Casey Anthony cleared of murdering young daughter

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Breitbart:

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) - Casey Anthony was acquitted Tuesday of murdering her 2-year-old daughter in a case that became a national sensation on cable TV, with its CSI-style testimony about duct-tape marks on the child's face and the smell of death inside a car trunk.

After a trial of a month and a half, the jury took less than 11 hours to find Anthony not guilty of first-degree murder, aggravated manslaughter and aggravated child abuse.

She was convicted only of four misdemeanor counts of lying to investigators who were looking into the June 2008 disappearance of her daughter, Caylee.

Tears welled in Anthony's eyes, her face reddened, her lips trembled, and she began breathing heavily as she listened to the verdict. Anthony, 25, could have gotten the death penalty if convicted of murder.

Many in the crowd of about 500 people outside the courthouse reacted with anger after the verdict was read, chanting, "Justice for Caylee!" One man yelled, "Baby killer!"

Given the relative speed with which the jury came back with a verdict, many court-watchers were expecting Anthony to be convicted in the killing, and they were stunned by the outcome.
________

I must be in a minority-I didn't think the prosecution was able to prove its case, and this is the result.

Meanwhile, here's Nancy Grace's head exploding.

[Argyle58]

I must be in a minority-I didn't think the prosecution was able to prove its case, and this is the result.

 

You are 100% correct in your assessment. After watching closing arguments (the only part of the case I paid any attention to) I remarked to my wife that if she were to be convicted, it would be because of her character, not any evidence against her. The prosecutors in this case can join the O.J. prosecuting team in blowing their careers on a high profile no brainer, letting the publicity obscure their duties in presenting an iron clad case.

 

It is a cornerstone to our criminal justice system that "It is better that 100 guilty men go free than to convict 1 innocent person." I don't know whether Anthony is guilty, or what she may be guilty of, but the prosecution proved her guilty only of lying to investigators.

[Pepper]

CA knows her daughter is dead.

CA does nothing for 31 days - wait,

oh yes party party party. Tattoo Lie Lie

And is found guilty of lying by jury - I guess they think the daughter drowned herself, then applied duct tape, then toddled off to the dump - and still don't find her guilty at least of abuse?

 

And parties again

[Pepper]

Dennis Prager in his book "Think a Second Time", p. 144

 

"That an innocent person may be executed is the one moral argument against capital punishment. Nonetheless, the remote possiblity of an innocent person's execution does not invalidate the death penalty. For one thing, judicial and technological safeguards (e.g., DNA testing) could be erected so as to make this all but impossible. Some safeguards may not now be strong enough. For example, in instances in which conviction is based on a single witness with no other corroborating evidence such as finger prints, hair samples, etc., a person should not be sentenced to death. But even with the best safeguards, an innocent person might still be executed and that is a horror.

 

Still, far more innocent people will be murdered if there is no death penalty than if there is. Murderers who are not executed will murder other prisoners and prison guards, or they will escape or be released on parole and murder civillians outside prison.

 

Our choice is clear--either the remote possibility of an innocent person being executed if there is a death penalty, or the certainty of many more innocents murdered without the death penalty. Nothing is risk free-from driving an automobile (in which some forty thousand Americans die each year) to the death penalty. The issue is: Can we minimize the risk so it becomes almost nonexistent?

[Sabre86]

Another "OJ" style verdict. She is guilty as sin, no matter what 12 brain dead jurors may say. Just goes to show, juries in the US will not convict a "pretty" girl, no matter what the crime, but if she had been male, or a 300lb woman, she'd be hanging from a tree in front of the courthouse. Those jurors have as much blood on their hands as she does.

[Geee]

Another "OJ" style verdict. She is guilty as sin, no matter what 12 brain dead jurors may say. Just goes to show, juries in the US will not convict a "pretty" girl, no matter what the crime, but if she had been male, or a 300lb woman, she'd be hanging from a tree in front of the courthouse. Those jurors have as much blood on their hands as she does.

 

 

What he said

[Argyle58]

Another "OJ" style verdict. She is guilty as sin, no matter what 12 brain dead jurors may say. Just goes to show, juries in the US will not convict a "pretty" girl, no matter what the crime, but if she had been male, or a 300lb woman, she'd be hanging from a tree in front of the courthouse. Those jurors have as much blood on their hands as she does.

 

 

What he said

 

 

I do not see this as a pretty girl got off. Review the evidence presented......the Prosecution did not prove it's case. They could not even prove that a murder had, in fact, taken place. There was not just reasonable doubt in their case, but extreme doubt.

 

If poor character ( plenty of that to go around in this case) was reason enough to send one to a table and a needle, a large portion of the population would cease to exist.

[Sabre86]

Sorry, but I must disagree.

 

Jurors, and much of the public, now think everything has to be gift wrapped like on CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, etc. It is rarely if ever so neat and pretty.

 

These jurors are idiots, and clearly made up their minds before the case ever started. Their hugging and high-fiving the bitch afterwards shows that there was never a chance of a conviction no matter how much proof there is/was.

 

And yes, "pretty" women tend to get off no matter what the charge and how much evidence. Texas is one of the few and perhaps only exception to this rule. The male jurors were probably thinking with "Jr." while the women must just be idiots, no other reason to explain why 7 of them would let her get away with it.

[Argyle58]

Sorry, but I must disagree.

 

Jurors, and much of the public, now think everything has to be gift wrapped like on CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, etc. It is rarely if ever so neat and pretty.

 

These jurors are idiots, and clearly made up their minds before the case ever started. Their hugging and high-fiving the bitch afterwards shows that there was never a chance of a conviction no matter how much proof there is/was.

 

And yes, "pretty" women tend to get off no matter what the charge and how much evidence. Texas is one of the few and perhaps only exception to this rule. The male jurors were probably thinking with "Jr." while the women must just be idiots, no other reason to explain why 7 of them would let her get away with it.

 

Forensic professionals have stated that, in this case, the investigators blew it, from the crime scene processors to the pathologists. I also disagree with you about the jury having predetermined their verdict......public sentiment was against Anthony from the beginning; so much so that the defense feared finding an impartial jury.

 

I have worked criminal law from both tables......the prosecution FAILED to prove it's case. If you disagree with that, provide facts, not emotions. That is the mistake that the prosecutors made, let's see you do better.

[Sabre86]

I'm not a lawyer, nor did I ever claim to be, but I have as much right to my opinion as everyone else, despite the fact it does not march in lockstep with yours.

 

It is my opinion she is guilty, and 12 people who probably have the collective IQ of a toad, are not going to change that. The prosecution may have failed in their job, but that doesn't make her innocent.

 

She is guilty as sin and thank God one day he will pass judgment. May she and every other person involved with the murder rot in hell for all eternity.

 

Now, as to why I have a very low opinion of juries.

 

My sister almost went to prison for a crime she did not commit, ended up with a felony conviction (90 days in jail, 10 year probation) despite the fact that all three of the perps signed sworn statements that she was not involved, was 20 miles away at the time, and had no knowledge of what they planned to do. There were half a dozen, non-family witness to place her no where near the crime. However, the ADA and a corrupt judge (who was later disciplined twice by the state and then tossed from the bench) ensured they got a conviction. The only evidence in the entire case, the three guys borrowed her car and went and robbed an old woman at knife point. They didn't pay her to use the car, and never told her what they were going to do other than "get some burgers." Our family couldn't afford an OJ or Anthony style defense team, but we made sure she had a decent lawyer, but when the ADA gets up and calls on the jury to send a message to the "other scum" who might think about holding a knife to the throat of an old woman, there is not much you can do to win. She is still working to clear her name, right now trying to get a pardon from the Governor, which of course requires approval from the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

 

So don't tell me that juries aren't often full of absolute idiots. There have been numerous cases locally where it was obvious the person was guilty, but some slick lawyer got them off. One guy was on trial for 3 armed robberies and the prosecution had all the evidence, eyewitness, fingerprints, security video, etc. The perp got off after the defense team paraded pictures of his "cousin" around because they looked a lot alike and claimed he committed the crimes. They also brought in all kinds of "experts" who impressed the jury with a bunch of techno-babble. Of course, the day after the verdict, it was shown the cousin was out of the state at the time, but no one found that during the trial. The perp even admitted in an interview he was guilty and laughing everyday at the law because "it is for suckas." He got busted again about a year later for another armed robbery and is now doing 30 years.

 

My point is, juries are often filled with stupid people who think everything is CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, etc. They will believe whoever can put on the most razzle-dazzle and the facts be dammed.

[Rheo]

Did not follow the case outside of headlines. Enough to think I know the details. Not.

 

I have a real problem with over zealous DA's and political stepping stones that the media hypes to make it seem a skippy.

 

Have the evidence and present an honest case, for liberty and justice for all. Not face time and career laucher.

 

I get what you are saying, Sabre.

[Sabre86]

Another problem is juries often think that the prosecution has to prove their case "beyond a shadow of a doubt" when the law says "beyond a reasonable doubt."

 

I guess sooner or later someone murder will get off because his lawyer will claim space aliens did it, and since the prosecution can't prove otherwise, the jury will vote not guilty.

[Argyle58]

I guess we can agree to disagree. In the long run, it doesn't matter. The trial is over, the verdict is read and the case can't be revisited.

[Casino67]

Did not follow the case outside of headlines. Enough to think I know the details. Not.

 

I have a real problem with over zealous DA's and political stepping stones that the media hypes to make it seem a skippy.

 

Have the evidence and present an honest case, for liberty and justice for all. Not face time and career laucher.

 

I get what you are saying, Sabre.

 

"make it seem a skippy." Can you say that in east coast language? I have never heard that phrase.

[Rheo]

Did not follow the case outside of headlines. Enough to think I know the details. Not.

 

I have a real problem with over zealous DA's and political stepping stones that the media hypes to make it seem a skippy.

 

Have the evidence and present an honest case, for liberty and justice for all. Not face time and career laucher.

 

I get what you are saying, Sabre.

 

"make it seem a skippy." Can you say that in east coast language? I have never heard that phrase.

No.

That is because I made it up tonight.

[Casino67]

Did not follow the case outside of headlines. Enough to think I know the details. Not.

 

I have a real problem with over zealous DA's and political stepping stones that the media hypes to make it seem a skippy.

 

Have the evidence and present an honest case, for liberty and justice for all. Not face time and career laucher.

 

I get what you are saying, Sabre.

 

"make it seem a skippy." Can you say that in east coast language? I have never heard that phrase.

No.

That is because I made it up tonight.

 

Have I told you before that I love your sense of humor?

[nickydog]

Did not follow the case outside of headlines. Enough to think I know the details. Not.

 

I have a real problem with over zealous DA's and political stepping stones that the media hypes to make it seem a skippy.

 

Have the evidence and present an honest case, for liberty and justice for all. Not face time and career laucher.

 

I get what you are saying, Sabre.

 

"make it seem a skippy." Can you say that in east coast language? I have never heard that phrase.

No.

That is because I made it up tonight.

 

Have I told you before that I love your sense of humor?

Me, too.

[SrWoodchuck]

Sweet E is beside herself with anger & I don't like it one bit, but I have to agree that the prosecution blew it. The defense & Jose Baez did what they had to do.....muddy the water.....and the prosecution "over-charged" Casey in my opinion. Our rage wants us to extract a penalty because the death of a beautiful young girl demands retribution. The prosecution bought into that sentiment; but should have charged her with 3 lesser charges [child abuse resulting in death should have been the top charge with 2nd degree manslaughter, or manslaughter through severe indifference] and nothing that might result in the death penalty [that put's a special onus on a judge & jury.] The goal should have been conviction & sentencing between 15 & 30 years, because it was a circumstantial case anyway......and if you can't link hair, prints or DNA to the perp.....you'll seldom get a 1st degree conviction. Some have said the prosecution's closing arguments & rebuttal should have focused more on destroying the silly defense theories that had no basis in fact & had no evidence to validate them, presented by the defense.

 

I'm left wondering how the "dysfunctional Anthony family" will live now. How can you accept your daughter back after knowing that she killed her innocent baby......and then slandered her father & brother to get off?

 

My hope: At least 2 years more [in addition to time served] & a bunch of probation. Like OJ, I don't think she can live without messing up criminally. [bTW- Whatever happened to her charge of theft & cashing of her friend's checks?]

[Argyle58]

Sweet E is beside herself with anger & I don't like it one bit, but I have to agree that the prosecution blew it. The defense & Jose Baez did what they had to do.....muddy the water.....and the prosecution "over-charged" Casey in my opinion. Our rage wants us to extract a penalty because the death of a beautiful young girl demands retribution. The prosecution bought into that sentiment; but should have charged her with 3 lesser charges [child abuse resulting in death should have been the top charge with 2nd degree manslaughter, or manslaughter through severe indifference] and nothing that might result in the death penalty [that put's a special onus on a judge & jury.] The goal should have been conviction & sentencing between 15 & 30 years, because it was a circumstantial case anyway......and if you can't link hair, prints or DNA to the perp.....you'll seldom get a 1st degree conviction. Some have said the prosecution's closing arguments & rebuttal should have focused more on destroying the silly defense theories that had no basis in fact & had no evidence to validate them, presented by the defense.

 

I'm left wondering how the "dysfunctional Anthony family" will live now. How can you accept your daughter back after knowing that she killed her innocent baby......and then slandered her father & brother to get off?

 

My hope: At least 2 years more [in addition to time served] & a bunch of probation. Like OJ, I don't think she can live without messing up criminally. [bTW- Whatever happened to her charge of theft & cashing of her friend's checks?]

 

SrWoodchuck!!

 

You said in a more succinct manner what I was trying to get across in my earlier posts. I can't think of a single person, other than Anthony and her team, who wanted anything other than a conviction. But, that emotional wish aside, the prosecution overreached and presented a case fraught with reasonable doubt.

 

As for the future....expect her to get time served on her four convictions. I wouldn't expect to see any further prosecutions against her in this matter in order to avoid the appearance of "piling on".

 

However, I would not count out perjury charges brought against George and Cindy. If those charges are brought, they should plea out and do their best to slink away from the mess that they helped to create.

[Pepper]

I have worked criminal law from both tables......the prosecution FAILED to prove it's case. If you disagree with that, provide facts, not emotions. That is the mistake that the prosecutors made, let's see you do better.

 

 

I have court room experience, too.

 

Let's see, twice. There was a DUI charge, speeding, assault with deadly weapon charge, and attempted murder - but it was all in Florida, so I got off. Then the next time in Georgia....

 

[Argyle58]

I have worked criminal law from both tables......the prosecution FAILED to prove it's case. If you disagree with that, provide facts, not emotions. That is the mistake that the prosecutors made, let's see you do better.

 

 

I have court room experience, too.

 

Let's see, twice. There was a DUI charge, speeding, assault with deadly weapon charge, and attempted murder - but it was all in Florida, so I got off. Then the next time in Georgia....

 

 

Better to try Texas, so as to get the desired results.

[Evad]

I'm not a lawyer, nor did I ever claim to be, but I have as much right to my opinion as everyone else, despite the fact it does not march in lockstep with yours.

 

It is my opinion she is guilty, and 12 people who probably have the collective IQ of a toad, are not going to change that. The prosecution may have failed in their job, but that doesn't make her innocent.

 

She is guilty as sin and thank God one day he will pass judgment. May she and every other person involved with the murder rot in hell for all eternity.

 

Now, as to why I have a very low opinion of juries.

 

My sister almost went to prison for a crime she did not commit, ended up with a felony conviction (90 days in jail, 10 year probation) despite the fact that all three of the perps signed sworn statements that she was not involved, was 20 miles away at the time, and had no knowledge of what they planned to do. There were half a dozen, non-family witness to place her no where near the crime. However, the ADA and a corrupt judge (who was later disciplined twice by the state and then tossed from the bench) ensured they got a conviction. The only evidence in the entire case, the three guys borrowed her car and went and robbed an old woman at knife point. They didn't pay her to use the car, and never told her what they were going to do other than "get some burgers." Our family couldn't afford an OJ or Anthony style defense team, but we made sure she had a decent lawyer, but when the ADA gets up and calls on the jury to send a message to the "other scum" who might think about holding a knife to the throat of an old woman, there is not much you can do to win. She is still working to clear her name, right now trying to get a pardon from the Governor, which of course requires approval from the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

 

So don't tell me that juries aren't often full of absolute idiots. There have been numerous cases locally where it was obvious the person was guilty, but some slick lawyer got them off. One guy was on trial for 3 armed robberies and the prosecution had all the evidence, eyewitness, fingerprints, security video, etc. The perp got off after the defense team paraded pictures of his "cousin" around because they looked a lot alike and claimed he committed the crimes. They also brought in all kinds of "experts" who impressed the jury with a bunch of techno-babble. Of course, the day after the verdict, it was shown the cousin was out of the state at the time, but no one found that during the trial. The perp even admitted in an interview he was guilty and laughing everyday at the law because "it is for suckas." He got busted again about a year later for another armed robbery and is now doing 30 years.

 

My point is, juries are often filled with stupid people who think everything is CSI, NCIS, Law & Order, etc. They will believe whoever can put on the most razzle-dazzle and the facts be dammed.

 

Sabre--There is nothing scarier than an innocent person who gets caught up in the American jurisprudence system.

It's a great system if you're guilty but if your're innocent, you can kiss your ass good by.

[Pepper]

Someone guilty of a charge should opt for jury trial. If innocent, opt for a judge. But have a million dollars for defense attorneys in either event.

[Geee]

I have worked criminal law from both tables......the prosecution FAILED to prove it's case. If you disagree with that, provide facts, not emotions. That is the mistake that the prosecutors made, let's see you do better.

 

 

I have court room experience, too.

 

Let's see, twice. There was a DUI charge, speeding, assault with deadly weapon charge, and attempted murder - but it was all in Florida, so I got off. Then the next time in Georgia....

 

 

 

I think you should seek the Republican nomination

[Rheo]

I have worked criminal law from both tables......the prosecution FAILED to prove it's case. If you disagree with that, provide facts, not emotions. That is the mistake that the prosecutors made, let's see you do better.

 

 

I have court room experience, too.

 

Let's see, twice. There was a DUI charge, speeding, assault with deadly weapon charge, and attempted murder - but it was all in Florida, so I got off. Then the next time in Georgia....

 

 

 

I think you should seek the Republican Democrat nomination