Casey Anthony

BufordBuford Senior MemberPosts: 6,582 Senior Member
Not guilty.

Glad to see this circus is over.
Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
«1

Replies

  • beartrackerbeartracker Senior Member Posts: 3,116 Senior Member
    Glad it is over WOW!!! Don't know what to think or feel, have to deal with my anger that justice for the child was not found today!!:roll::uhm::uhm::down:
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 12,647 Senior Member
    Be glad you're not in Central FL and it's the ONLY thing on daytime TV.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • beartrackerbeartracker Senior Member Posts: 3,116 Senior Member
    Boy, you said a mouthful there, you are so right. :beer:
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 22,997 Senior Member
    Glad it's over, too. The law was served, but not justice for the little girl. I watched way too much coverage of the trial; prosecution didn't prove their case, IMHO. Evidence just didn't seem to be there for either murder or manslaughter conviction. And way too much conflicting testimony from the 'expert witnesses'; no wonder the jury came to the conclusion they did.
    If a Liberal throws a hand grenade at you, pick it up, pull the pin, and throw it back at them.



  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 26,695 Senior Member
    She might not go to jail but she'll never really get away with it.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,478 Senior Member
    You must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The state did not even come close. The state attorney was coming up with left field evidence and grand standing. That guy was thinking about a future in politics, like so many state level attorneys do. They all want some huge national case like this to pole vault them to office. Everything about the case was circumstantial, and really far fetched, from both sides.

    If it truly was an accident, then there need be no justice "served" for Caylee, as non was due. Casey and Baez are not criminal masterminds pulling off the heist of a century, but Casey WILL pay the rest of her life because of the coverage that was blown out of proportion. Why was this case so special? Little girls are murdered all the time, and people are put on trial for murder hundreds of times a day across this country. But, when you have an attractive white girl from a decent family and a pretty white kid the entire country is all of a sudden up in arms about a case with no factual evidence. Why isn't any covering the woman who microwaved her kid to death last month? Oh yea, she wasn't white and pretty. Doesn't make for good TV
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • Lt.Lt. New Member Posts: 10 New Member
    Yep, glad it's finally over. Unfortunately, there's a little girl that is dead and we'll probably never know who did it!
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 31,722 Senior Member
    That whole family is dysfunctional (to put it mildly) and know way more than they are telling.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 6,138 Senior Member
    The only way I could find her guilty was to use the process of elimination. I do believe that the little girl was murdered, and did not drown. Regardless of how dysfunctional this family is, I don't for a second think that George Anthony had a hand in Caylee's death. I don't think his wife did, either. Unless there's someone out there that we haven't heard about, that only leaves Casey. But, other than that, I have to agree that the prosecution didn't have the evidence to prove guilt. In my heart, though, I'll always believe that Casey Anthony just got away with pre-meditated first degree murder.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • NCFUBARNCFUBAR Senior Member Posts: 4,245 Senior Member
    I personally believe she CAUSED the child's death in some way but did not murder her. But I also don't know that beyond a shadow of a doubt as the letter of the law states for a guilty verdict. The DA didn't show all the pieces needed to convict and the idiot Baez poked just enough holes to get her off. I hate it ended this way but by the guidelines of the justice system it seems correct but it sucks in my mind.
    “The further a society drifts from truth ... the more it will hate those who speak it."
    - George Orwell
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 12,647 Senior Member
    Big Chief wrote: »
    That whole family is dysfunctional (to put it mildly) and know way more than they are telling.

    When your defense lies on the idea that "Our family is more messed up than the Jacksons (Michael, Jermaine, Joe, LaToya, Janet, etc.) you know things are surreal.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 31,722 Senior Member
    What kind of orange Monkey Business is you wearing on your haid?
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • BigDanSBigDanS Senior Member Posts: 6,667 Senior Member
    Dexter Morgan.
    "A patriot is mocked, scorned and hated; yet when his cause succeeds, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
    Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.... now who's bringing the hot wings? :jester:
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 37,985 Senior Member
    Anyone who doesn't report their 2 year old daughter missing for 30 days she be shot in the face.No chance of that person breeding again that way. Really, its that simple. She did it.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • ericbericb Banned Posts: 393 Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Anyone who doesn't report their 2 year old daughter missing for 30 days she be shot in the face.No chance of that person breeding again that way. Really, its that simple. She did it.
    My daughter is an ethics Atty for the Florida Bar... if you want her opinion and some info..IM me
    "HunterJoe...You need to stick to topics you know about, which I realize is going to limit your post count."~Dan Johnson
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,212 Senior Member
    I'm glad it's over so that we can get back to the other important topics that have been dominating the news recently. Namely, what are Charley Sheen and Lindsey Lohan doing?
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • ericbericb Banned Posts: 393 Member
    ultimately the premise " without a shadow of doubt " prevailed.

    The defense painted so many confusing, scenarios that they baffled the the jury with BS
    "HunterJoe...You need to stick to topics you know about, which I realize is going to limit your post count."~Dan Johnson
  • bmlbml Senior Member Posts: 1,075 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Anyone who doesn't report their 2 year old daughter missing for 30 days she be shot in the face.No chance of that person breeding again that way. Really, its that simple. She did it.


    This
    scottd wrote: »
    The milk of human kindness is often out dated and curdled.

    This is like watching a bunch or **** trying to hump a door knob.....
  • LinefinderLinefinder Moderator Posts: 4,167 Senior Member
    I was the jury foreman on a 2nd degree murder trial. The law doesn't state "beyond a shadow of a doubt". It states "beyond a reasonable doubt". The import of the two statements is light-years apart.

    And yes.....circumstantial evidence can, and does, convict. And in most cases....that's a good thing, else a high percentage of murderers that are presently no longer plying their trade would still be doing so.

    Mike
    Decisions have consequences, not everything in life gets an automatic mulligan.
    KSU Firefighter
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0 Member
    $5 says she's doing "adult" movies within 18 months.
    To make a long post short here, ...
  • LinefinderLinefinder Moderator Posts: 4,167 Senior Member
    I suspect you're right, Scott. Possible four year sentence for the convictions she received today, with three years off for "time served".....yeah.....18 months is probably about right.

    Mike
    Decisions have consequences, not everything in life gets an automatic mulligan.
    KSU Firefighter
  • gunrunner428gunrunner428 Senior Member Posts: 1,018 Senior Member
    Best summation I heard was that the jury had "CSI" expectations, waiting with bated breath for the fingerprints, DNA evidence, incriminating video, and razor-sharp autopsy findings to unequivocally lock in a "guilty" verdict. Barring that, they took the judge's instructions to find "beyond reasonable doubt" to an extreme and manufactured doubt in each little facet of evidence.

    Also, some of the Monday-morning quarterbacks pointed out the unusual positioning of the defendant, an attractive young lady with tears in her eyes, eye-to-eye with the jury throughout the trial. Tough to not feel at least some irrational sympathy for "the poor dear" during the hammering she got from the prosecutors.

    The preponderence of evidence, including her month-long lapse in reporting a "missing" child, her fabricated stories of a non-existent nanny and her mysterious boyfriend through the investigation, and her IMO insanely calm call to the authorities just after her mother frantically called 911 all add up to a pile of evidence against her, at least for a manslaughter or depraved indifference conviction.

    Maybe the prosecution set itself a goal too high by going after the full-on death penalty-eligible convictions.

    That said, I agree it's a shame this much attention isn't given to every abused, murdered, neglected child case.
  • olesniperolesniper Senior Member Posts: 3,590 Senior Member
    Starting next week.....she'll be searching every beer joint and honky tonk in Orlando........looking for her baby's killer.......that is........when she's not playing golf with OJ.
    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
    I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,478 Senior Member
    Linefinder wrote: »
    And yes.....circumstantial evidence can, and does, convict. And in most cases....that's a good thing, else a high percentage of murderers that are presently no longer plying their trade would still be doing so.

    Mike

    And many an innocent man has been sent away for years, life, or been put to death to later be proven innocent by new technology or new evidence/testimony come to light. In cases like this, the State attorneys get such a big head they put on the blinders and can only look down VERY narrow tunnel vision. The TV will tell the rest of us how to think, and by what I see online around the country today, TV works wonders.

    Bull headed attorneys with agendas and the media have more then once put innocent people in jail. 2 people who had never met before in their lives, were jailed for 15 years for crimes against children they didn't commit. ALL the evidence proved them innocent, but police and DA's supressed evidence, badgered children into confessing, gave them scripted "testimony" all so they could make names for themselves in the public eye. Even after a 2nd appeals judge found ALL the evidence to prove them innocent beyond doubt and freed them, the original prosecutors said no way, they HAD to be guilty because they knew "in their heart"

    Emotion, gut instincts, feelings have absolutely no little tiny bit what so EVER, any business in a court of law. Facts, proof, solid evidence, period.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • MileHighShooterMileHighShooter Senior Member Posts: 4,478 Senior Member
    Best summation I heard was that the jury had "CSI" expectations, waiting with bated breath for the fingerprints, DNA evidence, incriminating video, and razor-sharp autopsy findings to unequivocally lock in a "guilty" verdict. Barring that, they took the judge's instructions to find "beyond reasonable doubt" to an extreme and manufactured doubt in each little facet of evidence.
    \

    When we are talking about the state considering taking someones life, should there be anything LESS then 100% absolute proof? We aren't talking a 5-10 year stint up state, her LIFE was on trial. Many people forget how much that can mean because its not happening to someone you know or love. Capital murder, murder in the 1st, murder 1, however you want to call it. When its a capital charge which can carry a death sentence you MUST prove beyond all reasonable doubt, with solid hard evidence, intent, motive and literally put the smoking gun in hand. They had none of this.
    Wambli Ska wrote: »
    Once again, please refrain from cutting short any baseless totally emotional arguments with facts. It leads to boring, completely objective conversations well beyond the comprehension ability of many.
  • ghostsniper1ghostsniper1 Banned Posts: 2,645 Senior Member
    Its just kind of scary that a person MAY be convicted of a crime they didn't commit because some gungho DA just wants to pad his resume with convictions. I personally agree with CPJ and think the girl did it after all the BS, lieing, partying and whatnot. I'm a father of 2 youngins and can't imagine not only my child going missing, but reporting it a month later while I was out partying and getting drunk in the meantime. People really amaze me.
  • ericbericb Banned Posts: 393 Member
    When we are talking about the state considering taking someones life, should there be anything LESS then 100% absolute proof? We aren't talking a 5-10 year stint up state, her LIFE was on trial. Many people forget how much that can mean because its not happening to someone you know or love. Capital murder, murder in the 1st, murder 1, however you want to call it. When its a capital charge which can carry a death sentence you MUST prove beyond all reasonable doubt, with solid hard evidence, intent, motive and literally put the smoking gun in hand. They had none of this.

    That is exactly correct and the defense presented such a muddled confusing book of evidence, it basically overwhelmed the Jury....MOOK COURT 101. Baffle them with BS. That ultimately was what happened. There was so much evidence presented from both sides, the jury did not know what to consider. So she walked.
    "HunterJoe...You need to stick to topics you know about, which I realize is going to limit your post count."~Dan Johnson
  • gunrunner428gunrunner428 Senior Member Posts: 1,018 Senior Member
    When we are talking about the state considering taking someones life, should there be anything LESS then 100% absolute proof? We aren't talking a 5-10 year stint up state, her LIFE was on trial.

    Agreed on that one MHS. That thought was the source of my pondering if the state bit off more than it could chew by seeking the premeditated, "murder one" convictions. Had they sought a lesser manslaughter or "murder 2" charge, the jury might have been less likely to over-analyze the minute details and explain them away one by one and follow a path towards a preponderance of the evidence as a whole rather than "miss the forest for the trees".

    No matter which side of this issue a person might land on with this, the prosecution had a duty to perform, and I wonder if they let their future aspirations or their personal feelings sway their judgement in how hard they would pursue the matter in court.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 22,997 Senior Member
    Where I think the prosecution failed is that there was no direct evidence, circumstantially or otherwise, presented that proved 'beyond reasonable doubt' that Casey killed her daughter. There was plenty of evidence from Casey's parents home(unique duct tape and the cloth bag from a two bag set) that would point to someone in the family being responsible for the death of the child, and the disposal of the body, but no evidence that proved WHO did it and HOW, even circumstantially. The prosecution failed present a case that got from point A to point B with solid facts.
    If a Liberal throws a hand grenade at you, pick it up, pull the pin, and throw it back at them.



  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 31,722 Senior Member
    olesniper wrote: »
    Starting next week.....she'll be searching every beer joint and honky tonk in Orlando........looking for her baby's killer.......that is........when she's not playing golf with OJ.

    Nope, she will first get a cool million for doing 20/20/Oprah/Tabloids interviews.

    http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/07/06/casey-anthony-can-earn-millions-from-media-hollywood/?test=faces
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.