+- NightOwl Forums (https://forums.nightowlpro.com)
+-- Forum: The Crypt (https://forums.nightowlpro.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Forum: Off Topic (https://forums.nightowlpro.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Casey Anthony (/showthread.php?tid=37784)
Casey Anthony - mybankey - 07-05-2011
Not sure if anyone on here has been following this case in florida where i live. The case of Casey Anthony, she was found NOT GUILTY.
Im amazed by this,
Tom :/
Casey Anthony - crazydog500 - 07-05-2011
But Guilty for lying to a cop. Retarded
Casey Anthony - alvanaxe - 07-05-2011
coonoodeling beeeoootch needs to die for what she had done!
Casey Anthony - mybankey - 07-05-2011
Its crazy to me. And how is she gonna live, meaning, she cant go home to mom and dad after what she said about him sexually abusing her.
Tom
Casey Anthony - mrmorningside - 07-05-2011
she needs to burn
Casey Anthony - psychosocial91 - 07-05-2011
This makes no sense at all that must be one dumb or deaf jury...
Casey Anthony - stainboy - 07-05-2011
Bottom line is that the prosecution didn't have enough evidence. Don't know what else to say. It showed that she lied and that she covered up her daughters' death, but it wasn't strong enough to indict her as the murderer.
Have we been misled by our justice system that our courts often render verdicts we don't agree with? I mean, have we indicted Anthony prior to the trial anyways?
If so, then what need do we have for due process? It seems that due process was carried out and Anthony was cleared.
Should we forgo the burden of proof on the prosecution?
Casey Anthony - mybankey - 07-05-2011
(07-05-2011, 08:45 PM)stainboy link Wrote: Bottom line is that the prosecution didn't have enough evidence. Don't know what else to say. It showed that she lied and that she covered up her daughters' death, but it wasn't strong enough to indict her as the murderer.All im saying is, if i had a kid that drowned, i would have called 911. And no one including my family would make me lie about it, nor would i ever have had the child thrown into the woods for her final resting place. But i guess people act in different ways.
Have we been misled by our justice system that our courts often render verdicts we don't agree with? I mean, have we indicted Anthony prior to the trial anyways?
If so, then what need do we have for due process? It seems that due process was carried out and Anthony was cleared.
Should we forgo the burden of proof on the prosecution?
Tom
Casey Anthony - clownnation - 07-05-2011
Its obvious that her story was sketchy from the start. But the bottom line is, if you are going to convict someone on something serious like Muder, you have to have proof. They didnt have any. Just "It doesnt look right" and the medical examiner saying he can not say how the baby died was a death blow to the case in my opinion, cant really say she murdered her if you dont know how she died. It is possible that her neglect led to the accidental death and she tried to cover it up out of fear or shame and it dominoed out of control.
golly gee willikers shame for that poor little girl.
Casey Anthony - 420Smiles - 07-05-2011
I'm with Stain and Clown on this one. My wife called me from work, all in a tizzy over this verdict, and all I could tell her was that "justice has been served". By saying that, I am not condoning what she may or may not have done........I am saying that here in the U.S. we have a system of justice that says we are ALL innocent until proven guilty. That is a very tough thing to accept and also something that should be thought about by all.
There were really only 2 outcomes that could happen here.......1) The prosecution (and investigative team) find and deliver to the courts enough evidence to convict.......or 2) The prosecution (and investigative team) do not find and deliver to the courts enough evidence to convict. It seems like a joke to say "those are your options".........but well.......Those are your options, and that is the way it works.
It is really no difference in the outcome of the trial, just as we seen in the O.J. Simpson trial, the public had convicted that girl (same as O.J.) way before the trial had even started and the publics "GUILTY" verdict will stand far longer than any sentence gave by a courtroom judge or jury. It will follow her the rest of her life. It may very well be bad to be locked up for 25 years, but at least in prison you are around like minded people who may even relate to your story of events. I think it would be far worse to live freely in public, where everyone stares, points and whispers everytime you walk into a room. All job oppertunities lost to speculations and rumor. Never leaving the house without the fear that some vigilanty will act on his own guilty verdict.
I personally think they will only find more charges to press against her, take her to court on those things and find her guilty. That is the same thing that was done to O.J. Simpson. He was found "Not Guilty" on criminal counts of murder...........but later was found "Guilty" in the civil case. It makes no difference to them how they get you to prison..............if they really want you in prison, one day you will go.