A Sea Of Red

Sad day when Killers can get their freedom back after killing someone (and even her own child) -

http://news.yahoo.com/casey-anthony-acq ... 00480.html

Another OJ situation and more proof that our legal system does not work!!

Unfortunately, the state blew it big time. Give credit to Baez, he found holes in almost every argument the state made.

She'll get her ultimate justice one day.

Wow... I can't believe she actually got off scot-free..

Baez doesn't deserve any kind of credit...but I will say the investigation was flawed from the very beginning...

I do think it was pretty clear she had something to do with it....

Glad to see all of you were a part of the investigation and knew that she was guilty. Shame you couldn't pass that along to the jurors, lawyers, and judges who came together and presented and discussed evidence to determine that she was innocent.

The legal system is surprisingly only broke when it goes against the court of public opinion. Funny how that happens.

The legal system has never, and hopefully will never, be based on emotion (like the emotion everyone is showing today). It's based on facts, doubt, evidence, and questioning. The jury didn't find enough facts and evidence to say that she was guilty. What makes anyone else feel like they know better than that?

It just seems strange for the woman to create elaborate lies, make up a fake father for Caylee and make up imaginary friends and be innocent. If she knew she was innocent, she have let the evidence speak for itself instead of trying to lying like crazy. Also, while the judicial system is the best system we have to deem someone innocent or guilty it is by no means perfect.

NG33 wrote:Also, while the judicial system is the best system we have to deem someone innocent or guilty it is by no means perfect.

This is like the middle-aged guy who blames his computer for everything. It ain't the machine, it's the user.

Poor case to work with for prosecutors even though the mountain of circumstantial evidence makes it obvious who committed the crime. This was easy pickings for defense counsel rebuttal. Keep in mind that jurors are limited to considering evidence that judges deem is worthy of their consideration. That had an impact on the outcome of this case.

It is not surprising that jurors are ducking media inquiries.

ALUmnus wrote: This is like the middle-aged guy who blames his computer for everything. It ain't the machine, it's the user.

Haha I didn't mean it to come across as if I'm blaming the judicial system. The reason it doesn't always work is because we live in a world of imperfect people. The only one that could always give out always perfect and always appropriate justice is God himself.

I think all of us believe she did it.

Question is... "beyond a reasonable doubt"? Even I admit 2% of me could see her parents being involved.

ToTheLeft wrote:Glad to see all of you were a part of the investigation and knew that she was guilty. Shame you couldn't pass that along to the jurors, lawyers, and judges who came together and presented and discussed evidence to determine that she was innocent.

The legal system is surprisingly only broke when it goes against the court of public opinion. Funny how that happens.

The legal system has never, and hopefully will never, be based on emotion (like the emotion everyone is showing today). It's based on facts, doubt, evidence, and questioning. The jury didn't find enough facts and evidence to say that she was guilty. What makes anyone else feel like they know better than that?

From the very beginning the investigation was flawed...way too many hands in the pot.

Our justice system is a good one, but when you have humanity involved it will never be perfect

Its clear that Casey did it, but it was also a very tough case for the jury that is for sure

NG33 wrote:It just seems strange for the woman to create elaborate lies, make up a fake father for Caylee and make up imaginary friends and be innocent. If she knew she was innocent, she have let the evidence speak for itself instead of trying to lying like crazy.

Is it possible she's just really messed-up in the head? What you said makes sense to you and me, but maybe it never will to her...

The jurors may say she is not guilty, the public will always believe she killed Caylee. Casey therefore will always have a mark of Cain with her name.

I think the defense did a good job of creating doubt in the jurors minds, which is all they had to do. While all the lies make it extremely plausible that she did it, the prosecution's case rested mostly on circumstantial evidence. Without the hard evidence, its hard to convict.

Tell that to Scott Peterson. Circumstantial evidence is evidence.

different jury, different lawyers, different investigation teams...its impossible to compare 2 circumstantial cases Sly

I'm just illustrating that circumstantial cases can be won.

JK37 wrote:

NG33 wrote:It just seems strange for the woman to create elaborate lies, make up a fake father for Caylee and make up imaginary friends and be innocent. If she knew she was innocent, she have let the evidence speak for itself instead of trying to lying like crazy.

Is it possible she's just really messed-up in the head? What you said makes sense to you and me, but maybe it never will to her...

So you're saying that a girl who is obviously a party girl, likely meaning she has a history or drugs and/or alcohol abuse, could be messed up in the head?

Weird.

i heard about this case approximately 24 hours ago. glad i didn't waste my time caring.

living in florida its been impossible to avoid

thepostman wrote:living in florida its been impossible to avoid

Yeah in saint pete last week its all they talked about. I guess it could have been worse... I could have been in orlando.

disgusting family.

remind me to go down to florida if i ever go completely whacko and decide to murder my potential future child.

ToTheLeft wrote:The legal system has never, and hopefully will never, be based on emotion (like the emotion everyone is showing today). It's based on facts, doubt, evidence, and questioning. The jury didn't find enough facts and evidence to say that she was guilty. What makes anyone else feel like they know better than that?

And you can adamantly say for a fact that no juror has ever made their decision based on emotion?

I like to know how letting your child go missing for 31 days and not bothering to report it for 31 days isn't considered child neglect. What else do you have to do to get convicted on child neglect down there?