I dont really want to get into a blow by blow, but it is not a crime NOT to report someone missing.
And you cannot equate your feelings (which were mine as well) but you have to look at the facts.
And those do not point to anyone killing anyone.
I know it sucks, but if I am looking to send someone to the chair I would want more definitive evidence than what they presented.
As the juror says, “not guilty” does not mean innocent.
I heard one of her former friends last night talking about trying to get Caylee’s law passed. Something to do with not reporting missing child. Does anyone know anything about this?
I guess before DNA forensics it was impossible to convict ANYONE of murder unless there were witnesses. /sarcasm. If you really followed this trial and you hold these views, then I submit you are a moron. To much maple syrup for you.
PS: If I were a DA I wouldn't bother prosecuting anymore murder cases on circimstantial evidence. Let 'em walk with a one way ticket to VT.
First of all, I think you misspoke.....it’s not a crime NOT to report a missing child.....is that what you meant? It will be if Caylee’s Law is passed. It IS neglect of a child not to report her missing.....we don’t need a special law.
She was charged with murder by neglect or willful action causing the death of Casey......penalty 15 years. This is what I would have convicted her on. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt for murder 1 w/DP was a stretch only because of the decomposition of the body and lack of evidence proving it. The duct tape brought it dang close though. I might have gone for that and life in prison.
And juror#3 is a nutcase.....I have seen her interviews.....enough said.
It soon will be 'a felony' if not reported within 24 hours if "Caley's Law" is put on the books.