Thread: Casey Anthony acquitted

After nearly six weeks of testimony, a panel of seven women and five men decided that Ms. Anthony did not murder Caylee by dosing her with chloroform, suffocating her with duct tape and dumping her in a wooded area, as prosecutors claimed. They also did, however, find her guilty of lesser charges, of providing false information to law enforcement officers. The jury did not ask to review any evidence.<br>



Read full article Here

Her or one of her family member had something to do with the death or knowledge of it, but like the defense said, "something", "maybe", "might" does not prove guilty. I know she did it, but there just wasn't enough clear cut evidence. It's sad that Casey will now probably right a book and be on every TV show, bringing in millions! Her whole family is fucked up, someone in that house killed Caylee. Even though Casey was found not guilty, she still will be punished the rest of her life. Whether it's a life of self guilt or the media scrutinizing her, to people harassing her, her life is over. This will loom over her for ever.

^ well I'm not sure about that, she didn't seem too upset after her daughter's death, I did read up her husband tried to commit suicide at one point though so you're right about the whole family being fucked up, It's quite clear that it was someone in the family, the problem is who? and why did she lie to the police multiple times? overall I just feel sorry for the girl, she was really young and pretty, I hope casey burns in hell if she did it. Most evidence pointed to her so I can't believe she got away with it. Also I heard that even though she was sentenced to 4 years in prison, her previous years in jail waiting for trial might make them up so she might not serve any years at all. All in all this is one of the most fucked up cases I've seen makes me sick just thinking about what was done to that girl.

Serving on a jury is a actually a tough job, and when I served it was on far more 'run of the mill' cases, without any publicity attached to them. As those that have served on a jury will know just because you say not guilty, does not mean that you think they are actually innocent. It may be the difference between thinking they are probably guilty, and being sure of it.

As Droidlover said someone in that household is guilty, the reasonable doubt for the jury was probably not knowing for certain which one.

I hadn't watched much of the trial, but the news reports sure made her sound guilty. I hope she really didn't do it.

No matter how it turned out, that's one seriously broken family from here on.

Innocent until proven guilty. The ideal system worked despite the fact that someone IS at fault for the death of the toddler.

^^ That about sums it up ^^ I am ashamed to live in a country that lets people do horrendous things to others and get away with it.
Everyone knows she did it, if she didn't, she would be insane with rage trying to find who killed her little baby.

it might just be me but if anything happened to my son like that I would be on a murderous rampage until I was dead or the person that did it was.

Believing someone is guilty is not enough you have to prove it, or what is the point in a justice system. It is Blackstone's ratio - "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

If proving guilt was not required you would be living in a police state, and remember the jury heard the facts of the case, not a sensationalised picture delivered by the media, and decided that the state had not met it's burden of proof. I am sure that was not an easy decision for them to make.