• 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!

Did the Jury get it right in the Casey Anthony trial

Did the jury get the verdict right in the Casey Anthony trial?


  • Total voters
    38

SgtRock

Cancel Cancel Culture and Woke Supremacy
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,025
Reaction score
2,896
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Did the jury in the Casey Anthony trial get the verdict right? The defense demonstrated reasonable doubt and the prosecution was unable to prove the case against Ms. Anthony
 
Last edited:
NO. THE SYSTEM FAILS AGAIN. She will answer to God for her heinous crime tho.
 
based on what was given to them, yes, they did. I won't pretend to be certain on Casey's guilt/innocence. I really have NO idea what happened and I won't pretend to know or try to justify hating her because of the tragedy of her daughter's death. But yeah, ultimately the jury got it right based on what they had available.
 
The jury made the right decision based on the evidence provided by the defense and the prosecution.

Completely different question from whether Casey Anthony is actually innocent or guilty.
 
I believe they had enough evidence for child endangerment and possibly manslaughter. They failed to do their jobs and let a sick woman who was burdened by her 2 year old child off the hook.
 
I believe they had enough evidence for child endangerment and possibly manslaughter. They failed to do their jobs and let a sick woman who was burdened by her 2 year old child off the hook.

That's not up to the jury. They only get to decide on the charges brought by the prosecutor. The prosecutor in this instance brought a charge of murder, not child endangerment or manslaughter.
 
That's not up to the jury. They only get to decide on the charges brought by the prosecutor. The prosecutor in this instance brought a charge of murder, not child endangerment or manslaughter.

Actually, charges 2 and 3 were neglect and manslaughter.
 
Oh, I didn't realize that. She got off on those too?

Yep. All they got her on was 4 counts of lying to law enforcement. Maximum of 4-years if she servces consecutive sentences.
 
The jury here was as right as the jury in the OJ Simpson trial.

Because not guilty = innocent.
 
based on what was given to them, yes, they did. I won't pretend to be certain on Casey's guilt/innocence. I really have NO idea what happened and I won't pretend to know or try to justify hating her because of the tragedy of her daughter's death. But yeah, ultimately the jury got it right based on what they had available.

From what I have heard, and from what I know about trying cases, there was sufficient reasonable doubt especially on the First Degree Murder charge
 
I agree with this part, unless you are trying to say the jury is wrong.



Huh? No it doesn't.

OJ Simpson was obviously innocent.

And yes, no evidence = not guilty = innocent. It's true. Example? Casey Anthony.
 
The jury dedicated time from their private lives and heard all the evidence against Casey Anthony. No real evidence against her was found. Thankfully the jury was smart enough to go on facts and not the personal opinion of Nancy Grace.
 
OJ Simpson was obviously innocent.

Wake, I can't tell when you're being sarcastic and when you are not. If you are, you have GOT to be ****ting me. OJ Simpson was found not guilty. I'm 95% certain that he is NOT innocent.

And yes, no evidence = not guilty = innocent. It's true. Example? Casey Anthony.

No, not guilty means the jury didn't find enough evidence to convict you of the crime. It means the prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey Anthoney murdered Caylee. It does NOT mean that she is innocent.
 
Did the jury in the Casey Anthony trial get the verdict right? The defense demonstrated reasonable doubt and the prosecution was unable to prove the case against Ms. Anthony

From what little I understand about the case and in my highly uninformed opinion, she should of been convicted of the child neglect and/or abuse charges.

If I heard correctly, she failed to report the disappearance for 1 month.
 
Wake, I can't tell when you're being sarcastic and when you are not. If you are, you have GOT to be ****ting me. OJ Simpson was found not guilty. I'm 95% certain that he is NOT innocent.



No, not guilty means the jury didn't find enough evidence to convict you of the crime. It means the prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey Anthoney murdered Caylee. It does NOT mean that she is innocent.

If you want to know why "people like me" are angry, it's because Casey was found not guilty yet I am 95% certain that she is NOT innocent.
 
From what little I understand about the case and in my highly uninformed opinion, she should of been convicted of the child neglect and/or abuse charges.

If I heard correctly, she failed to report the disappearance for 1 month.

The jury seemed to have overlooked that.

I wonder why..
 
If you want to know why "people like me" are angry, it's because Casey was found not guilty yet I am 95% certain that she is NOT innocent.

Based on what you yourself just said there, if you were a juror in this case you would have to vote to acquit.
 
If you want to know why "people like me" are angry, it's because Casey was found not guilty yet I am 95% certain that she is NOT innocent.

Then you agree that not guilty does not equal "innocent"? Seems that way.

And I would respond, deal with it. That's how our justice system works. It's not perfect, but the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is there for a reason.
 
I believe our "excellent system" failed, yet again.

The system failed with OJ and Casey. What is to keep me or anyone else from copying their patterns in a close enough way to also be presumed "not guilty"? It must be grand to see such holes in our system and, if copied to an extent, can be presumed not guilty.

I think murderers slip through the system.
 
Stillballin75, it's not easy to just "get over" this obvious injustice.

This issue angers me far, far more than political discussion ever could. I can't think of that sweet little girl and get over it.
 
I believe our "excellent system" failed, yet again.
I don't believe so. I don't believe the state proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony killed her child.

I think murderers slip through the system.
This I have to agree with ... there's a dead child and no one convicted for it.
 
Lack of evidence + mismanagement of the case= not guilty
 
Back
Top Bottom