Jump to content


Photo

Verdict is in.. Casey Anthony trial


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 Karen

Karen

    Just getting started

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 433 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 12:40 PM

Expected to be announced at 2:15pm Eastern. I hope justice is served for that little girl.

#2 mom2nico

mom2nico

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 12:52 PM

Thanks. I'm watching now.

#3 Kris

Kris

    Plotting a takeover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,533 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:01 PM

I hope justice is served.I want to see her in jail for life

#4 single_mom

single_mom

    Just getting started

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 461 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:10 PM

I don't want to see her in jail for life, i want the same fate for her as she dealt to her poor defenseless daughter.

#5 canadianangel

canadianangel

    Mom2momer since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 854 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:20 PM

Not Guilty of First degree Murder and not guilty of child abuse I do not agree so sad :(

#6 mom2nico

mom2nico

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:25 PM

Very sad. I am shocked, as I think the experts will be too. They were all on CNN saying that she would obviously be found guilty just minutes before the verdict. So if she's not guilty, who is? Clearly something isn't right here.

#7 Sam

Sam

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:25 PM

HUGE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE! BULLSHIT!!!

#8 canadianangel

canadianangel

    Mom2momer since Sept 2005

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 854 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:27 PM

they proved that she Chloroformed her child and was found not guilt argh makes me mad!

#9 Leanne

Leanne

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,261 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:32 PM

I am disgusted!! I am watching it live right now and she is smiling and laughing. ugh just disgusting.

#10 sims

sims

    team murky waters

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,511 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 01:48 PM

Holy did not see that coming

#11 Kris

Kris

    Plotting a takeover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,533 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 02:08 PM

I am so incredibly angry that worthless excuse for a mother got off. Not even child abuse! For crying out loud she waited a month before reporting her missing!!! I dont understand what the jury was thinking. Poor Caylee

#12 mom2nico

mom2nico

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,571 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 02:13 PM

Not even child abuse!


Exactly!

#13 jenny

jenny

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,498 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 02:19 PM

Guys just remember God saw all and will bring justice accordingly to whoever did this to this poor little girl. It's sad all around.

#14 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:03 PM

The prosecution has a weak case, the defense were able to poke holes in all the witnesses' testimonies and create more than reasonable doubt. IMO, it would have been a breech of justice to find her guilty. Not that I believe she is innocent, don't get me wrong.. I think she is more than guilty, but that's not the way it works. Everyone is entitled to a fair and timely trial and it was clear that there was doubt. It can stare you straight in the face, but if there is anyway you can prove doubt, you cannot charge!

Edited by ~Jill~, 05 July 2011 - 03:03 PM.


#15 bcnap

bcnap

    if the 3rd doesnt kill you it makes you stronger

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 769 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:04 PM

wow her tat say's it all.. as of thursday, she will be livin the " belle Vita"
oh i am so sad for Caylee, she walks free, and it was so obvious, lying, slut she is

#16 Kris

Kris

    Plotting a takeover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,533 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:05 PM

I am surprised that she didnt at least get child abuse! Not reporting your child missing and than lying about where is is should be more than enough for that

#17 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:05 PM

I believe saying she walks free is a bit of an understatement. With the media attention she has gotten, she will go nowhere unrecognized. She may not be locked up, but in some senses she still very much will be in a prison.

#18 Sam

Sam

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:27 PM

The prosecution has a weak case


Okay, I'm the first to admit, I have not been following the trail. I watched 1 program last week that was an hour long, and that is it. You say the prosecution had a weak case, maybe they did I don't know. All I know is that they found 87 seperate computer searches for cholorphorme (sp?) and even a google search about breaking necks. Was there any reason or defense given to these things?

How about the duct tape on the babies face with clorophoame, or the fact they found a post mortom hair belonging to Cailee in the trunk of mom's car. Was that evidence too weak?

I'm sure there was more the prosecution was going for, but these things really stood out to me. Again, I really didn't follow this case so am not sure about details.

#19 jenny

jenny

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,498 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:41 PM

But....when you see a clip of the investigation...the investigater did not find anything in the woods...but later on her body was found in the same woods by someone else. The investigator questioned why the ones that did find her didn't take him back and say did you look here? So it's possible someone put her body there after the first search. There was doubt...evidence was weak.

#20 justsamma

justsamma

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 972 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 03:45 PM

i'm sad and angry all at the same time.
i didn't think she would get murder one, but i didn't expect her to get away with manslaughter or CHILD ABUSE.

#21 vals

vals

    Proud member since September 2008

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,169 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 05:21 PM

This is just tragic!!!! People will now think they can get away with abusing and killing children so long as they cover their tracks. SO, SO, SO SAD!!!!

#22 turtle'smom

turtle'smom

    New Kid on the Block

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 223 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 05:24 PM

I am totally disgusted by the tragic turn of events!! That girl should have gotten tbe death penalty for what she did!! Karma will get her, I hope in due time!!! :(

#23 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 05:38 PM

I think the real issue with the internet searches is that it wasn't only her who had access to the computer. She could prove others could have used it to search those things just as easily as she could.

It wasn't that there was no evidence, there was TONS of evidence.. BUT, it was all circumstantial at best.. there was never anything to really put the gun in her hand, figuratively speaking.

She could have just as easily been set up, as far as the true details show. Her lying was the only thing they could 100% pin on her without any doubt.

As far as a hair in the trunk? Was she not a passenger in this car? Did she not go on errands with her mother? Could a hair not have fallen there because it was stuck to velcro on say.. a stroller? Or on a sleeping bag, or any bag? To me this is evidence of nothing, and that's the big problem with this case. Could it be a real clue? yes! Could it be just there by chance and mean nothing, absolutely! It does not indicate anything at all happened, in all reality.

For what it's worth I highly doubt people will think they can "get away" with killing their kids!! That's insanely extreme, IMO. Sick people will hurt other people regardless of it they can truly get away with it or not.

Lots of questions remain here, ones that will in all likelyhood never be answered.

#24 Sam

Sam

    No turning back now

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,036 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 05:47 PM

As far as a hair in the trunk? Was she not a passenger in this car? Did she not go on errands with her mother? Could a hair not have fallen there because it was stuck to velcro on say.. a stroller? Or on a sleeping bag, or any bag? To me this is evidence of nothing, and that's the big problem with this case. Could it be a real clue? yes! Could it be just there by chance and mean nothing, absolutely! It does not indicate anything at all happened, in all reality.


I thought they had evidence that the hair was post mortem. It had "root banding" which proved the hair was pulled off a dead body.

#25 Lina

Lina

    Habit Forming

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 745 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 06:03 PM

at the end of the day she had a very good lawyer that was able to put holes in all the evidence provided by the prosecution and was very good at distracting the jury with other things such as her dad abusing her etc etc.

#26 DivineMrsM

DivineMrsM

    Member since October 2005

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,592 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 07:03 PM

I want to cry for that little girl. How scared she must have been, when her mother, the one she loved and trusted the most in her life, stuffed her in the trunk so she could go party.

That poor sweet baby girl. I hope Casey dies, one way or another.

#27 Jen.Uh.Fur

Jen.Uh.Fur

    Hopelessly devoted

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,012 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 07:18 PM




As far as a hair in the trunk? Was she not a passenger in this car? Did she not go on errands with her mother? Could a hair not have fallen there because it was stuck to velcro on say.. a stroller? Or on a sleeping bag, or any bag? To me this is evidence of nothing, and that's the big problem with this case. Could it be a real clue? yes! Could it be just there by chance and mean nothing, absolutely! It does not indicate anything at all happened, in all reality.


I thought they had evidence that the hair was post mortem. It had "root banding" which proved the hair was pulled off a dead body.


I thought this too.

The poor girl, got killed by the person who was supposed to protect her, thrown out with the trash and now her mother gets to walk free. I give it a month before Casey gets killed or her *ss beat.

#28 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 07:51 PM

Oh, sorry! I must have missed that part of it? I followed a lot in the beginning when she first went missing, than it became WAYYY too much of a media circus, and I have just recently started to follow it again.

I guess even if it were post mortem, if she can prove someone else could have or did at times drive her car, than yet again that could be seen as a hole in the story. Especially if they are working under the pretense that she was "set up".

Either way, there would be no justice. A poor innocent life is lost. No way can this be made right again, doesn't matter if she were charged or not. Yes, she would be in jail (though I didn't think for a second that the death penalty would ever stick), it wouldn't make what was done to Caylee right, and it will never bring her back.

#29 Jill

Jill

    Plotting a takeover

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,944 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 07:56 PM

Just researched root banding real quick and I guess it's not always present in a post-mortem sample, and they have not rules out that the banding could be caused by something else other than decomp.. So, I'm guessing they can't really rely on the results because it cannot be 100% determined.

Here's a quick quote

"Lowe told jurors that one of the hairs that was submitted to her had “root- banding.” She went on to explain that root-banding is a term attributed to a phenomenon that scientists see when a hair is examined post-mortem, although the banding is not always present. Because root banding is a new science, other factors have not been ruled out as causing the banding."

ETA another quote from that site:

In an attempt to discredit the use of hair-banding, Baez brought up the situation of Michael Malone an FBI agent, whose testimony on hair analysis was instrumental in the conviction of Donald Eugene Gates for rape-murder. The Washington DC. Man was convicted on the charges based on testimony by Malone on hair analysis and identifying him as the perpetrator of the crime. The verdict was later overturned based on DNA testing.

Edited by ~Jill~, 05 July 2011 - 07:58 PM.


#30 kears

kears

    was #36 joined in Mar. 2003

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 503 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 08:39 PM

Really disturbing. I agree with Jill, they only had lots and lots of circumstantial evidence and the defense made a good case for reasonable doubt.

Sadly even if new evidence comes forward double jeaopardy would prevent them from prosecuting for those same crimes. I guess they could go for child endangerment or something like that?

#31 Jen K

Jen K

    Bronze Volunteer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,252 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 09:06 PM

Really disturbing. I agree with Jill, they only had lots and lots of circumstantial evidence and the defense made a good case for reasonable doubt.

Sadly even if new evidence comes forward double jeaopardy would prevent them from prosecuting for those same crimes. I guess they could go for child endangerment or something like that?

Could they go for manslaughter with double jeaopardy?

#32 Tired Mom

Tired Mom

    Joined September 2006

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,591 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 09:26 PM

This entire trial was about the cruel torture and death of her daughter. And she showed no emotion other than boredom, fear over her own fate, and aloofness. I can't wrap my head around it. How could any mother who loved their child look BORED when talking about the agony her child DIED in.

That sorry excuse of a human being gave the jury everything they needed to convict.

I really hope Jen's right and it's just a short matter of time until she gets her as$
beat. Now that I think about it, I hope she lives a long, long time, with lots of people who will act as an instrument of karma. That she has to spend the rest of her life looking over her shoulder, spending whats left of her life in fear, like Caylee felt when she died.

#33 DivineMrsM

DivineMrsM

    Member since October 2005

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,592 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 09:26 PM


Really disturbing. I agree with Jill, they only had lots and lots of circumstantial evidence and the defense made a good case for reasonable doubt.

Sadly even if new evidence comes forward double jeaopardy would prevent them from prosecuting for those same crimes. I guess they could go for child endangerment or something like that?

Could they go for manslaughter with double jeaopardy?



I don't think they can go for any of those charges cuz I think they charged her with all of those already and found her not guilty.

#34 Kris

Kris

    Plotting a takeover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,533 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 09:32 PM

This entire trial was about the cruel torture and death of her daughter. And she showed no emotion other than boredom, fear over her own fate, and aloofness. I can't wrap my head around it. How could any mother who loved their child look BORED when talking about the agony her child DIED in.


This really got to me and made me sure she did it.

#35 moosemom

moosemom

    Not going anywhere soon ! ! !

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 976 posts

Posted 05 July 2011 - 10:42 PM

She cannot be charged with the crime of killing Caylee as this would be considered Double Jeopardy. She will be sentenced for the lying part of the crime, but that is about all.

The prosecution put all their cards on the table and they lost. The prosecution's case was mostly circumstantial in that they had no cause of death, they only had expert testimony and expert testimony is usually science - which with science there is always another opinion. The defense threw up too many flags for the jurors not to convict within a shadow of a doubt. The defense lawyer was NOT a good lawyer in the terms of knowing the law, but he was a good ENOUGH lawyer to keep it in the jury's mind that there is reasonable doubt.

Our court system is founded on "the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty" or the Presumption of Innocence. That is why O.J. was found not guilty of killing his ex-wife and the waiter, the prosecution could not provide enough evidence to show that he did it.

While the legal courts can only do so much, the court of public opinion is quite different. I would be hard pressed to think her parents will welcome her back with open arms after the accusations that the Defense Attorney said about her Dad molesting her as a child. Than there is the fact that she will have to find employment, she would probably have to change her name ..... so while she is not going to be held accountable for her child's death, she is not "scott free" to roam the earth freely.