Casey Anthony - The Decision Is In!

I guarantee the jury was given proper instructions prior to deliberation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I know they were, but the term reasonable doubt is still up for interpretation. No one can give a satisfactory answer to reasonable doubt amongst the law profession, it is left up to a jury to decide and interpret.
 
What's the point in having a jury if they're told what verdict to render? There was evidence in her car along with other evidence that could have & should have shown the jury that she was responsible. Do you not think other people have been convicted with less?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Nobody was told what verdict to render, but you have to base your decision off trial evidence and nothing else. Some jury members don't get it. That's why you discuss and also have clarification help from court if needed. Personal feeling can't come into play.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
One or two coincidences does not prove murder. The coincidences and circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, however, paint a pretty clear picture of what happened. Cloroform in car, cloroform search on her PC, dead body smell from K9 search, post mordem hair in the trunk, Casey admitted abandoning the car, not reporting a missing child for a month, partying after her kid went missing, lies to the police to cover her tracks. Obviously, analyzed seperately, the evidence is circumstantial and not sound, but if you view it all as part of the big picture, the evidence is enough to prove guilt. To me, the string of evidence removes all doubt of not guilty.
 
Last edited:
One or two coincidences does not prove murder. The coincidences and circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, however, paint a pretty clear picture of what happened. Cloroform in car, cloroform search on her PC, dead body smell from K9 search, post mordem hair in the trunk, Casey admitted abandoning the car, not reporting a missing child for a month, partying after her kid went missing, lies to the police to cover her tracks. Obviously, analyzed seperately, the evidence is circumstantial and not sound, but if you view it all as part of the big picture, the evidence is enough to prove guilt. To me, the string of evidence removes all doubt of not guilty.

So how did the little girl die?
 
So how did the little girl die?

Well, there is not a video tape showing how she died, so I guess it is a mystery. It was probably of natural causes like old age or diabetes or something. Counldn't have been that she was cloroformed and duct taped over her breathing ways. Afterall, there was no "direct evidence" of this happening. There was only a dead girl with tape over her mouth and nose. So, I guess her death is still a HUGE mystery.
 
Oh, it might have also been skunk ape or aliens abducting her. The prosecution never really ruled those possibilities out.
 
Well, there is not a video tape showing how she died, so I guess it is a mystery. It was probably of natural causes like old age or diabetes or something. Counldn't have been that she was cloroformed and duct taped over her breathing ways. Afterall, there was no "direct evidence" of this happening. There was only a dead girl with tape over her mouth and nose. So, I guess her death is still a HUGE mystery.

You have proof of any of that for circumstantial evidence to come into play?

When the prosecution can't prove how she died, it's really hard to bring circumstantial evidence into play to nail someone.
 
You have proof of any of that for circumstantial evidence to come into play?

When the prosecution can't prove how she died, it's really hard to bring circumstantial evidence into play to nail someone.

Like I said, there's no video tape of it happening, so it couldn't possibly be gleaned from the contextual evidence.
 
fortunately that's not how guilt is decided in this country. The defense did their job and the system worked. If you don't like the results then propose a better system
 
One or two coincidences does not prove murder. The coincidences and circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution, however, paint a pretty clear picture of what happened. Cloroform in car, cloroform search on her PC, dead body smell from K9 search, post mordem hair in the trunk, Casey admitted abandoning the car, not reporting a missing child for a month, partying after her kid went missing, lies to the police to cover her tracks. Obviously, analyzed seperately, the evidence is circumstantial and not sound, but if you view it all as part of the big picture, the evidence is enough to prove guilt. To me, the string of evidence removes all doubt of not guilty.

I'm pretty sure the smell of decomposition was not discovered by a K9, but was the result of analysis done by the people at ORNL. Also, they directly testified that they could not confirm that the decomposition was human in nature. Their results couldn't be duplicated, either, and the test itself is not a very widely accepted thing.

There is no way all doubt can be removed when they couldn't even discover the cause of death. Making potentially incorrect inferences is wrong and ignorant, and it's incredibly fortunate that our justice system prevents such assumptions.
 
she cloriformed the kid either to kill her or shut her up. they didn't prove murder one, but they proved she was involved in the kids death. no parent doesn't call 911 when a kid drowns.

I haven't even seen or heard where they proved any of this. Granted, I could have missed it.
 
fortunately that's not how guilt is decided in this country. The defense did their job and the system worked. If you don't like the results then propose a better system

if you don't think plenty of people are in jail with far less evidence than this case i don't know what to tell you.
 
I haven't even seen or heard where they proved any of this. Granted, I could have missed it.

they found it in the car she abandonded right next to the kids hair and they proved she search it on the internet. do people now need video of the murder to convict someone?
 
if you don't think plenty of people are in jail with far less evidence than this case i don't know what to tell you.

I understand that but if you leave your fate in the hands of 12 people that couldn't get out of jury duty then you're already in trouble. Sometimes it works and sometimes you get the chair
 
I understand that but if you leave your fate in the hands of 12 people that couldn't get out of jury duty then you're already in trouble. Sometimes it works and sometimes you get the chair

this is what i've been saying. you have a bunch of stupid people who got caught up in debating every little piece of evidence instead of looking at the evidence as a whole. the prosecution screwed up here obviously.
 
fortunately that's not how guilt is decided in this country. The defense did their job and the system worked. If you don't like the results then propose a better system

Well said. Our system is not perfect but I think it's the best in the world. The system worked, and by our laws they got this one right. Only thing the prosecution had on their side was emotion.
 
Well said. Our system is not perfect but I think it's the best in the world. The system worked, and by our laws they got this one right. Only thing the prosecution had on their side was emotion.

Yea justice was served. Now a 25 year old slut can get back to her life after killing her daughter.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 

VN Store



Back
Top