Recent Posts
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
It's God's love! (Aug 1, 2011 | post #289770)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Sure, if you are in the military and committed a crime off base and the crime is listed in the military penal codes, You can be tried by both court generally. Believe me I spend most of my career protecting children and raised two of my own, I understand the attachment to Caylee and I abhor Casey 's irresponsibility for not giving all of us closure as to how Caylee died. We all as human own the defenseless and we hurt deeply when we recognize failure . However we have to be true to the process, if we are not we will become weaker and less effective. (Aug 1, 2011 | post #289765)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
I stand by both God and poe15. poe15 sorry for the lost in your family, God bless. (Aug 1, 2011 | post #289659)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Misinformation from an uninformed poster from a another forum, is that what you using now to collaborate your theory, to suggest that Casey killed Caylee?. Come on be responsible with what you post. In order to be charge with a Federal Felony Murder you have to have been in violation of a federal Law. Example; murder while in the commission of a federal offense, the killing of a federal official. The allege murder of Caylee did not or does not meet the standards of a federal law violation. Look it up! Furthermore, what evidence would the federal gov. use, since they know there are none that prove that Caylee was murdered, Remember the FBI crime lab experts helped in ruling out the contention of the state evidences basically acquitting Casey. (Aug 1, 2011 | post #289657)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Boss Hogg, you and your friend are way out of line. The next time you do something good for someone else, the feeling that you'll get it's not man's made either my friend. Stop for a moment and explain those felling to yourself. (Aug 1, 2011 | post #289634)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
I consider this to be your best post, and I understand that you don't need my endorsement. Even though I come up with a different conclusion, including my believe that the chloroform search did not play a part in Caylee's death, and I also believe Cindy statement that the neck breaking issue was part of the search engine response to her search of chloroform. To me Cindy Statement was an obvious slam against the prosecution when they couldn't contradict the neck breaking statement, as a result the SA sat Cindy behind the computer. you have addressed the issues of the trial with an open mind and given yourself some wiggle room in case you are mistaken about Casey murdering Caylee. You have given a fair assessment of Casey's trial. (Jul 31, 2011 | post #289477)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Yes, exactly what I called you, Live with it. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289442)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Zipfer, you have gone too far the other way. Listen out of all the crime committed, only 2 % of the offenders ever get see any jail time. So I would say that it safe to say that the majority of all those in jail deserve to be there. The above statement was from a judicial report written in 2000 and not publish to the public. I don't think it has changed much since then. You are so right about the apathy in our society today! But even though in this case the verdict was right, we can't be impassioned about the fact that Caylee depended on adults to provide for her safety, and was owed the respect of being a part of humanity. Even though there is no law that I'm aware of that insist on the respect that Caylee deserved, I know we are not in disagreement in saying that there should be such a law. Take care of yourself. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289429)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
No not POE15!!! (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289399)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
Totaly agree with this post and the one that follows... (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289392)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
You called me a liar, Please post the post # in which I posted false statements without correcting it immediately, with a public apology on this forum. And that happened only once. Let's see if you are morally capable of apologizing to me. Don't pride yourself as being part of a whole, only the COWARDS are subjected to my "outrageous insults" because they lack the conscience to be fair and the responsibility to avoid placing someone else in peril. You can't follow my rational, It's obviously because you don't have the ability to rationalize. If I'm wrong debate me on the facts, and if you can't you actually as much of a COWARD as those who I have accused and PLEASE take my previous post in question as a self fulfilling prophecy of yours, with the MISSPELLED words and all. Maybe understanding who you are might APPEASE WHATEVER IS EATING YOU TOO. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289390)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
You and NGrace don't get to pick and choose evidences and statements made in the trial, misinterpret it and void them of their dismissing facts when it doesn't please you. Then you go ahead and post on this forum those outrages assumption, justifying them as your opinions. Your assumptions, far from being dignified as an opinion are actually conceived from a lack of integrity, morality, and negated honesty. That is why I call you guys COWARD, who can't debate the facts with intellectual honesty. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289378)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
You freaking BIGOT, DROOLING MOUTH- BREATHING IDIOT, DESPICABLY WEAK, ARROGANT, ELITIST, NARCISSISTIC, METROSEXUAL, MEGLAMANIACAL, IDIOT, God forsaken COWARD. You ignorant moron, tell me which word I miss spelled on my previous post, and if I did, your comment speaks volumes about miserable life, must be suffering horribly to apiece whatever is eating you . On number 3 you don't possess the brain matter to understand, as evident by your posts which are mainly filled with miss leading and illogical references. You don't have the dignity or integrity to walk on my shoes, when it comes to fulfilling the responsibilities of being a citizen of this great country, you should be the one on that boat to Cuba so you could learn how big of an A-gap you been all of your life. Copy and paste this information in your empty skull, so you don't have to be reminded again. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289364)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
You don't have to make a special effort, is stamp in your thought process and evident in your writing, you're a moron. Don't feel bad you are not alone in this forum, you at least have a couple rating you with a yellow light bulb. Now note, since the expert testimony in trial, and as written in this forum numerous times, there was no DNA on the duct tapes found on the scene, had it been used to smother Caylee, there would have been DNA from both Caylee and the offender on the duck tape. Unless the offender could be excluded if he or she were wearing glove. Now the issue with chloroform, the experts, said that nowhere was there chloroform found in sufficient amount to suggest that it was used to murder Caylee. Your assumption that Casey use the chloroform just to "Knock her out so she could then suffocate her", Try this tell a family member to surprise you while you're sleeping an push a pillow on your face, you can then share with us your neurological reaction. and learn about the inaccuracy of your statement. I'm not insulting you, I'm just being painfully honest because I'm fed up with people who do not take responsibility for miss information. This are your statements, . "Casey was found not guilty only because a jury failed to logistically link the evidence, but because it was a murder one DP case", then you say, "they (the Jury) felt they could not deliberate a charge of murder one because there was no fingerprints, witnesses or a concrete clue to put her right at the scene of Caylee's death". Do you understand your moronic contradiction of your two statement? and as far as the Manslaughter charge, in short, is the knowingly reckless act by someone that leads to the death of another. The only statement that got close to that charge in the trial was when Baez said that Caylee drown in the pool. The only person that could then be charge would be George. George is the home owner and responsible for making access to the pool child safe, even if Casey was taking care of Caylee at the time. Please don't give me the Cowardly excuse "It's my opinion". Understand logical thinking, 2 plus 2 equals 4, end that's a fact. You can't get away by saying 2 plus 2 equals 6 and say it my opinion, NOOOOO, IT"S A MORONIC STATEMENT, THAT how ALL YOU COWARDS USE TO HIDE YOUR IGNORENCE. (Jul 30, 2011 | post #289298)
CASEY: Does the State Have the Goods to Convict?
I have no problem with your opinion, as it was a theory in this trial which was not supported by evidence. However, I find it intellectually irresponsible for anyone to support such a theory as fact to discredit the jury and the system. (Jul 27, 2011 | post #288262)
Copyright ©2012 Topix LLC
