Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Shaddim · Jul 5, 2011, 04:41 PM

The jury found Casey not guilty because the prosecution couldn't prove the case against her beyond a reasonable doubt. Remember, Not Guilty doesn't mean they think she's innocent. Sure, I believe she did it, but that doesn't matter. It's all about the evidence and how the DA presented it.

Oh, and I did enjoy watching Nancy Grace's head explode when the verdict was read. It's sad that she doesn't have a clue as how our justice system actually works, despite her supposed experience. Facts > emotion.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/07/05/...html?hpt=hp_t1

Doofy · Jul 5, 2011, 05:09 PM

Ahhh, so that's what all the FaceSpace noise is about from my colonial buddies.
"Porch lights on for Caylee Marie Anthony"

OAW · Jul 5, 2011, 05:22 PM

I think this pretty much sums it all up ....

We're disappointed with the verdict today and surprised, because we know the facts," Lawson Lamar, state attorney for the 9th District, told reporters. But, he said, "I never, ever criticize a jury. Theirs is the task of deciding what to believe."

He praised the job done by prosecutors, but said proving the case was tough, as Caylee's remains were skeletal when they were discovered and lacked any chemical evidence. "This was a dry-bones case," Lamar said. "... The delay in recovering little Caylee's remains worked to our considerable disadvantage."

So you have a toddler that comes up dead. The mother is busted in all kinds of lies as to the girl's whereabouts. Her behavior is odd for a mother who has recently lost a child. She's the primary suspect and for good reason. But at the end of the day there wasn't any hard evidence to prove first degree murder.

OAW

turtle777 · Jul 5, 2011, 05:28 PM

Paging Dexter.

-t

Chongo · Jul 5, 2011, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

So you have a toddler that comes up dead. The mother is busted in all kinds of lies as to the girl's whereabouts. Her behavior is odd for a mother who has recently lost a child. She's the primary suspect and for good reason. But at the end of the day there wasn't any hard evidence to prove first degree murder.

OAW

The other problem is the charges. The "talking heads" say they overcharged. The case they presented was 1st degree, not "aggravated homicide' (AKA 3rd degree) and left the jury to decide 1st degree murder. Child abuse was unprovable as well. This was the same problem they had with the Rodney King case. I can't find the exact charges that were filed. Wikipedia says "excessive use of force" It was more like "excessive use of force intended to cause great bodily harm" What I do remember is the CNN analyst commented that was a verbose way of charging them with attempted homicide. Had it been just excessive use of force they would have been convicted

Doofy · Jul 5, 2011, 05:55 PM

What's the burden of proof over there? "Beyond reasonable doubt"?
(Edit: no matter - should have read Shad's OP again)

OAW · Jul 5, 2011, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Chongo

The other problem is the charges. The "talking heads" say they overcharged. The case they presented was 1st degree, not "aggravated homicide' (AKA 3rd degree) and left the jury to decide 1st degree murder. Child abuse was unprovable as well. This was the same problem they had with the Rodney King case. I can't find the exact charges that were filed. Wikipedia says "excessive use of force" It was more like "excessive use of force intended to cause great bodily harm" What I do remember is the CNN analyst commented that was a verbose way of charging them with attempted homicide. Had it been just excessive use of force they would have been convicted

Indeed. In a case where the cause and time of death could not even be established it would have been difficult enough to get a conviction for Aggravated Homicide. But to swing for the fences and charge 1st Degree Murder as well as Child Abuse was probably not the wisest decision on the part of the DA.

OAW

Shaddim · Jul 5, 2011, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

Indeed. In a case where the cause and time of death could not even be established it would have been difficult enough to get a conviction for Aggravated Homicide. But to swing for the fences and charge 1st Degree Murder as well as Child Abuse was probably not the wisest decision on the part of the DA.

OAW

Exactly. It's yet another case of a DA dropping the ball... again. She'll walk out of that court room a free woman on Thursday, no felonies on her record, just a few misdemeanors. Hell, if I were her I'd go right then and buy a handgun and apply for a CC permit.

Rumor · Jul 5, 2011, 07:37 PM

I followed this case a little. The biggest thing the DA had for them was human decomp in the trunk and Google searches for chloroform. Defense had an expert that testified it wasn't human decomp because flies wouldn't lay their eggs anywhere near chloroform.

He going out a raging for a month was damning, and her Good Life or what tattoo she got two weeks into her "vacation" but that wasn't enough either.

Prosecution just didn't have enough on their side, which is surprising considering how horrible to defense was during the trial.

Did she do it? Probably, but no cause of death, no death location, and no DNA evidence makes it hard to prove.

That whole family is messed in the head too.

mduell · Jul 5, 2011, 08:17 PM

The Martha Stewart treatment: couldn't get her for the suspected crime, but got her for lying to the investigators.

brassplayersrock² · Jul 5, 2011, 11:55 PM

/me sighs. Just another OJ case, this time with a white female and no glove that fits.

The Godfather · Jul 6, 2011, 12:40 AM

Expect her own legal reality TV show before 2012.

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Oh, and I did enjoy watching Nancy Grace's head explode when the verdict was read. It's sad that she doesn't have a clue as how our justice system actually works, despite her supposed experience. Facts > emotion.

This is her MO. She'll ask defense attorneys how they would defend a client and then she treats them like they really believe they're saying. She really seems to think (publically, at least) providing a defense for someone who may be guilty is morally reprehensible.

Sort of OT: I immediately got the vibe her brother was diddling her back when she was first arrested.

Chongo · Jul 6, 2011, 10:49 AM

Nancy Grace was sued over the Melinda Duckett suicide. She made an out of court settlement.

Grace had the Duke lacrosse team convicted before trial. She bailed the day they were cleared of all charges and Jane Velez-Mitchell had to announce the charges were being dismissed.

Grace also proclaimed Richard Ricci guilty in the Elizabeth Smart case, when in fact it was Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee.

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 11:29 AM

Our ex-mayor-for-life mistakenly put a guy away for killing his own daughter.

Whoops!

ctt1wbw · Jul 6, 2011, 04:30 PM

Can someone explain how you can be found guilty of lying to a law enforcement officer regarding information about a crime you are being accused of, and then later being found not guilty of committing said crime, but still being found guilty of lying to the cops? What kind of sense of that make?

turtle777 · Jul 6, 2011, 04:42 PM

That's not the issue. The issue is that the DA charged her with 1st degree murder.

For that charge, there was REASONABLE DOUBT. It could have been manslaughter, for all we know.
Hence, the jury did what they are paid to do: find guilt beyond reasonable doubt that she committed 1st degree murder. They couldn't, hence, they had to let her go.

The DA fumbled this.

-t

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 04:45 PM

^^ Is this rhetorical?

Edit: if it isn't, turtle has the gist. Lying to the cops doesn't make you guilty of first degree.

turtle777 · Jul 6, 2011, 04:50 PM

I'm serious. The law has been served, justice maybe not so much.

-t

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 05:05 PM

I was talking to ctt1wbw. Sorry for the mixup.

ghporter · Jul 6, 2011, 05:19 PM

Our criminal system is designed to avoid putting an innocent person in prison, not putting guilty people away. In the OJ case, the LAPD and LA prosecutors couldn't manage to "frame a guilty man" and make it stick. They had lots and lots of physical evidence, but could not connect the dots properly, and the jury did "the right thing" by aquitting OJ. That, with a lesser burden of proof, he was found to be liable for the two deaths in a civil case says a lot about how poorly LA county and the LAPD did with what they had for the criminal case.

Thousands of children are born in this country every day to people who shouldn't have kids. Most of the time, those parents take a little responsibility and at least try to take care of the kid. Casey isn't adult enough to be allowed out without a curfew and a minder, but that doesn't mean she's a murderer. Sociopathic, maybe, but how many people in Congress deserve that label?

Spheric Harlot · Jul 6, 2011, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Our criminal system is designed to avoid putting an innocent person in prison, not putting guilty people away. In the OJ case, the LAPD and LA prosecutors couldn't manage to "frame a guilty man" and make it stick. They had lots and lots of physical evidence, but could not connect the dots properly, and the jury did "the right thing" by aquitting OJ. That, with a lesser burden of proof, he was found to be liable for the two deaths in a civil case says a lot about how poorly LA county and the LAPD did with what they had for the criminal case.

"It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, "whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection," and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever."
— John Adams

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 05:36 PM

"You know whut..."
— Nancy Grace

Doofy · Jul 6, 2011, 06:18 PM

One thing I'm not understanding here.

I'm sure you'll have seen the FaceSpace event where everyone's invited to put their porch light on for the little girl. But didn't the little girl die three years ago? Why put the lights on now? Because revenge hasn't been issued? Seems that way to me.

Chongo · Jul 6, 2011, 06:42 PM

The Anthonys are receiving death threats. Casey will need to be looking over her shoulder for the rest of her life.
Casey Anthony Verdict: Anthony Family Gets Death Threats in Wake of Acquittal - ABC News

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by Chongo

The Anthonys are receiving death threats. Casey will need to be looking over her shoulder for the rest of her life.
Casey Anthony Verdict: Anthony Family Gets Death Threats in Wake of Acquittal - ABC News

Among the many ironies here, society is way more of a threat to her than she is to society.

subego · Jul 6, 2011, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

One thing I'm not understanding here.

I'm sure you'll have seen the FaceSpace event where everyone's invited to put their porch light on for the little girl. But didn't the little girl die three years ago? Why put the lights on now? Because revenge hasn't been issued? Seems that way to me.

Empty gestures have no expiration date.

ebuddy · Jul 6, 2011, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

Paging Dexter.

-t

ebuddy · Jul 6, 2011, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by turtle777

That's not the issue. The issue is that the DA charged her with 1st degree murder.

For that charge, there was REASONABLE DOUBT. It could have been manslaughter, for all we know.
Hence, the jury did what they are paid to do: find guilt beyond reasonable doubt that she committed 1st degree murder. They couldn't, hence, they had to let her go.

The DA fumbled this.

-t

^^^ There have been two death sentences issued on a woman in the history of Florida and one of them was a whacked out serial killer. There was never going to be a death sentence and the charge was lofty to begin with.

andi*pandi · Jul 6, 2011, 07:18 PM

Before Dexter, page Dr. Temperance Brennan and her team at the Jeffersonian.

OldManMac · Jul 6, 2011, 11:24 PM

Speaking of Nancy Grace and the Anthony case:

Brian Dickerson: Did Nancy Grace assure Tot Mom Casey Anthony�s acquittal? | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

Not such kind words for Grace.

Shaddim · Jul 6, 2011, 11:54 PM

That's accurate. Without the hype, "tot mom" wouldn't have attracted the attention needed to get such a legal team.

Grace helped her get away. Well, that and some stupid decisions made by the Orange Co. DA's office. I hope she enjoys the irony.

imitchellg5 · Jul 7, 2011, 12:06 AM

I can't even get out of a parking ticket

subego · Jul 7, 2011, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

That's accurate. Without the hype, "tot mom" wouldn't have attracted the attention needed to get such a legal team.

Grace helped her get away. Well, that and some stupid decisions made by the Orange Co. DA's office. I hope she enjoys the irony.

Meh. Baez is a tool. The acquittal fell in his lap.

Chongo · Jul 7, 2011, 07:34 AM

She'll be sentenced to time served. There's fear of vigilantes going after her.

subego · Jul 7, 2011, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

Before Dexter, page Dr. Temperance Brennan and her team at the Jeffersonian.

If DB's in on it, I say we go old school.

Shaddim · Jul 7, 2011, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Chongo

She'll be sentenced to time served. There's fear of vigilantes going after her.

Appears she'll get out in August.

Edit: Oh, and Best Angel Episode Ever!

andi*pandi · Jul 7, 2011, 11:36 AM

^truth.

mduell · Jul 7, 2011, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by ctt1wbw

Can someone explain how you can be found guilty of lying to a law enforcement officer regarding information about a crime you are being accused of, and then later being found not guilty of committing said crime, but still being found guilty of lying to the cops? What kind of sense of that make?

They were able to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that she lied about something to the investigators.
They weren't able to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that she committed first degree murder.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jul 7, 2011, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

That, with a lesser burden of proof, he was found to be liable for the two deaths in a civil case says a lot about how poorly LA county and the LAPD did with what they had for the criminal case.

To clarify, the civil case doesn't result in that inference at all. The lesser burden of proof means that it was easier for the plaintiff to win. If the criminal prosecutors had to operate on a balance of probabilities instead of "beyond a reasonable doubt", they might (probably?) have succeeded as well.