Casey Anthony

[Caitwald24]

I feel shes guitly. Theres just to much going on. I cant believe they found her not guilty.

 

[AlwaysPraying]

https://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a387/isiecal/article-2011804-0CE1AE6500000578-575_634x574.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SFko2Z_G5c&feature=player_embedded


Cheney Mason is a disgrace. This is him sticking his finger up at everyone after he left court after the verdict yesterday. As for the champagne celebration well.. Dorothy Clay Sims is also disgusting. I hope she enjoyed her victory dance

WHAT THE HELL! i didnt see this whole video until now, WTF kinda "professional" lawyers are they, WHY THE HELL is Dorthy taking pictures and all of the people outside. She was acting like a little girl not a full grown women

His finger was to the media. He was very angry at how the media portrayed the "tot mom" and the whole situation and didn't let her have her fair day in trial. This is one point I do agree with. She has been guilty since day one in the media, and there's nothing fair about that.

As well, this is peoples jobs, they are lawyers and their job was done and they were celebrating that fact. It's an old joke that the last things on earth will be car salesmen, lawyers and cockroaches. (not my joke, but a joke!). Stuff like this doesn't impact their daily lives when they have so many cases. Today they are working just as hard on another case. And honestly and truly, they have to believe their client or the whole thing wouldn't work, so yes, they should be "happy" that they did the right thing by their client. Just a different perspective on it, that's all. I, in no way, agree or condone their actions at all!

 

[AlwaysPraying]

I don't think that race needs to be bought into this to be honest. I also don't think that's 100% true. I agree media coverage would be alot less but race tends to impact jury selection (it shouldn't but it does).

You may not think it needs to be brought into it, but it does. I've been here (U.S.) for a while now and racism is still an issue in this country. People do not want to believe a young white woman (an attractive one, at that) would kill their child.

I'm aware of Downs, Smith, etc., so it does happen, but the reality is, most people just don't want to believe it.

I totally agree with race is a big part of why this got so popular. And she was "pretty" and the kid was "cute". They've even said if the child was a boy it would have never gotten the attention it did. Race is a huge factor still in North America, and so much in the media.

An interesting point is that most of the women who have been convicted of murdering their children have been done so under the insanity plea. I don't have numbers, but they were talking about it last night. It may be that people can't imagine a mother doing this willingly so she must be insane.

 

[Tasha]

I get what you are sayingabout race BUT the public pretty much 100% thought she was guilty, and she is still a white, attractive female to them too. The media too, can sometimes be seen as race swaying their opinion, again they pretty much had her down as guilty from the beginning, she was still white and (some would say) attractive and female to the media.

I think, yes sometimes race sways judgement but in this case most people thought she was guilty, but as Jem said in the eyes of the law they could not prove beyond resonable doubt.

 

[AlwaysPraying]

I get what you are sayingabout race BUT the public pretty much 100% thought she was guilty, and she is still a white, attractive female to them too. The media too, can sometimes be seen as race swaying their opinion, again they pretty much had her down as guilty from the beginning, she was still white and (some would say) attractive and female to the media.

I think, yes sometimes race sways judgement but in this case most people thought she was guilty, but as Jem said in the eyes of the law they could not prove beyond resonable doubt.

I don't think race played anything into guilt or innocence but rather it played into why the whole story got so crazy popular. There are way too many children that are missing or wind up dead that never get media coverage and their stories are never told, the murderers never found. Since this was an "easy and relatable" story it was a no brainer that it would get so much attention. Sad that a mom who's genuinely missing her child wouldn't get this kind of attention to find the child just because she's not white or pretty.

 

[Jem_x3]

I get what you are sayingabout race BUT the public pretty much 100% thought she was guilty, and she is still a white, attractive female to them too. The media too, can sometimes be seen as race swaying their opinion, again they pretty much had her down as guilty from the beginning, she was still white and (some would say) attractive and female to the media.

I think, yes sometimes race sways judgement but in this case most people thought she was guilty, but as Jem said in the eyes of the law they could not prove beyond resonable doubt.

I don't think race played anything into guilt or innocence but rather it played into why the whole story got so crazy popular. There are way too many children that are missing or wind up dead that never get media coverage and their stories are never told, the murderers never found. Since this was an "easy and relatable" story it was a no brainer that it would get so much attention. Sad that a mom who's genuinely missing her child wouldn't get this kind of attention to find the child just because she's not white or pretty.

I don't agree with this as I think this case was pretty unique. It became so popular because of all the lies and twists in the plot. Everyone got sucked in because of the bizarre behaviour of not only Casey, but her whole family. People wanted to know why Casey went out partying, why she made up dozens of imaginary friends and why she couldn't tell anyone the truth about where Caylee was.

I agree with what you've said in accordance to other cases but I can see why this one gained so much attention. The circumstances were strange and confusing.

 

[Tasha]

I can see what you are saying alwayspraying, it was just that octopus said if she were a minority then she would be on death row right now. But like I said 99% of people thought she was guilty irrespective of race.

 

[Jem_x3]

https://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a387/isiecal/article-2011804-0CE1AE6500000578-575_634x574.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SFko2Z_G5c&feature=player_embedded


Cheney Mason is a disgrace. This is him sticking his finger up at everyone after he left court after the verdict yesterday. As for the champagne celebration well.. Dorothy Clay Sims is also disgusting. I hope she enjoyed her victory dance

WHAT THE HELL! i didnt see this whole video until now, WTF kinda "professional" lawyers are they, WHY THE HELL is Dorthy taking pictures and all of the people outside. She was acting like a little girl not a full grown women

His finger was to the media. He was very angry at how the media portrayed the "tot mom" and the whole situation and didn't let her have her fair day in trial. This is one point I do agree with. She has been guilty since day one in the media, and there's nothing fair about that.

As well, this is peoples jobs, they are lawyers and their job was done and they were celebrating that fact. It's an old joke that the last things on earth will be car salesmen, lawyers and cockroaches. (not my joke, but a joke!). Stuff like this doesn't impact their daily lives when they have so many cases. Today they are working just as hard on another case. And honestly and truly, they have to believe their client or the whole thing wouldn't work, so yes, they should be "happy" that they did the right thing by their client. Just a different perspective on it, that's all. I, in no way, agree or condone their actions at all!

Perhaps he was angry but is this the way a respectable lawyer and man should act? No. It was childish and rude. The way she was portrayed can be deemed unfair but it does not justify his actions.

Yes, these are people's jobs and fair enough they want to "celebrate". But you do not do this in public or jump up and down like a little schoolgirl. It's tasteless, especially when a little girl's life has been lost. I don't believe you have to believe your client. Some lawyers know for damn sure their client is guilty, but again it's their JOB to defend that person. I get that you're not condoning it it's just a bit of a sore area for me because their actions did not show the sincerity they showed in their statements after the verdict was read. Noone should be a winner in this case. Noone. Their reactions have been inappropriate and disrespectful to the memory of that gorgeous little girl. It really irks me

 

[BigZai]

I have one question... Why was Caylees disappearance such a big deal, it is terrible when a child is missing what i mean is WHY did Caylee get more media attention then other missing children? Because her mother did not tell anyone for 31 days and lied? I know she didnt tell anyone because she knew she was dead (i believe she killed her)
I just dont get why Caylee's disappearance and her death got so much attention

Near where i live a few years ago a boy was found dead and duct taped to a tree, he was beaten so badly by his parents he had CHUNKS of his behind missing, and he died of dehydration because they left him there so long, his death was terrible and tragic and all he had was an article in the paper no bigger then an inch wide and 4 inches long

 

[robinator]

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick to Our Stomachs' Over Not Guilty Verdict

wow. very interesting.

 

[Octopus]

For those that believe the jury made the right decision, have you read the law regarding second degree murder, third degree murder, etc.? Do you know what culpable negligence means? I'm not saying this in a snarky way, but you have to understand the law and know what these terms mean to understand the injustice in this case.

I just can't get over that she got off. No matter how much of an incapable douche her lawyer is, WTF is wrong with that jury? I would love to get inside one of their heads. Perhaps if I knew where they were coming from I might not be so irked about this. They have the right not to talk to the media but I think in a case like this, when the whole world is like, WTF??, someone needs to set the record straight. Not fair to the rest of us!!

Sadly, it doesn't make me feel any better because it is clear they did not understand the law here. These issues are not things they had to grapple with and further, second and third degree murder wer charges and they didn't have enough evidence of that? We need professional jurors like in France; people who are educated and have an understanding of the law.

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick to Our Stomachs' Over Not Guilty Verdict

She wasn't charged with third degree murder or negligence. I see you edited your post though. She was charged with murder in the first degree, then the lesser (second degree), aggravated child abuse and aggravated manslaughter of a child. Those jurors know she's guilty but unfortunately I have to say it - they were following the law. You are not to convict guilty if there is reasonable doubt. And that doubt was there was no evidence to say how Caylee died - so how do they know what theory was right? In line with the law no theory could be proven - so no guilt could be proven. Gah. It gives me a headache to think about it. I am mad they came to that conviction but I also can't condemn them for it

She was charged with third degree murder (aggravated child abuse) and culpable negligence (manslaughter) in addition to first and second degree murder.

Well, you prove my point that most people don't understand the law, which is exactly why the jurors acquitted her. They were trying to understand motive and cause of death, both of which are not reasonable doubt. They also considered punishment, which is not to be considered under the law.

I'm starting to feel that "lay" people should not be on a death penalty murder case; professional jurors are needed.

 

[Octopus]

I have one question... Why was Caylees disappearance such a big deal, it is terrible when a child is missing what i mean is WHY did Caylee get more media attention then other missing children? Because her mother did not tell anyone for 31 days and lied? I know she didnt tell anyone because she knew she was dead (i believe she killed her)
I just dont get why Caylee's disappearance and her death got so much attention

Near where i live a few years ago a boy was found dead and duct taped to a tree, he was beaten so badly by his parents he had CHUNKS of his behind missing, and he died of dehydration because they left him there so long, his death was terrible and tragic and all he had was an article in the paper no bigger then an inch wide and 4 inches long

Some cases get momentum that other cases don't get. I don't believe there is a rhyme or reason for it; I think it sometimes just happens and this was one of the cases it happened to. There have been others that have gotten a lot of attention, but this is one of the first cases where Twitter, Facebook, etc. were around and thus, everyone can have a public opinion about it.

I think the Susan Smith case would have gone the same way if Twitter and Facebook were around.

 

[t33cup]

I understand they dropped the child abuse and negligence charges after caylees body was found she can't be guilty of negecting her for 31 days or whatever if she died on the first day seems like a whole host of errors regarding evidence and what she was prosecuted with were made I personally don't think they should have gone for the death penalty with only circumstantial evidence however strong, its that reasonable doubt part the judge wouldn't allow that charge to be changed though. Wiki has a lot f good details and facts on the case that help make sense of what went wrongwhen you read them all. I am stunned that she didn't have to give evidence for one thing and the family and their behaviour is all very odd although the defence were allowed to use that to ulitmate effect and cast aspirtions her own track record as a liar and thief was inadmissable evidence

 

[Tiff]

See, I personally don't agree. 31 days of lying about where your child is when you knew damn well where she was is neglect in my books.

I guess I wouldn't make a good juror.

 

[t33cup]

I think it got attention because casey is attractive and unlikely looking but moreso because it's a *mother* who has likely killed her own child AND with no known motive.. Aren't her parents still claiming caylee is alive somewhere and will be found? that's insane. They are like a normal any other familybut then they're really not, so many contradictions from them and the defence team (as a strategy tbh in their case) and just general oddness that makes all this curious when there is such a lackof motive

 

[t33cup]

See, I personally don't agree. 31 days of lying about where your child is when you knew damn well where she was is neglect in my books.

I guess I wouldn't make a good juror.

Well I don't agree either and they obv didn't feel that charge appropriate anymore so went for the full force of murder with death penalty which they just couldn't or failed to get a conviction on

 

[Tiff]

As far as I know, both of Casey's parents have agreed to the fact that Caylee is dead. It was her body that was found, after all.

 

[Tiff]

See, I personally don't agree. 31 days of lying about where your child is when you knew damn well where she was is neglect in my books.

I guess I wouldn't make a good juror.

Well I don't agree either and they obv didn't feel that charge appropriate anymore so went for the full force of murder with death penalty which they just couldn't or failed to get a conviction on

I don't think they had a strong enough case for Murder 1 either. But not even manslaughter? That's just crazy to me!!!!

If Claire were to die on my watch, I'd be tried (and probably convicted) of manslaughter. No question. I get the jurors had to do what they had to do... but ugh... the whole thing just makes me feel sick.

 

[t33cup]

Yeah and makes me sick that the whole family was moreso on trial and under greater scrutiny than casey -in order to cast doubt - whilst she herself whom is on trial is protected

 

[Jem_x3]

For those that believe the jury made the right decision, have you read the law regarding second degree murder, third degree murder, etc.? Do you know what culpable negligence means? I'm not saying this in a snarky way, but you have to understand the law and know what these terms mean to understand the injustice in this case.

I just can't get over that she got off. No matter how much of an incapable douche her lawyer is, WTF is wrong with that jury? I would love to get inside one of their heads. Perhaps if I knew where they were coming from I might not be so irked about this. They have the right not to talk to the media but I think in a case like this, when the whole world is like, WTF??, someone needs to set the record straight. Not fair to the rest of us!!

Sadly, it doesn't make me feel any better because it is clear they did not understand the law here. These issues are not things they had to grapple with and further, second and third degree murder wer charges and they didn't have enough evidence of that? We need professional jurors like in France; people who are educated and have an understanding of the law.

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick to Our Stomachs' Over Not Guilty Verdict

She wasn't charged with third degree murder or negligence. I see you edited your post though. She was charged with murder in the first degree, then the lesser (second degree), aggravated child abuse and aggravated manslaughter of a child. Those jurors know she's guilty but unfortunately I have to say it - they were following the law. You are not to convict guilty if there is reasonable doubt. And that doubt was there was no evidence to say how Caylee died - so how do they know what theory was right? In line with the law no theory could be proven - so no guilt could be proven. Gah. It gives me a headache to think about it. I am mad they came to that conviction but I also can't condemn them for it

She was charged with third degree murder (aggravated child abuse) and culpable negligence (manslaughter) in addition to first and second degree murder.

Well, you prove my point that most people don't understand the law, which is exactly why the jurors acquitted her. They were trying to understand motive and cause of death, both of which are not reasonable doubt. They also considered punishment, which is not to be considered under the law.

I'm starting to feel that "lay" people should not be on a death penalty murder case; professional jurors are needed.

I do understand law, I think you proved your own point though. Ok if we are going to nitpick, aggravated child abuse is a felony of the third degree. She wasn't charged with culpable negligence this is a factor in the charge of manslaughter of a child;

In Florida - Aggravated manslaughter of a child:
"The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification..., is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree.".

Anywho I don't come on here to nitpick about law with silly people who think they know better than everyone else. That wasn't the first of my posts on this thread you attempted to debunk. Moving on, the jurors acquitted her because there was not enough evidence for the charges brought against her. I'll say it again, had she been up for something that fit the evidence then perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation. Not knowing how Caylee died is reasonable doubt. How could they convict when they don't know how she died? They cannot say yes we KNOW she died by chloroform/duct tape. So how can they even be sure this is a homicide? I get the definitions of first, second and third degree murder but how can they convict when there IS reasonable doubt about how she died? I'm not going to argue law, but seriously.. There is absolutely nothing that actually links Casey to Caylee's death. There were witnesses testifying to what a good mother she was, how happy Caylee was when she was with her. Even if she had drowned in the pool they still could not convict her on lesser charges because there's no evidence she drowned either. I can see the dilemma the jurors had because when you don't know how someone's died how do you convict? The fact was they WERE following the law, very well actually because they found that they could not charge her because there is no evidence she died of neglect, by the hands or her mother, by accident or even of natural causes, because noone knows. It's all circumstantial.

I'm just as upset as anyone, I followed this case from the time she went missing. But, the jurors did not convict on emotion, which they're not supposed to which is why we're all sitting here dumbfounded now. One of the jurors has spoken out to say how sick they all feel, they cried and didn't want to give that verdict but they HAD to. They know damn well that woman is guilty, but in the eyes of the law there is no proof she is. I said earlier in the thread, it makes me sick they verdict they gave but I can't fault them on it, they did what they were asked to do