The Casey Anthony Verdict is Not an Endorsement of Our Criminal Justice System

redstate.com ^ | 7/5/11 | Rob Taylor

[Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears]

When the Casey Anthony verdict was announced I expected celebration from her defense team. I was more taken aback by the celebratory tone taken by pundits like Geraldo Rivera and Judge Andrew Napolitano. Their position is the same one that many liberals, anti-death penalty activists and libertarians are promoting now: this proves the system works.

But it doesn’t.

The American justice system is the greatest legal system in the world but like any other it is fallible. In the interest of liberty we err on the side of caution in criminal cases, but that means that in many cases we do not get justice. Talking heads on Fox were making the point that this was justice, that the verdict is a victory for the Constitution. This is wrong. Criminals getting off is a byproduct of a our love of liberty but it certainly isn’t an endorsement of our system.

Casey Anthony may or may not have killed her child but we know she committed several crimes afterward. She didn’t report her daughter missing for weeks. When police were finally involved she attempted to frame an innocent woman for murder. While her daughter was supposedly missing she was out partying. If not reporting your daughter missing for a month isn’t child abuse – or at least child neglect – nothing is.

(snip)

Little Caylee Anthony was abused, possibly raped according to her own mother who claimed George Anthony was a child molester. She disappeared and her mother did nothing. She died a horrible death and her family hired lawyers. Her body was desecrated, thrown into a ditch like so much garbage and her mother will likely walk free at sentencing. How is this an endorsement of American justice?

[Recovering Ex-hippie]

No I don’t agree with that statement as presented.

this is accurate:
““The American justice system is the greatest legal system in the world but like any other it is fallible. In the interest of liberty we err on the side of caution in criminal cases, but that means that in many cases we do not get justice.” ( I add, “we do not get justice for the VICTIM in many cases ).

I believe the following part is correct:
“ Talking heads on Fox were making the point that this was justice, that the verdict is a victory for the Constitution.”

That is, what the above is saying is, JUSTICE FOR THE STATE
has been served, because the process “worked”, the defendent was tried in our court of law with all due protections and legal remedies and the jury made a decision, in this case “not guilty “ ( NOT aquitted, or as the British say “guilt was not proven”). The prosecutor files the charges and the defendant is brought to trial, ON BEHALF OF THE STATE ( ALL CITIZENS), NOT the victim of the crime.

the following is not totally accurate...
“Criminals getting off is a byproduct of a our love of liberty but it certainly isn’t an endorsement of our system”

We pay a very high price for our freedom and for our PROTECTION OF THE INNOCENT UNDER THE LAW. Thus, while our legal justice system is not perfect, (ie humanely fallible ),very often the victim does not get “justice”.

The system can still be improved, albeit will never perfectly convict all those guilty and save all those not guilty. We have decided it is better for 10 guilty men to go free, than one innocent be wrongly convicted.

[dsc]

“The state had to prove its case to dummies, a daunting task but I guess they were a member of your peers.”

A member of my peers? I suppose you meant to type “a jury of my peers,” but were so steamed up that you made a mistake. No problem. Happens to us all.

Considering that Mark Levin said that they failed to prove their case in*his*opinion, am I his peer? That would be very flattering—to me, anyway.

[Revolting cat!]

"The American justice system is the greatest legal system in the world"

Unsupported and unsupportable claim. Feel good saying such nonsense?

[dsc]

“The state had to prove its case to dummies, a daunting task but I guess they were a member of your peers.”

A member of my peers? I suppose you meant to type “a jury of my peers,” but were so steamed up that you made a mistake. No problem. Happens to us all.

Considering that Mark Levin said that they failed to prove their case in*his*opinion, am I his peer? That would be very flattering—to me, anyway.

[longtermmemmory]

compared to say russia where cronyism means enforcement of contracts is a crapshoot?

compared to japan which has no jury system?

compared to france where the indicted has to PROVE they are innocent of the accusation?

compared to countless other countries where you do not get access to legal counsel?

compared to arabic nations where sharia is the law?

compared to mexico because it is mexico?

compared to contries where a robe means authority? powdered wigs?

compared to civil law rather than common law where the judges really have not even a tissue of check or ballance?

[Smokin' Joe]

Mothve, Method, Opportunity. They had the first, sort of, the last no problem. But no method, no murder proven, especially without a confession.

If you can't prove murder, you can't prove someone did it.

If you can't see that, you're just looking for the rest of the lynch mob.

The media have done their job well.

People are shreiking for weeks over the long cold corpse of a child, while hundreds of children have been murdered in the meantime, and beyond the highly emotional smokescreen of one more murdered kid in a daily sicker culture, we have our government committing high crimes--including abetting murder--and no one is looking.

Every time there is a soap-opera show trial on TV, there is something not being reported, be it the theft of our rights, the passage of onerous laws, or our govenrment not being taken to task.

When was THE last great grandstand trial? OJ Simpson? And what was going unreported in the media?

THE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ACTIONS OF THE BATFE, et.al. AT WACO

[mlo]

"If you can't prove murder, you can't prove someone did it."

"If you can't see that, you're just looking for the rest of the lynch mob. "

"The media have done their job well."

And where do you get the notion that murder wasn't proven?

[mlo]

"Surely, in order to ascertain that someone was murdered, you would have to know what the person died of?"

No, you wouldn't. Not if the circumstances otherwise tell you that the death was the act of another person. You don't necessarily require a medical diagnosis. That's part of the fundamental misunderstanding that let the jury make this mistake.

[Smokin' Joe]

Justice demands vengeance.

"Vengence in mine, saith the Lord."

Scattered across the west in little plots are tombstones which say "hanged by mistake".

I'd rather go to meet my maker and explain I wasn't completely sure, so I let that one go, than try to account for demanding the blood of an innocent, even once.

Our founders knew there would be cases which could not be proven.

As for our courts, either we honor their verdicts and rulings and abide by them or we don't.

We will not be able as a culture to pick and choose what verdicts we honor and which we don't, or the law will become meaningless.

The jury has delivered their verdict.

Either honor it or not, whether or not you agree with it.

With the evidence they were presented in court, and without the assistance of 24/7 talking heads on the TV with full color graphics designed to produce emotional responses to get us all involved so we watch their program, this is the verdict they have delivered.

[Smokin' Joe]

We know the child was dead. What we don’t know is how she got that way. If we don’t know how she got that way, we don’t know it was murder and not a bizarre accident. THe prosecution pusing for murder one, murder conducted with malice, premeditation, and forethought, is what sank the case. The jury might have come back with ‘guilty’ on a lesser charge such as manslaughter.

[PieterCasparzen]

"Surely, in order to ascertain that someone was murdered, you would have to know what the person died of?"

No, you wouldn't. Not if the circumstances otherwise tell you that the death was the act of another person. You don't necessarily require a medical diagnosis. That's part of the fundamental misunderstanding that let the jury make this mistake.

In a case like this where there is only a skeleton where nothing about it points to particular cause of death, circumstances would have to be very compelling, such as in cases where the remains are found on property where the accused controls access to the property, like a home, storage facility, etc., and motive would have to be very compelling, such as spouse wanting a divorce, standing to gain financially, etc. Actually, with the manner of death given as homicide and cause undetermined in the ME report, being based on the circumstances, according to the ME report itself, actually makes the manner of death in the ME report circumstantial evidence, not physical. Without that circumstantial manner of death determination, the death would not have been ruled a homicide and there could have be no homicide charge filed against the defendant.

The motive theorized by the prosecution in this case was that the mother felt the child was inhibiting her fun, but they presented nothing to support a transition from the happy times presented in photographic evidence to the point of wanting to commit murder. Also, there was no evidence that pointed to her somehow losing the help of her parents in raising the child, like an ultimatum to never bring Caylee back to their house. Motive therefore was impossible for jurors to feel 100% certain about, even though it was plausible.

[jonrick46]

Assumptions do not make a case.

[Just mythoughts]

The prosecution demonstrated by Casey's own words that child went ‘missing’ in her custody. AND no 2 + year old climbs into trash bags and a laundry bag from her home and makes her way down to the swamp garbage dump / pet cemetery, less than a mile from her home all by her self. Oh, and let us not ignore that Casey even told the investigators that ‘Zanny’ the ‘Nanny’ took her. This defendant ‘confessed’ to this crime and the people sleep.

Now the ‘state’ is going to have to pass a law that it is a felony IF a parent/care giver does not report their child missing within 48 hours or an ‘accidental’ death in 2 hours. Boy we have come a long way.

[jonrick46]

I got the picture without the media feeding me the propaganda:

Casey forgot to remove the ladder, Caylee got out of the house, climbed up the ladder and slipped without much sound, under the water.

Casey, worried about a negligent homicide charge, makes it look like a abduction case by creating the fantasy story about a babysitter taking Caylee overnight and failing to return. The police would then look for a kidnapper who never existed. Meanwhile Caylee's body is made to look like it was dumped by a murderer in a way that was supposed to make the police look for someone who never existed.

Florida code for manslaughter:

"782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.--

(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

[miss marmelstein]

I suspect they broke the rules and talked about the case ‘way before they were charged with the case.

[Guenevere]

So that accounts for Casey blaming everyone for it from the 'nanny' to the old ex-boyfriend....

..partying till the sun comes up...

..new tattoo

...and no grieving whatsoever...

...and her parents allowing her to spend 3 years in jail

..yeah, your theory really makes sense

[miss marmelstein]

Casey Anthony had a criminal history way before the murder. Both her mother and grandmother made attempts to have her arrested but then backed off. She stole endlessly from girlfriends and men.

She has one felony arrest prior to these new felonies.

She had sole custody of the child for the 31 days the baby was missing. Neither Cindy nor George Anthony had access to the baby during that time.

Casey abandoned her car. It was taken to a tow shop but the owner was frightened by the “smell of death” coming from the trunk. He alerted Casey’s parents who came down to collect it.

Cindy Anthony called 911 saying her daughter had just admitted that her grandchild had been missing for 31 days and “The damn car smells like there is a dead body in it.”

Casey Anthony then blames a complete stranger for stealing her baby, causing that woman to be descended upon by every law enforcement agency in the nation.

Stuck in jail, and still proclaiming her daughter alive, Casey laughs at rumors that her daughter died in the family pool.

Casey thrives in jail until the body is found in a swamp. Her reaction is so bad that jailers immediately suspect she is guilty of murder.

The body is wrapped in plastic bags from the Anthony house as is the duct tape and baby blanket.

Police find an overwhelming smell of chloroform in the trunk as well as decomposition and a single decomposed hair from Caylee. The cadaver dogs locate decomposition in the trunk and near Caylee’s playhouse.

Casey is seen going in and out of the Anthony home while both are at work. She even borrows a shovel from a neighbor at one point.

And then there are the 31 days of orgies and Ecstasy-taking, lesbian photos, tattoo-getting and sleeping with men while Caylee was present. Then there is the supremely creepy story (told by one of Casey’s boyfriends) of Casey waking up in the middle of the night while sleeping with some guy, grabbing up Caylee, disappearing into the night and showing up in the early morning hours without the baby. Asked where she was, Casey says she is with Cindy. But Cindy says she never saw the baby that night...

I know there are many other points of circumstantial evidence to this case that prove she is a murderer but I’ll leave it at that.

[Bluebird Singing]

Some seem to be “taken” by Ms. Anthony’s photogenic “qualities”, IMO. She was seen by some observers to have made flirty eye contact with one of the male jurors. She’s a real pro at what she does, isn’t she?

[Bluebird Singing]

I guess you missed the testimony in the trial regarding TRASH vs. GARBAGE in the trunk of the car. Didn’t you?

It was determined that the bag in the trunk contained TRASH.
Garbage would include decomposing food products. Trash is non-biological materials, which would not cause a smell of decomposition.

[Bluebird Singing]

Yeah, the brilliant Mark Levin went on national radio misstating the evidence. Disgusting.

I was listening and heard him say that the “strand” of hair (the one the state presented with the death band in the follicle) was found in the house 30 feet away from the trunk. And in light of this evidence as perceived by Mark Levin, he declares the state had no case. I’d like to know where he went to read up on this case that he had paid no attention to until now.

I have lost all respect for Mark Levin.