Casey Anthony Trial!!!

1…6791112

Replies

  • merrillfoster
    merrillfoster Posts: 855 Member
    Coming from a lawyer:

    The prosecution failed to make their case. Plain and simple. The jury did their job correctly and made a decision based on the facts presented, not their emotions or personal opinions. As someone pointed out, each count has very specific criteria associated with it, and the prosecution did not do a good enough job meeting these criteria. Most of their evidence was circumstantial at best.

    Our legal system was designed the way it was for a reason. Innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove her guilty, not on the defense to prove her innocent. The prosecution failed to do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Another thing to note: people need to separate the facts of the case from the media hype surrounding it. The media don't judge guilt or innocence, the jurors do. The media are trying to make the most sensational news possible, not to ensure a fair and accurate application of the justice system.

    Do I think she was guilty? Probably. But I wouldn't stake my life on it, and therefore I wouldn't stake hers on it either.
  • Smittyinthesun2
    Smittyinthesun2 Posts: 161
    I live in Orlando, and the verdict is sickening !

    The Anthony home is like a tourist attraction, as is the area where they found Caylee's remains.
  • FearAnLoathing
    FearAnLoathing Posts: 4,852 Member
    Where is Dexter when we need him
  • ♥Faerie♥
    ♥Faerie♥ Posts: 14,053 Member
    Agreed Fear......Maybe he is on his way to Orlando
  • txjulie
    txjulie Posts: 190 Member
    So sad. I do think she is guilty but the concrete evidence to prove her guilty (w/o a doubt) wasn't presented. Very unfortunate because she got away with murder of a beautiful little girl.

    I was literally sick to my stomach when they read the verdict. I thought she would get manslaughter and the child abuse/endangerment for sure. :mad:
  • boomboom011
    boomboom011 Posts: 1,459
    Coming from a lawyer:

    The prosecution failed to make their case. Plain and simple. The jury did their job correctly and made a decision based on the facts presented, not their emotions or personal opinions. As someone pointed out, each count has very specific criteria associated with it, and the prosecution did not do a good enough job meeting these criteria. Most of their evidence was circumstantial at best.

    Our legal system was designed the way it was for a reason. Innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove her guilty, not on the defense to prove her innocent. The prosecution failed to do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Another thing to note: people need to separate the facts of the case from the media hype surrounding it. The media don't judge guilt or innocence, the jurors do. The media are trying to make the most sensational news possible, not to ensure a fair and accurate application of the justice system.

    Do I think she was guilty? Probably. But I wouldn't stake my life on it, and therefore I wouldn't stake hers on it either.

    thank you! thats what i was looking for!
  • rebawagner
    rebawagner Posts: 199 Member
    I am not a judge but wouldn't not reporting a missing child for 31 days be neglect which in turn would be child abuse???!!! Makes me so mad!!
  • greeneyed84
    greeneyed84 Posts: 427 Member
    Very true, Our System doesn't work! People get away with things all the time yet others get punished or sentenced to life or death and didn't have anything to do with it.
  • awelch79
    awelch79 Posts: 233 Member
    Here is my take and it may not be popular. But the prosecution did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Did Casey kill her daughter? Yes she did. Did the prosecution PROVE she did it? No, they dropped the ball. Instead of relying on evidence they just played on emotions. The defense was able to poke so many holes in what evidence the State did have and in the end the jury followed the evidence and not their emotions. I think that Jose Baez and Cheny Mason had great closing arguments the other day where they attacked the lack of hard evidence. That said, she did just get away with murder. But we all meet our maker one day and she will have to answer for her actions.

    As much as it pains me to do so, I have to agree. Did she murder her daughter? HELL YES! Was there enough evidence provided by the prosecution to prove it? NO...but could that have something to do with the fact that she lied for 31 days and that was a critical time at the crime scene(s)? YES. She got herself a not guilty verdict by being a vidictive, dangerous liar. What does that say about our justice system? She got away with murder. Definitely. And I have to disagee that people will forget her and she wont be harrassed every single day of her life, everywhere she goes. Or at least I pray that doesnt happen. She should have to live with this every day...forever and into eternity when she meets her Judge.
  • abalicious
    abalicious Posts: 361 Member
    I will probably get flack for this... but oh well.

    People need to quit blaming the jurors. If you want to get angry blame the poor prosecution for failing to show the burden of proof. Or blame the defense for obviously doing their job very well. You can't convict someone on hunches or emotion alone. Child neglect and first-degree murder are two entirely different things. Obviously the prosecution didn't do a good job, otherwise they would have gotten their conviction if the defense did such a poor job. Their main selling points were a stain in the trunk of an old car that didn't contain a shred of DNA and pictures of a 22 year old woman partying. I never said she was innocent, but it all boils down to what you can prove and not what you think. The state did not present enough concrete evidence so it is not the fault of the jury. If anything can be taken from this trial it is that the media has too much interference in our court rooms. It's sad that this was paraded all over television so housewives would have something to converse with their girlfriends about. Public trials are the new soap operas. The public had this woman pegged as guilty before it even went to trial. And of course there is something wrong with our legal system. It was constructed by human beings and is also operated by human beings, both of which are prone to error. They didn't even know how the girl died. How can you convict someone of murder if they don't know how she was killed. The media needs to stop voicing their subjective opinions on an objective case. As for the chloroform search on her computer.... if anyone looked at my google search history they would think I was messed up. Just because you look up something that doesn't mean you act on it. The state failed to prove the she acquired chloroform.
  • greeneyed84
    greeneyed84 Posts: 427 Member
    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!


    If this were true i would agree BUT my know 2 people personally, they were 17 years old at the time, wrong place, wrong time. Both got convicted of the same murder. Neither did do it.
    Why?? They had NO evidence what so every against them. Only 1 witness who said it was them. Bingo, life in jail b/c that's all the damn proof they need.
    Now the best part: That same witness later then (in front of a judge, mind you) admitted to have lied. He's still free and those 2 "men now" are still locked up.
    Some system.....

    Btw, that was 7 years ago and they are still in jail for life and they keep trying to appeal it but they can't get anyone to listen. The real murderer is still running the streets, prolly killed a few more people during this time.
  • awelch79
    awelch79 Posts: 233 Member
    [/quote]
    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.
    [/quote]
    This is what I dont understand. I thought that in Florida, Aggravated Child Neglect/ Abuse (which all of the above items are or should be) would carry a Murder 1 conviction.
  • meganyor
    meganyor Posts: 4
    Physically sick over it:(
  • h3h8m3
    h3h8m3 Posts: 455 Member
    Interesting perspective on the thing.

    http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/07/05/why-casey-anthonys-verdict-makes-sense/

    It seems clear to me that either Casey or George Anthony killed the girl. But I have no idea which one did it. If I were on that jury I'd like to think I'd have at least given a guilty verdict on the child abuse and endangerment charges, but I don't think I could have convicted for the murder.
  • Gettinfit2
    Gettinfit2 Posts: 254 Member
    Coming from a lawyer:

    The prosecution failed to make their case. Plain and simple. The jury did their job correctly and made a decision based on the facts presented, not their emotions or personal opinions. As someone pointed out, each count has very specific criteria associated with it, and the prosecution did not do a good enough job meeting these criteria. Most of their evidence was circumstantial at best.

    Our legal system was designed the way it was for a reason. Innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove her guilty, not on the defense to prove her innocent. The prosecution failed to do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Another thing to note: people need to separate the facts of the case from the media hype surrounding it. The media don't judge guilt or innocence, the jurors do. The media are trying to make the most sensational news possible, not to ensure a fair and accurate application of the justice system.

    Do I think she was guilty? Probably. But I wouldn't stake my life on it, and therefore I wouldn't stake hers on it either.

    Agreed, but who want to hear a real legal perspective? :wink: Lawyers and jurors have to follow rules of evidence and jury instructions.:yawn: Cases are much more interesting and defendants are certainly guilty when news reporters spin the facts and incite emotions.

    The prosecution did not present a case sufficient to sustain a burden. A prosecutor's job requires evidence and persuasiveness to go along with the evidence. Evidently, that did not happen.

    :smokin: With all the crime that exists in this country, I never understood why the case was such a media hog.
  • LoveleeB
    LoveleeB Posts: 560 Member
    Heck yes I am pissed! But just imagine how sh*tty her life is going to be now if they call it time served because the whole world practically hates her and she destroyed what relationships she did have with her crazy family by lying about them. What has this world come to???
  • Dippydog
    Dippydog Posts: 154
    :frown: :sad: I am having OJ Simpson flashbacks!!!!!!!!!!!:mad: :angry: :explode: :grumble:
  • Jessamin
    Jessamin Posts: 338 Member
    Where is Dexter when we need him


    Precisely my line of thinking.

    Here's to hoping there's a real-life Dexter Morgan that is terribly pissed.
  • jalapenos
    jalapenos Posts: 345 Member
    Coming from a lawyer:

    The prosecution failed to make their case. Plain and simple. The jury did their job correctly and made a decision based on the facts presented, not their emotions or personal opinions. As someone pointed out, each count has very specific criteria associated with it, and the prosecution did not do a good enough job meeting these criteria. Most of their evidence was circumstantial at best.

    Our legal system was designed the way it was for a reason. Innocent until proven guilty, and the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove her guilty, not on the defense to prove her innocent. The prosecution failed to do so beyond a reasonable doubt.

    I agree- beyond a reasonable doubt.
    She should have at least got convicted of the 2nd or 3rd charge. She got away with the biggest lie of all- and she knows it. She didn't get a convicted in the death of her daughter today but I would hate to stand next to her when her judgement day comes. Caylee rolled over in her grave today and I can only pray for Caylee.
    I don't know what is more sad:
    *that she could profit from her daughter's death,
    *that she is capable of having more children or
    *if and when others are on trial for murder they will reference this case to get off on technicalities.
    A very sad day.
  • Schwiggity
    Schwiggity Posts: 1,449 Member
    Circumstantial evidence everywhere. Also, I really don't understand that severe an amount of empathy to take your vacation time to visit where the body of a dead little girl was found. It's really sad and tragic, but if people are this emotional about some child they never even knew, I don't know what they'd do when they lost someone close to them.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories