sitter

said lady was half Puerto Rican, half BLACK

took dem to an apt weh di babysitter suppose to live

not known dere...checks on the name by police found no such person

she mention someting to do wid har job

took police to Universal Studio an wen arrived at the gate, admitted she had not worked dere fi two years

police got fed up wid har lies and dem following tru ongle fi she admit lying at last moment

finally cable man find skull 1/4 mile from parents' house

found to be likkle dawta's

Casey now sez di likkle girl drowned in the family pool accidentally an har fada put di body in garbage bag an got rid of it

or if u want to read the how many years of it go yahso
http://investigation.discovery.com/blogs...y_timeline.html

[Yuriatin]

Re: NOT GUILTY

And you know what Wendy - this is what I'm talking about - people just need to use their common sense. Good grief man - people have been convicted of murder when there hasn't even been a BODY!

[X]

Re: NOT GUILTY

to me.. sometimes a casual onlooker, sometimes a victim of the media, it all seems like speculations..
No one seemd to have provided hard evidence..

I hear all these talks about lying, but how does that proves that she killed the little girl.

While I may think she is guilty, they needed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt , correct?
If so, then its the prosecution to blame as they obviosly did not eliminate doubt from the jurors mind..

[Seveen]

Re: NOT GUILTY

i was waiting for a conviction

now i'm ready to convict the press for media overload

how do i know if fox is right or cnn - i pick the views i agree with

i am ready to turn off my tv, deactivate my facebook account, throw away my cell phone

and live in the now

[Yuriatin]

Re: NOT GUILTY

You cannot eliminate doubt.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pleXxed</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold"> <span style="color: #FF0000"><span style="font-size: 17pt">reasonable</span></span></span> doubt , correct?
</div></div>

[RichD]

Re: NOT GUILTY

you cannot eliminate all doubt but what degree of doubt is acceptable if you are trying to put a person to death?

[evanovitch]

Re: timeline of case....

no the jury pool wasn not pristine..dis case been going on fi 3yrs..it started in 08..it came famous wen NG took it up

i dont care how much pundits said no mother goes on like she did for over a month wile supposedly ur child is missing

unless u di modda know di child is dead

now u could say she was acting out partly out of fear n not wanting to think of it

the death itself could have been accidental as she said

she could have had a dysfunctional family

wat iinterests me is that har defense dis not say, yes it was accidental and she behaved as she did because she is mentally ill due to dysfunction

dat she has never had to be responsible given how she is coddled by parents..but no, they said it was an accident n har fada n bredda molesting har is to blame..blame fi wat

so she said she was there wen the child died...everybody seem to figet dat..the mother said she knew alll along the child was dead

they neva said she had mental issues..dem seh tru she was supposedly molested is y she went about lying...excuse me..to me that is using the M charge to create revulsion an divert attention from the fact that the child was dead

also made people think of that rather than Casey saying to her parents on tape that they have been the best parents...that was wen they were asking her if they could have done anything else to help wen she did not tell them wat had happened...

i.e the supposed drowning...cause y would the father ask if him did a help har

she lied to both parents re whereabouts of child...allll recorded in the conversations she had wid dem wile in jail...testing of father's signature , voice etc when he tried to commit suicide showes no deception on his part

all agreed dat grandparents loved the granddawta

fada said they would help her in anyway , juss tell them wat was being said

now all know dat jail house conversations r taped so y she neva cuss dem out den, blame dem for enabling har and helping har get rid of di body...etc etc...

[Yuriatin]

Re: NOT GUILTY

I didn't get caught up in the flotsam and jetsam of the media hounds - Nancy Grace and her nightly screeching, In Session, the general 24/7 on it. This morning my go worker told me that she downloaded and app, for the verdict!

I watched the entire trial. I felt she should've been found guilty and that there was enuff testimony, physical and circumstantial (yes, you can consider and convict on circumstantial) evidence on which to convict. Just me.

I do agree with you tho - they shouldn't have gone for the death penalty.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RichD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you cannot eliminate all doubt but what degree of doubt is acceptable if you are trying to put a person to death? </div></div>