Casey Anthony - Guilty, or not guilty?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

It's obvious that she did it.

Apparently not

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by valo403

Apparently not

Legal issues get in the way.

I'm a pro at this, I watch Law & Order SVU every night.

...

[Hockey_Ninja]

the only thing good about her being not guilty is that we get to see Nancy Grace flame out on live t.v. its going to be epic.

[Cowperson]

So the defence argument seems to be a confession that an accident occurred - the drowning - and then an admission of a crime, interfering with a corpse, failure to report, etc, etc.

She was found guilty on four counts of interfering with an investigation by lying and will be sentenced. What of the other admissions?

Her actions suggest she may not have been proven guilty, but she probably is and, even if that's not the truth, she's probably going to be the new OJ in having a generally hostile public surrounding her the rest of her life.

An interesting case.

Cowperson

[moon]

Results like this where it was clear she is guilty as hell makes me lose faith in the justice system and the pathetic morons they get on the juries.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Her actions suggest she may not have been proven guilty, but she probably is and, even if that's not the truth, she's probably going to be the new OJ in having a generally hostile public surrounding her the rest of her life.

Hopefully it is more than just generally hostility.

[Parallex]

Wish I had Tivo... I want to see Nancy Grace develop a brain tumor live on international TV.

[CaptainCrunch]

There's no doubt that the defense attorneys have easier jobs, they just have to prove reasonable doubt, the prosecutor pretty well either has to nail the person to the crime, or get a iron clad confession.

In this case the belief is that she did the murder based on her behaviors (partying etc).

And while there was some physical evidence, I don't think that the prosecutors case was strong enough to breach reasonable doubt.

And since there is no double jeapardy, we've probably seen another murderer go free(even though I'm convinced that OJ's son and not OJ did the killing)

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by valo403

Apparently not

OJ was also acquitted despite being guilty.

[Shazam]

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Except she's not a serial killer.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by valo403

Found not guilty. I don't know all the details about this case, but it looks like the prosecution failed to present anything more than circumstantial and character evidence. Tough to meet the burden of proof without something more substantial than that.

Yeah they didn't present much of anything when it came down to it. One of the more powerful things they had on searching for chloroform and what not on the computer got destroyed when the mother said she was searching those things and not Casey. A lot of the scientific evidence seemed to be poorly presented by the prosecution and their witnesses from what I read (this part of it was very much like the OJ trial).

Because of the evidence I didn't ever really think she was going to be found guilty of first degree murder in a death penalty state. I figured she'd get manslaughter but she beat that as well.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

OJ was also acquitted despite being guilty.

Reasonable doubt my friend. In that case, the prosecution did a sh%t horrible job and Marcia Clark lost control of the proceedings early on.

The of course ultimate stupidity was the destruction of evidence, the discrediting of the investigating officer, the glove don't fit, and of course the jury selection was just wacky.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

So the defence argument seems to be a confession that an accident occurred - the drowning - and then an admission of a crime, interfering with a corpse, failure to report, etc, etc.

She was found guilty on four counts of interfering with an investigation by lying and will be sentenced. What of the other admissions?

Her actions suggest she may not have been proven guilty, but she probably is and, even if that's not the truth, she's probably going to be the new OJ in having a generally hostile public surrounding her the rest of her life.

An interesting case.

Cowperson

Was she charged with anything else? Unless there were counts as to those actions there's nothing for the court to do.

She probably did it, but you also have to remember that the 'evidence' we see is far different than that seen by the jury. We see sensationalized reports from the media, stories designed to generate readership, accounts based on opinion and an array of other things that may or may not accurately reflect what took place. We also don't see the boring stuff, the doubts cast on pieces of 'smoking gun' type evidence, the questions surrounding theories presented etc. High profile cases like this seem to often wind up this way, the public sees a completely different case than the jury and the outcomes are typically complete opposites.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Zevo

Except she's not a serial killer.

That you know . . .

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

OJ was also acquitted despite being guilty.

Actually, OJ was acquitted because he was not guilty. He may have done it, but the prosecution blew it, just as they appear to have done here.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by valo403

Actually, OJ was acquitted because he was not guilty. He may have done it, but the prosecution blew it, just as they appear to have done here.

Clearly they needed Matlock.

That guy had like a 100% conviction rate.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by valo403

Was she charged with anything else? Unless there were counts as to those actions there's nothing for the court to do.

.

Her defence consisted of an admission to other crimes, albeit more minor, and while not charged in this particular sequence since it would have interfered with the prosecution contention she's a stone cold killer, I would wonder if they can now come back to those more minor things.

In other words, its double jeopardy on murder but that shouldn't stop them from annoying her with charges of interfering with a dead body, failure to report a death, etc, etc.

Or do they just forget the whole thing?

I'm just saying she's free because she confessed to other, chargeable things.

Cowperson

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by valo403

Actually, OJ was acquitted because he was not guilty. He may have done it, but the prosecution blew it, just as they appear to have done here.

retracted

[Coys1882]

I think her and Karla Homolka should get a place together.