Did The Jury Really Understand Their Role In Casey Anthony Trial

Many trial lawyers will attest to the fact that you win or lose your case at the end of voir dire process, or jury selection. It’s a game of horse trading people to sit on the  jury that is advantageous to a lawyers case, and has even been depicted in movies like “A Time To Kill” or “Runaway Jury”.   There are experts who make a fantastic living at jury consulting for lawyers, pointing out the jurors to keep, strike or even pretend to be interested in by apposing council just for show. Phil McGraw, or Dr. Phil, was a jury consultant in the Oprah Winfrey Texas cattle industry civil trial, and it was from his masterful contribution to clearing Oprah from having to fork out millions that peaked the Queen of Daytime’s interest in Dr. Phil and thus launched his career as a television personality.

Jose Baez has been said by many legal experts to be unorthodox, long-winded and an amateur trial lawyer by his outlandish arguments presented but never argued or proven, like the sexual molestation allegations made against George Anthony brought up in opening arguments bet never mentioned again, but one thing Baez can hang his hat on being is an expert at picking a jury of IDIOTS as further evidenced by the two jurors who have now come forward with post trial comments.

Juror #2 told the Orlando Sentinel under agreement of anonymity “I just swear to God, I wish we had more evidence to put her away.  I truly do…”

Juror#3, Jennifer Ford, told ABC News “I did not say she was innocent… I just said there was not enough evidence.  If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be. Everyone wonders why we did not speak to the media right away.  It was because we were sick to our stomach to get that verdict. We were crying, and not just the women.  It was emotional and we weren’t ready.”

The interesting part about Jennifer Ford’s statement is that it was never up to the jury to determine punishment, as directed by Judge Belvin Perry, it is simply the jury’s duty to prove guilt or innocence. Therefore, it appears the Casey Anthony jury did not remotely understand its role in the trial, based on Juror #3 post trial statement.

One could potentially see how, based on understanding court procedure and trial law, and the circumstantial evidence presented, that a 1st degree murder charge may have been difficult decide on by the jury.  But, a woman who doesn’t report her child missing for 31 days, lies to police, and her parents, about all the questions surrounding Caylee’s whereabouts, how asleep at the wheel was this jury for not convicting Casey Anthony of the 2 lesser charges of aggravated manslaughter or aggravated child abuse for the obvious harm, based on these two jurors statements, Casey effected on her daughter?

Anyone with marginal intelligence and a busy lifestyle can get out of jury duty, I admit to doing it twice by claiming a conflicting interest in the case to be tried.  This jury wasn’t even  junior varsity team material, their actions and now their subsequent comments prove them to be mental midgets, and that is how a killer mom got away with murder.  And Jose Baez is not the genius litigator he is parading himself to be today, he is merely capable at picking a jury of imbeciles!

One has to wonder where the hearts of the defense team were with the post trial footage of them partying it up in a near by bar when a baby had been dumped dead by the side of a road in a bag for a coffin 3 years ago, and the Baez jury idiot detection team is breaking open champagne and giving the bird to reporters–very classy by the way Cheney Mason!  Perhaps they too are idiots and are resilient at recognizing their own kind!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *