Verdict at 2:15 in Casey Anthony case

[Freeda]

They're back!!

[graciegirl]

I can't believe this has happened.

What happens to her now Freeda? Does she walk free? Do the lesser charges keep her incarcerated?

[petenj]

I can't believe this has happened.

What happens to her now Freeda? Does she walk free? Do the lesser charges keep her incarcerated?

Free to lie and kill again.

[jebartle]

she is not innocent.....Defense and Casey are laughing and happy, they might have forgotten that Caylee is still dead!!! Remember....I think Casey's justice is yet to come.....Guess she will live the good life and ride away in her smelly car!!!!!!

[eremite06]

Oj ii.

[golfergal]

she'll be all over the talk shows telling more lies and getting more attention. unbelievable.

[gerryann]

Very sad situation. Disfuntional family. Poor baby

[vj1213]

soon there will be a book and movie deal...such a shame

[sandybill2]

Well, I can assure you I won't contribute a dime to her profiting from the death of her beautiful child. I hope little Caylee appears to Casey each and every time she closes her eyes with duct tape wrapped around her little face- asking her "why"--and that this image will haunt Casey for the rest of her life. I also hope Little Caylee will be a Guardian Angel for the other children that Casey will probably have. Heaven help them.

[jebartle]

Maybe Miss Hot Body can....Hmmm!....I'm just so sad for Caylee!

[PennBF]

As unpopular it is to say justice was done I believe this is a great example
of the American Justice System. The state tried to kill a person without any
true proof. It is not important whether she is innocent or guilty..What is important is that they tried to kill her without proof. The results today are
a perfect example of how everyone is protected from unfair prosecution
without proof. The jury heard all the evidence and made their decision. We owe them a huge amount of praise for demanding proof before killing someone.:BigApplause:

[CaliforniaGirl]

Oj ii.

Was living in Los Angeles during the OJ trial. My whole office stopped to watch the verdict being read - we were all in such shock, no phones were answered and no work was done for the remainder of the day. That is how I feel today - I am numb. No justice for Caylee.

[JimJoe]

I was a defense attorney for 5 years and tried 26 jury trials including 3 1st degree murder cases. I was next a prosecutor or 13.5 years and tried well over a hundred jury trials including more than a dozen murder and class A felony cases. I finished my career as a defense attorney for 12.5 years with dozens of jury trials including many murder cases.
The verdict was correct. They had no proof of murder and no proof Casey did it. All of the prosecution "circumstantial" evidence was consistent with an accidental death that was covered up by the disposal of the body. Casey did not act nor grieve like a parent of a deceased child. People react in many ways. If she had testified there was an accidental drowning and coverup, they may have still charged her with murder based on Child Endangerment (allowing the child to have access to a pool and drown in it, and a resulting death... good strategy by her lawyer to keep her off the stand.

It does not matter what any of us think. It only matters what the prosecution could prove. If they had found her guilty of 1st degree murder and executed her those jurors would never had had a peaceful moment the rest of the lives. That is how I finished my closing arguments and I won more than my share of trials.

Proof beyond ALL reasonable doubt.. they did not even get close. The child died, the body was discarded, and Casey did not act like "most" parents "should" have acted. Could you have sentenced Casey to death with that evidence? I could not.
JJ

[jblum315]

Don't forget --- Not Guilty does not mean Innocent

[collie1228]

If I were a resident of Florida I would be highly displeased with the entire prosecution of this case. And those of us who call this an injustice don't know much about our judicial system. Twelve handpicked fellow citizens listened to the evidence brought by a powerful institution called the prosecution, and that jury didn't buy any of it, except for four minor charges of lying to the police. The prosecutors intended that this woman get the death penalty, and she ended up convicted of four misdemeanors. I'll bet that the prosecuting attorney either decides not to run for reelection or gets soundly defeated if he does run. The legal expert at CNN said that in NY four misdemeanors might get you probation, but never jail time. We'll see what happens in Florida, but the prosecutors obviously had a weak case - the jury was out only a total of 11 hours, and never asked to review any of the evidence. That is a serious rebuke of the prosecution's case. Maybe Mr. Baez was smarter than anyone gave him credit for being? And maybe Ms. Nancy Grace isn't as smart as she would like you to think she is.

[gerryann]

An innocent child is gone forever......WHOEVER killed her will live with this the rest of their lives.

[Chief X]

I was a defense attorney for 5 years and tried 26 jury trials including 3 1st degree murder cases. I was next a prosecutor or 13.5 years and tried well over a hundred jury trials including more than a dozen murder and class A felony cases. I finished my career as a defense attorney for 12.5 years with dozens of jury trials including many murder cases.
The verdict was correct. They had no proof of murder and no proof Casey did it. All of the prosecution "circumstantial" evidence was consistent with an accidental death that was covered up by the disposal of the body. Casey did not act nor grieve like a parent of a deceased child. People react in many ways. If she had testified there was an accidental drowning and coverup, they may have still charged her with murder based on Child Endangerment (allowing the child to have access to a pool and drown in it, and a resulting death... good strategy by her lawyer to keep her off the stand.

It does not matter what any of us think. It only matters what the prosecution could prove. If they had found her guilty of 1st degree murder and executed her those jurors would never had had a peaceful moment the rest of the lives. That is how I finished my closing arguments and I won more than my share of trials.

Proof beyond ALL reasonable doubt.. they did not even get close. The child died, the body was discarded, and Casey did not act like "most" parents "should" have acted. Could you have sentenced Casey to death with that evidence? I could not.
JJ

Well said.

[PennBF]

Jimjoe..Thanks for taking the time to explain some of the problems with this case and how the American Justice system has worked. Your note was a
refreshing statement in contrast to those who would hang someone without sufficient proof. Again, thanks. :BigApplause:

[OpusX1]

I agree with JimJoe.
These jurors took their job very seriously. Many years ago I was a jury member and when you are holding a persons life and/or years of life in your hands you make sure that every T is crossed and every I is dotted. Better a hundred guilty go free than one innocent be punished. The prosecution did not prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. I did not follow this case the way some have so I can't say weather it was poor investigation, poor prosecution or a combination of both..

[eremite06]

Well, I can assure you I won't contribute a dime to her profiting from the death of her beautiful child. I hope little Caylee appears to Casey each and every time she closes her eyes with duct tape wrapped around her little face- asking her "why"--and that this image will haunt Casey for the rest of her life. I also hope Little Caylee will be a Guardian Angel for the other children that Casey will probably have. Heaven help them.

WOW!!!! She IS a good LIAR!!!!!

[katezbox]

JimJoe - thanks for your insight.

[CMANN]

As unpopular it is to say justice was done I believe this is a great example
of the American Justice System. The state tried to kill a person without any
true proof. It is not important whether she is innocent or guilty..What is important is that they tried to kill her without proof. The results today are
a perfect example of how everyone is protected from unfair prosecution
without proof. The jury heard all the evidence and made their decision. We owe them a huge amount of praise for demanding proof before killing someone.:BigApplause:

Well said.

[dillywho]

As unpopular it is to say justice was done I believe this is a great example
of the American Justice System. The state tried to kill a person without any
true proof. It is not important whether she is innocent or guilty..What is important is that they tried to kill her without proof. The results today are
a perfect example of how everyone is protected from unfair prosecution
without proof. The jury heard all the evidence and made their decision. We owe them a huge amount of praise for demanding proof before killing someone.:BigApplause:

Regardless of any opinions to the contrary, the system worked. The State did not prove their case beyond and to the exclusion of any reasonable doubt.

Had Dr. G left her ruling of manner of death at undetermined means, this trial would never have been. She could not say how the child actually died but how she thought she died. As an expert, she could testify as to her opinion. She said that the body had not been moved. She's most likely right about that, but parts definitely were. Roy Kronk actually testified to that.

This State's case was more about speculation. Maybe chloroform, maybe tape, maybe both....they couldn't prove either one or anything else. Theories are not proof.

As to all the people everywhere all over the country that are angry with the jury and their decision, I hope they will step up to the plate the next time they get a summons for jury duty and not work their butts off at figuring ways to get out of it. Either we believe in our Constitution and our system of justice set out in that document or we don't. We are not free to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we want to live by. It's all or nothing.

Maybe at some point we will all know the truth of what really happened, but I won't hold my breath waiting.

I still appreciate all the civil and respectful posting throughout the whole ordeal. Thanks to all.

Our ability to participate and express our opinions freely is another one of the things that make this the greatest, freeest country in the world. I count it a privilege to live both in this country and TV.

[dillywho]

If I were a resident of Florida I would be highly displeased with the entire prosecution of this case. And those of us who call this an injustice don't know much about our judicial system. Twelve handpicked fellow citizens listened to the evidence brought by a powerful institution called the prosecution, and that jury didn't buy any of it, except for four minor charges of lying to the police. The prosecutors intended that this woman get the death penalty, and she ended up convicted of four misdemeanors. I'll bet that the prosecuting attorney either decides not to run for reelection or gets soundly defeated if he does run. The legal expert at CNN said that in NY four misdemeanors might get you probation, but never jail time. We'll see what happens in Florida, but the prosecutors obviously had a weak case - the jury was out only a total of 11 hours, and never asked to review any of the evidence. That is a serious rebuke of the prosecution's case. Maybe Mr. Baez was smarter than anyone gave him credit for being? And maybe Ms. Nancy Grace isn't as smart as she would like you to think she is.

Nancy Grace is only good at sarcasm....probably why she no longer has a court job. She would be less popular than Jeff Ashton.

[JimJoe]

Two thoughts:
1. They should not have charged this as a death penalty case. From a practical standpoint, they raised their burden of proof from beyond aLL reasonable doubt to beyond ALL doubt.. a big mistake in my opinion.
2. I would have considered just charging her with the 4 counts of lying to the officers TO BEGIN WITH.. they would have had a trial run on her defense and maybe have even gotten to cross examine her on the stand.. There is no statute of limitations on murder. She may have made more statements if she was not charged initially with murder. They could then go after her with the Murder charge without the death penalty. Lying about a crime is not a lesser included offense of murder and would not bar later prosecution for murder.
JJ

[redwitch]

I'm glad Casey didn't get the death penalty or a life sentence. From what I had seen pre-trial (I followed the trial as little as possible), there just wasn't enough evidence to prove murder, let alone pre-meditated murder. This is NOT the OJ case all over again. OJ won because of who he was, a phenomenal legal team and some horrid mistakes by law enforcement officers (evidence didn't need to be planted but was).

With Casey, there really wasn't a case. Yes, there was a tragic death of a beautiful little girl but no real clues of how Caylee died. Circumstantial evidence leaves too much room for doubt. Would you want to send someone to their death or life in prison without having some hard facts even if you didn't like the individual on trial? Regardless, Casey will have to live the rest of her life with the knowledge that almost everyone is convinced she did in fact kill her own child. Odds are she'll never live at home again and I do believe her father has literally washed his hands of her. And I do believe that karma will ultimately take care of Casey.

JimJoe, thank you for such a well-explained and thought out post on justice.

[katezbox]

Two thoughts:
1. They should not have charged this as a death penalty case. From a practical standpoint, they raised their burden of proof from beyond aLL reasonable doubt to beyond ALL doubt.. a big mistake in my opinion.
2. I would have considered just charging her with the 4 counts of lying to the officers TO BEGIN WITH.. they would have had a trial run on her defense and maybe have even gotten to cross examine her on the stand.. There is no statute of limitations on murder. She may have made more statements if she was not charged initially with murder. They could then go after her with the Murder charge without the death penalty. Lying about a crime is not a lesser included offense of murder and would not bar later prosecution for murder.
JJ

JJ,

I completely agree with you on the capital murder charge. And the way you crafted a way to convict w/o danger of double jeopardy is very astute. Unfortunately, the media feeding frenzy created by Nancy Grace and her ilk, but an undue burden on the state to be tough.

k

[dillywho]

It would be interesting if the television people interviewing people on the street about their take on the verdict would ask them for their first question if they had ever served on a jury.

[Freeda]

I can't believe this has happened.

What happens to her now Freeda? Does she walk free? Do the lesser charges keep her incarcerated?

I can't believe it either. I know there is alot of difference of opinion in the forums about whether the state met its burden; but to me it did. The evidence, I felt, lead to only one conclusion as to what happened to Caylee. I got a text message that Jeff Ashton has announced his decision to retire. I thought that he and Linda Burdick were excellent.

It will be interesting if there is any feedback from the jurors as to whether they actually believed she was innocent vs. whether they believed in her probable guilt but couldn't overcome their belief that there was reasonable doubt.

Yes, Gracie, she is free on all of the charges except the 4 convictions for lying to a police office; on those it's my understanding that the sentence is up to one year per charge. Since she has served 3 years already, and the charges can probably run concurrently, it remains to be seen Thursday what Judge Perry does; but he could release her, I think, for time served.

[downeaster]

I was a defense attorney for 5 years and tried 26 jury trials including 3 1st degree murder cases. I was next a prosecutor or 13.5 years and tried well over a hundred jury trials including more than a dozen murder and class A felony cases. I finished my career as a defense attorney for 12.5 years with dozens of jury trials including many murder cases.
The verdict was correct. They had no proof of murder and no proof Casey did it. All of the prosecution "circumstantial" evidence was consistent with an accidental death that was covered up by the disposal of the body. Casey did not act nor grieve like a parent of a deceased child. People react in many ways. If she had testified there was an accidental drowning and coverup, they may have still charged her with murder based on Child Endangerment (allowing the child to have access to a pool and drown in it, and a resulting death... good strategy by her lawyer to keep her off the stand.

It does not matter what any of us think. It only matters what the prosecution could prove. If they had found her guilty of 1st degree murder and executed her those jurors would never had had a peaceful moment the rest of the lives. That is how I finished my closing arguments and I won more than my share of trials.

Proof beyond ALL reasonable doubt.. they did not even get close. The child died, the body was discarded, and Casey did not act like "most" parents "should" have acted. Could you have sentenced Casey to death with that evidence? I could not.
JJ

Thanks, JJ, I like what you said.

I might add, the Pinallas county jurors were not bombarded for three years by the Orlando media which tried, convicted and would have executed Casey had they had their way. It even lulled the prosecution into thinking they had an open and shut case. They even believed the media's perception of the defense being less than intelligent. The grin on Ashton's face today as he returned to the court room for the verdict said it all.

[PennBF]

I am really fed up with the commentator's/lawyers on TV. Judge Alex tonight explaining how the Jury did not understand. The Jury is the final decision and he should try to understand their logic and not deem them as being somewhat "Lacking"..How is he smarter than 12 people who listened to every single word of testimony.? The same goes for Nancy Grace, etc.etc. What arrogrance these people have. It really demonstrates how bad TV is
when it comes to commentators and ego's.
There was a Judge on channel 11 who was excellent and was logical and
balanced. The rest are running by explaining why the Jury was "lacking",
trying to justify their bad judgement throughout the trial, and so on.
THe jury ruled and that's it..chilout

[bogeybabe]

Judgement Day is coming for Casey. We may not see it, but believe me, she will rue the day she walked out of jail. Her life will never be "normal"....some little bit of justice for Caylee.///
It sickens me that her family got away with tossing her out like trash.!

[RichieLion]

I am really fed up with the commentator's/lawyers on TV. Judge Alex tonight explaining how the Jury did not understand. The Jury is the final decision and he should try to understand their logic and not deem them as being somewhat "Lacking"..How is he smarter than 12 people who listened to every single word of testimony.? The same goes for Nancy Grace, etc.etc. What arrogrance these people have. It really demonstrates how bad TV is
when it comes to commentators and ego's.
There was a Judge on channel 11 who was excellent and was logical and
balanced. The rest are running by explaining why the Jury was "lacking",
trying to justify their bad judgement throughout the trial, and so on.
THe jury ruled and that's it..chilout

This trial was on TV for every second of it and covered by these reporters who also listened to every word of testimony. These jurors left their common sense at the door. We're in the age of people expecting too much from science due to the "CSI" shows which depict improbable and impossible scientific outcomes from the scarcest of evidence. I don't have to leave my common sense behind just because 12 people did.

I'm with Nancy Grace. Somewhere out there, the Devil is dancing tonight.

[billmar]

This trial was on TV for every second of it and covered by these reporters who also listened to every word of testimony. These jurors left their common sense at the door. We're in the age of people expecting too much from science due to the "CSI" shows which depict improbable and impossible scientific outcomes from the scarcest of evidence. I don't have to leave my common sense behind just because 12 people did.

I'm with Nancy Grace. Somewhere out there, the Devil is dancing tonight.

Maybe the state overeached w/the charges, maybe it wasn't first degree. But, I find it hard to believe she is innocent when she failed to report her child missing for 30 days, and when confronted, lied about giving her to a nonexistent babysitter. If she didn't have anything to do with it, why did she tell all the lies (which the jury did convict on). I think you have it right...the Devil is dancing tonight.

[CaliforniaGirl]

This trial was on TV for every second of it and covered by these reporters who also listened to every word of testimony. These jurors left their common sense at the door. We're in the age of people expecting too much from science due to the "CSI" shows which depict improbable and impossible scientific outcomes from the scarcest of evidence. I don't have to leave my common sense behind just because 12 people did.

I'm with Nancy Grace. Somewhere out there, the Devil is dancing tonight.

ITA. There was no common sense in that jury room. The child climbed into the pool by herself, drowned, was pulled out by George Anthony, was handed off to Casey Anthony and then mysteriously ended up in the swampy woods in trash bags with duct tape over her mouth. Makes sense to me - not. Sad that the jury couldn't connect the dots. Sad that she'll probably sell book/movie rights, do a reality show and become a millionaire celebutante. I do believe in karma, though...and her day will come.

The bigger issue for me is our judicial system as a whole. I must have heard 20 times today that this verdict is proof that "our judicial system works." Am I the only one who disagrees? To be judged by a jury of one's peers doesn't seem to work so well any more - we have OJ, Robert Blake, Casey Anthony going free while the Innocence Project works so hard to free the wrongly convicted.

[barb1191]

As unpopular it is to say justice was done I believe this is a great example
of the American Justice System. The state tried to kill a person without any
true proof. It is not important whether she is innocent or guilty..What is important is that they tried to kill her without proof. The results today are
a perfect example of how everyone is protected from unfair prosecution
without proof. The jury heard all the evidence and made their decision. We owe them a huge amount of praise for demanding proof before killing someone.:BigApplause:

So true; well put PennBF....

[Pturner]

Two thoughts:
1. They should not have charged this as a death penalty case. From a practical standpoint, they raised their burden of proof from beyond aLL reasonable doubt to beyond ALL doubt.. a big mistake in my opinion.
2. I would have considered just charging her with the 4 counts of lying to the officers TO BEGIN WITH.. they would have had a trial run on her defense and maybe have even gotten to cross examine her on the stand.. There is no statute of limitations on murder. She may have made more statements if she was not charged initially with murder. They could then go after her with the Murder charge without the death penalty. Lying about a crime is not a lesser included offense of murder and would not bar later prosecution for murder.
JJ

Hi JimJoe,
Thanks for your excellent analysis as an experienced criminal attorney. FWIW, not a single poster on TOTV said they thought the state proved Casey guilty of first degree murder. It seemed clear that the state could not prove that.

Personally, I don't see the "reasonable" doubt that Casey killed Callie. However, as you said, from a practical standpoint-- though not a legal one-- the prosecution probably raised its burden with the jury from beyond a reasonable doubt to beyond a shadow of a doubt on the manslaughter charge by putting the clearly unproven capital offense on the table.

[Pturner]

ITA. There was no common sense in that jury room. The child climbed into the pool by herself, drowned, was pulled out by George Anthony, was handed off to Casey Anthony and then mysteriously ended up in the swampy woods in trash bags with duct tape over her mouth. Makes sense to me - not. Sad that the jury couldn't connect the dots. ...

The bigger issue for me is our judicial system as a whole. I must have heard 20 times today that this verdict is proof that "our judicial system works." Am I the only one who disagrees?

No, you are not the only one. To my thinking, common sense is not just permitted in our jury system, it is necessary for our justice system to work. That's why the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt-- i.e., a doubt that is based on reason-- and not the impossible beyond a shadow of a doubt.

[Russ_Boston]

If she had testified there was an accidental drowning and coverup, they may have still charged her with murder based on Child Endangerment (allowing the child to have access to a pool and drown in it, and a resulting death... good strategy by her lawyer to keep her off the stand.



Was this one of the charges against her? I didn't see that one. I thought it was only the 3 Felony charges (murder, manslaugher and aggrevated child abuse)? How could she be charged once the case was underway with another charge? I didn't think you could do that. Can you?

[Russ_Boston]

2. I would have considered just charging her with the 4 counts of lying to the officers TO BEGIN WITH.. they would have had a trial run on her defense and maybe have even gotten to cross examine her on the stand.. There is no statute of limitations on murder. She may have made more statements if she was not charged initially with murder. They could then go after her with the Murder charge without the death penalty. Lying about a crime is not a lesser included offense of murder and would not bar later prosecution for murder.
JJ

Good point but don't 99.99% of all misdemeanor charges just get pleaded out? There would not have been any trial for just these. She would have just shut up and taken the penalty for these misdemeanors which is normally just probation and a fine or very very little jail time.

Am I wrong?

[chuckinca]

It takes 12 of 12 jurors to find the defendant guilty; it also takes 12 of 12 jurors to find the defendant not guilty. Clearly, all the jurors believed that the state didn't prove her guilty.


.

[Pturner]

It takes 12 of 12 jurors to find the defendant guilty; it also takes 12 of 12 jurors to find the defendant not guilty. Clearly, all the jurors believed that the state didn't prove her guilty.


.

...and they took a lot of time reviewing and analyzing the evidence. :024:

[jackz]

...and they took a lot of time reviewing and analyzing the evidence. :024:

My take is that their mind was made up WITHOUT reviewing the evidence based on the amount of time they were out.

I recall being posted in The Netherlands when the OJ verdict came in and now being posted in Italy when the Casey verdict came in.

Both times the comments I hear from Non U.S. citizens in these countries is your jury system is BROKEN, I am afraid I have to agree.

[graciegirl]

My take is that their mind was made up WITHOUT reviewing the evidence based on the amount of time they were out.

I recall being posted in The Netherlands when the OJ verdict came in and now being posted in Italy when the Casey verdict came in.

Both times the comments I hear from Non U.S. citizens in these countries is your jury system is BROKEN, I am afraid I have to agree.

I think it is broken too.

I understand when Penn and Tweety and others say that the case had to be proven with hard facts but circumstantial cases have won before too.

[Russ_Boston]

circumstantial cases have won before too.

yes but most of the time they could answer at least one of these things with hard scientific evidence:

HOW did the person die?
WHEN did the person die?
WHAT was the exact method used to kill?
evidence to point to EXACTLY who did it.

Looking back at this case I don't think either was convincingly proved.

Do I think she did it? Heck yes. I can only hope that the justice system works as well for me or someone I know if we are improperly accused.

[PennBF]

Our system is not "broken". It is the best in the world and every American
should be proud of our system. I have traveled in Europe , etc quite a bit and I am proud of our country. I am disgusted with anyone
who falls prey to those who would like to run our country down.:BigApplause:

[JenAjd]

This was a post on someone's Facebook and I thought it was an excellant way to look at this whole thing. We all can have an opinion of course, but ultimately it is the jury who decides. I agree our system is THE best in the world. There certainly are exceptions where it
************************************************** ***

"I read this on a friends status- with thought I would have to agree----I wasn't in the courtroom to hear what the jurors heard only what the media cares to share with us. Jurors can only vote guilty if they have NO doubt. I don't know this mom personally, I don't know anything about her life growing up before this all happened...I will not judge...only God knows the truth."

[billmar]

This was a post on someone's Facebook and I thought it was an excellant way to look at this whole thing. We all can have an opinion of course, but ultimately it is the jury who decides. I agree our system is THE best in the world. There certainly are exceptions where it
************************************************** ***

"I read this on a friends status- with thought I would have to agree----I wasn't in the courtroom to hear what the jurors heard only what the media cares to share with us. Jurors can only vote guilty if they have NO doubt. I don't know this mom personally, I don't know anything about her life growing up before this all happened...I will not judge...only God knows the truth."

I think it's beyond a reasonable doubt.

[bkcunningham1]

I think that is where the jurors may have been confused too Jen. The law does NOT say the jurors must have no doubt. I think someone else tried to point out on another thread how television crime and television court dramas have given people misconceptions about reality and our real criminal justice system.

I personally know people who have been abused physically, sexually, mentally, verbally and every combination you can put together. They wouldn't kill anyone. Killing your child because you were abused as a child is a terrible defense in my opinion; but apparently in this crazy world we live in, it works.

It is sad to me to think that Casey Anthony may end up serving less time for killing her own child than Michael Vick spent for fighting and killing dogs. Our values are really perverted.

[graciegirl]

Our system is not "broken". It is the best in the world and every American
should be proud of our system. I have traveled in Europe , etc quite a bit and I am proud of our country. I am disgusted with anyone
who falls prey to those who would like to run our country down.:BigApplause:

Oh stop. Anyone who knows me, knows that it was not my intent to run our country down.chilout

This is a place where people can vent. You do.

[CaliforniaGirl]

Our system is not "broken". It is the best in the world and every American
should be proud of our system. I have traveled in Europe , etc quite a bit and I am proud of our country. I am disgusted with anyone
who falls prey to those who would like to run our country down.:BigApplause:

PennBF, anyone who questions systems and procedures that may or may not work as intended are not "running our country down." You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to question the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with you.

If no one ever questioned our systems or ways of life, we would still have slavery, women would not be allowed to vote...

[jackz]

Our system is not "broken". It is the best in the world and every American
should be proud of our system. I have traveled in Europe , etc quite a bit and I am proud of our country. I am disgusted with anyone
who falls prey to those who would like to run our country down.:BigApplause:

Not sure if your comment was directed at me or at Gracie. Seems Gracie has answered you very well. As for me, I am happy you have traveled in Europe and have had the opportunity to experience life outside the USA but being a career U.S. Government Employee who is very proud of our country and having had the opportunity to represent our country abroad in 3different European Countries as well as one Asian country, I am only stating the fact of the perception of our judicial system by others based on the OJ and Casey fiascos.

I did not and do not take their comments as trying to "run our country down" but respect their opinions based on the two cases I cited.

So direct your disgust elsewhere. I will not add a "big applause" icon to this message as I don't need self gratification for providing my thoughts.

[CMANN]

No system of justice is perfect. I happen to think that ours is the greatest. Some do not.

Which would you prefer, an imperfect system that occasionally allows a criminal to escape justice or would you prefer a system that occasionally kills the innocent?

I think you know which one I would pick.

[CaliforniaGirl]

No system of justice is perfect. I happen to think that ours is the greatest. Some do not.

Which would you prefer, an imperfect system that occasionally allows a criminal to escape justice or would you prefer a system that occasionally kills the innocent?

I think you know which one I would pick.

Unfortunately, ours has been proven to do both.

[RichieLion]

No, you are not the only one. To my thinking, common sense is not just permitted in our jury system, it is necessary for our justice system to work. That's why the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt-- i.e., a doubt that is based on reason-- and not the impossible beyond a shadow of a doubt.

:BigApplause: Succinct and to the point. "Reasonable doubt" has been transformed to mean "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" in too many people's heads by the improbable and impossible scientific reclamation of hard proof with only the extreme scarcest of physical evidence in all of these years of "CSI" programs. People think these fantasies must happen in real life now.

All the evidence and facts surrounding this case only connect to one person and one person only. That person will be free to walk among you very soon.

[CaliforniaGirl]

All the evidence and facts surrounding this case only connect to one person and one person only. That person will be free to walk among you very soon.

Jose Baez, Dorothy Simms, Cheney Mason, Linda Kinney Baden all swear that Casey did not kill Caylee. They say they know this for a fact. How do they know this?

Because a narcissistic, sociopathic compulsive liar told them so, of course.

[katezbox]

:BigApplause: Succinct and to the point. "Reasonable doubt" has been transformed to mean "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" in too many people's heads by the improbable and impossible scientific reclamation of hard proof with only the extreme scarcest of physical evidence in all of these years of "CSI" programs. People think these fantasies must happen in real life now.

All the evidence and facts surrounding this case only connect to one person and one person only. That person will be free to walk among you very soon.

Richie - I agree with your assessment of the effect of too much CSI etc. on juries and its affect on what constitutes "reasonable doubt." I made a similar post in one of these many Casey threads.

However, I do not think that the prosecution's case was compelling enough for capital murder. Personally, i have always thought she involved - but that the prosecutors did not connect the dots enough for me...

[RichieLion]

Richie - I agree with your assessment of the effect of too much CSI etc. on juries and its affect on what constitutes "reasonable doubt." I made a similar post in one of these many Casey threads.

However, I do not think that the prosecution's case was compelling enough for capital murder. Personally, i have always thought she involved - but that the prosecutors did not connect the dots enough for me...

She admittedly did not call the police for 31 Days, and instead went clubbing and having a ball and getting tattoos to commemorate her new and beautiful life. That should be classified aggravated child abuse right there.

Plenty of dots enough for me.

[Freeda]

[QUOTE=RichieLion;368569
Plenty of dots enough for me.[/QUOTE]

For me too, and they were all connected to each other, and the only person they all connected to was Casey. I wonder if all the science presented actually sort of backfired by contributing to an even higher standard of proof than 'reasonable doubt', subconsciously, in the minds of the jury. To me the most compelling evidence was the nonexpert evidence.

[katezbox]

For me too, and they were all connected to each other, and the only person they all connected to was Casey. I wonder if all the science presented actually sort of backfired by contributing to an even higher standard of proof than 'reasonable doubt', subconsciously, in the minds of the jury. To me the most compelling evidence was the nonexpert evidence.

I hear what you both are saying - and maybe I am just slow, but when you have no time of death, place of death, cause of death - you need to be sure your story hangs together. Keep in mind, I won't listen to Nancy Grace, so I may be (like the jury) missing information you are both aware of.

As a non-attorney, I don't know what is child abuse as defined by law in Florida....

[Russ_Boston]

I hear what you both are saying - and maybe I am just slow, but when you have no time of death, place of death, cause of death - you need to be sure your story hangs together. Keep in mind, I won't listen to Nancy Grace, so I may be (like the jury) missing information you are both aware of.

As a non-attorney, I don't know what is child abuse as defined by law in Florida....

As the Florida AG said: "this was a dry bones case, and they are tough to prove".

In many ways this was the opposite of the OJ case. That case had much more valid scientific evidence due to the blood etc.. The problem there was a good case by the defense which had their own contradictory science.

[graciegirl]

As the Florida AG said: "this was a dry bones case, and they are tough to prove".

In many ways this was the opposite of the OJ case. That case had much more valid scientific evidence due to the blood etc.. The problem there was a good case by the defense which had their own contradictory science.

I personally thought that the Dr. of Traumatology was a bust...but if you say it was a good case..I could NEVER EVER contradict you!:D

Just teasin' a little and Just my opinion as a nice fella always says............

[Russ_Boston]

I did call in contradictory:)

[JimJoe]

As the Florida AG said: "this was a dry bones case, and they are tough to prove".

In many ways this was the opposite of the OJ case. That case had much more valid scientific evidence due to the blood etc.. The problem there was a good case by the defense which had their own contradictory science.

Wow.. If the Prosecution now admits it was a tough case to prove, why the heck did they charge it as a death penalty case? NO ONE should be in favor of pursuing the death penalty in cases where it is tough to prove what happened or who did it. NEVER!! WE do not want to kill innocent people.
AND THAT IS WHY this jury found her not guilty.. the Prosecution FORCED Them to say if they convicted her, they could recommend the death penalty... and no reasonable person could sleep at night putting her to death on this crappy case.
This is why there have been HUNDREDS of people PROVEN INNOCENT to have been falsely convicted of MURDER and other serious crimes.. some facing the death penalty. Go to the Innocence project if you think I am kidding.
JJ

[jblum315]

In the OJ case, the problem was that the police screwed up the investigation and contaminated the evidence 6 ways from Sunday. In this case there was very little evidence, no investigation until the child had been dead for months, and what evidence there was nobody knew what to believe about it.

[Russ_Boston]

In the OJ case, the problem was that the police screwed up the investigation and contaminated the evidence 6 ways from Sunday. In this case there was very little evidence, no investigation until the child had been dead for months, and what evidence there was nobody knew what to believe about it.

Thanks - that's what I was trying to say.

[RichieLion]

In the OJ case, the problem was that the police screwed up the investigation and contaminated the evidence 6 ways from Sunday. In this case there was very little evidence, no investigation until the child had been dead for months, and what evidence there was nobody knew what to believe about it.

There was enough for at least a manslaughter conviction, if you were too squeamish for Murder 1. At least two FBI experts testified that there was indeed chloroform in the trunk of Casey's car. In addition, found in the trunk of the car was a hair that FBI experts say could only have come from a decomposing body and matched the hairs found with the skull of Caylee Marie Anthony in the swamp near the Anthony home. DNA analysis of the hair from the trunk showed that the hair could only have come from an Anthony family maternal source. Cindy Anthony, Cindy's mother and Casey Anthony all have treated hair and this 9 inch long hair was untreated. Jeff's hair was much too short to have supplied this hair. This proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee Marie Anthony's body was decomposing in the trunk of her mother's car.

Taped phone calls from Casey to her parents while she was in prison prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they knew nothing about the fate of their beloved granddaughter and were begging Casey to cooperate with the police. Casey's later alibi stories of "accidental death" proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she indeed knew what happened and when.

All that should prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she had culpability in the death of her daughter, and a manslaughter conviction coupled with aggravated child abuse should have easily been decided by any reasonable thinking jury.