I was stunned at the not guilty verdict, but while I never followed the trial very closely it seems to me that there was no actual evidence that the defendant actually murdered the victim.
Was this true?
Jerry Springer: No $1 Million Casey Anthony Offer
Published on July 08, 2011
by Associated Press
(AP and OfficialWire)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (USA)
OfficialWire News Bureau
Jerry Springer is caught in the Casey Anthony media frenzy and, he says, for no reason.
Springer dismissed a report that his TV show is offering $1 million to Anthony and her parents as “100 percent fabricated.”
The host of “The Jerry Springer Show” said Friday his syndicated program does not feature “known people” such as Anthony.
http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=79341&catid=60
‘the best judge around’
LOL.
At first I honestly thought he was mentally retarded, seriously.
Then as the trial went on, I was convinced.
Eubonics has no place in the court room.
Pinging a few folks...
Kristen Stewart Not Playing Casey Anthony
After being acquitted by the jury for the gruesome murder of her 2-year old daughter Caylee, it seems Casey Anthony’s brazen and smug demeanor all throughout the trial has caused her to be the most hated person in the world.
(snip)
I will not be surprised if people throw rotten tomatoes or eggs at her when she finally walks out of jail. As far as celebrities are concerned, no one has volunteered to portray her in a movie – certainly not Kristen Stewart.
According to sources, Kristen Stewart is not very pleased with talk linking her and Casey Anthony.
“Her people are really annoyed about the Casey Anthony comparisons. Kristen wants that talk to blow over soon, because it looks really bad.”
The source adds, “Don’t expect Stewart to portray Anthony in a flick anytime soon. She would never for no amount of money portray that girl… It’s grossing her out. All those entertainment shows are doing polls and what not and her people just want it to stop!”
http://www.showbizrenegade.com/2011/07/09/kristen-stewart-not-playing-casey-anthony/6466
Defense attorney Cheney Mason told everyone how he felt about the Casey Anthony coverage.
Then he gestured to show his disapproval. I think the gesture will probably last longer than his lecture about the media. Mason later told TMZ.com the middle-finger salute was for “a guy from a radio station who has been stalking my team for months.”
What was behind Mason’s anger after Anthony’s acquittal? I gained insights from Geraldo Rivera of Fox News Channel. Rivera, a friend of defense attorney Jose Baez, complained about how Baez had been treated by local attorneys on television.
“There’s a big difference between Casey and Jose,” Rivera said. “There was negative press directed at Jose by the local Bar. They were relentless in the attacks on him, people like Mark NeJame. They went after Jose in a way that was vicious. Jose has proved himself. He could have folded a million times. He stood his ground. He was David against Goliath. The Constitution protects unpopular people. The fact is he got paid chump change, sacrificing three years of his life. He is owed a huge apology from the local Bar and NeJame and other people.”
NeJame’s response? “Geraldo has done as much research on me as he did on Al Capone’s vault.”
(Above is an excerpt)
Casey Anthony Case: Reasonable Doubt vs. Shadow of a Doubt
The Anthony Acquittal Should Make Us Take a Good Look at Our Court System
(snip)
What really is at issue is the term reasonable doubt. Over the years, especially on television dramas, it has been used interchangeably with beyond a shadow of a doubt. And one is not the other. That is where the confusion lies.
In fact, the prosecution does not need to prove a case beyond a shadow of a doubt. The legal definition of reasonable doubt is quite clear: “A threshold or burden of proof in criminal cases, and a requirement in most modern criminal law systems, which requires the prosecutor or district attorney to prove to the trier of fact to be sure, not certain, of the accused guilt, before convicting,” according to Duhaime.org.
http://news.yahoo.com/casey-anthony-case-reasonable-doubt-vs-shadow-doubt-193100838.html
(excerpt, of course)
Looks like a great read for when I return home (I’m aways). Thanks for posting this.
It’s a tough job for anyone who has to preside over one of these circuses.
I liked the judge; but he had his hands full with Baez.
If Juror #3 is serious and doesn’t change what she said via a PR firm when she said they felt Casey was guilty; but there was no evidence; she is IMIO one of the most dishonest persons I have ever heard.
‘Tech Effect’ let Casey Anthony win
lauren ritchie
July 10, 2011
If Casey Anthony had been tried 30 years ago in that same Orange County courtroom, she probably would be facing a death sentence today instead of the few measly years she spent awaiting trial.
The 25-year-old mother who last week slipped out of a conviction on charges of killing her toddler seems to be the beneficiary of something that has come to be called the “Tech Effect.”
The premise is simple, but the results are dramatic: Juries today expect — nay, demand — complicated forensic evidence. And when prosecutors don’t give it to them, they acquit the accused.
They do it most often in cases precisely like Anthony’s: where the circumstances add up to a conviction but little scientific evidence backs up the case. A can of stink from Anthony’s car trunk, suggesting a body had been there, wasn’t good enough.
Before fancy forensics, juries would have connected the dots and applied common sense. In this age of information technology, jurors don’t trust their instincts the way they formerly did. Sending people to their death is too big a decision — they know forensic science is available, and they won’t take responsibility if it’s not presented.
Excerpt. More at:
And just for laughs, check out this photo at this link:
http://laist.com/2011/07/09/yeah_they_went_there_franklin_villa.php