Posted on 07/06/2011 7:02:33 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
That is an excellent point, one that we all should never forget.
Who’s talking about giving the state power to execute thousands? Try something new, we’ve heard this absurd argument before.
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.
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.
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.
Punishment wise, what’s the difference between Not Guilty and Not Proven guilty?
if you are admitting you dumped a body - shouldn’t there at least be charges concerning mistreatment of a corpse?
"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.
Hideous. Psychopathic. Satanic. And that's just the jury.
:-}
Well said, sir.
I like that - thanks for sharing.
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.
That's possible. It could also explain her death. If she cried and her nose was plugged up she would suffocate.
>>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.
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.