Posted on 07/06/2011 1:05:29 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Casey Anthony's defence team have been branded insensitive and loutish after they were spotted celebrating their court victory with a lavish champagne party.
In an unapologetic display many have slammed as inappropriate considering the serious nature of their case, Jose Baez and his team were seen downing drinks as they watched reaction to their client being found not guilty of brutally murdering her two-year-old child, Caylee.
At one point, attorney Cheney Mason could be seen making an obscene gesture to an angry crowd outside, an apparent gesture of contempt towards anyone who dares criticise the team.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Actually, that’s the least they could do for her.
Your comment would be more effective if you didn’t mix up the name of the deceased and the murderer.
Book deals.
Actually the jury did convict her of four counts of lying to police.
To: Liz
I guess the jurors overlooked that Casey is a liar.
30 posted on Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:37:46 PM by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
She is a liar. So what?
Celebrating the murder of a little girl.
I know that; but she may walk for time served; so what price is she paying?
O.J. Simpson is a liar. That doesn’t mean he killed Nicole. Nobody killed Nicole, just as nobody killed this little girl. Case over, go home folks.
"Very likely to have murdered." your phrase speaks a mouthful because under our rule of law, under our Constitution, a criminal conviction requires "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," and indeed, a conviction upon a lower standard (i.e., "very likely") would violate the 5th and 14th Amendments.
Normally they choose a pretty little white girl, preferably blonde, to focus on.
I stopped watching Greta during the Scott/Lacy Peterson era. Is she still talking about them?
I have intentionally not followed this particular circus and this is the first and last comment I will make about it.
The jury sat through every moment of the trial charged with the responsibility to evaluate every detail. Their conclusion? Casey was a good mother! Those are the words of each of the jurors who have spoken. Makes me wonder what the press was litening to.
Seems to me a lot of sore losers are upset that Casey Anthony didn’t get the death penalty based on flimsy circumstantial evidence and a prosecutor’s closing statement that all but said not even the prosecutors were sure she did it.
I’m not saying I’m a supporter of hers, I am saying that the prosecution was not entitled to a conviction.
It rather amazes me that the same FReepers who champion Fully Informed Juries would take umbrage at a jury refusing to convict someone on specious evidence.
The mistake here was that the prosecution brought their case in the absence of solid facts...like what happened with OJ Simpson.
Now watch the National Enquirer produce the photos or whatever that will prove this girl guilty.
We were actually waiting for Nancy’s head to explode.
This wasn’t about justice for Caylee, it was about ratings for Nancy & her constant stirring of the proverbial sh*tpot. Wonder how many nice outfits she can now buy for her kids/gnarly wigs for herself at the expense of a murdered child.
Cute to see her riling up the crowds outside the courthouse
Who ARE these people? From the creeps running down the halls to grab seats in the gallery, to the “outraged weepers”.....
Sick circus, to be sure.
Seriously though, you couldn’t have honestly expected her attorney to apologize for mounting a successful defense. I never understand it when individuals turn their wrath against the defense team, when we all know that it’s an adversarial system, and the defense works for the accused and only the accused.
Baez did what he was supposed to do. The job of a defense attorney is to try to win against the prosecution. I don’t have the foggiest notion what you guys expect the counsel for the defense to do in these trials, but whatever it is, I doubt it’s a realistic expectation.
>>Seriously though, you couldn’t have honestly expected her attorney to apologize for mounting a successful defense. I never understand it when individuals turn their wrath against the defense team, when we all know that it’s an adversarial system, and the defense works for the accused and only the accused.<<
By saying the Dad raped Casey, as an excuse for her behavior? By saying Caylee drowned, with no evidence, and that Rapist Dad put duct tape on the body to “cover up” the “accident”?
Then the mom lying on the stand about searching for chloroform, to rpotect her daughter, with the defense team’s approval?
Then this imbecile alternate juror thinking we’re so STUPID we are going to accept his idiotic declaration that “Casey is a good mother”?
You might find that “respectable.” I don’t. I find it evil, sick, wicked, demented, and immoral.
But we live in an amoral world where right and wrong don’t matter, justice is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is “winning,” even if winning means getting away with murder.
Respect those lowlife maggots all you want. Count me out.
I think defense lawyers who defend the indefensible are the lowest scum walking the earth today, vile filth who deserve no respect of any kind.
You can't have a trial without a defense lawyer. If no one steps up, the judge can order an attorney to represent a defendant. That pesky constitution and all of that.
Classy of the mindless mob to show up and jeer, too. They deserve each other.
>>Classy of the mindless mob to show up and jeer, too. They deserve each other.
<<
Actually, if you watch the video, you will see that that was not the case. They were simply documenting what happened, in a peaceful manner.
It’s the defense team that went all rude and classless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.