LOL at all the asshurt because she was found not guilty. Boo hoo. In all honesty I never thought she murdered her child. There was no evidence as to cause of death. Isn't it possible she died in another manner and was improperly disposed of in a panic? Isn't it possible that someone else drove the car besides Casey? Isn't it possible that any of the prosecutions witnesses lied or were mistaken in their testimony? Isn't it possible that the jury never bought into Nancy Grace's bullshit media bombardment of this mother? I really think you whiners need to look up just exactly what "reasonable doubt" actually means.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Isn't it possible she died in another manner and was improperly disposed of in a panic?
yes. very possible. And I am under the opinion that if you try and cover that up (which she did) then you are just as guilty as if you had purposely done it.
LOL at all the asshurt because she was found not guilty. Boo hoo. In all honesty I never thought she murdered her child. There was no evidence as to cause of death. Isn't it possible she died in another manner and was improperly disposed of in a panic? Isn't it possible that someone else drove the car besides Casey? Isn't it possible that any of the prosecutions witnesses lied or were mistaken in their testimony? Isn't it possible that the jury never bought into Nancy Grace's bullshit media bombardment of this mother? I really think you whiners need to look up just exactly what "reasonable doubt" actually means.
the prosecution went for the throat and missed. they were trying to get the first degree murder charge which would've let to the death penalty or a life sentence and those are the worst 2 sentences you can give to someone. so naturally that weighed heavily on the jurors minds. had the prosecution went for a lesser charge like second degree murder, third degree murder, or manslaughter they may have gotten a conviction. EDIT: yes i do know she was found not guilty on all those other charges too but the prosecution was mainly focused on first degree murder.
"That's another thing I love about metal, it's so fuckin' huge yet certain people don't even know it exists." - Rob Zombie
Isn't it possible she died in another manner and was improperly disposed of in a panic?
yes. very possible. And I am under the opinion that if you try and cover that up (which she did) then you are just as guilty as if you had purposely done it.
Guilty of a much different crime. Failure to report a death is a misdemeanor in most states. You and Nancy still don't get your desired result.
the prosecution went for the throat and missed. they were trying to get the first degree murder charge which would've let to the death penalty or a life sentence and those are the worst 2 sentences you can give to someone. so naturally that weighed heavily on the jurors minds. had the prosecution went for a lesser charge like second degree murder, third degree murder, or manslaughter they may have gotten a conviction. EDIT: yes i do know she was found not guilty on all those other charges too but the prosecution was mainly focused on first degree murder.
This. I think after prosecution went for the throat and failed the jury just said not guilty to everything else. Imo, she should have gotten manslaughter or something of the sort.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Isn't it possible she died in another manner and was improperly disposed of in a panic?
yes. very possible. And I am under the opinion that if you try and cover that up (which she did) then you are just as guilty as if you had purposely done it.
Guilty of a much different crime. Failure to report a death is a misdemeanor in most states. You and Nancy still don't get your desired result.
That isn't what I said. Regardless of what the laws are in this country now- I am stating that I believe the act of covering up a death should be punishable on the level of causing the death. I in no way support Nancy Grace and think she is a nasty bitch.
Knowing the evidence I know, if I was on that jury I would not have moved from a guilty verdict of manslaughter. That is how I roll. I don't care what the law is, I care what the law should be.
Another example for you - Put me on a jury where a dude is accused of possession of a pound of crack. He takes the 5th and makes no defense. The DA presents 10 expert witnesses, pictures, video, and finger prints on the crack as evidence. In that case I would not provide a guilty verdict. I believe drug possession is no crime, and I would not send someone to prison for something I dont consider a crime. I understand I will never be on a jury for believing this.
I dont know who how the baby dies or who was responsible or whether it was an accident or not. It could be she was using chloroform and did it by accident, or in the pool, or maybe she purposely did it. THe point is, noone knows how she dies, who killed her, when, why, or how. That is why she was found not guilty. Too many people in this country are found guilty with no evidence and alot of resonable doubt and sometimes its just not right. I cant tell you how many datelines or 48hrs I have seen where somebody is being released after serving 20years in prison for a crime they didnt commit. THe fact is whether you think she did it or not, there is no evidence to convict. I personally think she had something to do with it, whether accident or not, but our judicial system is not supposed to convict people on opinions, just evidence> thats why the jury isnt allowed to watch TV or read the news and is secluded from the public , so their minds arent altered by the media. I think SHane hit the nail on the head when he said if they just tried to nail her for manslaughter, they prolly could have built a solid case, she would have got 10-20 years and justice may have been served. But the prosecution basically went on a wild goose chase to try and get her the death penalty or life in prison and now she's going home tomorrow. Either way, it sucks about the little girl and nothing will bring her back. I just dont agree with locking people up because of opinions. THere just wasnt enough evidence. I mean cmon they didnt even have a motive, murder weapon, they dont even know how she died or if it was an accident. it's a shame cause someone killed her, but they just dont have proof. its not the defnse's job to prove her inoocent its the prosecutions job to prove her guilty, and they failed.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Did any of you follow the Scott Peterson trial? If not here is the summary....
The dudes wife went missing. The only evidence they had was that it looked like he made cement blocks (for allegedly sinking his wife in the ocean), and he used bleach to clean something (for allegedly cleaning up blood). That is all the evidence they had on him... By all accounts they lived a very story book happy life. They had ZERO DNA evidence, and nothing but circumstantial. He was convicted of 1st degree murder.
It seems to me that anyone who is glad casey anthony got off, should also be fuming that scott peterson is sitting on death row in CA. here is his trial if you are interested
Did any of you follow the Scott Peterson trial? If not here is the summary....
The dudes wife went missing. The only evidence they had was that it looked like he made cement blocks (for allegedly sinking his wife in the ocean), and he used bleach to clean something (for allegedly cleaning up blood). That is all the evidence they had on him... By all accounts they lived a very story book happy life. They had ZERO DNA evidence, and nothing but circumstantial. He was convicted of 1st degree murder.
It seems to me that anyone who is glad casey anthony got off, should also be fuming that scott peterson is sitting on death row in CA. here is his trial if you are interested
and i dont think one person said they were happy to see her get off or think she's 100% innocent. She was just found guilty on the charges they could prove, which was basically nothing.
Did any of you follow the Scott Peterson trial? If not here is the summary....
The dudes wife went missing. The only evidence they had was that it looked like he made cement blocks (for allegedly sinking his wife in the ocean), and he used bleach to clean something (for allegedly cleaning up blood). That is all the evidence they had on him... By all accounts they lived a very story book happy life. They had ZERO DNA evidence, and nothing but circumstantial. He was convicted of 1st degree murder.
It seems to me that anyone who is glad casey anthony got off, should also be fuming that scott peterson is sitting on death row in CA. here is his trial if you are interested
and i dont think one person said they were happy to see her get off or think she's 100% innocent.
This, all i have said is they could not prove to beyond a reasonable doubt that she did it. she could have or she could not have killed her kid. either way i'm sure she knows what really happened not that it matters now.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
didnt his brother say he helped him dispose of the body though? and also he had motive.
nope. he was caught with his brothers drivers license in SD because he was hiding from the media or possibly going to ditch the country. I followed this case closely, and as much as I wanted him convicted if he was guilty... I just felt the circumstantial evidence wasnt there.
The "motive" you speak of is he was having an affair. His gf didnt know about his wife, and vice versa. That isnt all that great of a motive.... lots of people cheat, but rarely does it lead to murder.
Comments
EDIT: yes i do know she was found not guilty on all those other charges too but the prosecution was mainly focused on first degree murder.
Knowing the evidence I know, if I was on that jury I would not have moved from a guilty verdict of manslaughter. That is how I roll. I don't care what the law is, I care what the law should be.
Another example for you - Put me on a jury where a dude is accused of possession of a pound of crack. He takes the 5th and makes no defense. The DA presents 10 expert witnesses, pictures, video, and finger prints on the crack as evidence. In that case I would not provide a guilty verdict. I believe drug possession is no crime, and I would not send someone to prison for something I dont consider a crime. I understand I will never be on a jury for believing this.
that whole to serve and protect thing is a myth btw
The dudes wife went missing. The only evidence they had was that it looked like he made cement blocks (for allegedly sinking his wife in the ocean), and he used bleach to clean something (for allegedly cleaning up blood). That is all the evidence they had on him... By all accounts they lived a very story book happy life. They had ZERO DNA evidence, and nothing but circumstantial. He was convicted of 1st degree murder.
It seems to me that anyone who is glad casey anthony got off, should also be fuming that scott peterson is sitting on death row in CA. here is his trial if you are interested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Peterson
The "motive" you speak of is he was having an affair. His gf didnt know about his wife, and vice versa. That isnt all that great of a motive.... lots of people cheat, but rarely does it lead to murder.