Casey Anthony Trial - Page 8

BluPhire · #1 07-06-2011, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

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

Just means you have boring friends.

LOL

Just messing with you.

christiangirl · #2 07-06-2011, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

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?

Um, what magic are you rambling about? I never said anything about "the defense" unless police and detectives are part of "the defense." I'm not referring to defense attorneys if that's what you mean. If there isn't conclusive evidence that Casey did it than I would hope the investigation would continue to find who did. If the work thus far has been to tie Casey to the murder, then perhaps there are other avenues/suspects previously unexplored that could be now if that's possible. Of course, that's if they can even prove how Caylee died which is a long shot, I know. There's no need to be an sarcastic, know-it-all arse, Kevin. I already said I don't know a lot about this and am only stating what I'd like to see happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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.

I know already knew the first bit (not happy about it but I understand now). Thank you for clarifying the bolded. I was pretty angry at hearing the verdict the first time, but I see why it had to happen. And iDied at those pix posted. GC never lets me down on that front.

Drolefille · #3 07-06-2011, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by christiangirl

Um, what magic are you rambling about? I never said anything about "the defense" unless police and detectives are part of "the defense." I'm not referring to defense attorneys if that's what you mean. If there isn't conclusive evidence that Casey did it than I would hope the investigation would continue to find who did. If the work thus far has been to tie Casey to the murder, then perhaps there are other avenues/suspects previously unexplored that could be now if that's possible. Of course, that's if they can even prove how Caylee died which is a long shot, I know. There's no need to be an sarcastic, know-it-all arse, Kevin. I already said I don't know a lot about this and am only stating what I'd like to see happen.

I know already knew the first bit (not happy about it but I understand now). Thank you for clarifying the bolded. I was pretty angry at hearing the verdict the first time, but I see why it had to happen. And iDied at those pix posted. GC never lets me down on that front.

Thing is, the prosecution/investigators are probably fairly certain that they are right and that this is where the investigation led. If there were more suspects, then they might continue to proceed down those lines, but a conviction without new evidence would be all the more difficult for the media circus of this trial.

Her acquittal doesn't mean they didn't find the killer, it means they couldn't prove it. Nor does it mean that she IS the killer, but they may simply have no other significant evidence. A lawyer can better say how likely it is for someone else to be tried.

DrPhil · #4 07-06-2011, 09:07 AM

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....

agzg · #5 07-06-2011, 09:11 AM

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.

DrPhil · #6 07-06-2011, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

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.

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

katydidKD · #7 07-06-2011, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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

Race, right?

DrPhil · #8 07-06-2011, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katydidKD

Race, right?

Look, dumb bitch, learn how to read.

katydidKD · #9 07-06-2011, 10:08 AM

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.

Munchkin03 · #10 07-06-2011, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katydidKD

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.

Please, for the love of G-d, please stop being an idiot.

agzg · #11 07-06-2011, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katydidKD

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.

If you have an issue, put her on ignore. Then you never have to see her novels. Which are typically always interesting and while I might not agree with them 100% there's something I can find that makes me go "huh."

DrPhil · #12 07-06-2011, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

If you have an issue, put her on ignore. Then you never have to see her novels. Which are typically always interesting and while I might not agree with them 100% there's something I can find that makes me go "huh."

Your cashier's check is in the mail. Unless you do direct deposit.

<----agzg just wants my money

just like knight_shadow and urrrrrybody else does....

agzg · #13 07-06-2011, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Your cashier's check is in the mail. Unless you do direct deposit.

<----agzg just wants my money

just like knight_shadow and urrrrrybody else does....

This would be funny if someone hadn't written $30,000 in fraudulent bill pay checks on my joint account last week.

I need money to pay my legal fees for that shitstorm.

DrPhil · #14 07-06-2011, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

This would be funny if someone hadn't written $30,000 in fraudulent bill pay checks on my joint account last week.

I need money to pay my legal fees for that shitstorm.

I thought about that after I typed it.

Sorry.

agzg · #15 07-06-2011, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by katydidKD

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.

Yes, you did say that she would call people racist. Unless there's a way to condemn someone for being racist without calling them racist that I've yet to hear about. Is that something they teach you in willfully ignorant school?