Casey Anthony - The Decision Is In!

#101
#101
LawVol13 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Why the **** would she dump the body without motive? Why wouldn't she call the ****ing police? Un-****ing-believable that this ***** goes free but someone goes to jail on a hearsay robbery charge.
 
#102
#102
born-n-raisedvol said:
She was convicted. Convicted of exactly what you pointed out, being a pathological liar.
Click to expand...

But she lied because she murdered them. Which is enough for me to convict her of murder...

She's probably already served the time warranted for lying. So she'll probably be walking the streets next week.

She got 3 years to get rid of an 18 year burden. That's all she really wanted... she won.
 
#103
#103
lylsmorr said:
Why the **** would she dump the body without motive? Why wouldn't she call the ****ing police? Un-****ing-believable that this ***** goes free but someone goes to jail on a hearsay robbery charge.
Click to expand...

per her defense because she was sexually abused leading to a bizarre pattern of lying and covering the 'innocent' up.
 
#104
#104
Its disappointing to say the least. A lot of folks are professing; "Whelp,... that's our justice system", and I realize that, but I think when you stir with human emotions, reconciliation is expected. Unfortunately (sometimes), in this country, we do not prosecute based on emotions. T&P to the family and I certainly hope they one day find peace. I offer nothing for Casey.

The Jurors, should they attempt to do so, should fail as "tell-all authors" regarding their time spent at this trial. Not one of them should be rewarded a profit from the death of a little girl, and a woman's ability to work the Justice system in her favor. I dont feel ill will towards them or wish revenge on them, but I certainly dont want them to gain anything from their service.

/rant
 
#105
#105
TXVOL07 said:
The Jurors, should they attempt to do so, should fail as "tell-all authors" regarding their time spent at this trial. Not one of them should be rewarded a profit from the death of a little girl, and a woman's ability to work the Justice system in her favor. I dont feel ill will towards them or wish revenge on them, but I certainly dont want them to gain anything from their service.

/rant
Click to expand...

Would not be surprised in the least if there will pop up a reality show starring Casey Anthony on the Bravo channel
 
#106
#106
lylsmorr said:
Why the **** would she dump the body without motive? Why wouldn't she call the ****ing police? Un-****ing-believable that this ***** goes free but someone goes to jail on a hearsay robbery charge.
Click to expand...

Err on the side of caution

The jury could not, without doubt, convict her of murder

Better to set a guilty person free, than imprison an innocent one
 
#107
#107
JokermanVol said:
per her defense because she was sexually abused leading to a bizarre pattern of lying and covering the 'innocent' up.
Click to expand...

Yep. And when you can't prove how the girl died in the first place, it provides reasonable doubt. Anthony didn't have to prove that she didn't do it; the state just couldn't prove that she did.
 
#108
#108
The newscasters said her parents had no reaction to the verdict. They just got up and walked out without approaching their daughter.


She's ruined so many lives and taken an innocent one and she gets time served....
 
#109
#109
LawVol13 said:
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.
Click to expand...

If it's absurd for me to assume that lying is proof of murder, then it's absurd to give random people the right to decide someone's fate. I'm not saying I know a better way but I'm saying there are definitely jury's that would have gone the other way on this decision. There was more than enough evidence to convict O.J. but he walked. So I really wouldn't give a crap if they gave her life without proof.

I just read a book about a dude who was found innocent after he had been raped in prison and given aids. Thus, I'm content with convicting someone on circumstantial evidence if there is a high percentage chance they did it. It wasn't just one person lying... it was the whole family. They all lied. Why? Even when they didn't know she was dead... they lied. They lied because they knew she was dead. They were just covering their own behinds.
 
#111
#111
The_Orange_Pearl said:
If it's absurd for me to assume that lying is proof of murder, then it's absurd to give random people the right to decide someone's fate. I'm not saying I know a better way but I'm saying there are definitely jury's that would have gone the other way on this decision. There was more than enough evidence to convict O.J. but he walked. So I really wouldn't give a crap if they gave her life without proof.

I just read a book about a dude who was found innocent after he had been raped in prison and given aids. Thus, I'm content with convicting someone on circumstantial evidence if there is a high percentage chance they did it. It wasn't just one person lying... it was the whole family. They all lied. Why? Even when they didn't know she was dead... they lied. They lied because they knew she was dead. They were just covering their own behinds.
Click to expand...

Circumstantial proof can convict people. There just wasn't enough of it here. And, you don't know what another jury would do; what we know is that people's emotions are flying high because of the media coverage of this event. Anthony was guilty before the trial ever started to the general public. But, after seeing the evidence put on by the state, the jury made the right decision.
 
#112
#112
LawVol13 said:
Prosecution couldn't show conclusively how she was killed. Defense offered an alternative scenario as to what happened. That constitutes reasonable doubt. Probably the right verdict considering the evidence, but it's probably just proof of how the system can fail.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's system failure. It should've hard to prove murder and the state should have bulletproof evidence. This case shows the strength of our system. The OJ case, OTOH, showed flaws in our system.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#113
#113
these juries always seem to get caught up in the minutiae. is she guilty? of course she is. screw the law.
 
#119
#119
GBO18 said:
Yep got to have beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

That's what juries of idiots don't get and prosecuters never clearly explain. They may have some doubt, because, of course, they personally didn't witness the murder, but that doubt is reasonable. This is another botched case that further proves that the majority of people are idiots.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#122
#122
How about a trade? This ***** burns and we set free an actual innocent convict. Fair trade
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top