Casey Anthony Got Off

[Sea Ray]

I don't understand those that say there was not enough evidence to convict her. I agree the evidence was shaky to convict her of 1st degree murder but there was all kinds of evidence that she was responsible for her daughter's death.

1) FBI expert testified that there was chloroform in her trunk
2) Many folks including her Mom testified that her trunk smelled like a dead body
3) Her behavior. She acted as if she had something to cover up
4) Lots of searches on her computer for chloroform
5) She was the last person to see her daughter alive
6) Duct tape was indicative of a crime, not an accidental drowning

The early returns are showing that the jury didn't understand the evidence and that's very troubling

At the very least this should have been a manslaughter

[traderumor]

I don't think you have to go any further than the 31 days to report and then the lies when she became the suspect really tell it all. The rest was just window dressing. The foreman must have been a very persuasive person to pull off the sales job to get a unanimous verdict.

[Sea Ray]

I don't think you have to go any further than the 31 days to report and then the lies when she became the suspect really tell it all. The rest was just window dressing. The foreman must have been a very persuasive person to pull off the sales job to get a unanimous verdict.

I think his/her sales pitch was "It's the 4th of July weekend. What are we doing here?"

[Tony Cloninger]

Said it exactly right. Pathetic work by the jury to let someone off beacuse she might be put to death.

[fearofpopvol1]

Most of you have already brought up points as to why this woman got off, so there is no sense in belaboring any of that.

I didn't really follow this case. I don't understand why this case got so much national attention, as if it was something special or unique, when similar situations like this (sadly) happen daily in this country? 200 mothers a year kill their children in this country. Does the media just pick one and decide they'll make this one the new "reality show" to entertain?

The woman murdered her daughter. The facial expression on her face as they were getting ready to read the verdicts showed this woman herself felt she was going down.

They convicted her of lying. But what did she lie about? That's the key as far as I'm concerned. The lies were all about the whereabouts of her daughter. Besides the glaring fact her daughter was missing for almost a month and she didn't even report it , but was out partying, is pretty damning evidence IMO. How could any mother do that?

One of the problems I have with our legal system is that you have to prove guilt without a shadow of a doubt to get a conviction. And all the defense has to do is inject "theories" into the minds of those jurors to feed reasonable doubt. Defense attorneys argued that the little girl accidentally drowned in the family swimming pool, and that Anthony panicked and concealed the death because of the traumatic effects of sexual abuse by her father. Now the judge rejected that because they presented NO EVIDENCE of that. But again, all the defense is trying to do is inject anything that can promote doubt.

I think the prosecution presented enough evidence, even circumstantial, to get a conviction.

IMO, this jury screwed up, and this woman got away with murder.

So what's next for her? A book and movies deal? Disgusting.

This is the part that really gets me. Anyone could argue for or against her being a murderer. However, there is no doubt that she was an awful mother who repeatedly lied and more than likely played a part in her murder. The fact that she, as well as her defense team, the jurors and all of the media are likely to profit from the death of a little girl (the media already has) makes me incredibly sick and sad.

[LoganBuck]

This is the part that really gets me. Anyone could argue for or against her being a murderer. However, there is no doubt that she was an awful mother who repeatedly lied and more than likely played a part in her murder. The fact that she, as well as her defense team, the jurors and all of the media are likely to profit from the death of a little girl (the media already has) makes me incredibly sick and sad.

If I heard correctly she was tagged with the cost of the prosecution, investigation, and the court costs. Any money from media deals will go to the state. An estimate I heard for this case was around $3 Million.

[Sea Ray]

Does anyone here agree with Geraldo Rivera that she was a good mother?

Geraldo Rivera had the nerve to claim Casey Anthony is/was a good mother.

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/20...a-good-mother/

Where does he get off saying these things?

[Sea Ray]

If I heard correctly she was tagged with the cost of the prosecution, investigation, and the court costs. Any money from media deals will go to the state. An estimate I heard for this case was around $3 Million.

Geraldo says the plan is for her to declare bankruptcy to get out from having to pay these judgements and then years later make her book/movie deals. Let's hope it doesn't work out that way. She really ought to finish high school first...

[Mutaman]

[QUOTE=Sea Ray;2433946
Where does he get off saying these things?[/QUOTE]

From what I understand, witnesses testified to this fact at trial.

[Mutaman]

I didn't really follow this case.

The woman murdered her daughter. The facial expression on her face as they were getting ready to read the verdicts showed this woman herself felt she was going down.

I think the prosecution presented enough evidence, even circumstantial, to get a conviction.

This seems like a typical reaction and I don't get it. If you din't really follow the case , much less be present in the courtroom to hear the testimoney and the cross examinations, or hear the charges from the judge, how can you flately say that the prosecution presented enough evidence and that the woman murdered her daughter? Because of your interpretation of the facial expressions on the woman's face?

[fearofpopvol1]

From what I understand, witnesses testified to this fact at trial.

They may have, but I think the point that's being made is what good mother doesn't report her child missing for 31 days? And partying and having a good time while the child is allegedly missing?

[Mutaman]

They may have, but I think the point that's being made is what good mother doesn't report her child missing for 31 days? And partying and having a good time while the child is allegedly missing?

Obviously a good mother doesn't. But Geraldo made it clear that he was stating that the evidence showed she was a good mother prior to the child's disappearance. The woman is obviously suffering from serous emotional problems, but you do not convict her of a capital crime solely on the above facts. Particularly when it was unclear how the child died.

[fearofpopvol1]

Obviously a good mother doesn't. But Geraldo made it clear that he was stating that the evidence showed she was a good mother prior to the child's disappearance. The woman is obviously suffering from serous emotional problems, but you do not convict her of a capital crime solely on the above facts. Particularly when it was unclear how the child died.

For the record, I never said she should have been convicted. I simply don't know all the facts and didn't follow everything in the case. I just think you could make a pretty compelling case to say that she was not a good mother, regardless of what the witnesses testified for pre-disappearance.

[Mutaman]

For the record, I never said she should have been convicted. I simply don't know all the facts and didn't follow everything in the case. I just think you could make a pretty compelling case to say that she was not a good mother, regardless of what the witnesses testified for pre-disappearance.

Geraldo made a good point that I agree with based on my experiences in the miserable family court arena: there were no signs of neglect or abuse prior to the child's disappearnce- no cigarette burns, no marks or signs of beatings, no complaints to child wellfare. In fact all the evidence was to the opposite effect. Moreover, if Anthony wanted to kill her daughter, why not just smother her with a pillow when she was sleeping? Why go through all this with cloroform and duct tape? Too many questions, too many issues. I wasn't in the courtroom. I won't criticise the jury.

[fearofpopvol1]

Geraldo made a good point that I agree with based on my experiences in the miserable family court arena: there were no signs of neglect or abuse prior to the child's disappearnce- no cigarette burns, no marks or signs of beatings, no complaints to child wellfare. In fact all the evidence was to the opposite effect. Moreover, if Anthony wanted to kill her daughter, why not just smother her with a pillow when she was sleeping? Why go through all this with cloroform and duct tape? Too many questions, too many issues. I wasn't in the courtroom. I won't criticise the jury.

All it takes is 1 incident to diminish everything. No parent is perfect and all parents make mistakes, but when you're talking about a parent not reporting their child missing for 31 days, that to me is beyond comprehension. Any "good" parenting in the past goes out the window when you make a poor decision like that in my book.