Casey Anthony Verdict. How Would YOU Have Voted?

[AU24K]

After time has passed concerning the Murder trial of Casey Anthony, if YOU were on the jury, how would you have voted?
Granted, no one on this forum(?) has access to the evidence and deliberations of the jury available, what is your take on the "not guilty" verdict?

I find it hard to believe that no one thought that she was in at least a small part responsible for Kaylee's death.
So, is the American justice system flawed? (Think of O. J.)
How can it be improved? CAN it be improved? How?
What role does the liberal thinking folks play in shaping the justice system? Or does it?

And, based on media reports, how would you have voted if you were on the jury? Why? What would have been the influence for your vote?

Me? The woman was guilty of at least obstruction if not manslaughter....What parent would show such callousness towards their own innocent child?

And your opinion?

Best,
Scott

[Felinepeachy]

I don't get it. There was more circumstantial evidence against her than there was against Scott Peterson. She gets off and he got the death penalty. I think laws are sexist against men in general. I mean, look how many women are actually child molesters, but so few do time for it compared to men. Look how many men go to jail for spousal abuse compared to women when women beat on men all the time. Look how many men go to jail for non payment of child support yet so many women do not pay and nothing happens to them. It's just wrong. I can't stand that women are always saying they want equal rights but they don't want equal responsibility.

SHE IS GUILTY!! She knows it, her attorneys know it, her family knows it, WE ALL KNOW IT!

[Frankn]

Here's how I look at it. Based on the liberal press, I would say she was guilty, BUT having a highly technical background, I would say there was a lot of unproven technology presented . One cop said that he could smell death in the trunk. I can smell death when I go in a nursing home, but it is not death, but the dying that I smell. The evaluation of the grave site was a commedy of errors. Death in the trunk based on one hair was a joke. When you convict someone of murder it has to be without a shadow of a doubt. When the DA pushed for first degree murder , he was writting his own defeat. Frank



Sorry, looks like spellcheck is dead again!

[jeff of pa]

If they would have charged her father
they would have got the real Killer

[AU24K]

Here's how I look at it. Based on the liberal press, I would say she was guilty, BUT having a highly technical background, I would say there was a lot of unproven technology presented . One cop said that he could smell death in the trunk. I can smell death when I go in a nursing home, but it is not death, but the dying that I smell. The evaluation of the grave site was a commedy of errors. Death in the trunk based on one hair was a joke. When you convict someone of murder it has to be without a shadow of a doubt. When the DA pushed for first degree murder , he was writting his own defeat. Frank



Sorry, looks like spellcheck is dead again!

Frank,
What is your technical background?

Best,
Scott

[stefen]

and OJ is a saint!

[AU24K]

I don't get it. There was more circumstantial evidence against her than there was against Scott Peterson. She gets off and he got the death penalty. I think laws are sexist against men in general. I mean, look how many women are actually child molesters, but so few do time for it compared to men. Look how many men go to jail for spousal abuse compared to women when women beat on men all the time. Look how many men go to jail for non payment of child support yet so many women do not pay and nothing happens to them. It's just wrong. I can't stand that women are always saying they want equal rights but they don't want equal responsibility.

SHE IS GUILTY!! She knows it, her attorneys know it, her family knows it, WE ALL KNOW IT!

I agree that law enforcement is archaic towards gender in that subject.
I was arrested for DV years ago when it was obvious that I was the victim; law enforcement photos would prove my assertion. Blood running down my face....
Now it is up to me to prove my innocence.

Best,
Scott

[DigginThePast]

"Casey Anthony Verdict. How Would YOU Have Voted?"

Its hard for me to answer the question not having (presumably) the same evidence presented to the jurors. I couldn't conclude, in court, beyond a reasonable doubt with what I know. I can say that I've been in the minority so far as my opinion. Most folks I know have consistently said she is guilty and the jury got it wrong. I just can't condemn the jury.

My opinion based off media reports? She is at least guilty of obstruction of justice if not guilty of murder.

I can envision a scenario where Casey's parents where in charge of Caylee when she died (accidentally or not). They then manipulated Casey into hiding the body etc. Finally they convinced Casey that she would never be convicted without the proper evidence. The only rub to this theory is that Casey just didn't appear to give a damn, but that seems to be consistent throughout Caylee's short life.

[bigscoop]

In light of the "alleged" evidence they presented, I can't imagine how the prosecution thought they were going to get a guilty verdict? Their decision to go into court with nothing more then they had really surprised me. "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" and I don't understand how they thought they had near enough to close the door on this one. I'm guessing this got pushed to court sooner then the prosecution wanted because clearly they had to know they didn't have enough. I don't think Casey even needed a good lawyer to escape the verdict. Just a really poor display & performance on the prosecution's part.

[piegrande]

Guilty as sin. There is no other reasonable explanation for her behavior after the baby clearly disappeared except that she did it. And, that by definition gives proof beyond a reasonable doubt.That is why they convicted Scott, there was no other reasonable explanation for his conduct after his wife disappeared except that he did it.

Having some information on how juries work, I suspect there was an influential juror who bleated over and over, "Where's the beef?" until they all contradicted their admitted belief she did it, and said, "Um, okay, no video; no witnesses, so we can't convict her though we think she did it." And, one juror said they were all sick because they believed she did it, but the proof wasn't there. The proof was there. Her conduct that could only be consistent with her guilt, as it was for Scott.

[ivan salis]

did she do it -- I would say most likely yep she did .

if as she says --her dad & brother molested her ( both were not favorible witness's to her case) so she punished them by smearing them with sex charges both to get the jury to dislike them and distrust them and have pity upon her --poor thing*) -- but if it occured as she says --then why once she was "of age" did she stay in that home? and once she had a child no good mother would have stayed in a home where by what she says " she knew" there waas without a doubt "molesters" present .--- to knowly expose your child to 100% known "molesters" isn't that "child abuse?" --makes no sense to me -- a person that was molested would never leave their child in such a situation unless they simply did not care what happened to said child. (un fit / uncaring parent)

I see it as casey being a person who just as soon not having "the snot nosed brat" hanging around , screwing up her "fun and partying" --however the child was her "meal ticket" with caseys mom and dad -- being able to be hit up on to "provide" and casey living off their goodwill due to the kid a lot of crap that casey did was forgiven and forgotten , covered up and paid off for.

I think caseys folks wanted casey to grow up and fly right --but to casey being the "single mom" AND BEING a do right type -go to work and grind it out as a "single mom" was like a death sentance ( BORING) - I THINK SHE WAS DRUGGING THE KID TO FREE HERSELF UP SO SHE COULD HAVE SEX (maybe for money , maybe for fun , who knows ?) and the kid ODed -- in the car * ithink at first she was going to put the kid in the pool and try the "oh my my baby got into the pool and drown bit -- but got cold feet and buried her near the pool --then she dug her up and moved her to the pet burail area -where the body was later found at.

the state screwed the pooch 3 ways to sunday in this case --the evidence collection was poor and the state went for murder 1 - and thus "overcharged" for the proof they had ---

[mikeofaustin]

Simple fact is, they overcharged. They charged her with murder. They could not prove it. what they should have charged her with was manslaughter or something else. This would have stuck.

[bigscoop]

Problem is this, "They failed to connect her, in any way, to the death of her daughter." Did she lie? Yes. Did she have a history of deceit and deception? Yes. These are things they could prove, so these are things she was/is guilty of. But they couldn't "prove" she had anything to do with the death of her daughter. The law says you cannot convict someone on circumstantial evidence alone, and sadly, that's all the prosecution had, along with some creative suggestions of what they thought "may have" happened based on that circumstantial evidence. They should have waited, set her free, let her "live out loud" for a while until more credible evidence was collected. The prosecution understood the obligations charged to them and Ivan is correct, the prosecution botched it pretty badly.

As for things that should have been done differently, 1) no more cameras in the court room, unless the media is willing to foot the bill for all the added fallout of their being there. Taxpayers should not have to cover the extra security and other cost that comes from all this sensationalized pressed coverage. Reporting a story is one thing, turning it into a national spectacle is something quite different. 2) No more profiteering from jury duty. When you leave the door open to this sort of thing you leave the door open for alternative thinking and purpose. Jurors need to remain focussed on their sworn duty, not on how they can utilize that duty to make big bucks. It's not a lottery slection, but it is quickly being allowed to become one. Just my two cents.

[KEYSHUNTER]

well,she is now back in florida to face probation

[AU24K]

She and O.J. should collaborate on a book. The title would be: "I Fought The Law and I Won."
Do I get any royalties for the suggestion? Oh, and movie rights! "Made for T. V."
You just wait...
It will all soon be a reality! Doubt me? Pony up a bet....
[center]



Best,
Scott

PS. this version is "The Bobby Fuller Four." It was performed originally by "The Crickets" in 1959, 3 months after Buddy Holly died.

[FarmerChick]

the jury said not guilty and they had access to all documents etc

what is there to guess about at this time?

don't bother...it is over and move forward because any and all court cases you 'watch' and the verdict is not what 'you' want will drive ya nuts

why waste your time with 'what could be different' unless you are in the legal system and analyzing it etc. to further justice or career etc?

[FarmerChick]

I thank God everyday "HERESAY" is not allowed in court.

facts are what makes a case simple as that


cause if EVER for any REASON one of us is in court.....heresay could easily send you away when not guilty------heresay is just that, useless info.

what people say, or might be overheard, or lying about......show me the facts and then you have a case

[FarmerChick]

yea, now we are 'using' Dr. Phil to get to the truth


my gosh stop the insanity please

[FarmerChick]

well I sure can say I lump Dr. Phil right therre wtih Jerry Springer


the case is over
jury has decided

to drag on further is an obsession of insanity in my book
unless you are related personally to this case, it is over.

[FarmerChick]

well that would be all well and fine

if they do, good
if they don't, good

not my problem at this point

'if someone' wants to go after her, so be it.

I am not wasting my time over this anymore