Any Thoughts on Casey Anthony

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]zahmad wrote:
People are mad at the jury when they upheld the law by following the instructions they were given on determination of guilt. If you are mad then your anger shouldn’t be aimed at the jury but rather the legal system and/or overreaching prosecutors. [/quote]

There was more than enough evidence to find her guilty of aggravated manslaughter and aggravated child abuse. I hold the jury responsible for that. I would listen to the stream at work and heard most of the case. The evidence was over whelming. For the manslaughter all that had to be proved is that the child was under her care and the child incurred grievous harm resulting in death. That was more than evident. For the child abuse, the child incurred grievous harm and said care taker gave no assistance. That was proven way beyond the shadow of a doubt.

From the jurors I heard from, I get the sense there was something of a bully contingent on the jury who basically said if you want to go home, you vote with us… Not proven, just the sense from what I read from the juror’s statements. Juror number 2 said he thinks she’s guilty, but could not convict her on ‘think’, as for the other 2 charges he said there was a huge fight in the jury room.

In other words, you are right it’s the system that failed over all, but I do hold the jury at fault fr the other two charges… To say she did nothing is plain ignorant.

122

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
As a lawyer, couple observations:

  1. The alternate jurors came to the same decision. This says a lot. They were there 24/7, unlike us who got the news through CNN talking heads with agendas. So I am not hard on this jury. I may disagree, but I was not there.

  2. The most likely scenario was mother was stoned/asleep/whatever, the kid got to the pool somehow and drowned, then the mother panicked and tried to cover up, thiking (correctly) that the local prosecutor would try to pin her with murder for simple negligence. The State screwed up by over-charging her with 1st Degree Murder.

  3. The State put on a bunch of liars as witnesses. This discredited all the ones who told the truth.

  4. All the mother’s weird behavior is classic innappropriate affect — she’s mourning the loss of her child, unable to tell anyone, and has no religious or spiritual upbringing. The most typical reactions to such a stress are: (A) going on a drunk/drug/party bender or (B) suicide. [/quote]

I agree on all except #4, to a degree. What type of law do you practice, Jew?

123

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’ll waste my time worrying about this irrelevant cunt after they throw the criminals who bankrupted this country and destroyed the economy in the slammer. Who cares about this shit? It’s a shame that the kid is dead. Nothing will bring her back, like Lifticus said. But really, in the grand scheme of things this verdict has absolutely ZERO impact on anything remotely related to my life. [/quote]

LOL! This trial was like porn for women! They cannot get enough. Even now that it is over.

124

[quote]garcia1970 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I’ll waste my time worrying about this irrelevant cunt after they throw the criminals who bankrupted this country and destroyed the economy in the slammer. Who cares about this shit? It’s a shame that the kid is dead. Nothing will bring her back, like Lifticus said. But really, in the grand scheme of things this verdict has absolutely ZERO impact on anything remotely related to my life. [/quote]

LOL! This trial was like porn for women! They cannot get enough. Even now that it is over.[/quote]

It was like porn for me too (head down in shame). I got sucked in to the vortex.

125

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]DeterminedNate wrote:
Fuck your semantics. Fuck your interpretation of the semantics. Fuck your disregard for common sense, in favor of semantics. And fuck you hiding behind the semantic equivalent of jerking off: “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Fuck using semantics to undermine what was the original intent of the US Court system, which is TO SERVE JUSTICE. I don’t give a fuck what they taught you in law school.

A dead child was found in a fucking SWAMP, like she was a goddamned piece of trash. Like a fucking empty Gatorade bottle with the label ripped off.

CHLOROFORM was Google searched.

HOW TO BREAK A NECK was Google searched.

A missing child went unreported for 31 days, and YOU CLAIM COPING MECHANISMS.

Fuck anybody who thinks that justice was served with Casey Anthony’s nonsensical not guilty verdict. A verdict that was totally and completely DEVOID of any type of common sense or rationale. The jury consultant did a phenomenal job picking a bunch of spineless sheep to sit on that bench.

The jury decided a verdict on the .000000000000000000001% chance that the stars aligned, 10 coincidences occurred, and that maybe, just maybe, people deal with death through partying, when they’re not lying their ass off and Google searching “chloroform” (84 times) purely out of intellectual curiosity. Gimme a fucking break.

And to all you legal hot shots and big-dicked mother fuckers: I welcome your criticism. Keep hiding behind that beyond a reasonable doubt steaming pile of horseshit. Use your damned head that you are so exalted for and realize what happened.

Last thing, as far as Jose Baez is concerned, good on him, guy did one HELLUVA sales job. He should get into selling medical equipment; I hear they make a KILLING. [/quote]

Emotional and rash judgment written all over this post. I hear those are feminine qualities.[/quote]

Interesting response, with some truth to it. But, is anger not an emotional response? And is anger not a primarily male-centric emotion? Or at least one that can be more easily expressed by males? I disagree that expressing one’s opinion (however emotional the tone) is a female quality.

But hey man, keep on going around acting like you know something that the rest of us don’t.

126

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. ALWAYS.

The prosecution did not have a case so they should have waited until better evidence comes to light.

And let’s not forget that prosecutors do not care about justice. They care about convictions regardless of guilt.

So let’s just call this a WIN for freedom and be done with it.[/quote]

A broken justice system is a LOSS for freedom. If a system cannot protect the most basic rights of it’s citizens, freedom is jeopardized. If you define freedom by murderers getting away with it, then shut down all the prisons and let them all run free. Then the rest of us will get to live ‘in prison’. [/quote]

Justice was served. A person’s rights were not violated. In this case it is the defendant’s rights that matter here. Not the murder victim’s.[/quote]

So you believe she was innocent? Then who killed her? The case IS about the victim, not the defendant. Just because the rules were followed doesn’t mean justice was served, it means the system fucked up and it needs to be fixed to prevent another murderer from getting away with it.
If it is justice that murderers get away with murder then we need not bother with a justice system at all.
[/quote]

And how would you fix the system?

127

[quote]doogie wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

…oh yeah, I forgot we don’t need intent, motive, and opportunity. We just need to know that specific fact and that proves it all.[/quote]

Are you being serious or just picking internet fights?

Intent–there was fucking duct tape on the kids mouth and nose.

Motive–to continue the party lifestyle she wanted with her boyfriend

opportunity-- she was alone with the kid all day.[/quote]

Exactly.

128

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
it’s obvious she did it… the 31 days she waited while getting a tattoo, partying, lying to police, the duct tape and trash bags (indicating a homicide).

however, simply put, this is not enough to convict someone of first degree murder. I assumed the jury was going to vote not guilty.[/quote]

First degree is hard to prove. Manslaughter or second degree is more likely.

129

[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
As a lawyer, couple observations:

  1. The alternate jurors came to the same decision. This says a lot. They were there 24/7, unlike us who got the news through CNN talking heads with agendas. So I am not hard on this jury. I may disagree, but I was not there.
    … [/quote]

I saw an interview with an insane alternate juror. He was under the bizarre impression that it was proven that the little girl drowned.

130

Question about this case: What the hell was the deal with the mom searching for chloroform? If she did it, why did she wait 2 years to say this as testimony? Didn’t the cops search the computer years ago? Wasn’t this all over the press? If the mom did the search and not CA, why didn’t she say something to the cops while they were doing their investigation? Do you think the mom committed perjury?

131

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question about this case: What the hell was the deal with the mom searching for chloroform? If she did it, why did she wait 2 years to say this as testimony? Didn’t the cops search the computer years ago? Wasn’t this all over the press? If the mom did the search and not CA, why didn’t she say something to the cops while they were doing their investigation? Do you think the mom committed perjury?[/quote]

She did commit perjury. Her employer testified she was at work when the searches were made. They are considering charges against her.

132

[quote]pat wrote:
So you believe she was innocent? Then who killed her? The case IS about the victim, not the defendant. Just because the rules were followed doesn’t mean justice was served, it means the system fucked up and it needs to be fixed to prevent another murderer from getting away with it.
If it is justice that murderers get away with murder then we need not bother with a justice system at all.
[/quote]

I don’t know anything about the case except she was accused of murdering her child.

I don’t care, really.

I just think it is silly you people get so emotional like little girls over one child when people are murdered out in the open by cops every day where justice is treated like a joke.

133

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

For all of you bible-thumpers out there that believe in divine justice why do you care if a murderer escapes conviction since by your own beliefs he will eventually be brought to “eternal” justice?[/quote]

LOL…For someone who claims to have read the Bible you sure are ignorant on the topic.[/quote]

That was me, dude.

I don’t care what’s written in the bible, koran, or whatever. If someone says they believe in some sort of eternal justice then terrestrial justice is of little significance. That’s all I am saying.
[/quote]

Sounds like you believe in a relative justice. What is justice in this case?

You said her going free is justice, so what does justice mean if letting murderers get away with it is justice.

So, say, if I broke in to your house, killed your whole family and sodomized their skulls, but a jury of my peers found me not guilty, according to you own logic, that would be just.[/quote]

How could there be justice done in this case? I would be dead. My whole family would be dead.

If you were the one that was suspected of the crime justice can only be done by due process of your rights but no justice will ever come about for me or my family one way or the other regardless of the jury’s decision.

134

[quote]doogie wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Question about this case: What the hell was the deal with the mom searching for chloroform? If she did it, why did she wait 2 years to say this as testimony? Didn’t the cops search the computer years ago? Wasn’t this all over the press? If the mom did the search and not CA, why didn’t she say something to the cops while they were doing their investigation? Do you think the mom committed perjury?[/quote]

She did commit perjury. Her employer testified she was at work when the searches were made. They are considering charges against her.[/quote]

Thanks for the info…sounds like the whole family’s insane !

135

I did some reading on this case last night as I generally don’t follow high profile cases. I think you’re right that there was enough for manslaughter. The big question mark is the whole computer search for choloroform. The evidence showed that SOMEONE in that household did the search but the prosecution could not prove it was Casey. The mother lied about it, and I don’t buy her story - if she was worried that her dogs were eating plants you search “dog eats plant” not “chlorophyll” and then accidentally hit the search results for “chloroform.” My theory of the case, based on what little I know and pure speculation, was that Casey’s father, George, did it. He was sexually molesting Caylee, and when Caylee became old enough to speak, he realized she would tell on him, so he killed her. He then told Casey that he killed her, but also told her that if she turned him in he would throw her under the bus and tell the cops that she was the one who did it. So she kept her mouth shut, and partied and acted like nothing happened. That’s just as likely as anything. However, if that’s the case, then Casey is part of a conspiracy, among other things.

This was an emotionally-charged high profile case. When a little kid dies, everyone thinks that someone needs to go to jail for, and don’t really care who. Someone in that house killed that little girl - the evidence simply couldn’t establish who.

What pisses me off about high profile cases is that if the result is not what people expected then suddenly the entire system is fucked up. Wrong. We need to look at the big picture here - there are thousands of criminal cases filed every year that are handled correctly. Overall, the system works well. Once in a while you’re going to get a difficult case like this. But you don’t go changing a system that works well overall just because of ONE bad emotionally-charged case. And if the system is going to make an error I’d rather see a guilty person go free than an innocent person go to jail. But what the hell do I know - I’m just a dumb tax attorney.

136

My take is this:

the father was the one who said the trunk of Casey’s car smelled like death. He knew what a dead body smelled like because he was once a police officer and possibly smelled a dead body before.

I feel that Casey did it. She probably felt like she didn’t have a chance in hell. Since she was going to lose and be sentenced to death anyway, she made up a story about her dad molesting her as a big FU to him since he turned her car over to the cops.

137

[quote]DeterminedNate wrote:
Interesting response, with some truth to it. But, is anger not an emotional response? And is anger not a primarily male-centric emotion? Or at least one that can be more easily expressed by males? I disagree that expressing one’s opinion (however emotional the tone) is a female quality.

But hey man, keep on going around acting like you know something that the rest of us don’t. [/quote]

I think you mistake anger for righteous indignation. Righteous indignation is anger, but anger is not always righteous indignation. I think it behooves you to learn the difference.

You are angry at people because they are following the logical foundation of this country’s legal system. The judicial system was set up to bring justice, but was also orientated to protect the innocent.

I would propose that this is because of America’s English and German Christian roots in which eternal justice was a factor.

138

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
What pisses me off about high profile cases is that if the result is not what people expected then suddenly the entire system is fucked up. Wrong. We need to look at the big picture here - there are thousands of criminal cases filed every year that are handled correctly. Overall, the system works well. Once in a while you’re going to get a difficult case like this. But you don’t go changing a system that works well overall just because of ONE bad emotionally-charged case. And if the system is going to make an error I’d rather see a guilty person go free than an innocent person go to jail. But what the hell do I know - I’m just a dumb tax attorney.[/quote]

You do realize that people are going to throw a fit at your display of reasoned thought.

Very well said.

139

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
I did some reading on this case last night as I generally don’t follow high profile cases. I think you’re right that there was enough for manslaughter. The big question mark is the whole computer search for choloroform. The evidence showed that SOMEONE in that household did the search but the prosecution could not prove it was Casey. The mother lied about it, and I don’t buy her story - if she was worried that her dogs were eating plants you search “dog eats plant” not “chlorophyll” and then accidentally hit the search results for “chloroform.” My theory of the case, based on what little I know and pure speculation, was that Casey’s father, George, did it. He was sexually molesting Caylee, and when Caylee became old enough to speak, he realized she would tell on him, so he killed her. He then told Casey that he killed her, but also told her that if she turned him in he would throw her under the bus and tell the cops that she was the one who did it. So she kept her mouth shut, and partied and acted like nothing happened. That’s just as likely as anything. However, if that’s the case, then Casey is part of a conspiracy, among other things.

This was an emotionally-charged high profile case. When a little kid dies, everyone thinks that someone needs to go to jail for, and don’t really care who. Someone in that house killed that little girl - the evidence simply couldn’t establish who.

What pisses me off about high profile cases is that if the result is not what people expected then suddenly the entire system is fucked up. Wrong. We need to look at the big picture here - there are thousands of criminal cases filed every year that are handled correctly. Overall, the system works well. Once in a while you’re going to get a difficult case like this. But you don’t go changing a system that works well overall just because of ONE bad emotionally-charged case. And if the system is going to make an error I’d rather see a guilty person go free than an innocent person go to jail. But what the hell do I know - I’m just a dumb tax attorney.[/quote]

No offense Mike, but I hope your accounting skills are better than your critical thinking skills.

This system let my former roommate who got away with nearly $100 million and served less than 4 yrs in Federal prison with me.

LULZ @ thinking the “system works well most of the time.”

Just imagine all those Wall Street goons who walked away with your money, then cried boo and the government gave them more !

It’s no wonder these people are laughing at you, laughing at the weakness in the country. Iceland indicted it’s prime minister for direct involvement in reckless bank lending. Time we become Iceland.

140

LOL @ internet lawyers…