Casey Anthony Trial

[VHSLhelper 571]

Jane V-Mitchell is shocked... her release date just announced as next Wednesday.

[VHSLhelper 571]

. her mother was the last one to see her alive.

 

How do you know that?

[Guest The Variable]

How do you know that?

 

Because nobody else did. She had the Caylee and lied to her parents saying she was at a conference and at disneyland with people who dont really exist.

 

I tend to follow the Sherlock Holmes method. When all other explanations fail, the remaining explanation (however improbable) must be true. In this case the remaining explanation is more than likely, and not even remotely close to improbable.

[BHS03 99]

People say that the jury got it right and the system works. Well you know what? That's a bunch of baloney. A murderer will be set free very soon. And if you think she is innocent due to "lack of evidence," then I have some ocean front property in Mcdowell County I will sell you.

[VHSLhelper 571]

NOBODY said she was INNOCENT.

She WAS found "not guilty", based on the (lack of) evidence.

[VHSLhelper 571]

Because nobody else did.

 

You've asked everyone else? Don't rem. you asking me.

[BHS03 99]

NOBODY said she was INNOCENT.

She WAS found "not guilty", based on the (lack of) evidence.

 

Maybe I should have expanded more but you are proving another point that I would like to bring up. Several people feel that she is guilty but yet they feel like its "ok" because the jury saw that there was a lack of evidence.

[Guest The Variable]

You've asked everyone else? Don't rem. you asking me.

 

You had been drinking, but you told me that you had not seen Caylee Anthony. See evidence below:

 

No, Variable, I have not seen Caylee.

 

Turns out, that nobody else the Cops interviewed had seen Caylee alive since seening her WITH her mother. So what else do you want?

 

So this begs the question: What kind of evidence WOULD have convinced the jury that she was guilty? She has motive, opportunity, no alibi, questionable to the point of damning behavior after the fact, intent to cover up the fact that a death had occured, no outward display of remorse or mourning for her child. Body found within proximity to where she lives with items that she had access to. A car smelling of death. ect, ect, ect.

 

I might have bought the Not Guilty on Murder 1 if they had convicted her of Child Abuse, but the fact that they came back with that crap makes me think that it wasnt a lack of evidence that earned this verdict, but a lack of brains on the jury panel.

Edited July 7, 2011 by The Variable

[BHS03 99]

Also, there was plenty of evidence to convict Casey Anthony. The system will have let a child murderer walk free on July 13th.

[deuceswild 15]

Also, there was plenty of evidence to convict Casey Anthony. .

 

Uhh? No. There was plenty of evidence to suspect Casey Anthony.

[BHS03 99]

Uhh? No. There was plenty of evidence to suspect Casey Anthony.

 

Go read through all the evidence and you will see.

[deuceswild 15]

Go read through all the evidence and you will see.

 

Ok.

 

I still have reasonable doubt.

[BHS03 99]

Ok.

 

I still have reasonable doubt.

 

No you don't.

[GMan 3,569]

She's a Witch!!!!

 

[Guest The Variable]

She's a Witch!!!!

 

 

You know, a duck and a large scale would be a lot less of a tax-payer burden than our current system.

[deuceswild 15]

No you don't.

 

LoL, I don't?

 

Impressive.

 

What am I thinking..now?

[blueinbama 259]

You had been drinking, but you told me that you had not seen Caylee Anthony. See evidence below:

 

 

 

Turns out, that nobody else the Cops interviewed had seen Caylee alive since seening her WITH her mother. So what else do you want?

 

So this begs the question: What kind of evidence WOULD have convinced the jury that she was guilty? She has motive, opportunity, no alibi, questionable to the point of damning behavior after the fact, intent to cover up the fact that a death had occured, no outward display of remorse or mourning for her child. Body found within proximity to where she lives with items that she had access to. A car smelling of death. ect, ect, ect.

 

I might have bought the Not Guilty on Murder 1 if they had convicted her of Child Abuse, but the fact that they came back with that crap makes me think that it wasnt a lack of evidence that earned this verdict, but a lack of brains on the jury panel.

 

Here's why I have reasonable doubt, and I do have a brain, and so did the jurors:

 

1. What was her motive? To be able to party, so she killed her child so she could party? Not buying it. She was a loving mother as stated by witnesses and her mother and father.

 

2. Opportunity: Every mother has opportunity.

 

3. No alibi: She didn't need an alibi. No one knows time of death.

 

4. Questionable behavior: I'll give you that one. In fact, questionable is being kind. But that doesn't make her a murderer. Crazy as hell? Most likely.

 

5. Cover up? Because of her father, and possibly her mother, who I feel were involved. After finding Caylee in the family pool, George said, "Look what you've done! You're going to jail for the rest of your life".

 

6. No outward display of emotion or remorse? We have no idea. We weren't there when Caylee died.

 

7. Body found close to home with items she had access to: She's not the only one that had access to those items...George and Cindy Anthony did as well.

 

8. Car smelling of death? Not proven. In fact, the people who saw the car immediately after Cindy reported smelling decomp didn't smell anything of the sort. They smelled rotting garbage.

 

You can argue that you believe these accusations, but you can also argue that you don't. The jury didn't believe what was being told to them by the defense, and neither do I.

[Guest The Variable]

1. What was her motive? To be able to party, so she killed her child so she could party? Not buying it. She was a loving mother as stated by witnesses and her mother and father.

And witnesses countered that. The mother and father seem to be as dishonest as she is and willing to purjure themselves in order to keep her out of a conviction. She was running out of ways to ditch her kid to have a good time. Caylee because an incredible inconvenience to her social life. She had to invent people and there are reports (from Caseys own mouth even) that she was doping her kid so she could party at night.

 

2. Opportunity: Every mother has opportunity.

Then she has opportunity.

 

3. No alibi: She didn't need an alibi. No one knows time of death.

They have an approximate time of death, and Casey was MIA for the majority of that window.

 

4. Questionable behavior: I'll give you that one. In fact, questionable is being kind. But that doesn't make her a murderer. Crazy as hell? Most likely.

Yes, its circumstancial, not concrete.

 

5. Cover up? Because of her father, and possibly her mother, who I feel were involved. After finding Caylee in the family pool, George said, "Look what you've done! You're going to jail for the rest of your life".

This would imply that she murdered her kid.

 

6. No outward display of emotion or remorse? We have no idea. We weren't there when Caylee died.

Since the beginning of this whole ordeal there was no sense of genuine or unprompted mourning or remorse.

 

7. Body found close to home with items she had access to: She's not the only one that had access to those items...George and Cindy Anthony did as well.

But they had no motive.

 

8. Car smelling of death? Not proven. In fact, the people who saw the car immediately after Cindy reported smelling decomp didn't smell anything of the sort. They smelled rotting garbage.

Lab reports found that there was evidence consistent with the presense of a dead body. The defenses response to that was diversionary by saying that a lab tech said that the bag in the car did not smell like death initially. That does not mean that the evidence was not there, just that he didnt smell something.

 

You can argue that you believe these accusations, but you can also argue that you don't. The jury didn't believe what was being told to them by the defense, and neither do I.

Like I said, I could accept the not guilty on murder one, but the not guilty on child abuse is what made me think that the jury underwent a collective lobotomy.

[blueinbama 259]

And witnesses countered that. The mother and father seem to be as dishonest as she is and willing to purjure themselves in order to keep her out of a conviction. She was running out of ways to ditch her kid to have a good time. Caylee because an incredible inconvenience to her social life. She had to invent people and there are reports (from Caseys own mouth even) that she was doping her kid so she could party at night.

 

 

Then she has opportunity.

 

 

They have an approximate time of death, and Casey was MIA for the majority of that window.

 

 

Yes, its circumstancial, not concrete.

 

 

This would imply that she murdered her kid.

 

 

Since the beginning of this whole ordeal there was no sense of genuine or unprompted mourning or remorse.

 

 

But they had no motive.

 

 

Lab reports found that there was evidence consistent with the presense of a dead body. The defenses response to that was diversionary by saying that a lab tech said that the bag in the car did not smell like death initially. That does not mean that the evidence was not there, just that he didnt smell something.

 

 

Like I said, I could accept the not guilty on murder one, but the not guilty on child abuse is what made me think that the jury underwent a collective lobotomy.

 

If the jury can't find her guilty of murder or manslaughter, how are they going to find her guilty of child abuse? There's no evidence of any of the three. No cause of death. No body, only skeletal remains, and no broken bones or damage to the bones to prove child abuse. The meter reader found the skull, and as a matter of fact there is evidence and testimony that he inserted a stick into the eye socket of the skull, so he disturbed the evidence. No prior history of abuse or neglect. No testimony from any witnesses accusing her of abuse. Child neglect? Absolutely, especially if the drowning story is true.

 

Bottom line, it is reasonable to believe this was an accident that went horribly out of control. It's also reasonable to believe this could have been first degree murder, or manslaughter. But believing it and proving it are two different things.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I sincerely hope no juror would be that irresponsible, especially in a first degree murder case where a child has died, but I guess that's possible. Our system is not perfect by any means, but I prefer our system of justice over any other in the world. It is meant to protect the innocent until they are proven guilty. I am so thankful we are given the opportunity as Americans to be judged by our peers instead of some one, two or three judge panel or the like.

 

Jurors are that irresponsible. Believe me.

[Deleted Account 5,203]

I might have bought the Not Guilty on Murder 1 if they had convicted her of Child Abuse, but the fact that they came back with that crap makes me think that it wasnt a lack of evidence that earned this verdict, but a lack of brains on the jury panel.

 

And this is EXACTLY why I have the strongest of doubts that the jury may be at fault. Certainly a "reasonable doubt". ;)

[GMan 3,569]

Jurors are that irresponsible. Believe me.

 

Jurors are only irresponsible if you're on the wrong end of their judgment...

[BHS03 99]

I still don't see why this whole "she didn't have a motive" argument is coming into play. Look at the mothers over the years who have killed their kids for either no reason or some crazy reason. Susan Smith for example, her motive was, to dispose of her children so that she might have a relationship with a wealthy local man who had no interest in a "ready-made" family.

 

Yeah, Casey Anthony is REAL innocent. While her daughter was missing, she didn't feel the need to report it to anyone. In fact, she decided that she would just go out to the clubs and party a little bit. Yeah, that has innocent written all over it.

[VivaFutbol 10]

I'm no legal expert at all, but I still feel the jurors made the right decision. I have no doubt that Casey Anthony knows what happened to her daughter, but that doesn't make her a murderer.

[BHS03 99]

I'm no legal expert at all, but I still feel the jurors made the right decision. I have no doubt that Casey Anthony knows what happened to her daughter, but that doesn't make her a murderer.

 

That makes her look just as bad.