Jump to content

Verdict reached in Casey Anthony trial


dragonflies

Recommended Posts

  • Members

From what I understand... the main reason that a not guilty verdict was delivered was because there was no direct evidence. No fingerprints, no DNA, nothing. I feel really nervous convicting people on circumstantial evidence. And she partied and whored around while her daughter was missing? People deal with trauma in all kinds of ways, some sit around and wring their hands, some party and get drunk and try to forget it, some intentionally harm themselves.... i'm the hand wringing basket case type myself, but I can see how the other type would appear callous to many. I also think they overcharged her. If they had went for involuntary manslaughter, I'm sure there would have been a guilty verdict. And seeing how this trial turned out and how ridiculous and broken the justice system is... one can understand why she'd cover an accidental death up. 30 years ago, the family is the LAST people that were suspected in crimes like these, and today... with all these prosecuters who ahve watched too damn many episodes of CSI, the family is the FIRST place they look for suspects, and everyone knows it. It's ridiculous, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Look, I know this isn't going to win me a lot of fans, but: You can't prove someone is a murder if you can't prove that the victim was murdered. I don't believe for a second that any of those jurors think Casey is innocent, but at the end of the day, no one can prove anything in this case, other than that Caylee is dead. That jury had no choice, based on the evidence, to find her not guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy