• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Casey Anthony Trial: Jury Reaches Verdict

one thing for certain: IF I ever want to commit a murder and get away with it...I know where I'm going.
 
The jury did their job and they were there day in day out and they got instructions from the judge and came up with a verdict.

As I just heard on Fox News we can have our opinions but we didn't see of hear all the evidence, and the Prosecution failed to convice the jusry and those 12 people who's opinions are the ones that count in the end, and we need to live with it, as we most of us did when OJ got off.
 
another thing: how the hell they ruled not guilty on the child abuse charge is unbelievable. the mere fact that the kid was missing for a month before she told anyone is, in itself, child abuse. your kid is missing and instead of telling someone, you make up a lie about a non-existant nanny and go out partying?
 
Serenity said:
the jury did their job and they are being persecuted for it. Casey may well have committed this crime, but the State didn't prove their case. period. the jury made their decision based on the evidence they heard and not on their emotions. isn't that the sort of jury everyone would want if they were ever in a situation that required juror involvement? of course it is.

i feel for all the jurors. what a ****ty position for them to be in. they must be wondering if justice will ever be served for little Caylee too.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Had I been on that jury I couldn't in good conscience go with a guilty verdict for either murder or manslaughter. There is too much of a chance that the death could have been accidental. My feelings on her guilt aside, I'd have to go with the evidence presented. In my opinion, not enough was presented to prove she intentionally killed her child.
 
Caine said:
WOW. You are a defense attorney's DREAM juror.

God I can't believe some of the **** you are excusing in these posts.

You are failing to understand the term...... its very popular in our criminal law procedure....

R-E-A-S-O-N-A-B-L-E.
Click to expand...

I'm not excusing anything. I'm also not responding emotionally and irrationally to supposition and speculative evidence. Pictures of the crime seen before ANYTHING was moved shows the duct tape lying just in front of the skull (IIRC). NOT attached. It was ASSUMED that the duct-tape had been attached because the mandible was still connected to the skull.

I might be a defense attorney's wet dream, who knows? I know I'm going to weigh what is presented very, very heavily if I'm tasked with convicting or acquitting somebody whose guilty verdict could lead to death. I'm not going to act like Nancy Grace and countless others who went around calling for Casey's head on a spike because I'm just SO SURE that she killed the child. I'm not sure. Nobody who looks at the facts of the evidence could possibly be sure. Anybody who says they are is acting on emotion, not logic.
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
Oddly - just as many have agreed that someone was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - and turns out they were completely innocent and let loose from death row years later.
Click to expand...

An oddly enough, every time that has happened, it was because due process was somehow denied to the defendant in the original trial because of the prosecutors coercing witnesses to give false testimony and ID's, buried exculpatory evidence, etc
 
Serenity said:
the jury did their job and they are being persecuted for it. Casey may well have committed this crime, but the State didn't prove their case. period. the jury made their decision based on the evidence they heard and not on their emotions. isn't that the sort of jury everyone would want if they were ever in a situation that required juror involvement? of course it is.

i feel for all the jurors. what a ****ty position for them to be in. they must be wondering if justice will ever be served for little Caylee too.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about this last night as I watched a news anchor blaming the jury for the verdict. No wonder these people didn't want to talk to the press yesterday. They probably knew that so many people would be shocked, angered, and hostile regarding their verdict. I work when the trial is on, so I didn't get to watch it very often (the psychology is interesting to me, but they didn't cover it very often), but I did browse through some of the evidence that had been released over the course of the investigation. These jurors had absolutely nothing proven that pointed them directly at Casey except the 31 days. The state did not present a solid argument regarding those 31 days, so they only come across as suspicious. I feel for them. They made a tough decision and the best decision they could have made considering the state's case.
 
Councilman said:
The jury did their job and they were there day in day out and they got instructions from the judge and came up with a verdict.

As I just heard on Fox News we can have our opinions but we didn't see of hear all the evidence, and the Prosecution failed to convice the jusry and those 12 people who's opinions are the ones that count in the end, and we need to live with it, as we most of us did when OJ got off.
Click to expand...

The big difference is that with OJ there was a trail of blood and evidence. With this case we dont even know how she died. We do know THAT she died. I think the prosecution ****ed up by going after murder 1 charges. Im not a lawyer and havent slept in a Holiday Inn lately but Im pretty sure in order to pull off a murder 1 verdict you have to have more than some emotional appeal to convict because SOMETHING happened...
 
OscarB63 said:
another thing: how the hell they ruled not guilty on the child abuse charge is unbelievable. the mere fact that the kid was missing for a month before she told anyone is, in itself, child abuse. your kid is missing and instead of telling someone, you make up a lie about a non-existant nanny and go out partying?
Click to expand...

Look at that objectively. Does that prove child neglect in and of itself, given the state definition of child neglect (what she was charged with):

(f) Neglects the child. Within the context of the definition of "harm," the term "neglects the
child" means that the parent or other person responsible for the child's welfare fails to supply the
child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or health care, although financially able to do so or
although offered financial or other means to do so. However, a parent or legal custodian who, by
reason of the legitimate practice of religious beliefs, does not provide specified medical
treatment for a child may not be considered abusive or neglectful for that reason alone, but such
an exception does not:
1. Eliminate the requirement that such a case be reported to the department;
2. Prevent the department from investigating such a case; or
3. Preclude a court from ordering, when the health of the child requires it, the provision of
medical services by a physician, as defined in this section, or treatment by a duly accredited
practitioner who relies solely on spiritual means for healing in accordance with the tenets and
practices of a well-recognized church or religious organization.
(g) Exposes a child to a controlled substance or alcohol. Exposure to a controlled substance or
alcohol is established by:
1. A test, administered at birth, which indicated that the child's blood, urine, or meconium
contained any amount of alcohol or a controlled substance or metabolites of such substances, the
presence of which was not the result of medical treatment administered to the mother or the
newborn infant; or
2. Evidence of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of a controlled substance or alcohol by a
parent when the child is demonstrably adversely affected by such usage.
As used in this paragraph, the term "controlled substance" means prescription drugs not
prescribed for the parent or not administered as prescribed and controlled substances as outlined
in Schedule I or Schedule II of s. 893.03.
(h) Uses mechanical devices, unreasonable restraints, or extended periods of isolation to control
a child.
(i) Engages in violent behavior that demonstrates a wanton disregard for the presence of a child
and could reasonably result in serious injury to the child.
(j) Negligently fails to protect a child in his or her care from inflicted physical, mental, or sexual
injury caused by the acts of another.
(k) Has allowed a child's sibling to die as a result of abuse, abandonment, or neglect.
(l) Makes the child unavailable for the purpose of impeding or avoiding a protective
investigation unless the court determines that the parent, legal custodian, or caregiver was fleeing
from a situation involving domestic violence.
(33) "Institutional child abuse or neglect" means situations of known or suspected child abuse or
neglect in which the person allegedly perpetrating the child abuse or neglect is an employee of a
private school, public or private day care center, residential home, institution, facility, or agency
or any other person at such institution responsible for the child's care.
Click to expand...
 
DemonMyst said:
I am going to start out by stating a few facts.. (If anyone here was a member of the jury then please disregard this post..)

Nobody here was on the jury..
Nobody here saw the evidence they saw..
Nobody here actually has to live with thisd verdict..

Having that.. I think the people here that claim she is guilty is showing their ignorance.. You can't judgment on someone based on the tid bits the press choose to show us for ratings.. All the coverage that I saw potrayed her to be guilty..

Since nobody here actually has the burdon of living with this verdict.. I don't see how any of us could or would dare to question thier judgement.. We don't have the insight they have nor the knowlege on the case.. 12 people voted unaminously that she was innocent.. It wasn't a hung jury, and they didn't deliberate that long..

Reasonable doubt is simply any definable fact that says the accused could or might be innocent.. Nobody should be sentenced to life or death unless you are absolutey sure without any doubts..

It is one thing to discuss this case, the evidence, who might have killed this little girl other than her mother..

I am making no claim to her innocense or guilt.. I was not a jurist.. I respect the findings of the jury.. As I said in my last post.. I would rather a murderer be set free than someone who is innocent be wrongfully convicted..

Typed on my phone.. Excuse typos..
Click to expand...

Thing is, there was at least enough doubt of her innocence. I am shocked that they found her not guilty, and this wasn't a mistrial. Shocked.
 
the real shame is that the poor little girl isnt coming home.
but

It is, if nothing else, refreshing to know that mob rule mentality to convict,
is protected by a jury of your peers
 
sangha said:
An oddly enough, every time that has happened, it was because due process was somehow denied to the defendant in the original trial because of the prosecutors coercing witnesses to give false testimony and ID's, buried exculpatory evidence, etc
Click to expand...

We have a man here who was recently released after serving 20 years in prison. During the trial, the victim positively identified him as the perp. Recently, she wrote a letter to the governor emploring him to commute the prisoner's sentence because she had made up the crime to get back at the man on her mother's urging. The guy lost 20 years of his life based on victim testimony from somebody who was ever truly a victim. That is a greater miscarriage of justice than Casey going free, IMO.
 
I don't know if it is true or not, but a lawyer has told me that there is no law which makes not reporting your missing child a crime.
 
sangha said:
I don't know if it is true or not, but a lawyer has told me that there is no law which makes not reporting your missing child a crime.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, it isn't illegal...that'd be a hard crime to track. What's the time-frame? If the child is going on a weekend trip and you don't report until Tuesday, did you violate the law? If you're told the child is safe with a family member you trust, when in reality something bad has happened, did you violate the law?
 
tessaesque said:
As far as I know, it isn't illegal...that'd be a hard crime to track. What's the time-frame? If the child is going on a weekend trip and you don't report until Tuesday, did you violate the law? If you're told the child is safe with a family member you trust, when in reality something bad has happened, did you violate the law?
Click to expand...

I think those issues could be addressed by making it a requirement to report when the circumstances are such that "a reasonable person would have reason to believe the child may havebeen harmed" or something similar. It's known in legal circles as the "Reasonable Man Standard"
 
tessaesque said:
I feel for them. They made a tough decision and the best decision they could have made considering the state's case.
Click to expand...

I'm not there (yet?).

Father testifies she left home on June 16th with Caylee, didn't return for 31 days.
Casey's mother asks to see Caylee, Casey makes up lies why that's not possible.
July 13th Casey's father finds a notice that his daughters car is in a tow lot, and the trunk smells like a decaying body.
Casey's mom reports Caylee missing for 31 days.

When questioned, Casey said Caylee had been kidnapped by her nanny, Zanny. (made up ****)
Casey also told police that she worked at Universal Studios, a lie

Hair from Caylee found in the trunk of Casey's dead smell car that was left abaonded, not reported missing
Decomposition in trunk confirmed
Chloroform confirmed
Caseys computer had searched for chloroform and how to make it. Also searched for neck breaking, and death.
Same type of bag, tape, and pastic bags, all found in Casye's home.

June21 Diary entry from Casey:
I have no regrets, just a bit worried. I just want for everything to work out OK. I completely trust my own judgment and know that I made the right decision. I just hope that the end justifies the means. I just want to know what the future will hold for me. I guess I will soon see – This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time. I hope that my happiness will continue to grow– I've made new friends that I really like. I've surrounded myself with good people – I am finally happy. Let's just hope that it doesn't change.[61]
Click to expand...

Give me a ****ing break.

Last person seen with her.
Motive (Diary, partying, 31 days missing indicates you know...**** you Caylee right?)
Evidence (the PC searches, the body in her car, the tape, bag, etc., from her house, not reporting her missing, the cover-up lies)
Come on. Only thing she didn't do was flee police with a disguise and Caylees blood soaking her clothes, but that isn't enough either is it.

People need to do the right thing. If they think laws prevent that, they are cowards. How can you get a god damned guilty verdict, you have to have 21 eye witnesses? How dumn can you get?
 
tessaesque said:
As far as I know, it isn't illegal...that'd be a hard crime to track. What's the time-frame? If the child is going on a weekend trip and you don't report until Tuesday, did you violate the law? If you're told the child is safe with a family member you trust, when in reality something bad has happened, did you violate the law?
Click to expand...
Of course it's not illegal. It's damning evidence however.
 
VanceMack said:
The big difference is that with OJ there was a trail of blood and evidence. With this case we dont even know how she died. We do know THAT she died. I think the prosecution ****ed up by going after murder 1 charges. Im not a lawyer and havent slept in a Holiday Inn lately but Im pretty sure in order to pull off a murder 1 verdict you have to have more than some emotional appeal to convict because SOMETHING happened...
Click to expand...

I think that was the biggest mistake of this entire incident.

They were reaching for the stars, but were only trying to use a 10ft ladder.
 
Mach said:
I'm not there (yet?).

Father testifies she left home on June 16th with Caylee, didn't return for 31 days.
Casey's mother asks to see Caylee, Casey makes up lies why that's not possible.
July 13th Casey's father finds a notice that his daughters car is in a tow lot, and the trunk smells like a decaying body.
Casey's mom reports Caylee missing for 31 days.

When questioned, Casey said Caylee had been kidnapped by her nanny, Zanny. (made up ****)
Casey also told police that she worked at Universal Studios, a lie

Hair from Caylee found in the trunk of Casey's dead smell car that was left abaonded, not reported missing
Decomposition in trunk confirmed
Chloroform confirmed
Caseys computer had searched for chloroform and how to make it. Also searched for neck breaking, and death.
Same type of bag, tape, and pastic bags, all found in Casye's home.

June21 Diary entry from Casey:


Give me a ****ing break.

Last person seen with her.
Motive (Diary, partying, 31 days missing indicates you know...**** you Caylee right?)
Evidence (the PC searches, the body in her car, the tape, bag, etc., from her house, not reporting her missing, the cover-up lies)
Come on. Only thing she didn't do was flee police with a disguise and Caylees blood soaking her clothes, but that isn't enough either is it.

People need to do the right thing. If they think laws prevent that, they are cowards. How can you get a god damned guilty verdict, you have to have 21 eye witnesses? How dumn can you get?
Click to expand...

They could not duplicate the results of the chloroform or human decomp tests. They got 1 positive result on each and couldn't reproduce those results again. That doesn't "prove" them. Also, as mentioned probably 10 times before, the methods used for the decomp testing were brand new, unverified, and never before utilized. Casey's father has been show to lie almost as often as Casey (lied to his family for 5 years about financial issues, had 2 affairs: 1 before and 1 after Caylee's death, etc), so his testimony must be looked at with a question as to the credibility. The searches were done on the family computer; that doesn't prove Casey did them. One hair in the drunk, but no DNA, no decomp fluids, no blood, no other indication of Caylee's presence. I'm sure there are some of my hairs in the trunk of my car. Hair sheds constantly. They couldn't find any trace evidence that linked Casey's car, person, or personal belongings to the drop scene, either.

You see what you want to see with evidence. If you want her to be guilty you'll find quilt. If you go in with no expectations and no bias and merely look at what's presented you probably don't come up with a certain "guilty" or "innocent" determination.
 
Caine said:
Thats why I could never be a defense attorney in a capital crime case......

There is absolutely no ****ing way I could assist someone in getting away with murder only to feed my own selfish bastard desires (money).
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you Caine....but most attorneys doing capital work do not do it for the money. Capital case work usually results in lots and lots of hours and relatively low pay. Most people do it because they believe strongly that the death penalty is immoral.
 
OscarB63 said:
another thing: how the hell they ruled not guilty on the child abuse charge is unbelievable. the mere fact that the kid was missing for a month before she told anyone is, in itself, child abuse. your kid is missing and instead of telling someone, you make up a lie about a non-existant nanny and go out partying?
Click to expand...

Sorry....but that is not the law.
 
sangha said:
As far as I know, "No"

But my mind could be changed if someone would post a link to the law that says it is neglect to not report your missing child
Click to expand...


From the DCFS website..."Neglect happens when a parent or responsible caretaker fails to provide adequate supervision, food, clothing, shelter or other basics for a child."

DCFS - FAQ's Child Abuse and Neglect

Now are you attempting to say that failure to report a missing child for 31 days is "adequate supervision"?

Really?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
From the DCFS website..."Neglect happens when a parent or responsible caretaker fails to provide adequate supervision, food, clothing, shelter or other basics for a child."

DCFS - FAQ's Child Abuse and Neglect

Now are you attempting to say that failure to report a missing child for 31 days is "adequate supervision"?

Really?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Since when is failing to report a child inadequate supervision? A person can't even get away with murdering their kid without people getting uppity. Sheesh, people are so touchy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom