The Caylee Anthony Case
- Thread starter Natasha
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
eek-
423Replies
-
11KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
The jury can only deliberate and decide a verdict on the evidence that was presented to them.
I think she was most likely guilty, but the prosecution did a completely piss-poor job of presenting the case. The chick is absolutely batshit insane and never would have even gone to prison in my opinion, she probably would've spent the rest of her locked life in a mental health facility.
She should have been guilty of manslaughter due to indifference. There certainly wasn't enough evidence to convict of murder.
I feel sorry for the jury, I've already read comments elsewhere saying they should be killed for their verdict. Hell, people here are blasting them even. Leave the poor people alone, they were in a lose-lose situation because of the media frenzy whipped up by Nancy Grace and her ilk.
I think she was most likely guilty, but the prosecution did a completely piss-poor job of presenting the case. The chick is absolutely batshit insane and never would have even gone to prison in my opinion, she probably would've spent the rest of her locked life in a mental health facility.
She should have been guilty of manslaughter due to indifference. There certainly wasn't enough evidence to convict of murder.
I feel sorry for the jury, I've already read comments elsewhere saying they should be killed for their verdict. Hell, people here are blasting them even. Leave the poor people alone, they were in a lose-lose situation because of the media frenzy whipped up by Nancy Grace and her ilk.
I heard it was time served, as well. It makes sense, she has been sitting in jail so long her credit is probably sky high, she probably doesn't get in much trouble and the guidelines for what she was convicted of are probably much under her credit.
Because that's all she was fucking convicted on. Jesus Christ people... no matter what you think based on the limited amount of information you all were provided, she was found not-guilty. The prosecution did a shitty job of presenting their case, and she wasn't convicted. Hell, maybe she didn't actually kill her child, we won't ever know... but there simply wasn't enough evidence to convict her.
Just because a bunch of "experts" on the internet think that she's guilty doesn't mean that she actually was.
Not to say that I'm defending her, because like I said already... she's fucking insane.
I'm sure a good 95% of people will forget all about this once they hear that another Kardashian supposedly has a sex tape out.
Very. Their decision speaks for itself. I would hate to hear a SINGLE one of them say anything about Caylee, it would sicken me.
i can honestly i know nothiing about this case, i rarely watch TV apart from sports
i think i will keep it that way
i think i will keep it that way
I can almost guarantee you that her attorneys would've pushed for a mental defect argument after conviction if she was found guilty.
I feel the same way about my son. But the fact remains that NOBODY knows whether she was guilty or not other than herself and her daughter.
Not from the evidence I heard.
Yeah, because of outraged people like you. I'd be afraid for my safety if I read half the shit posted here about them, let alone the rest of the internet.
Their decision speaks to the quality of evidence provided to them.
Of course, they'd try anything in the bag of tricks to lessen her potential punishment, that's their job, but courts don't just let anyone spend a sentence for a murder conviction in a mental hospital. She would not be found mentally defective if they legally determined she was competent to stand trial.
Probably.
This is pretty easy to say for people that have never sat in a courtroom, charged with killing someone. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution. Beyond a reasonable doubt. I saw this coming from day one. Sure, all signs point one way... but the prosecution failed to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Believe me... if YOU had ever sat in a courtroom charged with taking actions that caused the death of someone else, YOU would see how the state failed as well. In my instance, the deceased family was shocked and livid when I was acquitted as well. The fact remained that MY actions did not result in his death. I was simply following the standard of care that any other person would have been following that day.
Believe me... if YOU had ever sat in a courtroom charged with taking actions that caused the death of someone else, YOU would see how the state failed as well. In my instance, the deceased family was shocked and livid when I was acquitted as well. The fact remained that MY actions did not result in his death. I was simply following the standard of care that any other person would have been following that day.
One cannot assert that with any accuracy, as we do not know what potential biases existed in these jurors beforehand and what types of variables they experienced outside the courtroom and during deliberation. The teams do a good job of weeding out potential confounding variables but it is never 100% fail-safe.
A different group of jurors may have reached a different verdict under the same presentation from both sides.
Yep, our judicial system sucks because the jurors didn't drink Nancy Grace's kool-aid.
80,566Threads
2,194,932Messages
5,014Members