Casey Anthony Trial

[kerosene]

I was wondering that too, Nirvana. Where's the dad? Do they even know who Dad is? Yeah, who the hell knows.

The whole thing is a big show. I am surprised she wasn't even convicted of child abuse. I thought there was enough evidence to support even that. But like so many people mentioned already, the jury gets limited information.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by glatt

they don't want the jury to have all the written testimony in front of them
because they could wind up getting bogged down on the important issues of the case.

FTFY

[Sundae]

Shawnee - yes.
So did the police.

The trial was awful enough for her parents, without this shit.
All I can hope is that this helps curtail some of the dirty practices of the red-tops.

There is a big campaign to boycott the News of the World.
Ford have already withdrawn as an advertiser and more will follow.
Although a part of me thinks moral outrage is ironic if you take this gutter-wipe seriously - they try to stir it up every week.

And this comes on the back of many other "scandals". All of which were originally denied and then settled out of court. And yet this time we're asked to believe them - no-one anywhere ever knew about this guv'nor! But the Private Detective who did it is already in prison so let's just all shush up about it, right?

No. You behave despicably, you might get away with it. You fulminate about other people breaking laws, you might just escape hypocrisy claims. You mess with a case about a schoolgirl, abducted and murdered on her way home from school with a huge hunt on for her body for months? Sorry chaps - there's going to have to be a cull.

[Clodfobble]

Okay, but that's not reasonable in this day and age, IMHO. We don't torture confessions out of people anymore--and if you want to point to occasional police abuses to say we do, then I'd say obviously pleading the 5th didn't help them in those cases. It's an out-dated amendment.

[Happy Monkey]

All of the amendments were written with 18th century issues in mind, and have to be interpreted by each generation with regard to the issues of the day.

The 5th was relevant up through McCarthyism, at the very least, and I don't think that future witch hunts are out of the question - there is an effort to rehabilitate McCarthy's reputation. Just because McCarthy often managed to work around, and sometimes ignored the 5th doesn't mean its worthless.

We don't torture confessions Spanish-Inquisition-style anymore, but police routinely go as far as they can under the 5th amendment, so I certainly wouldn't want to make "as far as they can" to be further.

"Pleading the fifth" is just the "right to remain silent" when actually in court, rather than during police interrogation.

Also, would we really want to open every defendant to perjury charges if the jury doesn't believe their alibi? From wikipedia again:

The Supreme Court has held that "a witness may have a reasonable fear of prosecution and yet be innocent of any wrongdoing. The privilege serves to protect the innocent who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances."

[infinite monkey]

Hmmm, I think they made a decision based NOT on emotion. Emotional opinion is SHE WAS GUILTY AND SHOULD BE HANGED. Just look around at the unwashed masses, via twitter or facebook or in the streets or at the bar...legal experts, all.

The real issue is the prosecution went too far in charges pursued without any real evidence to back it up. Hearsay is not evidence. They had very, very, little to offer.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, remember. They didn't do their job, if she was, in fact, guilty.

ps JUST LIKE OJ JUST LIKE OJ. Hardly just like OJ. What a silly already overused comparison.

I read a repost on CNN of twitter comments (because I don't EVEN get the whole twitter thing, what's with the 'at' sign or the pound sign or whatever sign that precedes 'tweets'? But I digress.) It was about our justice system being based on "it's better to let a guilty person go free than to convict an innocent person." This is why the prosecutors need to do a good job and NOT rely on the emotional opinions of the masses, thinking the jury can't rise above emotional opinion.

[Nirvana]

Doesn't anyone else wonder who the father of this child was and think maybe it was Dad/grandpa? And maybe they covered it up because when she died they knew they would be found out to be having an incestuous relationship because of the testing that could be done during an autopsy??

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Nirvana

Doesn't anyone else wonder who the father of this child was and think maybe it was Dad/grandpa? And maybe they covered it up because when she died they knew they would be found out to be having an incestuous relationship because of the testing that could be done during an autopsy??

DNA testing was done and both George (dad) and Lee (brother) were excluded as possible fathers.

Wouldn't that be a heck of a Maury show ...

HLN was talking about whether or not the biological father, if ever identified, could pursue a wrongful death civil suit against Casey. Heck, even Casey may not know who he is.

She has already been served by Zenaida Gonzalez' attorney for defamation of character.

My prediction: Casey Anthony will be dead within two years, either suicide or drug overdose. Is it too late to add her to my celebrity death pool?

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

ps JUST LIKE OJ JUST LIKE OJ. Hardly just like OJ. What a silly already overused comparison.

Bullshit. You are so high on drugs. It was EXACTLY like OJ.

OJ: Running back for the Buffalo Bills, portrayed a navy SEAL, African American

CA: Running back for the Buffalo Bills, portrayed a navy SEAL, African American

What more evidence do you need? Next, you're gonna start in on the whole six million lies thing, aren't you?

[Spexxvet]

If the trash bag don't fit (over Casey's head), you must acquit

[BigV]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

Hmmm, I think they made a decision based NOT on emotion. Emotional opinion is SHE WAS GUILTY AND SHOULD BE HANGED. Just look around at the unwashed masses, via twitter or facebook or in the streets or at the bar...legal experts, all.

The real issue is the prosecution went too far in charges pursued without any real evidence to back it up. Hearsay is not evidence. They had very, very, little to offer.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, remember. They didn't do their job, if she was, in fact, guilty.

ps JUST LIKE OJ JUST LIKE OJ. Hardly just like OJ. What a silly already overused comparison.

I read a repost on CNN of twitter comments (because I don't EVEN get the whole twitter thing, what's with the 'at' sign or the pound sign or whatever sign that precedes 'tweets'? But I digress.) It was about our justice system being based on "it's better to let a guilty person go free than to convict an innocent person." This is why the prosecutors need to do a good job and NOT rely on the emotional opinions of the masses, thinking the jury can't rise above emotional opinion.

tldr

[infinite monkey]

Well I wonder NOW!

Eeeeks. Interesting theory.

[TheMercenary]

I think she may have to go into some type of witness protection program of security, they have already stationed extra cops outside of her house.

[infinite monkey]

Thanks foot3. I guffawed.

[ZenGum]

From FailBlog:




Ooowwwwwwch.