Just interested in how consistent you are. Scott Peterson was convicted with much less circumstantial evidence. Should he be set free?
Should parents be immune from prosecution when they fail to report 2 year olds who have gone missing for 30 days?
If murderers manage to hide their victims from authorities until a cause of death can not be determined and no DNA can be harvested do they all receive get out of jail free cards?
Do they receive the cards even though the victim is wrapped in duct tape and garbage bags exactly the same as they keep at their house, their trunks smell like death, hair found in the trunk is consistent with hair from a dead body, that hair belongs to the victim and the trunk is loaded with critters that feast on dead flesh?
Do you think that not reporting a missing 2 year old to authorities could cause grave harm to that two year old? Because if you do then Casey Anthony should have been convicted of aggravated child abuse.
There's more but let's start with these rational questions.
You have a slight problem with logic.
First, she was not charged with not reporting. If she had been, it would have stuck.
Who hid the child? That was one of the jury’s problems. The prosecution did not prove who did that or anything else.
Who wrapped her in duct tape?
Small question. Big ramifications.
As I said, it will be a sad day when we can simply point our finger at a person and say “I know you did it. Off with your head!”
The prosecution did not do their job.
Scott Peterson was not on trial in this case. Not material.
You might “know” she is guilty, but that is not enough. It has to be done by the book or we are all in danger of false imprisonment.