Casey Anthony Found Not Guilty of 1st-Degree Murder, Acquitted of Manslaughter in Daughter's Death

FOX ^ | July 5, 2011 | Staff

[freebird5850]

Morning all, didn't see a thread for today so I created one.

[dfc1]

Thanks for the ping. I have been heartsick since yesterday.
Justice was not given to Caylee. The alternate juror (who I can’t watch anymore) is dumber than a box of rocks. I thought I heard that he was a teacher. Poor students. He said the $64,000 question was “why did Casey not call police for 31 days and why did she lie to the police”. Hello! She’s guilty, that’s why. She didn’t call the police, Cindy did. I guess he didn’t even know that. He sure is making up for all the other jurors not talking yesterday.

My whole family is outraged. The jurors (probably all Obama voters) didn’t even ask any questions of the judge. They were anxious to get home and go on their vacations. They had their minds made up from the beginning and I’m glad they didn’t try to defend their decisions yesterday. I don’t ever want to see or hear from them.

I will never watch Hannity again. Last night a woman on the panel was defending the prosecution’s case and Hannity interrupted her. When the camera suddenly went back to him, he had an angry, hateful look on his face. I’m done with most of the Fox shows.

I hate that Casey will make money off of poor, little Caylee but I think she will trip up again one day. For all those people saying Casey was a good mom...a good mom would want to know where her child was every second.

Thanks again for the excellent threads you provided during the trial.

RIP little Caylee.

[Irenic]

I believe the state met the burden of manslaughter at the least. I never believed this was a capital case- and still had some doubts at the end- however those doubts of mine met the reasonable definition as I perceive it’s intended.
**********************************

Completely agree.

[wrhssaxensemble]

“I don’t think it is a death of common sense.”

Nor do I. I agree completely with the rest of your analysis as well. Given the limited amount and value of evidence put forth by the prosecution to the jury there just wasnt enough to show beyond a reasonable doubt that she killed her daughter. It’s really as simple as that. The defense didn’t need to show anything about her purported innocence or anything else people have been alleging lately. The question is- and only is- did the prosecution show beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury given only the evidence presented that she killed her daughter. No, it did not.

I’m glad to see I’m not the only person viewing the case this way though. Some have been going as far as to call me a wannabe accomplice to infanticide because I keep pulling up the standards that must be met in criminal courts.... special

“The search teams screwed up when they did not want to get their feet wet when that guy called in August and said he thought he saw the body. If you want to think about devine providence, that was it. And it moment passed without the police seeing it for what it was. Because no one wanted to get their feet wet.”

What’s interesting is that there was a rumor at the time that Anthony’s chief counsel Baez called law enforcement and told them to not report the body but to call him in first. It wouldn’t surprise me- he has been disciplined twice before by the florida bar. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_Baez_(lawyer) granted wikipedia is an awful source but it has useful links). I think the real tragedy in all this is that maybe if he was held to the professional rules of responsibility we would have a conviction today of someone who is likely guilty.

“Finally, I think we will see Casey on the cover of some magazines. I think she will be on Oprah’s new channel sometime this fall. I predict she will pose naked. She will be a celebrity of the sorts of Loraina Bobbit (sic), Tanya Harding, and the Long Island Lolita Amy Fisher. And even in the sense of Lizzie Borden.”

How correct it looks like you will be:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011620/Casey-Anthony-verdict-Not-guilty-mother-make-fortune-media-interviews.html

“In the end here are the lessons I think we should all learn: When the notice for jury duty comes in the mail, embrace it. Be involved, and use YOUR common sense (not yours specifically-—but the generic, third person YOUR). And, attention to detail and being willing to get your feet wet are essential to solving problems.”

Wonderful point.

[truthkeeper]

I agree. Didn’t we hear testimony (I heard it somewhere) that he went to work and left these tasks to Cindy? I think deep inside he knew it meant something really bad, but not the specifics, and couldn’t deal with it. He just left it all up to Cindy to handle.

[SE Mom]

Actually- the state offered pleas from the start and Casey rejected them.

[DAC21]

“That’s the thing that gets me the most, that not one juror was willing to hang the jury”

Didn't one of the Alternates whom agreed on the decision state he didn't believe in the Death penalty, maybe I heard that wrong? That is one of the questions that the Prosecution would have have asked during the Selection process and would have been eliminated them from consideration. Had that statement came from one of the twelve that decided this case, could that not have resulted in a mistrial?

[dfc1]

On second thought, Casey did know where Caylee was. She just didn’t have to deal with her anymore.

[rbmillerjr]

“premeditated murder wasn’t proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

To convict for murder, you don’t have to prove premeditation...just murder.

[Guenevere]

agree....bttt

[Irenic]

“When George picked the car up at the tow yard, why didn’t he call 911 when he smelled the decomposition.”

Because Cindy was talking with and texting with Casey daily. Casey was alive and I’m sure in his wildest dreams, he couldn’t imagine his granddaughter dead.

He doubted himself and let it go.

[freekitty]

You can be sure I didn’t miss the point. There was no reasonable doubt. The defense presented a dog and pony show. They diverted which is what they do every bit of attention that pointed the finger at their client. All that was missing was the defense wearing clown suits. As I have pointed out, juries judge mostly by emotion. This trial was more about how Jose and Casey were the true victims. The jury chose not to see anything but the dog and pony show and they never once asked for any evidence of what Jose was parading.

One of the worst cases I have ever seen was a truth in lending. A young man and his parents who co signed were sued by a bank for none payment of a loan. The parents counter sued by saying the contract was not clear. The contract was clear. You signed to borrow money and were expected to repay that money. The defense made it sound like the parents were victims which they were not. Most of the jurors voted with their hearts and not that heads because the mean old bank was asking they repay the loan which is quite reasonable while the parents had a little dick of a son who didn’t pay the loan and they got stuck with it. A contract is a contract.

[Quix]

THANKS for your kind request and words. Maybe this is a 100lb answer to a 1oz question . . . but anyway . . .

It was such a disgustingly horrid thing that I chose not to follow it much.

What I did read . . . sounds like the woman skated free of a dispicable crime on schlocky work on the prosecution's side and slick work on the defense side plus perhaps a jury that didn't realize the jury has the authority in our system to also judge the law and render whatever parts of the law null and void in a particular case should it so see fit.

Seems to me a smart foreman should have taken charge of this jury and insisted that the jurors judge the law and the evidence as they saw fit--demanding to see whatever additional evidence they saw fit. Maybe that wouldn't have flown but as I understand it--it could have.

At least that's my layman's understanding of such things. I'm sure the atny's hereon will set me right if I'm wrong.

I think the courts are inching towards making it OK as one commie globalist championed--being able to kill one's child at will up to the age of 7 years old--with impunity.

Too often, it seems to me, it is the case that juries--given various outs of the more industrious to escape serving on juries--include too many clueless idiots who couldn't reason their way out of a wet paper bag nor fairly analyze evidence sufficiently to safely buy fruit at a farmer's market.

Part of me wonders if they commie globalist oligarchy isn't setting up court cases to make an increasing mockery of Christian values and to throw as many monkey wrenches into the legal system to make a mockery of it as possible.

There's been an assertion in the commie globalist literature that the future will include the mandate from the elite globalist rulers to the police for the police to shoot dead on sight anyone caught breaking any law.

So evidently they are planning to toss juries entirely. Seems to me that juries making absurd rulings hastens that day.

Just my RK (Resident Kook) opinion, of course.

Those paying any attention to it should be warned that Big Brother is watching.

[Girlene]

I know, truthkeeper.

[truthkeeper]

:-)

[SE Mom]

Excellent post and it illustrates what I believe happened here. I think jurors in this case believed reasonable doubt meant any doubt at all.

And let’s ALL check out what Cheney Mason had to say BEFORE he joined the You Must Be Dreaming Team (not sure what else I can call this defense group)

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2011/07/06/casey-anthony-jury-says-not-guilty-as-sin-why-did-cheney-mason-think-casey-would-get-life-justice-for-caylee/

[Just mythoughts]

IS it reasonable to have a defense in opening statement claim they will show that George molested her, stuck his ..... in her mouth in the morning and then sent her off to school. NOT one shred of evidence was presented that George ever laid a hand or touch her in any of the criminal acts he was accused of doing. This little lying stealing itch attempted to destroy her father and apparently the jury found the accusations without any evidence as ‘reasonable’.

IF George had anything to do with the death or the cover-up this lying little itch would have served him up day one and she would have never spent one day in jail. George was according to the video record attempting to get Casey to tell the investigators what happened to the child.

[CynicalBear]

>>Seems to me a smart foreman should have taken charge of this jury and insisted that the jurors judge the law and the evidence as they saw fit--<<

And what exactly is your evidence that they didn’t?

[matginzac]

Totally agree...
She certainly could have been convicted for a lesser charge - even her own defense admitted she was a “slut” and neglectful for 31 days...
When the alternate juror was interviewed this AM, he said the prosecution didn’t provide a motive...
Is he SERIOUS???
This leads me to believe they just had no moral compass whatsoever...sorry to say.

[freekitty]

Btw, one of the best cases I have ever seen where justice was done was the trial of George W. Bush becoming President. His attorneys won because they actually tried the case by law while the opposite side was inserting everything but the kitchen sink. Thank heavens common sense prevailed there.

[Country Eagle]

Alternate jurors don't go into deliberations with the 12 other jurors yet when this alternate was first asked about his response to the verdict he used the words “What WE understood”. Then in another interview when he said “we” he corrected himself and said at least that's what I think the other believe.

I just heard the interview again on HLN and he said “WE”.

There is no doubt in my mind that this jury talked about the case before they went into deliberation and I wish there was a way someone could prove it. And, I wonder if this would nullify(sp) this jury for not following the judges orders.