Casey Anthony Trial

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by BetteDavisEyes

Due to time served, she could be out later in July or August.

Exactly.

[BetteDavisEyes]

I want to slap the smirky smile off her face. Ugh.

/end rant

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by BetteDavisEyes

I want to slap the smirky smile off her face. Ugh.

/end rant

I wanna smack all of them honestly.

Casey Anthony, Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell, and the jurors that are currently snitching talking about they were sick to their stomachs.

**Edit**

Casey Anthony is getting out next Wednesday.

[BetteDavisEyes]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

**Edit**

Casey Anthony is getting out next Wednesday.

I'm surprised they published this due to the massive media attention and the hostility towards her. I would have figured they'd keep the date under wraps for her own safety & then she'd go into hiding before starting her media tour of the U.S.

[UGAalum94]

Don't you all have a sense that she'll be back in jail at some point?

I don't think you go from being an amoral sociopath to a law abiding citizen, especially when you might have literally gotten away with murder the last time you got into trouble.

Granted, I don't expect her to go to jail for anything related to this case and I don't expect her to perhaps kill anyone else, but I just don't expect much from her.

[katydidKD]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Don't you all have a sense that she'll be back in jail at some point?

I don't think you go from being an amoral sociopath to a law abiding citizen, especially when you might have literally gotten away with murder the last time you got into trouble.

Granted, I don't expect her to go to jail for anything related to this case and I don't expect her to perhaps kill anyone else, but I just don't expect much from her.

Yes. She will do something stupid and unrelated in all likelihood, and be in prison. Just like OJ who is locked up for the rest of his life essentially.

[dekeguy]

A couple of comments:
1. Burden of proof rests with the prosecution in almost all instances and certainly in this case. In criminal law it is for the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. In Civil Law the standard is somewhat less, it is determined on the balance of probabilities.
2. In Scotland there is a third verdict - Not proven. This means that the defendant was probably guilty but there was insufficient proof to overcome the issue of reasonable doubt. It is often described in UK Law Schools as "Not Guilty but don't do it again." We might do well to adopt that option in the US.
3. If someone with 'standing' before the court, like a family member, wants to pursue the issue there is always the civil remedy of Wrongful Death. OJ was hit with such a suit and massive damages were awarded to his late wife's family.
4. Incidentally, I believe the OJ trial was NOT a miscarriage of justice. The evidence chain of custody was hopeless and the investigating detective was shown to be prejudiced and have ample opportunity to mishandle evidence and plant evidence detrimental to OJ. Whether or not he did the crime was not established beyond 'reasonable' doubt. Therefore the verdict was solid.
The wrongful death issue was a means of destroying OJ financially. However, the later arrest and trial which landed him in prison seemed a bit too much of a 'let's get OJ and throw his butt in jail' revenge action. The old chesnut that 'Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done' sticks in my craw in that case. There were so many mitigating and extenuating circumstances involved that I thought the sentence was excessive and sent a very unfortunate message. Please remember as you read this that I am the Conservative Barrister who has often been called a right winger in GC.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for what they are worth.

[AnotherKD]

Originally Posted by dekeguy

A couple of comments:
1. Burden of proof rests with the prosecution in almost all instances and certainly in this case. In criminal law it is for the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. In Civil Law the standard is somewhat less, it is determined on the balance of probabilities.
2. In Scotland there is a third verdict - Not proven. This means that the defendant was probably guilty but there was insufficient proof to overcome the issue of reasonable doubt. It is often described in UK Law Schools as "Not Guilty but don't do it again." We might do well to adopt that option in the US.
3. If someone with 'standing' before the court, like a family member, wants to pursue the issue there is always the civil remedy of Wrongful Death. OJ was hit with such a suit and massive damages were awarded to his late wife's family.
4. Incidentally, I believe the OJ trial was NOT a miscarriage of justice. The evidence chain of custody was hopeless and the investigating detective was shown to be prejudiced and have ample opportunity to mishandle evidence and plant evidence detrimental to OJ. Whether or not he did the crime was not established beyond 'reasonable' doubt. Therefore the verdict was solid.
The wrongful death issue was a means of destroying OJ financially. However, the later arrest and trial which landed him in prison seemed a bit too much of a 'let's get OJ and throw his butt in jail' revenge action. The old chesnut that 'Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done' sticks in my craw in that case. There were so many mitigating and extenuating circumstances involved that I thought the sentence was excessive and sent a very unfortunate message. Please remember as you read this that I am the Conservative Barrister who has often been called a right winger in GC.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for what they are worth.

Are you from the UK? Or are you also one of those lawyers that refer to themselves as "Blankety Blank, Esquire"?

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by BetteDavisEyes

I'm surprised they published this due to the massive media attention and the hostility towards her. I would have figured they'd keep the date under wraps for her own safety & then she'd go into hiding before starting her media tour of the U.S.

The release date, likely on some official form, is public information and available for anyone who'd care to ask.

Who is the "they'd" who'd keep it under wraps for her safety? the same media that's gone wall-to-wall coverage the last 3 years? The national media is a pimp and this trial was just the latest whore. Sorry, but that's the real. ...now, given America's appetite for the bizarre, they'll move on to the next oddity of allegedly "national import."