Casey Anthony Found Not Guilty Of Anything but lying to cops...

1. 61

   TMMasonposted 13 years ago

   I don't know if any of you have been watching this trial... but Jose Biaz got her off.
   
   She is going home...
   
   Wow!
   
   That is insane...WTF?...
   
   What do they think happened to that baby?
   
   I believe the judge is going to let her go home.
   
   No they are going to have a hearing for sentencing on Thursday...
   
   Wow!.........

   replyreport
   1. 89

      Stacie Lposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      going home? what home? do you think her parents and brother will welcome her back?
      she threw them under the bus and mom lied for her!

      replyreport
      1. 61

         TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I really think they will let her go to their house. I wouldn't if I were George... but, it is his daughter... so?...
         
         And they have a hearing for sentencing on the lying to cops on Thurs.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      Jenny Roseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I'm still in shock.  I never thought they'd convict her of murder 1 but someone killed that baby and all the circumstantial evidence led to Casey.  I overheard someone say "she'll have to live with this the rest of her life" and I would have laughed if it weren't so sad.  Casey danced away the first 30 days after her daughter was missing.  I think she'll dance away the rest of her life. May Cayley rest in peace....if she can.

      replyreport
   3. 60

      vgroom82posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I think she is is guilty and I don't know how the jurors could live w/themselves to let a murderer that killed her own child...... go free. lol.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         vgroom82posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         sorry my kids distracted me and it was funny. I didn't mean the LOL. b/c this is def not a funny topic. I am a mother so I don't know how any mother could kill their own child.

         replyreport
      2. 76

         Uninvited Writerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Don't blame the jurors, they had to decide on the evidence.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Doug Hughesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            As near as I can tell, (and I did not follow all the details), she was charged with murder I, but the evidence only proved she was a bad mother.
            
            I agree. The jury did their job.

            replyreport
   4. 70

      galleryofgraceposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      She can't go "home", she has to finish pulling time for check fraud!

      replyreport
2. 60

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   Never did see what the evidence was. Intuition tells me she is innocent.
   Is it lefties: innocent until proven guilty?
   Is it righties: guilty until proven innocent?

   replyreport
3. 40

   Greg Sageposted 13 years ago

   Not a fan of proof, I see.
   
   I am surprised they didn't find her disregard as a parent to be grounds for culpable negligence leading to her daughter's death, but it's an understatement to say that murder was not proven.
   
   
   Frankly, the level and sheer number of unprecidented expert witness testimonies allowed is shocking.  Time after time, the state presented entire classes of evidence never before used in a FL courtroom....
   
   
   ... yet they couldn't be bothered to send someone to verify basic things like pets buried nearby that would confound their witness testimony.
   
   This shows a blatant disregard on the state's part for uncovering the truth... while they held her for years and spent millions finding one unproven way after another to introduce expert witnesses.
   
   Does that sound like a strategy for a sound case?
   
   She may well be murderer.  I can't say and neither can anyone on here, but the prosecutions case was severely flawed, and they proved on several occasions that they were out to hang her... and not to determine whether or not she was actually guilty.
   
   Spending months trying to show she's a bad parent and a liar proved two things:
   
   1 She's a bad parent.
   
   2 She's a liar.

   replyreport
4. 65

   prettydarkhorseposted 13 years ago

   actually that is what I am guessing
   
   reasonable doubt

   replyreport
5. 61

   TMMasonposted 13 years ago

   Actually I do not believe it should have ever been brought as Murder 1, it was at most negligent homocide. So do not assume you know what I think. There should be no politics in the judicial system, none at all.
   
   I just cannot believe the Jury said not guilty for all counts except the lying to police. Lets face it, once you're in court, your pretty well screwed already.

   replyreport
   1. 86

      I am DB Cooperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed. The evidence just wasn't there for a 1st degree murder charge. I have little doubt that she was responsible for her daughter's death, but proving that she murdered her daughter was a difficult task, especially with Casey's parents willing to cover for her on various aspects of the case.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      rebekahELLEposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      So shocked... I think there is no doubt for those who followed the case from the beginning that she is guilty. There were so many lies, screw ups, cover ups, oops, surprise, surprise...
      another one walks away as a free woman, where is the justice for little Caylee? 
      
      She'll get less than 6 months for her lies, a year at the most.
      
      I just think of all the innocent people sitting in prison.. I guess we spend more money on the drug offenders, not the murderers.
      
      Just throw little Caylee in the woods and let animals and maggots eat her remains.. sic, sic, sic. It makes me sic..

      replyreport
6. 72

   livewithrichardposted 13 years ago

   Wow pretty much sums this up. I'm completely surprised by the verdict though the prosecutor pushed too hard trying to convince the jury that Casey killed her daughter because she wanted to be a party girl and not have the responsibility of raising a child. 
   
   If Casey lived alone with her daughter this might be acceptable but she lived with her parents and her parents were actually raising that baby girl.  Casey partied whenever she wanted to because she had her parents there for her daughter.  I just don't think that was a good enough motive for murder.
   
   Giving false testimony to the police will probably get her 6 months with time served she'll probably go home immediately.

   replyreport
7. 65

   prettydarkhorseposted 13 years ago

   the prosecution has no solid evidence and you are left with more questions than answer. It doesn't mean that when you are a liar, you are a killer.
   
   my gut tells me she is innocent..

   replyreport
8. 79

   mega1posted 13 years ago

   We'll always wonder what really happened.  This girl, guilty or not, is pretty much convicted anyway, whether she served more time or not - her life is completely over. Unless she finds a way to live her life in some serving way, living for others, giving herself for others, I doubt if she will last long.  I hope she has good spiritual counseling.  The world has a tendency to produce the karma that is needed, and so if she was guilty, she will be punished. 
   
   The thing that really gets to me is how a trial like this(thinking of O.J. now) affects the whole world and in this case we will never have closure on the story.  It seems like the media's vulturizing of the whole process, feeding on it, is really a shame and there should be better control of that.

   replyreport
9. 59

   optimus grimlockposted 13 years ago

   wow you guys didnt watch this much it was sooo obvious that she did it. For her to get next to nothing is a slap in the face to our justice system!

   replyreport
10. 89

    Stacie Lposted 13 years ago

    the jury must have been tired or believed George was some monster...I think the prosecution should have made a lesser charge.

    replyreport
11. 79

    mega1posted 13 years ago

    So based on the info we do have, what do you think really happened to that little girl?  It just can't end with this verdict, surely there is some explanation - it is crazy making

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Onusonusposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I guess nobody killed the girl, she committed suicide, to the behest of her loving mother, who lied to the police, duct taped her own face, and threw her own dead body in the trunk of the car, and then accidentally fell into a swamp.

       replyreport
12. 61

    TMMasonposted 13 years ago

    I believe her mother, Casey, about leaving her with Zanny the nanny... but Zanny the nanny is Zanax... not a cuban woman. I think she was mickeying the babi girl with that or the cloroform when she couldn't get the zanax, and one day a lil too much, and oops! Panicking she discarded the body, took a few days driving around to decide to do it, but it had to be done. And went on about it...

    replyreport
    1. 72

       livewithrichardposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Or it could be as the defense portrayed it.  The 2 year old girl was able to sneak into the backyard, climb into the pool and she drowned.  Terrified and panicked once discovered, the adults, having watched too much CSI, schemed to cover up the accidental drowning by fabricating an abduction and then told lie upon lie once the baby girls body was found. 
       
       Anyone find this reminiscent of 1994 Susan Smith Case where the "mother" let her car roll into a lake and drown her 2 young children and then claim they were abducted by a black male?

       replyreport
       1. 79

          mega1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          there's probably a psychological reason for the similarity - maybe some mothers cannot believe that they would do such terrible things or be so negligent, when something bad happens through their own fault they truly believe their own stories they make up to protect them from knowing how desperate they were - in Casey's case it seems like the classic "spoiled little princess" who cannot deal with having her own child, having never prepared for motherhood.  It all started long before she was born.

          replyreport
13. 79

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    The jury needs to see enough proof to meet the standard of exceeding reasonable doubt.  Apparently they didn't. A jury erring on the side of not guilty doesn't cause me as much distress as a community that thinks the juries job is to agree with the majority or the media or them. What next, picketing a juror's house?

    replyreport
    1. 61

       TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I agree wholly, if you don't see it, you let them go.

       replyreport
       1. 79

          psycheskinnerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          There is a standard set in law and explained to them by a judge.  If it is too high you get it changed.  You don't blame the juror for doing exactly what they are meant to do. You certainly don't look at (as I have seen suggested elsewhere online) violently retaliating against the jury. Mob mentality is scary.

          replyreport
          1. 61

             TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             I am waiting to see the idiots group up at the grand-parents house anytime now.... I saw them idiots at the Court House everyday beating each other up like a bunch of animals.
             
             Almost proved evolution.... almost.

             replyreport
14. 40

    Greg Sageposted 13 years ago

    My next door neighbor is a bad mother.  I've seen her prove this many times.
    
    +
    
    She is also a liar.  She lied has lied to me on multiple occasions.
    
    +
    
    Caylee Anthony is dead.
    
    =
    
    My neighbor is guilty of murder.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Scary stuff.  I'm in the wrong business.  I should be selling pitchforks and torches.
    
    This is all happening just up the road from me, btw.  They live less than a mile away.

    replyreport
    1. 79

       mega1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

       It feels like they're only a mile away from here too, tho in reality its thousands of miles away - the tv brings it all into the home and we live with it.  I am serious when I say that I hope Casey will have the good fortune to have great spiritual counseling to help her live a good life from now on - but I still am wanting to know, really know, what happened.
       
       It was negligence at the very least.  so very sad

       replyreport
15. 79

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    That fight to get into the gallery was certainly a low point.  Making the Mom some kind of celebrity with a book deal would be even lower... but I can see it coming.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Yes I believe your right, Psyche. She will be rich for a while from interviews and such... sad. And then agian, as Richard said, it could have been an accidental drowning.

       replyreport
       1. 76

          Uninvited Writerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I think today is a banner day TM,  I actually agree with you about something.

          replyreport
          1. 61

             TMMasonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             In that case I don't mean a thing I said.

             replyreport
    2. 72

       livewithrichardposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I think there was a movie deal in the works with Kristen Stewart portraying Casey.  I doubt that will happen but there are those out there that are trying to bank on this tragic event as with all tragic events.

       replyreport
       1. 79

          mega1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          vultures!

          replyreport
16. 59

    MelissaBarrettposted 13 years ago

    I have a 17 year old son, he is currently summering for a couple weeks at my parents.  I call at least twice a day to check in on him.  I also have a two year old girl.  I would be on the phone with the police in hysterics if I didn't know where she was for 30 minutes, let alone 30 days.  I am far from being the worlds best mother.
    
    Emotion tells me she should fry, even if she didn't actually kill her child.  If you fail to protect your kids you are-and I mean this quite sincerely- unworthy of continuing to breath air. 
    
    At the very least, the court system should have ripped her uterus out.  Just so she can never breed again. 
    
    ~emotional rant over~

    replyreport
17. 60

    readytoescapeposted 13 years ago

    Having watched the Trial almost in its entirety, the simple fact is the Prosecution did not prove anything other than the Baby was dead.
    
    There was not one shred of evidence presented that the mother, or anyone else for that matter, killed that child. The Jury could do nothing but acquit.
    
    Personally, I think she did it and is guilty, but the Prosecution let her get away with murder. I also believe the family knows alot more than they are telling, especially the Grandfather.

    replyreport
18. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 13 years ago

    Nancy Grace shot herself in the foot on this one, as usual.

    replyreport
19. 82

    2besureposted 13 years ago

    No one who has ever had a child that they loved would allow them to be missing for 31 day and never report it.  I know she is guilty of causing the death of her child.  Because they could not prove it, does not mean she is innocent.  It she did it, Karma will come into play, and she will not escape true justice.

    replyreport
20. 65

    Ralph Deedsposted 13 years ago

    My impression is that Casey doesn't have all her marbles.

    replyreport
    1. 79

       mega1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

       absolutely - would like to see a good psychological write-up on her and her experiences, i.q. etc.  it seems obvious to me too that lots of things may have been wrong in her life, but also she may not have been dealt a full deck.

       replyreport
       1. 40

          Greg Sageposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, well, that's probably an understatement.
          
          I wonder what any of us and our families would look like under that kind of microscope, though.
          
          Not half that bad I hope, but still not as pretty as we like to think.

          replyreport
21. 40

    Greg Sageposted 13 years ago

    I've done my best to steer clear of the case... which is pretty hard to do living here, but it really is amazing to me....
    
    Dogs are used to FIND evidence. 
    
    If a dog was used to find drugs, and the dog indicated that he thought he smelled drugs, that is universally understood NOT to be proof of drugs, but rather "probable cause" to allow further search in the hopes of finding ACTUAL EVIDENCE.
    
    In a series of completely unprecedented legal maneuvers, the prosecution actually time and time again tried to equate the dogs' FAILURE to find evidence as admissible PROOF.  Their string of "expert witnesses" were tailored to give this limbo-stick level of "proof" the same perceived credibility as a DNA test.
    
    ... mind you, they FAILED at their assigned task of finding EVIDENCE.
    
    The fact that this was even ALLOWED in a courtroom is troubling.
    
    If the state can take YEARS from someone's life and spend millions of dollars FABRICATING entirely new ways to spin their INABILITY to find evidence, what's to stop them from doing the same to any of us?
    
    Frankly, the fact that they would try to take what is at best probable cause for an actual search to occur, and pass it off to the jury as proof beyond a reasonable doubt shows utter contempt for the jury's intelligence.
    
    The state will be lucky if she doesn't sue for millions.

    replyreport
22. 60

    logic,commonsenseposted 13 years ago

    Just a female OJ!

    replyreport