NBC: Jury has reached a verdict in Casey Anthony trial [NOT GUILTY]

[CrabR]

People may not like the decision but we got to support the decision and the Jurors.I do not think they a thorough job, but it is their decision not mine.

Unfortunately I can see the mentally challenged trying to do her harm. Look at the idiots protesting in front of the Anthony home, they seemed to be on the most part to be trailer trash

Jury #3 interview is interesting, she says the prosecution did not prove things certain things. Yet it was entered early on into evidence. In a 6 wk trial you have to take notes. Most left their notepads in the court when they went to deliberate.

In retrospect the prosecution should have made different charges. Problem with DA being a political job they have to charge what will get tehm the most votes

[aREDSKIN]

In retrospect the prosecution should have made different charges. Problem with DA being a political job they have to charge what will get tehm the most votes

If there is any truth to this statement then the system is whacked. In retrospect the prosecution should have charged her with something that they were POSITIVE they could convict her on given the EVIDENCE they had. Obviously, they over reached and IMO let a murderer go free.

[ixcuincle]

No one said she didn't do it just because she's not guilty. Nearly everyone thinks she did it.

The most important part is that the jury was level-headed and made an educated decision. They did not find enough proof of her murder to conclude that Casey did it.

What's making me angry are these people who insist Casey should be assassinated, or threaten jurors' lives. It's sad and pathetic when we let a case like this dominate our lives to that point, where we have to threaten and make death threats on people who are just doing their civic duty.

[rdsknbill]

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The stupid people are the ones who think that because a jury didn't see enough evidence to convict her, Casey Anthony is as pure as the driven snow.

Point to one person on this thread who has said that.

---------- Post added July-8th-2011 at 07:52 AM ----------

I think everyone knows Casey will not be long for this world; someone will kill her. I am not advocating that now but my gut tells me someone will do just that given the emotions over this case.

Because that happens all the time.

Can someone give me five examples of vigilante justice in this country over the last decade.

I still want to know who this avenging angel is going to be. What bon bon eating middle aged Nancy Grace fan is going to skip her manicure appointment, drive to Florida, and whack out Casey Anthony? Who is going to risk the death penalty because they are so very very angry?

[LeesburgSkinFan]

I'm rooting for breast cancer in her case.

[Rudechain]

Right, but the discussion we were having or the question I was asked is, what should the penalty be for lying or obstruction, such as Casey Anthony committed. Obviously, it was a hypothetical but that was the discussion we having.

Well the penalty for lying or obstruction in this case was 1 year for each count and a 1000 dollar fine. Not to mention she is being invoiced for the cost of the investigation, which I have heard approached half a million dollars.

In other states it might be higher or lower as each state sentences based on varying factors. It's my contention that the majority of the time, this penalty is more than just. In Casey's situation, that's all they could get her for so people are a bit sore and I do understand. ( I do think she had something to do with it, but there were errors on the part of law enforcement that may have led to time, animals and the elements to wash away the evidence)

---------- Post added July-8th-2011 at 09:12 AM ----------

I am sure that the 12 jurors did their due diligence and voted their conscience based on the evidence presented to them. I really have no beef with the jurors or the trial or the process. My main point through all of this is that "not guilty" does not necessarily mean innocent.

What I've been trying to do is to say "aside from the criminal trial end of this, what happened to Caylee Anthony?" It's as simple as that. Step back from the "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" standard of a criminal trial and look at it from the perspective of "a 2 year old girl died, WTF happened?" If you look at it from that perspective, all common sense points to Casey Anthony.

Sometimes people get away with murder. Sucks, but it happens. My frustration in this thread is not with the verdict, it's with posters who say "Welp, the jury said 'not guilty' so she must not have done it."

I agree that all common sense points to Casey, but they did not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

What happened to Caylee? Well we know she died. That's about it. We don't know how she died, we dont' know where she died, and the evidence was not able to exclude all others. That's the crux of the situation. The defense team was able to create doubt and we all know the results.

I have yet to hear anyone in here say that not guilty means that she did not do it and I have followed this thread. If someone did, please kindly point it out.

[Popeman38]

You know society has reached a new low when Jeff Ashton is having to defend the justice and jury system to Bill O'Reilly, who seems to repeat over and over that the burden to prove the child died some other way besides at her mothers hands lies with the defense. Ashton has to say the burden lies with the state like 5 times. Bill, STFU and learn from an expert.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/104272003...ylist_id=87485

[Rudechain]

You know society has reached a new low when Jeff Ashton is having to defend the justice and jury system to Bill O'Reilly, who seems to repeat over and over that the burden to prove the child died some other way besides at her mothers hands lies with the defense. Ashton has to say the burden lies with the state like 5 times. Bill, STFU and learn from an expert.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/104272003...ylist_id=87485

I thought Ashton explained it very well but it seems O'Reilly wanted him to admit that the accident theory was bogus but the state did not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sad but true.

[Popeman38]

I thought Ashton explained it very well but it seems O'Reilly wanted him to admit that the accident theory was bogus but the state did not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sad but true.

It is really sad when the prosecutor, who just lost the biggest case of his career, has to defend the jury process.

[Rudechain]

What's really sad is how many people don't actually realize how our justice system actually works. I heard Nancy Grace agree with a caller that the judge should not have accepted the juries verdict. Now Nancy is going for nothing more than shock value and it seems is gleefully riling the masses. ( and she practiced law)

Personally, I think the media and Nancy in particular have been irresponsible in the name of ratings. She had convicted Casey before the trial with media attention, which is why the jury had to come from Pinellas county.

However, this is a prime chance for people to actually learn how our justice system actually works. Sadly, nobody probably will.

[Popeman38]

What's really sad is how many people don't actually realize how our justice system actually works. I heard Nancy Grace agree with a caller that the judge should not have accepted the juries verdict. Now Nancy is going for nothing more than shock value and it seems is gleefully riling the masses. ( and she practiced law)

Personally, I think the media and Nancy in particular have been irresponsible in the name of ratings. She had convicted Casey before the trial with media attention, which is why the jury had to come from Pinellas county.

However, this is a prime chance for people to actually learn how our justice system actually works. Sadly, nobody probably will.

Please refer to that wretch as Nancy ****ing Grace. She should have to help cover the cost of the investigation. The entire TruTV and HLN coverage of this trial was an abomination. Only employing people that had convicted Casey in their minds, and giving them marching orders. Even when Ashton acted like a jackass, they were there professing his dominance. Anyone with any knowledge of the justice system should be offended with how this trial was covered.

[Rudechain]

The coverage was abysmal and in my mind very one sided. Personally, I think that's one of the primary reasons for the uproar. I have seen signs calling the jurors idiots. I don't think they are idiots, and the onus they were given was an weighty one at that. She and others convicted her long ago and the media coverage caused problems for both the prosecution and defense.

Responsible journalism, it's not Nancy ****** Grace.

[Popeman38]

The coverage was abysmal and in my mind very one sided. Personally, I think that's one of the primary reasons for the uproar. I have seen signs calling the jurors idiots. I don't think they are idiots, and the onus they were given was an weighty one at that. She and others convicted her long ago and the media coverage caused problems for both the prosecution and defense.

Responsible journalism, it's not Nancy ****** Grace.

On a positive note, this case has made me realize that while I am fiscally conservative (just to right of center) and socially moderate (just left of center), I am an extreme liberal when it comes to the justice system. Balanced with my extreme conservative views on the 2nd, and I am truly a middle of the road independent. This makes me happy.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Well the penalty for lying or obstruction in this case was 1 year for each count and a 1000 dollar fine. Not to mention she is being invoiced for the cost of the investigation, which I have heard approached half a million dollars.

In other states it might be higher or lower as each state sentences based on varying factors. It's my contention that the majority of the time, this penalty is more than just. In Casey's situation, that's all they could get her for so people are a bit sore and I do understand. ( I do think she had something to do with it, but there were errors on the part of law enforcement that may have led to time, animals and the elements to wash away the evidence)

---------- Post added July-8th-2011 at 09:12 AM ----------

Right, that was the point of the discussion. Typically, it probably is an adequate penalty but in cases or circumstances such as the one we saw with Anthony, it's clearly not sufficient. In those kinds of cases, perhaps a stronger penalty should be considered. That is exactly what was being discussed.