Casey Anthony is not guilty of first degree murder...

[tizzo]

To everyone defending the jury's verdict, we get it. The prosecution's case was not water tight. And looking at it objectively, most people would agree.

With all due respect, not everyone gets it. This thread has been about the verdict, and at least three people here have argued that she should have been convicted - not that she did it, but that she should have been convicted based on the evidence. One person went so far as to say that he wasn't 100% sure, but still thought she should have been convicted.

However, most people have common sense and can form their own opinions. Well maybe not most, perhaps I am giving too much credit. But speaking for myself at least, I believe she did it. And I find it hard to see how anyone can think she did not. I can see how you might not be completely and totally sure, but to think she is innocent, that just seems impossible. The evidence is fairly strong, and since I do not need to prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt, I form my own opinion, like many others have.

If you think she is innocent, good for you. I don't. Simple as that.

This is a completely different topic than what is being discussed here. Not one person I'm aware of, except for her lawyer, has said that they think she is innocent.

 

[WDWmazprty]

I don't think for one second that she is innocent but what I or anyone else "thinks" is irrelevant. In a court of law it is about what you can prove. All the state did was prove that Casey was a spoiled, lying piece of crap. They failed to prove she was a murderer.

Agreed.

The outrage being shown at this verdict, is not being directed at the Jury for the most part. The outrage is being directed, rightly IMO, at Casey.

What we think is irrelevant when it comes to getting a conviction for her. What we think is relevant when discussing this case amongst ourselves.

Right. I understand all about lack of evidence and her being proven 'not guilty' and not innocent. It sucks that the evidence that WAS given, her behavior from the beginning, etc. points to her as being the one who most likely committed the crime. If she didnt do it, who did? Maybe she didn't actually do it, but she almost certainly had a hand in it somehow.

I think just knowing that, as for right now, she got away with 'murder' is upsetting a lot of people. Yes, that may be how the system works, doesn't mean the verdict is always correct. But ,that's what we have to work with.

Unfortunately, this may be one of those cases where the real killer is never found or the real killer actually has gotten away with it.

 

[The Mom]

Agreed.

The outrage being shown at this verdict, is not being directed at the Jury for the most part. The outrage is being directed, rightly IMO, at Casey.

What we think is irrelevant when it comes to getting a conviction for her. What we think is relevant when discussing this case amongst ourselves.

Exactly. And we can show our disagreement by not doing anything that will benefit her - don't buy any collaborative books, watch movies if she gets any financial reward, etc.

If you feel she is guilty, don't help her to benefit from her crime in any way.

 

[tizzo]

Agreed.

The outrage being shown at this verdict, is not being directed at the Jury for the most part. The outrage is being directed, rightly IMO, at Casey.

Not from what I've seen. All the outrage I've seen has been against the jurors. At whom else could you be outraged if you watched the case on TV and are shocked at the outcome? (And if you didn't watch it, how could you have formed an opinion at all???) If you didn't think the evidence supported a conviction, you would have expected this outcome.

Note that I have already seen veiled threats against the jurors. Things along the lines of "the only smart thing they did was not reveal their identities", or "I better not find out who they are".

 

[tizzo]

The only verdict I don't understand (whether or not I agree with all of them) is "not guilty of child endangerment." If a mother doesn't report a missing child for 30 days, how could it not be child endangerment? IMO that charge was proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

I could be wrong, but I don't think she was charged with child endangerment. She was charged with murder one, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter.

I'm hesitant to criticize the prosecution for this because as Ashton said, they had a very high burden, and not finding the body for so long made it almost impossible to prove anything to begin with. But I do think that charging murder one was a gamble that may have cost them a lesser charge. This is because even though the jury could have convicted her of lesser included chargers, in order to pursue Murder 1 the prosecution had to insist on a specific set of facts, which it turned out they couldn't prove, and in so doing they essentially argued that the alternate facts that would have supported a lesser charge were not the correct ones.

Not that the prosecution doesn't deserve their fair share of criticism either. I didn't watch the whole trial, but I did see one occasion in which the prosecution was rather obviously trying to confuse the jury. If the jury noticed, that could have worked against them.

I also had an issue with the prosecution's assertion that Caylee's body had been where it was found all along. It wasn't credible (at least to me), and not only was it not necessary to their case, I think it may have hurt their case since given how close it was to the house it makes the police look completely inept for not finding her, and calls into question the quality of the entire investigation. This isn't all the prosecution's fault - they had to prosecute the case they were given by the police. But they made decisions on how to proceed that caused that to be a factor, when it didn't have to be. Which may tie back to the decision to pursue murder one.

 

[draybook]

First, with all due respect, I have plenty of common sense. I also think that if it can't be proven then you must acquit. Maybe I'm just jaded because I spent time waiting in jail for a crime that I had no part in, but just because you think someone did it, it isn't enough.

Second, I love reading about how people are threatening the jurors. So these people want to show their outrage about a violent crime by committing a violent crime? Those sir, are your people that lack common sense.

 

[The Mom]

I could be wrong, but I don't think she was charged with child endangerment. She was charged with murder one, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter.

.

If that's the case, then there wasn't enough evidence to convict her of abuse, since although most of us would agree that not giving a d*** about your child is abusive, it doesn't fit the legal definition. And as you mentioned, child endangerment would not fit into the chain of indictments.

I'm not even sure that the punishment for child endangerment or child neglect would be worth the effort and cost of bringing her to trial again. And then the state would have to prove that her not reporting Caylee missing immediately resulted in her death, or that her neglect actually caused harm, so it probably wouldn't hold up as a "stand alone" charge. :shrug:

 

[tizzo]

I'm not even sure that the punishment for child endangerment or child neglect would be worth the effort and cost of bringing her to trial again. And then the state would have to prove that her not reporting Caylee missing immediately resulted in her death, or that her neglect actually caused harm, so it probably wouldn't hold up as a "stand alone" charge. :shrug:

I'm sure that was at least partially in play here. The only thing I could find about neglect or endangerment was that they dropped neglect charges against her in 2008. My guess is that is what they were charging her with when they thought Caylee was missing and Casey hadn't reported it. Once they found the child dead and decided to charge Casey with murder, they dropped the neglect charge, either because it wasn't worth it, or maybe because the facts that would back up a neglect or endangerment charge were in conflict with those that they were planning to assert to prove murder.

 

[Monty]

Exactly. And we can show our disagreement by not doing anything that will benefit her - don't buy any collaborative books, watch movies if she gets any financial reward, etc.

If you feel she is guilty, don't help her to benefit from her crime in any way.

Sadly, for the same reasons this case drew such a ridiculous media frenzy, the general public will jump at every offering related to the case from here out and Casey will likely become quite wealthy.

Lawyers on cable news networks pontificating on a case they don't know the intimate details of, snippets of juicy details 'leaked' that were never presented as evidence and thus never proven in court, photographs of a cute two-year-old girl and the general public's insatiable hunger for gossip mean that the people who "think" she's guilty have no way to confirm what they "think" they know as fact. A significant number of them will lap up anything that's published or broadcast, looking for their "I told you so" moment, irregardless of how much they're lining the pockets of this woman they've independently tried, convicted and personally given the lethal injection to.

IMO trials should never be broadcast and reporting should be limited to the fact that a trial of "X" individual for "Y" crime is taking place [in order that individuals who might have pertinent information would know to come forward to the prosecution or defence] and then when a verdict is reached, the details of the evidence and circumstances of the offence and trail can be reported. The USA seems so caught up in the public's "right to know" that it obscures the right to a fair trial.

 

[Laura]

From my understanding, Casey got that tattoo 2 days after Caylees death, when Caylee wasn't even reported 'missing' . The timing of the tattoo would imply Casey knew Caylee was dead at this time. If she got the tattoo after Caylees body was found than fair enough, but before? She knew!

She never denied knowing Caylee was dead.

The whole story the defense brought to the table was that Casey knew Caylee died accidentally, but then covered it up because of pressure from her father.

I keep reading comments that "Casey MUST know what happened to Caylee!" Well, no duh! She's admitted this from the start of the trial! :dazzle:

I also keep reading comments on Facebook "WHY AREN'T THEY LOOKING FOR THE REAL KILLER?" :brick: The defense never claimed a single time that Casey didn't know exactly when and how Caylee died!

This verdict came about the way it did for one reason and one reason only. Lack of "conclusive" evidence. The prosecution had multiple lines of evidence that had the potential to convict Casey. The problem was none of them could conclusively tie Casey to the murder. Had there been one finger print, one skin cell or hair in the right place the verdict would have been different. The simple fact was there wasn't. You can not convict someone for murder 1 based on the tone of their voice, a tattoo or their lack of emotion. You need solid, quality evidence. The state simply did not prove their case.

Exactly what I've been trying to say.

We don't want to go back to the days of mob rule in this country, which resulted in executing people because they held a different belief or led a lifestyle which the mob finds repugnant.

Exactly. Though it does seem like a majority of uneducated people in my Facebook feed would like to go back to those days. :dazzle:

Not from what I've seen. All the outrage I've seen has been against the jurors.

Same. One of my favorites was from my Facebook feed yesterday...from someone whose own level of intelligence has always been questionable...

Not guilty! I can't believe they found Casey Anthony not guilty! Proves there are a lot of people who aren't intelligent in this world- thus everyone that was on the jury! Kaylee may not have justice here but God will make sure she has justice!

But I do think that charging murder one was a gamble that may have cost them a lesser charge. This is because even though the jury could have convicted her of lesser included chargers, in order to pursue Murder 1 the prosecution had to insist on a specific set of facts, which it turned out they couldn't prove, and in so doing they essentially argued that the alternate facts that would have supported a lesser charge were not the correct ones.

It was a gamble, but they had to take it. It would have caused a public outrage for them to go after a lesser charge.

 

[tizzo]

It was a gamble, but they had to take it. It would have caused a public outrage for them to go after a lesser charge.

I'm not sure that I agree. Since the trial began, the predominant sentiment I've been able to detect (most of it, admittedly, coming from TV analysts and not the general public) is almost universal disbelief that they even considered going for 1st degree murder. And seeing the nature of the evidence they had only reinforces that, at least for me.

Anyway, as I expressed earlier, the state is perhaps deserving of some measure of outrage. If Caylee's body really did lie undisturbed in the woods across the street from the house for most of the time she was missing, as asserted by the prosecution, then there was no excuse for it to take so long to find her. And the delay in finding the remains is by far the biggest reason that there was no physical evidence. That in turn lead the prosecution to resort to exotic and novel forensic methods to try and tie it all together, which played right into the defense's narrative about the prosecution's desperation to get a murder one conviction at all costs.

 

[dave&di]

There you go playing "Judge and Jury".

No, I'm just giving my opinion as has everyone on this thread! :shrug:

 

[sweetpee_1993]

I guess before there was so much technology and such to gather fingerprints, DNA, residual evidence, etc. that nobody was ever guilty of anything. No murders. No rapes. No theft. No robbery. Nothing. Or maybe crime didn't exist before television with the CSI's, the NCIS's that taught the world that the only way to prove someone did something wrong is with all the wonderful forensic science and evidence-gathering techniques. Yeah, because everything you see on tv is real.

Yes, the prosecution brought only circumstantial evidence to the table. They didn't have the benefit of a fresh body laden with prints and "pretty" trace evidence. If they had only presented a few bits of circumstantial evidence then I could see where they would be reaching with a few what-ifs. That wasn't the case. They had a whooooole load of signs that flashed "Casey", many avenues that all ended with "Casey". If all the signs point in 1 direction without a single sign that states otherwise then why is there a need to have question? An innocent person does not need to lie. It's that simple. An innocent person's parents would not feel the need to change their stories and lie. Also, an innocent person's parents would be rejoicing that their child found justice in being found not guilty. Whether or not Casey's hand was the one that kept her daughter from taking another breath is irrelevant. She was involved. Nobody questions that. She did not lift a finger to do a single thing to help her daughter at any time. If she was involved she's just as guilty as anyone else involved. Anyone and everyone involved should rightfully share the same fate.

I'm hopeful that no matter where Casey Anthony decides to go people will recognize her and let their voices be heard. If she turned up in my neighborhood she sure wouldn't be made to feel welcome. Let the rest of her life be a thing of misery.

 

[sweetpee_1993]

Sadly, for the same reasons this case drew such a ridiculous media frenzy, the general public will jump at every offering related to the case from here out and Casey will likely become quite wealthy.

Lawyers on cable news networks pontificating on a case they don't know the intimate details of, snippets of juicy details 'leaked' that were never presented as evidence and thus never proven in court, photographs of a cute two-year-old girl and the general public's insatiable hunger for gossip mean that the people who "think" she's guilty have no way to confirm what they "think" they know as fact. A significant number of them will lap up anything that's published or broadcast, looking for their "I told you so" moment, irregardless of how much they're lining the pockets of this woman they've independently tried, convicted and personally given the lethal injection to.

IMO trials should never be broadcast and reporting should be limited to the fact that a trial of "X" individual for "Y" crime is taking place [in order that individuals who might have pertinent information would know to come forward to the prosecution or defence] and then when a verdict is reached, the details of the evidence and circumstances of the offence and trail can be reported. The USA seems so caught up in the public's "right to know" that it obscures the right to a fair trial.

Agreed. This is why I have my list of whack-jobs I do NOT contribute to....at the top would be Kate Goslin, Charlie Sheen, and a whole list of the gossip-column's finest....:lol:

As a hot-blooded American girl who totally prides herself on the freedoms my father and our nation's for-fathers faught to provide & maintain, I will be the first to tell you that this "right to know" thing is crap. I couldn't agree with you more. There's a time and place for information to be given and received. Criminal investigations and legal proceedings aren't gossip or entertainment.

 

[Master Yoda]

I guess before there was so much technology and such to gather fingerprints, DNA, residual evidence, etc. that nobody was ever guilty of anything. No murders. No rapes. No theft. No robbery. Nothing. Or maybe crime didn't exist before television with the CSI's, the NCIS's that taught the world that the only way to prove someone did something wrong is with all the wonderful forensic science and evidence-gathering techniques. Yeah, because everything you see on tv is real.

Yes, the prosecution brought only circumstantial evidence to the table. They didn't have the benefit of a fresh body laden with prints and "pretty" trace evidence. If they had only presented a few bits of circumstantial evidence then I could see where they would be reaching with a few what-ifs. That wasn't the case. They had a whooooole load of signs that flashed "Casey", many avenues that all ended with "Casey". If all the signs point in 1 direction without a single sign that states otherwise then why is there a need to have question? An innocent person does not need to lie. It's that simple. An innocent person's parents would not feel the need to change their stories and lie. Also, an innocent person's parents would be rejoicing that their child found justice in being found not guilty. Whether or not Casey's hand was the one that kept her daughter from taking another breath is irrelevant. She was involved. Nobody questions that. She did not lift a finger to do a single thing to help her daughter at any time. If she was involved she's just as guilty as anyone else involved. Anyone and everyone involved should rightfully share the same fate.

Of course not but the number of false convictions were higher. More than 200 people have been freed due to exoneration by DNA evidence since 1989. Because of modern forensics we expect a higher level of evidence and rightly so. Eye witness testimony, even from an honorable person, is shaky at best. Throw embellishment and lying into the mix and it gets even worse. Properly collected and analyzed data does not lie.

What would you have us do? Go back to throwing women in a lake to see if they are witches? Maybe we could use the lynch mob form of justice again? If you want to be mad at anyone be mad at the prosecution. They were the ones who chose to go for murder 1 knowing it was a long shot. The jury might have been willing to convict on murder 2 knowing that the chiar was not an option.

 

[WDWmazprty]

Some interviews with Matt Lauer....

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43652425/ns/today-today_people/

Former fiance: Anthony family a ‘carnival of dysfunctionality’
Casey's ex says there's ‘no way’ clan will have a normal life after trial drama
Below:

x Jump to text After a murder trial in which Casey Anthony’s family was portrayed as a...
text

x Jump to discussion comments below
.discussion

x
Next story in People
Capsize survivor: ‘I asked the Lord’ for help related

.Advertise | AdChoices.Video: Casey Anthony’s ex-fiance: ‘Angry, shocked’ by verdict
Open in new window
Closed captioning of: Casey Anthony’s ex-fiance: ‘Angry, shocked’ by verdictAdvertise | AdChoices>> jesse grund who was once engaged to casey anthony testified at her trial. he's with us exclusively along with her bodyguard. good morning to both of you. jesse , let me start with you. just your reaction to the verdict. what was your response?
>> i was angry and shocked by the verdict. it's obvious from the evidence that was presented that casey was the last person to see caylee alive and her body was dumped in the woods. by saying --
>> tracy ?
>> i was also shocked. i couldn't believe it.
>> you said you actually got ill.
>> i felt sick to my stomach all day yesterday.
>> jesse , i know you feel one of the mistakes that the prosecution made in this case was to try to present the anthony family as a cohesive, loving group. why is that?
>> because the fact is, matt, they are not a cohesive loving group. that family was a carnival of dysfunctionality. most families in america are dysfunctional and have their problems. theirs was worse. all it took was a defense to show a little bit of how dysfunctional they were to start poking holes in the prosecution's case.
>> you feel that george and cindy anthony , while on the stand, hurt the prosecution?
>> absolutely. cindy 's example of lying, as i've always said, the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree. casey had to learn her behavior from somewhere. presented a picture of that family, the same picture that the defense was trying to present.
>> and so, tracy , where does this family go now? we have a mother and father apparently on one side, although there may be some fractures between them as well. you've got a daughter and a brother perhaps on the other side. where does this family go, in your opinion?
>> i think what happened is i think casey will end up going home . i don't know if george will stay there. i think cindy will have casey home. it's hard to quit loving your daughter but i think cindy wants to get to the bottom of this and she won't care if it takes ten day or ten years.
>> you envision a time where casey anthony goes back and lives with her mother again after this trial.
>> yes, i do.
>> you think the father becomes estranged from the family?
>> i would think so. i would actually hope so. i can't see george staying in the situation.
>> jesse , give me your take on this. look into your crystal ball . what do you see happening with this family over the coming weeks and months?
>> there's no way casey goes back to that household. cindy and casey have had an adversarial relationship the entire time she has been alive. being part of the family the way i was, there is no way casey goes back to that home. there's no way they have any semblance of a normal family life. right now she has everything she ever wanted. sles going to have money. she's going to have people at her doorstep asking for her, wanting her. she's going to have that partying lifestyle that she so craved.
>> i don't know when the last time was that you spoke with casey , jesse , but first of all, when was it and what would you say to her if you could talk to her this morning?
>> the last time i talked to casey was when she showed up at my house to take a shower because she didn't have a shower available for her to use. what i would i say if i saw her today? i would tell her that she needs to repentd because at the end of the day she is going to have to answer to why caylee isn't on this earth anymore.
>> jesse grund and tracy mclaughlin, my thanks to both of you. appreciate it very much.
>> matt, thank you. can i take a second to thank a lot of the people out there who supported me, friends and family. i haven't always been the easiest to deal with during this time. but i appreciate all the love and support everyone has poured out to me through this.
>> jesse , thank you very much.

Show transcript
By Scott Stump
TODAY.com contributor TODAY.com contributor
updated 7/6/2011 9:13:04 AM ET 2011-07-06T13:13:04
Share Print Font: +-After a murder trial in which Casey Anthony’s family was portrayed as a fractured mess by the defense, Anthony’s former fiancé told TODAY’s Matt Lauer on Wednesday that there is no way the family can return to a normal life.

More from TODAY.com Eating disorders stalk women into adulthood
It's not a phase: Rather than outgrowing eating disorders, new research shows that many women find the pressures of middle age trigger old anxieties and can rekindle a potentially life-threatening battle with the scale.

.Why did Casey Anthony case captivate so many women?
Natalie Portman's baby name revealed?
He won $3.4M — then went back to work as janitor
Store bans drunken customers from buying puppies
..Jesse Grund was previously engaged to Anthony and at one time believed he was the father of Anthony’s 2-year-old daughter, Caylee, whose decomposed body was found in the woods in 2008. Grund witnessed the dynamics between Casey, her parents, George and Cindy, and her brother, Lee, and feels there is no picking up the pieces of a family in disarray.

Video: Casey Anthony’s ex-fiance: ‘Angry, shocked’ by verdict (on this page)
“They are not a cohesive, loving group,’’ Grund told TODAY exclusively about the Anthonys. “That family was a carnival of dysfunctionality.

“There’s no way Casey goes back to that household. Cindy and Casey have had an adversarial relationship the entire time that Caylee has been alive. Being a part of that family the way that I was, there is no way Casey goes back to that home. There is no way they have any semblance of a normal family life.’’

Tuesday's not-guilty verdict has captivated the nation. And like many, Grund was incredulous when Anthony was acquitted on all counts on Tuesday. In his opinion, the prosecution made a mistake in trying to portray the Anthonys as normal and loving.

Story: Juror: Casey Anthony verdict was the right one
“I was angry and shocked by the verdict,’’ he said. “It’s obvious from the evidence that was presented that Casey was the last person to see Caylee alive, and her body was dumped in the woods.’’

Video: Prosecutor: I was ‘shocked’ by verdict (on this page)
The verdict came at the end of a trial in which the defense tried to illustrate the dysfunction of the Anthony family, alleging that George molested Casey when she was eight years old. George denied their claims and the judge said they were never proven by evidence. George acknowledged that he contemplated suicide at one point, even leaving a note, while Casey issued an icy stare in his direction throughout his testimony. Meanwhile, Cindy cried frequently and was often portrayed as a liar.

Advertise | AdChoicesAdvertise | AdChoices
Advertise | AdChoices
.“(With) Cindy’s example of lying, as I’ve always said, the apple doesn’t fall too far from the tree,’’ Grund said. “Casey had to learn her behavior from somewhere.’’

More about People TODAY He won $3.4M — then went back to work as janitor .
Tour de ‘Force’: Star Wars fans unite for ailing infant
Juror: Casey Anthony verdict was the right one
Man jumps nearly 20 feet to world record
Capsize survivor: ‘I asked the Lord’ for help
..Casey's brother Lee Anthony described being frozen out of Caylee’s birth celebration by his mother and sister. It all added up to a picture that Grund had seen firsthand when he fell in love with a 19-year-old Anthony in 2005.

When Caylee was first born, Casey Anthony told Grund he was the father, even though they had broken up before she became pregnant. When Caylee’s disappearance was first reported, Casey told authorities that Grund was the one responsible for it, according to tapes released by Orlando police. Grund took a polygraph test, and was quickly ruled out as a suspect.

Video: Anthony family torn apart by trial (on this page)
In 2008, Grund told TODAY Anthony was a fun-loving girl who turned into a pathological liar once her daughter was reported missing. The girl he once fell in love with is now gone, he felt, and has been replaced by a party girl who enjoys attention. The media glare of the trial and her subsequent acquittal should only serve to feed that attention, he said.

“Right now, she has everything she ever wanted,’’ Grund said. “She is going to have money, she is going to have people at her doorstep asking for her, wanting her, and she’s going to have that partying lifestyle that she so craved.’’

Anthony’s fate has been determined by the legal system, but what ultimately happened to her daughter may never be known.

“What would I say if I saw her today?’’ Grund said about Anthony. “I would tell her she needs to repent, because at the end of the day, she is going to have to answer for why Caylee isn’t on this earth any more.’’

 

[Crockett]

... 22,000 kids die of hunger each year and not one gets one tenth of the outrage expressed in this thread.

This is the U.S.A., pal. You're only significant if you're: rich, popular, or have a pretty face.

 

[The Mom]

Again, the state cannot convict someone of a crime because the accused (or anyone else involved) didn't act the way the average person would.

Someone accused of a crime does not have to prove his/her innocence, nor even be forced to give an explanation for his/her behavior. The burden is on the state.

 

[The Mom]

This is the U.S.A., pal. You're only significant if you're: rich, popular, or have a pretty face.

And the court of public opinion might consider that a reason to believe the accused must be guilty or innocent, without real evidence, depending upon the circumstances.

 

[imagineer boy]

Yeah, to be honest I'm really scratching my head over why this case has gotten so much publicity. I mean its certainly an unusual case for sure, I just don't get why people are going so banannas about it.