Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(Audio) Dennis Miller on Casey Anthony: This is the Best Legal System in the World?
The Dennis Miller Show ^ | 7/6/11 | Denni Miller

Posted on 07/06/2011 7:02:33 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

AUDIO


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: casey; caseyanthony; caylee; florida
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last
For discussion only, does not necessarily 100% reflect the views and opinions of Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears.
1 posted on 07/06/2011 7:02:41 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
AUDIO
2 posted on 07/06/2011 7:03:57 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

At one time South Africa was seen as having the best legal system in the world. I imagine it is one of the worst now.

Many years ago, F. Lee Bailey said the military system of justice is better. When asked how, he said they are more likely to find the guilty, guilty and the innocent, not guilty. My JAG Colonel nephew agrees with that.

Despite all the Arlen Spector jokes I like the Scottish system. They have three possible verdicts. Not Guilty, which means they don’t think you did it: Not Proven Guilty: which means the jury thinks you did it but there was no enough evidence to convict.

The other is Not Guilty and we really think you didn’t do it. Sort of a clearing of your name.


3 posted on 07/06/2011 7:11:20 PM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

I left out Guilty and put in Not Guilty twice in my sort of rough summation of Scottish verdicts.

Guilty means we know you did it and have nod doubt at all.


4 posted on 07/06/2011 7:14:33 PM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free than execute 1 who is innocent.

For those like me who don't trust the government that is the best system...

5 posted on 07/06/2011 7:22:57 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

maybe we should make it a crime for jurors to sell appearences after a trial and claim that it made them sick to vote not guilty and for not pondering the evidence. it seems they were more interested in sentencing which was against instructions. As for what Dennis said..2 to 5 years if your child is missing 31 days is not enough..and seems to be major evidence that you offed your kid.


6 posted on 07/06/2011 7:24:12 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

It’s the best legal system in the world if one is guilty.


7 posted on 07/06/2011 7:34:41 PM PDT by RINOs suck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

>>The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free than execute 1 who is innocent.<<

I agree completely with that. But that does not preclude me from speaking out when I think justice has been denied.

Fair enough?


8 posted on 07/06/2011 7:39:13 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

Casey said the nanny’s name was Zanny. Zanny is the street name for Xanax a sleeping aid. My guess is that she was doing whatever she needed to do, to knock her baby out so she could party(at some point tried the chloroform, seriously dangerous stuff). I’m even wondering if Caylee was in the trunk during these times so Casey could party. Duck taped mouth so if she happened to wake she couldn’t yell or cry out? God only knows what happened. This is just a guess. Horrible that this woman will walk free soon and probably make a bundle of money.


9 posted on 07/06/2011 7:39:33 PM PDT by MsLady (Be the kind of woman that when you get up in the morning, the devil says, "Oh crap, she's UP !!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe
"The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free than execute 1 who is innocent."

SLIGHT CORRECTION TO REALITIES OF THE DAY: The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free AND MURDER AGAIN, than execute 1 who is innocent.

As if executing an innocent in this or the O.J. Simpson case was the choice. Absurd!

10 posted on 07/06/2011 7:41:13 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
I'm with Dennis. She didn't call the police for the first 30 days? Buzz the buzzer, throw the Red Flag, ... convict her of something, more than lying to the police once she did call.

That said, her lawyers convinced 12 jurors to acquit. Perhaps this says more about them than it does about our legal system!

11 posted on 07/06/2011 7:41:36 PM PDT by ImpBill ("America ... where are you now?" signed, a little "r" republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe
The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free than execute 1 who is innocent.

Doesn't speak to this situation. Juries like this are just as likely to convict the innocent as acquit the guilty.

12 posted on 07/06/2011 7:47:52 PM PDT by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

I have far less problem letting a murderer go even if they kill again than giving the state the power to execute innocent men and women.


13 posted on 07/06/2011 7:48:46 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal

>>Doesn’t speak to this situation. Juries like this are just as likely to convict the innocent as acquit the guilty. <<

Well said.

And this woman seems like she has seen how WRONG her decision was, and must have had it pointed out to her...hence the change of heart.


14 posted on 07/06/2011 7:50:03 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill

This IS the best legal SYSTEM in the world. The plain fact is that the prosecution presented a case with no real physical evidence and no witnesses. Jurors are not supposed to find someone guilty based on emotion or on how they “feel”. I think the jury did exactly what they were supposed to do. Perhaps this will discourage prosecutors from caving to public pressure and rushing cases, although I highly doubt it.


15 posted on 07/06/2011 7:51:09 PM PDT by cumbo78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ImpBill

The essential point is that regardless of guilt, the court must convict a person by strict adherence to the law.

Otherwise, we would have cops simply walking up to the first suspect, pointing their finger at him and pronouncing “We know you did it”.

Then put him away for life, hang him or whatever.

Our system was developed for the purpose of keeping that very thing from happening.

It matters not that you “know” that she killed the baby. You must prove it in a way that is indisputable.

The prosecution fialed to do that.


16 posted on 07/06/2011 7:51:50 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cumbo78
Are you insane? The defense admitted that the "slut" dumped her 2 year old in the swamp and went slutting around town while the baby lay rotting nicely outfitted in duct tape and Glad bags.

That the jury did not at least convict her of aggravated child abuse knowing she never contacted authorities is evidence that the jurors are either morons or mentally ill. Juror 14 is definitely mentally ill since he has stated that Casey was a good mother.

17 posted on 07/06/2011 7:57:06 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon

Here’s what we know:

According to the defense, 2-year-old Caylee drowned in the backyard pool, and Dad covered it all up after sexually molesting Casey. Then Mom did internet searches for chloroform. Then she didn’t.

No one knows who used Casey’s computer to do the internet searches for “neck injuries, chloroform, inhalation, death, head injuries,” and “internal bleeding.” Or who deleted them.

Then Casey worked at Universal Studios for two years. Then she didn’t.

Then according to Casey, she left Caylee with a nanny named...uh...Zanny. That’s when the trouble began. Zanny kept Caylee for 31 days, while the family kept asking where Caylee was. Then she didn’t. Because there WAS no Nanny named Zanny.

My theory is that Caylee put duct tape over her own mouth, walked into the woods, climbed into the trash bags, and suffocated.

Casey was so distraught by her father raping her that she didn’t even notice Caylee was missing. And she tried to forget about Rapist Dad by partying and getting tattoos and making up more lies about Zanny the Nanny. Also, in not reporting anything to the police for a month.

But the main thing is, this is a “HUGE VICTORY FOR JUSTICE”® and we can all celebrate the jury’s verdict!

WOOOOOHOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pass the fireworks and champagne.

/s


18 posted on 07/06/2011 8:00:27 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

I agree completely about the military justice system. It is the best possible court if you are innocent, or have reasonable justification. And it is also the worst possible court to appear before if you are guilty.

But add to that, the purpose of a military court is *not* justice, but “to maintain good order and discipline in the military.” And that is night and day from a civilian court.

For example, a homicide in a brawl, heat of anger, or many other circumstances, might only merit 3 or 4 years in prison. But someone who molests a child could get 15 or 20 years, because the latter is seen as very harmful to military morale.

And there are other things that really matter in a military court. For example, with the permission of the president of the court, any member of the court can ask *anyone* a question. This includes attorneys, witnesses, and anyone else appearing before the court, even if they are seated in the gallery.

This means that most of the razzle dazzle that civilian attorneys try in civilian court is right out the window. Attorneys try that stuff in a military court and the members of the court will chew them up and spit them out.

It also means that witnesses for one side might be grilled by the members of the court in such a way that they give better testimony to the other side. And bad attitude, or heaven help you, perjury, could end up with you wearing irons in short order.

It is downright refreshing to see unvarnished honesty in court, and the wicked nailed on the spot. No games. No Latin. No cheating.


19 posted on 07/06/2011 8:03:25 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MsLady

Actually I’ve thought the same thing - that she put her baby in the trunk so she could party.

If anyone tries to make money with/from her I won’t be participating. No magazines with her on the cover...no nothing.


20 posted on 07/06/2011 8:08:19 PM PDT by Aria ( "If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cumbo78

You don’t need either physical evidence or witnesses to convict somebody. Circumstantial evidence is to be considered just as strongly. Jurors are supposed to think and examine. This jury did neither. Beyond a reasonable doubt to these people was if it wasn’t on video, it didn’t happen. No reasoning powers at all. Don’t bother taking time to try and connect the dots and use common sense. Unfortunately this isn’t the last time this is going to happen. In todays world everything has to be perfect like on CSI.


21 posted on 07/06/2011 8:08:47 PM PDT by WatchOutForSnakes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon
The prosecution fialed to do that.

Just interested in how consistent you are. Scott Peterson was convicted with much less circumstantial evidence. Should he be set free?

Should parents be immune from prosecution when they fail to report 2 year olds who have gone missing for 30 days?

If murderers manage to hide their victims from authorities until a cause of death can not be determined and no DNA can be harvested do they all receive get out of jail free cards?

Do they receive the cards even though the victim is wrapped in duct tape and garbage bags exactly the same as they keep at their house, their trunks smell like death, hair found in the trunk is consistent with hair from a dead body, that hair belongs to the victim and the trunk is loaded with critters that feast on dead flesh?

Do you think that not reporting a missing 2 year old to authorities could cause grave harm to that two year old? Because if you do then Casey Anthony should have been convicted of aggravated child abuse.

There's more but let's start with these rational questions.

22 posted on 07/06/2011 8:09:11 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
That the jury did not at least convict her of aggravated child abuse knowing she never contacted authorities is evidence that the jurors are either morons or mentally ill.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think those charges would have to have been listed in the original indictment, and probably weren't, since the prosecution overplayed their hand and went for Murder One with scant physical evidence.

I am hoping the prosecution can appeal the verdict, or perhaps charge her with abuse of a corpse, but do not know if it would be considered double jeopardy. If she does go to Federal prison for any length of time, there is a good chance that rough justice will be done, as was done to Jeffrey Dahmer and other child abusers.

23 posted on 07/06/2011 8:12:04 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (To ACLU & its plaintiffs: Stop dragging the public into your personal struggle w/ God. -Mark Baisley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

She was acquitted of aggravated child abuse. Try wrapping your arms around that and you’ll understqand why I say the jurors are either morons or mentally ill.


24 posted on 07/06/2011 8:14:08 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

You have a slight problem with logic.

First, she was not charged with not reporting. If she had been, it would have stuck.

Who hid the child? That was one of the jury’s problems. The prosecution did not prove who did that or anything else.

Who wrapped her in duct tape?

Small question. Big ramifications.

As I said, it will be a sad day when we can simply point our finger at a person and say “I know you did it. Off with your head!”

The prosecution did not do their job.

Scott Peterson was not on trial in this case. Not material.

You might “know” she is guilty, but that is not enough. It has to be done by the book or we are all in danger of false imprisonment.


25 posted on 07/06/2011 8:24:36 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
let 1000 of guilty go free AND MURDER AGAIN

That is an excellent point, one that we all should never forget.

26 posted on 07/06/2011 8:26:54 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: montanajoe

Who’s talking about giving the state power to execute thousands? Try something new, we’ve heard this absurd argument before.


27 posted on 07/06/2011 8:31:55 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon
You have a slight problem with logic. First, she was not charged with not reporting. If she had been, it would have stuck.

She was charged with aggravated child abuse. The statute applies to any action that can or does cause harm to a child. Not reporting a missing 2 year old obviously fills that action. She was acquitted of that charge and you evidently don't even know it.

Who hid the child? That was one of the jury’s problems. The prosecution did not prove who did that or anything else.

Once again you exhibit the dearth of knowledge you have about this case. The defense ADMITTED in court that Casey Anthony hid the body because the baby had drowned.

Next time you tell somebody they have a problem with logic try having some clue as to what the hell you are talking about.

28 posted on 07/06/2011 8:32:05 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Yes, it’s the best legal system in the world. At the very least, one of the best. Which makes it even more important to identify situations when the system drops a turd and recognize them for exactly what they are. This verdict is a turd. It’s a valid verdict...but it’s still a turd. I think we do neither ourselves or the system any favors by pouring chocolate syrup on the turd, putting ice cream on the side and pretending it’s a volcano cake.


29 posted on 07/06/2011 8:32:51 PM PDT by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey-anthony-trial-defense-claims-caylee-anthony-drowned/story?id=13674375

The above link, which proports to be a series of direct quotes from the testimony at the trial, does not support your conclusions.


30 posted on 07/06/2011 8:45:17 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: yarddog

Punishment wise, what’s the difference between Not Guilty and Not Proven guilty?


31 posted on 07/06/2011 8:46:21 PM PDT by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

if you are admitting you dumped a body - shouldn’t there at least be charges concerning mistreatment of a corpse?


32 posted on 07/06/2011 8:50:33 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon
"How in the world can a mother wait 30 days before ever reporting her child missing? That's insane, that's bizarre... The answer is actually relatively simple. She never was missing," Baez said. "Caylee Anthony died on June 16, 2008 when she drowned in her family's swimming pool."

Baez also claimed that Casey Anthony's father, George Anthony, found the body in the backyard pool and indicated that he helped dispose of the body.

Who did he help? OJ?

This supports my conclusion 100%. Your reading comprehension is suspect amigo. And your judgement is awful.

33 posted on 07/06/2011 8:53:51 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
She was acquitted of aggravated child abuse. Try wrapping your arms around that and you’ll understqand why I say the jurors are either morons or mentally ill.

Hideous. Psychopathic. Satanic. And that's just the jury.

34 posted on 07/06/2011 8:55:57 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (To ACLU & its plaintiffs: Stop dragging the public into your personal struggle w/ God. -Mark Baisley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

:-}


35 posted on 07/06/2011 9:01:20 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Well said, sir.


36 posted on 07/06/2011 9:04:21 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
They have three possible verdicts. Not Guilty, which means they don’t think you did it: Not Proven Guilty: which means the jury thinks you did it but there was no enough evidence to convict. The other is Not Guilty and we really think you didn’t do it. Sort of a clearing of your name.

I like that - thanks for sharing.

37 posted on 07/06/2011 9:16:17 PM PDT by GOPJ (Black flash mobs: street level reflections of elite liberal hatred for middle class America..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

I submit that jurors be given an objective test on deliberation procedures before they can be placed on the jury. The test should be no more difficult than a simple written drivers license test.

Some of the areas covered could include requiring them to observe the evidence, take notes and not dress up on the second day /s.


38 posted on 07/06/2011 9:20:06 PM PDT by Enough is ENOUGH (Fabian Globalism: Environmentalism halts production, forces population into dense controllable areas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MsLady
I’m even wondering if Caylee was in the trunk during these times so Casey could party. Duck taped mouth so if she happened to wake she couldn’t yell or cry out?

That's possible. It could also explain her death. If she cried and her nose was plugged up she would suffocate.

39 posted on 07/06/2011 9:23:26 PM PDT by GOPJ (Black flash mobs: street level reflections of elite liberal hatred for middle class America..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

>>I am hoping the prosecution can appeal the verdict<<

I do not believe this is possible, “Double Jeopardy.”

That said, I am NOT a lawyer.


40 posted on 07/06/2011 9:32:06 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

“Baez also claimed that Casey Anthony’s father, George Anthony, found the body in the backyard pool and indicated that he helped dispose of the body.”

The above statement could only have been made either in the opening statement, which I believe it was, or in the closing argument to the jury.

Neither of these are admissible as evidence. The jury must make its decision based on evidence, and there are strict rules as to what can be submitted as evidence.

Actually there was no evidence presented by either side as to cause of death, when and where, who did what.

I realize that more than one murderer has been convicted without the body, but hopefully in all of those cases there was better supporting evidence and a better prosecutor who could tie it all together.

Perhaps the prosecution should have waited, even if it took years, until they had a better case.


41 posted on 07/06/2011 10:10:47 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon

Actually, one of the jurors said today they “thought it was a horrible accident” and that “ something weird was going on with the father”.

In other words, going on the opening or closing statements of Baez, not evidence.


42 posted on 07/06/2011 11:08:51 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MsLady
That's what I thought, and in Casey's warped mind it was an “accident” because she gave her to much Xanax and Chloroform, she didn't mean to kill her by asphyxiation or poison, she “accidentally” did, she just wanted her to sleep or be unconscious so she could party, and the duck tape was so she couldn't cry out if she awoke, or to tape down a chloroformed cloth. She may even have drown in her own vomit, so there's the drowning. Not to sound crude, but waking up after being chloroformed usually causes nausea and vomiting, and if there's duck tape on your mouth and your 2, there's not much you can do. But there you've got “accident’ and “drowning”. There's usually some truth in most lies.

This would make it murder 1. : Causing the death of a minor through aggravated child abuse. Also, Xanax is expensive and Casey was broke. Also, you can build up a tolerance to Xanax so that it doesn't work anymore. So the child would not fall asleep with the usual dose after a while. So you move on to chloroform. Sick.

43 posted on 07/06/2011 11:24:56 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

You are right....the jury system was sabotaged by the public school system controlled by Marxists/unions...which put out complete idiots. These children who become adults who are put through Dewey’s conditioning program are as dumb as stumps.

The lawyers are indoctrinated by atheists/Holmsian law which is not connected to morality....Absolute Truth and God-given rights. They no longer go after truth—they go for the money and the reputation. Our legal system has been corrupted by the secular/humanist/atheist/progressives/marxists/socialists....whatever you want to call those evil bast*rds. They are truly evil—the ones who deny God and that our rights and duty lie with Him.


44 posted on 07/07/2011 1:50:04 AM PDT by savagesusie (Virtue is a habit of the mind, consistent with nature and moderation and reason. Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: All

Double jeapordy. 5th Amendment.

No testimony that directly accuses of murder. So the prosecution never had a witness testify to the same theory they had about duct tape being the manner of death. The duct tape was only the State’s theory of manner of death.


45 posted on 07/07/2011 3:13:02 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

SO on target! Funny, too. Look how it ties into the whole distribution-of-wealth, you’re-okay/I’m-okay thing. This jury leaves the impression that it felt it was empowered to forgive! that mercy was within its purview to grant! Not only were they utterly incapable of differentiating EVIDENCE from whole-cloth CONJECTURE, they couldn’t even choose from three possible homicide levels. So much for all those “critical thinking” skills the NEA touts.

And for a lawyer to assist in weaving the fantasies and lies of his client—whether to advance himself, mitigate his client’s culpability, or to promote his views on capital punishment—HAS to be the height of unethical behavior.

This verdict is only one consequence of the state of education here. The lack of shame is another.


46 posted on 07/07/2011 3:43:34 AM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

In 2007 there were 398 homicides recorded where the victim was 1-4 years old. This is from the CDC.

I wonder why there weren’t a few of them in the national media like this one.

Answer: Casey Anthony case was picked up by the media because of the mass appeal of it’s storyline: a pretty girl from the suburbs who is a wild party girl mom kills her cute baby and goes on partying.

Oh, of the 398 homicides of 1-4 year olds in 2007, 48 were by the discharge of a firearm, 350 were homicide by some other means.

Just for consideration...


47 posted on 07/07/2011 3:43:56 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Perfectly logical destination of the Roe v. Wade slope.


48 posted on 07/07/2011 3:50:09 AM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

The case was tried as a Capital Murder case. Tell me what proof was presented that pointed to Anthony as the murderer who should be subject to the death penalty? There wasn’t any. The prosecution MUST prove the case “beyond a reasonable doubt”. They didn’t do it! Remember, she was found “not guilty”. She was not found “innocent”. There’s a huge difference.


49 posted on 07/07/2011 4:05:56 AM PDT by cumbo78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen; All

Remember this ?

Jan 23 2009: Casey Anthony’s father, George Anthony, is escorted to a hospital by police after he allegedly sends suicidal text messages to family members.

Makes no sense at that point in time if Casey is the killer and he suspected that since he found gas cans that she “stole” from his house back in July of ‘08. When he “looked in her trunk to find a tire tool ?” when her car was parked at his house.

If he was so sure Casey killed Caylee all along, why is he feeling suicidal a few weeks after the body is found in the middle of December right by his house ?

Or did he not think she was the killer ? Why would him and his wife not testify and be part of Casey’s defense if they think she is innocent ?

Just seems odd to me...


50 posted on 07/07/2011 4:10:32 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson