http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28600305/detail.html?utm_source=manual&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=casey+updates
For those of you still confused about the fictitious evidence presented at the trial, here is one clarification.There was not 84 searches for chloroform, there was only 1.Of course this is what the defense claimed all along,but the state tried to convince the jury there was 84 searches. Most likely, the reason for the single search, was simply Casey's curiosity.Casey's then boyfriend, Roberto Morales had a humorous post to his MySpace page. It was a postcard that said "Win her over with chloroform". She did not know what chloroform was, so she looked it up. When she did, she learned it was a popular anesthetic of the early 1900's. That was that. If she had googled it further, she would have also learned that chloroform is almost impossible to manufacture by an individual without killing themselves in the process.
As if the inference that a 22 year old girl would actually attempt the long, dangerous and laborious process of replicating a drug from the early 1900's in her garage was not ridiculous enough, the state also wanted us to believe that she used it to kill her child. To add more fuel to the fire, the prosecution also falsely stated that the word was searched 84 times, when they were fully aware, that was not the case.
Moronic as all this sounds, there are actually members of the public who fell for the state's fairytale, hook, line and sinker. Thank God the members of the jury did not.
For those of you still confused about the fictitious evidence presented at the trial, here is one clarification.There was not 84 searches for chloroform, there was only 1.Of course this is what the defense claimed all along,but the state tried to convince the jury there was 84 searches. Most likely, the reason for the single search, was simply Casey's curiosity.Casey's then boyfriend, Roberto Morales had a humorous post to his MySpace page. It was a postcard that said "Win her over with chloroform". She did not know what chloroform was, so she looked it up. When she did, she learned it was a popular anesthetic of the early 1900's. That was that. If she had googled it further, she would have also learned that chloroform is almost impossible to manufacture by an individual without killing themselves in the process.
As if the inference that a 22 year old girl would actually attempt the long, dangerous and laborious process of replicating a drug from the early 1900's in her garage was not ridiculous enough, the state also wanted us to believe that she used it to kill her child. To add more fuel to the fire, the prosecution also falsely stated that the word was searched 84 times, when they were fully aware, that was not the case.
Moronic as all this sounds, there are actually members of the public who fell for the state's fairytale, hook, line and sinker. Thank God the members of the jury did not.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
I moderate all comments so your post may not show up immediately.Any reasonable, thoughtful post will be published. I will not censor anyones' ideas or perspectives.I will censor in the case of profanity and vulgarity.I just ask that you keep it clean and try to keep an open mind.