Tearful Anthony jurors ask prosecutors, where was the evidence?
Prosecutors did not offer enough evidence to convict Casey Anthony, two jurors have said in media reports.
July 7th, 2011
09:19 AM ET

Tearful Anthony jurors ask prosecutors, where was the evidence?

Two jurors in the Casey Anthony trial say they wish the outcome had been different but prosecutors did not present enough evidence to convict Anthony of killing her daughter, Caylee, according to news reports Thursday.

"It doesn't feel good. It was a horrible decision to have to make" to find Anthony not guilty, said Jennifer Ford, who identified herself as Juror No. 3, in an interview with ABC News.

"We were sick to our stomach to get that verdict. We were crying, and not just the women," Ford said of the 12 jurors in the ABC interview.

The tears were still flowing Wednesday as Juror No. 2 (he did not want to be identified by name) spoke to Florida's St. Petersburg Times.

"I just swear to God … I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do … But it wasn't there," he said in an emotional interview with the Times.

Juror No.2, who the Times reported is a black male, married and a father of two young children, said he was the last holdout on the jury who wanted to convict Anthony on a lesser charge of aggravated manslaughter, which would have carried a prison term of up to 15 years, according to the newspaper.

The prosecution's inability to prove who was Caylee's caretaker at the time of her death, Casey Anthony or the girl's grandparents, doomed the manslaughter charge, Juror No. 2 said.

"We truly don't know what happened. Somebody knows, but we don't know," he said in the Times interview.

Ford told ABC that prosecutors left key questions unanswered.

"If you're going to charge someone with murder, don't you have to know how they killed someone or why they might have killed someone, or have something where, when, why, how? Those are important questions. They were not answered," she said in the ABC interview.

An alternate juror, who was present for the trial and sequestered along with the serving jurors, said he would have voted for acquittal, too.

"They didn't show us how Caylee died. They didn't show us a motive. I'm sorry people feel that way. ... These were 17 total jurors. They really listened to this case and kept an open mind," ABC News quotes Russell Huekler as saying.

While those three people have spoken about the case, at least one of the sitting jurors wants money for the behind-the-scenes story.

The man, identified as Juror No. 6, wants $50,000 for his story and has hired a publicist, CNN contributor Howard Kurtz reports for The Daily Beast.

Post by:
Filed under: Casey Anthony • Crime
soundoff (2,889 Responses)
  1. Kat

    What? so you couldn't use your common sense. Blaming someone else for your decisions is immature.

    August 2, 2011 at 3:48 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Tom Blake

    This case has resulted in a mass criticism of the jury system. Hundreds, if not thousands of commentators, have attacked the jury system as we know it for needing reform. These criticisms have ranged from minimum qualifying standards to demanding total isolation of jurors. However, it's no picnic to be a juror. You listen to the instructions of the judge. You listen to the arguments made by the prosecution and the defense. You're not allowed to talk about the case with anyone. You're supposed to isolate yourself from all media coverage of a matter. Maybe most fundamental in all these challenges is that fact that the judges who are instructing you and the prosecutors and defense attorneys who are trying to persuade you are trained in the legal profession. While some people have called for an abolition of the jury system, what does that do to the national foundation of a trial by one's peers? Another thing to keep in mind is that getting jurors on a trial is a pick of the draw. However, both sides have control... "In the voir dire process, plaintiffs and defendants get the opportunity to question prospective jurors to determine if they would like to have them eliminated from a case." Source: Twelve Qualities of the Successful Plaintiff, by Tamara Kismet. The jury system may not be perfect, but there are many flaws in our justice system. How about the fact that jurors are sometimes forced to interpret mountains of scientific and technical evidence. Most jurors aren't trained in forensic crime scene investigation. There are weaknesses in our jury system, but some are part of other issues, such as the use of experts or the admissibility of evidence.

    December 14, 2012 at 11:44 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78