'I'M the one who Googled chloroform': Casey Anthony's mother drops a bombshell as she testifies

I have no doubt that Casey is conniving and a pathological liar. But that doesn't prove she's a murderer. I don't think we know WHAT happened in this case, but for those who think Casey's guilty of murder, I wonder what you are basing it on. Because being a lying, conniving, even evil person doesn't prove she murdered someone...

I know - I haven't seen the case, but is there one piece of evidence that makes people think she took her daughter's life?

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Yeah, this is one area I'm curious about. Casey is pretty messed up. Usually when it's to this degree, a family dynamic (read maltreatment) is the cause.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


She had possession of all the evidence, mainly.

!. She had possession of the child. This is the MAIN evidence. She HAD the child when last seen.

2. She had possession of the car, where the body had been long enough to decompose. She later abandoned the car next to a dumpster, to make the odors "blend lin". She called her BF to come pick her up, so we know it was she who abandoned the car.

3. She had possession of the blanket the child was wrapped in, it came off child's bed, or out of the child's bedroom.

4. She borrowed a shovel from the neighbor, reportedly considering burying the body in her parents back yard.
Cadaver dogs sniffed out scents of decompostion in the area where she placed the body, as she changed her mind. Probably realized this was a bad idea, and decided to take the body elsewhere.

5. As far as accidental injury, there is NEVER any reason to place duct tape on a child's face. Not a one.

Then the other things I'm sure you already know about. Chloroform in the car. Google search on how to make chloroform. Google search on "neck breaking".

The multitude of lies covering her whereabouts for a month.

The "bella-indifference" upon learning the child was deceased.

As for doing all this to cover up an accidental injury? Nobody is that stupid.

THank you for your thorough response, lady.

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
5. As far as accidental injury, there is NEVER any reason to place duct tape on a child's face. Not a one.

Your first 4 items would be indicative of her having SOMETHING to do with Caylee after her death, which we already know, but did she kill the child?

Was there duct tape on the face of the child? I didn't know this. Maybe that's the piece of information I'm missing? There's certainly no reason to put duct tape in a dead child's mouth...

As for doing all this to cover up an accidental injury? Nobody is that stupid.

I don't know... It depends on what's going on. There could be many reasons that she tried to cover it up the child's accidental death, besides stupidity. She could be covering for someone else.

Anyway, if there was duct tape on the child's mouth, that is pretty incriminating...

I'm sorry I'm asking for details on this now. I should do the research myself, but there's so much to sift through...

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


The only one of your points that is undeniable is the first one.

There is no proof of any of the rest.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Well there was duct tape in the area of the mouth, but keep in mind it wasn't attached to anything as the body was decomposed completely to a skeleton. The body was underwater at times. For all we know (thought they said the tape folded under the jaw, we can't see really) the tape moved or if not she put it on because she hated the idea of insects getting in her daughters mouth, or it was to protect her face from animals, close her eyes, etc. Nothing can be proved.
Not to mention no one can prove she was the one that put it there.
No fingerprints. There wasn't even DNA of Caylee on the duct tape. Dr. Spitz said that is highly unusual and speculated the duct tape was applied after the body was already skeletal.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Surely.

I think it amounts to how much an individual (a juror) is willing to accept circumstantial evidence. I think this case is ripe with it. Ripe, and falling off the tree. lol.

If cases couldn't be proven with circumstantial evidence, then Ted Bundy would have walked. OJ Simpson's acquittal would have been justified. There were no witnesses to the murders, other than the deceased themselves, so the pieces of the puzzle fit together to show a picture of a homicide, and in this case, by the one who possessed the child, and by the only one who had access to ALL the evidence.

And BH, I really don't think anybody is stupid enough to carry on such a charade for the long period of time she did. And certainly not in the cabaret way she did. She had law enforcement and her parents running around in circles, like her puppets. I honestly think this amused her to see them do her bidding.

Even if it was accidental. Her child was dead, no matter the cause. People grieve. People break down. People get drunk. People tell someone, who then has the good sense to report it.

She has been found competent, therefore capable of reason. A reasonable person would not do the things she did. As I said, and as I believe, nobody is that stupid. Even now, she would call this off, break down, and tell about the accident, but she's not. She's taking this as far as she can to see if she can get away it.

If the verdict comes back guilty, watch how quickly she goes to "Plan B". Then, we might hear a new story about how a little "one-time only" chloroform dose, went terribly wrong, and she panicked. But first, she's testing the waters to see if she can get off scott free.

reply to post by ladyinwaiting



Shes the daughter of a cop. Think she hasn't heard stories about what happens to people who cause the death of their child due to negligence? She knew, that's reason to hide the body.

There was no unusual evidence of chloroform in the car. Nothing beyond amounts found in cleaning fluids. There was ONE search for chloroform (and a good excuse for why). I doubt she had the know how to make chloroform and there was never any chloroform found or evidence of where she made it etc.

There just isn't enough evidence for murder.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Thanks for the duct tape details. That is very different than duct tape put on her mouth while she was alive. I'm afraid I still couldn't convict Casey with this information. No doubt she's a disturbed young woman who has many problems, though.

It will be interesting to hear the verdict on this.

By the way, I couldn't have convicted OJ either and I was VERY involved with that trial.

It's not that I think Casey (or OJ) is innocent of the murder. I just believe strongly in innocent until proven guilty and I don't think guilt of murder has been established and proven. Circumstantial evidence could suggest a LOT of things, including the murder of Caylee by her mother, but suggestion isn't enough for me to convict.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Well it was just impossible to tell when it was put on. It wouldn't make sense for someone to go back and put it on after death, but it also wouldn't make sense that duct tape wouldn't hold some of the dna of the decomposing body it was attached to.

Lot's of weird stuff.

I wish I could watch the OJ trial now. I was too young.

Verdict is IN!!! We will know in 30 minutes!!!

It's gonna be LIFE!

Redundant post deleted. (Verdict reached).

reply to post by berkeleygal


No point in speculating as we will know soon I guess. I think less though especially if the jury actually based their verdict on the evidence (then it will be not guilty). My guess first four counts, if any of the top three it will be manslaughter I may be wrong in seconds though.

12 hours is considered average deliberation in a capital murder trial and I think that's about how long it was here.

Called it. Jury did their jobs.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I agree. I was kind of surprised about the not guilty on the aggravated child abuse charges, but I don't really know what that is.

I think the legal system worked. They couldn't prove her guilt. That means she's innocent in the eyes of the law. She may still have done it, but they couldn't prove it.

I'd much rather see a guilty person go free than an innocent person convicted.

Gotta love the live twitter feeds concerning the trial, apparantly Casey Anthony is part of the illuminati.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Called it. Jury did their jobs.

They did indeed.

Probably largely due to them not being exposed to any media during the last 6 weeks... plus the defence was just weak.

SOB!! I cant believe it:

"Casey Anthony found not guilty of murdering daughter"

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

I'd much rather see a guilty person go free than an innocent person convicted.

Exactly.. Even if she was guilty I doubt we have to worry about Casey Anthony going out and beginning a life of crime and killing again.

Also Cheney just ripped on the talking head lawyers that spread B.S. and ruin jury pools all over the country and it was awesome.

Well I guess Baez's business just went up. He is the Johnny Cochran of this decade

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
SOB!! I cant believe it:

"Casey Anthony found not guilty of murdering daughter"

Yessss, we've effectively saved a life and kept another individual from the United States' barbaric death penalty!


Not to mention Florida has saved about $24 million by not executing her.

Today was a great day for justice.