Hacker 82 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 I for one would love to see Nancy Grace's head blow up, that would be entertainment. She is a ghoul who feeds upon the misery of others. She spews righteous indignation but tomorrow she will be on another mission. Got to have misery to get ratings so she can draw her hefty salary. Yes Variable, I would love to see people step up and get involved in a positive way on many things. We passively sit by and watch government at all levels do as it will and turn around and re-elect the same fools. We all need to go out and try to do something to make the world a better place. Whether it be to volunteer at a nursing home, do something kind for someone, anything that shows we care about making this a better place. We, the people, (yeah that is intentional.) are the ones who have to make a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VHSLhelper 571 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Nancy Grace's head just exploded... Don't be a tease, G! I would NOT have wanted to have been in the same room with her when the verdict was read. MY EARS !!!!! Ow, OOOWWWWWWW !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 (edited) Attorney Chaney Mason took the news media to task, and I agree with him. These lawyers and talking heads who get on TV and spew their biased opinions hopefully have learned a lesson...innocent until proven guilty. They all have egg on their faces today, especially Nancy Grace. Edited July 5, 2011 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted July 5, 2011 Amen. Nancy Grace is annoying. She's a hard mix of Fran Drescher and Satan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Amen. Nancy Grace is annoying. She's a hard mix of Fran Drescher and Satan. Good comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 My thoughts: I can't in good conscience "blast" the jury for making the "wrong decision". NONE of us listened to 100% of the evidence like those jurors did, so any smarmy comments either way are baseless, improper, and misguided. I don't doubt the system: it's the prosecution's burden to convict beyond a reasonable doubt. However, I still must wonder about jurors. I don't trust jurors. I didn't before I came to law school, and I absolutely don't now that I'm out. Perhaps it's me being hurt because an innocent child will never see justice. If the "system" worked, so be it, I can live with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VivaFutbol 10 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 While I think she is guilty, the evidence isn't compelling enough to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMan 3,569 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Truth be told... We would have never even heard about this case had it not been for... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VivaFutbol 10 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 The more I think about it, the less guilty she becomes in my opinion. At first I thought she was guilty, and just 30 minutes ago I stood by it, but now I'm doubting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMan 3,569 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Has anyone here ever been called for jury duty? The Judge gives the jurors specific instructions to base their judgment on. Innocent until proven guilty and the guilt must be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you are 99.9% sure someone is guilty, that .1% requires you to judge them "not guilty". I'm sure there was enough doubt in each jurors mind to meet that requirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 The posted this on another board. Most people won't like it. But whatever.. It's the job of the prosecutors to prove without a doubt that she committed these crimes. They obviously failed epicly at doing this. Don't hate the jury for not voting guilty. IMO, hate the the prosecutors for not providing enough evidence to the courts and the jury to support the claims that she murdered her daughter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Truth be told... We would have never even heard about this case had it not been for... Then why didn't you tell the truth? ;) Nancy Grace is a pathetic human being, and I don't throw that around lightly. You should be thanking that meter maid that called 911...THREE separate times...and finally got action. Edited July 6, 2011 by UVAObserver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VHSLhelper 571 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Amen. Nancy Grace is annoying. She's a hard mix of Fran Drescher and Satan. Oh, please... don't insult Satan like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VHSLhelper 571 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 The posted this on another board. Most people won't like it. But whatever.. It's the job of the prosecutors to prove without a doubt that she committed these crimes. They obviously failed epicly at doing this. Don't hate the jury for not voting guilty. IMO, hate the the prosecutors for not providing enough evidence to the courts and the jury to support the claims that she murdered her daughter. Well, I guess they realized they would never be able to prove it 100% without an "actual" cause or witnesses, so they threw everything they had and hoped for as much time as possible. That being said, who thinks she woulda been found guilty if the case as heard by Judge Judy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Variable Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Attorney Chaney Mason took the news media to task, and I agree with him. These lawyers and talking heads who get on TV and spew their biased opinions hopefully have learned a lesson...innocent until proven guilty. They all have egg on their faces today, especially Nancy Grace. True, but in this case its irrelevent. There has to be character present before it can be assassinated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Attorney Chaney Mason took the news media to task, and I agree with him. These lawyers and talking heads who get on TV and spew their biased opinions hopefully have learned a lesson...innocent until proven guilty. They all have egg on their faces today, especially Nancy Grace. True, but in this case its irrelevent. There has to be character present before it can be assassinated. Everyone deserves a level playing field. This case was tried in the media. That's wrong, questionable character aside. I'm not defending Casey Anthony, but I do defend her right to a fair trial. Nancy Grace almost made that impossible. Chaney Mason was spot on. Edited July 6, 2011 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Variable Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Everyone deserves a level playing field. This case was tried in the media. That's wrong, questionable character aside. I'm not defending Casey Anthony, but I do defend her right to a fair trial. Nancy Grace almost made that impossible. Chaney Mason was spot on. As over the top and annoying and completely ridiculous as Nancy Grace behaved, Casey Anthony deserved worse that what she got. She is the epitome of the irresponsible and neglectful parent. Her parents got what they deserved too since they facilitated this behavior instead of calling child services or taking guardianship of the child themselves. Yes, that child murderer got her day in court, and yes she is now a free woman. The system operated as it should have when operated by folks more fixated on scoring political points than getting a conviction. Did the media go too far? Probably, but at the same time they also punished that scum more than the justice system that did fail one dead little girl. Laughing and smiling in court after finding out she got away with murder, I wonder how long it will take her to write the sequel to OJ Simpsons book. At least I know that sociopath will likely burn for her sins as she will never feel remorse for what she did. Bottom Line, I am not ashamed of our laws and our courts...but this is one instance that proves the system isnt perfect...that these things will occasionally happen to ensure innocent people are not wrongfully punished. Edited July 6, 2011 by The Variable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 As over the top and annoying and completely ridiculous as Nancy Grace behaved, Casey Anthony deserved worse that what she got. She is the epitome of the irresponsible and neglectful parent. Her parents got what they deserved too since they facilitated this behavior instead of calling child services or taking guardianship of the child themselves. Yes, that child murderer got her day in court, and yes she is now a free woman. The system operated as it should have when operated by folks more fixated on scoring political points than getting a conviction. Did the media go too far? Probably, but at the same time they also punished that scum more than the justice system that did fail one dead little girl. Laughing and smiling in court after finding out she got away with murder, I wonder how long it will take her to write the sequel to OJ Simpsons book. At least I know that sociopath will likely burn for her sins as she will never feel remorse for what she did. Bottom Line, I am not ashamed of our laws and our courts...but this is one instance that proves the system isnt perfect...that these things will occasionally happen to ensure innocent people are not wrongfully punished. So you're sure she killed Caylee? No "reasonable" doubt in your mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Variable Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 So you're sure she killed Caylee? No "reasonable" doubt in your mind? Not one. Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Of course not, no things are certain...but who goes partying after their kid accidentally died and nobody else knows? Gets tattoos saying "the good life". What was she doing borrowing a shovel days after the kid was last seen? Who gives their kid borderline perscription medication to put them to sleep while they go clubbing? You dont Duct-Tape a dead body, there is no reason to. There really is a mountain of circumstancial evidence that by itself each piece can be explained, but when put together is too much to cast reasonable doubt as to what happened. She wasnt even somber after the trial. Shes a sociopath, and sociopaths have a pretty bad track record of killing things that get in the way of their desires. And even if I am wrong, for what she did while her kid was "missing" she deserves every piece of bad press that exposes her for what she is even if she didnt kill Caylee: Scum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Not one. Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Of course not, no things are certain...but who goes partying after their kid accidentally died and nobody else knows? Gets tattoos saying "the good life". What was she doing borrowing a shovel days after the kid was last seen? Who gives their kid borderline perscription medication to put them to sleep while they go clubbing? You dont Duct-Tape a dead body, there is no reason to. There really is a mountain of circumstancial evidence that by itself each piece can be explained, but when put together is too much to cast reasonable doubt as to what happened. She wasnt even somber after the trial. Shes a sociopath, and sociopaths have a pretty bad track record of killing things that get in the way of their desires. And even if I am wrong, for what she did while her kid was "missing" she deserves every piece of bad press that exposes her for what she is even if she didnt kill Caylee: Scum. You're right. She did all of those things, and she was a liar, a slut, scum and a horrible mother. All of the things done to Caylee were unspeakably horrible. I'm as outraged as you and everyone else. But I'm outraged because of Caylee, not because I know without a doubt that Casey is guilty. I can understand why the jury had no choice but to find her not guilty, because the prosecution failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, and in this country, the prosecution has the burden of proof. Being a sociopath does not make Casey a murderer. It makes her crazy as hell, and it makes her different from most of us, but it doesn't prove she murdered Caylee. Edited July 6, 2011 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Variable Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 You're right. She did all of those things, and she was a liar, a slut, scum and a horrible mother. All of the things done to Caylee were unspeakably horrible. I'm as outraged as you and everyone else. But I'm outraged because of Caylee, not because I know without a doubt that Casey is guilty. I can understand why the jury had no choice but to find her not guilty, because the prosecution failed to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, and in this country, the prosecution has the burden of proof. Being a sociopath does not make Casey a murderer. It makes her crazy as hell, and it makes her different from most of us, but it doesn't prove she murdered Caylee. I am pretty sure we agree on this point for the most part, bama, except you see reasonable doubt and I do not. And I am outraged because of Caylee too, because nobody was looking out for her. Not Casey, not her parents, not family friends...nobody. Nobody did the right thing and she didnt have a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) I am pretty sure we agree on this point for the most part, bama, except you see reasonable doubt and I do not. And I am outraged because of Caylee too, because nobody was looking out for her. Not Casey, not her parents, not family friends...nobody. Nobody did the right thing and she didnt have a chance. Yep. Believe me, I was looking for a reason to convict her, I was just never convinced. But we agree on everything else. Edited July 6, 2011 by blueinbama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghs73 157 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Has anyone here ever been called for jury duty? The Judge gives the jurors specific instructions to base their judgment on. Innocent until proven guilty and the guilt must be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you are 99.9% sure someone is guilty, that .1% requires you to judge them "not guilty". I'm sure there was enough doubt in each jurors mind to meet that requirement. the bad part about this is just about everyone can have a little doubt about a case unless you actually saw the person commit the crime then you would not be on the jury. i think jurist have to use some common sense in trials. beyond a reasonable doubt but beyond a shadow of guilt no. because as i said can be a little doubt in all and it only takes one to hang a jury. the key should be reasonable doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Variable Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 the bad part about this is just about everyone can have a little doubt about a case unless you actually saw the person commit the crime then you would not be on the jury. i think jurist have to use some common sense in trials. beyond a reasonable doubt but beyond a shadow of guilt no. because as i said can be a little doubt in all and it only takes one to hang a jury. the key should be reasonable doubt. Unless UVAO corrects me, I think it IS beyond a reasonable doubt. I have heard that sometimes jurors take it to the extreme as GMAN described as a shadow of a doubt. If that was the case, nobody should be convicted in a jury trial. There is always the chance that the case is wrong, even with a confession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMan 3,569 Report Share Posted July 6, 2011 Unless UVAO corrects me, I think it IS beyond a reasonable doubt. I have heard that sometimes jurors take it to the extreme as GMAN described as a shadow of a doubt. If that was the case, nobody should be convicted in a jury trial. There is always the chance that the case is wrong, even with a confession. No, it isn't taking it to extremes. Have you ever pulled jury duty? As I said, you have to follow the Judge's directions as to how to look at the evidence presented in the case. If the evidence that the Prosecution brought against the Defendant is in any way disaffirmed by the Defense and leaves doubt to whether or not the Defendant did it, you must rule "not guilty". Remember, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The Prosecution could not prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Casey Anthony was the one who killed Caylee. The Defense did their job in this case whether we agree with it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.