I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
".......they proved: she knew the child was missing for over a month yet never bothered to contact the police; they proved that she lied to her parents telling them that the child was with a nanny or visiting somewhere or so many other reasons that kept them from seeing the girl; they proved that the little girl was found with duct tape over her mouth, over her nose and a third piece covering those; they proved that during the month she was missing that Casey went out partying every night; they proved she lied to police when they first questioned her, telling them she worked for universal when she did not; they proved she lied to the police when she claimed a nanny had he girl, when no such nanny existed....."
Of all the things you listed, not one of them proves that she actualy killed her daughter. They might make it sem like that, and they may fit some theory of the murder, but that's all. There is no prove in any of those things other than she isa liar,an unfit mother and a really screwed -up person.
not in and of themselves, but when taken as a whole, they add up. Just as if you find an iron in the ground, it does not make it the corner, and that it is the exact distance as record from a known corner does not make it the corner, and that it is the exact angle as between two known corners does not make it the corner, and that all property owners have recognized it as the corner does not by itself make it the corner. But if you take them all as the sum, then they suddenly elevate the corner beyond reasonable doubt and you can say "This is the corner"
We use a preponderance of the evidence standard which is different.
In this case the preponderance was enough that there should have been no reasonable doubt. Especially when the defense offered the "she drowned and we faked her murder" defense.
I think our system is broken...
Unfortunately, no. The dumping of her body was a part and parcel of the crime that she already got away with. they can not come back with additional charges from the same crime.
I should have said land surveyors should use a preponderance of the evidence standard which applies to civil cases. The prosecution in criminal cases have to meet a higher standard, beyond a reasonable doubt:
reasonable doubt. The doubt that prevents one from being firmly convinced of a defendant's guilt, or the belief that there is a real possibility that a defendant is not guilty. * "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard used by a jury to determine whether a criminal defendant is guilty. See Model Penal Code § 1.12. In deciding whether a guilt has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury must begin with the presumption that the defendant is innocent.
presumption. A legal inference or assumption that a fact exists, based on the known or proven existence of some other fact or group of facts. * Most presumptions are rules of evidence calling for a certain result in a given case unless the adversely affected party overcomes it with other evidence. A presumption shifts the burden of production or persuasion to the opposing party, who can then attempt to overcome the presumption.
-Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Edition.
I think our system is broken...
I would not say it is unfortunate because the prohibition against a second trial is a basic part of our constitutional rights.
I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
> No, she got off because her lawyers managed to get some schmucks to feel sorry for her.
Do we need any further evidence the perfect death penalty is too great a power to be wielded by imperfect people?
I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
I never said I believe in the death penalty, BABS. I prefer her to rot in a jail cell the rest of her life. Preferably one with no AC.
I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
It's called a "circumstantial evidence" case. There’s no video tape of the little girl being killed, but we know something happened to make her die. We know the mother acted like she had something to hide and lied, lied, lied about what really happened, and is probably still lying. We know the mother hid the body in way that prevented forensic analysis from determining if it was accident, or not. There is no explaination as to why you'd duct tape over the airway of a child who drowned.
Sometimes I think Matlock and CSI have ruined the criminal justice system. Not all cases end with evidence so overwhelming that the defendant breaks down and confesses to everything … after 60 minutes (minus commercials) of investigation. But that doesn’t mean we can’t find people guilty.
I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
> I never said I believe in the death penalty, BABS. I prefer her to rot in a jail cell the rest of her life. Preferably one with no AC.
I didn't post you did or didn't.
I quoted a snippet of your post to shed light on the dangers of mixing a penalty as perfect as death with schmucks and feelings.
Carry on.
The system isn't broken...
...the jury returned the only verdict they could given the evidence (or lack there of) presented by the prosecutor.
It doesn't matter how GUILTY "we" know that she is, it still has to be PROVEN in a court of law.
Sorry, but that half wit, disfunctional Anthony did not conseal any crime from the forensic scientists, there simply was no forensic evidence that could be linked to her.
I think Anthony's next stop will be either a TV "reality" series, or maybe porn.
> So, your child accidentally drowns, and your response is duct tape her mouth (after she's dead?!?), put her is bag, and throw her in the woods like a sack of garbage, then get drunk and screw for a month?
>
> Sorry, but I will never believe that type of behavior is a response to a legitimate accident. Honestly, her and her family sound like self-serving psychopaths, and to them the dead kid was just collateral damage.
People have to be convicted for murder on evidence not nonsense.
I Think Our System Is Working Just Fine
> It's called a "circumstantial evidence" case. There’s no video tape of the little girl being killed, but we know something happened to make her die. We know the mother acted like she had something to hide and lied, lied, lied about what really happened, and is probably still lying. We know the mother hid the body in way that prevented forensic analysis from determining if it was accident, or not. There is no explaination as to why you'd duct tape over the airway of a child who drowned.
>
> Sometimes I think Matlock and CSI have ruined the criminal justice system. Not all cases end with evidence so overwhelming that the defendant breaks down and confesses to everything … after 60 minutes (minus commercials) of investigation. But that doesn’t mean we can’t find people guilty.
A lawyer being interviewed on TV said that in real life in a real courtroom there is always uncertainty. With TV programs there is always certainty. That's the problem with television.
I agree with you Jud. I didn't follow the trial all that close but got the snippets of each days events on the nightly news. Little more than conjecture and innuendo. I don't blame the jury for acquitting her at all.
The police and prosecutors seemed overly vindictive and hateful and that certainly hurt their case to the jury as well.
Is the family dysfunctional, then certainly. Did Caylees mom make some terrible judgement mistakes, then certainly. Did she kill her? I'd say not proven at all.
Sad that a little girl lost her life and that this turned into a courtroom version of the Jerry Springer show.
Apparently late term abortion is legal in Florida. :-O
On a serious note, EVERYONE I know in this area KNOWS she is guilty, that's why they had to go to Pinnellis County for the jurors.
Orange County screwed up BIGTIME, twice.
First, when they took FOUR MONTHS to recover the body after it was first reported.
Second, going after the death penalty, when they could have nailed her with lesser charges.
Our justice system does not work. Defense can just make stuff up off the tops of their heads, and that's enough to introduce reasonable doubt.
Funny how people believed the ever shifting, ever changing story from defense, but not the straight forward, non wavering story of prosecution.
Right on the money, Jud~!
> On a serious note, EVERYONE I know in this area KNOWS she is guilty, that's why they had to go to Pinnellis County for the jurors.
No, everyone in your area THINKS she is guilty, which is why they moved the trial to an area deemed more likely to have jurors that haven't been overly influenced by the media and public opinion.
We are lucky to live in a country that, at least for now, protects the rights of the accused. Would you rather live with a system where you are considered guilty until you prove your innocence? Not me.
What gives?
I live in Pinellas County where the jurors were pooled from.
I have read statements from my fellow county citizens and from those outside of Pinellas County condemning, questioning the intelligence and threatening the jurors.
Is this what Americans have devolved to? Any and everything that "you" don't agree with or like is undeniably wrong and those that disagree with you be damned? Are we one big loser reality show? Strong belief in your opinions is one thing, to condemn, question the intelligence and especially threatening those that disagree with you speaks volumes about your character, or better yet, lack thereof.
I keep reading about tolerance, stopping the bullying in schools, etc. When children see and read "adults" being so reprehensible, where do you think the bullying begins? With YOU!
We are having a situation here in NYC with this French diplomat "(DSK"), who was accused, arrested, denied bail and confined to house arrest on sexual assault charges.
Now, it turns out that much of what occurred may be (emphasize "may be") a scam, con or frame up. Bail has been lowered, house arrest is over, and he may even be allowed to go free this week, as there are discussions going on with the DA's office today.
