Casey Anthony Trial

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Yeah, the little I saw of this case made me question these exact things. Just because she did a lot of things that look suspicious doesn't rise to the level of direct evidence. I feel sorry for jurors. It's hard to follow the letter of the law when you may have that gut feeling that someone is guilty but the State hasn't proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.

We need to be careful here, though - while the case was largely circumstantial, circumstantial evidence is still evidence, and should usually be given the same consideration as direct evidence (per instruction of law).

Hell, most of the time circumstantial evidence is more reliable than eye witness testimony. It's hard to say whether jurors correctly applied the law as given to them, but it does seem like a pretty straightforward decision path.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

We need to be careful here, though - while the case was largely circumstantial, circumstantial evidence is still evidence, and should usually be given the same consideration as direct evidence (per instruction of law).

Hell, most of the time circumstantial evidence is more reliable than eye witness testimony. It's hard to say whether jurors correctly applied the law as given to them, but it does seem like a pretty straightforward decision path.

I know circumstantial evidence is evidence, but there were some holes there. I think for a lot of people, the fact that she didn't report her daughter missing for a month is all they had to hear to convict her. She's not exactly the type of person any one of us would want to be friends with, and she hasn't been proven innocent. The jury just didn't feel like they had enough to convict her.