Skip to comments.Why Casey Anthony Was Acquitted (Key Word: JURY)
Posted on 07/10/2011 5:51:14 PM PDT by truthkeeper
A good read... ...but if you don't want to, DON'T.
I’m sick of hearing about her. My wife had this on the TV 20 hours a day. Unfortunately, she couldn’t get out of bed because she broke her foot. So that’s all she had to do.
Thanks for posting, TK...excellent article. I had Judge Torres once when I did jury duty...he was great.
Then why did you stop by? ;)
...and if the police had chosen to go into the swamp six months earlier they would have found her little body in a lot better shape...in my mind the police are the ones who screwed up
Sadly, the way Voire dire operates, anyone who is intelligent, can make cognitive arguments, and has strong opinons about anything usually gets sent home.
I never get to serve. I was even blackballed by the US District court after one voire dire where after about 4 questions I had most of the jury pool agreeing with me and against the public defender.
And its a shame, because I wouldn’t mind serving but I just won’t lie to get on a jury.
Thanks for the article. I’m slowly going through all the depositions from her friends and I find it scary that there are people like this in this country, that there are young people so naiive as to get mixed up with this: they think drugs are nothing; they party like libertines; they shack up with anybody at the drop of a hat. They have no defense against being victimized by a sociopath like Casey. They allow Casey and others to drift in and out of their residences, use their cars, steal their checkbooks, etc.
I don’t think any of my kids were so stupid when their were in college, or just starting out. Now I worry about my grandchildren.
Of course, then there is Cindy who certainly has problems of her own.
On the bright side, at least now Mississippi can say: "Hey, at least we ain't Floriduh".
We have a systemic problem in the United States in that one trial can not be used to assign guilt of a crime of premeditation, or guilt of a crime of passion or opportunity all at one go.
That idiocy does not lie upon the jury, and those utter Rosey O'Donnell pie holes reading this who have been bloviating about how stupid the jury is need to take a closer look: You've been shouting into a mirror.
All in all there is a fine line between wrongful and rightfull convictions. If you get my drift.
Was the prosecution not allowed to take part in jury selection?
Before I read this article; that is exactly what I was thinking? How were they able to get hold of this jury? The lawyers know a lot about you before you are assigned.
Gosh, the FBI can tell a foreigner ver here they know what they were doing at age 5 in their own country almost on a particular day.
Even the defense team knows Casey is very dangerous and very guilty.
Those who want to say “see how the system worked”, I would agree that the process was followed, but the system is only as good as the quality of the people on the jury and the behavior of the attorneys.
To actually put a person on a jury who says “I don’t like judging people” is about the most ignorant thing you could do.
I just can’t believe these jurors looked at Casey’’s history?
Nobody who has difficulty judging others should be allowed on the jury. It was the OJ jury again. I listened to a Jennifer Ford on TV for a few moment and she sound stupid. At best, it was a stupid jury incapable of putting together the dots.
Gee, I listened to Mark Levin right after the verdict.
He is a lawyer, and pretty sharp minded conservative one, at that.
He said on the air, he did NOT believe the PROSECUTION proved the case, beyond a reasonable doubt.
He said they showed the mother was an awful, despicable human, and that the child was dead.
But he said they failed to prove the child was murdered, or that the mother was the murderer.
Apparently to Levin, the jury got it right, not wrong.
Yes, I know. First of all, I watched the trial. Unless I am mistaken, I believe Mark said he did not watch the trial but only read updates. I disagree with him.
If you recall, the jury also had an aggravated manslaughter choice. If they thought it was an accident, that verdict was an option.
Apparently the jury felt Caylee died of natural causes, because Casey walked free with no punishment whatever for "losing" her daughter, never bothering to report her missing at all and lying about where she was, and then having the child turn up dead.
Does the expression "getting away with murder" ring any bells here? BTW, seventy percent of the country disagrees with this verdict, according to polls:
It was flooded for several months. Yes when kronk called 3 times in Aug they should have done their jobs. At least on of the cops was fired.
There was more than enough to convict her, this was an OJ Jury, period.
Perhaps you could introduce her to a new invention: the book. It does however required user intervention: you have to turn the pages.
Seems obvious, doesn’t it?
OK, I can buy the not proving Casey murdered Caylee, but to say it wasn’t a murder at all? WTF? 2 year olds don’t put themselves into garbage bags and throw themselves into shallow graves. It certainly WAS a murder. And Casey knows who did it. BTW, who is the father of Caylee? I saw a “fiancee” mentioned, but never a mention of the father of the toddler, who he is, what he does, where he is, etc.
It seems Judge Perry has the final say. For example, the prosecution tried several times to dismiss Juror #4 based on her statement that she didn't want to judge anyone. The defense fought hard to keep her.
Judge Perry ruled for the defense, based on the Batson rule, which states that someone can't be dismissed based on race alone.
It had nothing to do with race! She didn't want to judge anyone and a trial is ALL about judging defendants and witnesses! Bad decision especially for the prosecution. I've heard this wasn't the only juror the prosecution wanted to strike using one of their 10 exemptions but Judge Perry wouldn't allow it.
Was Levin a defense lawyer?
truthkeeper; this is downright spooky.
Not only did HH judge Perry taint the jury by over riding the states right to strike 10 jurors of their choice, but he also calculated slutmom’s time served using time that was already used for the stolen check charges.
Why no outrage at this injustice? Why does the judge get a pass given these discretionary blunders?
ALL the lawyers said that they didn’t prove their case.....I TOTALLY disagree.....Common sense should have trumped everything.
Article good, comments to follow are very bad. Stupid libs - just like the juries the article criticizes.
..Levin did not keep up with this trial or anything of the previous 3 years...
...I didn't keep it up with it 24/7 even though it's been on our news 24/7 for a long time....
..but even the little I tuned in the last few weeks....
.....it was obvious to me she did it...
..and I believe O'Reilly had a survey of 100, 000 people and 90 percent said she did it.
Levin thought he had to comment it on it, I guess....
....but that doesn't make his opinon count more than others.
The link has been pulled.
Good morning....this was put up too late for me last night.
There are so many aggravating/irritating things about this whole mess but I add to it the remarks by that creep Mason that the jury saw the whole trial and the rest of us didn’t. Therefore, they were in a better position to make the call as to guilty/not guilty.
Is he so stupid that he doesn’t realize that we got to see MORE of what went on in the courtroom because the jury was sent out so many times? I know the stations broke for commercials during the majority of these times but we still saw more than the jury did. We got information the jury was never allowed to see/hear.
And pukey Geraldo seems to be getting a kick out of sticking his finger in our eye each time he appears on TV! His own wife is disgusted with him - HA! Hoorah for Kimberly Gilfoyle - she can outshout him!!!!
I don’t know the cure for a verdict like this but something needs to be changed in the whole system. Everyone is entitled to a “defense” according to our constitution but do defense attorneys have the right to twist things to the point that they can get their “guilty” clients off? They can stand up and say, “I know my client isn’t guilty” and then proceed to lay out a preposterous defense. There should be some restrictions on their presentations. Why are they so FOND of defending and clearing dirtbags?
We need defense attorneys like Dustin Hoffman in “Sleepers”.
If any of us ever find ourselves hauled into court for ANYTHING, hire an attorney who will put forth the most ridiculous and absurd defense and we too can be judged “not guilty.”
Someone I know (...) was molested by her father.
This did do some serious damage to her concept of men in general, and husbands in particular. However, when she kidnapped her children (the first time), she wound up living with - drum roll... - her father, and the mother who enabled said abuse.
Afterward, she lived with a few men who appeared to not be interested in women, married at least one, probably to help with his otherwise illegal status. Kidnapped the children a second time, and was granted full blessings by the court (which proceeded to charge her children’s father back child support for the years she hid the children or left them in his care).
If you expect people, or courts, to make the obvious decisions, the world can have some nasty surprises in store.
Mason....is an idiot. Giving folks the finger? really, classy, mason.
AS for Mark Levin...and his cohort Hannity, well....they were so busy with politics that this little murder case was beneath them...then they decide to comment when they know little of the facts.
Leading me to Geraldo.....who bonded with another Latino lawyer....therefore placing himself squarely on the side of the defendant.....his shallow little mind is all about race, but I digress.
I am still outraged about the verdict, but what does this teach us? Jurors will not even debate the case running so fast for the door that they let a murderer walk. Now Eric Holder and Obama bring the latest captured terrorist here to America for one of our trials?
Those idiots who are too sophisticated to watch the Casey Anthony trial have no idea what they have just unleashed. It scares the heck out of me.
He was completely correct. This is not the fault of the jury. This is the fault of the prosecution. They should have never gone for Murder 1 or Aggravated Murder. There was no evidence of premeditation and no evidence of aggravated assault - none. The cause of death was never determined. THAT is the kicker. If you don't know the cause of death, you can't call it murder. It really is that simple.
Maybe if they had taken the death penalty off or even gone for just manslaughter there would have been “guilty” for some charge
Had something to do with a website showing two families living adjacent to each other off of Hope Springs where Caylees remains were found. The two families live next door to each other. What is interesting is one family goes by the first name of Caylees nanny while the other family next door goes by the last name of Caylees nanny.
The reason they are bringing this up is a jailhouse conversation between Casey and her brother Lee. They believe Casey was giving clues to Lee where Caylee is.
I believe the website is sacred moneys. Don’t know anything about it. Have no idea if true; but it is spooky.
Wonder how they convicted Scott Peterson with circumstantial evidence?
You’re so right!
Because they had cause of death in the Peterson trial perhaps?
Laci Peterson’s body washed up out of the ocean....cause of death could not be determined due to decomposition and she was missing her arms and her head.....so no, they had no cause of death either......she could have fallen overboard in an accident for all anyone knows. oh, yeah, her baby washed up earlier nearby. Scot Peterson was indeed convicted on circumstantial evidence.
“”Leading me to Geraldo””
I took the time to look up info on his “legal” career....
He got his J. D. from Brooklyn Law School in 1969, did post grad at the U of Pa that same year and briefly attended Columbia U Grad School of Journalism during the summer of 1970.
AFTER A BRIEF CAREER IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, where he served the NYC Police Dept., as an investigator, he RETURNED to law and became a lawyer for a New York Puerto Rican activist group, the Young Lords.. Now that’s quite a career in the legal field! He got a degree PERIOD!
No wonder he thinks Casey Anthony was a devoted mother. She managed to have her picture taken with her child.... BS loves BS....
Everything after 1970 was work as a journalist. Why doesn’t anyone ever call him on “I’m a lawyer.”
I have to wonder if he EVER passed the Bar exam! Didn’t leave him much time after law school when one year later he went directly into journalism. I would bet he never took the Bar exam.
AND I must add he has been married to 5 women - has 4 children with 3 wives and 1 with an unnamed woman/mother.
I will not watch....I don't want to her hear how the prosecution did not prove their case....
Enough already....this juror had his chance almost a week ago...
If I am not out on a squad call I will tune in....not to listen but to look...I am curious as to what they look like. They hide them all through the trial, now I can get a gander. Juror 3 looked like a loon with her babbling. Like you said....they got their say, now they don’t like the response from the hoi poi. Tough nuggies.
...and he's hidden
. and his voice is disguised....
Also, if you go to the Orlando Sentinel article about Greta's show tonight and read ALL the letters afterward.........you will feel very validated ....I certainly did.
Almost every letter, if not every one, as I read down, were from folks who said they would not watch Greta tonight...
..they didn't want to affirm her show or this juror by watching...
..they are still fighting mad about the outcome....etc etc.
I think just this juror and Cheney Mason will be on.
I'm not interested from hearing either...
Great calls juror # 11 a decent man.
Watch if you want....but it might just make you more angry.
“”Maybe if they had taken the death penalty off or even gone for just manslaughter there would have been guilty for some charge””
In spite of what our good friend Geraldo believes, they could have convicted her on the 3rd charge as handed down by the Grand Jury indictment - which carried a penalty of 34 1/2 months up to 15 years in prison.
There was a Special Finding to the 3rd charge:
They could have found-—that Casey Marie Anthony was/was not a caregiver for Caylee Marie Anthony at the time of the offense-—. It was on their verdict forms - tied to the Aggravaged Child Abuse charge:
(Grand Jurors) “”upon their oaths do present that Casey Marie Anthony, between the 15th day of June, 2008 and the 16th day of July, 2008, in said County and State, did willfully or by culpable negligence, in violation of (blah blah statutes), while a caregiver to Caylee Marie Anthony, a child under 18 years of age, fail or omit to provide Caylee Marie Anthony with the care, supervision and the services necessary to maintain Caylee Marie Anthony’s physical and mental health or fail to make a reasonable effort to protect Caylee Marie Anthony from abuse, neglect or exploitation by another person, and in doing so caused the death of Caylee Marie Anthony.””
Now in my opinion that would have fit very nicely. The prosecution wanted the death penalty so didn’t concentrate on the other charges which would have worked. It would have kept her off the streets for maybe 15 years but she wouldn’t have been found “not guilty.”
Gerald says she was a devoted mother and Caylee “loved her” so she MUST HAVE BEEN the caregiver!
Heck - I could have been on the jury and slept through the whole 30+ days and I could have found her guilty on that 3rd charge!
...but you won't see him and you won't be given his name.
If he's so proud of what he did....why hide.
The trial really had nothing to do with guilt. It had everything to do with Jose selling that jury; which he did. He made the prosecutors look like bullies. Jose made it personal and damn the evidence.