Parenting

Wow. These prosecutors need to be fired. Casey Anthony

Essentially, everything we heard at trial about chloroform being searched 84 times ... not true. And the prosecutors found out it wasn't true and never bothered to correct the record. ONCE a site was searched about uses of chloroform in the 1800's. There is a dramatic difference between 84 searches and a single search.

If she hadn't been aquitted, the judge would have to set aside the verdict anyway. The ethical violation on the part of the prosecutors is lose-your-license-to-practice huge. I will be curious to see what happens.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html?_r=2&hp 

Re: Wow. These prosecutors need to be fired. Casey Anthony

  • That's pretty shocking. I don't think the computer searches were necessarily enough to prove pre-meditation anyway, but it's hard to believe prosecutors would continue with evidence they knew was false.

    I still think she is guilty. I don't know if she planned it out in advance or if she was drunk and stupid and thought duct tape would keep Caylee quiet while she partied. But I think she's guilty of causing her daughter's death.

    Annalise Marie 05.29.06
    Charlotte Ella 07.16.10
    Emmeline Grace 03.27.13
  • Loading the player...
  • I don't think the jury was actually paying any attention to the trial,so they could have claimed anything, really, without affecting the outcome.

    also, I think they reported that this had been gone over with the defense, so Im pretty sure that after the testimony shown on TV ammends had been made in the actual courtroom, right? I think they had the expert make the mistaken testimony- and then discussed it's accuracy, and proceeded. (or no? I know I read that baez had been consulted with the new findings.)

     

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • wow- i just rea your link, and it pretty much says the opposite of what I had originally seen- that's really bad!

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
  • I saw this on HLN last night. There was an error with the software used saying it was searched 84 times but in fact it was only searched once. There were 84 websites looked at about chloroform.

    So she searched it once and then visited 84 websites related to it. It really doesn't change anything IMO.  The report was found to be incorrect right after the computer scientist testified and they disclosed it immediately to the defense, hence why they used it in their closing statements.

This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards
"
"