Casey Anthony Trial!!!

Options
168101112

Replies

  • brewingaz
    brewingaz Posts: 1,136 Member
    Options
    Who will play her on the Lifetime Movie Network version of the story?
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    We know that she used to knock her kid out so she could party.
    We know that she didn't report her missing for a month.
    We know that she showed no emotion over the whole thing.
    We know that she lied to the police.
    We know the trunk of her car smelled like a dead body.


    That was enough to get her. These are facts, not emotions.



    We know that she used to knock her kid out so she could party.
    - We actually don't KNOW this one

    We know that she didn't report her missing for a month.
    - Yes but it does not prove murder

    We know that she showed no emotion over the whole thing.
    - This is subjective, and also does not prove murder

    We know that she lied to the police.
    - Which she was found guilty of

    We know the trunk of her car smelled like a dead body.
    - Yes, but does not link Casey to her death - it is only circumstantial evidence


    Look I am with you, she IS guilty, but the evidence just sucked.

    http://research.lawyers.com/ask-a-lawyer/Is-Circumstantial-Evidence-Enough-to-ConvictU-5709.html

    http://www.southcarolinacriminaldefenseblog.com/2010/03/state_v_frazier_convictions_fo.html


    Lets not forget the Scott Peterson trial either. Circumstantial evidence can be used to connect the dots and convict.
  • Heatherbelle_87
    Heatherbelle_87 Posts: 1,078 Member
    Options
    We know that she used to knock her kid out so she could party.
    We know that she didn't report her missing for a month.
    We know that she showed no emotion over the whole thing.
    We know that she lied to the police.
    We know the trunk of her car smelled like a dead body.


    That was enough to get her. These are facts, not emotions.



    We know that she used to knock her kid out so she could party.
    - We actually don't KNOW this one

    We know that she didn't report her missing for a month.
    - Yes but it does not prove murder

    We know that she showed no emotion over the whole thing.
    - This is subjective, and also does not prove murder

    We know that she lied to the police.
    - Which she was found guilty of

    We know the trunk of her car smelled like a dead body.
    - Yes, but does not link Casey to her death - it is only circumstantial evidence


    Look I am with you, she IS guilty, but the evidence just sucked.

    http://research.lawyers.com/ask-a-lawyer/Is-Circumstantial-Evidence-Enough-to-ConvictU-5709.html

    http://www.southcarolinacriminaldefenseblog.com/2010/03/state_v_frazier_convictions_fo.html


    Lets not forget the Scott Peterson trial either. Circumstantial evidence can be used to connect the dots.

    Correct but only if the defense cant poke holes in it, or enough successful holes. And unfortunantly for Caylee, her grandparents helped her mother get away with it and helped the defense destroy the prosecutions circumstantail evidence. In the Scott Peterson case her family was against him and he had a STRING of bad marriages/missing/dead wives. If Casey somehow has another child and it ends up dead, she wont make it to trial before someone decides to serve justice themselves
  • ColeyBear08
    ColeyBear08 Posts: 495 Member
    Options
    Poor little Caylee Anthony... There will never be any justice for the death of that little girl. Do not avenge yourselves, dear friends, but give place to God’s wrath, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. Just some words for thought for you, Casey Anthony.
  • skinnyminnie2
    skinnyminnie2 Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    Too sad. This baby is dead and no one is going to be held accountable.
  • boomboom011
    boomboom011 Posts: 1,459
    Options
    Prosecution dropped the ball. I cant wait to hear what the jurors have to say. Im working but has anyone heard from them? Usually the defense will have a moment with them.

    They had to prove without a reasonable doubt which they didnt. You have to take the emotion out of it when youre in the jury box. Is it difficult? Absolutely! Is it necessary? yes.

    Right now everyone is upset and emotional. I get it. Im not on Casey's side but this is how it goes. Someone talked about the movies and its so true. We see movies like A Time To Kill and thats TV. Things are messy in the real world. The evidence is not in black and white.

    Correct me if Im wrong but werent they unable to even find the real cause of death? Im just asking cause i didnt get to see the trial.
  • skinnyminnie2
    skinnyminnie2 Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    Amen. It is sad but you're correct. Vengence belongs to the Lord
  • Laceylala
    Laceylala Posts: 3,094 Member
    Options
    This is so disgusting,
    She sold her soul to the devil,
    But one of this days she will get so drunk and she will tell all the true, because the devil is a traidor.
    Horrible.

    Unfortunantly she could confess NOW and cant be re-tried unless the prosecution can PROVE the jury was tainted/incapable.bought out.

    The most any of us can hope for is for new evidence to be found (since the FBI and local police NEED to start looking for a new killer) that will tie her to it and she will be found guilty for accessorie to murder, aiding and abeting, and covering up a crime.

    IF the state appeals the decision they need to dig up hard evidence. IDK how closely you all followed it but Im not shocked, there wasnt nearly enough HARD EVIDENCE.

    And YES people abuse and kill their kids on a regular basis in this country and dont even get caught for YEARS. I think the prosecution fell victim to media pressure and went to trial too soon. A better job needed to be done in securing her fate before putting this infront of a judge, jury, and the entire US

    I didn't watch the whole thing (so I am not as informed as others)...but I thought that Caylee was found to have drowned accidentally in the pool.. will they reopen it as a murder investigation?
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options
    Our system isn't so cut and dry. It IS set up to give a person the most benefit of doubt as possible. Prosecution must prove they did it, not show they probably did it. "We need justice and she most likely did it, " is not how our court system runs.

    And criminal counts are funny. They each come with a very specific thing they must prove and those things are intentionally hard to prove.

    I know this is murder, but ask any spouse of a jealous person if they'd think it's fair to judge on circumstantial evidence rather than actual proof. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is really against someone, but they did not do it. All of the time? No. But sometimes. Our court system is there to protect those sometimes people.

    People might think our justice system is flawed for that... I'd rather have a murderer go free, who had to live with their pariah status for the rest of their life... than to have an innocent person die for crimes they did not commit, but we just can't believe that. It makes murders out of everyone if that happens. Her life=ruined.

    I'm not against the death penalty... if we have undeniable proof for conviction.
  • LizC26
    LizC26 Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    There may have not been enough evidence to convict her of 1st degree murder (Although if I were a juror, that's what I would have went with), but there was absolutely enough to convict her of child abuse or manslaughter (which means her actions/neglect led to her death)
  • Heatherbelle_87
    Heatherbelle_87 Posts: 1,078 Member
    Options
    This is so disgusting,
    She sold her soul to the devil,
    But one of this days she will get so drunk and she will tell all the true, because the devil is a traidor.
    Horrible.

    Unfortunantly she could confess NOW and cant be re-tried unless the prosecution can PROVE the jury was tainted/incapable.bought out.

    The most any of us can hope for is for new evidence to be found (since the FBI and local police NEED to start looking for a new killer) that will tie her to it and she will be found guilty for accessorie to murder, aiding and abeting, and covering up a crime.

    IF the state appeals the decision they need to dig up hard evidence. IDK how closely you all followed it but Im not shocked, there wasnt nearly enough HARD EVIDENCE.

    And YES people abuse and kill their kids on a regular basis in this country and dont even get caught for YEARS. I think the prosecution fell victim to media pressure and went to trial too soon. A better job needed to be done in securing her fate before putting this infront of a judge, jury, and the entire US

    I didn't watch the whole thing (so I am not as informed as others)...but I thought that Caylee was found to have drowned accidentally in the pool.. will they reopen it as a murder investigation?

    No, there is actually still NO IDEA exactly how she died! The pool thing was something the defense said happened, which they had no evidence of either other then a few pictures of caylee opening the sliding glass door and playing in the pool with adults in there with her.

    I personally think they should reopen the entire investigation. Either in a new state or labs outside of the state due to the already high media scrutinty
  • angryguy77
    angryguy77 Posts: 836 Member
    Options
    There may have not been enough evidence to convict her of 1st degree murder (Although if I were a juror, that's what I would have went with), but there was absolutely enough to convict her of child abuse or manslaughter (which means her actions/neglect led to her death)

    Agreed.

    btw, how was the cruise?
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options
    And beyond that, for those who think our "justice" system is flawed...

    People in power used to just kill people they thought wronged them. Systems of justice were created, more to stop that from happening unfairly... not to find justice for the wronged. Now, we have a much different perspective. Our inclination is to turn this system back into a "they must pay" kind of thing.
  • simplyshannal
    simplyshannal Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    Law states that if a juror has a reasonable doubt of guilt that they must acquit and that is what they did. Did she or didn't she, that is not my place to judge, it is God's and the day will come where she will be judged, just as we all will. We will probably never know what really happened to Caylee Anthony but she is now an angel in heaven and justice for her will be done one day. The state did not prove their case, plain and simple! A prosecutor that walks into a courtroom with nothing but circumstantial evidence is placing a gamble on the verdict and the state lost! Casey has already served over 2 years in jail and I won't be shocked when she gets time served for her sentence and she is out by the end of the week. Don't think that life will be easy for her, because it won't. She won't be back at the club living it up and she won't be our partying and drinking. She will more than likely be watching her back because there will be some CRAZY nut out there that thinks it is his or her place to kill the woman. No one should condone the killing of Casey Anthony by another because that is condoning murder and that makes those people no better than any other murderer our there.
  • Jaradel
    Jaradel Posts: 143 Member
    Options
    I am not surprised that she was not convicted of murder - there wasn't enough evidence to convict beyond a shadow of a doubt - but shocked that she wasn't at least convicted of neglect, based on the fact that she didn't report the disappearance of Caylee for a month.
  • brewingaz
    brewingaz Posts: 1,136 Member
    Options
    This is why I'd be a piss poor juror. I would use common sense in my judgement decision.
  • boomboom011
    boomboom011 Posts: 1,459
    Options
    Our system isn't so cut and dry. It IS set up to give a person the most benefit of doubt as possible. Prosecution must prove they did it, not show they probably did it. "We need justice and she most likely did it, " is not how our court system runs.

    And criminal counts are funny. They each come with a very specific thing they must prove and those things are intentionally hard to prove.

    I know this is murder, but ask any spouse of a jealous person if they'd think it's fair to judge on circumstantial evidence rather than actual proof. Sometimes circumstantial evidence is really against someone, but they did not do it. All of the time? No. But sometimes. Our court system is there to protect those sometimes people.

    People might think our justice system is flawed for that... I'd rather have a murderer go free, who had to live with their pariah status for the rest of their life... than to have an innocent person die for crimes they did not commit, but we just can't believe that. It makes murders out of everyone if that happens. Her life=ruined.

    I'm not against the death penalty... if we have undeniable proof for conviction.

    bunches i believe we have something we can both agree on!
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options
    Many a time, "common sense" has sent an innocent man to death.
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options


    bunches i believe we have something we can both agree on!

    :)
  • 27strange
    27strange Posts: 837 Member
    Options
    C-R-A-Z-Y-!-!-!