Justice for Casey Anthony?

Strong Opinions


If you’ve followed the Casey Anthony story, you’re sure to have an opinion. Any mother charged with the murder of her child will cause strong emotions in the public. And many will be holding their breath, waiting for the verdict.

It doesn’t matter whether you believe Casey Anthony is guilty or innocent, the requirement is that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt her guilt or else she has to be found not guilty. That was basically the task set before the jury as they went into deliberations. Ten hours later, they came back with the verdict: not guilty.


Reasonable Doubt

I’ve already heard a lot of opinions from people in the few short hours since the verdict was announced. Most are outraged. They were convinced that she was guilty and should’ve been punished. It’s a good thing that the court of public opinion doesn’t get to serve the punishment.

I agree that the situation is horrible. Any death of a child will cause strong feelings in a society. It’s just not right that something like that should happen. And Casey has not been the most pitiable of defendants. But we do have to remember the laws that this country was founded upon and that they are still in effect hundreds of years later. Because they work. Not all of the time and not perfectly. But they do work.

Jurys are admonished to find the defendant guilty only if the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt as part of their instructions prior to deliberation. The use of the term “reasonable doubt” is in place to prevent the prisons from being filled with innocent people who looked like a criminal or because they didn’t show remorse when they should have. Reasonable doubt isn’t the same thing as absolute certainty. No one can be absolutely certain of what another person has done, but instead it implies that the doubt must be based upon reason and common sense. Doubt such that a reasonable person would hesitate to act upon it. That is what the jury in the Anthony case has done. They viewed the evidence and testimony and decided that there was a reasonable doubt that she had committed the crime she was accused of. Does that mean she’s innocent? No. It just means that there was a reasonable doubt that she was guilty. And the jury gave the only verdict they could.


Whether you have an opinion on the case or not, it must be acknowledged that the court system is in place to protect all of its law-abiding citizens. Does it fail? Of course, because it’s run by fallible human beings. But most people would say it’s better than many other choices, including the vigilante justice of prior times. Justice isn’t perfect but it’s fair.


More by this Author


Comments 8 comments

vgroom82 profile image

vgroom82 5 years ago from USA

Wow. Well, if she really DID murder her own child (which I think; just as many others do), I hope her daughter haunts her for the rest of her life. I hope she feels remorse and guilt and people will make her life miserable because she gave everyone REASON/S to believe she was/is guilty of murdering her own child. As a mother, I don't know how she could live with herself knowing she killed her own child.


jm72writes profile image

jm72writes 5 years ago from Missouri Author

I agree that I can't imagine living with herself if she is guilty. And my opinion is to agree with what the majority feels as far as her guilt. My article was more about the justice system and what the jury's job was as well as the prosecutor's.


vgroom82 profile image

vgroom82 5 years ago from USA

I don't know how the Jurors could live with themselves to basically let her get away with murdering her own child. They should get haunted for the rest of their lives as well as Casey Anthony.


meteetse profile image

meteetse 5 years ago from Foxboro ma.

If I were a juror in this trial. We would be still deliberating. Jurors are praying Casey doesn't murder somebody else.


jm72writes profile image

jm72writes 5 years ago from Missouri Author

I couldn't believe they came back with a verdict after only the second day for a murder charge. I was very disappointed that they didn't spend more time deliberating. But that is just my opinion.


meteetse profile image

meteetse 5 years ago from Foxboro ma.

I really believe the prosecutor's proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case I saw no reason that Casey did not accidently kill her little girl, and overwhelming evidence she was the only one that could have. Accidental or not its murder all the same. The jurors just misinterpret the letter of the law. They jurors wanted the i's dotted and the t's crossed. If you woke one morning too find puddles on your driveway and your lawn was soaked with water. You would come to the conclusion that it had rained even though you didn't actually see it rain. Thats commonsense talking, something the jurors lost on their trip down the rabbit hole.


jm72writes profile image

jm72writes 5 years ago from Missouri Author

Your example fits perfectly with what I believe is the true definition of reasonable doubt. Jurors must use reason and common sense in their verdict. The unfortunate problem is that either they don't understand the meaning of reasonable doubt or that their definition of common sense is different. Any system will be flawed when left to interpretation by people. I think that is what has happened by using reasonable doubt to decide on a verdict. I believe they follow their interpretation as honestly as they can but they let guilty people go free and innocent people go to prison. The question then becomes "Is there a better system?"


h_spi 5 years ago

However, reasonable doubt does not mean NO doubt. The first juror to speak publicly even stated herself she felt Casey was guilty. She just felt it was an accident. Well, why then did they let her slide on the neglect of a child charges. Case in point, Casey was the last "adult", and I use the term lightly, to see little Caylee alive. Circumstantial evidence has been written off in the country of CSI watchers, as good evidence. You see, most murders take place under the cover of darkness. And, most murders font admit to their crime. Especially not if you are raised to be a narcasist, with a terrible lying problem. I guess we are only promised a jury of our peers. Not a jury of rational, smart people able to make deductions based on curcumstantial evidence.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working