Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Casey Anthony Case Fuels Push in States for 'Caylee's Law'
Fox News ^ | 12/8/2011 | The Associated Press

Posted on 07/08/2011 2:31:45 PM PDT by ladyellen

The trial and acquittal of Casey Anthony has spawned a slew of proposed laws named after her 2-year-old daughter Caylee, as lawmakers and their constituents try to extract some measure of reform out of a case that ended -- for many onlookers -- with frustration.

The state proposals, which sprung up after an Oklahoma woman started an online petition drive Tuesday, would generally make it a felony for a parent not to report the death or disappearance of his or her child in a certain period of time.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anthony
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last
What do you think of Shepard Smith's reaction?
1 posted on 07/08/2011 2:31:49 PM PDT by ladyellen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

Let’s not be stupid. It falls under negligence.


2 posted on 07/08/2011 2:33:13 PM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."

--Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand

3 posted on 07/08/2011 2:33:53 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." - Bertrand de Jouvenel des Ursins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen
Casey Anthony Case Fuels Push in States for 'Caylee's Law'

|

Swell. More laws. Just what we needed.

4 posted on 07/08/2011 2:34:04 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

So what is it going to be...a law against incompetent prosecutors???


5 posted on 07/08/2011 2:36:18 PM PDT by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

mixed feelings on the bill, as these knee-jerk reaction bills generally are unnecessary at best and have damaging effects at worst.

In this case, the idea seems to make sense. Hold a parent responsible for their child and provide a stiff punishment if they do what Anthony did and cover up a disappearance. It does seem to be a clear case for a negligence charge, but Anthony did not get any punishment for this act. If anything, the current laws may just need an upgrade to deal with vile acts like this and make it cut and dry in court. The brand new law borders on nanny-statism.


6 posted on 07/08/2011 2:38:17 PM PDT by ilgipper ( political rhetoric is no substitute for competence (Thomas Sowell))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax

the prosecutors did all they could with the evidence they had. The jury just ignored what they were shown because the liked the made-up stories about sexual abuse and kids drowning that the defense described in the opening statements, despite having nothing to back it up in the actual presentation.


7 posted on 07/08/2011 2:45:14 PM PDT by ilgipper ( political rhetoric is no substitute for competence (Thomas Sowell))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Amen. The “there ought to be a law . . . .” syndrome is responsible for so much of the over-regulated mess we have now.

How are these laws going to be written? Narrowly tailored to the exact situation as Casey Anthony? More likely they’ll be stupidly broad and there will be legitimately grieving parents who could be FELONS because they didn’t file the right paperwork with Big Brother. I don’t want to hear about how that won’t happen because of “prosecutorial discretion”; the upthread quote from Atlas Shrugged is spot on.


8 posted on 07/08/2011 2:46:09 PM PDT by rockvillem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen
Butthead Smith is at least two good reasons not to watch television!

This whole fiasco is more reflexive reaction to an image painted by the pimps of the media and the law industry.

Where is the outcry against permitting the pimps of the media to use a trial of a crime as a prop to promote their emotional EXPERTISE?. The trial should be taped for later discussion and analyses, but NO BROADCASTS OF A TRIAL IN PROGRESS. This certainly adds to the length of the trial

Where is the outcry against prosecutors (mostly political appointees) being held accountable for bringing a case without sufficient evidence (i.e., WHAT WAS THE CAUSE OF DEATH?)

Having TV programs 365/24/7 reported as NEWS is absurd and it should STOP!
9 posted on 07/08/2011 2:50:14 PM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
the prosecutors did all they could with the evidence they had. The jury just ignored what they were shown because the liked the made-up stories about sexual abuse and kids drowning that the defense described in the opening statements, despite having nothing to back it up in the actual presentation.

If that's true then I guarantee you that she will be back before a court sooner or later for another crime.

Look at O.J.
Look at Rodney King
Look at Alcee Hastings
Look at Dominique Strauss-Kahn

When bad people get away with a crime, they get even more arrogant and out-of-control.

10 posted on 07/08/2011 2:50:49 PM PDT by Steely Tom (Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA

Agreed. We already have a billion laws this whole mess fell under but the prosecutors were stupid and incompetent.

We don’t need more laws.


11 posted on 07/08/2011 2:52:35 PM PDT by CodeToad (Islam needs to be banned in the US and treated as a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

Florida needs a Dexter.


12 posted on 07/08/2011 3:01:19 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

shouldn’t we have a Terry’s law first?

Or perhaps a John Lennon’s law?


13 posted on 07/08/2011 3:04:54 PM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. N.C. D.E. +12 ....( History is a process, not an event ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

Would this law apply to women who abort their children?


14 posted on 07/08/2011 3:12:19 PM PDT by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax
So what is it going to be...a law against incompetent prosecutors???

I never followed the trial but, like anybody else that is not living under a rock, I know the basic facts and a friend of mine last night rattled off a laundry list of evidence:

1.) The smell of decomposition noticed by many people with prior experience in such a smell.
2.) The child's hair in the trunk with a "death band" on it
3.) The mother partying after the disappearance. Etc., etc., etc.

It seemed pretty slam-dunk to me.

In your opinion, how was the prosecution able to mess this up?

Was the jury just to squeamish to condemn a pretty face to death? Was a lesser charge an option for the jury?

15 posted on 07/08/2011 3:12:37 PM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: leprechaun9
Where is the outcry against prosecutors (mostly political appointees) being held accountable for bringing a case without sufficient evidence (i.e., WHAT WAS THE CAUSE OF DEATH?)

Too much CSI and tv crap that these jurors expected in REAL LIFE!!

There was NO cause of death in the Stacy Peterson case either, but Scott is sitting on death row! (and that is California)!!

At least this bill would stop these killers from dumping the body til there is NO evidence left to find cause of death!!!!

16 posted on 07/08/2011 3:14:21 PM PDT by blondee123 (Obama-Socialist in Chief!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

I forget who, but someone (Instapundit?) suggested a while back that as a rule of thumb, any law named after a child is probably a bad law.


17 posted on 07/08/2011 3:17:44 PM PDT by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyellen

Flabbergasted. He got it right. Now we’ve got one more piece of useless legislation.


18 posted on 07/08/2011 3:20:15 PM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Great quote! (And they’re not all that abundant from Rand.)


19 posted on 07/08/2011 3:24:30 PM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blondee123
At least this bill would stop these killers from dumping the body til there is NO evidence left to find cause of death!!!!

Just how would it do that?, the investigation would still only start after the report. Just like this case.

The end result of this law will be concientious parents overwhelming the police system when junior can't immediately be located for fear of going to jail for a felony. Ungrateful teens will use as a bludgeon against their parents when they don't get their way. This law is a bad idea, with plenty of potential for misuse.
20 posted on 07/08/2011 3:29:21 PM PDT by yuleeyahoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson