Say What? Casey Anthony NOT guilty ...

UMM...yes actually it does mean she is NOT GUILTY! Unless you have a completely different set of rules of law than the rest of the United States of America!

There is outrage about the verdict because people made their decision of guilt based on media coverage and supposition of the "assumed facts" of this case. Not basing their decision on waiting for the actual evidential proofs of what happened and by who! Which the prosecution could not submit to this trial.

PROOF? No reports or complaints on file about any abuse during the life of Caylee!

HOW? They were living with the grandparents. The death could have occurred when she was at the store, or any where other than the residence, while Caylee was in the care (or supervision) of either grandparent. Where is the neglect...let alone gross neglect?

NECROPHILIA? Give me a break! Where is the proof that she put the body in the bags and buried the body (or tossed the body) in the swamp?

She was found guilty of lying to authorities....that was documented and the conviction upheld! What other crimes? Even the experts can't come up with other lesser crimes that would be able to be proven to get a conviction.

The only point of fact you and all the others have....death of a 2 year old! Now...you get the proof, not supposition, of how and by what means this child died...then you should have been the prosecution with your information and physical evidential proof....but you don't have any and you are no farther along than the DA and law enforcement investigators who put this case to the courts with nothing tangible to get a conviction.

They didn't have any evidence of anything except a 2 year old was dead...they folded to local and national media pressure to "stick it to the mother" since the media had launched an all out campaign to charge ?somebody?....

Who is the legal system? The media and their bias and unfounded fact finding by supposition and accusation without evidential proofs except circumstantial evidence?

Our legal system...not perfect, and flawed...is not based on public or personal bias or opinion...it is based on fact and proof. Physical evidence and motive are required to get a conviction, especially in a Capital Offense. Did it do what it was supposed to do in this case....YES it did...no evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt......verdict NOT GUILTY!

 

Yes, that is the attorney. I believe in Scott Peterson's case, they proved that his wife was murdered? The media was out of control in that case, too. These days, the media can convict someone before the case even goes to trial. They don't have to prove their case, just continue to make accusations until the individual is found guilty.

 

They also proved he had motive, he was at the scene, and he was witnessed in the area where the bodies were located!

Completely different from the Anthony case!

 

There is little similarity between these two cases other then the media hype. There was evidence that Peterson was guilty. They had about everything they needed but a witness who saw him kill his wife.

The Casey Anthony case didn't even prove a murder occurred. The prosecution failed to prove a murder occurred. The prosecution failed to prove that Casey was involved in any way in her child's disappearance. There is widespread speculation, but speculation is not proof. According to witnesses in court, Casey was a loving mother. The only thing that the prosecution could prove was that she lied to police. She was convicted and served her time. The prosecution wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer dollars on a case which they could not prove. You would think that with all the money they spent that they could at least prove that a crime occurred. Someone put Calee's body in a bag and dumped it. That may be a crime, but who committed it? They can't prove that Casey even did that.

This mob mentality that I see is pretty scary. If some had their way, they would have grabbed her from the jail and hung or stoned her regardless of the evidence. Nancy Gracie should keep her mouth shut about the prosecution having over whelming evidence. They had NOTHING!!! If they had overwhelming evidence they would have presented it.

 

So if she actually did it - killed her daughter - and the jury found her not guilty, does that mean she miraculously did NOT do it? You do realize how ridiculous your statement is? Reread my post.

She was FOUND not guilty. That doesn't mean she IS not guilty.

Bottom line, you don't know any more than I do what happened. You want to defend her, that's fine. But your basis of defense has no more 'facts' than mine does. I say she got away with murder; you say she didn't. Right now, only she and God knows for sure. The rest is conjecture. And I'm perfectly comfortable where I am on it, thanks.

Oh brother. Necrophilia is having sex with a corpse. It is NOT the same thing as abuse of a corpse. Try and keep up, will ya? I can't believe you even posted that.

Abuse of a corpse can cover anything from leaving a body to rot somewhere to drawing a smiley face on the dead person's forehead. Abuse of a corpse is designed to encompass anything done (or not done for that matter) to someone already dead.

Dumping the body in a swamp is abuse of a corpse. Moving a corpse around is abuse of a corpse. There was plenty of evidence by her actions alone, to convict her on that, had they opted NOT to go for the home run. And I can say with with complete understanding because in my association with a missing person's advocacy group, I've seen plenty of cases where prosecutors opted for lesser charges like that when they couldn't get a murder one charge to stick on someone that was obviously guilty.

It's a start. In this case, they could have nailed Casey with enough lesser charges and kept her in jail, while continuing the murder one investigation. There never would have been an issue with double jeopardy, either. Now, if they suddenly find the evidence they needed, they cannot prosecute her because of double jeopardy.

The prosecution boned this totally from the get-go. No arguments there at all.

Actually, they can and the prosecution has been bar-b-qued for it. They had a plethora of lesser charges they could have gone after her with, but went for the homerun, hoping to convict on public opinion alone. I'm not arguing with anyone that the prosecution did not satsifactorily prove their case because they didn't - not with what they were going after.

Unfortunately, the travesty was also aided and abetted by at least a few jurors who were motivated be something other than the trial - getting out as quickly as possilble in one case and making money off interviews in the case of another.

In the end, this whole thing is pretty simple. We agree that she was proven not guilty - that's how the LEGAL system works and she rolled the dice and won. Where we don't agree is on whether or not she truly, factually, actually, literally was NOT guilty. You believe her to be completely innocent. I believe her to be guilty in some way of the death of her daughter.

Just because a jury FOUND her not guilty, doesn't make you right any more than it makes me right. But I have my thoughts and beliefs and as I said, I'm pretty comfortable with my own deliberations.

Deal with it.

I've actually read with interest, her lawyer whining about how she is not adjusting well over these past couple days. I suppose that kind of guilt might be pretty difficult to overcome.

Whether you believe in karma, the universe, or God's own justice, hers is coming. And I'm completely fine with that.

 

I don't know if Casey Anthony is guilty or innocent.

I wasn't there. I don't know what happened...

And neither do any of you. So let it drop already...

 

Whether she did it or not is irrelevant.

It is only your opinion and not a fact.

She was tried in a court of law and found not guilty.

Using your warped thoughts to this leads one to believe that a person accused of a crime is indeed guilty and no need for a trial as dictated in the constitution.

She received a fair trial.

Let it go.

 

Not guilty is not the same thing as innocent.