When Casey Anthony was found not guilty by the jury Tuesday afternoon, the vast majority of those following the case (and even those who weren't, but knew of the horrific crimes against Caylee Anthony) were shocked, and rightfully so. Ask those same people, and they'll tell you without a shadow of a doubt that they wholeheartedly believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that she was guilty of murdering her two-year-old daughter, and yet she still was acquitted. What gives?
According to legal experts, though there was plenty of evidence against her, the amount of hard evidence that undoubtedly tied Casey Anthony to the murder was lacking, at least to the point where it could convince the jury to not ask more questions.
According to defense attorney Richard Hornsby, "The bottom line is that the jurors did not completely believe the prosecution's theory and they chose to acquit. They were able to raise reasonable doubt in the jurors' minds."
Rather, the jury chose to believe that Casey Anthony had just been a victim of "an accident that snowballed out of control." Pfft. As if anyone could possibly feel an ounce of sympathy for her aside from, apparently, the jury.
But why, when the general public (albeit largely without legal training) felt so strongly that there was no doubt that she was guilty, did the twelve jurors feel the opposite? The trial was televised in its entirety, with viewers and jurors given the same information and both with no official legal background to speak of. So how is it possible that Casey Anthony will walk free, while her two-year-old baby girl lies in a grave? Where was the "justice" in our justice system?
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 24
And now you don't believe in the Justice system?
Give me a break.
There are some that say Casey was negligent. I would be more that willing to buy that argument but as far as being a murder, I don't buy that. The justice system that we saw and was present to the nation wasn't perfect but it was transparent.
A VAST DIFFERENCE.
Obviously a young child's death is a terrible tragedy, but Sympathy, for the deceased, has NOTHING to do with a defendan't guilt.
2. If it were an "accident', failure to administer CPR. Failure to call 911.
3. Three pieces of duct tape over the mouth…count them 1,2,3
4. Remains discarded in trash bags leaving no evidence of an attempt at a ceremonious burial (indicating sorrow, grief or remorse).
5. Items that were in the trash burial bags were all from her home which she had free access to for long periods of time where she could be alone.
6. Per the defense, Casey cried and cried and cried when she found Caylee after she had “drowned” in the pool (as any grieving parent would do in the event of an accidental death of a child) and then promptly went out and rented and watched movies with her boyfriend. She then slept in late (the whole day) with her boyfriend the next day. Her hearsay actions seem appropriate, but her documented actions do not reflect a grieving parent that falls in line with her hearsay actions of grief.
7. For almost a year she sat in jail and never said it was accidental drowning. Instead she waits until the opening day of the trial.
8. The“secret” that was so bad that Jose Baez said she couldn’t tell ANYONE was that her father and brother molested her, but she told at least 2 former boyfriends…so it wasn’t that big of a secret. Thus, I don’t believe she couldn’t tell anyone about Caylee’s death because they were a family of secrets.
Yes, there is far more I could list, but I won’t go into it. I feel it was a miscarriage of justice.
As far as "not being on the jury" well, I served on a Jury in a different case... I had that experience and I still think she is guilty. We did see all they saw.... I have a feeling, like OJ, we haven't heard the last of the Casey Anthony story. If she gets out on Thursday, I hope the three years in jail taught her something.... but it's not much for a murder. And with Oj, his time in jail and his trial did not teach him he wasn't above the law.
That does not preclude an accidental death, does not in itself imply otherwise.
2. If it were an "accident', failure to administer CPR. Failure to call 911.
If she fell asleep, and woke up hours later, realizing Caylee was gone, she could have panicked.
3. Three pieces of duct tape over the mouth…count them 1,2,3
Cover nose and mouth of already dead child to move without dripping water taken in during drowning. Largest crime, altering a body?
4. Remains discarded in trash bags leaving no evidence of an attempt at a ceremonious burial (indicating sorrow, grief or remorse). Burying the beloved child the same way their beloved pets were buried. Not preferred, but in a panic, not knowing what else to do.
5. Items that were in the trash burial bags were all from her home which she had free access to for long periods of time where she could be alone.
Yes, she drowned at the home.
6. Per the defense, Casey cried and cried and cried when she found Caylee after she had “drowned” in the pool (as any grieving parent would do in the event of an accidental death of a child) and then promptly went out and rented and watched movies with her boyfriend.
She had to go on like nothing happened, a rule she believed in, "That's my story and I'm sticking to it."
She then slept in late (the whole day) with her boyfriend the next day. Her hearsay actions seem appropriate, but her documented actions do not reflect a grieving parent that falls in line with her hearsay actions of grief.
If she stayed in bed all day, and wanted the presence of her lover, that is very much in line with grieving. Renting a movie left her there, where she could continue to snuggle and find comfort.
7. For almost a year she sat in jail and never said it was accidental drowning. Instead she waits until the opening day of the trial.
Jose said they overcharged her. You don't know if he approached them about settling it, but they were determined it was murder.
8. The“secret” that was so bad that Jose Baez said she couldn’t tell ANYONE was that her father and brother molested her, but she told at least 2 former boyfriends…so it wasn’t that big of a secret. Thus, I don’t believe she couldn’t tell anyone about Caylee’s death because they were a family of secrets.
I do think her parents demanded she be perfect all the time, and she tried to be. They were a family of secrets.
Yes, there is far more I could list, but I won’t go into it. I feel it was a miscarriage of justice.
I do not agree it was a miscarriage of justice.They did not have evidence.
Do you actually believe that the Jurors WANTED to let a guilty defendant go free?
If the prosecution CAN'T prove its case, then the defendant is not guilty.
It doesn't MEAN the defendant is innocent. There's a difference.
That's the way our justice system WORKS.
If you don't like it, try to change the system; otherwise, live with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn5-VN3SH1o&feature=related
She knew something.
Also, why did she wait 31 days to report her little daughter missing?
This whole thing is a shame and now Casey gets to profit from it.
The justice system failed in this case and the prosecutors should never be allowed to work on another case again.
They screwed up beyond belief.
I understand reasonable doubt, but they left reason to let her go.
George Vreeland Hill
Jurors being interviewed are more or less saying, "If you don't know if it's a murder, how can you punish someone for it?"
"CNN: As a former prosecutor, if you could retry this case, how would you do it differently?
Grace: I think they did such a very good job it’s hard to attack anything they did. I think maybe I would’ve taken a different tack in jury selection but that’s really it. There were some obvious problem jurors: You had one on there with an arrest for DUI; another with an arrest for drug paraphernalia; one who, along with his sister, had beaten up their father; one juror who said she could not judge. Why the heck would you not want someone off the jury who cannot judge? The jury is the sole judge of facts, evidence and the law. Who the heck wants someone who can’t judge? They tried to get rid of them but were not successful. I think the jury was snakebitten from the get-go."
The answers might lie in the Jurors themselves. There are so few who feel the prosecution did NOT prove their case, it was hard to believe she got off... but maybe these Jurors didn't connect the dots because they didn't want too... at least for not reporting the "accident" she deserved some kind of sentence for child abuse.... I just don't know how you can rule out the duck tape, Dr. G's assessment and her nanny kidnapping lies...and not give her manslaughter. She ought to get 911 tattooed to her hand to remind her next time of what to do...
They would have gotten their conviction with a one week trial, and saved the state a whole lot of money.
PS the duct tape is a nothing, and perfectly in line with a drowning, as it would seal in the fluids from the drowning (being applied AFTER the child has already drowned.)
The nanny lies started 2 years before, the kidnapping one was a desperate ploy to avoid fessing up that she let her drown, or whatever did happen. I do not believe she murdered her on purpose. Maybe she left her in the car too long and the heat got her. Florida is a very hard place to raise a child. I thank God every day that I got mine raised in one piece. I made sure they learned to swim, and did everything I could to take care, as many parents do. Sometimes things go wrong, and but for the grace of God, it could be any of us. (Most of us would handle it differently than Casey, of course.)
PS the duct tape is a nothing, and perfectly in line with a drowning, as it would seal in the fluids from the drowning (being applied AFTER the child has already drowned.)
I've seen some stupid analysis and I believe your convoluted approach takes it all. You have created all your own scenarios...without a shred of evidence. I love the placing the duct tape over the mouth of a drowning victim so the water doesn't leak out. Perfectly in line with what?! I haven't ever heard of that. You got some strange rituals wherever you live.
You do know there was no evidence presented in the trial that the child drowned. Opening statements are not evidence. They can say what they want. The only person who could testify to any of those theories was Casey, but she didn't testify. Thus, ZERO evidence of any of that.
Maybe aliens abducted her? Same amount as your left in the car theory. I haven't seen too many articles on keeping water from dripping out of a drowning victims mouth....by using duct tape. Why would anybody try to keep water from draining from a dead body? Don't you think there would have been more DNA on the tape since drowning produces a large amount of foaming and frothing?
Okay Char, now that we have an alleged witness (Casey) that knows for a FACT that the father George committed the crime and witnessed it. See if Casey is willing to testify in court that her father was responsible for at least manslaughter and hid the body or disposed of the body. If this is the case, he should be tried for murder or manslaughter. We have an eye-witness that can put him at the scene.
Don't get your hopes up Char because those charges will never come. Why....because there is no evidence. There is no evidence to support that theory, but her defense attorneys presented it in court as fact. And the sheep were distracted by the shiny objects.
Yes, Casey can lie about everything, but we will believe her on this one. Even her boyfriend said that she never told him she was sexually abused. He said she claimed physical abuse as in punishment.
Even if she was sexually abused, all the evidence points to her killing the child.
And you were distracted by it. Wow...how simplistic. Leave the thinking to others.
There was no evidence of any chloroform ever being made or used. The levels in the trunk were likely contaminant from cleaning products. The FBI guy said so.
Nobody knows what all happened to the body. Much evidence the body was moved. As for the DNA on the tape, totally deteriorated, else we would know who tore off the pieces. Doesn't really matter if there is no murder. The decomp. obviously took place while the body was on it's side, as testified to. This means the hair WAS arranged like the medical examiner said, and Ashton was incredulous, but that is what the evidence says. I am not in a fairy land, I just looked at the evidence, and there is not enough to convict. 12 jury members agreed with me. Every jury I have ever been on has reached a just decision. I am 100% sure. I think this jury did what they had to do, with the evidence presented.