See other Editorial Articles
Title: Casey Anthony Nears End of Probation: Do You Still Think She's Guilty?
Source:
SodaHead
URL Source: http://www.sodahead.com/united-stat ... -shes-guilty/question-3123351/
Published: Aug 24, 2012
Author: .
Post Date: 2012-08-24 12:47:50 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 266
Comments: 15
We were all mesmerized with the strange story of Casey Anthony and her missing daughter, Caylee, whose body was later found in a wooded area... and the seemingly odd fashion in which the young mom dealt with the news of her daughter's disappearance and death. After a trial that was televised and covered on all major news platforms, Casey Anthony was found not guilty of the murder of her 2-year-old daughter and most of the country was in shock. Now, it's been a year since the trial verdict and Casey Anthony is nearly done with her one-year probation for check fraud, which means that soon, she will be a completely free woman. Do you still have doubts about the trial verdict? Do you think Casey Anthony is responsible for her daughter's death? MSNBC.MSN.COM reports: Poster Comment:"Casey Anthony, the young Florida mother who became a cable news sensation after the 2008 disappearance and death of her 2-year-old daughter Caylee, finishes her year of probation on check fraud charges on Friday, her lawyer told ABC News."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
Given the case and lack of evidence the incompetent prosecution team presented, had I been on the jury I would have voted not guilty. They proved the baby was dead and that she was a lying slut who partied and was loaded all the time and a horrible mother but they didn't prove beyond a reaasonable doubt that she killed her child.
They proved it well enough that I would have voted to fry that bitch. There is no doubt whatsoever that she killed that baby.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
What evidence did they provide that she committed the physical act of taking her child's life? According to a software designer who created the computer program used by police and prosecutors to allege that Casey Anthony had conducted a Google search of the word “chloroform” 84 times, the prosecution erred in their assertion regarding the computer search and knew they might be doing so prior to the conclusion of the Anthony trial. The computer search was a key piece of evidence in the murder trial as the prosecution sought to prove that Anthony had carefully studied the use of chloroform to render her daughter unconscious as part of a plan to murder 2 year old Caylee Anthony. The designer, John Bradley, is the chief software developer for Cacheback, the owner of the software program used by the Orange County Sheriff’s department to determine how many times Ms. Anthony had searched for information on the use of chloroform. Bradley also gave expert testimony with respect to the same at the trial. Subsequent to Bradley’s testimony, during a redesign of the software program, he discovered that the program used in the investigation had erred and that, in fact, the computer had only conducted a Google search for the word 1 time leading to a website that was also visited just one time - a considerable distinction from the 84 times the prosecution alleged. Bradley decided to commence the redesign after learning, following his testimony at trial, that police had used a different software program prior to his own and had come up with a different result – something they had failed to tell Bradley prior to his testimony and a fact that worried Mr. Bradley who realized the importance of getting it right as Ms. Anthony’s life might very well be at stake. Bradley says that upon discovering the mistake, he immediately emailed and phoned prosecutor, Linda Drane Burdick, and Sgt. Kevin Stenger of the sheriff’s office to disclose his findings, expecting that this new piece of information would be provided to the defense. It was not. “I gave the police everything they needed to present a new report,” Mr. Bradley said. “I did the work myself and copied out the entire database in a spreadsheet to make sure there was no issue of accessibility to the data.” Under the law, prosecutors are obligated to reveal any and all information that could be relevant to the guilt of the defendant, particularly information that would be exculpatory. Failing to do so is a serious offense and, had Ms. Anthony not been found not guilty, would have likely presented grounds for a new trial.
here are some of the things required to convict of pre-meditated first degree murder... How did Caylee die? Who killed her? The goofball prosecution team proved neither. Remember the closing argument when the prosecution said "We can only hope the chloroform was used before the tape was applied" Hope? Here are some of the major problems with their case.... No chloroform was ever found No DNA was found on the duct tape The medical examiner could not determine the exact “cause” of death That is enough for reasonable doubt. Did she do it? I don't know. Did the prosecution prove it? NO!
Did she do it? Yes. End of effin' story! You can say all day that she didn't do it if you want to but I and most other people believe she did. I would have had no problem whatsoever to have found her guilty if I had had the opportunity. You are in the minority if you believe she didn't do it, a rather small minority of about 15% iirc.* Of course you have the right to believe whatever you believe, even that some space alien came down in a flying saucer and killed the baby but that just isn't what happened. *I understand that the fact that most people believe she did it does not, in and of itself, prove anything. Well, other than that the majority listened to her unbelievable bs story and found her to be not credible and that the baby was a burden to her sorry @$$ and got in the way of her partying. The fact is that the defense got lucky and got an "OJ jury." Sad but it happens sometimes. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
As I said before, I don't know if she did it or not because the prosecution didn't prove it. And being a pathological liar doesn't prove a person is a killer. She was a pathological liar years before her daughter ended up dead. Does that mean anybody that she associated with during that time who died was killed by her? This statement probably best describes why we differ on this.. "Better 10 Guilty Men Go Free than to Convict a Single Innocent Man" Willaim Blackstone
Right, it is clear as can be she did it. It may all be circumstantial evidence, but that does not matter, circumstantial evidence is enough to fry her. I have no doubt she will kill again, no doubt whatsoever. She has no feelings for her own daughter, she will definitely kill again. Any man dating this woman is a nut. God is always good!
My feelings exactly. Nothing I can add except, trial by media is reserved for certain people; trailer trash moms and billionaire investment bankers who "swindle lots of the wrong folks", particularly wealthy non Christians in New York City.
Oh, you were there? Geez, why didn't you testify then?
A few years back a survey was done of people who had served on juries. What was shocking was 73% said they went into the trial believing that the person was "probably" guilty because they wouldn't have been arrested otherwise. That is what is wrong with the jury system. We are brainwashed into believing the authorities/govt are always the honest ones and would never do anything malicious. Fact is, many prosecutors and law enforcement authorities will do whatever it takes to win a case and make themselves look like the "good guys" and the heros, including convicting innocent people. I am anti-capital punishment and recently I got into a discussion with a pro-capital punishment person who lives in Texas. It was amazing how little they seemed to care about justice and ensuring the guilty person was the one convicted and executed. I said I might be able to accept capital punishment under one condition.... that those who are pro-capital punishment will admit they are guilty of murder if an innocent person is executed and that they would have to do life in prison for taking part in the killing of an innocent. Of course, you know what the answer was... "why should I be punished... I didn't do anything wrong".
I am anti-capital punishment and recently I got into a discussion with a pro-capital punishment person who lives in Texas. It was amazing how little they seemed to care about justice and ensuring the guilty person was the one convicted and executed. I said I might be able to accept capital punishment under one condition.... that those who are pro-capital punishment will admit they are guilty of murder if an innocent person is executed and that they would have to do life in prison for taking part in the killing of an innocent. Of course, you know what the answer was... "why should I be punished... I didn't do anything wrong". Well said. And even if a jury wrongly convicts or a man is wrongly executed, jurors and pro CP advocates tell themselves (or are told by cops) that "he was probably guilty of sumthin' else anyway". Many people who support CP in principle are shocked when they are familiarized with it in practice. When a VA judge and prosecutor refused to allow a new trial for a condemned prisoner that was eventually freed (by the federal court) with new DNA evidence, I decided to deny my support for CP. The state simply cannot be trusted with the power when their career climbing minions tell themselves that condemned prisoners who may be innocent are "prolly guilty of somethin' else" anyway. In order to frustrate anti CP folks they must appear infallible when putting people to death. The search for truth is no longer a noteworthy goal to such people.
Not necessarily. But it is pretty clear that she killed her little daughter, at least to me it is. I guess that is something we will just have to agree to disagree on. And I have no problem with that. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
Lots of people have been convicted on less evidence. And I agree that any man who would date her is a nut and any child she might have in the future is in danger. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken "..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
What can I say, some people are just dumb. God is always good!
What can I say, some people are just dumb. Yep! Some don't know the diff between believing something is true and knowing something is true.
#2. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#1)
#3. To: James Deffenbach (#2)
#4. To: James Deffenbach (#2)
(Edited)
#5. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#4)
#6. To: James Deffenbach (#5)
#7. To: James Deffenbach (#5)
Did she do it? Yes. End of effin' story!
#8. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#1)
Given the case and lack of evidence the incompetent prosecution team presented, had I been on the jury I would have voted not guilty. They proved the baby was dead and that she was a lying slut who partied and was loaded all the time and a horrible mother but they didn't prove beyond a reaasonable doubt that she killed her child.
#9. To: RickyJ (#7)
Right, it is clear as can be she did it.
#10. To: HOUNDDAWG (#8)
(Edited)
#11. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#10)
A few years back a survey was done of people who had served on juries. What was shocking was 73% said they went into the trial believing that the person was "probably" guilty because they wouldn't have been arrested otherwise. That is what is wrong with the jury system. We are brainwashed into believing the authorities/govt are always the honest ones and would never do anything malicious. Fact is, many prosecutors and law enforcement authorities will do whatever it takes to win a case and make themselves look like the "good guys" and the heros, including convicting innocent people.
#12. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#6)
Does that mean anybody that she associated with during that time who died was killed by her?
#13. To: RickyJ (#7)
Right, it is clear as can be she did it. It may all be circumstantial evidence, but that does not matter, circumstantial evidence is enough to fry her. I have no doubt she will kill again, no doubt whatsoever. She has no feelings for her own daughter, she will definitely kill again. Any man dating this woman is a nut.
#14. To: HOUNDDAWG (#9)
Oh, you were there? Geez, why didn't you testify then?
#15. To: RickyJ (#14)
Oh, you were there? Geez, why didn't you testify then?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest