Hi, Betty, I think the state proved that the young girl had met a foul end, but I don’t think it succeeded at proving who had done it, how it had been done, and to what end.
It’s mistake was insisting that this be a capital murder case, given they hadn’t really created an air-tight case ahead of time.
They were hoping the jury would see it their way.
Even now, I can’t tell myself in a short sentence how this woman murdered her daughter or even if this woman murdered here daughter in the capital sense.
I believe she neglected her to death, and the state should have gone after such a conviction.
No death penalty; long incarceration.
But though I have followed these trial proceedings with unflagging interest, I didn't sit on this jury.
So what I think "technically" doesn't matter.
Personally, I never saw it as such. But then, what do I know: I'm not a lawyer....
What bothers me is that I can't help but feel that justice was not served in this case, not for Caylee, nor for Casey.
The jurors were so "'down in the weeds" of the legal aspects of an overweening prosecutorial case, and evidently so flummoxed by conflicting scientific experts, that they just didn't see the big picture, which necessarily involves the ends of justice.
However, I am confident that justice will be served in the end....
Or so it seems to me, FWIW.
Thanks so much for writing, dear brother in Christ!