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.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
Sharon, like what? Was there DNA linking the duck tape to Caysee? No! Could they prove that the blood in the trunk was Caylees? No! Keep in mind that the charge was such that the prosecution had to show that Caysee DELIBIRATELY killed her daughter, not that she was negligent, which she was.
This is CSI thinking. You assume that every murder is grisly and bloody and comes with mountains of unassailable DNA evidence. Of course there was no blood in the trunk– there wouldn't have been unless Caylee had massive bleeding wounds. Of course there was no DNA on the duct tape– there was no body left. DNA isn't some magical thing that stays around forever. When the soft tissue dies, the DNA is destroyed with it. You're arguing that if a body is skeletonized that there's no possible way to prosecute a murder.
What is duck tape
SMS, sorry., duct tape, that's what happens when you type in a hurry. Extracheese, the idea that enough evidence is neede to convict someone existed waaaay before CSI. CSI, which by the way I have never watched, was based on that idea, not the other way round!
SMS – that is what AFLAC gives you when you get injured.
Ha ha, good one Balls!
The Juror who continually maintains that "Not Guilty" does not mean innocent obviously hasn't read the definition of innocent in Webster's Dictionary. The definition clearly states, "Not Guilty legally of a given crime."
Yes legally, "not guilty" does not mean innocent, and if that's what makes her sleep better at night, then go for it. But the fact that she'll be going free shortly just for lying to police and that she's not a convicted murder, for all intents and purposes does mean innocent.
i'm sorry but i remember the line "innocent until proven guilty."
When I murder someone jose baez is the attorney I want to have
Juror number six needs to be flogged!!!!
AMEN
For? Making money? You should be flogged for helping CNN make money off the story too.
Hey guys, will you visit HelpFaye.ORG , a friend of mine is fighting for her life.... thank you..
If this jury was on the Scott Peterson case...Scott Peterson would have walked free...People had more common sense at the time..CSI was not on TV YET...And ther was very very little evidence in the Scott Peterson murder trial..But the Jurors USED COMMON SENSE AND CONNECTED THE DOTS..........
Your another useless moron, You don;t convict someone because you THINK they may have done it, you convict them when you KNOW they have done it by the evidence presented. I hope you never end up on the wrong end and have to fight for your life because someone THINKS you committed a crime. 17 jury members not 1 said she was guilty, but along comes you who never seen the whole trial like the jruy did and yet you know bets, what a moron you are.
Enough with these 12 stupid people. How can you claim that you felt that she was guilty but they didn't prove it. If they didn't prove it you wouldn't feel that she was guilty. A bunch of losers who were too stupid to be able to get out of jury duty.
Really? So you don't think it's possible to think something without having proof? Have you ever thought your significant other was cheating on you but not had the proof? You can't prove it for sure, but it doesn't exactly clear your mind. That is how the jury feels right now.
No, Mel, you're wrong. Your analogy points to someone who isn't sure about something. These jurors have just admitted they were so certain they felt sick about returning a not guilty verdict. So sure she was guilty that they cried.
Yes, but they also said, I wish we could have found her guilty but the evidence was not there. Simple as that. You don't put someone up for a possible death sentence because you feel like she is guilty. That is not the way our Justice System works. If you want to blame someone then blame the prosecution. They said we're going to prove to you that this woman planned and executed a murder and they failed to do that.
I am sure, if she wasn't guilty – she would have spouted out the name of the real killer and would have been forthcoming with the story as opposed to sitting in jail for 3 years. The girl liked the night life too much. Shame on her parents for covering up her mental state all of her life as opposed to getting her help – they did nothing more than enable her all of her life. And shame on Cindy Anthony for lying under oath to save her daughters sorry behind. Her you guys go – you reap what you have sown. Poor Cayley – didn't have a chance.
The jurors were sequestered... They didn't see all the media hype that we saw.. They had to base their findings on the evidence presented in the trial. Speculation is NOT evidence, people!!
EXACTLY... Nancy Grace is the reason everyone here thinks Casey is guilty... That women had a personal vendetta aginst Casey and got the Nation into attack mode.
Juror #6 symbolizes the downward spiral of our nation's values.
Sounds like juror #2 has #2 for brains.
Panic is not an excuse . It was an accident based on selfishness , putting Caylee to sleep so she could go out and party , and it went horribly wrong and she died . So, she lied her A** off . If she was innocent she would have been hysterical and looking for her only missing child, not going to clubs and having a great time and telling lies to the authorities . 4 years is disgusting . With time served she will be out very shortly . I hope her parents turn their back on her , as she and her lawyers did to them . I also hope no one employs her , rents to her and if a book or movie comes out that no one buys it and helps her to profit from this. She already got away with murder , lets not make her rich too. Caylee is in a better place than we are and this outcome proves that within a shadow of a doubt . Rest in peace sweet baby .
Linda you, and potentially Webster, are wrong. Not proving that someone is guilty is not the same as proving their innocence.
To all the people complaining about "How bad is our justice system?" or "The prosecution did not present their case well" or it's an "Embarrassment to the way we select juries", you might not agree with the verdict; but the way I see it, the United States still has the best (although not perfect) 'legal system' in the world. If you don't like it maybe you should move to North Korea, Iran, Sudan or Libya (just a few options).
Saying the prosecution did not present their case well is not a knock on the legal system? It's a knock on the people that prosecuted this case. Why would I move to North Korea because a couple of people in Florida presented a shoddy case in a 1st degree murder trial.
ED SR
There was plenty of evidence the jurors were idiots!!
She is guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You must not have listend or watched the trial.
Ok, go ahead and list this evidence which provides no reasonable doubt that she did it. List it out
There was evidence? Where? In the fact that people 'knew' she did something to her kid? Or the lack of a cause of death? Or the lack of motive? Or the lack of a timeline of death? Come on, people. We all know she had something to do with it, but the proof is NOT there. There is no solid proof linking her to the murder of the child. if you think there is, then youhaven't been watching the trial.
To convict, ESPECIALLY for murder, the evidence MUST be there. We have to judge on evidence, not emotional response or 'gut feelings.' The law doesn't work that way (and thank god it doesn't).
Really. Where is it? The answer, you don't have it.
i think people need to understand that we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. i'm sorry you people feel this way about this lady (i'm not defending her either) but this is our law in America. Also, nobody other than the jurors and those in the courtroom know anything other than what the media has been feeding you. Your opinions are basically worthless because you werent there! now move on.
To All the name callers and those who feel/think the Jurors failed...Hello Pot, this is Kettle...your black!
Casey Anthony is guilty of many things, proven in court.
She was/is...
A Liar,
A bad parent,
Morally bankrupt,
a Party Girl,
and an addict.
However, she was not charged with any of those crimes, she was charged with Murder One! There is nothing wrong with the Jurors! The State over-reached for a Murder One conviction and failed to provide evidence that pre-meditated murder was commited! Period!