Casey Anthony - The Decision Is In!

#76
#76
The bearded attorney needs to eat a d*** by the way.

Carry on.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#77
#77
I still think this whole thing was a ploy by her and the parents to cause this confusion with the whole drowning scenerio. It worked and presented that resonable doubt I suppose.
 
#80
#80
She's probably going to walk, like Lawrence said she'll get credit for time served, unreal.
 
#82
#82
With all the evidence against her, the shovel borrowing, etc...please tell something more plausible

The problem was the evidence not the jury. It was the right verdict considering the evidence. The ***** probably did it, but after millions of dollars spent on attempting to prove it, they couldn't do it.
 
#83
#83
Westboro Baptist's next picket should be in Florida.

If the killer is charged with murdering them... just lie about it. Who cares if they get caught in a lie. If their family gets caught helping them lie... who cares? The jury can easily be manipulated. All your lawyer has to do is stand in front of them for 5 hours saying "Who cares if they lied? You need proof. I think her dad did it but I'm no accusing him". Her defense lawyer was on par with some of the scummiest I've ever seen.
 
#84
#84
I'm not sure there was evidence there to show that she killed the kid at all. There was circumstantial evidence that suggested it, but the defense offered a scenario up that is possible and that the state didn't effectively rebut. There just wasn't enough direct evidence to tie Anthony to actually killing the kid.

That's all you need is circumstantial, and the circumstantial was stronger than any case I've seen in a long time. And the defense didn't offer one valid scenario. They said it was an accidental drowning. Ok, so you turn an accidental drowning into a cover up that looks like first degree murder and then you go out for 31 days of partying and getting a tattoo that says beautiful life.

The reason that there is circumstantial evidence is the fact that she dumped the kid like a dog, and the body was so decomposed that there wasn't much that could be done or concluded from it. No person had access to every single piece of evidence than the one who just got found not guilty. The lie after lie after lie that was expanded upon once she got caught in them, the internet searches, the reaction, the bug in the trunk, the sign of chloroform, and many other numerous items prove her guilt. Three pieces of freaking tape that could cover all grounds to ensure a kid doesn't breathe, is evidence.
 
#87
#87
I'm not sure there was evidence there to show that she killed the kid at all. There was circumstantial evidence that suggested it, but the defense offered a scenario up that is possible and that the state didn't effectively rebut. There just wasn't enough direct evidence to tie Anthony to actually killing the kid.

I agree. I won't and can't say that she had nothing to do with the death of Caylee. What I do know is that it would be a complete injustice to lock someone up for something without adequate proof. Sure, we can all fill in the blanks as we'd like but how will that provide justice any more than the alternative?

10 hours of tape say that she is a pathological liar. That has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Nothing else was conclusive.

That brings me to another point. Given the fact that she is such a bad liar, what makes anyone think that she'd be capable of premeditating a murder and eliminating all direct evidence that she committed it?
 
#88
#88
Westboro Baptist's next picket should be in Florida.

If the killer is charged with murdering them... just lie about it. Who cares if you get caught in a lie. If your family gets caught helping you lie... who cares? The jury can easily be manipulated. All you have to do is stand in front of them for 5 hours saying "Who cares if they lied? You need proof. I think her dad did it but I'm no accusing him". Her defense lawyer was on par with some of the scummiest I've ever seen.

The last thing that needs to happen is to involve those dipshats.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#90
#90
Remember Mary Winkler

The jury knew she killed her husband in his sleep, but they bought the idea that she accidentally shot him with a 12 guage blast to the head in the middle of the night

I guess she was such a good wife, she was just cleaning it for him
 
#91
#91
The problem was the evidence not the jury. It was the right verdict considering the evidence. The ***** probably did it, but after millions of dollars spent on attempting to prove it, they couldn't do it.

Does it matter?

People are convicted all the time without evidence supporting it.

And when there is tons of evidence supporting it, people like O.J. get off anyways.

The system is flawed so there is no point in arguing specifics as if the system is legit. The fact that both her and her mom were caught lying is enough for me to convict her.
 
#93
#93
Remember Mary Winkler

The jury knew she killed her husband in his sleep, but they bought the idea that she accidentally shot him with a 12 guage blast to the head in the middle of the night

I guess she was such a good wife, she was just cleaning it for him

Replace a man in either scenario, and you have a guilty verdict.
 
#95
#95
That's all you need is circumstantial, and the circumstantial was stronger than any case I've seen in a long time. And the defense didn't offer one valid scenario. They said it was an accidental drowning. Ok, so you turn an accidental drowning into a cover up that looks like first degree murder and then you go out for 31 days of partying and getting a tattoo that says beautiful life.

.

They didn't prove how she died. They didn't prove how she killed her or that she even did. They proved she dumped the body. Going partying for 31 days shows she's sick, but it doesn't show she killed her. And the drowning scenario was never effectively rebutted. I didn't really think there was near enough evidence to get 1st degree murder. I was surprised to see that she got off on the child abuse charge.
 
#97
#97
Does it matter?

People are convicted all the time without evidence supporting it.

And when there is tons of evidence supporting it, people like O.J. get off anyways.

The system is flawed so there is no point in arguing specifics as if the system is legit. The fact that both her and her mom were caught lying is enough for me to convict her.

She was convicted. Convicted of exactly what you pointed out, being a pathological liar.
 
#98
#98
The last thing that needs to happen is to involve those dipshats.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I'm not saying they should picket the decision.

I'm saying they should picket a funeral and get shot. The murderer will be given a free pass in that f'ed up state anyways. There are no repercussions to murdering in Florida.
 
#99
#99
The system is flawed so there is no point in arguing specifics as if the system is legit. The fact that both her and her mom were caught lying is enough for me to convict her.

It's the best system, and yes, it is flawed. The girl may have done it, but they couldn't prove it. Bottomline. It's absurd to act as if someone lying is proof positive that someone committed any crime they're charged with.
 
They didn't prove how she died. They didn't prove how she killed her or that she even did. They proved she dumped the body. Going partying for 31 days shows she's sick, but it doesn't show she killed her. And the drowning scenario was never effectively rebutted. I didn't really think there was near enough evidence to get 1st degree murder. I was surprised to see that she got off on the child abuse charge.

I agree actually, the murder 1 didnt seem to get proved, but I was shocked she was acquitted of the other serious charges.
 

VN Store



Back
Top