This is the nature of the system that we have and we should be damn grateful to have it. We do not try people in the court of public opinion but in a public court in front of a jury of our peers.
What do you think we should do? Should we form a lynch mob and and hang her? Maybe you could lead a pack of hooligans in wilding her? Should we beat her until she can no longer bear children?
Besides a public shunning, everything you would desire to do to her would be a crime and vigilantism. Be my guest. You will be the one prosecuted and likely convicted in that instance.
I think she did it, so do you, so do allot of people. Who cares, we where not charged to make a decision on the case. You watched the proceedings on TV and where subject to opinions, procedures and here say not available to the jury. You are what would be considered TAINTED and unavailable to sit on the jury.
Many of us are damn well aware of what information was provided to the jury because the entire case was televised and there was 24/7 coverage. The jury here failed to do their job. People here on FR and elsewhere are perfectly justified in observing this and expressing their opinions because it is obvious. The jurists who have appeared on tv have come across and dumbs who accepted wild defense accusations without any factual basis and ignored facts presented by the prosecution.
Many people justifiably want justice here for a mother who clearly covered up her involvement in the death ofnher child and want to see both civil case success and to see what other criminal charges could be pursued. I see nothing wrong with that.