I don't think that, as a juror, I could convict anybody without 1) A cause of death (to show that a murder occurred at all) and 2) Some kind of physical evidence to link that person to the murder. I can't see anybody being convicted on this one because there is no proof that she was even murdered.

Wow, so you'd impose a burden on the defense that not only would they have to prove innocence rather than keep the other side from proving guilt, but further, you'd require them to prove someone else did it?

And with what defendant's crime lab and investigative force would they do this magic you speak of?

Christiangirl already said she doesn't know much about the law.

Christiangirl, being found not guilty does not mean you were found innocent and it does not require proof that someone else did it. The point is whether or not the evidence can convict YOU of doing it. If there's evidence that someone else and someone in particular did it, okay I guess, but generally speaking a separate trial would have to delve much further into that.

****
On this morning's news, a legal expert was explaining the jury's decision. He said that a mother (I assume he also meant parent, in general) is supposed to protect her children. But this isn't about mother vs. child and anger over a supposed bad parent. This was the state vs. Casey Anthony and the evidence just wasn't there to convict.

She was found guilty of 4 misdemeanor counts that could carry a sentence of 1-4 years each (I think that's what was stated). I wonder if she'll receive any prison time.

The news was also criticizing Casey Anthony's smile and celebration as though she should have been crying or had a blank face because her daughter is still dead. Perhaps, perhaps not. Anthony's parents supposedly had a blank face and left the courtroom before the media frenzy began.

Even though Casey Anthony slipped through the cracks, I'm glad I live in a country where a person is innocent until proven guilty. Except if you live in West Memphis, Arkansas.

Innocent people do not lie to police. Accidents are not made to look like murders. Unfortunately, common sense is not proof of guilt in a court of law.

4 misdemeanor counts of lying to the police, which each carry up to 1 year in the pokey. Anthony has already been in jail since '08 awaiting trial, so she's served three years of that already. She may serve a year, but that's doubtful.

Gotta fill that dead airtime.

This isn't about guilt vs. innocence. She was convicted of lying so the whole liar thing is covered. A liar does not make a murderer unless there is evidence as such. Stranger things have happened so an accident looking like a murder is not so impossible that it could remove doubt.

I don't consider any of this common sense. It may be emotion and assumption but not common sense. And thank God the law is not (solely) based on what some consider common sense.

I suppose I didn't make clear that I DO understand the difference between innocent and "not guilty". I understand, and agree with the jury's verdict. There was not enough evidence to convict. That doesn't mean I don't think the bitch did it.

A liar does not a murderer make in an American court of law. My point is that if you are innocent of a crime, you know the truth will save you, and therefore, you tell the truth. That sounds like common sense to me.

She's just lucky it took investigators 6 months to find the body, or else there'd probably be some pretty damning physical evidence.

The Early Show is showing clips of protests and people's responses as soon as the verdict was announced. I get some people's anger and sadness over this all. But it's just like any other public court case. The Early Show is now showing previous "trials of the century" including one that happened 50 years before the O.J. trial that led to the banning of the media in courtrooms. Then 50 years later cable networks were created and the O.J. trial was covered extensively.

Pardon me but I also couldn't help but smirk at a few of the reactions. That includes a whiny, crying little girl who said something like "oh, I can't help but think about my own mom...she loves me so much...." Uh...yeah...ok...uh...hmmmmm....

Cool.

I still don't consider any of this common sense.

ETA: I did see where you said you're glad you live in a country where people are innocent until proven guilty. ;)

I already knew you don't have any.

Well, it's the role of the prosecutor to bring the case in a certain way. The prosecutors failed to do so--there was reasonable doubt pinging all over the place.

My FB page hasn't been popping the way that some of y'all have experienced. I'm lucky, I guess. :)

It's grating to me, the "as a mother I couldn't do this, a mother can't, she's a bad mom."

As if it's totally normal to kill someone of any age who's just not related to you. And what about the dads?

But that's a different conversation.

LOL The truth has sent many a man to jail. Sorry maybe I was born into a cynical race so truth in a court of law has never done a lot of the people I've known any good.

Court cases have convicted people on bodies that have been found 3, 5 and 10 years later so I can't agree with you on that one.

But in the grand scheme I understand where your thoughts are coming from so hey.

:confused:

Uh...are you bored?

Just means you have boring friends.

LOL

Just messing with you.

Is that cynical race the human race?

Be careful not to make bored violetpretty attempt to come at you. LOL.

It's the same conversation. I would like to delve further into that and why some victims receive more attention than others.

;)

There goes my bait. LOL



Like I said, I understand where she is coming from. Everybody that is having an emotional issue has yet to bring facts to the table.

I mean even Nancy Grace was more focused on her being a bad mother and who is Caylee's father (like not knowing who the father is somehow punishes Casey) than actually quoting the facts that the jury possibly overlooked.

Why? Because she didn't have facts that the jury had.

There it went. Down the toilet. Fail. ;)

Race, right?

Look, dumb bitch, learn how to read.

I had a sales rep today start in on "Shame about that verdict yesterday..." When I agreed that "Yes, it was a shame that the prosecution didn't meet their burden of proof and the jury had to follow the law.", he changed his tune pretty quickly.

I had the same kneejerk reaction many did; she's probably guilty and it's terrible that she may be getting away woth murder. However, after hearing all the doubt that the media had done a pretty good job of hiding, I have to agree that the proof just wasn't there. That only leaves one thing to say: KARMA'S A BITCH.

.

Look, dumb bitch, learn how to read.

Oh no, you called me a dumb bitch.

Oh no, dumb bitch can't read. Instead of trying to be up my ass, learn how to read.

Yeah, OK :)

Passive aggressive dumb bitch will now pretend that she didn't initiate this discussion and that she had it right the whole time.

love you too

Passive aggressive dumb bitch will now pretend that she didn't initiate this discussion and that she had it right the whole time.

She's too busy sobbing over the sole injustice in this world, Casey Anthony's acquittal.

Look, the prosecutors failed to provide that she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutors didn't do their job; the jury did. Done and done. Be mad at the State of Florida for not providing a good case--don't be mad at a bunch of Internet Strangers.

Dude im not mad im just waiting for DrPhil's novel on how this has everything to do with race/class/gender

Passive aggressive dumb bitch has now corrected herself.

If dumb bitch could read she would have already read my novel.

If you're refusing to see the glaring race/class/gender issues with this case, and the media's portrayal for it, I feel sorry for you. It must be hard to see pretty sunsets with all that wool over your eyes.

Oh, I totally see it. But DrPhil brings it into just about every thread like clockwork.

I see class issues, but I don't see it as class privilege. Gender and race privilege, however, are all over the place here. It's easier for a jury to look down on a poor or working-class (as I always assumed Casey Anthony to be) than it is a middle class or reasonably wealthy woman. If anything, her class background may have hurt her case...? I guess it's a moo point.

It was already in the thread before DrPhil got here. Stop being such a drama queen. You're not even amusing.

At some point in this discussion, someone is going to phrase something in a way that is racist/sexist/classist by DrPhil's standards and DrPhil will write a novel condemning them. Thats whats missing here i think.

I think a lot of the slut shaming ties in with her class. Pretty, middle class, white girls ain't supposed to be sluts. (If anything, her class worked against her in this case, which isn't typically the case).

Actually, I think a lot of the ways privilege typically works in favor of an accused murderer worked against her (at least in the court of public opinion). Must be the combo effect.

hehehe... I know it's a typo above, but I have a friend who for YEARS thought it was really a "moo point", like, it was so pointless that someone would say "moo" to it to highlight it being nonsensical.

/back to the regularly-scheduled arguments above... ;)