Well, there you have it! The smoking gun, the admission of guilt. The statement that ties it all together. /s
You know, once you made the argument that if you go to bed and wake up to fresh snow, although you did not see it snow, you can conclude it did—and you stated, no, it could have been trucks brought in filled with snow—I am only responding to you so that others of sound mind can get a glimpse into the kind of absurd reasoning the jurors must have engaged in.
The fake conversation slutmom claimed occurred with Caylee weeks after Caylee was killed is one more compelling piece of evidence against her. I do concede some of the evidence presented by the state did not impress me-—dogs alerting where no video was taken, and the trainer saying in essence “trust me, my dog alerted.”. But your response kind of indicates the general obtuseness of your thinking. It’s as though you cannot combine all of the proven facts and circumstances as a whole picture. You can’t see the forest as you attempt to dissect all of the csi type trees.
And you probably would never bring common sense into the equation. But for fun here’s an offer-—go to 5 used car lots, open 100 trunks and tell me if you find one unclean or badly stained. Common sense tells me dealers will do whatever it takes to detail a car thoroughly. To do otherwise is to work against yourself. So Lee lied about this one issue, or was wrong. Got a big stain or a bag of garbage in your trunk?
There are classes you can take in logic. There used to be, and probably still is, a game called wffnproof that teaches logic, so it can be a learned skill.
“No one makes an accident look like a murder” such a simple concept but beyond the common sense of this jury. I would be curious about the life choices of people lacking the common sense gene, like the jury and you.