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.
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 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.
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.
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?