• 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 Verdict, jurors safety?

The Toast

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
57
Reaction score
8
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Source: Casey Anthony verdict could haunt jurors - USATODAY.com

"Outside the courthouse , protesters chanted "Justice for Caylee" as they waved signs that said "Arrest the Jury!!" and "Jurors 1-12 Guilty of Murder."

Opinions on the safety of the jurors? Is it fair for their names to be released to the public? Heated but appropriate debate is welcome.
 
Source: Casey Anthony verdict could haunt jurors - USATODAY.com

"Outside the courthouse , protesters chanted "Justice for Caylee" as they waved signs that said "Arrest the Jury!!" and "Jurors 1-12 Guilty of Murder."

Opinions on the safety of the jurors? Is it fair for their names to be released to the public? Heated but appropriate debate is welcome.

I never once even saw the jurors really, but I wouldn't release the names.
 
Ya we really didn't get to see much of them at all. Which is probably a good thing. It's just the fact that a large portion of America disagrees with the verdict. There are some crazy Americans out there. :/
 
I think Perry should continue to refuse to release the names of the jurors until such time as the public anger dies down. A new trial, tragedy, or situation will arise to distract the public. Until then, they should protect these people, IMO.
 
Freedom of information?
 
It is not even close to the same thing to see coverage of a criminal trial on TV or hear about on the radio as it to be in the court room and see the whole trial form start to finish.

I this case I did manage to see much of the trial and as much as I may think something awful took place here the jury was right in that the Prosecutors were unable to prove anything they claimed other than the poor little girl was dead.

They didn't have a clue how she died or who might have killed her if it was murder, and the law is clear they have to prove things.

Feeling that she was murdered and that Casey did it is not proof.

As I said in another Thread I would like to know the make up and education level of those who want the jury to pay for doing what they were charged and sworn to do.

It's hard to be on a jury and having someones fate in your hands.
 
The controversial part is that most people believe that the jury was not sure exactly the procedures they needed to take..Here we have a couple month long trial and the jury decided in less than 11 hours? Makes you wonder.
 
This is why publishing huge court cases like this on TV where public opinion doesnt mean **** is dumb and not needed and is only used to boost corporate media ratings and only diverts attention from important issues going on around the world and at the country abroad.
 
Source: Casey Anthony verdict could haunt jurors - USATODAY.com

"Outside the courthouse , protesters chanted "Justice for Caylee" as they waved signs that said "Arrest the Jury!!" and "Jurors 1-12 Guilty of Murder."

Opinions on the safety of the jurors? Is it fair for their names to be released to the public? Heated but appropriate debate is welcome.
There names should not be released.

People get way too involved in these kinds of cases. If you get that emotional about something you're not directly involved in you need to see a therapist to check on your mental health and projection issues.
 
The controversial part is that most people believe that the jury was not sure exactly the procedures they needed to take..Here we have a couple month long trial and the jury decided in less than 11 hours? Makes you wonder.

You might be Right but from what I heard from Juror # three the Prosecutors proved nothing. leaving them no choice.

All of the evidence didn't prove anything and just added to speculation and that's not even close to proof.

It's frustrating to see but the law is clear and they did what it told them to do, as hard as it is to swallow.
 
It is not even close to the same thing to see coverage of a criminal trial on TV or hear about on the radio as it to be in the court room and see the whole trial form start to finish.

I this case I did manage to see much of the trial and as much as I may think something awful took place here the jury was right in that the Prosecutors were unable to prove anything they claimed other than the poor little girl was dead.

They didn't have a clue how she died or who might have killed her if it was murder, and the law is clear they have to prove things.

Feeling that she was murdered and that Casey did it is not proof.

As I said in another Thread I would like to know the make up and education level of those who want the jury to pay for doing what they were charged and sworn to do.

It's hard to be on a jury and having someones fate in your hands.

I disagree they didn't have a clue how this child died or who did it. There was an abundance of evidence to support the fact this child was murdered by her mother. The jury failed in their responsibility to weigh the evidence properly.

The jury failed to enter the mind of Casey, and understand what makes her tick. To this I also fault the prosecution for failing to provide a clear narrative of this (such as with psychaitrists as witnesses and their evaluations.) Perhaps they wanted to steer clear of showing mental illness for fear of an insanity defense, and it certainly would have removed the death penalty from the equation (which was a mistake to pursue in the first place.)

I also fault the Florida legal system itself. In other states there is a "Guilty but mentally ill" verdict which could have served the prosecution well here. That verdict carries the same sentence as a guilty verdict, but time will be spent in a mental hospital until "cured." Granted, there is no known cure for sociopathy, but that is not the jury's problem to solve. The fact remains Casey IS a sociopath and that this is a mental illness. This could have given the prosecution an opportunity to show more clarity as to her motive for killing Caylee. Sociopaths only care about themselves, and jealousy was at the heart of this murder. Cindy even states as much in the myspace posting she had made shortly after Caylee was being kept from her by Casey. Cindy gave all her love to Caylee, the love that Casey used to receive. Casey ruthlessly took that away from her mom, willfully and spitefully.

I think names of all jurors should be released, and their interviews will be fruitful in showing how they failed to notice the elephant in the room: Casey is a sociopath who was the only one capable of murder, and you don't make an accident look like a murder.
 
Last edited:
I disagree they didn't have a clue how this child died or who did it. There was an abundance of evidence to support the fact this child was murdered by her mother. The jury failed in their responsibility to weigh the evidence properly.

The jury failed to enter the mind of Casey, and understand what makes her tick. To this I also fault the prosecution for failing to provide a clear narrative of this (such as with psychaitrists as witnesses and their evaluations.) Perhaps they wanted to steer clear of showing mental illness for fear of an insanity defense, and it certainly would have removed the death penalty from the equation (which was a mistake to pursue in the first place.)

I also fault the Florida legal system itself. In other states there is a "Guilty but mentally ill" verdict which could have served the prosecution well here. That verdict carries the same sentence as a guilty verdict, but time will be spent in a mental hospital until "cured." Granted, there is no known cure for sociopathy, but that is not the jury's problem to solve. The fact remains Casey IS a sociopath and that this is a mental illness. This could have given the prosecution an opportunity to show more clarity as to her motive for killing Caylee. Sociopaths only care about themselves, and jealousy was at the heart of this murder. Cindy even states as much in the myspace posting she had made shortly after Caylee was being kept from her by Casey. Cindy gave all her love to Caylee, the love that Casey used to receive. Casey ruthlessly took that away from her mom, willfully and spitefully.

I think names of all jurors should be released, and their interviews will be fruitful in showing how they failed to notice the elephant in the room: Casey is a sociopath who was the only one capable of murder, and you don't make an accident look like a murder.

1. Caylee's body decomposed - they did not, at all, know how she died.
2. A sociopath could easily hit their kid and then their kid dies as a result accidentally. A sociopath could also neglect their kid who then dies in a bathtub. In both cases, said sociopath could then cover it up and party it up.
3. "Not guilty" != innocent. Not guilty = we do not have enough proof to put them in jail for life or give them the death penalty. Having someone's life in your hands is too serious basing a conviction on the circumstantial evidence in this case.
 
I disagree they didn't have a clue how this child died or who did it. There was an abundance of evidence to support the fact this child was murdered by her mother. The jury failed in their responsibility to weigh the evidence properly.

The jury failed to enter the mind of Casey, and understand what makes her tick. To this I also fault the prosecution for failing to provide a clear narrative of this (such as with psychaitrists as witnesses and their evaluations.) Perhaps they wanted to steer clear of showing mental illness for fear of an insanity defense, and it certainly would have removed the death penalty from the equation (which was a mistake to pursue in the first place.)

I also fault the Florida legal system itself. In other states there is a "Guilty but mentally ill" verdict which could have served the prosecution well here. That verdict carries the same sentence as a guilty verdict, but time will be spent in a mental hospital until "cured." Granted, there is no known cure for sociopathy, but that is not the jury's problem to solve. The fact remains Casey IS a sociopath and that this is a mental illness. This could have given the prosecution an opportunity to show more clarity as to her motive for killing Caylee. Sociopaths only care about themselves, and jealousy was at the heart of this murder. Cindy even states as much in the myspace posting she had made shortly after Caylee was being kept from her by Casey. Cindy gave all her love to Caylee, the love that Casey used to receive. Casey ruthlessly took that away from her mom, willfully and spitefully.

I think names of all jurors should be released, and their interviews will be fruitful in showing how they failed to notice the elephant in the room: Casey is a sociopath who was the only one capable of murder, and you don't make an accident look like a murder.

Going by the evidence of your avatar should I assume that you are violent? Or a "sociopath"?

While I admittedly didn't pay attention to anything about the trial I will support our system and side with the jury on this one. Mainly because they were there for the whole thing and not just parts of it like everyone outside of the courtroom. If people are protesting and calling them murderers then it is obvious to me that there may be at least one person that may take it to extreme's. As such thier names should be withheld for at least a year imo, or even better, until they give thier permission to release thier names.
 
1. Caylee's body decomposed - they did not, at all, know how she died.
2. A sociopath could easily hit their kid and then their kid dies as a result accidentally. A sociopath could also neglect their kid who then dies in a bathtub. In both cases, said sociopath could then cover it up and party it up.
3. "Not guilty" != innocent. Not guilty = we do not have enough proof to put them in jail for life or give them the death penalty. Having someone's life in your hands is too serious basing a conviction on the circumstantial evidence in this case.

1. Duct tape was covering mouth and nose. Evidence this was a murder as testified to by the medical examiner.
2. Both of your examples fit the charge of manslaughter of a child. Yet the jury found her not guilty of this. Also, her diary entry shows this was not an accident.
3. This jury could have found her guilty of a lesser charge. They failed to add up the facts and resist fanciful doubts the defense was desperately trying to raise.
 
1. Duct tape was covering mouth and nose. Evidence this was a murder as testified to by the medical examiner.
2. Both of your examples fit the charge of manslaughter of a child. Yet the jury found her not guilty of this. Also, her diary entry shows this was not an accident.
3. This jury could have found her guilty of a lesser charge. They failed to add up the facts and resist fanciful doubts the defense was desperately trying to raise.

1. The tape may have been put on after she was dead.
2. The point is that we don't know what happened - many things could have happened and kid drowning in a bathtub or pool is not manslaughter.
3. Your confidence is misplaced.
 
What about the scuzzy guy who found the body AFTER the area had been combed, and then kept it for a week hoping for a quick buck?

The fact is, NOBODY knows what happened. Circumstantially, it looks like Casey might have done it, or at least been in on it, but that doesn't PROVE anything.

This whole thing was such a media circus from the git-go, we'll never get to the truth now. Lawyers who weren't even on the case were commenting on TV. It was all over the tabloids. Meanwhile there were other kids benig murdered every day all over the world and not many people noticed. This whole thing was a diversionary tactic. What people should ask themselves when they see this kind of media circus is, "What's going on in the world that they don't want us to notice?"

While I understand outrage at the murder of a child, the mob should be angry at the media instead of calling for someone to be convicted and sentenced to death on circumstantial evidence. That could hurt us all in the long run.
 
^So the smell of a decomposing body in her car and 87 searches on chloroform doesn't make you wonder?
 
Our national obsession with this case is ****ing despicable.
 
It is absurd for our fellow americans to ever be so naive as to wish ill-will upon these 12 people who so respectfully and dutifully took time out of their lives to sit upon a panel and follow our constitution. The fact that there were people outside the courthouse chanting "justice for caylee" is understandable but by no means should their hatred be towards the 12 poor souls that had to sit through a horrific trial. The blame should be upon a prosecution and state government who failed to build a viable case against Casey Anthony. I can say I did not personally watch the trial but if there was a unanimous vote within two days of the jury going into speculation obviously someone other than the jurors failed to do their job appropriatelly. Any american who wishes harm upon these people should look and the mirror and reflect on the fact that yes Caylee is no longer with us but how about the thousands of young children who get taken from us daily. Should we not also bring justice for those children and not just Caylee. This child surely should be a stepping stone for our government in its deliberation for our child neglect laws and should stem into the abortion rulings considering it was argued that Ms. Anthony wanted nothing to do with her daughter and that there are so many mothers out there that feel the same way. It is truley saddening to hear that there are Americans who wish harm to these jurors. I say we thank them for being the few people to sit through such a devistating trial and listenging to the grusome details of Caylee's death which will surely stick in their memories for years to come.

Wake up America!
 
1. Duct tape was covering mouth and nose. Evidence this was a murder as testified to by the medical examiner.
2. Both of your examples fit the charge of manslaughter of a child. Yet the jury found her not guilty of this. Also, her diary entry shows this was not an accident.
3. This jury could have found her guilty of a lesser charge. They failed to add up the facts and resist fanciful doubts the defense was desperately trying to raise.

1. Duct tape on the mouth was speculation, not proven fact.
2. There was no proof and the diary didn't say "I killed my child".
3. There was no proof of felony murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, or neglect. Can't convict when there's reasonable doubt.

Also, I'd recommend you actually read transcripts/evidence reports. You are woefully misinformed.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of facts, here is an interesting one...The duck tape was actually proven to have been put on after the body had decomposed.

Isn't that interesting......
 
- under Florida law, 'Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child' (s. 782.07) is defined as:

"A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(3) ..."
- s. 827.03(3) is defined as (in the first-degree):

1. A caregiver's failure or omission to provide a child with the care, supervision, and services necessary to maintain the child's physical and mental health, including, but not limited to, food, nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would consider essential for the well-being of the child; or

2. A caregiver's failure to make a reasonable effort to protect a child from abuse, neglect, or exploitation by another person.

Neglect of a child may be based on repeated conduct or on a single incident or omission that results in, or could reasonably be expected to result in, serious physical or mental injury, or a substantial risk of death, to a child.

According to juror 2, they were 6-6 on this charge at first, the not guilty winning out because George could have been the caregiver at time of death.

The facts all pointed to Casey being the caregiver. Scott Peterson case had circumstantial evidence also, he got murder 1. I think these jurors got duped just like Casey's other victims. Evil is the hardest thing to confront.
 
Speaking of facts, here is an interesting one...The duck tape was actually proven to have been put on after the body had decomposed.

Isn't that interesting......

Not true. Link?
 
It's absurd that people obsess over something that is so relatively minor in comparison to the death and destruction that goes on regularly across the globe. Care about something actually meaningful, not some stupid court case. These people need to get a life.
 
Back
Top Bottom