The outcome of the Casey Anthony case once again proves that our judicial system has failed! Not Guilty! May she rot in Hell! Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson! Get the point!
Don't think I agree with you on this one, from what I understand our system did exactly what it was supposed to do, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was guilty. What we believe, and most likely the jury believes (that she was/is guilty) does not matter, it is still on the accuser to prove guilt, not the accused to prove innocence.
I am disappointed that justice has yet to be served on behalf of Caylee Anthony. However I am proud to live in a country that requires the government to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
I did not watch or follow all of the trial, but I heard enough to see some holes in the case against the accused. Obviously the jury saw enough to vote not guilty. A hung jury would not have shocked me as much. I had been telling my wife I did not expect a capital murder conviction, but I expected 2nd degree, negligent homicide or something.
If this were to be your grand daughter then what would you think!
Someone killed that precious little girl and it wasn't the grandparents. Why would they just get up an leave the court room without saying something to their daughter who just had been acquitted of murder without talking to her! Could that mean something? I think so!
May she rot in Hell and party until her heart is content. I only hope she soon gets what is due to her. Like OJ Simpson, Rodney King and the likes we will be hearing again form her soon! I believe if Ashton would have given the final arguments instead of the chick it would have came out different.
Problem as I heard it explained was that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the premeditated murder charge. The acquittal doesn't mean the jury didn't believe that she had something to do with the eath of that child, just that there as no premeditation. In all liklehood had the State brought her up on a lesser charge she would have been convicted.
Our system, fortunately, gives the State little leeway in a capital case and we may all be frustrated and pizzed at the outcome but it is better than the alternative, in my mind anyway.
"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington
No one jump on me for this but I'm not 100% sure that she did it. The prosecution's case had too many holes in it and left too many questions unanswered for the jury to decide that she is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If she really did do it, the prosecution should of found more evidence and should have created a better case. If she did do it though, may she rot in the firey pits of hell for all eturnity and may the devel use her bones as tooth picks.