Skip to content

September 6, 2011

96

try casey anthony in federal court???

by Andrea O'Connell

Every day spam is scooped up by the excellent WordPress spam-blocker and deleted.  Sometimes I have to manually delete the spam because occasionally legitimate comments are mistakenly caught.

I found one of those “legit” comments tonight.  Although, it wasn’t exactly a comment, it was a link to a petition about the Casey Anthony trial.  It’s a legitimate link and an actual petition that already has 48,000 signatures.

48,000 people agree with this petition.

The petition, on change.org,  is intended to convince the legal and political community in this country to consider trying Casey Anthony in Federal Court,  with a federal crime!  What federal crime they believe Casey Anthony committed, I cannot tell you, but the petition refers repeatedly to the murder of Caylee Marie Anthony.

The petition will be sent to:

  • Office of Lt. Governor Jennifer Carroll (Jennifer Carroll)
  • United States Attorney’s Office Middle District of Florida (ROBERT E. ONEIL)
  • State of Florida Attorney General (Pam Bondi)
  • Governor of Florida (Florida Governor Rick Scott)
  • United States Attorney General (The U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder)
  • Director in Charge FBI Headquarters Washington DC (Robert Mueller)
  • Assistant Director in charge FBI Headquarters Washinton D.C. (James W. McJunkin)
  • ORANGE COUNTY STATE ATTORNEY (LAWSON LAMAR)
  • FBI Orlando Headquarters (Special agent in charge Steven E. Ibison)
  • President of the United States (President Barack Obama)

Though I am loath to publicize this petition, if you would like to review what is written, here is the link:  http://www.change.org/petitions/united-states-attorney-general-try-casey-anthony-in-federal-court

Apparently, there are 48,000 people who don’t know the reason for the double jeopardy rule of law.

The concept of double jeopardy is based on the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. “Nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.”

The reason for this protection?  To make sure that We the People are not abused by the government via repeated prosecution, or other abuses.

If repeated prosecutions were legal,  it would amount to a form of  oppression that denies human rights.

In Communist countries the government has total control over such things, and will convict because they can.  Communist countries also control religious beliefs, political parties, and the distribution of wealth.

As we know from WW2, Hitler’s goal was to design a type of German individual that fit his liking.  Under Hitler it was a crime to be Jewish.  13 million people were given the Death Penalty because of their religion.  Catholics, and homosexuals were singled out, too.

Communist countries don’t have trials.  They have convictions.

Casey Anthony was already tried for the crime of murder.  She was found Not Guilty.  Yes, the verdict is difficult to swallow.  Yes, it seems like a travesty of justice, and yes, most of the country believed she was guilty.   But, to even consider trying her again is chilling.  Think about what it would mean if citizens could be tried twice for the same crime!

Casey Anthony is not guilty; that does not mean she is innocent.  Though, she was innocent until proven guilty.  She was proven not guilty and now, she can sing from the rooftops that she committed the crime, and not a single thing can happen to her.

People say, our system of justice didn’t work in this case.  I do not agree.  The system of justice worked.  Just because we didn’t like the outcome of the trial does not mean the system didn’t work.

Casey Anthony now deserves all the freedoms that you and I enjoy.

She had a fair trial – she was given protections and special treatment that most defendants don’t enjoy.   Unfortunately, 12 jurors did not believe the evidence presented – that’s the bottom line.

Reforms are needed to improve the jury system in long, media-laden trials.  But no one could say that Casey Anthony did not have a fair trial or a fair jury.

Judge Belvin Perry is a Jurist of the highest caliber, as was Judge Stan Strickland.  The Prosecution won most of their motions leading up to the trial.  No one can say the prosecution got a bad wrap.

The defense, we said, was  incompetent, unethical, and morally challenged.

But they did what they had to do and won the case.

They won.  In life there are bitter pills to swallow.

Advertisements
96 Comments Post a comment
  1. dee
    Sep 7 2011

    Poignantly true.

    Reply
    • Sep 9 2011

      Yeap, Dee. It sure is. Hope all is well with you! 🙂

      Reply
  2. Faith
    Sep 7 2011

    Dearest Andrea
    Excellent as always! Your points are well stated and right on the money. I’m not sure I agree with the fair jury statement. I personally think they were in to much of a hurry to get out of there. That of course is just my opinion and not worth much as far as the big picture goes.
    Yes the defense won this one,but I can truly say that if I were ever tried for any kind of crime I would not pick Baez or Mason to defend me,they are both a disgrace to the professional practice of law. They have shown no respect for the law,the court or themselves. JMHO of course.
    I’m not sure KC will have much of a life even after she serves probation but she is free and should not be hindered in living her life the way she chooses,as long she stays within the law.
    Well I go back to “teaching” my class today,we’re starting with Genesis. I hope I’m not too much out of my depth.
    Have a beautiful day!
    Faith

    Reply
    • Sep 7 2011

      God bless all you do for Him, Faith!

      I agree with your opinion about Baez and Mason. I think that there needs to be laws on the books concerning making accusations in an opening statement that cannot be backed up by either an LE investigation or credible witnesses. I also think there needs to be an abolishment of sequestered juries. They will watch out for each other and the integrity of the deliberations. I know of a case where a man went through three trials because of jury misconduct. Why frustrate jurors any more than need be? JMO~

      Reply
      • Faith
        Sep 7 2011

        Thank you for your very kind words. I’m learning way more from my class then they learn from me. I serve Him because He loves me.
        I think this whole mess might have been avoided if,as the state requested,the judge had ordered a gag order.

      • Sep 7 2011

        YW! :mrgreen:
        I know what you mean about learning more from the class! I’ve taught my share of Bible studies.

    • Sep 9 2011

      Faith, thank you! 🙂 Yes, this jury seemed anything but fair, but the way they were handled, picked, etc., was very fair. When they all came together, it was like a perfect storm for the State – like an earthquake, hurricane, tornado, flood, and tsunami came together to wreak havoc in Orlando.

      I’m sure you will do beautifully in your teaching of Genesis. You’re spirit is in it 100 percent, I’m sure, and with that honesty of focus, nothing will ever go wrong, I am sure of it!

      Reply
  3. Sep 7 2011

    Andrea, great Post!
    I must admit I also did sign that above mentioned Petition, believing if there is any way possible for her to be made responsible for what she has done to her own Daughter than it should be done.
    I do believe and always will believe in this Case Injustice has been done, many things went wrong in this Case. I won’t get in to Details because most of us know what went wrong, there is no Reason for me to repeat the Reasons.
    The Verdict came in, right or wrong, it is what it is.
    I still think Casey Anthony got away with Murder and therefore she can go on with her Life to live it as she chooses, Caylee’s Life has been taken away from her before she even had a Chance to live it, what is right about that, I ask?
    For me, the best thing ever can happen is that I never see or hear from Casey Anthony again, or any one who had anything to do with her getting away with Murder.
    All those People deserve what Karma will bring to them eventually.
    I have to believe there is Justice after all and it will catch up with them in time.
    In the Meantime I will make it a Point not to watch anything or read any Books coming from any of the Anthony’s or the whole Gang supporting the Anthony’s.
    That is my Right to not feed the Greed and Injustice in this sad Tragedy of a Case in which the Life of a little innocent Girl Caylee was taken away and the Person responsible is walking the streets scott free like nothing ever happened. JMO

    Reply
    • Sep 9 2011

      Hi Hilde,

      Everyone, including me, was so upset after the verdict and we wanted to do “something” to make the horrible and shocking decision a bit easier to take. I can’t blame you one bit for signing that petition – I may have, too, right after the verdict because I was so mad.

      I’ve calmed down since then and realize it’s out of anyone’s hands. Casey Anthony will not have a happy life, that’s her hell on earth.

      And, you’re right – if she goes quietly away, it would be the best for all. I think that’s just what she’s trying to do, and I wish people would leave her alone – the more she’s chased, the more media she gets. The more the parents talk, the more media is generated…On the other hand, I understand the interest (still) in this story – I still follow it and want to know about every silly thing that’s happening, but I don’t consider it “news” and yet it is news, in a sense….. Talk about a dichotomy!

      Reply
      • Sep 9 2011

        Don’t forget DR> PHIL on Tuesday!!!! I saw excerpts of his interview on ET tonight. I have to say the makeup job on both of them looked pretty good. Apparently no questions were filtered. He asked questions that we all want answers to. It’s a two part interview. Atleast I think it’s Tuesday but to be sure you might want to check it on Monday just in case I got the date wrong. I have followed this case from the very beginning so why wouldn’t I watch it now…….

    • Jan 31 2012

      let me to you some thing dont let peopal fool you she will be tryed in federal court and let let you in on every crime that she has commited 1murder 2manslaughter of a child 3 premeditated murder 4child neglect 5aggravated child abuse6aggravated manslaughter7 obstruction of justis 8 giveing false information to police bribery and tempering with witnesses and jury members and stealing checks and then furgeing her name on them and then cashing them and paying peopal to purger them selfs on the stan and cumputer hacking and stealing information and hacking in to peopals personel web sites and stealing i n formation and bribeing mother and daughter from out side the court and out side the court room to use that information agaisnt them with out there knowlage and they bribed the jury members with cash and got them to change there storys as well as cindy anthoy and they wer told by jdge belvin perry jr that they wer not allowed to concider punishment by law and if they did then they would have to stop the trail and charge the jury members with contemped as well as the anthoy attys they lied under oath and with held information in the case and lets not for get that casey anthoy also commited grand theft auto and she tryed to get rid of evidents in the case thats why they junked caseys car after the trail because they knew wht was going on and so did casey anthoys atty be cause casey anthoy told them that she did in fact kill caleey anthoy and when and where and jose baez and chiny mason and elizabeth fryer and linda kenny boden and andera lyons all knew that jose baez did in fact help casey to despose of caleey anthoy and they did not come clean so they need to be chrged with accory to muder along with the 22 other charges agaisnt the jurymembers plus the deff attys and casey anthoy as well and i beg the us atty general eric holder and robert oneal and the fbi to revoke her probation and put her back in jail for murder and because her attys need to be brought up on contemped charges as well as 22 other charges on top of that thank you sincelery mr james scruggs

      Reply
  4. Sep 7 2011

    I’ve not signed any petitions anywhere pertaining to this case. I signed one ages ago and got my inbox inundated with other causes to take note of. I’m thinking these online petitions are nothing more than placebos and for that I’m somewhat glad. It shows me that people have a caring heart and don’t like seeing injustice-they won’t let it slide, in other words. And, it is a far better thing to do than carrying out a vengeful act against Felon Anthony.

    I did hear that it is legitimate to try her in Federal Court since the Feds were brought in. I am a little fuzzy on the details but it had something to do with Caylee’s civil rights being violated. I’ve heard some credible talking heads say its legit aand would not be double jeapardy. If that is true, then I say, go for it. Otherwise, just boycott anything to do with this case and the people involved who want to make blood money (whatever is in your heart in that respect). I just hope never to see the day when the people of our nation are scolded into sucking up and taking it when an injust verdict is delivered. That is as much a travesty as the crime itself.

    Reply
    • Sep 9 2011

      Hi Sherry, Well, I think some talking heads will say anything to get their face on the news. The fact is, it would be double jeopardy, sadly. I also remember hearing something about Caylee’s civil rights, but it wouldn’t stand. Murder is murder, and Civil Rights is totally different. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was about protecting minorities from oppression, it was about preventing discrimination of different classes of people, including minorities and women. It assured African Americans had voting rights. The workplace changed in dramatic ways as a result of the Civil Rights Act (LOL! I had to study this for my MS in HRM!),

      The workplace changed for the better, but the glass ceiling is still very real.

      So, I just can’t see how it has anything to do with the Casey Anthony case. I think it was mostly wishful thinking!

      Reply
    • Jim
      Oct 26 2011

      All federal cases, regardless of reason need federal jurisdiction. The Casey case does not have that in it. Therefore it can never be heard in fed court no matter what. Read about the requirements for fed jurisdiction.

      Reply
  5. Sep 7 2011

    thanks Sherry for understanding how I feel by the way You commented.
    You are so right, we do have the Right to speak up when we see Injustice done.
    We might not be able to change it, at least we can voice our Opinion to let them know something went terrible wrong in this Case.
    Maybe the Anthony Case will be a Lesson for future Cases.

    Reply
  6. Sep 7 2011

    Perhaps there is more of a sentence in Casey roaming free. In fact, what does FREE mean to her? Due to the notariety of the case and her “not guilty” verdict, she can not go anywhere without the fear of someone taking a pot shot. She would have been more protected in jail because she would have still been in isolation to protect that kind of prisoner. Ok, she she can drink and smoke, screw and have whatever she wants for dinner, she can exercise (lol), she can get married, have more children (god forbid), she can vote, she can do practically everything but wander free in a mall, or take a walk by herself, go skating, go to a movie. Well, you get the drift…… Whether Casey feels any remorse or sheer giddiness for her freedom, she is NOT FREE, and never will be. Even if the petition garners millions of signatures for a Federal trial, it will never come to fruition. For now, we have to take our cod liver oil and have a nasty after taste of injustice for Caylee. Mother KARMA is what will finally be the outcome for Casey.

    Reply
    • colleen
      Sep 7 2011

      Well said. There is Karma. That the old saying “what goes around, comes around” really is true.

      Reply
      • Sep 9 2011

        Amen to that, Collen!

    • Sep 9 2011

      Hi Weezie… I have often thought the same thing about Casey Anthony being in a worse jail now than she ever was.

      She’s free – she has her freedom, but at what cost? It’s not freedom at all, though she knows she’s physically free and she can see her freedom, it is just NOT within her reach, and won’t be for a long time.

      I’m with ya all the way, my dear! 🙂

      Reply
  7. Faith
    Sep 7 2011

    Question: Would anyone of us trade our freedom for the kind of freedom KC has gotten. She is the most hated person on the planet! She will probably never know the love of a good man. She’s shown herself too be to lazy to get an education,so there is no job of any value in her immediate future. Until she comes to the point where she can admit what she did,and show remorse,she will never be a well adjusted,contributing member of society. She is not free. Not free as we know freedom.
    I thought convicted felons lost their right to vote?

    Reply
    • Hilde
      Sep 8 2011

      No, I wouldn’t want to be in Casey A. Shoe’s’
      Matter of fact I will do my Best to appreciate what I have and be thankful for it.

      Reply
  8. David Cook
    Oct 5 2011

    If you are going to put up a site and talk about stuff you know nothing about…then it might be best for you to do something else with your time..instead of spreading false and misleading information on the internet….about a very important petition…and maybe you need to realize the State and the Federal Government are separate entities….and that Casey Anthony can be tried in Federal Court for lying to Investigators from the FBI in the State’s case…..This is called Dual sovernity….and it has nothing to do with the Constitution or double jeopardy…so before you convince your sheeples or your followers to NOT do the right thing…Why don’t you do your research first…….

    Reply
    • Oct 5 2011

      Andrea is an intelligent woman. If you have links to help her in the research that would be much appreciated by us all. Help us to understand that its legit, ‘k? TIA!

      Reply
      • Oct 5 2011

        Sherry! Thank you. It sure would have been nice to see some references and citations instead of childish pouts.

        Sent from my iPhone

      • Oct 5 2011

        YW! :mrgreen:

    • Oct 5 2011

      David,
      I am educated about dual sovereignty. But it does not apply in this case. Casey A never spoke to FBI. The short time she did, after being indicted, she was protected by the Fifth Amendment.

      The FBI has no cause, or jurisdiction, against her unless she was interviewed or interrogated by them. Furthermore, and more importantly, the FBI has more important work like intercepting terrorists, and other very dangerous crimes than to waste any more resources on this case.

      The FBI only investigates. After they do, they provide their findings to the US Attorney’s Office in the local jurisdiction where the crime occurred. The local office decides whether or not to proceed with prosecuting the case.

      The case is over. You are not doing anyone a favor by asserting this absolute false hope. This case is over.

      Time to face reality.

      No one likes the jury decision, but it will never change now. It’s over now.

      You are living in a make believe world where everything or everyone gets the punishment they deserve. That does not happen, unfortunately.

      Sent from my iPhone

      Reply
    • Jim
      Oct 26 2011

      @David maybe you should take your own advice. There is no federal jurisicition for this case and it can never be heard in fed court. Please challenge me on this so that I can publically prove you wrong. It has nothing to do with dual soveriegnty.

      Reply
      • Oct 26 2011

        Jim, Thank you so much for helping David understand the idea of trying CA in Federal court is a total pipe dream! The petition associated with this idea had to have been created by someone who either cannot understand the protection that the Bill of Rights gives us against the federal government, or refuses to accept the rule of law and due process protection. It’s a notion that goes against everything our constitution stands for, especially after someone is found not guilty! The jury spoke, and that’s it. end of story.

    • Jiim
      Nov 3 2011

      David the one who does not know whats going on is you, not the author. Dual sovereignty has nothing to do with the very basic principle of federal jurisdiction. The case has no federal jurisdiction. Lying to FBI investigators does not qualify the Feds to prosecute for murder in federal court. Just because you are willing to abandon all procedure of Constitutional law does not mean Casey can be prosecuted until she is found guilty. Its not just a technicality, it stops govt abuse of all the accused. Stop pretending to have researched something you clearly do not understand.

      Reply
      • Lee Wells
        Nov 3 2011

        If the Feds have jurisdiction they can and will try a state acquittal case and that includes murder. There is an on going case on Louisanna whereby a federal grand jury handed down an indictment for a triple murder and arson. Jurisdiction was the apartment building where the murders and arson was used in interstate commerce. Now how do you argue these facts? It took three years my friend after the acquittal. Look it up.

  9. Oct 19 2011

    Casey did speak to Nick Savage, FBI Investigator, and it was videotaped. The conversation was the one in which Casey said that she knew in her gut that Caylee was still alive. I hope they prosecute her for lying about the kidnapping and obstruction of justice because she knew where she dumped her body. You can’t take hope away. There are other false kidnapping claims and it turns out it was the parents who killed their kids. If lying to the FBI isn’t against the law and punishable, then why have it listed as a federal crime? Heck, let’s all lie to the feds and see what happens.

    Reply
  10. Oct 19 2011

    By the way, child murder is very important just like terror attacks. Casey was interrogated months before the indictment. The feds have tried other murder cases that ended in state acquittal. Their interest in the Louisanna murder crime? The apartment building where the murders took place was used in interstate commerce! Give me a break. If they want to try bio mom, they can and damn well should. The buck must stop somewhere.

    Reply
    • Jim
      Oct 26 2011

      @goinAustin Your making up stuff that just isn’t true. Casey’s case is not terrorism and everyone knows that. Stop pretend to change the facts to fit the requirements. No fed trial ever.

      Reply
  11. Oct 19 2011

    I can find the Louisanna case if need be. A federal grand jury indicted this “man.”

    Reply
    • Jiim
      Nov 2 2011

      @goinaustin Show how anything in the Casey Anthony murder case had any federal involvement. Do not use make believe reasons such as “the child murder is an act of terriosm.” We all know your just trying to make the case fit the rule where it clearly does not. Lying to the FBI is not murder so Casey can not be charged with Fed murder because she lied to the FBI. The state and only the state had jurisdiction. So how is this a Fed trial?

      Reply
      • Nov 2 2011

        Hi Jim,
        Yes! I totally agree with you! 🙂

      • Lee Wells
        Nov 3 2011

        She should be tried for lying about the kidnapping and obstruction of justice. It is against federal law. If it is not then why have on the books? She will get her rear caught someday and no one will help her.

    • Nov 3 2011

      I know the case you’re referring to and it has no similarity to the Anthony case! There is not a chance in hell that your dream will come true… If it does, God help us all.

      Reply
      • Lee Wells
        Nov 4 2011

        Not my dream it is her nightmare. Give it a rest buddy.

      • Lee Wells
        Nov 4 2011

        Who really cares if bio mom is tried or not. The Louisanna case is very similar. The Feds used the interstate commerce excuse for trying that murderer. Either way she is a muderer and will be tried one day. The trier is not yet known. And God will not have mercy on her useless soul. There is no redemption for murder. Murder is murder.

      • Nov 4 2011

        Lee Wells, Casey Anthony will make it into the Kingdom of God if she repents of her sins and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. There are many murderers in God’s Kingdom due to Christ’s sacrifice. Liars and the effeminate, too. And theives. Its all due to Christ’s work and righteousness and not their own goodness, for no one is good enough except Christ, to come before the most holy God. Jesus is the only Way to be in that Kingdom God has.

        BTW, you are a murderer at heart. You desire evil on another. That’s murder because it is of hate. Its not just the outward act but the inward evil of the heart that God judges.

      • Lee Wells
        Nov 4 2011

        Gee, it takes a lot of gall to call someone you do not know a murderer. Holy cow! LOL

      • Nov 4 2011

        You want to speak for God and how He will judge Casey Anthony but yet you do not know His word. Read it and you will know that Jesus is the One who said that anyone who has hate in their heart towards another is murderer. He said it, I didn’t. Take it up with Him.

      • Nov 4 2011

        The only useless souls in God’s sight are those who die without Christ Jesus as their Savior and Lord. But you do know that self-righteousness is a sin in his sight? Who are you to judge what God will do to her? Her life is not yet over.

      • Lee Wells
        Nov 4 2011

        Amen to you BTW.

    • Jim
      Nov 8 2011

      @goinaustin What does this have to do with Casey’s case? What in Casey’s case is a fed matter, or reason for Fed involvement? That does not mean what Fed laws where broken. That means what gives the Feds jurisdiction to hear the case at all?

      Reply
      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 3 2012

        Casey will not go to heaven, she has no soul, she has no spirit. Anyone with a soul and a spirit has compassion. Casey was “cold” without compassion. She is of the devil and to the devil she will return because she is his bride. One of his own. If Casey was truely remorseful she would not have gone to parties, she would not have the tatoo Belle Vita. Casey is a cold blooded person without feelings. No, my friends she will not go to heaven because she is of the devil.

      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 3 2012

        Also, let me add to those of you that read the Bible please look at Matthew 7:16 “But by their fruits you will know them.” The End

  12. Jim
    Nov 8 2011

    @Lee Its not about what is or is not on Fed law books. U ppl need to understand, laws and courts R not just about laws. Jurisdiction, the ability to have the authority to judge and enforce the law is where your whole argument dies. Without Fed jurisdiction, some act or reason giving the Feds authority to prosecute, there is no case. It doesn’t matter what Fed laws Casey broke, if she broke them in a way that does not involve the Fed govt. The Caylee murder appears to be a purely state jurisdiction issue. So if it can’t be done at the state level it can’t be done at all! I can give you references on this that show exactly what I’m saying if your interested. But this isn’t debatable or anything new. It has nothing to do with how I or U feel about it. But its a fact U can’t avoid.

    Reply
    • Feb 1 2012

      How about this: Ms. Casey Anthony searched the internet on how to make an illegal substance, known as CHLOROFORM. It was found in her car trunk in high concentrations by an FBI lab. Her daughter died, she did not report it, and it fact her mother called the police. There was the smell of death in the same car trunk. An intelligent jury could put the pieces of the puzzle together. She searched on how to make chloroform, it was found in her trunk, and so it can be surmized that she made this disgusting drug for whatever reason and her daughter died as a result. Let a federal grand jury decide.

      Reply
      • Jim
        Feb 16 2012

        @Lee Wells U really don’t seem to understand the burden of proof on the prosecution here. 1st, the prosecution has to prove what they say happen actually happened. Saying there is 1 internet search for making chloroform, not 84 as they claimed, isn’t proof its a proposal, nothing more. Next, 1 expert offered very dubious theory on gas sample testing showing high levels of chloroform that’s all that happened. Thats not proof. Just accepting it as proof just means you’re ignoring the standard of law requiring proof BEYOND DOUBT. Ignoring the obvious question of despite a claim of chloroform it didn’t appear magically, how did it get there? If your only answer is no one knows for sure then its reasonable to have a doubt of guilt so the jury voted not guilty as they should have done!

  13. Feb 17 2012

    Some babble about federal jurisidication and on and on. The state of Florida said that she searched how to make chloroform and there is proof. An FBI lab found it high concentrations in HER car trunk.

    A normal, reasonable person would infer that she did make it to sedate her baby or kill her which it ended up doing. She searched on how to make it and it is found in her car trunk that only she had possession. Logic and inference is that she did make it and it is against the law and her daughter died.

    So, one time doing something, isn’t proof that she wanted to know how to make the chemical and searched how to make it and also searched neck breaking, etc. This establishes a pattern of criminal thought. There isn’t one single, huge smoking gun in this case but there are many pieces of the puzzle that spell murder. It’s like saying a team only won by ONE point–but they still won. One search on the internet is all it takes to find out information. One.

    That crazy searched the internet on how to make chloroform and if I was a juror it wouldn’t make a rat’s rear if it was only one time. If the feds want to, they can convene a federal grand jury and let them decide. That’s all I am saying.

    If they can use the lame excuse for trying a black man from Louisana for murder who was acquitted in state court because the apartment building has low-income tenants so it is considered used and affects interstate commece, then they should try this lousy white Florida woman for making chloroform.

    I am sure that IF she is tried in federal court it wouldn’t be a replay of the last disaster in court. Cases have been won on a lot less evidence. Over.

    Reply
    • Jim
      Feb 17 2012

      @Lee Wells Once again its not arbitrary assignment of making a case a fed matter. I’ve explained to U how burning down a bldg can involve interstate commerce and therefore makes it a possible Fed prosecution case. But that didn’t happen in the Casey Anthony’s trial. So its not related in anyway. So CA can not be tried, no if about it, because jurisdiction prevents it. Whether U agree with it or not, its a fundamental principle in all cases. What U call babble is what the court takes very seriously. Mock all U want. It just displays ignorance, because courts and trials are very serious matters, and they don’t ignore principles just to convict someone they don’t like.

      Now as for the rest of your claim that CA must have had chloroform because one guy, at Oakridge labs not the FBI, had an unsubstantiated air sampling data is not proof. Its a theory that is highly debatable at best. Air sampling is far from proof. I’m giving the prosecution the benefit of doubt by saying there could be chloroform. Then a reasonable question to determine whether or not chloroform was there is to ask, how would CA come to have chloroform? Just saying well she made it isn’t enough. Ppl who know how hard, not easy, it is to actually make chloroform know its not something some typical high school dropout mommy can do. The materials R easy to get but the process takes a lot of chemistry experience that few ppl have. Thats a fact! Ppl that go around saying oh its easy to make, its on the internet, etc usually have very little knowledge of what could happen in just trying to make it. Everything is easy to say. Making chloroform takes real skill; and unless U understand what could go wrong and what to do you would probably hurt yourself just trying to make it. So once again its very unlikely CA could have made chloroform.

      Reply
  14. Lee Wells
    Feb 17 2012

    Yes, it is hard to make chloroform and that’s probably why Caylee died. She’s stupid and a high school dropout but she did try to make chloroform. Bio mom’s mother thought she made chloroform and lied on the stand to protect her. But, I guess the search meant nothing to the case so she lied on the stand. If I mocked justice, I wouldn’t waste my time replying on the site. A state grand jury indicted her and I am sure they saw and heard most of evidence presented at trial. The feds trying Casby under the “interstate commerce” jurisidication is a loop hole they found and a lame one at that. Who knows what tomorrow will bring. There aren’t any for Caylee and other murdered children.

    Reply
    • Jim
      Feb 17 2012

      @LeeWells Why would Caylee die from Casey making chloroform? That makes no sense. The prosecution proposed that CA made chloroform and then used that chloroform to kill Caylee. Nothing like what U said was even proposed by the prosecution. R U insinuating that CA was making chloroform and accidentally killed Caylee? If thats your belief ok. But, that is not what was in the trial.

      As for interstate commerce being a loop hole thats not true. No prosecutor ever claimed CA case had any interstate commerce involvement. Just saying its a “loophole” for possible fed prosecution is ridiculous. Interstate commerce is a real thing. What in CA case had any interstate commerce involvement? Its not just some secret term that they can charge her with and never have to support. There has to be real interstate commerce involvement to invoke that term. Law isn’t some magic act that doesn’t need substantial reasoning. The gov can’t just make up reasons to make the case a fed case like you’re trying to do. If they did, a judge would dismiss it right away. Nothing in the CA case has fed jurisdiction and that can not be changed.

      Reply
      • Lee Wells
        Feb 21 2012

        If a murder case crosses state lines, which this one did, because of the false kidnapping claim that the fake Zanny lived or was from New York, NC or wherever, it did involve the feds. Why would her mother lie on the stand about the chloroform intructions search? Only if she knew that bio mom was in possession of chloroform, probably found the container in her trunk and we already know she tried to clean up the evidence. Tell me, why did she lie about that? I sure do hope that the feds wouldn’t mirror the state case. Bio is such a huge liar and fabricated so many different stories that who will ever know the truth. One fact remains though. She did kill that little girl and showed no remorse then or now. I never said that this case involved any interstate commerce loophole only the crime crossing state lines and the manufacturing of an illegal substance. A reasonable person could conclude, given all the pieces of the puzzle, that she did either make chloroform, attempted to make chloroform or was in possession. Cindy, as an RN, would recognize chloroform and figured she best lie on the stand to protect her. That’s how correct the state was in their assertions. I don’t care to carry on this discussion anymore. Time will tell and it doesn’t really matter what anyone thinks.

      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 3 2012

        @Lee Wells,
        Don’t let these “know it alls” get you down. I have been fighting this since the trial and I feel like you do. Back to back we stand together and eventually something will be done to get Casey back in court and hopefully onto death row. A murder is a murder and if it is not solved it stays an opened case. I have hope that someone somewhere is still working on this and a “loop hole” will be found. Thanks for you comments.

  15. Jim
    Feb 22 2012

    @LeeWells I would quit too if I made some of those statements here. False kidnapping claims while saying Zanny was from NY is not murder. Nor does it invoke Fed jurisdiction in anyway. Just because someone makes up a person and claims they’re from out of state does not mean it make Fed jurisdiction. Its obvious you’re searching for something that is clearly not there. That would be fed jurisdiction! Like I said in the beginning, Either the commission of the crime has fed jurisdiction or it doesn’t. Fake stories of make believe people does not create fed jurisdiction. By your theory if CA said the Canadian army took Caylee it would mean she could prosecuted in Canada. Clearly that’s preposterous!

    Next you said CA bought or made or stole chloroform. I’ve asked several times for some proof on that. Not an internet search but some real evidence. That means equipment, or reports of missing chloroform, or a person who supplied her with chloroform. Something that makes logical sense as to how she would have this unusual chemical. Just like most CA haters you failed to show any evidence of that because U don’t care about real evidence. Its all about cute baby pics and punishing someone for Caylee’s death. Thank God the law prevents exactly what U stand for. If the state can’t prove the crime the accused walks. But thanks for letting people see how ridiculous the prosecution claims R. U proved that U don’t have proof; and that helped me show how silly these claims of CA must be guilty truly R. I agree, U lost big here, thanks for making it evident!

    Reply
  16. Jim
    Feb 23 2012

    @LeeWells I don’t take orders from U. Besides I thought U said your moronic piece. BTW, U keep saying dumber things each post. For the 5th time, FOR CA TO BE TRIED FOR FED MURDER THE MURDER, NOT THE LYING, MUST HAVE A FED ACT CREATING FED JURISDICTION! Apparently U don’t understand the difference between lying and murder! Copying and pasting only helps IF U UNDERSTAND HOW AND WHEN THE LAW APPLIES! U clearly don’t understand a very simple concept. IT TAKES THE ACT IT SELF OF MURDER TO HAVE A FED COMPONENT IN BREAKING THE LAW TO MAKE IT A FED CRIME! LYING IS A SEPARATE CRIME AND IS A DIFFERENT CHARGE. BTW CA was convicted of lying and sentenced for that. So obviously if it all is just one thing, like U keep pretending it is, then it wouldn’t have been possible for CA to get convicted of lying while being acquitted for murder! Just because U insist on believing something that is completely ignorant of the law is no one’s fault but your own. I ‘ve proven your ignorance beyond a doubt.

    Reply
  17. Jim
    Feb 28 2012

    Well it looks like another runs out with her tail between her legs. Anyone following along I hope they realize why its not something you can make happen with a petition or because someone doesn’t understand how the Rodney King trial works. Yes the officers had a fed trial, but each case is different. Each case has its own merits. When ppl say “well there was a fed trial for so and so,” why can’t CA be brought to Fed court? Its usually a big red flag that they don’t understand how the legal sys. works. But thx Andrea for the form to show just how uninformed some ppl R when it comes to the laws of their own country. I hope ppl looked up what jurisdiction is. If U did and U understod it, U shuld have no prob figuring why CA can’t be brought to Fed court. If U just learned about jurisdiction it will be useful in helping U understand the legal sys. Another victory here, I’m out, hoped someone learned why Lee Wells argument just doesn’t make any legal sense.

    Reply
    • Lee Wells
      Feb 29 2012

      There was a man who was arrested for lying to the FBI about HIS abduction. He made the whole thing up. He was released on $20,000 bond.

      Reply
    • Lee Wells
      Feb 29 2012

      Lying to the state and the Feds is lying to different sovereigns and therefore punishable by both.

      Reply
      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 3 2012

        Right on…Lee!!

      • Jim
        Mar 3 2012

        BTW Andrea thank you for your well done interview with judge Strickland. He backed up what I have been telling them all along. Just because there is a law on the books and its broken, doesn’t mean U can be prosecuted for the crime. Jurisdiction is required for the law to enforceable. So every time Lee Wells insist that dual sovereignty allows the state and Fed prosecute the same crime regardless of the circumstances it shows how little they understand of how the law works. Dual sovereignty is not some special power and the prosecuting party still must have jurisdiction. Its against the law for CA to murder Caylee in the state of Utah. Why can’t they just take the case to Utah and prosecute her there Lee?

  18. Jim
    Feb 29 2012

    @Lee Wells U really don’t understand this issue at all. I’m starting to feel sorry for U. I’ll explain it once again. CA can not be tried on Fed murder charges no matter who she lied to. The crime of lying is not the crime of murder. It doesn’t matter if she told a 1000 lies to the FBI. That does not create Fed jurisdiction! Dual sovereignty does not vacate the requirement of fed jurisdiction for fed crimes. Saying it over and over just shows that U don’t understand why jurisdiction is, or what dual sovereignty is about.

    For CA to go on trial for Fed murder the act of murder, not the lies she told, must have something that creates Fed jurisdiction. That is not opinion, that is fact. So unless U can show how the MURDER HAS FED JURISDICTION U R WRONG! The more cases U show of different crimes with different circumstances just go to show U don’t understand how jurisdiction is determined. U say jurisdiction blah blah because its a big word U can’t figure out what makes it so important. Thats ok lawyers and judges do understand.

    Reply
    • Lee Wells
      Feb 29 2012

      I did not say “jurisdiction blah blah”. What is “jurisdiction blah blah”? U don’t get the gist.

      Reply
      • Jim
        Feb 29 2012

        @Lee Wells Whether U said jurisdiction blah blah is not the point. Dual sovereignty does not allow for Casey to be tried in Fed court because without Fed jurisdiction there can not be a Fed trial. Your just using words U clearly have no idea what they really mean. Dual sovereignty only applies if the case has state and another, like Fed, jurisdiction. Without jurisdiction there can not be another trial. Dual sovereignty would apply if the crime of murder had an element of Fed involvement. Lying to the FBI does not create Fed involvement, because lying is a separate crime and is charged separately.

        Dual sovereignty only applies, in Casey’s situation, only if Casey could have been charged by the Feds originally. The Feds couldn’t charge her because only the state has that authority based on how the murder happened. Since the Feds never had the authority to bring the case to court dual sovereignty does not change anything in the CA murder trial. Whether or not U believe that its true its a fact, and I can prove it. U haven’t said anything that shows this to be inaccurate. So U might as well accept it because its the law and its not going to change just because ppl hate Casey.

      • Lee Wells
        Feb 29 2012

        All that should happen if at all possible would be to try her for lying about the kidnapping and through those lies obstructed justice, hindering an official investigation, state and federal. It may never happen but she will never know when they come and get her. Gone, just like baby Cays. Either way, justice will prevail.

  19. Jim
    Mar 1 2012

    @ Lee Wells well I guess you’re trying to admit there is no possibility of a fed murder trial. If U still think she can be tried for Fed murder please tell us how that works. Other than internet searches U never explained how CA could have chloroform so I guess U can’t prove that either. All that is left is lying to the FBI.

    Since no one really knows how Caylee died prosecuting CA for just lying would be a big risk for the Feds without much chance of a big penalty. If Caylee was already dead when CA lied a lot of the impact of the lie is meaningless because the the lie didn’t prevent the authorities from stopping the murder. It would be a complicated case with very little chance of the Feds getting much of a sentence for anything. The Feds have bigger cases with more impact to pursue.

    Yes CA lied. Everyone knows that. The only ppl who believe the murder happened as described by the state R ppl that don’t understand, and don’t want to understand, how difficult, if not impossible, performing that murder would be. That is exactly what a jury is suppose to vote not guilty on. Inference and speculation is not allowed of jurors. If U want to blame anyone blame the investigators who failed to follow up and get real physical evidence to support the prosecution’s case.

    Reply
  20. Daisy in Florida
    Mar 1 2012

    Dear Andrea,
    Casey Anthony is guilty of deliberately murdering her precious daughter, Caylee. Casey was proven innocent only because the decision came from 12 irresponsible people who cared more about the food they were going to eat, the entertainment that the State of Florida was going to provide for them and whether they would be able to read a newspaper or watch some TV. Only because of this “devil may care” decision issued by these 12 idoits was Casey Anthony allowed to burst forward into seculsion. Did our system fail? You bet your “britches” our system failed!! As far as Judge Perry is concerned he was more concerned in acknowledging the whimsical wishes of the already pampered jury. Some of which were “forced” to serve. And you call that fair? No, dear Andrea, the system did fail. It failed a very small, innocent child whos only pleasure in life was to snuggle up with her Winnie the Pooh blanket and have her Grandmother read stories to her. I felt this at the time of the trial and I feel this now, Judge Perry could have turned that verdict over. I suspect some money under the table may have exchanged hands.

    Reply
  21. Daisy in Florida
    Mar 1 2012

    Oh, by the way, I did sign this petition and I will sign every petition pertaining to this case that comes my way. I have written 8 letters to various people involved with the case and have made copies and will re-send these letters until either I am too old to write an address on an envelope or Casey is on death row.

    Reply
  22. Jim
    Mar 1 2012

    @Daisy Too bad U didn’t understand the trial at all. You don’t know what the jurors thought. You weren’t there. You don’t have a clue what the jurors did in deliberation. All you know is what you see on TV. Baby pics that made you decided CA had to be guilty. Oh, the jury didn’t find CA innocent they found her not guilty. You can write all the letters you want to be filed in the trash can because that’s were there going. Were a country of laws not hatred based on pure conjecture.

    You obviously don’t know how the law works and I doubt that you care. But CA was found not guilty fair and square. So deal with it. Oh if you plan on calling jurors idiots you should at least know how to spell the word. Judge Perry followed the law and made sound decisions based on the law that you don’t understand. BTW, calling others idiots while misspelling every other word and making grammatical errors left and right shows how resistant you are to learning the basics. Judge Perry graduated law school, with the paragraph you wrote I wonder if you graduated high school.

    Reply
    • Daisy in Florida
      Mar 3 2012

      I saw the whole trial and the jury was constantly passing notes to Judge Perry telling him what food they wanted to eat, could they have a newspaper, could they go out shopping, nananananana. The jury never asked for additional information while in deliberation. They cared more about what foods they were going to eat, what entertainment the State of Florida was going to provide for them then they did about solving a murder of an innocent child. One jurior #5 was forced on the jury. Yes, I watched it and I think Judge Perry could have done a lot more than he did if he had more focused on the trial then trying to appease the jury. This is a murder of an innocent child, an opened case. Someone eventually will have to pay and I hope it is Casey.

      Reply
  23. Mar 2 2012

    Hi all…I’ll be back to chat, but I wanted to point out that Judge Stan Strickland spoke to me about this issue…. I specifically asked him about this, his comments can be found here: https://andreadreamin.com/2012/01/04/my-interview-with-the-honorable-stan-strickland/

    Reply
  24. and unfortunately you do not understand the true meaning of double jeopardy..It IS a Federal Crime to lie to the FBI…sorry to rain on your parade but its true

    Reply
  25. Jim
    Mar 2 2012

    @Seeking Here we go again another one who thinks dual sovereignty means CA can be tried in Fed court. U probably don’t know what jurisdiction means in law. Because if U did U would know why CA can not be tried for Fed murder. That is a fact. The murder of Caylee had nothing in it that created Fed jurisdiction, that includes lying to the FBI. Lying is not murder. So lying has to be tried separately.
    So there is no possibility of a fed murder trial for CA, ever.

    Reply
  26. Jim
    Mar 2 2012

    Since it seems like ppl here don’t know this, every filing for Legal case has a section titled Jurisdiction and venue. Its the part where the prosecution explains why the court should hear the case. They don’t ever say things like every case has fed jurisdiction, or because of lying etc. Its all based on what gives the court the authority to hear it.

    Unless they can give a clear concise explanation as to what makes a case Fed, or state, or civil it will be rejected. U ppl R just making crap up and pretending it creates fed jurisdiction. That will never work even if a million ppl sign a petition. BTW they never say jurisdiction applies because in some other cases something similar happened. Its based on real requirements.

    Reply
    • Daisy in Florida
      Mar 3 2012

      Laws are made to be amended…..Laws are made to be broken. Judge Perry knew that this was a “high profile” case and in my opinion he did not “cover” all of his bases. I think he did a very poor job in choosing the jury…at one point he asked the officers to go to the shelter next door of the court and “bring anyone in that had a drivers license”….I heard him say this. That in my opinion was the WRONG way to handle a “high profile” case. If enough people complain about this case something eventually will be done about getting Casey back into jail. “The squeeking wheel gets the grease”. Also, a murder is always an open case until someone is found guilty. Murder does not just “blow” away. Casey will get what is due her.

      Reply
      • Jim
        Mar 3 2012

        @Daisy U really think they snatch ppl off the st. and make them serve on juries? U obviously don’t know that U have to qualify to be on a jury. U have to live in the right area, not have any felonies, be a US citizen, etc. Oh despite what U saw on TV a judge does not pick a jury. The 2 sides select it from a pool of jurors based on questions they ask.

        Judge Perry has been doing his job for over 30 yrs and has law degree and a license to practice law. But I’m sure U could give him tips on “how it should be done.” Ya thats what they do. If enough ppl complain they can go pickup CA and throw her in jail. No trial needed. Why don’t U just pass around a petition saying CA killed Caylee and she should go straight to jail for that. Hey, U said laws R meant to be bent and broken. I’ll say 1 thing, U have an imagination. Its not based on what the law or our country stands for but U don’t seem to care about that

      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 3 2012

        Jim, Yes, I think Judge Perry would have “snached” people of the street. And you, Jim, need to read over the information regarding the jury members. Yes, some of them did have arrest records and some had a conviction record. I think, and this is just the opinion of someone whom you think did not go to high-school, but I think that the whole case was handled in a very sloppy manner by Judge Perry.

        Also, Jim, I think that you are a very, very insecure person who finds pleasure in degrading and mocking people when, in fact, you are the one who probably has the problem. People like you give yourself away by reacting to comments like you do….you’re insecure, you must not think very highly of yourself, you hide yourself on sites such as this in order to degrade people, you probably beat your wife and children and even tho you try to make it seem like you do, you don’t have a lot of sense.

        I am asking you not to share your negative comments with me any longer.

  27. Daisy in Florida
    Mar 3 2012

    <———–holding hand up…..I have a question.
    Since it was so obvious that Cindy and George lied on the stand in a court of law, under oath, in front of a Judge and the American people, why was she NOT arrested for perjury? This tells me that anything can happen on this case, anything.

    Reply
    • Jim
      Mar 3 2012

      @Daisy Yes Cindy did perjury herself. No they don’t arrest U for that. The atty Gen has to decide if its worth spending resources, atty’s time etc, to bring a criminal case against her. Based on what they perceived her punishment would be and how much it would cost to pursue it the Fl atty generals office said forget about it. Stuff like that happens everyday.

      Reply
  28. Jim
    Mar 3 2012

    @Daisy If U don’t like my comments you R free to leave at any time. To put it simply your pathetic. U make up crap about me when U don’t even know who I am. Thats because its all U know how to do. You’re unable to find out any facts or provide anything other than your personnel belief which is nothing more than what U dream up in your head. What a loser!

    Its really obvious U don’t know what your talking about. U don’t know the difference between a felony conviction and a parking ticket. Because if U did U would know why U can be arrested and serve on jury. I said a felony conviction Daisy. So U don’t know who can and cannot be on a jury. Stop trying to pretend like everything U don’t know isn’t important.

    Daisy face it, U don’t know what you’re talking about. U don’t know how jurors R selected or what the judge can or cannot do. When your stuck and feel cornered, because U don’t understand the laws of the country U live in, U decide it time to throw in a lie about someone who is calling out all your BS because thats all U know how to do. Time to grow up! This isn’t the 3rd grade. Your off topic idiotic retort against me doesn’t work. It just shows how desperate and pathetic U R.

    Reply
  29. Jim
    Mar 7 2012

    Well thank God these fake facts R over. No Judge Perry wasn’t paid off. No the jury wasn’t bought off. Baez isn’t running an underground prostitution ring and Obama is not a muslim! After all the phony stories told just to try to make some high school drop out single mother look like the greatest criminal since the Zodiac killer failed, you’re left with reality.

    The prosecution proved nothing other than Casey’s personality is a disgrace. But nothing proved murder. I realize U haters don’t have the answers. But stop blaming real straight forward questions for your failure to prove CA’s guilt. U lost because the hard facts to convict are not there! If the facts were there she have been convicted! Grow up, and stop blaming others for following the law instead of your own delusions.

    Reply
    • Lee
      Mar 8 2012

      Who is to say what will or won’t happen to toxic mom? Cindy lying about the choloform search means that toxic mom did make it or have it in her possession. Tell me why she would lie otherwise? There are federal laws against child abuse and with laws comes enforcement. Florida receives federal grant money to protect children so who knows. If it wasn’t clear that chloroform killed Cays it became crystal clear when Cindy lied on the stand to protect toxic mom. Love this banter. Thanks!

      Reply
      • Daisy in Florida
        Mar 8 2012

        Great point, Lee

      • Jim
        Mar 8 2012

        @LeeWells How does Cindy lying about internet searches make chloroform appear? If I search for Lamborghinis will one appear in my driveway? Ppl lie because they lie. Sometimes ppl lie just to lie. One thing is certain. Just because
        someone lies about anything, it doesn’t mean that their guilty just because they lied about it.

        Ppl lie about how old they are, does that mean they all want to be older than they really are? Of course not! Kids will lie claiming to be older and middle aged ppl often lie and say their younger. But they both lie not for the same reasons and some ppl lie to be anything but their age. The point is the lie doesn’t mean just one thing. So U can’t say because someone lies they have to be guilty. Their guilty because the evidence proves it, not the notion of what U think U would do if U were them.

        There is no proof CA abused Caylee. That was one of the many flaws of the prosecutions. No one ever claimed she was abusive toward Caylee. If U said abuse is a pattern and there is usually signs of previous abuse b4 a murder I would agree. But CA had no history of that happening. No one testified that they saw any evidence of this. When U just make believe things have happened that never happened at all and pass it off as truth how is that not lying? Shouldn’t the truth prove she is guilty? Why do U need to make stuff up to support your reasoning?

      • Mar 8 2012

        What part of toxic mom is screwball haven’t you grasped? They should charge George with the murder. Toxic mom said that he drowned after her sexually molested her so they need to arrest George. Caylee’s death is still unresolved and since a lot of people seem to believe anything she says, George is guilty and so should be brought to justice. Guess that would mean toxic mom would have to testify against him. I heard there is still unsealed evidence. Don’t have a fit, I really just read that somewhere. There are new pictures of Caylee showing up on FB. Word is that good ‘ol toxic mom is selling pictures of her murdered child. She was such a good mother (not). Probably just another rumor.

      • Mar 8 2012

        I would bet the farm that if a jury, that had common sense and logic, had a chance to study all the facts about the chloroform, the search which no one else could have completed but bio mom, her mom lies for her, it was found in her car trunk in high levels (and I knew this was a new method to test air samples not used before), she doesn’t report her daughter missing at all, the granny does, the child ends of dead and abandoned in a swamp, the smell of death is in her car, verified by two trained police dogs and at least 8 humans, I could conclude that she did make chloroform, or had possession (got it from one of her many ex-boyfriends), and she is responsible for that child’s death. All I have to say is that she better hope and pray the feds don’t wrangle her rear into federal court because she’ll need to wear Depends while making her duck face.

  30. Jim
    Mar 9 2012

    @LeeWells Its amazing, no matter how many times I’ve proven, with the law, that CA cannot be tried in Fed Court for murder, U just keep pretending like its going to happen any day now. Did U notice the title of this page? LOL, I’d still like to know how U think CA can be brought to Fed court. So far I haven’t heard how the section for jurisdiction would be answered.

    Next is your claim that chloroform searches means that CA had chloroform. Yet, I keep do internet searches for Maseratis and I didn’t get 1 from the internet search. I guess U could always claim she is a witch. But after the judge laughed that off and said no seriously what proof do you have to support this claim of CA made or got chloroform, what would U say? That is what a prosecutor has to do in order to get a judge to even consider taking CA to court.

    Its a pretty straight forward obvious point. If U can’t show how CA could have gotten chloroform, internet searching doesn’t make chloroform appear, then its obvious its REASONABLE DOUBT. Fantasies aside, if U can’t answer HOW its possible then any person, jury or judge, will realize its because your whole claim that CA had chloroform is just wishful thinking. Pretend all U want if U don’t have good explanations it obviously shows why a state jury found CA not guilty. Your making my point clearer with ever post.

    Reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. When you just can’t let it die | ITSOGS
  2. the path of happiness is measured by human kindness | only dreamin'

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

%d bloggers like this: