Replies

Lack of evidence. If this was a wrongful death civil suit they might have found her responsible, but for a criminal charge there just wasn’t enough evidence. Did Casey kill her daughter, even accidentally? Did the daughter drown? The evidence doesn’t distinguish. The evidence *does* point to someone hiding the body, but who the heck knows — maybe the family was afraid of being charged with child neglect.

Sometimes a guilty person goes free. That’s how our system is: we consider it much more important to ensure that we don’t convict an innocent person.

I agree with you completely.

I am surprised by how upset many FReepers are with the verdict.

Lack of evidence. If this was a wrongful death civil suit they might have found her responsible, but for a criminal charge there just wasn’t enough evidence. Did Casey kill her daughter, even accidentally? Did the daughter drown? The evidence doesn’t distinguish. The evidence *does* point to someone hiding the body, but who the heck knows — maybe the family was afraid of being charged with child neglect. Sometimes a guilty person goes free. That’s how our system is: we consider it much more important to ensure that we don’t convict an innocent person.

Well, the whole deal revolves around the word "lack." There WAS evidence, but the question is, evidence of what? There was evidence of a deliberately buried body, a lying mother, who celebrated the loss of her daughter before her body was even found, and who did internet searhces for chloroform, and who had legal responsibility for the safety of her child.

1st Degree? 2nd Degree? Willful Manslaughter? Negligent Manslaughter? That's quite a spread of applicable charges, given the evidence. I just don't believe that what was found didn't meet ANY of them.

Or that (as has been mentioned in this thread) even a single juror didn't hang on letting her off Scot-Free (because that's EXACTLY what happened here).