A mother and child.
The verdict of the Casey Anthony's trial for killing her daughter Caylee, leaves much to be desired. It has caused a tumultuous public backlash, and has brought back memories of the O.J. Simpson murder trial.
However, in Casey Anthony's case, there was no "murder" or any proof of it. There was a host of evidence that overwhelmed the court and caused the judge, Belvin Perry, to interrupt at certain unscheduled interludes, to bring some semblance of decorum to the proceedings. That was his job, and he handled it perfectly well.
He, Judge Belvin Perry, called the attorneys in the case to the bench, at least three or four times, to admonish them; and though, that scenario was not unusual, they gave the people in the courtroom, and particularly the Jurors, a sinister impression for them to speculate if a "game" of superiority was going on between the defense team and the prosecution.
For example, Casey's lawyer, Jose Baez, thought he was being ridiculed enough to make him call the court's attention to the behavior of one of the prosecution lawyers. That made the judge to interject the proceedings with the words "Gentlemen, gentlemen.....," and asked the attorneys to approach the bench, for a much needed consultation, from time to time, to make the case (to) run smoothly.
Meanwhile, the media were feeding on the drama taking place, thinking that the more evidence being heaped on Casey Anthony made her look like a killer; which was, to their dismay later on, a foolish assumption.
While the media foray was going on, lawyer Jose Baez was waiting his turn to refute all those charges that were being brought to bear on his client.
He was able to indicate that Caylee Anthony's death was not a killing or murder, but a pure accident that could occur to any child who happened to be playing around a swimming pool without anyone paying a much closer attention to him or her. There was no adult supervision; and in this particular case, a parental one.
Therefore, when the media frenzy pointed to Caylee's mother as a criminal, and deliberately making her child to die, the majority of the jurors were having different thoughts. She (Casey) was still a suspect and not a murderer yet, "until proven guilty." They (jurors) were not confused, for they had noticed that Casey Anthony was being victimized by the prosecution, through sheer lack of evidence, most of which was circumstantial.
"What is the cause of death?" "Where is the reason to compel a loving mother to act that way?" "Was she capable of such a fiendish act?" Those were some of the questions that members of the jury were asking themselves.
The prosecution had lavished itself with the idea that public opinion was on its side; and that Casey Anthony would be convicted of the "crime" that they, the prosecutors, had said all along that she had committed. That was jumping to the wrong conclusion, if there ever was one.
So, when the verdict came out it (prosecution) was shocked. It was not what its lawyers expected. A person was "innocent until proven guilty" was the farthest thing from their minds. They had forgotten that in the United States legal system, the accused was always innocent until there was ample proof to pass a guilty verdict on him or her, and not the other way around (as the French did.).
Nevertheless, as Jose Baez said after the verdict, "there are no winners in this case,"; except that a young child, Caylee Anthony, has lost her life, and for what, that was anybody's guess. That should leave a sour taste in the mouths of all concerned; and that should include the general public, of course.