Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Since no one (except Casey) knows and can prove exactly what happened, there is reasonable doubt........... but there is no hard evidence, just circumstantial evidence............ Yes, there was tons of other circumstantial evidence.

---

WG, you continue to miss the point of the meaning of "beyond a reasonable doubt". You say that only Casey can "prove" what happened. PROOF, IN THE SENSE YOU MEAN, IS NOT NECESSARY! The EVIDENCE is the key.

Then you say there is "NO HARD EVIDENCE, JUST CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE". What do you mean, "JUST"? There's no such thing, in law, as JUST circumstantial evidence. Evidence, whether circumstantial or direct, is still EVIDENCE! Evidence is what is used to convict or acquit.

(Excuse my caps, but I'm getting so damn frustrated as Altenweg and I do this again and again and again, and it seems you're not reading/examining our previous posts on the issue).

There will always be some scenario that someone can construct that would indicate innocence - but does that scenario pass the test of common sense? If it does, acquit. If not, convict. I cannot imagine a single scenario for innocence (not guilty) that fits the evidence presented - not a single one.

As a Judge said in another case trying to explain the idea of "reasonable" doubt, is it possible that an alien committed the crime and removed the evidence? Yes, it's within the realm of possibility, but is it reasonable? No.

You admit there was "tons of circumstantial evidence" - but tons weren't enough for you? Tons? How many tons do you need?

I know you're bending over backwards in an attempt to be fair, but a court must work within the rules.

Jury trials are an advance over trial by ordeal, but they are not perfect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

As I have heard described elsewhere....the problem is the legal definition of "Beyond a REASONABLE doubt" has some taken the meaning in far too many peoples minds to mean " Beyond ANY doubt". And those two things mean very different things.

---

Right, you summed it up nicely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

WG, you continue to miss the point of the meaning of "beyond a reasonable doubt".

---

I don't think so.

Quote:

---

You say that only Casey can "prove" what happened.

---

No, I said she is the only one who knows what happened, how Caylee died.

Quote:

---

you're not reading/examining our previous posts on the issue

---

Nor are you mine.

Quote:

---

There will always be some scenario that someone can construct that would indicate innocence - but does that scenario pass the test of common sense? If it does, acquit. If not, convict.

---

This is the U.S. justice system and how it works? -- common sense?

Quote:

---

I know you're bending over backwards in an attempt to be fair

---

Saints preserve us all, especially me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Her suspicious behavior persuaded me, just like it persuaded you.

---

It is very honest of you to admit that you were swayed by "suspicious behavior", but very dishonest to accuse Altenweg of the same thing.

Altenweg, for 3 days now, has laid out logical point by logical point.

Nowhere did she give you any reason to say that she was persuaded by "suspicious behavior".

I have to add that so far no one has provided a REASONABLE alternative to the known (condemning) facts.

Unless we are to believe that Casey was molested by her father and brother at the age of eight, and this led to the accidental death of her child in a swimming pool 15 years later. How in the world could anyone connect THOSE dots?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

It is very honest of you to admit that you were swayed by "suspicious behavior", but very dishonest to accuse Altenweg of the same thing.

---

What else is it? That seems to be what Alty has been talking about all this time, i.e. Casey's behavior before and during that month. If I am wrong, I apologize to her.

Quote:

---

I have to add that so far no one has provided a REASONABLE alternative to the known (condemning) facts.

---

Accidental death is a reasonable alternative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

This is the U.S. justice system and how it works? -- common sense?

---

YES!

Finally, we may have a breakthrough here. A jury is charged with using its common sense. YES! YES! YES!

A jury listens to, watches, and examines testimonies, all the while utilizing its God-given common sense. That's the prime reason why we have trials by jury, so that 12 jurors can collectively employ their life experience, their wisdom, and their common sense.

Without the common sense of human beings, we might as well have a computer program to sit in judgement -a program, by the way, that would be utterly defeated by the notion of reasonable doubt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

What else is it?

Accidental death is a reasonable alternative.

---

(What else is it?) How about those "tons" (your words) of circumstantial evidence for a starter?

Accidental death is not an argument, it's a statement. I think Altenweg has covered this possibility extensively in a few previous posts. I won't re-do it here. It's there for your perusal.

Legally you don't even NEED a body for a murder conviction. There are numerous cases to show precedent for that.

And its "Reasonable doubt" not "ANY doubt" that's the threshold of proof that's being overlooked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

A jury listens to, watches, and examines testimonies, all the while utilizing its God-given common sense. That's the prime reason why we have trials by jury, so that 12 jurors can collectively employ their life experience, their wisdom, and their common sense.

---

And if Caylee accidentally drowned (or died somehow by accident) and Casey panicked, but then used that to her advantage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

And if Caylee accidentally drowned (or died somehow by accident) and Casey panicked, but then used that to her advantage?

---

Used to what advantage? Not sure what you mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

Used to what advantage? Not sure what you mean.

---

Let's say Caylee drowned accidentally. For some reason, Casey, being the clueless person she is or maybe was drunk or had taken drugs, was too scared to report it, thinking no one would believe her and would think she had done something to cause the little girl's death. So she put the body in a garbage bag and then in the trunk of her car (sounds like something she would do, even if she hadn't killed the girl) and blocked it out of her mind, continued to party, telling her parents Casey was away from home. So, in that way Casey could have used the accidental death to her own advantage.

I have a niece who is capable of something like that. She didn't hide the death of her child, but did accidentally burn down her family's house and attached garage in a very bubble-headed way and then went merrily on with her life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Let's say Caylee drowned accidentally. For some reason, Casey, being the clueless person she is or maybe was drunk or had taken drugs, was too scared to report it, thinking no one would believe her and would think she had done something to cause the little girl's death. So she put the body in a garbage bag and then in the trunk of her car (sounds like something she would do, even if she hadn't killed the girl) and continued to party, telling her parents Casey was away from home. So, in that way Casey could have used the accidental death to her own advantage.

---

What mother, in a million years, would ever take her (accidentally) drowned daughter and throw her into garbage bags? Then throw her into the trunk of her car and let her rot there for a month? And then create lie after lie after lie about what happened? Certainly not a mother whose daughter accidentally drowned. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? No. Even drunk or drugged. She's sober the next day.

Remember there's more. She researched how to kill (a reasonable assumption) her daughter using chloroform. She also researched "breaking a neck". Chloroform was found by forensic experts. A chloroform syringe also. Drowned children are not chloroformed.

Duct tape covered her daughter's mouth and nose. Drowned children are not duct taped.

Fantastic lies about non-existent nannies, non-existent jobs, and then recanting all those stories to be replaced by stories of molestation by her father and brother when she was 8 years old.

If this doesn't tell you she was guilty beyond a "reasonable" doubt, nothing ever will.







Duct tape was found on the remains, covering the child's mouth and nose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

What mother, in a million years, would ever take her (accidentally) drowned daughter and throw her into garbage bags?

---

The daughter is dead. There's nothing she can do about it. She's scared because she will be accused of hurting the girl. Each day that goes by without being found out makes it more and more likely to her that she's managing the situation. She can even ignore the smell coming from the trunk of the car. The daughter's death is not her fault, but there's nothing she can do to bring her daughter back to life. So why not take advantage of her freedom.

Yes, there are mothers like this.

Quote:

---

Remember there's more. She researched how to kill (a reasonable assumption) her daughter using chloroform. She also researched "breaking a neck". Chloroform was found by forensic experts. A chloroform syringe also.

---

Oh, yes, she researched it, but Fate intervened and took the girl before she could kill her.

Quote:

---

Duct tape covered her daughter's mouth and nose. Drowned children are not duct taped.

---

This was insurance. If the body had been found, Casey could have said that someone murdered the little girl, thus taking the onus off her, since she knew the girl had accidentally drowned.

Quote:

---

Fantastic lies about non-existent nannies, non-existent jobs, and then recanting all those stories to be replaced by stories of molestation by her father and brother when she was 8 years old.

---

I didn't say she isn't a nut-case or a pathological liar.

Quote:

---

If this doesn't tell you she was guilty beyond a "reasonable" doubt, nothing ever will.

---

Nope, it doesn't.

Quote:

---

Duct tape was found on the remains, covering the child's mouth and nose.

---

Additional insurance in case someone found her. Make it look like someone murdered her. Take the trail away from herself.

Remember, she's not a member of Mensa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

The daughter is dead. There's nothing she can do about it. She's scared because she will be accused of hurting the girl. Each day that goes by without being found out makes it more and more likely to her that she's managing the situation. She can even ignore the smell coming from the trunk of the car. The daughter's death is not her fault, but there's nothing she can do to bring her daughter back to life. So why not take advantage of her freedom.

Yes, there are mothers like this.

Oh, yes, she researched it, but Fate intervened and took the girl before she could kill her.

This was insurance. If the body had been found, Casey could have said that someone murdered the little girl, thus taking the feared onus off her, since she knew the girl had accidentally drowned.

I didn't say she isn't a nut-case.

Nope, it doesn't.

Additional insurance in case someone found her. make it look like someone murdered her. Take the trail away from her.

---

Why will she be scared if she's accused of hurting the girl? There's simply no evidence to support that supposition. The rest of your scenario is based on this weak proposition of her being afraid to be accused. You're building a house of cards.

In the recorded history of child pool drownings in Florida, there has NEVER been a case where the mother didn't report it. From an expert witness.

As I've said again and again, yes, you can make up scenarios, but are they reasonable? In this case, absolutely not.

Why is the trunk of her car drenched in chloroform? From an expert witness.

Explain the syringe.

Wouldn't a mother be wracked with grief had her daughter drowned? Explain her party behavior, her tattoos.

Finally, do you seriously believe a mother would drive around for a month with her daughter's body in the trunk of her car.

Everything about her actions shows guilt. Common sense. Reasonable doubt.

You have shown, again and again, that you don't understand the legal meaning of circumstantial evidence, and the concept of reasonable doubt. I don't BLAME you for that, but I think it behooves you now to go research these ideas so we can be discussing from a common basis.

I can't keep repeating the same things over and over again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

Why will she be scared if she's accused of hurting the girl?

---

She's sitting there with her daughter's dead body. She's young and stupid. She's in shock. She has a history of being accused of wrongdoing (or may believe she does), so why not this time too?

Quote:

---

In the recorded history of child pool drownings in Florida, there has NEVER been a case where the mother didn't report it. From an expert witness.

---

And Casey was an everyday, normal mom?

Quote:

---

As I've said again and again, yes, you can make up scenarios, but are they reasonable? In this case, absolutely not.

---

You are thinking of Casey as your average, loving mom without looking at what else may have been going on inside her.

Quote:

---

Why is the trunk of her car drenched in chloroform? From an expert witness.

---

More insurance? Covers up the smell? She dumped the bottle of chloroform into the trunk just because? She kept the "evidence" all together? (It doesn't take much chloroform to knock out a child. So why so much if she killed Caylee?)

Quote:

---

Explain the syringe.

---

Like I said, maybe she had planned murder, but Fate intervened. Or, more insurance to make it look like someone else had killed the girl?

Did she purchase the chloroform and syringe before or after Caylee's death? Were any receipts produced?

Quote:

---

Wouldn't a mother be wracked with grief had her daughter drowned?

---

Maybe she was. But the girl was dead (accidentally), and she was free of responsibility. Time to party.

Quote:

---

Explain her party behavior, her tattoos.

---

See above.

Quote:

---

Finally, do you seriously believe a mother would drive around for a month with her daughter's body in the trunk of her car.

---

Yes, a very dysfunctional one would. You are thinking "normal" here.

Quote:

---

Everything about her actions shows guilt. Common sense. Reasonable doubt.

---

Guilt? Not at all! Whether she killed Caylee or the girl accidentally drowned, Casey's actions show only one thing: She is the center of her own world.

We can end this here, if you like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

We can end this here, if you like.

---

LOL - yeah, time to end it.

You have presented what I would call the "alien" defense. Somebody from outer space did it. No matter how unreasonable, throw it at the fan.

Good job.

If I ever need a good defense attorney... and the jury has the IQ of a rutabaga...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

If I ever need a good defense attorney

---

Maybe I'll get my law degree next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

Casey Anthony is being RELEASED from jail - Sunday.

Did you think she was staying?

---

I haven't been following this Athos. I don't want to.

Tick

Quote:

---

Like I said, maybe she had planned murder, but Fate intervened. Or, more insurance to make it look like someone else had killed the girl?

Did she purchase the chloroform and syringe before or after Caylee's death? Were any receipts produced?

---

WG, I have to point this out. The chloroform wasn't purchased, that's why she researched how to make it online, visiting one particular site with detailed info on how to make (not purchase) chloroform at home.

I have to ask, if the child accidentally drowned, why take the time to chloroform her, duct tape her, put her in two garbage bags, a laundry bag, and dump her in the woods.

Seems like overkill to me.

Quote:

---

Guilt? Not at all! Whether she killed Caylee or the girl accidentally drowned, Casey's actions show only one thing: She is the center of her own world.

---

I'm still amazed that you've read all of this evidence and believe Casey ( a known liar) about the drowning. I'm also shocked that you would think that a narcissist like Casey would sit in jail for 3 years when Caylee's death was accidental (according to you). Can you explain that? Why would you sit in jail for 3 years for something that wasn't chargeable? Why wouldn't you be admitting that the child drowned? Why wait until your trial to let that info out?

All this is some fine speculation . None of it was proved beyond the high burden of reasonable doubt. I agree with those who blame CSI . In the past the prosecutors may have been able to skate and get by with a jury pool that did not have much understanding of forensics . As the people have become smarter ,perhaps it is tougher for prosecutors to build a case . Too bad . This should be a message to over-reaching prosecutors to get their ducks in a row before they attempt to get a capital first degree murder conviction.