Puplet Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I don't know whether to believe she is innocent or not. I suspect she knows more than she has admitted to but if I were on that jury I don't think I could have said 100% guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLADE8T1 Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Well I should imagine the fifth amendment silence helped her out a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I don't know whether to believe she is innocent or not. In that case, read the verdict and it will tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLADE8T1 Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 In that case, read the verdict and it will tell you. And it will tell you what?.That there is no physical evidence of her mother actually commiting the crime?.It doesn't mean she didn't do it,only they couldn't prove she did do it. Everyone knows the american justice system isn't exactly perfect,unless ofcourse you happen to be called OJ Simpson,and then it works a treat. I was quite looking forward to the jurors interviews afterwards.They had the whole press conference room set up for the 12 jurors,and not one of the buggers showed up lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 And it will tell you what? It will tell you she is innocent. That's how the judicial system works. A not guilty verdict means she's an innocent woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Well I dont know what to believe. Part of me thinks accidental drowning,then then another part of me thinks,well why would she be searching for chloroform before her death?.Lets also remember that she only started blaming her parents framing her this may.So I dont buy the whole "items planted" story. I was trying to use my new found "lie to me" skills,but I was rubbish at it lol. Before the child's death? Or, before the child's reported disappearance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 I wondered why all my US facebook "friends" were ranting and frothing at the mouth this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoxingClever Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 I was wondering about the bail bonds thing too. Two people paid 500,000 each for her bail, what on earth would they gain from that? It is a very odd system. What was all that about the parents wanting "immunity"? "How absolutely sad that Caylee’s grandparents come forward after she is found and claim they will not give conflicting statements to save their own A@# only if they are provided full immunity. The answer should be from the prosecutors office, a resounding NO!!!" So basically, if they give the same statements they won't be tried? I don't think anyone can say for definitive if she did it or not. I think that there's no doubt she had something to do with it, and there's a lot of things that remained unanswered. The diary entry, the google searches, the smell of death in her car, the duct tape, why she didn't report her missing.... the list goes on. Either way, if she did do it shes got to live with that for the rest of her life. If she didn't do it, the web of lies she spun has torn her family apart. Either way, she didn't report her child missing for 31 days. How is that NOT child neglect?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 I was wondering about the bail bonds thing too. Two people paid 500,000 each for her bail, what on earth would they gain from that? It is a very odd system. What was all that about the parents wanting "immunity"? "How absolutely sad that Caylee’s grandparents come forward after she is found and claim they will not give conflicting statements to save their own A@# only if they are provided full immunity. The answer should be from the prosecutors office, a resounding NO!!!" So basically, if they give the same statements they won't be tried? I don't think anyone can say for definitive if she did it or not. I think that there's no doubt she had something to do with it, and there's a lot of things that remained unanswered. The diary entry, the google searches, the smell of death in her car, the duct tape, why she didn't report her missing.... the list goes on. Either way, if she did do it shes got to live with that for the rest of her life. If she didn't do it, the web of lies she spun has torn her family apart. Either way, she didn't report her child missing for 31 days. How is that NOT child neglect?! Whether it is or isn't is irrelevant in respect to the verdict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sierra Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 I was wondering about the bail bonds thing too. Two people paid 500,000 each for her bail, what on earth would they gain from that? It is a very odd system. What was all that about the parents wanting "immunity"? "How absolutely sad that Caylee’s grandparents come forward after she is found and claim they will not give conflicting statements to save their own A@# only if they are provided full immunity. The answer should be from the prosecutors office, a resounding NO!!!" So basically, if they give the same statements they won't be tried? I don't think anyone can say for definitive if she did it or not. I think that there's no doubt she had something to do with it, and there's a lot of things that remained unanswered. The diary entry, the google searches, the smell of death in her car, the duct tape, why she didn't report her missing.... the list goes on. Either way, if she did do it shes got to live with that for the rest of her life. If she didn't do it, the web of lies she spun has torn her family apart. Either way, she didn't report her child missing for 31 days. How is that NOT child neglect?! Usually (and I have NO personal experience with bail bonds and I hope to god it stays that way) you only have to come up with 10% in cash. I can't imagine who would want to bond her worthless self out of the pokey, I would have let her sit there. But whoever it was may have either fronted the money or used a property bond and put their house, car or business up. The downside of this is that if the person runs, and a Bounty Hunter can't locate them and bring them back in a set time frame, the person who put up the money or property loses it. Also, the bail bondsman loses the remainder of the bail if they skip town. Remember Dog the Bounty Hunter? Most bail bondsman/bounty hunters are often former felons themselves and they will push the boundries of the law to protect their investment and bring someone back for trial. You do not want to mess with these people. Most are street smart and mean. In certain cases or if the accused is deemed a flight risk, the judge may either refuse to set bail or set the bail so high only someone like Bill Gates could pay it. And not reporting your baby girl missing for nearly a month? I got cold chills the first time I heard this story and I just knew they'd never find that child alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.