Court hearing for dad who left baby in the car - Page 28

mima · ‎03-14-2010

I would like to know if the Daycare called daddy to find out why he hadn't dropped off the baby. If they did, that will be a final nail in his coffin.

Do you know if you can watch the court hearing online? I missed it when it was on TV.

pattypeep · ‎06-06-2011

On 7/6/2014 mima said:
I would like to know if the Daycare called daddy to find out why he hadn't dropped off the baby. If they did, that will be a final nail in his coffin.

Do you know if you can watch the court hearing online? I missed it when it was on TV.

There was no testimony that the day care called; however, they did send out a blanket email. You would think if he had really just forgotten that the email would have jogged his memory. You can go to HLNnews.com and see quite a bit of the hearing and testimony. He's guilty as sin and I suspect his wife was in on it. I can't bare to even say "m*m".

Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea-Robert A. Heinlein

Catitude · ‎01-09-2014

On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 missyw1 said:
I could see a similar jury pool as Casey's. I bet the defense is banking on it.

I agree with you.

A bunch of people who go to church every Sunday like these two.

Your point?

Hoovermom · ‎03-19-2010

On 7/6/2014 Dagna said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 Isobelle said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 missyw1 said:
I could see a similar jury pool as Casey's. I bet the defense is banking on it.

I agree with you.

A bunch of people who go to church every Sunday like these two.

That is a prejudiced remark if I've ever heard one.

I go to church every Sunday myself.

It's not prejudiced to say they will be looking for a jury that resembles the 2 of them as much as possible. That was the strategy for getting OJ off too.

I think it's a little more complicated than that.

In O.J.'s case for example you either had people who really couldn't believe he did it - because of who he was - along with jury nullification folks who didn't care if he did it or not, but weren't going to allow his conviction - for a variety of reasons.

So in this case, if you had devout fundamentalist church goers, they would have to not believe he did it - they would not be your typical jury nullification - it doesn't matter if he did it, he's one of "us" types.

The defense would actually be better off with a mental health plea - if they can get folks to buy it.

Wow, what a horrible way to classify church goers. I don't believe a word you have said about them. Have you noticed that the blog for signatures went away along with the donations. These "devout fundamentalist church goers" had not heard the story. Did you see what the pastor said during the hearing? She admitted that she really did not know this monster. Do you also said these things about the atheists that would be on a trial? Talk about closed minded and narrow.

Tiesa · ‎07-02-2014

On 7/6/2014 Hoovermom said:
On 7/6/2014 Dagna said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 Isobelle said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 missyw1 said:
I could see a similar jury pool as Casey's. I bet the defense is banking on it.

I agree with you.

A bunch of people who go to church every Sunday like these two.

That is a prejudiced remark if I've ever heard one.

I go to church every Sunday myself.

It's not prejudiced to say they will be looking for a jury that resembles the 2 of them as much as possible. That was the strategy for getting OJ off too.

I think it's a little more complicated than that.

In O.J.'s case for example you either had people who really couldn't believe he did it - because of who he was - along with jury nullification folks who didn't care if he did it or not, but weren't going to allow his conviction - for a variety of reasons.

So in this case, if you had devout fundamentalist church goers, they would have to not believe he did it - they would not be your typical jury nullification - it doesn't matter if he did it, he's one of "us" types.

The defense would actually be better off with a mental health plea - if they can get folks to buy it.

Wow, what a horrible way to classify church goers. I don't believe a word you have said about them. Have you noticed that the blog for signatures went away along with the donations. These "devout fundamentalist church goers" had not heard the story. Did you see what the pastor said during the hearing? She admitted that she really did not know this monster. Do you also said these things about the atheists that would be on a trial? Talk about closed minded and narrow.

Exactly! Church going people can be deceived just like everyone else and once they were shown these two's true colors they promptly withdrew their support for them.

SydneyH · ‎03-10-2010

On 7/6/2014 Dagna said:
I think it's a little more complicated than that.

In O.J.'s case for example you either had people who really couldn't believe he did it - because of who he was - along with jury nullification folks who didn't care if he did it or not, but weren't going to allow his conviction - for a variety of reasons.

So in this case, if you had devout fundamentalist church goers, they would have to not believe he did it - they would not be your typical jury nullification - it doesn't matter if he did it, he's one of "us" types.

The defense would actually be better off with a mental health plea - if they can get folks to buy it.

I do believe based on what we know, mental incompetence is the only viable defense. Since I'm not a juror, I'm comfortable in discussing what has been reported so far..........

pinkskates4 · ‎03-10-2010

On 7/6/2014 Hoovermom said:
On 7/6/2014 Dagna said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 Isobelle said:
On 7/5/2014 terrier3 said:
On 7/5/2014 missyw1 said:
I could see a similar jury pool as Casey's. I bet the defense is banking on it.

I agree with you.

A bunch of people who go to church every Sunday like these two.

That is a prejudiced remark if I've ever heard one.

I go to church every Sunday myself.

It's not prejudiced to say they will be looking for a jury that resembles the 2 of them as much as possible. That was the strategy for getting OJ off too.

I think it's a little more complicated than that.

In O.J.'s case for example you either had people who really couldn't believe he did it - because of who he was - along with jury nullification folks who didn't care if he did it or not, but weren't going to allow his conviction - for a variety of reasons.

So in this case, if you had devout fundamentalist church goers, they would have to not believe he did it - they would not be your typical jury nullification - it doesn't matter if he did it, he's one of "us" types.

The defense would actually be better off with a mental health plea - if they can get folks to buy it.

Wow, what a horrible way to classify church goers. I don't believe a word you have said about them. Have you noticed that the blog for signatures went away along with the donations. These "devout fundamentalist church goers" had not heard the story. Did you see what the pastor said during the hearing? She admitted that she really did not know this monster. Do you also said these things about the atheists that would be on a trial? Talk about closed minded and narrow.

I think you need to reread what I said.

I said in order for them to find him not guilty they would have to believe he did NOT do it.

And they would NOT let him go if they thought he DID do it - just because he was a churchgoer.

So they are NOT the typical jury nullification types who really don't care if the person did it as long as he is one of "them" and/or they can stick it to the justice system for perceived past injustices.

mima · ‎03-14-2010

On 7/6/2014 twopeas said:
On 7/6/2014 mima said:
I would like to know if the Daycare called daddy to find out why he hadn't dropped off the baby. If they did, that will be a final nail in his coffin.

Do you know if you can watch the court hearing online? I missed it when it was on TV.

There was no testimony that the day care called; however, they did send out a blanket email. You would think if he had really just forgotten that the email would have jogged his memory. You can go to HLNnews.com and see quite a bit of the hearing and testimony. He's guilty as sin and I suspect his wife was in on it. I can't bare to even say "m*m".

Thanks!