Casey Anthony - Predict Verdict

It's not really a wrist slap. People hate her now. OJ got away with killing his wife and her lover. This chick killed her child.... i would be very afraid if I were her. BUT. Nowhere near what she should have gotten. Death, no, but a nice 30 years would have been lovely.

Has she been cleared on all counts? Besides the false info bit?

I like that. I was trying to explain to my friends why I didn't think she should get the death penalty. That sums it right up.

 

And shr was found guilty on all the lying charges - because they could prove it to the standard of beyond a reasolable doubt.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk

 

Not reporting a missing child needs to be a felony with stiff STIFF penalities. I have no idea how we don't have that one on the books.

 

The duct tape being wrapped around the face means it was there at the time of death. The decomposition in the tape also means it had significant time with the body. The specific brand is very rare, meaning that someone in that family placed it on Caylee just prior to or immediately after death. I'm not sure how that isn't direct evidence pinning down at most 2 of the family members.

You can prove beyond a reasonable doubt by the process of elimination. With one piece of evidence (duct tape), all but 3 can be excluded (those that lived in the house). Work records place the mother at work, so you're down to 2 people. Casey said it was an accident which places the child alive with her last. There is no reason for a former law enforcement officer to make an accident look like a murder. IF it was an accident, he would've reported it... he can safely be eliminated. Back to everything pointing at Casey and murder. What rational reason would there be to place duct tape over the face of a child?

I understand "not guilty" versus "innocent". However, I feel that this "circumstantial evidence" proves her guilt. I understand they didn't find her DNA or fingerprints at the scene. If the duct tape weren't super rare it might be a different story. The whole notion of the psychic is extremely convenient as well.

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" does not equal "beyond the exclusion of any possible doubt". You could've imagined a host of scenarios from aliens to the boogeyman.

 

The fact that I wasn't on the jury makes me hesitant to have a strong opinion about her guilt or innocent. I think it is a little weird how the tv and a lot people decide guilt or innocent based on what the news reports. I find it kind of odd that the jury was only out for 10hrs. That tells me the prosecutors case was not as strong as the news made it out to be, considering everything I heard dealt with not if she would be convicted, but what she would be convicted of.

 

The media may pump stuff up, but the court transcripts are a very interesting read and available all over the internet. We may not be able to hear what the jury hears, but we can read everything they hear. That's the stuff we need to be basing our "arguements" on.

But I also don't know the law. I thought if we had enough "evidence" pointing in the same direction, we could hold them accountable on some level.... I guess not.

 

The tape could have been placed at any time before or after death. Again possession of the tape no matter how unique does not mean that it is a direct link. Circumstantial evidence needs more than a excessive amount to be render a guilty verdict. Motive needs to be there and there was no motive given/proven by the prosecutors according to an alternate. The fact that Anthony wants to be a party girl does not a motive make. The case needs to be decided on proven facts. There was no forensic evidence given. Outside of a Perry Mason admission of guilt this was a difficult case. I doubt the media provided us with all of the evidence but the most salacious. You have the right to believe what you wish and I have no problem with that either.

The defense did a great job of providing alternative explainations that cast doubt. Not that they were plausible.

This case should not have garnered the attention it did. Thank Nancy Grace for that.

 

Maybe dad and brother agreed to the incest twist. They new it couldn't be proven, but that it could provide doubt. Risks they may have taken in a bid to save their daughter's/sister's life. *drama piano*

Poor little girl :-/

So, we honestly don't have a law saying you have to report a person/child missing in X amount of time?

 

Generally more than evidence is needed to hold someone accountable. You need a resonable motive and opportunity also. The evidence then needs to withstand scrutiny and hopefully reasonable explainations as to why it is not valid.

Also witnesses need to be believable, thus the reason that while the transcripts are an interesting read they do not tell the whole story. The case appears to have been all about doubt.

 

That family was broken a long long time ago.