Casey Anthony - Jury Foreman Interview

Exclusive: Casey Anthony Jury Foreman on Forensic Evidence and Suspicions of George Anthony
Print
Close
By On the Record Published July 12, 2011 | FoxNews.com
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," July 11, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Tonight: Not guilty. Now, how did that happen? For the first time, you will find out. You will hear from the foreperson. Casey Anthony Juror Number 11 goes "On the Record." As foreperson, he had the job to run the deliberations and then sign the verdict form, the form that read "not guilty" to the murder of little Caylee. Now, we know a lot of you are stunned and many outraged by the verdict. You want to know how and why 12 citizens said not guilty. And tonight and only right here, you get that inside information. Here's the foreperson. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Nice to have you join us. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Greta. It's an honor to be here. VAN SUSTEREN: You are Number 11, right? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Number 11. VAN SUSTEREN: And the foreperson? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was the foreperson. VAN SUSTEREN: You've asked us not to use your name. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I greatly appreciate that. VAN SUSTEREN: So you get to the first day of the trial and opening statements. After you heard the opening statement of the prosecution, before the defense opening statement, what did you
1 of 10
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/exclusive-casey-...
think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll tell you what, it really threw me for -- it was shocking. It was very shocking. Because again, I really didn't follow much of the case after the first couple of weeks. And with what the state was presenting, I thought that was pretty standard. You know, in the opening remarks, they did show some pictures that were -- you know, that will stay with you for life. And we realized just how intense and how serious this case is. When -- you know, when the defense got up, then that's when they started throwing out things that we did not know. And that's where it really kind of hit us. It was something that we had to kind of sit back and let soak in and just see where he went with from there. So it was shocking. It was very eye-opening. You know, it's a situation -- that's a time I will never forget. VAN SUSTEREN: You know, the people who watched it on television, or even in the courtroom, we can divert our eyes from the pictures of the remains, or whatever it is, I mean, the really horrible -- you're the fact- finder. You can't. So you actually -- you all had to actually look at the really... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We had to look at it. VAN SUSTEREN: ... the worst pictures. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we did. We had to look at it. It was right there in front of us. And we had to, you know, make sure that we take -- you know, take the notes that we needed to take on those pictures. And it was tough. You know, and I told the judge this. I've never been -- I've never once made a decision in my life where I wanted to get in a profession where I'd have to see those types of things. And we were forced to. And it was tough. VAN SUSTEREN: In terms of the picture of the remains, one of the issues was the duct tape. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you actually see a picture of the remains on the ground and placement of the duct tape? I mean, is that something that you saw? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did. Yes, we saw that numerous times. That was shown us to, the duct tape, the -- you know, the skull -- that was something that was a major focus at times. And you know, we were able to see, you know, all of that. VAN SUSTEREN: Was the duct tape on the skull or was it adjacent to the skull? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was -- as far as on the skull, there was one area where it was connected, and that dealt with more the hair. It was not on actually a part of the bone. But it was right there in the vicinity of the nasal cavity and where the mouth would be.
2 of 10
VAN SUSTEREN: So one interpretation would be that it -- that the duct tape was over the mouth and nose. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: From what you looked -- I mean, that's one interpretation. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's one interpretation, yes. VAN SUSTEREN: How was that explained to you in terms of -- you know, I mean, some people have thought and -- that the prosecution obviously thought that that showed an effort to suffocate. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. Right. And that's what the prosecution was explaining to us, that that was -- the purpose of the duct tape was for suffocation. And they explained to us, you know, the vicinity of where that duct tape was, the age of the duct tape. The one thing that I never really bought was the duct tape was placed at a later time because you could look at that duct tape and you could tell that it's been aged. But as far as where the duct tape was at the initial point and to where the duct tape was when the body was found, that was argued and that's where a lot of the discrepancy was. You know, it was attached to a part of the hair, which makes you think that it was placed on there. But that was the only -- placed on there before the body was placed where it was. I don't like using the word dumped. But it was something that, you know, we had to really take a long, hard look at because it was there for some time. And we needed to -- you know, where it was actually from the get-go, we don't know. VAN SUSTEREN: When you say the hair, when I hear that (INAUDIBLE) piece of duct tape up here on the head is hair, down here -- I realize it's a smaller -- you know, remains ... that is down here. Was it more on the hair region or more on the nose and mouth region of what you could -the best you could see, when they found the skull? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. When they found the skull, there was the longer part of the hair that came down towards the ear. Now, the hair formed what's called a hair mat. And that's where the hair then -- as the decay was taking place, the hair then fell to form sort of a -- like a horseshoe ring around the head. So... VAN SUSTEREN: You mean like looped around the head? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, looped a little bit around and underneath it, but more back around the base of the skull and up towards the sides of the jaw. VAN SUSTEREN: Right.
3 of 10
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So sort of like this horseshoe-type of look to it. The duct tape was where and what part of the head and where -- what part of the hair that it was attached to would have been very difficult to see just because of all of the hair being there on the ground. There was only a few strands of hair that really covered the skull, not to go in depth in what the visual of the skull was. So I couldn't exactly tell you where that tape was on -- in the vicinity of hair, when the hair was actually to the - - to the skull. VAN SUSTEREN: Well, so was the duct tape on the hair? And if the hair moved, the duct tape moved? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could have. VAN SUSTEREN: So it wasn't, like -- I realize (INAUDIBLE) the thinking by the prosecution is it was on the flesh, and when the flesh recedes and decomposes, that then that moves the tape. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, the tape was a little -- the tape was more attached to the side. As it got up towards the mouth, it became more detached. And that's where, you know, a lot of the discrepancy could have been. But you know, it was a situation really where, with decomp and with time spent, with time gone by, we knew the vicinity of where that tape was, but we just didn't know, you know, exactly where. But it was -- you know, we knew the vicinity of where that tape was in relation to the skull. VAN SUSTEREN: Were you convinced where that tape came from, I mean, the source of the tape? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: Where did the tape come from? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The tape came from wherever they store the tape at the Anthony house. VAN SUSTEREN: So it was Anthony tape. You don't have any doubt about that. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. It was a very distinctive type of tape. The tape was shown numerous times, the same type of tape, which was made in -- in Avon, Ohio, which had its mark on it. It was not your standard silver duct tape that did not have any markings on. This did -- this did have a mark on it, and it was on throughout the tape consistently. Every couple of inches, there was that mark. I've never seen that tape before, and I've bought duct tape numerous times. I know that that same tape was spotted in a video at one of the centers that they opened up for the missing Caylee. It was noted to be on numerous signs to be posted for -- that had pictures of Caylee. It was also placed on the gas can, which was, you know, something that was attributed to the
4 of 10
house there. VAN SUSTEREN: It's amazing how you become an expert in things like -- even now, you're an expert in tape. I mean, you... (CROSSTALK) VAN SUSTEREN: ... day in and day out, things that you never ordinarily in your career might become so familiar with. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. Right. Exactly. You never know. I mean, those things -- some things that we would never want to learn, we had to learn. Some things we knew a little bit about, you know, that was only refined. VAN SUSTEREN: How -- how do you -- or what did you believe to be or conclude was how the remains or the body got from wherever the child died to the -- where the remains were found, a couple blocks away? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I mean, we know that it was -- I mean, obviously, the body was -- it was dumped there. It was left there. As far as -- there's a lot of gray area, a lot of gray area that goes from on that June 15th to when the body was discovered. And there's a lot of that, you know -- there's just a lot of speculation as to how it got there. Who took it there? And just a lot of unanswered questions in that regard. So I can't really comment on that. I don't know how it got there, how Caylee got there. I don't -- I can't tell you how or who, but ultimately, the body ended up there. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you -- were you ever convinced how she died? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. Never. VAN SUSTEREN: So what's your most likely, which is -- which is -- apart from -- beyond a reasonable doubt is a very different standard than what's most likely or what you think or what you guess or anything. Where do you fall in the spectrum? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, as far as -- again, this is all -- this is all speculation. There's a number of ways that Caylee could have died. You know, there is the possibility, there was the evidence of chloroform, which we can touch on later. There was a pool right there just a -- feet away, you know, a couple feet away from the doors that, you know, has had pictures of her being able to open, ladders that she potentially could really have climbed up herself. And I know that that is a major way that a lot of children die down here in Florida. But we don't know if that's the cause or if that was the cause of death. We don't know the cause of death, and that was one of the major issues that we had and one of the major issues that we had to
5 of 10
address. We don't know the cause of death. Everything was speculation. VAN SUSTEREN: You mentioned the chloroform. How did that figure into this and into your thinking? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the chloroform -- it really -- as far as the development of the chloroform, the Internet search on the chloroform, you know, really, there was the MySpace or FaceBook posting of the "Win her over with chloroform" picture. And then there was the actual Google search the next day that was done from the computer, not the laptop, but from the actual desktop computer in the Anthony home. You can speculate, you know, hey, here it is, the boyfriend posts this, "Win her over with chloroform." The next day, I want to know what chloroform is. You can speculate into that. There was no documentation on buying anything to make chloroform. The one Internet search that she made from Google was a three-minute Internet search. And then it subsided from there. And you know, if there was possible more traces of it in greater amounts, more of a way of how it can be concocted, how it could be purchased, whatever may be -- none of that was ever there. So we were very limited in what we had when it came to chloroform. We were told, and they did, you know, as far as how -- and what chloroform is detected in other products at the levels -- you know, chloroform is detectable in other products, as well. But there just was not enough, there really was not enough for us to bring chloroform into the mix. We know there were smaller levels of it in the trunk. We know there was a Google search on it. And that's what we had. It wasn't detected anywhere else. It was not on the steering wheel. It wasn't on the handle of the door, going into the car. And even if there was, there still is a question of who and where. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you think that Cindy Anthony was telling the truth when she said that she had done the searches for chloroform? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, there's a lot of speculation into that. There's a lot that went into her and looking for the chlorophyll because she was worried about her dogs. You know, I don't know. With Cindy, it wasn't as obvious to me, the lying. I mean, she was -- she was in a lot of pain. She was in a lot of stress. You know, allegedly, she was on a lot of medication. And she's been questioned a number of different times. But you know, as far as her going back and forth with that, you know, that was something that you always kind of kept in the back of your mind. You know, as far as her lying about it, well, there's, you know, people that may look into that and people -- but that was not something that we really considered much when we were going into deliberation.
6 of 10
VAN SUSTEREN: When Cindy testified, she said something to the effect -- and I don't know the exact words, but that the car smelled of death or something. And I guess the prosecution's theory is that the child decomposed in that car, in part. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you credit what she said? Did you believe that that body -- that the child decomposed in the trunk? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, you know, there was the smell of decomposition that some police officers said they noticed and others did not. Here's the problem that I have with the decomposition, and this could -- this may lead into other questions that you may have for me. The day that everything went down in July, the car was there. People were not going in and out of the front door. They were going in and out of the garage door, and the car was right there. And there was nobody that detected the sign of decomp in that regard. If it was something that was that pungent, something that was that obvious, with the law officers that were going in and back -- in and forth -- in and out of the garage at that state, the father said that he smelled it earlier, but didn't bring it up at that point. I didn't -- the smell of the decomp was argued. And some people smelled it, some people did not smell it. So as far as whether or not the body did actually decomp in that trunk, you know, there is evidence that there could have been the decomp in there. But again, you know, we were looking more towards the cause and the who and the how. You know, with that car, there were a number of people that had a number of different -- that could have had access to that car. It wasn't just one key. And you know, you don't know how the body was actually or who put the body in the trunk or how long the body was in the trunk. Was there the smell of decomp in there? Yes, there was the smell of decomp from some people that would speculate that the body was put in the trunk. But then there were others that did not smell it. VAN SUSTEREN: So I think Lee did and Cindy did, right? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, and George did initially. VAN SUSTEREN: And George -- who you would think would have a motive to try to protect their daughter or sister, but who actually went the other way because that was something that would most likely hurt her. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I didn't understand his -- when you go back to the tow yard, I don't understand his rationale and what he did... VAN SUSTEREN: Who's his?
7 of 10
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: George. VAN SUSTEREN: OK. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, here it is, you haven't seen two members of your family in a very long time. You make the comment that it smells -- there's a smell of decomp. And you being a law enforcement officer, you would think that this is something that you might think could have been one of the two, you know, that -- causing that smell of decomp. But then he goes and gets in the car and drives away and he -- you know, he makes the comment that, you know, we need to get this car home, we need to get this -- this car stinks, you know, him not calling Casey at that point in time to see if, you know, she's all right or what's going on here. There's -- it raises a lot of questions. It really does. (END VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: There's much more of our interview with Juror Number 11. The jury foreman tells you what the jury thought of George Anthony and whether they believed George and Lee sexually molested Casey. More with juror number 11, the foreperson, next. Also, Casey's defense attorney, Cheney Mason, calls it a total failure. What's he talking about? We ask him. Defense attorney J. Cheney Mason goes "On the Record" in just a few minutes. Stay tuned. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) VAN SUSTEREN: Here's the foreperson, Juror Number 11. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Jose Baez's opening statement said that there was child molestation in the family, George on Casey and also Lee. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you believe that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: You didn't believe it? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was not something -- well, there was no evidence to back that, so I could not really take it into consideration. You know, him just saying that this is what happened, I wasn't going to use that to formulate my opinion of George in any way. I was going to let what he
8 of 10
did up on the stand dictate how I felt about him. And so no, that was not something that I really took into consideration at all. And many of us did not. VAN SUSTEREN: Did some people think that he had done it and concluded that during their deliberations and some say that they believed that he had? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. It was -- that not really much of a -- that was not a discussion of ours when we got into deliberation as far as the sexual abuse. What was, was George Anthony's actions and his demeanor and, you know, the way that he presented some things up there on the stand. VAN SUSTEREN: And what about his actions and his demeanor? What was the -- what did you think and what did others think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that's a good question because, you know, I was right there. You know, I was 10 feet from him. And you know, I'm used to reading -- because of my profession, I'm used to reading people. And I really thought that George had a very selective memory in the whole regard. I thought that George at times could remember something to be as vivid as it just happened the day before. The way that he described a number of things that happened on June 15th would be one example. He could tell you everything that happened. He could tell you everything that everybody was wearing. He could tell you the show that he was watching, the topic that they were on. But then you go and he's questioned on a gas can. And I don't know if you remember the whole situation with the can and how long it took for that full scenario to play out. He couldn't remember which can or -- and we had to go back and forth. I know him and the defense went back and forth as to which picture he was shown when he was really only shown one. And he went back and forth on that. You know, he had very selective memory for me. And that in itself was something that I always kept in the back of my mind. For every time he got up there, I was just kind of on guard for that. You know, when it came to -- and this may be snowballing into a whole 'nother question that you may have for me but you know, with George, with the can, the selective memory, the way that he handled the tow yard incident, the -- you know, River Cruz, the lady that he could have had an extramarital affair with -- it raised questions. It really did. VAN SUSTEREN: Raised questions about his character, or whether he had some involvement in the death of his granddaughter? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Really both for me, character as far as the fact that he could be possibly lying. Also, the fact that his involvement was going to be in question because he was there on the 15th. He was the -- you know, he can tell you exactly when Casey and Caylee left. How do we know that that is -- that that is right? So it questioned a lot for us. It really questioned a lot.
9 of 10
VAN SUSTEREN: To the point where he would let his daughter face the possibility of execution? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I really can't answer that question, but it was -- you know, it was something that we felt, you know, we need to take a close look at with George. VAN SUSTEREN: Did anybody think George was a believable, out of the 12 you? Anyone thing George was believable or credible, or were otherwise likewise suspicious of him? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a suspicion of him. That as -- that was a part of our conversation that we had of the -- well, what I'd call the round robin topics that we had when we were doing deliberation. That was brought up. VAN SUSTEREN: Suspicious that he was involved in covering up the death, suspicious involved with the -- an accidental death, or suspicious he was a murder? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. VAN SUSTEREN: Really, that he was a murderer? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. We don't know. We don't know. The suspicions were raised. VAN SUSTEREN: In the deliberation room? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation. (END VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Tuesday night, Juror Number 11, the foreperson, will take you inside that jury deliberation room. You will hear for the first time what went on behind closed doors, right here "On the Record" at 10:00 PM Eastern.
Print Close
URL
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/exclusive-casey-anthony-jury-foreman-forensicevidence-and-suspicions-george-anthony
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. 2011 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes.
10 of 10
Exclusive: 'It Disgusted Us' - Casey Anthony Foreman Reveals What Happened Inside the Deliberation Room
Print
Close
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," July 12, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Tonight: Outrage is sweeping America! Here in Washington, it is the debt ceiling. And across America, it is the Casey Anthony verdict. First Casey Anthony. Seconds after 12 jurors said not guilty, protesters hit the street, demanding justice for Caylee. Protesters are enraged that in five days, Casey will walk out of jail and breathe the fresh air of freedom. How did this happen? Well, you're about to go inside the jury room. You get the inside story from the jury person -- jury foreperson. And you'll also hear about the jury's suspicion of Casey's father, George. Do they think George covered up an accident or covered up a crime? Or is he even a killer himself? Right now, for the first time, you go inside the deliberation room. Here's part two of our interview with Juror Number 11. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: How many people do you think at least -- and maybe it changed during the course of deliberations, but how many initially thought that George was responsible for a murder? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: George? Well, you know, there is no -- the problem is with the gray area, there's no way that we can tell the responsibility. What was in question a lot of times dealt with, you know, Caylee was with Cindy the night before. When she came back the next night, they looked at the pictures of them at the retirement community. Then, you know, they went to bed. You know, guardianship, when it started, who was looking out for her that next day? You know, George and Cindy and Casey all took hand in raising Caylee. We know that, you know, Cindy went to work. And then the gray area comes in. VAN SUSTEREN: But at that gray area, I'm thinking, you know, the -- I realize that George isn't
1 of 9
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/exclusive-039it-...
charged in this case. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. Right. VAN SUSTEREN: And he's not charged with (INAUDIBLE) Casey, but what I find interesting is that some jurors thought that he might be responsible not just for an accident or cover-up but for a murder. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was just -- it was just one of those things where we -- because he was there and there was a gray area there, he was in question for -- you know, for -- for us just being -- having -- having some character issues when he was on that stand. And he was there. He was there at the time, on that day that all the gray area is happening with us. And that puts him in that mix. It put him in the mix for us. VAN SUSTEREN: If this were a murder, in terms of the discussion and deliberations -- and obviously, that was something that wasn't proven by the state beyond a reasonable doubt. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: If the -- was there ever some sort of discussion of motive? They don't have to prove motive, but... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: ... was there every any discussion about, like, why anybody would do that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just -- we -- and again, motive was not something that we have to prove or anything. It's not -- we felt that the motive that the state provided was -- in our eyes was just kind of weak, you know, that a mother would want to do something like that to her child just so that she can go out and party. That's what they presented to us. And -- but aside from that, no, there was no other talk on motive. VAN SUSTEREN: Between June 16th and the time that -- mid-July, her behavior -- she's out partying. You saw the pictures, obviously. There's the tattoo. What was the discussion? And what did you think about that period? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it disgusted us. We were all very disgusted with that between June 16th, when it happened, to the time that it -- and that's what makes this hard. That's what makes this -- is what made it very hard for us. It's something that, you know, I wish -- because of that and seeing that, it'd be -- we wished there was something else we could look at that'd be more -that'd be a felony, something where, you know -- and we don't have the power to do this. We don't have the ability to put the laws in place for this, but something where if you do not report a child missing, then it's going to be a felony, and for every hour, day, whatever goes on
2 of 9
that it gets worse and worse because her actions were disgusting. VAN SUSTEREN: I'm trying to -- I've had this discussion with others about whether or not you can prove a cause of death by someone's horrible behavior, which is the situation. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: I don't think -- I don't think you can. I think it's a scientific issue... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: ... which is what I think the jury also concluded. But the whole discussion outside of the trial, for us, on our show, was, like, you know, How in the world could someone act like that with a missing child? I mean, that was the thing that was just inexplicable to us. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. And it was to us, too. It was to us, too. But you know, we were asked to indict on cause of death... VAN SUSTEREN: Convict, you mean. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Or, I'm sorry, convict on cause of death. And much of the time we were in that trial, a lot of it dealt with her actions afterwards. And that's something that although it is disgusting, it is heinous, we weren't really able to take into consideration with the -- with the coming down with the verdict on the indictments. VAN SUSTEREN: What do you think of Lee, her brother? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought Lee was very genuine. I thought Lee... VAN SUSTEREN: Tough -- tough for him, wasn't it? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was very tough for him. He had a very hard time with it. I thought Lee in the videos of how he handled things, the videos of the conversations that he had with Casey in prison, he handled himself with -- he took on a tremendous amount of responsibility, and he handled it very well, I thought. I -- it was very hard on him, and I thought he handled this situation just in a tremendous manner. VAN SUSTEREN: What did you think of the judge? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The judge was excellent. VAN SUSTEREN: How about the prosecutors first? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The prosecutor?
3 of 9
VAN SUSTEREN: Yes. How -- did they do a good job? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I thought, you know, for what they -- you know, I -- really, in prosecution, when it was over and done with, when they rested, I wanted more. I wanted more. I really thought the prosecution -- I don't know if there was more for them to give. I wanted more, though, because I thought it really put us at that point in a situation where this is going to be -this is going to be difficult. So as far as how they presented things, I thought they did a very good job. I thought Ashton was -- you could tell they put a lot of work in the presentations. And I thought you could tell they knew what they were doing. They -- you know, they were, you know, very professional. And in some regards, at some times, I thought they made light of things that I didn't take -- I didn't consider was in good taste. VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the -- there's one reference, I think, in closing argument, where Jeff Ashton, the prosecutor, got slapped around a little bit by the judge for smirking. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For smirking, yes. I thought that was very distasteful. You know, the pigs in the blanket thing that he made towards reference to the one guy who put a pig in back of a car and studied decomp of the pig in the car, just -- at times -- and you're there for a long time, and I understand that many things pop up that could be humorous, but you always have to keep in the back of your mind that there's a -- you know, there's young girl who's died. And You know, we need to maintain our focus. VAN SUSTEREN: How about the defense team? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the defense team -- you know, I really thought the defense team -they were always -- again, they were very professional. I thought they did a good job. You know, they brought up -- they pushed the reasonable doubt, and the reasonable doubt was there. So they -- you know, they did a good job of defending, you know, when the prosecution rested, defending. And then I thought they did a good job in their closing remarks of, you know, sticking to their guns in that regard. VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any single juror in that group -- you don't have to name the person -who didn't take his or her job very seriously in terms of weighing the evidence and voting? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. No. We weighed the evidence. You know, I know -- there's a difference between quality of time and quantity of time. I've been in many meetings where I can say, you know, we spent a lot of time on this but the quality wasn't there. We remained focused. We had a nice system in place. We were dedicated. We did not take many breaks. We had a course of action that everyone took serious. This was a very serious matter and all of us took it serious. And we were able to, you know, formulate the verdicts that
4 of 9
we needed to formulate. VAN SUSTEREN: Why, after the verdict, you -- didn't the jury give a press conference? Which you are not obliged to give, by any means. I don't mean to suggest it. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: But some juries do, some don't. Why didn't you? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it was a very -- the whole situation -- the whole process was very stressful for us and it was very emotional. And when it was over and done with, when we came back in the jury room, it was -- it just was a very difficult process for a lot of people to go through. And there's emotions that people were expressing was just heart-wrenching. VAN SUSTEREN: Some really emotional? I mean, were there tears or crying? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: Was there sobbing? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was sobbing. There was tears. There was just a lot of people that really didn't want to talk. That's what we did - - you know, we talked to each other hour upon hour. We wanted to unwind. We didn't want to have to answer questions. We needed time. It was a situation where we really needed time. And with me being the foreman, I told them, you know, this is something that we just really need to give us some time and look us up later because we can't do this now. And we -- we -- all of us came to an agreement on that. But you know, for us and our best interests and for you guys to get the best story that you needed, we needed just some time for us to unwind and gather our thoughts. VAN SUSTEREN: When you -- when the judge gave you the case to go begin deliberations, you still didn't have a foreperson at that time, right? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: You -- you were still (INAUDIBLE). You go into the room, and how did you get selected? What's the process? Did someone say, Hey, number 11, why don't you do it? Or did you vote on it? How did..? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was -- we really didn't vote on it. I walked in, and they said, We need to find out who the foreperson's going to be. And just about everybody said me. So you know, I was honored.
5 of 9
VAN SUSTEREN: There was no -- no one else said, I'd like to do it, or anything? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was -- there was one other person who did want to do it, and then everyone basically said, no (INAUDIBLE) VAN SUSTEREN: And did you sense any resentment or problem with that person? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. She was excellent. VAN SUSTEREN: She was fine on it. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She was excellent. She did a great job with aiding me. She was very intelligent. And she helped me out a lot and -- as did a lot of the other jurors in the case. There was one in particular who did a great job of helping me through the process and keeping things organized for us, asking the questions when we needed to ask. One thing that I did was I wanted everyone to know everyone's thoughts. So I just called it a round robin discussion that we were going to have where nobody else could speak. Everyone had to say their thoughts on any issues. And we did this a number of different times throughout the course of deliberation. And when I would come back around, you know, the guy that helped me out a lot did a really good job of bringing up questions and points, you know, that we needed to look at. VAN SUSTEREN: The first day of deliberations -- about what time did you go into the room, do you remember? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't remember the exact time. I want to say it was possibly 2:00, 2:15 -- between 2:15 and probably 2:45 we went in. VAN SUSTEREN: When was the first vote, then, on it, besides the foreperson issue? When was the first... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I wanted to know -- I wanted to take a pre- vote. I wanted to see where we stand, where people stood. So we voted right away. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean, you raise your hand or... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: ... or in secret? Raise your hand. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You raise your hand. VAN SUSTEREN: And what was the split the first vote?
6 of 9
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, for which indictment? When... VAN SUSTEREN: Murder. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, for murder, it was 10 to 2, 10 saying -- it was 10 innocent, 2 guilty. VAN SUSTEREN: And about -- if you went in about 2:15, when do you think that was? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't remember exactly when that was. VAN SUSTEREN: Hour, two hours, three hours, next day? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Probably about -- well, it wasn't the next day, but we went in on the first day. It was within the first hour. VAN SUSTEREN: So there was not a lot of persuading or anything that had to be done. I mean, the... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not for the pre-vote. VAN SUSTEREN: Not for the pre-vote. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: So there were two that were they adamant on guilty or just uncertain, or how do you measure their level of... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I believe with one, there was an uncertainty, one that was pretty adamant about it. VAN SUSTEREN: Adamant that it was guilty? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Uh-huh. VAN SUSTEREN: And what later changed that to not guilty, do you think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I never -- I never really -- with that person, I didn't get into that. It changed through our deliberations... VAN SUSTEREN: Sooner or later? Or much later? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was much later. The next day, was -- when we did our post-votes is when that came out. And we realized -- you know, the indictments 4 through 7, I wanted to get that out of the -- that -- there was direct evidence on that.
7 of 9
VAN SUSTEREN: That's the lying. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was the lying. VAN SUSTEREN: OK. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And so we -- you know, there was no -- that was a no-brainer. That was 12 to nothing guilty. And we -- so we knocked those out right away because the evidence was there. We get into 1 through 3, then that's where the issue is raised. As far as the first one with murder in the first, you know, with the 10-2 voting, after going the process that I explained earlier, where we dissected the word or the verbiage that was on the indictment and looked at our notes and looked at the evidence, you know, the killing we couldn't -- was not something that we could get. VAN SUSTEREN: Well, it's very interesting that right from the get-go, there were 10-2 for not guilty. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean, that gives you some level of indication of how certain the jury was. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it does. It does, you know? And all of us felt, really, when prosecution rested, we thought because we did not go in researching this much, we were somewhat of an open book, somewhat. When they rested, I just -- I was stunned. I was stunned. I thought there would be more. I really did. And I was waiting for more. And a lot of us fell that way. A lot of us felt that way, that there's just not enough evidence to fill in the gray area that we needed to have filled in. VAN SUSTEREN: In terms of the two who in the 10-2, in the initial round on the murder, what was hanging up the two? Or what did -- what were they focusing on? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The focus was on, really, the chloroform and the duct tape and that -- the chloroform, the duct tape, all of the circumstances that -- or all of evidence that was provided in that regard could -- could have emotion played into it. I didn't ask. VAN SUSTEREN: Bad behavior of her play into it at all? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bad behavior, her (INAUDIBLE) yes. That's -- that was, you know, something that could have had something to do with it. But I didn't ask about that because that was not something that was in -- it was -- it's not something that we could talk about in the -- for the mid- June -- you know, for June 16th. And so it wasn't really discussed. But I think emotion could have played into it, kind of gut response that they let out. And that's why I wanted to see where we stood with the pre-vote, with the -- you know, with my occupation, I
8 of 9
give pre-tests for that exact same reason. And so I wanted to know where we stood. VAN SUSTEREN: Did -- was there ever any discussion, either during the trial or during deliberation or anything, about the fact that she might be executed, that you might be called upon to make that decision? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: Never -- never took that into account? You never looked across the courtroom and thought, I'm going to have to decide whether she lives or dies? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, we went on -- when we -- are you talking about when we were into deliberation or... VAN SUSTEREN: No, just any... (CROSSTALK) VAN SUSTEREN: ... during the course of the trial. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. Oh, yes. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean, you know, looking across the courtroom. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a thought. Absolutely. Absolutely. When we went into deliberation, no, because the punishment is not something that's in our -- the punishment is written right down there on paper as what we were able -- the punishment's on the paper. It's the verdict. So we didn't take it into consideration. But yes, there were times where I'd be sitting there and I'd look over, and you know, the extent of the outcome, of what could happen, it hits you. You know, it weighed on you at times. But you know, not something that I would dwell over. (END VIDEOTAPE)
Print Close
URL
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/exclusive-039it-disgusted-us039-casey-anthonyforeman-reveals-what-happened-inside-delibe
9 of 9
Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'
Print
Close

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," July 13, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: We all saw it, Casey Anthony crying several times during her trial. But were they real tears? Did they have an impact on the jury? What was it like for the jurors to sign off on that not guilty verdict form? We asked Juror Number 11. Here is part three of our interview with the jury foreperson. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Did she look at you at all? Did she ever have any contact with the jury, sort of eye contact? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just quick eye contact they would make. We were sitting in front of her so it was going to happen. VAN SUSTEREN: What do you think she is like? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have no clue. As far as I know from what I've seen in evidence, I know from the videos that I've seen from her, when she's was in prison the pictures that were taken that were admitted into evidence, anything about her personality, I do think that she has issues she will battle forever, issues that I can't understand. I don't associate myself with people like that. I don't really know much about the personality of Casey Anthony. I just know from what I was able to see that she does have problems. VAN SUSTEREN: It's interesting, because something you didn't hear and had nothing to do with the trial, but there were letters she wrote while in child, talked about having another child, which horrified people. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. We didn't know anything about those. VAN SUSTEREN: Your thought about it?
1 of 4
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/casey-anthony-f...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I haven't given it much thought. So her writing in prison to other people, you know, I don't know what else you can do in prison. As far as the alleged pregnancy, again, that's something that really -- you know, it disgusts me. VAN SUSTEREN: She didn't testify. She has a constitutional right not to testify, but everyone always wonders whether the jury thinks why didn't she testify if she didn't do anything. Was there any discussion about her not testifying? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was never brought up. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you want to hear from her? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You want to hear from the person that they are talking about for the six to eight weeks. But she has a right not to testify. S it would have been unproductive for any of us to dwell on that. There would be no reason for us to do that. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you see her cry? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yep. VAN SUSTEREN: What did you think about that, genuine? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know. I think there were times when she was crying because -- I did think it was genuine when Lee was crying. That was a very heart wrenched, emotional point for Lee. And I thought that was genuine for her. But all of the others, I don't know what she is asked to do or told what to do. I don't know if she is the type of person that can cry on the drop of a dime when she needs to. So not something I weighed in to anything when it came time for us to come to a verdict. VAN SUSTEREN: So this is pretty clinical in the sense look at the evidence, look at verdict form? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You look at the verdict form, you look at your notes, and you look at the evidence, yes. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you ever feel sorry for her? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: Not once? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not once. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you ever feel sorry for George?
2 of 4
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. As far as -- I feel sorry for the fact that now here they are left to pick up the pieces. You have to keep in mind and keep in perspective that there is -- their granddaughter is deceased. And I feel sorry for them in that aspect. What sits with me, what bothers me the most is the fact that they -- nobody made the effort. I say "they," them, who, one or two, whoever, maybe made the effort to get ahold of somebody. VAN SUSTEREN: Cindy made the 911 call when she found out. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Cindy is different. Cindy was never one that we thought had any point in the matter. But, the others did. And that's what we -- that's a shame. That's why I was saying before there really should be something in place where we can -- that can be punishable. Serious, not misdemeanor, something serious so they can be punished because of that. VAN SUSTEREN: Any disgust for anyone in particular? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I'll tell you what, when I had to sign off on the indictments, there was -VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the verdict. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The verdict, yes, when I had to sign off on the verdict, the sheet that was given to me, there was a feeling of disgust that came across me knowing that my signature and her signature were going to be there on the same sheet. I do have a disgust for -- I don't want to name names, but for people in the family, I do. There's issues that go on that I don't -- I can't really discuss. But yes, there is a sense of disgust, by all means. VAN SUSTEREN: What about the meter reader? What do you think happened? You think that he had anything to do with moving the remains? Did he see the remains in August, really? What do you make of all that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know what to make of Roy Kronk. I know the defense pushed the issue with him. I just -- there wasn't much time spent on him for us to really generate a feeling towards Roy Kronk. I do think that he did -- he stated that he did remove the remains at a time. He picked the bag up. At one point a skull came out. VAN SUSTEREN: You don't think he moved it from the house? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. There's nothing that puts him in that house. There's nothing that shows consistently he was involved in the Anthony family. So that was not something that I really took in consideration. But again, we don't know. There's such a gray area there. But he was not one that I put in that mix on those days. VAN SUSTEREN: I understand it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and you don't if
3 of 4
there was an accident or murder. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: But what is your suspicion how that child got from the home to where the remains are found? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It wasn't very far. Whether she was put in the trunk of Casey's car, there is a good possibility of that. Again, it's a suspicion. Was she put in that car and then taken out of that car and then put in another? We don't know the whole process of going from the house to the corner of Suburban Drive, around the corner to the spot on Suburban Drive. So, I wish there was something that can tell us that as to how that really happened. Who put the body in the car? How they put the body in the car? What happened to the body before it was put in the car? Those are issues we don't know. VAN SUSTEREN: When you signed the verdict in the verdict room and said all right, let's go, let's tell the deputy we are ready to go, what was it like in the room? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was tough. VAN SUSTEREN: Meaning what? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Silence. I was very silent. There's a lot of time from the time when I knocked on that door, to the time that we actually out there was a lot of time. And it was just a very, very somber, just silent, quiet moment for all of us. I wanted to -- I tried to close my eyes and relax, and I really couldn't. I had a lot of people go through and check to make sure everything was filled out right on it, make sure the date was right, that the appropriate box was checked just to -- for my own comfort. (END VIDEOTAPE)
Print Close
URL
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/casey-anthony-foreman-039she-has-issues-she039llbattle-forever039
4 of 4
Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'
Print
Close

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," July 15, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: The anger over the verdict is at a fever pitch and a heavy burden was placed on the jury. Now, the jury was not satisfied that the prosecutors proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony was guilty of murder. Why? Where did the state's evidence fail? The interview you all want to see, the foreman of the jury. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Nice to have you join us. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Greta. It's an honor to be here. VAN SUSTEREN: You are Number 11, right? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Number 11. VAN SUSTEREN: And the foreperson? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was the foreperson. VAN SUSTEREN: You've asked us not to use your name. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I greatly appreciate that. VAN SUSTEREN: So you get to the first day of the trial and opening statements. After you heard the opening statement of the prosecution, before the defense opening statement, what did you think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'll tell you what, it really threw me for -- it was shocking. It was very shocking. Because again, I really didn't follow much of the case after the first couple of weeks. And with what the state was presenting, I thought that was pretty standard. You know, in the opening remarks, they did show some pictures that were -- you know, that will stay with you for
1 of 11
life. And we realized just how intense and how serious this case is. When -- you know, when the defense got up, then that's when they started throwing out things that we did not know. And that's where it really kind of hit us. It was something that we had to kind of sit back and let soak in and just see where he went with from there. So it was shocking. It was very eye-opening. You know, it's a situation -- that's a time I will never forget. VAN SUSTEREN: You know, the people who watched it on television, or even in the courtroom, we can divert our eyes from the pictures of the remains, or whatever it is, I mean, the really horrible -- you're the fact- finder. You can't. So you actually -- you all had to actually look at the really... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We had to look at it. VAN SUSTEREN: ... the worst pictures. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we did. We had to look at it. It was right there in front of us. And we had to, you know, make sure that we take -- you know, take the notes that we needed to take on those pictures. And it was tough, you know? VAN SUSTEREN: How -- how do you -- or what did you believe to be or conclude was how the remains or the body got from wherever the child died to the -- where the remains were found, a couple blocks away? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I mean, we know that it was -- I mean, obviously, the body was -- it was dumped there. It was left there. As far as -- there's a lot of gray area, a lot of gray area that goes from on that June 15th to when the body was discovered. And there's a lot of that, you know -- there's just a lot of speculation as to how it got there. Who took it there? And just a lot of unanswered questions in that regard. So I can't really comment on that. I don't know how it got there, how Caylee got there. I don't -- I can't tell you how or who, but ultimately, the body ended up there. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you -- were you ever convinced how she died? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. Never. VAN SUSTEREN: So what's your most likely, which is -- which is -- apart from -- beyond a reasonable doubt is a very different standard than what's most likely or what you think or what you guess or anything. Where do you fall in the spectrum? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, as far as -- again, this is all -- this is all speculation. There's a number of ways that Caylee could have died. You know, there is the possibility, there was the evidence of chloroform, which we can touch on later. There was a pool right there just a -- feet
2 of 11
away, you know, a couple feet away from the doors that, you know, has had pictures of her being able to open, ladders that she potentially could really have climbed up herself. And I know that that is a major way that a lot of children die down here in Florida. But we don't know if that's the cause or if that was the cause of death. We don't know the cause of death, and that was one of the major issues that we had and one of the major issues that we had to address. We don't know the cause of death. Everything was speculation. VAN SUSTEREN: You mentioned the chloroform. How did that figure into this and into your thinking? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the chloroform -- it really -- as far as the development of the chloroform, the Internet search on the chloroform, you know, really, there was the MySpace or FaceBook posting of the "Win her over with chloroform" picture. And then there was the actual Google search the next day that was done from the computer, not the laptop, but from the actual desktop computer in the Anthony home. You can speculate, you know, hey, here it is, the boyfriend posts this, "Win her over with chloroform." The next day, I want to know what chloroform is. You can speculate into that. There was no documentation on buying anything to make chloroform. The one Internet search that she made from Google was a three-minute Internet search. And then it subsided from there. And you know, if there was possible more traces of it in greater amounts, more of a way of how it can be concocted, how it could be purchased, whatever may be -- none of that was ever there. So we were very limited in what we had when it came to chloroform. We were told, and they did, you know, as far as how -- and what chloroform is detected in other products at the levels -- you know, chloroform is detectable in other products, as well. But there just was not enough, there really was not enough for us to bring chloroform into the mix. We know there were smaller levels of it in the trunk. We know there was a Google search on it. And that's what we had. It wasn't detected anywhere else. It wasn't on the steering wheel. It wasn't on the handle of the door, going into the car. And even if there was, there still is a question of who and where. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you think that Cindy Anthony was telling the truth when she said that she had done those searches for chloroform? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, there's a lot of speculation into that. There's a lot that went into her and looking for the chlorophyll because she was worried about her dogs. You know, I don't know. With Cindy, it wasn't as obvious to me, the lying. I mean, she was -- she was in a lot of pain. She was in a lot of stress. You know, allegedly, she was on a lot of medication. And she's been questioned a number of different times.
3 of 11
But you know, as far as her going back and forth with that, you know, that was something that you always kind of kept in the back of your mind. You know, as far as her lying about it, well, there's, you know, people that may look into that and people -- but that was not something that we really considered much when we were going into deliberation. VAN SUSTEREN: If this were a murder, in terms of the discussion and the deliberations, and obviously, that was something that wasn't proven by the state beyond a reasonable doubt... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: ... too, as well -- if the -- was there ever some sort of discussion of motive? They don't have to prove motive. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: But was there ever any discussion about, like, why anybody would do that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just -- we -- and again, motive was not something that we had to prove or anything. It's not -- we felt that the motive that the state provided was -- in our eyes, was just kind of weak, you know, that a mother would want to do something like that to her child just so that she can go out and party. That's what they presented to us. And -- but aside from that, no, there was no other talk on motive. VAN SUSTEREN: Between June 16th and the time that -- mid-July, her behavior -- she's out partying. You saw the pictures, obviously. There's a tattoo. What was the discussion? And what do you think about that period? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, it disgusted us. We were all very disgusted with that between June 16th, when it happened, to the time that it -- and that's what makes this hard. That's what makes this -- it's what made it very hard for us. It's something that, you know, I wish -- because of that and seeing that, it'd be -- we wished there was something else we could look at that'd be more -that'd be a felony. VAN SUSTEREN: What did you think of the judge? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The judge was excellent. VAN SUSTEREN: How about the prosecutors first? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The prosecutors? VAN SUSTEREN: Yes. How -- did they do a good job? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I thought, you know, for what they -- you know, I -- really, in
4 of 11
prosecution, when it was over and done with, when they rested, I wanted more. I wanted more. I really thought the prosecution -- I don't know if there was more for them to give. I wanted more, though, because I thought it really put us at that point in a situation where this is going to be -this is going to be difficult. So as far as how they presented things, I thought they did a very good job. I thought Ashton was -- you could tell they put a lot of work in the presentations. And I thought you could tell they knew what they were doing. They -- you know, they were, you know, very professional. And in some regards, at some times, I thought they made light of things that I didn't take -- I didn't consider was in good taste. VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the -- there's one reference, I think, in closing argument, where Jeff Ashton, the prosecutor, got slapped around a little bit by the judge for smirking. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For smirking, yes. I thought that was very distasteful. You know, the pigs in the blanket thing that he made towards reference to the one guy who put a pig in back of a car and studied decomp of the pig in the car, just -- at times -- and you're there for a long time, and I understand that many things that pop up that could be humorous, but you always have to keep in the back of your mind that there's a -- you know, there's young girl who's died. And you know, we need to maintain our focus. VAN SUSTEREN: How about the defense team? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the defense team -- you know, I really thought the defense team -they were always -- again, they were very professional. I thought they did a good job. You know, they brought up -- they pushed the reasonable doubt, and the reasonable doubt was there. So they -- you know, they did a good job of defending, you know, when the prosecution rested, defending. And then I thought they did a good job in their closing remarks of, you know, sticking to their guns in that regard. VAN SUSTEREN: When was the first vote, then, on it, besides the foreperson issue? When was the first... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I wanted to know -- I wanted to take a pre- vote. I wanted to see where we stand, where people stood. So we voted right away. VAN SUSTEREN: I mean, you raise your hand or... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: ... or in secret? Raise your hand. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You raise your hand.
5 of 11
VAN SUSTEREN: And what was the split the first vote? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, for which indictment? When... VAN SUSTEREN: Murder. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, for murder, it was 10 to 2, 10 saying -- it was 10 innocent, 2 guilty. VAN SUSTEREN: And about -- if you went in about 2:15, when do you think that was? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't remember exactly when that was. VAN SUSTEREN: Hour, two hours, three hours, next day? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Probably about -- well, it wasn't the next day, but we went in on the first day. It was within the first hour. VAN SUSTEREN: So there was not a lot of persuading or anything that had to be done. I mean, the... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not for the pre-vote. VAN SUSTEREN: Not for the pre-vote. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: So there were two that -- were they adamant on guilty or just uncertain, or how do you measure their level of... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I believe with one, there was an uncertainty, one that was pretty adamant about it. VAN SUSTEREN: Adamant that it was guilty? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Uh-huh. VAN SUSTEREN: And what later changed that to not guilty, do you think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I never -- I never really -- with that person, I didn't get into that. It changed through our deliberations... VAN SUSTEREN: Sooner or later? Or much later? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was much later. The next day, was -- when we did our post-votes is
6 of 11
when that came out. And we realized -- you know, the indictments 4 through 7, I wanted to get that out of the -- that -- there was direct evidence on that. VAN SUSTEREN: That's the lying. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was the lying. VAN SUSTEREN: OK. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And so we -- you know, there was no -- that was a no-brainer. That was 12 to nothing guilty. And we -- so we knocked those out right away because the evidence was there. We get into 1 through 3, then that's where the issue is raised. As far as the first one with murder in the first, you know, with the 10-2 voting, after going the process that I explained earlier, where we dissected the word or the verbiage that was on the indictment and looked at our notes and looked at the evidence, you know, the killing we couldn't -- was not something that we could get. VAN SUSTEREN: She didn't testify. She has an absolute constitutional right not to testify. But everyone always wonders whether the jury thinks, like, Why didn't she testify if she didn't do anything? Did you -- was there any discussion about her not testifying? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, never. That was never brought up. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you want to hear from her? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I mean, you want to hear from the person who is -- that they're talking about for the six to eight weeks. But that's not -- she has a right not to testify. So it would have been very just unproductive to me to dwell on that, for any of us to dwell on that. There was -- there would be no reason for us to do that. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you see her cry? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: What did you think about that, genuine or -- what'd you think about that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know. I think there were times, you know, when she was crying because -- you know, I did think it was genuine when Lee was crying. That was a very heartwrenched emotional point for Lee. And I thought that was -- that was genuine for her. But all the others -- I don't know what she's asked to do or told what to do. I don't know if she's the type of person that can cry on the drop of a dime when she needs to. So not something that I really weighed into anything when it became time for us to come to a verdict.
7 of 11
VAN SUSTEREN: Any disgust for anyone in particular? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I'll tell you what. When I had to -- when I had to sign off on the -- on the indictments, there was a... VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the verdict. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The verdict, yes. When I had to sign off on the verdicts, the sheet that was given to me, there was just a feeling of disgust that came across me, knowing that my signature and her signature were going to be there on the same sheet. I do have a disgust for -- I don't want to name names, but for people in the family. I do. There's issues that go on that I don't -- I can't really discuss. But yes, there is a sense of disgust, by all means. VAN SUSTEREN: What about the meter reader? What do you think happened? Do you think that he -- that he had anything to do with moving the remains... UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, Roy Kronk? VAN SUSTEREN: Did he see the remains in August really? I mean, what do you make of all that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know what to make of Roy Kronk. I know the defense pushed the issue with him. I just -- there wasn't much time spent on him for us to really generate a strong feeling towards Roy Kronk. I do think -- you know, he did -- you know, he stated that he did remove the remains at a time -- at time. You know, he picked a bag up. At one point, a skull came out. VAN SUSTEREN: But you don't think he moved it from the house? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, he used the meter reader stick... VAN SUSTEREN: You don't think he moved it from the house. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. I don't -- there's nothing that puts him in that house. There's nothing that shows consistently he was involved in the Anthony family. So that was not something that I really -- that I really took in consideration. (END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK) Here's more of our interview with the jury foreman and what he and other jurors thought about Casey Anthony's father, George.
8 of 11
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) VAN SUSTEREN: Jose Baez's opening statement said that there was child molestation in the family, George on Casey and also Lee. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you believe that? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. VAN SUSTEREN: You didn't believe it? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was not something -- well, there was no evidence to back that, so I could not really take it into consideration. That was not really much of a -- that was not a discussion of ours when we got into deliberation as far as the sexual abuse. What was, was George Anthony's actions and his demeanor, and you know, the way that he presented some things up there on the stand. VAN SUSTEREN: And what about his actions and his demeanor? What was the -- what did you think and what did others think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that's a good question because, you know, I was right there. You know, I was 10 feet from him. And you know, I'm used to reading -- because of my profession, I'm used to reading people. And I really thought that George had a very selective memory in the whole regard. I thought that George at times could remember something to be as vivid as it just happened the day before. The way that he described a number of things that happened on June 15th would be one example. He could tell you everything that happened. He could tell you everything that everybody was wearing. He could tell you the show that he was watching, the topic that they were on. But then you go and he's questioned on a gas can. He couldn't remember which can or -- and we had to go back and forth. I know him and the defense went back and forth as to which picture he was shown when he was really only shown one. And he went back and forth on that. You know, he had very selective memory for me. And that in itself was something that I always kept in the back of my mind. But you know, with George, with the can, the selective memory, the way that he handled the tow yard incident, the -you know, River Cruz, the lady that he could have had an extramarital affair with -- it raised questions. It really did. VAN SUSTEREN: Raised questions about his character, or whether he had some involvement in the death of his granddaughter?
9 of 11
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Really both for me, character as far as the fact that he could be possibly lying. Also, the fact that his involvement was going to be in question because he was there on the 15th. He was the -- you know, he can tell you exactly when Casey and Caylee left. VAN SUSTEREN: Did anybody think George was believable or credible, or were others likewise suspicious of him? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a suspicion of him. That was -- that was a part of our conversation that we had of the -- well, what I'd call the round robin topics that we had when we were doing deliberation. That was brought up. VAN SUSTEREN: Suspicious that he was involved in covering up the death, suspicious he was involved with the -- an accidental death, or suspicious he was a murderer? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. VAN SUSTEREN: Really, that he was a murderer? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. We don't know. We don't know. The suspicions were raised. VAN SUSTEREN: In the deliberation room? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation. VAN SUSTEREN: How many people do you think at least -- and maybe it changed during the course of deliberations, but how many initially thought that George was responsible for a murder? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: George? Well, you know, there is no -- the problem is with the gray area, there's no way that we can tell the responsibility. What was in question a lot of times dealt with, you know, Caylee was with Cindy the night before. When she came back the next night, they looked at the pictures of them at the retirement community. Then, you know, they went to bed. You know, guardianship, when it started, who was looking out for her that next day? You know, George and Cindy and Casey all took hand in raising Caylee. We know that, you know, Cindy went to work. And then the gray area comes in. VAN SUSTEREN: But at that gray area, I'm thinking, you know, the -- I realize that George isn't charged in this case. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. Right.
10 of 11
VAN SUSTEREN: And he's not charged (INAUDIBLE) Casey, but what I find interesting is that some jurors thought that he might be responsible not just for an accident or cover-up but for a murder. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was just -- it was just one of those things where we -- because he was there and there was a gray area there, he was in question for -- you know, for -- for us just being -- having -- having some character issues when he was on that stand. And he was there. He was there at the time, on that day that all the gray area is happening with us. And that puts him in that mix. It put him in the mix for us. (END VIDEOTAPE)
Print Close
URL
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/exclusive-casey-anthony-jury-foreman-039everythingwas-speculation039
11 of 11

Casey Anthony - Jury Foreman Interview

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Casey Anthony - Jury Foreman Interview

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Exclusive: Casey Anthony Jury Foreman on Forensic Evidence and Suspicions of George Anthony

Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'

Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'

Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'

Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'

Casey Anthony Foreman: 'She Has Issues She'll Battle Forever'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Exclusive - Casey Anthony Jury Foreman: 'Everything Was Speculation'

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen