Casey Anthony verdict is in

[Penguin]

Get to a TV if you want to watch it. Will be read at 1:15 central.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Guilty!

[KuppiKunta]

I still don't understand why this case is such a big deal nationally.

[Midtowner]

I don't know why I care, but I kind of do. I'm obviously not one of those wackadoodles who watches Nancy Grace and refers to this case as "Tot Mom," but it is somewhat interesting. Evidence is being presented here that I would have never in a million years have considered searching for or expecting someone else to search for.

Both the state and the defense were pretty amazingly bad in this case. Air that smells like death? But trust a jury to sort it out--at least so long as corporate liability is not at issue (but I digress).

[thecynic]

I'd do her

[The Maestro]

Link? I'm not seeing it as "in".

[Turd_Ferguson]

I'd do herghey.

[The Maestro]

Nevermind...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20110705/us-casey-anthony-trial/

[Flagstaffsooner]

That was quick. She gets the long sleep.

[Flagstaffsooner]

Not guilty, whoa.

[Penguin]

Wow.

[JohnnyMack]

Wow.

[delhalew]

It's a shame she will continue to breath air.

[Flagstaffsooner]

OJ all over again.

[Boomer.....]

What a joke!

[JohnnyMack]

I weep for the republic.

[3rdgensooner]

Someone got away with murdering that child.

[Cheez-It]

HOLY ****!

[Penguin]

Guilty on 4 counts of lying to the popo. That'll be 4 years max.

[jk the sooner fan]

wow.....i bet she gets time served for lying to the cops and goes home today

[sooner_born_1960]

I was just going to opine "time served"

[Cheez-It]

The is going to book his ticket to Florida.

ON EDIT: Unless he is already there....

[JLEW1818]

unreal

she will pay

[Penguin]

Who's going to take her in? Cindy and George probably don't want her!!!

[REDREX]

Bella Vita

[reflector]

wow.....i bet she gets time served for lying to the cops and goes home today

I don't think the sentencing will happen until Thursday or Friday.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Unbelievable

[OutlandTrophy]

unreal

she will pay

pay for what? She didn't murder her kid.

[delhalew]

Who's going to take her in? Cindy and George probably don't want her!!!

Plenty of scumbags would be happy to have her.

[crawfish]

All I'll say is, there have been a lot less guilty people convicted and serving life sentences (and death penalties).

I have no doubt she accidentally killed Caylee and tried to hide the evidence. No justice in this trial.

[Flagstaffsooner]

wow.....i bet she gets time served for lying to the cops and goes home todayI bet the little tramp goes home and snorts two line of coke and chomps on 4 peckers tonight.

[JohnnyMack]

pay for what? She didn't murder her kid.

Yes she did.

[Penguin]

I guess Nostradamus was right!

[JohnnyMack]

I bet the little tramp goes home and snorts two line of coke and chomps on 4 peckers tonight.

We KNOW what 1tc is going to do tonight, what about Casey Anthony?

[OutlandTrophy]

Yes she did.

nuh uh. The jury even said that she didn't even abuse her!!

[StoopTroup]

She'll be out walking the street on Friday.

[pphilfran]

The evidence was circumstantial and the jury had reasonable doubt....

[StoopTroup]

And the Father is a complete scumbag.

[SoCaliSooner]

She'll be out walking the street on Friday.

She's getting away with it!!!!11!1

[The Maestro]

And can we find some way to not make it racial about the fact no parades or dancing in the streets today when someone so obvious in guilt gets away with murdering someone?

Just sayin'.

[Thaumaturge]

NOOOOOO! There's no justice for Nancy Grace!

[SoonerofAlabama]

Wow. Did not expect this. 3-4 years of prison. Should be a whole lot more.

[Wishboned]

Maybe Oprah can get her to confess.

And no one will have to take her in, she's going to get a major payday with a book deal, and talk shows out the ***.

[dwarthog]

Someone got away with murdering that child.

Amen, this is a really bad.

No doubt Casey will dedicate the rest of her life searching nightclubs for the real perp.

[landrun]

The jury really thinks her dad had something to do with this.

That stupid defense lawyer was pretty good after all. I doubt anyone anticipated this verdict. :eek:

[crawfish]

And the Father is a complete scumbag.

...as is the mother.
...and Casey, too.

The only purely innocent one was the murdered girl, and only one of the above actually murdered her. There will be no justice here because you can't try the murderer again.

[yankee]

Who?

[StoopTroup]

Honestly if she didn't kill her child...there has got to be some sort of charges for a cover up and disposal of that child's body.

[WichitaSooner]

All this outrage... if ONLY Casey had killed her baby IN THE WOMB... then we could have completely avoided this whole trial and subsequent outrage.

[delhalew]

A juror stumping against the death penalty?

[87sooner]

All this outrage... if ONLY Casey had killed her baby IN THE WOMB... then we could have completely avoided this whole trial and subsequent outrage.

good point...

[Penguin]

It is funny to watch the talking heads getting all pissed off.

[soonerscuba]

All this outrage... if ONLY Casey had killed her baby IN THE WOMB... then we could have completely avoided this whole trial and subsequent outrage.Mock outrage and abortion, together at last!

[WichitaSooner]

good point...

Yeah, suddenly her "choice" isn't as valid as it is before the baby is born... it's funny how that works.

[GrapevineSooner]

This is where we need some Criminal Justice majors to help us out here.

Because IIRC, they jury could have convicted her on a Murder in the 2nd or 3rd (or maybe even manslaughter), even though she was tried for Murder in the 1st.

And I agree that the lack of physical evidence tying her to the body was probably the only thing that allowed her to walk in this case.

Anyway, if she did have something to do with the death of her child, karma will get her.

Just like it got OJ.

[Penguin]

Honestly if she didn't kill her child...there has got to be some sort of charges for a cover up and disposal of that child's body.

They were talking about that on In Session. The prosecutors never bothered to file charges on that and that might have been a mistake.

[Pricetag]

Maybe Oprah can get her to confess.

And no one will have to take her in, she's going to get a major payday with a book deal, and talk shows out the ***.
Yep. This is the part where we, as a society, step up and try not to act like mongrels and make this woman wealthy. Sadly, we won't be able to help ourselves.

[3rdgensooner]

All this outrage... if ONLY Casey had killed her baby IN THE WOMB... then we could have completely avoided this whole trial and subsequent outrage.It is sometimes surprising to find out who will tolerate, and even forgive, various transgressions.

People are complicated, no doubt.

[MsProudSooner]

She may end up wishing the jury had found her guilty. I suspect the general public will make her life a living hell.

[Penguin]

The biggest question for me was the chloroform. The state never addressed the chloroform. How does a 20-something year old girl get her hands on chloroform? Or do you expect people to believe that this high school dropout made the chloroform herself without leaving evidence behind?

[StoopTroup]

Now that she's not guilty, what about her claims that she was sexually abused by her Father and Brother?

[StoopTroup]

There is a huge mob outside the Courthouse ready to hang her.

[Penguin]

And the funny business with the duct tape. At the crime scene in the swamp, the duct tape was barely attached to the skull, but at the medical examiner's office, the duct tape had magically moved and covered the mouth and nose completely. The state never explained that.

[JohnnyMack]

The biggest question for me was the chloroform. The state never addressed the chloroform. How does a 20-something year old girl get her hands on chloroform? Or do you expect people to believe that this high school dropout made the chloroform herself without leaving evidence behind?

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=chloroform&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=4Er&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1280&bih=895&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=4496226390257315550&sa=X&ei=FmETTvfrCoyksQK0pNXUDw&ved=0CFMQ8wIwAA

[soonerbrat]

the prosecution's evidence was not enough to convict her. Maybe they should've dismissed without prejudice and reopened it at a later date, and try to get more solid evidence. There's no statute of limitations for murder.

[StoopTroup]

the prosecution's evidence was not enough to convict her. Maybe they should've dismissed without prejudice and reopened it at a later date, and try to get more solid evidence. There's no statute of limitations for murder.

Exactly why I thought they would mistrial.

[pphilfran]

the prosecution's evidence was not enough to convict her. Maybe they should've dismissed without prejudice and reopened it at a later date, and try to get more solid evidence. There's no statute of limitations for murder.

What additional solid evidence were they going to find?

[pphilfran]

Exactly why I thought they would mistrial.

That was my guess...

My better half has been saying all along that the kid drowned in the pool and to avoid neglect charges she hid the body...papa was probably also involved...

Who knows...the whole duct tape and chloroform combination always made me wonder..why do you need duct tape if you used chloroform...and if you used chloroform why the need for the duct tape...

Toss in the utility dude and there was ample opportunity for a mistrial or innocent verdict...

[OUMallen]

It is better one hundred guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.


I'm just going to leave this here...

[tommieharris91]

Yeah, suddenly her "choice" isn't as valid as it is before the baby is born... it's funny how that works.

Wait... We're gonna bring abortion to this thread? Let's just just call someone a Nazi and get that over with too.

[JohnnyMack]

People shouldn't be allowed to vote or serve on juries. Seriously. Judge Dredd would have executed this **** two years ago.

[Penguin]

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=chloroform&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=4Er&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=1280&bih=895&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=4496226390257315550&sa=X&ei=FmETTvfrCoyksQK0pNXUDw&ved=0CFMQ8wIwAA


Again, order it, pay for it, and get it shipped to you without leaving a paper/electronic trail. Don't leave a single shred of evidence that a police detective can find with a search warrant.

[pphilfran]

Wait... We're gonna bring abortion to this thread? Let's just just call someone a Nazi and get that over with too.

Nazi

[StoopTroup]

What additional solid evidence were they going to find?
There was a lot that wasn't allowed.

None of the Jury wants to speak with the press.

[tommieharris91]

I'm just going to leave this here...

**** that guy. :D

[OUMallen]

There was a lot that wasn't allowed.



Typically done to protect the rights given by the Constitution and the rules of evidence.


I can't help but like it every time the government isn't allowed to incarcerate someone based on loose circumstantial evidence and innuendo. Do I think she did it or played a major role? Yeah, probably. But I'm going to defer to Ben Franklin on this one, as I posted above. I love you, America!

[pphilfran]

There was a lot that wasn't allowed.

None of the Jury wants to speak with the press.

What and why was it not allowed? I haven't followed this thing very closely...

I wouldn't talk to the press either...the press basically had her convicted prior to all the testimony...

[SoCaliSooner]

There is a huge mob outside the Courthouse ready to hang her.

She's not going to get away with it!!!!11!1!!!

[StoopTroup]

She's not going to get away with it!!!!11!1!!!

I'm not sure she would without her having some protection. Some of those Women look like they would tear her limb from limb.

[jkjsooner]

The question always gets asked why we care about these trials. I ask that question too. However, the media has a way of creating their own stories. After weeks of turning the channel and complaining about how ridiculous the coverage was, once it came down to the end I actually got sucked into it a little. I guess at some point almost everyone becomes at least a slight bit curious even if they never agreed with the attention the murder/trial received in the first place.

Then, of course, there's the question on whether her trial would have drawn the same attention had she been ugly, fat, black, older, etc. There's a good chance had she fit these categories, she would have been stuck with a public defender who wasn't making his name on this one case and would not give it 1/10th of the effort this guy did.

[soonerbrat]

What additional solid evidence were they going to find?

i don't know, i'm not an evidence investigator, but it's better to dismiss without prejudice for the time being and have the option to prosecute later than just letting her be acquitted, IMO. Same result, she's out on the street, but at least maybe you can get her back in jail at some point.

[StoopTroup]

I'll say this....sometimes someone is gonna slip through the cracks and beat the charges against them. Anyone who has practiced law or served on a jury more than likely understands how lucky Casey Marie Anthony is that she is going to walk.

[OUMallen]

The question always gets asked why we care about these trials. I ask that question too. However, the media has a way of creating their own stories. After weeks of turning the channel and complaining about how ridiculous the coverage was, once it came down to the end I actually got sucked into it a little. I guess at some point almost everyone becomes at least a slight bit curious even if they never agreed with the attention the murder/trial received in the first place.

Then, of course, there's the question on whether her trial would have drawn the same attention had she been ugly, fat, black, older, etc. There's a good chance had she fit these categories, she would have been stuck with a public defender who wasn't making his name on this one case and would not give it 1/10th of the effort this guy did.

When it comes down to it- it's just interesting.

[pphilfran]

i don't know, i'm not an evidence investigator, but it's better to dismiss without prejudice for the time being and have the option to prosecute later than just letting her be acquitted, IMO. Same result, she's out on the street, but at least maybe you can get her back in jail at some point.

Good point....they probably had a ton of pressure applied to them to get the case resolved...

[JohnnyMack]

Again, order it, pay for it, and get it shipped to you without leaving a paper/electronic trail. Don't leave a single shred of evidence that a police detective can find with a search warrant.

I'm just saying that if I can do that in 12 seconds, I think with some planning I imagine I could get a hold of some stuff rather cleanly.

[jkjsooner]

I think the good thing is that most people know the true character of Casey Anthony. Even if she did not kill her child (which is doubtful), it's clear that she is a self centered compulsive liar. People are going to start treating her as such.

[BU BEAR]

She should like totally appeal the false statement charges and claim ineffective counsel. Yeah, that is the ticket. {/end sarcasm}

[3rdgensooner]

I think the good thing is that most people know the true character of Casey Anthony. Even if she did not kill her child (which is doubtful), it's clear that she is a self centered compulsive liar. People are going to start treating her as such.
Not the ones who think they have a chance to get in her pants.

[StoopTroup]

It will be interesting if she goes Home on Friday and if her Parents allow her to stay with them or they have her stuff put out on the front lawn or an apartment or a storage or just tell her to get lost.

After what she claimed about her Father I think I'd ask for a restraining order from her.

[The Maestro]

The only good thing to come out of this is a reply to Kim Kardashian's twitter account...

@elibraden
Eli Braden ME TOO!! ITS LIKE WHEN YOUR DAD HELPED GET O.J. OFF!! RT @KimKardashian: WHAT!!??!! CASEY ANTHONY NOT GUILTY!!!! I'm speechless!!!


Eli Braden is a hero...

[OUMallen]

She still may get up to 4 years for lying to police.

[OutlandTrophy]

She still may get up to 4 years for lying to police.

which is beyond stupid because the police can lie to you.

[The Maestro]

She still may get up to 4 years for lying to police.

Four years or a needle in the arm.

I think she's fine with the four years.

[OUMallen]

which is beyond stupid because the police can lie to you.

:D

[StoopTroup]

She still may get up to 4 years for lying to police.

Time served is 3 years and most think she will be released on Thursday. After the Defense Statements if I was the Judge...I think I might hit her with all four years and as much as possible and let her serve it out but then you begin to think rationally and that with the amount of felonies that get time, her misdemeanor would seem very weak in keeping her in jail another moment.

[pphilfran]

Time served is 3 years and most think she will be released on Thursday. After the Defense Statements if I was the Judge...I think I might hit her with all four years and as much as possible and let her serve it out but then you begin to think rationally and that with the amount of felonies that get time, her misdemeanor would seem very weak in keeping her in jail another moment.

She probably won't go to prison for a misdemeanor...

[StoopTroup]

She probably won't go to prison for a misdemeanor...

I wasn't talking prison I was talking jail.

[The Maestro]

http://www.happyplace.com/8739/please-join-facebook-page-casey-anthony-host

Take that, Betty White!

[pphilfran]

I wasn't talking prison I was talking jail.

She probably won't go to jail for a misdemeanor...

[OutlandTrophy]

Casey says
http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/images/p/pack_of_haters-6783.jpg

[The Maestro]

Casey lives in Florida, right?

I know who to call...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JGcEgBqq8_w/TGCys3e3aPI/AAAAAAAAAZs/_HFGjLpVtWI/s1600/dexter_1%5B5%5D.

[StoopTroup]

And behind every murdering Mother there is a Police Force that has to ask
for People to respect the verdict and stay away from the Anthony House.

[WE ARE dirtburglars]

Unbelievable. If this had been a man on trial it would have been a 30 minute deliberation with a unanimous guilty verdict. Apparently the jury was 7 women to 5 men. Not sure how the laws work in FL, but if they dont require a unanimous decision to find guilt or innocence then those 7 women are most likely what won her the trial.

[StoopTroup]

R.I.P. Caley Marie Anthony

http://image1.findagrave.com/photos250/photos/2008/353/32269407_122971637747.jpg

[pphilfran]

Unbelievable. If this had been a man on trial it would have been a 30 minute deliberation with a unanimous guilty verdict. Apparently the jury was 7 women to 5 men. Not sure how the laws work in FL, but if they dont require a unanimous decision to find guilt or innocence then those 7 women are most likely what won her the trial.

Kind of a stretch...they all have to be in agreement to convict...

[OUMallen]

Unbelievable. If this had been a man on trial it would have been a 30 minute deliberation with a unanimous guilty verdict. Apparently the jury was 7 women to 5 men. Not sure how the laws work in FL, but if they dont require a unanimous decision to find guilt or innocence then those 7 women are most likely what won her the trial.

I think women would be more likely to convict a woman of kkilling her own child due to have female gonads.

[MsProudSooner]

Unbelievable. If this had been a man on trial it would have been a 30 minute deliberation with a unanimous guilty verdict. Apparently the jury was 7 women to 5 men. Not sure how the laws work in FL, but if they dont require a unanimous decision to find guilt or innocence then those 7 women are most likely what won her the trial.

I doubt that the sex of the defenant had anything to do with it. Remember Gene Leroy Hart?

I think she's probably guilty, but I understand why the jury acquitted her.

[rekamrettuB]

Odds that she ends up pregnant w/in 3 years?

[Breadburner]

It's ok to kill your kid...You just have to do it right.....

[Aldebaran]

Please please please let the pornography of it be better than Nailin' Palin and Tonya Harding combined.

[OUMallen]

Odds that she ends up pregnant w/in 3 years?

Nigh 100%

[Mississippi Sooner]

Please please please let the pornography of it be better than Nailin' Palin and Tonya Harding combined.

The Tonya Harding video and pics almost ruined porn for me.

Almost.

[WichitaSooner]

The Tonya Harding video and pics almost ruined porn for me.

Almost.

Casey Anthony vs. Octomom in an Ultimate Surrender match... I'd watch ALL of that... I'm just sayin'

And if you don't know what Ultimate Surrender is... just assume you want to see it...

[Penguin]

It's ok to kill your kid...You just have to do it right.....



It's always been OK to lie, cheat, steal, and kill as long as you don't get caught.

[The Maestro]

Somewhere Mike Vick is yelling, "THEY WERE DOGS, NOT MY KID!!!!'

[OutlandTrophy]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2010/05/1272938115936.jpg

[OutlandTrophy]

I bet it was the baby sitter that Casey tried to tell them about when they first questioned her.

[GKeeper316]

it was a puerto rican guy.

[3rdgensooner]

Where's Caley's father in all this?

[OutlandTrophy]

deceased, I believe.

[Soonerfan88]

Where's Caley's father in all this?

No one knows who the father is. Even Casey claims to have no idea. I think they've done a few DNA tests, including father & brother because of her abuse claims, but all have been negative.

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

This is where we need some Criminal Justice majors to help us out here.

Because IIRC, they jury could have convicted her on a Murder in the 2nd or 3rd (or maybe even manslaughter), even though she was tried for Murder in the 1st.And I agree that the lack of physical evidence tying her to the body was probably the only thing that allowed her to walk in this case.

Anyway, if she did have something to do with the death of her child, karma will get her.

Just like it got OJ.

This is the key to this whole mess. in order to convict on 1st degree murder, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the murder was premeditated. IMO, had the state charged her with 2nd degree murder, or even mansluaghter, the results would have been different. But, because She was charged with 1st degree murder, and the defense argued that it was an accident, the state did not successfully prove the deense wrong. i think the state wanted to play on the emotions of the public, hoping that would lead to a conviction. however, in their haste to convict, they persued the wrong charge and Casey was found not guilty.

For as bat **** crazy some of Baez's defense schemes seemed at the time, i guess he put so much doubt in the jurors minds that it paid off....what a cluster ****

[pphilfran]

The jury had various choices...1st degree murder was not the only charge they could have agreed to convict...

[StoopTroup]

Asked about paternity in 2008, Anthony's friend Lauren Gibbs told detectives, "Um, well, at first I thought it was Jesse. I don't know his last name. But um, and then she told me later that it was not and that it was somebody who was in the Army or something like that. But then she told me that he had died last year in a car accident."

Casey's Mother's OpinionCasey's mother, Cindy Anthony, seemed to agree with the car crash theory. "Caylee's father was in a terrible car accident," she told PEOPLE in 2008. "He is deceased."

Jesus Ortiz was a 21-year-old who had dated Casey before he died in 2007. After he was publicly named as Caylee's possible father, Ortiz's family was stunned.

"Miss Anthony never told the family Jesus was the father or that he might be the father," they said in a statement. "In fact, the family has never met her and does not know her."

Now that Caylee is gone, the matter of her paternity could conceivably always remain a mystery.

[OutlandTrophy]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2009/04/chris-crocker-leave-britney.jpg

Leave Casey alone.

[Aldebaran]

You just know her and Nancy Grace are going to have explosive hate sex in the green room at some point.

[OU Adonis]

I'm just saying that if I can do that in 12 seconds, I think with some planning I imagine I could get a hold of some stuff rather cleanly.

[sic'em]You would be amazed at what I can do in 12 seconds[/sic'em]

[3rdgensooner]

You just know her and Nancy Grace are going to have explosive hate sex in the green room at some point.
*gag*

[StoopTroup]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.urlesque.com/media/2009/04/chris-crocker-leave-britney.jpg

Leave Casey alone.

I'd say that's only going to happen if when she gets out...her Mom and Dad has their bags packed and leave the U.S. for a nice 5 year vacation to some island in the Med.

[rekamrettuB]

Anyone have an estimate on the $$$ amount spent for Casey's defense and, if it's paid, who foots the bill? Is Casey sitting on some cash? Will a book/TV deal be turned over to the attorney firm? Anyone?

[The Maestro]

I like the video on CNN of all the folks just hanging around outside the courthouse. Yes, your opinion of a legal proceeding carries about as much weight with me as the homeless guy 15 feet away from you who also has nowhere more important to be.

No matter what the rule truth is, I am already annoyed at all the wannabe legal experts that have blossomed today.

[Mississippi Sooner]

At least this time there weren't some idiots dancing around outside the courthouse chanting "we beat the system. We beat the system."

[StoopTroup]

Anyone have an estimate on the $$$ amount spent for Casey's defense and, if it's paid, who foots the bill? Is Casey sitting on some cash? Will a book/TV deal be turned over to the attorney firm? Anyone?

The State of Florida pays for the investigation they instituted and the court cost they demanded.

Casey walks and her Attorneys get paid by the State as well since she was indigent at the time of the court case against her.

The Defense Attorneys case goes into the record/history books and probably becomes a historical case that will be taught in Law Schools. They probably make dough for their defense of their client and Casey is able to do the same and even write her own story as to how she is completely perplexed as to how anyone could think she would kill her Daughter and whatever story about her life before and after the loss of her Daughter.

This Court Case might be over but I'd say the Story is just beginning.

[OUMallen]

The State of Florida pays for the investigation they instituted and the court cost they demanded.

Casey walks and her Attorneys get paid by the State as well since she was indigent at the time of the court case against her.

The Defense Attorneys case goes into the record/history books and probably becomes a historical case that will be taught in Law Schools. They probably make dough for their defense of their client and Casey is able to do the same and even write her own story as to how she is completely perplexed as to how anyone could think she would kill her Daughter and whatever story about her life before and after the loss of her Daughter.

This Court Case might be over but I'd say the Story is just beginning.

I don't know why the case would be historical in law schools. Maybe a quick illustration of the burden of proof? :confused:

[Mississippi Sooner]

Has Larry Flynt called her yet?

[SoonerofAlabama]

Anyone watching HLN with the crazy woman with the sign?

[Curly Bill]

Playboy, Hustler or Penthouse? Which one does she pose for?

[Sooner_Tuf]

Anyone have an estimate on the $$$ amount spent for Casey's defense and, if it's paid, who foots the bill? Is Casey sitting on some cash? Will a book/TV deal be turned over to the attorney firm? Anyone?

I read somewhere that her main lawyer was paid out of a fund that was raised when the child was missing. The other lawyers worked pro bono.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Has Larry Flynt called her yet?

Not yet but Weiner sent her a few texts.

[Midtowner]

I don't know why the case would be historical in law schools. Maybe a quick illustration of the burden of proof? :confused:

That's what I was thinking. Aside from the media attention, this was kind of a run-of-the-mill sorta murder case.

[StoopTroup]

I like the video on CNN of all the folks just hanging around outside the courthouse. Yes, your opinion of a legal proceeding carries about as much weight with me as the homeless guy 15 feet away from you who also has nowhere more important to be.

No matter what the rule truth is, I am already annoyed at all the wannabe legal experts that have blossomed today.

Well aren't they just really people who are interested in our system of justice? Court Cases require a Jury sometimes and juries are picked from people who have no felonies and have opinions. Without people who wish to serve, there is no justice. I think it's probably better that there are people who are interested and involved.

[Penguin]

Was I the only one wacking with prejudice while the verdict was being read?

[OutlandTrophy]

Well aren't they just really people who are interested in our system of justice? Court Cases require a Jury sometimes and juries are picked from people who have no felonies and have opinions. Without people who wish to serve, there is no justice. I think it's probably better that there are people who are interested and involved.

those people were not on the Jury. They were standing around outside and no connection to the case. jeebus.

[The Maestro]

those people were not on the Jury. They were standing around outside and no connection to the case. jeebus.

THIS^^^^

Tried to post the link...just went to the main link.

cnn.com and you decide on the folks outside. They were far from folks concerned for our judicial system.

[cccasooner2]

Innuendo and gossip trumps evidence and logic.

[Oldnslo]

A couple of items:

The verdict was unanimous.

The jury had the options of 1st degree, 2nd degree, manslaughter, or felony-murder. Or, of course, "not guilty". That they didn't even go with one of the lesser-included felonies means that they Absolutely Didn't Buy the State's Case.

[StoopTroup]

That's what I was thinking. Aside from the media attention, this was kind of a run-of-the-mill sorta murder case.

So there is never anyone in Law Schools who would use a case like this that has so much public interest and raw emotion that it would go unexamined by Students or Professors? I would think every bit of it would be torn down and explained at least over the next five years. At the very least I think it might be a good example of what to avoid as a prosecutor? There has already been a statement by the prosecution that the case was lost due to a bare bones amount of evidence. Did the Police just do a lousy job or did the Prosecution just file weak charges? How the he'll could a highly trained group of professionals loose the case and fail to convince a jury of every major charge? There were some investigating Detectives that couldn't believe she walked.

I have to think that if it was a run of the mill case....the prosecutors blew it then? This was a Death Penalty Case where the defendant did 3 years behind bars! If she was not guilty then isn't it a shame that she was ever in jail at all?

If this is run of the mill....I hope I never have to serve on a 30 day trial as a juror.

[Penguin]

If there's anybody freaking out, just remember this: Casey Anthony is a high school dropout that loves to party. She WILL screw up and she WILL be arrested again. And you know that judges all across America will not hesitate to throw the book at her for whatever charge that she will face.

[OUMallen]

So there is never anyone in Law Schools who would use a case like this that has so much public interest and raw emotion that it would go unexamined by Students or Professors? I would think every bit of it would be torn down and explained at least over the next five years. At the very least I think it might be a good example of what to avoid as a prosecutor? There has already been a statement by the prosecution that the case was lost due to a bare bones amount of evidence. Did the Police just do a lousy job or did the Prosecution just file weak charges? How the he'll could a highly trained group of professionals loose the case and fail to convince a jury of every major charge? There were some investigating Detectives that couldn't believe she walked.

I have to think that if it was a run of the mill case....the prosecutors blew it then? This was a Death Penalty Case where the defendant did 3 years behind bars! If she was not guilty then isn't it a shame that she was ever in jail at all?

If this is run of the mill....I hope I never have to serve on a 30 day trial as a juror.


It's interesting in pop culture and all, but there's no special rule of law that came from it so far. Maybe if it's appealed and there's some major opinion published down the line regarding a rule of evidence or something...

[StoopTroup]

those people were not on the Jury. They were standing around outside and no connection to the case. jeebus.

I don't know for sure but it is possible that some if them were a bit more than people just standing outside. Every day of this trial there were people running to find a seat in the courtroom and some of those out there today could be folks who have sat in the Courtroom or are educated in the legal process, currently going to Law School or indeed they could just be people with no life. Either way...I think it's good that people have interest in our Justice System.

[Partial Qualifier]

It's interesting in pop culture and all, but there's no special rule of law that came from it so far. Maybe if it's appealed and there's some major opinion published down the line regarding a rule of evidence or something...

On the other hand, the trial coverage could be a landmark case study for Journalism Media programs..

[StoopTroup]

It's interesting in pop culture and all, but there's no special rule of law that came from it so far. Maybe if it's appealed and there's some major opinion published down the line regarding a rule of evidence or something...

They failed to represent a little girl who was disposed of like a piece of garbage. I think it's a bit more than run of the mill. It was billed as a Murder and now it's just a shallow grave that has now become a proper burial. Somewhere justice wasn't served.

[WE ARE dirtburglars]

Kind of a stretch...they all have to be in agreement to convict...

Not if it only requires majority decision, but like I said, I dont know the laws there, not saying thats why she was acquitted but saying that could be a reason. But how often do you see a guy get away with the obvious murder of his child? I stand by the reasoning that gender played the biggest role in her acquittal because I dont see how an unbiased jury could have found her not guilty. The only way I see that verdict is with bias, and the only bias that makes sense is gender. Ive seen all the evidence, heard all the arguments and no unbiased, sane person could view her as innocent.

Edit: I dont think that women are the only ones who viewed her as innocent just because shes a woman, I think that men tend to view crimes by women as lesser as well, and I think thats why they went so easy on her.

[Mongo]

$20 says Stoop shoots Casey Anthony to carry out justice

[WE ARE dirtburglars]

A couple of items:

The verdict was unanimous.

The jury had the options of 1st degree, 2nd degree, manslaughter, or felony-murder. Or, of course, "not guilty". That they didn't even go with one of the lesser-included felonies means that they Absolutely Didn't Buy the State's Case.

Then every person on that jury deserves to rot in hell along with Casey Anthony. This is about as cut and dry as the OJ case without the mishandling of evidence and whatnot. I am just baffled at the decision.

[Mongo]

$20 says Stoop shoots Casey Anthony to carry out justice




and then smears **** in his hair

[MsProudSooner]

Not if it only requires majority decision, but like I said, I dont know the laws there, not saying thats why she was acquitted but saying that could be a reason. But how often do you see a guy get away with the obvious murder of his child? I stand by the reasoning that gender played the biggest role in her acquittal because I dont see how an unbiased jury could have found her not guilty. The only way I see that verdict is with bias, and the only bias that makes sense is gender. Ive seen all the evidence, heard all the arguments and no unbiased, sane person could view her as innocent.

Then how do you explain Gene Leroy Hart?

I think that it's possible that the number of cases that have been overturned based on DNA evidence have made juries very hesitant to convict people based on purely cirmustantial evidence.

[OUMallen]

They failed to represent a little girl who was disposed of like a piece of garbage. I think it's a bit more than run of the mill. It was billed as a Murder and now it's just a shallow grave that has now become a proper burial. Somewhere justice wasn't served.

You sure know a lot about all the evidence and what not...you should have called the prosecutors! Too late now. I blame you for all this. :eek:

[StoopTroup]

The prosecution says the public and the media rushed to judgement regarding the guilt of Anthony. I guess they really didn't believe she was guilty either.

So did they file the charges the way they did just so the retire Cop and his Family wouldn't be charged because they have a whack job for a daughter?

[JLEW1818]

i don't like her chances at life outside prison anyways... you know?

[GrapevineSooner]

Nazi

No, you're a Nazi sympathizing Communist Marxist or whatever. ;)

[WE ARE dirtburglars]

Then how do you explain Gene Leroy Hart?

I think that it's possible that the number of cases that have been overturned based on DNA evidence have made juries very hesitant to convict people based on purely cirmustantial evidence.

All evidence in a criminal case is circumstantial unless there is some sort of video footage of the crime taking place or a signed confession of something. I dont know all the details of the Hart case, but from what I do know, he was basically seen as the scape goat for the murders because of his personal history, and then DNA evidence was inconclusive. Thats totally different from this case.

[GrapevineSooner]

i don't like her chances at life outside prison anyways... you know?

Do you like them more than you liked Jeffrey Dahmer's in general pop?

[StoopTroup]

You sure know a lot about all the evidence and what not...you should have called the prosecutors! Too late now. I blame you for all this. :eek:

I've been watching it for awhile now and I will say that I didn't watch it as close as the O.J. Trial. Again the evidence I do know about is this....

If you find your child or your Grandchild don't you immediately call 911?

Everything in this trial was circumstantial and that they maybe shouldn't have turned this into a death penalty case.

I blame you for not being the DA.

[MsProudSooner]

All evidence in a criminal case is circumstantial unless there is some sort of video footage of the crime taking place or a signed confession of something. I dont know all the details of the Hart case, but from what I do know, he was basically seen as the scape goat for the murders because of his personal history, and then DNA evidence was inconclusive. Thats totally different from this case.

I would agree that everything is circumstantial unless you have video footage and in the age of digital video I'm not sure how conclusive that would be. It just seems that the jury might have been looking for a smoking gun, so to speak, and they didn't have one.

I wouldn't be surprised to hear jurors say they thought she did it., but the prosecution didn't proove it.

Remember the case where 2 nuts killed a woman and her two daughters but the husband got away? Many of the jurors had to undergo counseling after the trial because of mental health problems from being jurors in the trial.

[StoopTroup]

No time of death, No How did she die....

Pretty sad.

[Serge Ibaka]

yawn

[JLEW1818]

the kid that flicked off the camera will serve more time than her

[StoopTroup]

yawn


the kid that flicked off the camera will serve more time than her

He deserves it.

[Curly Bill]

the kid that flicked off the camera will serve more time than her

Plus the dude's got a steady job. She probably has her sights set on him already.

[rekamrettuB]

the kid that flicked off the camera will serve more time than her

More than 3+ years?

[JLEW1818]

More than 3+ years?

he is more guilty than her, according to the system.. She was simply charged awaiting trial.

[SoCaliSooner]

Oxy moron is winding up...

[cleller]

The biggest question for me was the chloroform. The state never addressed the chloroform. How does a 20-something year old girl get her hands on chloroform? Or do you expect people to believe that this high school dropout made the chloroform herself without leaving evidence behind?

She was not trying to buy chloroform, she was doing internet searches on how to make your own.
There are tons of how-to pages on the internet, using bleach, acetone, and ice. All easy to obtain at Walmart, Home Depot, any hardware store.
Making the chloroform would be simple compared to the lies she made up.

[Fish&Game]

someone wake me up when I need to care...

[StoopTroup]

eZGyg4rLQds&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[StoopTroup]

How many of you would wait 30 Days to report your kid missing?

[Penguin]

She was not trying to buy chloroform, she was doing internet searches on how to make your own.
There are tons of how-to pages on the internet, using bleach, acetone, and ice. All easy to obtain at Walmart, Home Depot, any hardware store.
Making the chloroform would be simple compared to the lies she made up.


Didn't Cindy and George notice their house stinking of bleach and nail polish remover? Testimony of that would be damning. Never heard it, though.

[Serge Ibaka]

How many of you would wait 30 Days to report your kid missing?

yawn.

[StoopTroup]

yawn.

Why do you hate children?

[SicEmBaylor]

I watched this entire trial online...literally.

What has to be understood about this case is that while there is no direct-tangible evidence against her, every bit of evidence points to her by the process of elimination.

I don't know how any juror could apply common sense and the process of elimination to the evidence and not know beyond a REASONABLE doubt that she killed that little girl.

Id like to tape that twisted bitch's mouth and nose shut with duct tape and dump her *** in a swampy ditch.

[StoopTroup]

yawn.


I watched this entire trial online...literally.

What has to be understood about this case is that while there is no direct-tangible evidence against her, every bit of evidence points to her by the process of elimination.

I don't know how any juror could apply common sense and the process of elimination to the evidence and not know beyond a REASONABLE doubt that she killed that little girl.

Id like to tape that twisted bitch's mouth and nose shut with duct tape and dump her *** in a swampy ditch.

One of the Alternate jurors said he felt like the Prosecusion failed to prove Motive and IMO it probably was hard to do that with the filtered version of what we saw everyday. Her Defense Team did a great job saving her ***.

[SicEmBaylor]

One of the Alternate jurors said he felt like the Prosecusion failed to prove Motive and IMO it probably was hard to do that with the filtered version of what we saw everyday. Her Defense Team did a great job saving her ***.

I didn't watch the tv coverage -- I watched the unfiltered pool feed from gavel to gavel.

However, having said that, the prosecution doesn't have to provide or prove a motive though it helps. If they couldn't see what her motive was then they're deaf, dumb, and blind.

[StoopTroup]

I didn't watch the tv coverage -- I watched the unfiltered pool feed from gavel to gavel.

However, having said that, the prosecution doesn't have to provide or prove a motive though it helps. If they couldn't see what her motive was then they're deaf, dumb, and blind.

I agree but that's the thing about jury's they can always surprise you just like they did today.

[silverwheels]

I watched this entire trial online...literally.

What has to be understood about this case is that while there is no direct-tangible evidence against her, every bit of evidence points to her by the process of elimination.

I don't know how any juror could apply common sense and the process of elimination to the evidence and not know beyond a REASONABLE doubt that she killed that little girl.

Id like to tape that twisted bitch's mouth and nose shut with duct tape and dump her *** in a swampy ditch.

Yeah...that'll teach the jury that acquitted her!

[StoopTroup]

Yeah...that'll teach the jury that acquitted her!

Amazing that the jury didn't want to talk to the press.

[Breadburner]

So what the **** did she lie to the cops about.....????

[silverwheels]

Amazing that the jury didn't want to talk to the press.

An alternate juror did.

[StoopTroup]

So what the **** did she lie to the cops about.....????

According to Casey Anthony's father, George Anthony, Casey left the family's home on June 16, 2008, taking Caylee (who was almost 3) with her and did not return for 31 days. Cindy asked repeatedly during the month to see Caylee, but Casey claimed that she was too busy with a work assignment in Tampa, Florida. At other times, she said Caylee was with a nanny, later identified by Casey as Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, or at theme parks or the beach. It was eventually determined that although Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez does in fact exist, she had never met Casey nor Caylee Anthony, any member of the Anthony family, or any of Casey's friends

[StoopTroup]

On July 13, 2008, while doing yard work, Cindy and George Anthony found a notice from the post office for a certified letter affixed on their front door. George Anthony picked up the certified letter from the post office on July 15, 2008, and found that his daughter's car was in a tow yard. When George picked up the car, both he and the tow yard attendant noted a strong smell coming from the trunk. Both later testified that they believed the odor to be that of a decomposing body. When the trunk was opened it contained a bag of trash, but no human remains.

Caylee Anthony was reported missing to the Orange County Sheriff's Office on July 15, 2008, by her grandmother, Cindy. During the same call, Casey Anthony acknowledged to the 911 operator that Caylee had been missing "for 31 days." A distraught Cindy also told the 911 operator "There is something wrong. I found my daughter's car today and it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car."

[StoopTroup]

When Detective Yuri Melich, with the Orange County Sheriff's Department, began investigating the disappearance of Caylee Anthony, he found discrepancies in Casey's signed statement. When questioned, Casey said Caylee had been kidnapped by her nanny, Zanny. Although Casey had talked about Zanny, she had never been seen by Casey's family or friends, and in fact there was no nanny. Casey also told police that she worked at Universal Studios, a lie she had been telling her parents for years. Investigators brought Casey to Universal Studios on July 16, 2008, the day after Caylee was reported missing, and asked her to show them her office. Casey led police around for a while before admitting that she had been fired years before. Casey Anthony was first arrested on July 16, 2008, and was charged the following day with giving false statements, child neglect, and obstruction of a criminal investigation. The judge denied bail, saying Casey had shown "woeful disregard for the welfare of her child." On August 21, 2008, after one month of incarceration, Casey Anthony was released from the Orange County jail after her $500,200 bond was posted by the nephew of California bail bondsman Leonard Padilla in hopes that Casey would cooperate and Caylee would be found. She was arrested again on August 29, 2008, on charges of forgery, fraudulent use of personal information, petty theft for forging $700 worth of checks and using her friend's credit cards without permission. Leonard Padilla, whose nephew posted Casey Anthony's $500,200 bail, stated that if he had known before the bail was posted what he learned later, including that Anthony would not cooperate with him, he probably would not have helped get her out of jail.

On August 11, 12, and 13, 2008, tips of a suspicious object found in a forested area near the Anthony residence were called in to police by a meter reader, Roy Kronk. However, a search was not conducted at that time. After another report from the same man on December 11, 2008, human remains were found in a plastic bag. Duct tape was found on the face of the skull. On December 12, the remains were tentatively identified as Caylee's.

On December 15, WFTV reported that more bones were found in the wooded area near the spot where the remains had initially been discovered. On December 19, 2008, medical examiner Jan Garavaglia confirmed that the remains found were those of Caylee Anthony. The death was ruled a homicide and the cause of death listed as undetermined.

[Breadburner]

I hope someone files a civil case against the mudering ****....!!!

[MsProudSooner2]

I hope someone files a civil case against the mudering ****....!!!


Who could do that? No one knows who the father is.

[StoopTroup]

I wonder if this is coming up and if Zenaida could essentaily lay claim to any profits Casey might make off of this case?


Anthony told investigators that she had left 2-year-old Caylee on June 16 with a babysitter named Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez – also known as "Zanny" – at a specific Orlando apartment complex. A woman named Zenaida Gonzalez who was on the apartment records as having visited apartments on that date was questioned by police and said she did not know Casey or Caylee. She has since filed a defamation suit seeking compensatory and punitive damages, alleging that Casey willfully damaged her reputation. It was reported that Anthony would be exercising her rights under the Fifth Amendment in response to written questions in the civil case. The civil trial is set for August 29, 2011.

[Breadburner]

Who could do that? No one knows who the father is.

Possibly her parents....???

[StoopTroup]

Yep quite the yawner huh ?

LMAO!

[tulsaoilerfan]

Seems to me that if she were innocent she would have taken the stand to defend herself at some point wouldn't she? Or did she do that and i just didn't see it ?

[Breadburner]

I wonder if this bitch can be re-tried on child neglect or abuse......

[thecynic]

Amazing that the jury didn't want to talk to the press.


I'm glad they didn't talk. Maybe it means they took their job seriously. I can't stand it when jurors talk to the media like some kind of victory tour or something.

[StoopTroup]

Seems to me that if she were innocent she would have taken the stand to defend herself at some point wouldn't she? Or did she do that and i just didn't see it ?

It seems like she made a gamble that paid off. By not testifying she didn't have to address anything that might make her look guilty. The experts said she stood a huge chance of getting hammered during cross examination.


Despite what jurors may think, there are also good reasons not to have the defendant testify. First, it opens them up to cross-examination by the prosecution. Sometimes the defendant is nervous, emotional, or less than truthful on the stand. This gives the prosecution the opportunity to pick apart the defense and score points against the defense's own witness.

[sperry]

It seems like she made a gamble that paid off. By not testifying she didn't have to address anything that might make her look guilty. The experts said she stood a huge chance of getting hammered during cross examination.



Yep. Innocent or guilty she lied a whole lot, and would have gotten destroyed on the stand.

[StoopTroup]

I'm glad they didn't talk. Maybe it means they took their job seriously. I can't stand it when jurors talk to the media like some kind of victory tour or something.

I'll agree that sometimes it seems odd and once they do they seem to open themselves up to being on trial. Imagine if you said something that you might have misunderstood or just not expressed well. Then you are under the eye glass of public opinion. I'm guessing the Judge might have told them to avoid interviews due to how huge the media blitz is?

The rough descriptions of 5 or 6 of them i've seen so far seems to indicate the jury is made up of pretty intelligent folks and 4 of them that didn't want to be on the jury.

[StoopTroup]

I guess there is hope that justice was served and that maybe Casey is protecting the real story or killer, and should other evidence be discovered they could indeed investigate and charge someone, just not Casey Anthony.

[yermom]

How many of you would wait 30 Days to report your kid missing?

if it was going to interrupt my constant club whoring, i might not

[cleller]

We seem to have reached the stage where juries are not intelligent enough to make a decision based upon the evidence presented. Unless something can be shown to them in black and white, or on video, they feel there is a "reasonable doubt".
These people could not decide if the earth orbits the sun or vice-versa unless someone took them out to the edge of the galaxy for a year to watch.

[SoCaliSooner]

if it was going to interrupt my constant club whoring, i might not

Some here might not notice their kid...or family missing...for 30 days unless somebody posts it here on SF.

[StoopTroup]

Maybe the Jury wanted out? 11 hours to deliberate 7 counts that the prosecution took 29 days to prove and not 1 request for information or clarity.

You would think that there might be one hold out that would have slowed them down and took a bit longer to consider it all?

Is it possible a bad economy saved her a bit in that the Jury just wanted to be done with it and that so many things the Defense dis to cast doubt worked?

I wouldn't blame an actual Trial Lawyer from expressing an opinion but some of what I'm expressing is questions that people who make their living watching and reporting on Murder / Jury Trials.

It's not like this is the first rodeo for so many folks who discuss these cases.

[cccasooner2]

It's what America is all about, losers and winners. Jeff Ashton = loser (looser on SF), Jose Baez = winner. The rest doesn't matter at all.

[Penguin]

We seem to have reached the stage where juries are not intelligent enough to make a decision based upon the evidence presented.


Move to Iran, then. They don't bother with the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. Sounds like paradise for you.

[StoopTroup]

if it was going to interrupt my constant club whoring, i might not

LoL.

[StoopTroup]

It's what America is all about, losers and winners. Jeff Ashton = loser (looser on SF), Jose Baez = winner. The rest doesn't matter at all.

Ashton did seem shocked.

[cleller]

Here's an idea. You either believe the child drowned in the pool, and George and Casey duct taped her and dumped her in the swamp- or Casey murdered the child, and dumped her.

There really are no other options. What do you believe?

George and Cindy both say the child could not have drowned, by the way.

[cleller]

Move to Iran, then. They don't bother with the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. Sounds like paradise for you.

That's my point, they are not smart enough to see she was guilty.

[yermom]

how could she not have drowned?

[booomer]

Saw this on facebook.....

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=237189926299700

Porch lights on for Caylee Marie Anthony.

[Penguin]

You either believe the child drowned in the pool, and George and Casey duct taped her and dumped her in the swamp- or Casey murdered the child, and dumped her.


The very fact that a juror is faced with these 2 choices means that juror must vote not guilty. That was the instruction of the judge. If you have 2 reasonable scenarios, where one suggests guilty and one suggests not guilty, then a juror MUST assume the not guilty scenario. The juror would be forced to vote not guilty.

[booomer]

What kind of world is this that your 2 year old can be missing for 30 days and you don't tell anyone.......and that's not a crime??? I'm beside myself over this verdict.

[JLEW1818]

only way to be proven guilty, is to have a full video of the murder, and the president of the united states present

[Jacie]

Amazing that the jury didn't want to talk to the press.

Juror #14 was on the line to Fox within two hours of the verdict. CNN didn't get that alternate on till much later so point goes to Fox on this one.

[tommieharris91]

I didn't really follow it, but after hearing some details I'm wondering why the state of Florida brought 1st degree murder charges against her. There really wasn't strong enough evidence to garner that strong a charge. They didn't have any way to prove premeditation. I'm pretty sure Florida could have convicted her on manslaughter.

[JLEW1818]

I didn't really follow it, but after hearing some details I'm wondering why the state of Florida brought 1st degree murder charges against her. There really wasn't strong enough evidence to garner that strong a charge. They didn't have any way to prove premeditation. I'm pretty sure Florida could have convicted her on manslaughter.

correct

[oumartin]

I told yens that the Dad was involved and apparently the jury thought so.

[cccasooner2]

I told yens that the Dad was involved and apparently the jury thought so.

At least the women did. They apparently knew how likely it was to have dad's dick in their mouth. No evidence was necessary for that. :D

[StoopTroup]

Juror #14 was on the line to Fox within two hours of the verdict. CNN didn't get that alternate on till much later so point goes to Fox on this one.

I was elbow deep in some BoomerQ at some point and prior to Eliot (bring me another Hooker ) Spitzer I was switching back and forth to Fox MSNBC Nancy Grace and CNN. Missed that.

[AlbqSooner]

i don't know, i'm not an evidence investigator, but it's better to dismiss without prejudice for the time being and have the option to prosecute later than just letting her be acquitted, IMO. Same result, she's out on the street, but at least maybe you can get her back in jail at some point.

Once the jury was sworn to try the case and one witness gave ANY testimony, any dismissal by the State would be WITH prejudice. That is to say, the State could not refile the case against Casey.

[AlbqSooner]

All evidence in a criminal case is circumstantial unless there is some sort of video footage of the crime taking place or a signed confession of something. I dont know all the details of the Hart case, but from what I do know, he was basically seen as the scape goat for the murders because of his personal history, and then DNA evidence was inconclusive. Thats totally different from this case.

As I previously posted, I was practicing law in Pryor at the time of the Hart trial and was collaterally involved. The jury got that verdict right. The State failed to present a case that proved EACH and EVERY material allegation beyond a reasonable doubt. That being the case, NOT guilty was the only verdict available to a jury that followed it's oath as jurors.

[cleller]

The very fact that a juror is faced with these 2 choices means that juror must vote not guilty. That was the instruction of the judge. If you have 2 reasonable scenarios, where one suggests guilty and one suggests not guilty, then a juror MUST assume the not guilty scenario. The juror would be forced to vote not guilty.

So you think its reasonable that the child drowned, and George dumped it in the swamp. He then let Casey be charged with first degree murder, rather than admit the child drowned? He also lied about this in her trial, committing perjury, and hurting her defense. This is the more likely of the two scenarios?

[ouwasp]

Gene Hart
OJ
Casey

At least the 1st two got a measure of justice meted out. Time will tell on the third...

[StoopTroup]

Once the jury was sworn to try the case and one witness gave ANY testimony, any dismissal by the State would be WITH prejudice. That is to say, the State could not refile the case against Casey.

One of her original Counsel made himself ineligible and she had to get new Counsel. Why didn't they stop the show then and send it to another Court? Is that even possible?

[AlbqSooner]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

[ouwasp]

like I said, maybe fate will deal out the justice to Casey, much like what Gene and OJ rec'd. We can only hope....

[cccasooner2]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".


That is well and good, but Nate Hybl was the losing QB to OSU twice.

[87sooner]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".


horse manure

[Mongo]

I AM OUTRAGED!!!!

[Frozen Sooner]

Once the jury was sworn to try the case and one witness gave ANY testimony, any dismissal by the State would be WITH prejudice. That is to say, the State could not refile the case against Casey.

There you go with your pesky 5th Amendment again...

[JohnnyMack]

I think she's a murderin' skank, but I will admit that the prosecution didn't have a ton of physical evidence. And the smell-expert prolly didn't help their case either.

[StoopTroup]

So you think its reasonable that the child drowned, and George dumped it in the swamp. He then let Casey be charged with first degree murder, rather than admit the child drowned? He also lied about this in her trial, committing perjury, and hurting her defense. This is the more likely of the two scenarios?

Listening to that chain of events really makes it seem pretty doubtful. I think she's hiding the truth about her kid and maybe the Dad got involved in a cover up at some point but I guess it's just such a screwed up Family that anything is possible and that might be why so many people are pissed about the verdict...did the Family intentionally create the doubt and get their Daughter off the hook? Is it possible to put something like that together fast enough to make it believable and although it was an accident, is it right to play games with the justice system. Are they that capable? Can people react like that after the loss of such a beautiful girl? If they can...does that make them all modern day Jack the Rippers?

Poor little girl.

[AlboSooner]

OJ all over again.

This

[tulsaoilerfan]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

I'm sick of the term "beyond a reasonable doubt"

[thecynic]

It was supposed to be a jury, not a lynch mob. This is our judicial system at work. It's the greatest system in the world. That jury knows more about his case than anyone on this board. If they didn't think they proved their case, then we as a society have to accept that. Be pissed all you want, but justice was served. Maybe she killed her little girl, maybe she didn't. But the evidence didn't prove she did according to the laws of our great land and the people who heard more evidence than anyone here did.

[StoopTroup]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

I do follow all that as without the rules then there is no justice. I did ask earlier if then , did the prosecution just make so many mistakes by letting the Family and the media interfere with making good decisions in nailing her down and making her look like she was a part of a conspiracy to cover up her Daughters death?

[BU BEAR]

I'm sick of the term "beyond a reasonable doubt"

You would feel different if you were the criminal defendant.

[BU BEAR]

only way to be proven guilty, is to have a full video of the murder, and the president of the united states present

I would not believe Baraq Hussein Obama even if he was corroborated by the video tape.

[cccasooner2]

......but I guess it's just such a screwed up Family. ........


Seriously, what was it that convinced you that it was a screwed up family? Was it the grandparents in denial their daughter could do such a thing? Was it the grandparents getting pissed that the media was camped out in their yard 24/7 hounding them? Nancy Grace declaring their daughter guilty of 1st degree murder? Anger over Nancy Grace not appologizing to the wife of a CONVICTED FELON that died in prison for a crime he did not commit (the Utah whore abduction case. :rolleyes: )?

[A Sooner in Texas]

The jury made the right call based on the evidence presented. I pray someday Caylee gets justice. But I also am enjoying the thought of Nancy Grace having a seizure when the verdicts were read.

[StoopTroup]

So many people posting here are denigrating the jury system as a result of this case. When the state fails to carry its burden of proving each and every material of each and every charge, the jurors MUST vote not guilty. That is the law.

In order to get a NOT guilty verdict, each and every juror must have at least one doubt that they consider reasonable. The verdict must be unanimous. If there is a split verdict, it would be a mistrial.

Twelve people who heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, probably have a more complete understanding of what was and was not presented in evidence than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who, having heard every word of testimony and viewed every piece of tangible evidence, then reviewed and discussed the instructions of law which the judge gave them, with an eye to applying that law to the evidence are probably better equipped to render a decision than the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".

Twelve people who sat together for 11 hours discussing among themselves the evidence and the law and ALL 12 of whom, based upon having viewed the evidence, heard and observed the witnesses, reviewed the applicable law, and discussed all of that, concluded that the State had failed to prove its case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt should be praised rather than castigated for having the moral sense of duty to render a verdict of not guilty. Those who know more than the jurors knew about the evidence - testimony and exhibits - actually presented do not, I submit, include the posters here or the journalists who are wailing and gnashing their teeth while spouting such terms as "Miscarriage of Justice".


It was supposed to be a jury, not a lynch mob. This is our judicial system at work. It's the greatest system in the world. That jury knows more about his case than anyone on this board. If they didn't think they proved their case, then we as a society have to accept that. Be pissed all you want, but justice was served. Maybe she killed her little girl, maybe she didn't. But the evidence didn't prove she did according to the laws of our great land and the people who heard more evidence than anyone here did.

The thing we kept hearing was that defense needed to convince reasonable doubt and that the Prosecution didn't need to prove she murdered the child they could convince the jury there was circumstantial evidence and enough to convict her. Again somehow they failed to prove that she covered up the child's death. For me that would be enough to convict her. Now....I'm against the Death Penalty so I would have leaned towards a lesser charge and if later there was proof that she was covering for someone then I wouldn't be opposed any conviction being overturned.

[thecynic]

The thing we kept hearing was that defense needed to convince reasonable doubt and that the Prosecution didn't need to prove she murdered the child they could convince the jury there was circumstantial evidence and enough to convict her. Again somehow they failed to prove that she covered up the child's death. For me that would be enough to convict her. Now....I'm against the Death Penalty so I would have leaned towards a lesser charge and if later there was proof that she was covering for someone then I wouldn't be opposed any conviction being overturned.

I guess whatever the talking heads were you were hearing that from was wrong.
I don't understand what you're saying in the statement in bold. They failed to prove she covered it up, and that would be enough to convict her?
Not arguing just not understanding.

[StoopTroup]

The jury made the right call based on the evidence presented. I pray someday Caylee gets justice. But I also am enjoying the thought of Nancy Grace having a seizure when the verdicts were read.

Well that's the real problem because if Casey did kill her daughter to get even with her Mom and Dad or something even more twisted and then covered it up and tried to pin a cover up on her Dad and her Mom testified she looked up Chloroform on the internet to help create chaos or even nail the Dad since he cheated on her....the real truth will never come out and nobody will really ever believe any of it.

Unless her Brother and her made some pact to kill the kid and pin it on her father by saying the kid drown in the pool and Dear Ole Dad covered it up with the animal buryings....

Seriously....it's really hard to think that the child's real murderer will come to justice.

[AlboSooner]

It is quite difficult to prove anything without a reasonable doubt. Even scientific principles have inherited doubt in them. However, our justice system is one of the best in the history of mankind.

I feel bad for the kid who had to die at such a young age, and now somebody who killed her is still free. C'est la vie

[SbOrOiNaEnR]

I blame this guy:

http://www.rankopedia.com/CandidatePix/77523.gif