Casey Anthony - The Decision Is In!

[GahLee]

Wasn't Scott Peterson given the death penalty on mostly circumstantial evidence?

Can't remember, thought there was harder evidence against him.

Like someone else has posted, if Casey Anthony had a d***, probably a different verdict.

 

[govols/cc]

She was the sole guardian of that child. She was soley responsible for what happened. If you can't prove murder there's no way in hell you can't charge her with something that will keep her out of the clubs for a few years.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[GahLee]

That's right. You clearly know much more and have been privy to much more information than the members of the jury.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Never said that, just what has been proven and she has lied about proves to me that she played a hand in it.

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

She was the sole guardian of that child. She was soley responsible for what happened. If you can't prove murder there's no way in hell you can't charge her with something that will keep her out of the clubs for a few years.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

so any parent who has a child that dies should have to go to prison because they are ultimately responsible for the well being of the child, even when no one knows how the child dies?

this is why you aren't allowed to make the rules.

 

[GahLee]

She was the sole guardian of that child. She was soley responsible for what happened. If you can't prove murder there's no way in hell you can't charge her with something that will keep her out of the clubs for a few years.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No doubt, she will probably get time served. that to me is the most unreal portion of the crime.

How does she not get felony child abuse?

Or something?

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

Never said that, just what has been proven and she has lied about proves to me that she played a hand in it.

so because she lied she committed a murder?

since you are an expert, you should show us which element of the murder statute that clause fulfills.

 

[GahLee]

so because she lied she committed a murder?

since you are an expert, you should show us which element of the murder statute that clause fulfills.

I said played a hand.

To me, if someone covers up the death of thier child, they played a hand in it, no?

 

[GAVol]

I said played a hand.

To me, if someone covers up the death of thier child, they played a hand in it, no?

Problem is, even if you believe she played a hand, that doesn't necessarily equate to murder 1.

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

I said played a hand.

To me, if someone covers up the death of thier child, they played a hand in it, no?

1+1 doesn't always equal 2 when it comes to the law.

 

[govols/cc]

so any parent who has a child that dies should have to go to prison because they are ultimately responsible for the well being of the child, even when no one knows how the child dies?

this is why you aren't allowed to make the rules.

You're obviously just trolling.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[GahLee]

When I catch my son in a lie, it is because he is trying to cover for himself, something he did or was about to do, that is why people lie.

She lied about the whereabouts of her daughter, lied about the "babysitter", covreed up her daughters death, accident or murder.

Adds up to guitly in some form to me, maybe not murder one, so don't harp on that, I'm not saying that at all, but she certainly is a piece of garbage that should do more that what she will more than likely get for what happened to her kid.

 

[vol4eva]

Problem is, even if you believe she played a hand, that doesn't necessarily equate to murder 1.

It doesn't but I was baffled at the not guilty verdicts on the lesser charges.

 

[GahLee]

Problem is, even if you believe she played a hand, that doesn't necessarily equate to murder 1.

I know.

But it seems like they could have gotten her on something, ya know.

 

[rockytop9808]

I'm just saying that unless there is 100% proof such as those things couldn't you make up some story like she did?

I don't know.

It's very hard for me to believe that she didn't play a hand in it.

If there isn't proof there's no reason to instantly assume someone committed a crime.

Unless you enjoy witch hunts, I guess.

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

When I catch my son in a lie, it is because he is trying to cover for himself, something he did or was about to do, that is why people lie.

She lied about the whereabouts of her daughter, lied about the "babysitter", covreed up her daughters death, accident or murder.

Adds up to guitly in some form to me, maybe not murder one, so don't harp on that, I'm not saying that at all, but she certainly is a piece of garbage that should do more that what she will more than likely get for what happened to her kid.

so if you son hides the broken cookie jar does that mean that he knocked it over trying to steal a cookie out of it?

what if he had a friend over and they did it? What if the cat knocked it over? What if he was reaching for the healthy snack but accidentally knocked it over and didn't want you to get mad?

If your son were on trial for his life, wouldn't you want the state to prove beyond all doubt that he was trying to steal the cookie when he knocked it over?

 

[GAVol]

It doesn't but I was baffled at the not guilty verdicts on the lesser charges.

I was too. I fully expected the jury to use the lesser charges as a cop out, but it's clear this jury just wasn't going to buy the circumstantial case.

 

[GahLee]

1+1 doesn't always equal 2 when it comes to the law.

Sadly, you're right.

 

[GahLee]

so if you son hides the broken cookie jar does that mean that he knocked it over trying to steal a cookie out of it?

what if he had a friend over and they did it? What if the cat knocked it over? What if he was reaching for the healthy snack but accidentally knocked it over and didn't want you to get mad?

If your son were on trial for his life, wouldn't you want the state to prove beyond all doubt that he was trying to steal the cookie when he knocked it over?

I don't need to ask a single question, he has the guiltest look ever on his face.

Bad example, I'm just saying the lying was so radical that it seems she was going well beyond just trying to cover an accidental death.

 

[vol4eva]

I was too. I fully expected the jury to use the lesser charges as a cop out, but it's clear this jury just wasn't going to buy the circumstantial case.

How is neglecting to report a missing child for a month in which she later turns up in a swamp dead not a crime? I was almost positive they'd nail her on child abuse.

 

[GahLee]

How is neglecting to report a missing child for a month in which she later turns up in a swamp dead not a crime? I was almost positive they'd nail her on child abuse.

You just said what I have trying to say, just much better.

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

I don't need to ask a single question, he has the guiltest look ever on his face.

Bad example, I'm just saying the lying was so radical that it seems she was going well beyond just trying to cover an accisental death.

she told a ton of terrible lies, and she by all accounts is a terrible person...but (thankfully) that isn't enough to convict someone of murder. The State needed to show more.

In this age of CSI and Law & Order marathons, jurors expect DNA and forensics, all the bells and whistles that they see on tv shows. Circumstantial cases like this are hard to get guilty verdicts out of these days.

Casey Anthony will still have to face her maker one day, and his judgment will be true and justice will be served if she did indeed kill her child.

 

[Spartacavolus]

Problem is, even if you believe she played a hand, that doesn't necessarily equate to murder 1.

As others stated, belief doesn't matter anyway. Proof does. It is what it is. Not the first to go without punishment and not the last. I was in a jury for a trial and we all had our opinions/beliefs but the bloodwork was misplaced. We had no choice.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[GoBigOrangeVols]

How is neglecting to report a missing child for a month in which she later turns up in a swamp dead not a crime? I was almost positive they'd nail her on child abuse.

lying to the investigators and making false statements is the crime she was convicted of.

the baby turning up in a swamp doesn't prove that she abused it, sadly, but I agree that not reporting it missing for 30 days should absolutely be considered neglect.

 

[GahLee]

she told a ton of terrible lies, and she by all accounts is a terrible person...but (thankfully) that isn't enough to convict someone of murder. The State needed to show more.

In this age of CSI and Law & Order marathons, jurors expect DNA and forensics, all the bells and whistles that they see on tv shows. Circumstantial cases like this are hard to get guilty verdicts out of these days.

Casey Anthony will still have to face her maker one day, and his judgment will be true and justice will be served if she did indeed kill her child.

Agreed.

But like it was just stated, it just seems off in every way, and there was certainly more than enough to convict her of neglect/abuse whatever you want to call it.

 

[rockytop9808]

What I really don't understand is how people are coming to complex conclusions about her guilt without having been in the courtroom or having held and seen all of the evidence. All anyone knows here is what came through the media, which almost universally declared her guilty from the get-go.