Posted on 07/06/2011 7:02:33 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
At one time South Africa was seen as having the best legal system in the world. I imagine it is one of the worst now.
Many years ago, F. Lee Bailey said the military system of justice is better. When asked how, he said they are more likely to find the guilty, guilty and the innocent, not guilty. My JAG Colonel nephew agrees with that.
Despite all the Arlen Spector jokes I like the Scottish system. They have three possible verdicts. Not Guilty, which means they don’t think you did it: Not Proven Guilty: which means the jury thinks you did it but there was no enough evidence to convict.
The other is Not Guilty and we really think you didn’t do it. Sort of a clearing of your name.
I left out Guilty and put in Not Guilty twice in my sort of rough summation of Scottish verdicts.
Guilty means we know you did it and have nod doubt at all.
For those like me who don't trust the government that is the best system...
maybe we should make it a crime for jurors to sell appearences after a trial and claim that it made them sick to vote not guilty and for not pondering the evidence. it seems they were more interested in sentencing which was against instructions. As for what Dennis said..2 to 5 years if your child is missing 31 days is not enough..and seems to be major evidence that you offed your kid.
It’s the best legal system in the world if one is guilty.
>>The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free than execute 1 who is innocent.<<
I agree completely with that. But that does not preclude me from speaking out when I think justice has been denied.
Fair enough?
Casey said the nanny’s name was Zanny. Zanny is the street name for Xanax a sleeping aid. My guess is that she was doing whatever she needed to do, to knock her baby out so she could party(at some point tried the chloroform, seriously dangerous stuff). I’m even wondering if Caylee was in the trunk during these times so Casey could party. Duck taped mouth so if she happened to wake she couldn’t yell or cry out? God only knows what happened. This is just a guess. Horrible that this woman will walk free soon and probably make a bundle of money.
SLIGHT CORRECTION TO REALITIES OF THE DAY: The American system was designed with the idea that its better to let 1000 of guilty go free AND MURDER AGAIN, than execute 1 who is innocent.
As if executing an innocent in this or the O.J. Simpson case was the choice. Absurd!
That said, her lawyers convinced 12 jurors to acquit. Perhaps this says more about them than it does about our legal system!
Doesn't speak to this situation. Juries like this are just as likely to convict the innocent as acquit the guilty.
I have far less problem letting a murderer go even if they kill again than giving the state the power to execute innocent men and women.
>>Doesn’t speak to this situation. Juries like this are just as likely to convict the innocent as acquit the guilty. <<
Well said.
And this woman seems like she has seen how WRONG her decision was, and must have had it pointed out to her...hence the change of heart.
This IS the best legal SYSTEM in the world. The plain fact is that the prosecution presented a case with no real physical evidence and no witnesses. Jurors are not supposed to find someone guilty based on emotion or on how they “feel”. I think the jury did exactly what they were supposed to do. Perhaps this will discourage prosecutors from caving to public pressure and rushing cases, although I highly doubt it.
The essential point is that regardless of guilt, the court must convict a person by strict adherence to the law.
Otherwise, we would have cops simply walking up to the first suspect, pointing their finger at him and pronouncing “We know you did it”.
Then put him away for life, hang him or whatever.
Our system was developed for the purpose of keeping that very thing from happening.
It matters not that you “know” that she killed the baby. You must prove it in a way that is indisputable.
The prosecution fialed to do that.
That the jury did not at least convict her of aggravated child abuse knowing she never contacted authorities is evidence that the jurors are either morons or mentally ill. Juror 14 is definitely mentally ill since he has stated that Casey was a good mother.
Here’s what we know:
According to the defense, 2-year-old Caylee drowned in the backyard pool, and Dad covered it all up after sexually molesting Casey. Then Mom did internet searches for chloroform. Then she didn’t.
No one knows who used Casey’s computer to do the internet searches for “neck injuries, chloroform, inhalation, death, head injuries,” and “internal bleeding.” Or who deleted them.
Then Casey worked at Universal Studios for two years. Then she didn’t.
Then according to Casey, she left Caylee with a nanny named...uh...Zanny. That’s when the trouble began. Zanny kept Caylee for 31 days, while the family kept asking where Caylee was. Then she didn’t. Because there WAS no Nanny named Zanny.
My theory is that Caylee put duct tape over her own mouth, walked into the woods, climbed into the trash bags, and suffocated.
Casey was so distraught by her father raping her that she didn’t even notice Caylee was missing. And she tried to forget about Rapist Dad by partying and getting tattoos and making up more lies about Zanny the Nanny. Also, in not reporting anything to the police for a month.
But the main thing is, this is a “HUGE VICTORY FOR JUSTICE”® and we can all celebrate the jury’s verdict!
WOOOOOHOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pass the fireworks and champagne.
/s
I agree completely about the military justice system. It is the best possible court if you are innocent, or have reasonable justification. And it is also the worst possible court to appear before if you are guilty.
But add to that, the purpose of a military court is *not* justice, but “to maintain good order and discipline in the military.” And that is night and day from a civilian court.
For example, a homicide in a brawl, heat of anger, or many other circumstances, might only merit 3 or 4 years in prison. But someone who molests a child could get 15 or 20 years, because the latter is seen as very harmful to military morale.
And there are other things that really matter in a military court. For example, with the permission of the president of the court, any member of the court can ask *anyone* a question. This includes attorneys, witnesses, and anyone else appearing before the court, even if they are seated in the gallery.
This means that most of the razzle dazzle that civilian attorneys try in civilian court is right out the window. Attorneys try that stuff in a military court and the members of the court will chew them up and spit them out.
It also means that witnesses for one side might be grilled by the members of the court in such a way that they give better testimony to the other side. And bad attitude, or heaven help you, perjury, could end up with you wearing irons in short order.
It is downright refreshing to see unvarnished honesty in court, and the wicked nailed on the spot. No games. No Latin. No cheating.
Actually I’ve thought the same thing - that she put her baby in the trunk so she could party.
If anyone tries to make money with/from her I won’t be participating. No magazines with her on the cover...no nothing.
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.