Casy Anthony found not guilty on major charges.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Casy Anthony found not guilty on major charges.

The media and many observers are "stunned" by this verdict. I am not.

DONT GET ME WRONG, I think she did it too. But what I have always argued, not just in this case, but long term as a society, what kind of society and jury pool we would want to live under? Do we want to live under a system that reflects the media's presumption of guilt and sensationalism? Or do we want a high standard of proof if we are going to take another citizen's freedom away we better get it right?

This jury was not saying "not guilty" on the major murder charges, because they thought she was not guilty. That is just the strict two choice word language we currently have now. What this jury was saying is that the state did not prove it's case.

I think it would be horrible to create a society where law enforcement, and lawyers and juries convicted only on emotion or nature of the charge. We should never convict someone because of the nature of the charge or because we don't like them personally.

FACTS, not emotions, not the nature of the charge. This jury was NOT saying she didn't do it. They were saying that the case was not strong enough.

This cuts to the core LONG TERM, not based on one person or one case, but cuts to the core of what kind of society we would want to live under. I have always been of the mindset that it is far better to let the guilty go free than to convict one innocent person.

This jury did did not do this because they liked her, they did it because evidence, IF you are going to take someone's freedom away, should have an extremely high standard.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
I agree on your point.

I agree on your point.


Ken G.
Bronze Member
Posts: 1352
Joined: 2008-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Brian 37 wrote:Casy Anthony found Not Guilty on Major Charges

 That is soooooo sad, a little girls life was wiped out, and nobody's to blame . All I can say is Wow, will she be convicted of other crimes in another court ? like OJ. This get the longest face palm in History !

Signature ? How ?


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4568
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 I actually agree with

 I actually agree with Brian on this one. Although, I have to admit I paid virtually no attention to the case so I don't really have an opinion on whether or not she is actually guilty. It is good to have a justice system that errs on the side of leniency. Better that a few guilty people walk free than one innocent person go to jail. Every time there is a high profile case like this one everyone gets all hyped up and becomes convinced of the persons guilt based on the news media.

 

As a person who served on a jury for a murder case that was highly publicized locally, I can attest that the trial the jurors see is completely different from the trial played out in the media. Fortunately, we don't throw people in prison based on mob rule and keeps the jurors sheltered from the rampant speculation and selective fact reporting of the media. 

 

Another thing, I heard on the radio today that if she was found guilty she might face the death penalty. That is bullshit. Even if she is guilty she is hardly likely to be a repeat offender. It is bad enough to have a death penalty at all, but if you are going to have one it should be reserved for extreme cases where the perpetrator is not really in question. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
 Well, as Brain says, there

 Well, as Brain says, there is, at least, a logical distinction between not guilty and not proved guilty. There is a legal history to that.

 

In Scotland, the older legal system allowed for a legal verdict of either proved or not proved. However, there was a landmark case in the 1720's (wikipedia does not link to it so I will have to google the matter) which was such a piece of crap that the jury asserted the right to tender an innocent verdict.

 

Apparently, it was a case of nullification because the case was fully proved on the evidence but the jury felt that the law was so wrong that it had to go. Even so, the jury felt that “not proved” was a bad verdict to tender. So they asserted the right to go for “not guilty”.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: I

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I actually agree with Brian on this one. Although, I have to admit I paid virtually no attention to the case so I don't really have an opinion on whether or not she is actually guilty. It is good to have a justice system that errs on the side of leniency. Better that a few guilty people walk free than one innocent person go to jail. Every time there is a high profile case like this one everyone gets all hyped up and becomes convinced of the persons guilt based on the news media.

 

As a person who served on a jury for a murder case that was highly publicized locally, I can attest that the trial the jurors see is completely different from the trial played out in the media. Fortunately, we don't throw people in prison based on mob rule and keeps the jurors sheltered from the rampant speculation and selective fact reporting of the media. 

 

Another thing, I heard on the radio today that if she was found guilty she might face the death penalty. That is bullshit. Even if she is guilty she is hardly likely to be a repeat offender. It is bad enough to have a death penalty at all, but if you are going to have one it should be reserved for extreme cases where the perpetrator is not really in question. 

Oh no no no,you and I are sworn enemies. I am a commie pinko who hates all rich people. I hate the Constitution. If it weren't for this right to a speedy trial, we could have just executed her on the nature of the charge and spared the tax payers money.

(note to self: Did I think this, or type it)

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
In all seriousness, the

In all seriousness, the idiots who bitch about this verdict DONT value the constitution. NO ONE is saying you have to like the verdict. But you do have to respect the way the system is set up LONG TERM because it insures that like Beyond said, "Mob rule" doesn't rule.

BUT, there are countries where you don't get a trial, and other countries, where even if you do, it is more of a kangaroo court because the nature of the charge has embarrassed the state.

"Justice for Caylee" is nothing but an emotional reaction that really says "I want revenge". "Justice" as our system is set up, is not about revenge, but a high standard of quality control to protect the rights OF ALL long term. The idiots who bitch about this need to read the fucking constitution to understand why verdicts like this have to be allowed to happen. LONG TERM it is much better society demand a record of accusations and peer review and hold accountable the court.

Without our court system a mob or a state can simply yank you off the street, make shit up, jail you, or murder you.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE THIS VERDICT, but you are nuts if you want to throw out the entire system because one case doesn't turn out the way you want it to.

Anyone focusing on one case ANY CASE and complaining about needs to read the constitution. There is a much bigger picture in the history of American law that EXPLAINS why we must accept this verdict. Other countries leaders and courts DONT respect rights to lawyers and juries. So if you don't like our system because of this verdict, I'd suggest you go live in a country where there are no standards and the state can do whateve5r they want to you.

The founders were extremely wise in saying that the state had to make a record of the accusation against someone. They were wise in allowing a jury, not a cop, not a judge, not a mob, to decide the outcome.

It sucks that Caylee was murdered. But there IS  a much bigger picture to the history of law and WHY it is important to accept that sometimes the guilty can go free.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Judge Dredd is not the System in the US

I'm from Orlando Brian and pretty much over the hype on this one single case.

[/rant on}

Nancy Grace is an irritating bitch who is doing nothing but trying to increase ratings. FUCK HER! She plays on people's emotions to jack up ratings. She interviewd Melinda Duckett the night before her suicide in 2006 making wild accusations in regard to the fate of her missing child Trenton.  Her kid Trenton has still never been found. Thanks to Nancy Grace freaking that woman out no one will ever know for sure what happened to her kid.  Irriting bitch Nancy Grace plays on people's emotions to make MONEY. The more idiots that watch her the more she is going to make. She lives for tragedies like this. It gets her viewers

Since CNN continues to employ Nancy Grace I do not watch Headline News anymore. I made an exception last night to see how Nancy Grace would spin the verdict.

True to form, she created another controversy to keep viewers turned in to her tripe.

Note to Nancy:

There is no such fucking entity as the devil.

The only fuckers dancing in the streets are all you media assholes watching your ratings rise and counting your cash.

Go the fuck home.

Florida typically charges someone with everything from littering to 1st degree murder in an attempt to make something stick especially in an emotional case such as this.

Casey is not a fucking angel. So fucking what. The state did not prove she murdered Caylee.

The state can't even determine the cause of death of Caylee.

 End of fucking story.

These fuckers that came here need to get on their return flights and go the fuck home. Especially all the media assholes.

Casey was the adult who was taking care of Caylee, somehow Caylee died. There is nothing in her history to suggest child abuse.

She should have been charged with neglect of a child resulting in death and that's all.

That goes for every parent that has a kid die unattended in a swimming pool or from a gun left out, or that goes flying through the windshield, or goes flying out of the back of your pickup.

A child died in Daytona on Monday in a hotel pool - are they going to charge them with 1st degree murder?

[/rant off]

Brian37 wrote:

In all seriousness, the idiots who bitch about this verdict DONT value the constitution. NO ONE is saying you have to like the verdict. But you do have to respect the way the system is set up LONG TERM because it insures that like Beyond said, "Mob rule" doesn't rule.

BUT, there are countries where you don't get a trial, and other countries, where even if you do, it is more of a kangaroo court because the nature of the charge has embarrassed the state.

"Justice for Caylee" is nothing but an emotional reaction that really says "I want revenge". "Justice" as our system is set up, is not about revenge, but a high standard of quality control to protect the rights OF ALL long term. The idiots who bitch about this need to read the fucking constitution to understand why verdicts like this have to be allowed to happen. LONG TERM it is much better society demand a record of accusations and peer review and hold accountable the court.

Without our court system a mob or a state can simply yank you off the street, make shit up, jail you, or murder you.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE THIS VERDICT, but you are nuts if you want to throw out the entire system because one case doesn't turn out the way you want it to.

Anyone focusing on one case ANY CASE and complaining about needs to read the constitution. There is a much bigger picture in the history of American law that EXPLAINS why we must accept this verdict. Other countries leaders and courts DONT respect rights to lawyers and juries. So if you don't like our system because of this verdict, I'd suggest you go live in a country where there are no standards and the state can do whateve5r they want to you.

The founders were extremely wise in saying that the state had to make a record of the accusation against someone. They were wise in allowing a jury, not a cop, not a judge, not a mob, to decide the outcome.

 

Absolutely agree. You don't have to like the verdict but fucking stop claiming there is no justice in Florida.

A fair trial was held with jurors from Tampa. They decided the state didn't have proof Caylee was murdered as the state couldn't even figure out how she died.

There was nothing that tied Casey to the death of Caylee other than she was supposedly the adult supervising her at last report.

 

Brian37 wrote:

It sucks that Caylee was murdered. But there IS  a much bigger picture to the history of law and WHY it is important to accept that sometimes the guilty can go free.

Then after everything you have said you somehow know that Caylee was murdered. Correction for you:

 It sucks that Caylee died.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
If the glove does not fit,

If the glove does not fit, you must acquit

 

 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:If the

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

If the glove does not fit, you must acquit

 

 

 

Exactly!

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Quote:This jury was not

Quote:
This jury was not saying "not guilty" on the major murder charges, because they thought she was not guilty. That is just the strict two choice word language we currently have now. What this jury was saying is that the state did not prove it's case.

I think it would be horrible to create a society where law enforcement, and lawyers and juries convicted only on emotion or nature of the charge. We should never convict someone because of the nature of the charge or because we don't like them personally.

FACTS, not emotions, not the nature of the charge. This jury was NOT saying she didn't do it. They were saying that the case was not strong enough.

Agree.

Quote:
I have always been of the mindset that it is far better to let the guilty go free than to convict one innocent person.

Disagree... vehemently.

As it stands right now, we do a good bit of both letting guilty parties go and convicting innocents. Sometimes the guilty get a raw deal for a relatively minor crime. In the case of the stupid fucking three strikes system, if you steal someone's pizza 3 times and have been convicted for it twice already, you get 25 to life. Since I don't have the wealth of legal knowledge as a couple of other RRSers have, I'll keep my mouth shut on most of it. The causes are likely myriad. But one cause I can confidently talk about is biased/bad judges. A judge is a delegated position that is given sweeping powers over the outcome of a case, be it marital, civil, criminal, admiralty, or otherwise... and if they become sympathetic to either the plaintiff, defense, or prosecution, and none of these potential parties detect said sympathy, the trial becomes damaged beyond repair. Judges can sometimes be bribed.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:I'm

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I'm from Orlando Brian and pretty much over the hype on this one single case.

[/rant on}

Nancy Grace is an irritating bitch who is doing nothing but trying to increase ratings. FUCK HER! She plays on people's emotions to jack up ratings. She interviewd Melinda Duckett the night before her suicide in 2006 making wild accusations in regard to the fate of her missing child Trenton.  Her kid Trenton has still never been found. Thanks to Nancy Grace freaking that woman out no one will ever know for sure what happened to her kid.  Irriting bitch Nancy Grace plays on people's emotions to make MONEY. The more idiots that watch her the more she is going to make. She lives for tragedies like this. It gets her viewers

Since CNN continues to employ Nancy Grace I do not watch Headline News anymore. I made an exception last night to see how Nancy Grace would spin the verdict.

True to form, she created another controversy to keep viewers turned in to her tripe.

Note to Nancy:

There is no such fucking entity as the devil.

The only fuckers dancing in the streets are all you media assholes watching your ratings rise and counting your cash. 

Agreed. I absolutely despise Nancy Grace and all those media hounds soaking up this tragedy to earn a buck. They are just as bad, if not worse than Casey. They are taking a terrible event and loving every minute of it. They make their living off of other people's misfortunes and misery.

 

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

She should have been charged with neglect of a child resulting in death and that's all.

OF COURSE !!!!!!

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:I'm

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I'm from Orlando Brian and pretty much over the hype on this one single case.

[/rant on}

Nancy Grace is an irritating bitch who is doing nothing but trying to increase ratings. FUCK HER! She plays on people's emotions to jack up ratings. She interviewd Melinda Duckett the night before her suicide in 2006 making wild accusations in regard to the fate of her missing child Trenton.  Her kid Trenton has still never been found. Thanks to Nancy Grace freaking that woman out no one will ever know for sure what happened to her kid.  Irriting bitch Nancy Grace plays on people's emotions to make MONEY. The more idiots that watch her the more she is going to make. She lives for tragedies like this. It gets her viewers

Since CNN continues to employ Nancy Grace I do not watch Headline News anymore. I made an exception last night to see how Nancy Grace would spin the verdict.

True to form, she created another controversy to keep viewers turned in to her tripe.

Note to Nancy:

There is no such fucking entity as the devil.

The only fuckers dancing in the streets are all you media assholes watching your ratings rise and counting your cash.

Go the fuck home.

Florida typically charges someone with everything from littering to 1st degree murder in an attempt to make something stick especially in an emotional case such as this.

Casey is not a fucking angel. So fucking what. The state did not prove she murdered Caylee.

The state can't even determine the cause of death of Caylee.

 End of fucking story.

These fuckers that came here need to get on their return flights and go the fuck home. Especially all the media assholes.

Casey was the adult who was taking care of Caylee, somehow Caylee died. There is nothing in her history to suggest child abuse.

She should have been charged with neglect of a child resulting in death and that's all.

That goes for every parent that has a kid die unattended in a swimming pool or from a gun left out, or that goes flying through the windshield, or goes flying out of the back of your pickup.

A child died in Daytona on Monday in a hotel pool - are they going to charge them with 1st degree murder?

[/rant off]

Brian37 wrote:

In all seriousness, the idiots who bitch about this verdict DONT value the constitution. NO ONE is saying you have to like the verdict. But you do have to respect the way the system is set up LONG TERM because it insures that like Beyond said, "Mob rule" doesn't rule.

BUT, there are countries where you don't get a trial, and other countries, where even if you do, it is more of a kangaroo court because the nature of the charge has embarrassed the state.

"Justice for Caylee" is nothing but an emotional reaction that really says "I want revenge". "Justice" as our system is set up, is not about revenge, but a high standard of quality control to protect the rights OF ALL long term. The idiots who bitch about this need to read the fucking constitution to understand why verdicts like this have to be allowed to happen. LONG TERM it is much better society demand a record of accusations and peer review and hold accountable the court.

Without our court system a mob or a state can simply yank you off the street, make shit up, jail you, or murder you.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO LIKE THIS VERDICT, but you are nuts if you want to throw out the entire system because one case doesn't turn out the way you want it to.

Anyone focusing on one case ANY CASE and complaining about needs to read the constitution. There is a much bigger picture in the history of American law that EXPLAINS why we must accept this verdict. Other countries leaders and courts DONT respect rights to lawyers and juries. So if you don't like our system because of this verdict, I'd suggest you go live in a country where there are no standards and the state can do whateve5r they want to you.

The founders were extremely wise in saying that the state had to make a record of the accusation against someone. They were wise in allowing a jury, not a cop, not a judge, not a mob, to decide the outcome.

 

Absolutely agree. You don't have to like the verdict but fucking stop claiming there is no justice in Florida.

A fair trial was held with jurors from Tampa. They decided the state didn't have proof Caylee was murdered as the state couldn't even figure out how she died.

There was nothing that tied Casey to the death of Caylee other than she was supposedly the adult supervising her at last report.

 

Brian37 wrote:

It sucks that Caylee was murdered. But there IS  a much bigger picture to the history of law and WHY it is important to accept that sometimes the guilty can go free.

Then after everything you have said you somehow know that Caylee was murdered. Correction for you:

 It sucks that Caylee died.

Boy did you misread what I said. My criticism is not of the jury's decision. My criticism is of the idiots who are crying foul AFTER due process was done.  These morons need to read the constitution and understand WHY we as a society have to respect the decision of the jury.

There is a media opinion (duh, Casey did it) and a legal definition(verdict) which makes Casey legally innocent.

But one juror interviewed said what I thought was correct, "How can you punish someone if you don't know how they did it?" The jurors WANTED to convict her, but rightfully agreed that the case was not based on emotion, but facts, and to that jury, the state's case was not strong enough, no matter what their personal opinion of Casey was.

"Justice" to the fuckwads slamming the jury, isn't about fact finding. These armchair quarterbacks slamming the jury, were not sitting on the jury themselves, and did not here all the information themselves, and were not faced with the jury instructions written on paper that the jury had to follow.

"Justice" from a Constitutional context, isn't, or in my mind, should not be about favoring either side, but fact finding and if you cant find strong enough facts, then as a juror you should err on protecting the constitution by letting the accused go for lack of evidence, which IS what this jury did.

But "justice" to the nutcases who are outraged by due process, isn't about fact finding, but revenge.

But come on, a skeleton in a bag with duct tape on it? Caylee was murdered, but there was NOT sufficient evidence that Casey did it. And because they didn't determine manor of death or cause of death, this verdict was the correct one.

So please don't think I am one of those morons going "Caylee was murdered don't you want someone to pay"

My response, "No, I don't want "someone" to pay, I want the facts to prove the responsible person without speculation and with sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt".

My point is "DUH" without facts doesn't constitute a case. That is what happened here. Casey IS legally innocent and we as a society, if we value our own rights, need to respect due process and this verdict.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
You misread what I Said.

PJTS wrote:
Brian37 wrote:

It sucks that Caylee was murdered. But there IS  a much bigger picture to the history of law and WHY it is important to accept that sometimes the guilty can go free.

Then after everything you have said you somehow know that Caylee was murdered. Correction for you:

 It sucks that Caylee died.

I didn't like you used the word murdered in your sentance. The cause of death of Caylee is unknown.

Brian37 wrote:

Boy did you misread what I said. My criticism is not of the jury's decision. My criticism is of the idiots who are crying foul AFTER due process was done.  These morons need to read the constitution and understand WHY we as a society have to respect the decision of the jury.

No I only objected to one word you used that didn't fit the context of your argument.

And I understood you were not one of the crazed mob crying foul, I agreed with you on your points.

The stupid lemmings outside the courthouse were so dumbass they were shouting "appeal" "appeal". They could have been manipulated at that point to say "burn the bitch" or "lynch the bitch".

 

Brian37 wrote:

There is a media opinion (duh, Casey did it) and a legal definition(verdict) which makes Casey legally innocent.

But one juror interviewed said what I thought was correct, "How can you punish someone if you don't know how they did it?" The jurors WANTED to convict her, but rightfully agreed that the case was not based on emotion, but facts, and to that jury, the state's case was not strong enough, no matter what their personal opinion of Casey was.

"Justice" to the fuckwads slamming the jury, isn't about fact finding. These armchair quarterbacks slamming the jury, were not sitting on the jury themselves, and did not here all the information themselves, and were not faced with the jury instructions written on paper that the jury had to follow.

"Justice" from a Constitutional context, isn't, or in my mind, should not be about favoring either side, but fact finding and if you cant find strong enough facts, then as a juror you should err on protecting the constitution by letting the accused go for lack of evidence, which IS what this jury did.

But "justice" to the nutcases who are outraged by due process, isn't about fact finding, but revenge.

But come on, a skeleton in a bag with duct tape on it? Caylee was murdered, but there was NOT sufficient evidence that Casey did it. And because they didn't determine manor of death or cause of death, this verdict was the correct one.

 

Brian, the location and condition of the remains did not in itself indicate cause of death. Duct tape on the face could have been used to keep the jaw attached.

Note - there was no skin residue on the adhesive of the tape - forensics showed that. This indicates the tape was put on after Caylee was dead. The only DNA on the tape was not Casey's or anyone in her family or even the idiot meter reader Kronk.

Brian37 wrote:

So please don't think I am one of those morons going "Caylee was murdered don't you want someone to pay"

My response, "No, I don't want "someone" to pay, I want the facts to prove the responsible person without speculation and with sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt".

My point is "DUH" without facts doesn't constitute a case. That is what happened here. Casey IS legally innocent and we as a society, if we value our own rights, need to respect due process and this verdict. 

And again, Brian I only object to the word murdered because there is no way to tell.

 

Other than that I agree with you.

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:I

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I didn't like you used the word murdered in your sentance. The cause of death of Caylee is unknown.

Of course she died of natural causes. People's remains are often put in gym bags because no one has anything to hide. Casey simply couldn't afford a funeral for her kid. The oxycontin in my medicine cabinet isn't really mine -I don't even know how it got there!

 

.... the sky isn't actually blue.

Nope, you've have to at least admit, that there is a shitload of 'interesting' circumstances for someone we don't "know" died of a wrongful death. It's just that, well... murder cases are often adjourned on circumstantial evidence alone. Also pjts... the court of public opinion is not nor will it ever be the court of law. It's important to remember the basic stuff sometimes.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao

Kapkao wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I didn't like you used the word murdered in your sentance. The cause of death of Caylee is unknown.

Of course she died of natural causes. People's remains are often put in gym bags because no one has anything to hide. Casey simply couldn't afford a funeral for her kid. The oxycontin in my medicine cabinet isn't really mine -I don't even know how it got there!

There is no way to tell how she died with the technology available today. One can suspect whatever but one can't make a conclusion here.

This is not much different then the believers that interpret the god into the equation for explanations because things are left unexplained.

If you don't know you don't know.

 

Kapkao wrote:

.... the sky isn't actually blue.

No it isn't. It appears blue to most humans though.

See - http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Evidence_that_the_sky_is_not_blue

 

Kapkao wrote:

Nope, you've have to at least admit, that there is a shitload of 'interesting' circumstances for someone we don't "know" died of a wrongful death. It's just that, well... murder cases are often adjourned on circumstantial evidence alone. Also pjts... the court of public opinion is not nor will it ever be the court of law. It's important to remember the basic stuff sometimes.

What is very unclear is actually who was the caregiver on the day Caylee died or disappeared. The grandparents or Casey. No one even knows that.

The whole situation is suspicious and leaves many questions but so was the shooting of JFK and Oswald. Something else we will never know what actually occured.

The cause of Caylee's death may never be known. Unknowns cause people to venture into conjecture.

This is just like the crap theists argue. They go to conjecture and personal emotions when they refuse to acknowledge that some things can't be explained.

The god made everything because something must explain how the Universe got here.

That's what I see going on here.

Casey must have done it, I know  she did I just know she did. Sounds about the same to me as the god did it I know he did.

Both are based on conjecture and no proof.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
What is very unclear is actually who was the caregiver on the day Caylee died or disappeared. The grandparents or Casey. No one even knows that.

The whole situation is suspicious and leaves many questions but so was the shooting of JFK and Oswald. Something else we will never know what actually occured.

The cause of Caylee's death may never be known. Unknowns cause people to venture into conjecture.

This is just like the crap theists argue. They go to conjecture and personal emotions when they refuse to acknowledge that some things can't be explained.

The god made everything because something must explain how the Universe got here.

That's what I see going on here.

Casey must have done it, I know  she did I just know she did. Sounds about the same to me as the god did it I know he did.

Both are based on conjecture and no proof.

Red Herring, dude. Are you responding to my points or someone else's? Cuz it looks like you're responding to someone else's more than mine half the time.

I don't think anyone's claiming knowledge of Caylee's death... at least not on RRS. I personally am not saying that Casey is the murderer. I'm simply pointing out that putting Caylee's body in a gym bag in the middle of the woods points to an (amateurish) attempt to cover up the commission of a crime. Undeniably so, as far as I'm concerned, because no other scenario fits... unless you have some top ace theories you'd like to share.

Who commited a crime relating to Caylee, and what the crime was is anyone's guess. That the crime was murder or negligent homicide, is a probability, just not a positive fact (yet.)

edit; Also...

Quote:

No it isn't. It appears blue to most humans though.

See - http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Evidence_that_the_sky_is_not_blue

..the link you provided doesn't provide any conclusive evidence relating to the color of Earth's atmosphere being something other than what it appears to us. Not that the smartass remark I originally made and you overanalyzed has any bearing on the thread's subject matter.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao

Kapkao wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
What is very unclear is actually who was the caregiver on the day Caylee died or disappeared. The grandparents or Casey. No one even knows that.

The whole situation is suspicious and leaves many questions but so was the shooting of JFK and Oswald. Something else we will never know what actually occured.

The cause of Caylee's death may never be known. Unknowns cause people to venture into conjecture.

This is just like the crap theists argue. They go to conjecture and personal emotions when they refuse to acknowledge that some things can't be explained.

The god made everything because something must explain how the Universe got here.

That's what I see going on here.

Casey must have done it, I know  she did I just know she did. Sounds about the same to me as the god did it I know he did.

Both are based on conjecture and no proof.

Red Herring, dude.

 

I didn't know we were debating it looked like a friendly discussion to me.

Kapkao wrote:

Are you responding to my points or someone else's? Cuz it looks like you're responding to someone else's more than mine half the time.

 

Mostly others and in general. This was the 1st and only response to you.

Kapkao wrote:

I don't think anyone's claiming knowledge of Caylee's death... at least not on RRS. I personally am not saying that Casey is the murderer. I'm simply pointing out that putting Caylee's body in a gym bag in the middle of the woods points to an (amateurish) attempt to cover up the commission of a crime. Undeniably so, as far as I'm concerned, because no other scenario fits... unless you have some top ace theories you'd like to share.

Who commited a crime relating to Caylee, and what the crime was is anyone's guess. That the crime was murder or negligent homicide, is a probability, just not a positive fact (yet.)

 

I'm not saying a crime was not commited but murder is only one of several possibilities for dumping a body in a swampy area. Others are accidental death from neglience, accidental death in general - a meteorite hit Caylee in the head.... who the fuck knows... not anyone willing to talkk... but clearly failure to report her death.

 

But who and how?

I don't believe anything anyone in the Anthony family has to say at all at this point.

 

Kapkao wrote:

 

edit; Also...

Quote:

No it isn't. It appears blue to most humans though.

See - http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Evidence_that_the_sky_is_not_blue

..the link you provided doesn't provide any conclusive evidence relating to the color of Earth's atmosphere being something other than what it appears to us. Not that the smartass remark I originally made and you overanalyzed has any bearing on the thread's subject matter.

 

If you are really interested you can investigate it, like you I replied in a similar smartass way.

 

I would just like to not see fucking Breaking News Casey Anthony Blah Blah Blah .... scrolling over my TV every fucking day like has been for the last 3 years.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:I

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:


I didn't know we were debating it looked like a friendly discussion to me.

Debates can also be friendly discussions. They aren't mutually exclusive.

 

 


Quote:
If you are really interested you can investigate it, like you I replied in a similar smartass way.

If that was you being a smartass, I think you need practice.

You don't even compare to Rednef. Then again, I don't think anyone delivers the same level of causticity to theists.

Quote:
I would just like to not see fucking Breaking News Casey Anthony Blah Blah Blah .... scrolling over my TV every fucking day like has been for the last 3 years.

You and me both, except in my case it's google news.

"STFU! People die all the time, including kids... is it worth this many airwaves? NO!"

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao

Kapkao wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

 

I didn't know we were debating it looked like a friendly discussion to me.

Debates can also be friendly discussions. They aren't mutually exclusive.

 

 

 

true.

 

Kapkao wrote:

Quote:
If you are really interested you can investigate it, like you I replied in a similar smartass way.

If that was you being a smartass, I think you need practice.

 

You don't even compare to Rednef. Then again, I don't think anyone delivers the same level of causticity to theists.

 

I can be such as with Gramps but  pretty much everyone on RRS in this thread had very little disagreement from my views. Freeminer really pissed me off in Gramps thread for awhile and I responded accordingly. Though I did not resort to the type of language I reserve for the media fuckwads. I usually don't use foul language but Nancy Grace and friends brings that out.

I just want the media assholes to go the fuck home.

 

Kapkao wrote:

Quote:
I would just like to not see fucking Breaking News Casey Anthony Blah Blah Blah .... scrolling over my TV every fucking day like has been for the last 3 years.

You and me both, except in my case it's google news.

"STFU! People die all the time, including kids... is it worth this many airwaves? NO!"

There too but worse when your local TV stations are Orlando.

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: I have always

Brian37 wrote:
I have always been of the mindset that it is far better to let the guilty go free than to convict one innocent person.

Glad your not in charge...lol

Can you do the math for those who are victims of your mathematical theorums?

Because that's what happened when they investigated an earlier allegation against Jeffrey Dahmer. They let him go, which ended up in more heads in his fridge than if they had locked him up.

Brian37 wrote:
This cuts to the core LONG TERM, not based on one person or one case, but cuts to the core of what kind of society we would want to live under.
 

Then why base your strategy on one that potentially unleashed murderers and rapists into society for the emotional peace of mind that someone with a 50/50 chance of being guilty of the crime they're alleged to have committed, (who could potentially get killed by a bus the next day) might be unjustly become housed in a prison?

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

PJTS wrote:
Brian37 wrote:

It sucks that Caylee was murdered. But there IS  a much bigger picture to the history of law and WHY it is important to accept that sometimes the guilty can go free.

Then after everything you have said you somehow know that Caylee was murdered. Correction for you:

 It sucks that Caylee died.

I didn't like you used the word murdered in your sentance. The cause of death of Caylee is unknown.

Brian37 wrote:

Boy did you misread what I said. My criticism is not of the jury's decision. My criticism is of the idiots who are crying foul AFTER due process was done.  These morons need to read the constitution and understand WHY we as a society have to respect the decision of the jury.

No I only objected to one word you used that didn't fit the context of your argument.

And I understood you were not one of the crazed mob crying foul, I agreed with you on your points.

The stupid lemmings outside the courthouse were so dumbass they were shouting "appeal" "appeal". They could have been manipulated at that point to say "burn the bitch" or "lynch the bitch".

 

Brian37 wrote:

There is a media opinion (duh, Casey did it) and a legal definition(verdict) which makes Casey legally innocent.

But one juror interviewed said what I thought was correct, "How can you punish someone if you don't know how they did it?" The jurors WANTED to convict her, but rightfully agreed that the case was not based on emotion, but facts, and to that jury, the state's case was not strong enough, no matter what their personal opinion of Casey was.

"Justice" to the fuckwads slamming the jury, isn't about fact finding. These armchair quarterbacks slamming the jury, were not sitting on the jury themselves, and did not here all the information themselves, and were not faced with the jury instructions written on paper that the jury had to follow.

"Justice" from a Constitutional context, isn't, or in my mind, should not be about favoring either side, but fact finding and if you cant find strong enough facts, then as a juror you should err on protecting the constitution by letting the accused go for lack of evidence, which IS what this jury did.

But "justice" to the nutcases who are outraged by due process, isn't about fact finding, but revenge.

But come on, a skeleton in a bag with duct tape on it? Caylee was murdered, but there was NOT sufficient evidence that Casey did it. And because they didn't determine manor of death or cause of death, this verdict was the correct one.

 

Brian, the location and condition of the remains did not in itself indicate cause of death. Duct tape on the face could have been used to keep the jaw attached.

Note - there was no skin residue on the adhesive of the tape - forensics showed that. This indicates the tape was put on after Caylee was dead. The only DNA on the tape was not Casey's or anyone in her family or even the idiot meter reader Kronk.

Brian37 wrote:

So please don't think I am one of those morons going "Caylee was murdered don't you want someone to pay"

My response, "No, I don't want "someone" to pay, I want the facts to prove the responsible person without speculation and with sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt".

My point is "DUH" without facts doesn't constitute a case. That is what happened here. Casey IS legally innocent and we as a society, if we value our own rights, need to respect due process and this verdict. 

And again, Brian I only object to the word murdered because there is no way to tell.

 

Other than that I agree with you.

 

 

WE ARE NOT IN DISPUTE as much as you like to think.

One is "opinion" and the other is legal fact in the law of a jury.

It is a NO DUH, that the kid was murdered. How many dead bodies that die naturally end up in garbage bags?

I am not claiming that it was a fact that she was murdered, but it IS my opinion. AND not one that I could prove in court.

I am totally with this jury in that because they didn't know how she died they couldn't prove murder, but even they said THEY WANTED ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PUT HER AWAY. So even they had the opinion she did it, but didn't have the facts to prove it.

One issue is opinion, and the other issue is what can actually be proven. I was not stating that Caylee was murdered as a fact proven in a court of law, obviously it wasn't proven in a legal standard. But it sure as hell looks that way.

AS I SAID, I am with this jury because of the lack of evidence, no so much that a murder was committed, but because they couldn't directly connect Casey to the dump site. And most certainly it didn't help that they did not know how Caylee died.

But, let me ask you this. Even without duct tape. IF IF IF IF IF IF IF, they had found Casey's fingerprints on the garbage bag at the dump site, and car tire prints from Casey's car at the dump site, even without cause of death, wouldn't it be easier to convict her of something?

I think if they had found a tire track or finger print at the dump site, Casey would be sitting on death row.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
I now understand your "opinion"

Brian37 wrote:

WE ARE NOT IN DISPUTE as much as you like to think.

One is "opinion" and the other is legal fact in the law of a jury.

It is a NO DUH, that the kid was murdered. How many dead bodies that die naturally end up in garbage bags?

I am not claiming that it was a fact that she was murdered, but it IS my opinion. AND not one that I could prove in court.

 

Your opinion that she was murdered is noted. Everyone has an opinion on this case.

As I do not believe anything any member of the Anthony family says I can't decide who is responsible for Caylee's death.

One of them is responsible.

Brian37 wrote:

I am totally with this jury in that because they didn't know how she died they couldn't prove murder, but even they said THEY WANTED ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PUT HER AWAY. So even they had the opinion she did it, but didn't have the facts to prove it.

I also agree with the jury, if you can't tell how she died how can you legally say the child was murdered. Answer - you can't.

The jurors are human, they heard all the sordid details of Casey's actions after Caylee disappeared/died which will influence you emotionally but nor legally.

Brian37 wrote:

One issue is opinion, and the other issue is what can actually be proven. I was not stating that Caylee was murdered as a fact proven in a court of law, obviously it wasn't proven in a legal standard. But it sure as hell looks that way.

 

Your use of the word murdered in the context that you used indicated you could conclude this even though the evidence can't support it. If you had said, in my opinion Caylee was murdered I would not object but that is not what you did. I now understand that your opinion is she was murdered.

Brian37 wrote:

 

AS I SAID, I am with this jury because of the lack of evidence, no so much that a murder was committed, but because they couldn't directly connect Casey to the dump site. And most certainly it didn't help that they did not know how Caylee died.

 

OK, I understand your opinion now.

Brian37 wrote:

But, let me ask you this. Even without duct tape. IF IF IF IF IF IF IF, they had found Casey's fingerprints on the garbage bag at the dump site, and car tire prints from Casey's car at the dump site, even without cause of death, wouldn't it be easier to convict her of something?

I think if they had found a tire track or finger print at the dump site, Casey would be sitting on death row. 

Of course if there had been her fingerprints on the garbage bag or tire tracks that matched the car or Casey's fingerprints or DNA on the duct tape it would be a slam dunk case for conviction of some form of murder, manslaughter or wrongful death of a child.

There wasn't though.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic wrote: I

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

I am not claiming that it was a fact that she was murdered, but it IS my opinion. AND not one that I could prove in court.

 

Well, I also have an opinion on this case. My opinion is that it deserves a folk song.

 

 

Yesterday in Orlando,

Miss Caley Anthony died

And the cops got mama on a charge of homicide.

 

Now some folks say she didn't do it and others say of course she did

But they all agree that miss Casey A is a problem kind of kid.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wlO-J0v9ZY

 

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13671
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

WE ARE NOT IN DISPUTE as much as you like to think.

One is "opinion" and the other is legal fact in the law of a jury.

It is a NO DUH, that the kid was murdered. How many dead bodies that die naturally end up in garbage bags?

I am not claiming that it was a fact that she was murdered, but it IS my opinion. AND not one that I could prove in court.

 

Your opinion that she was murdered is noted. Everyone has an opinion on this case.

As I do not believe anything any member of the Anthony family says I can't decide who is responsible for Caylee's death.

One of them is responsible.

Brian37 wrote:

I am totally with this jury in that because they didn't know how she died they couldn't prove murder, but even they said THEY WANTED ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PUT HER AWAY. So even they had the opinion she did it, but didn't have the facts to prove it.

I also agree with the jury, if you can't tell how she died how can you legally say the child was murdered. Answer - you can't.

The jurors are human, they heard all the sordid details of Casey's actions after Caylee disappeared/died which will influence you emotionally but nor legally.

Brian37 wrote:

One issue is opinion, and the other issue is what can actually be proven. I was not stating that Caylee was murdered as a fact proven in a court of law, obviously it wasn't proven in a legal standard. But it sure as hell looks that way.

 

Your use of the word murdered in the context that you used indicated you could conclude this even though the evidence can't support it. If you had said, in my opinion Caylee was murdered I would not object but that is not what you did. I now understand that your opinion is she was murdered.

Brian37 wrote:

 

AS I SAID, I am with this jury because of the lack of evidence, no so much that a murder was committed, but because they couldn't directly connect Casey to the dump site. And most certainly it didn't help that they did not know how Caylee died.

 

OK, I understand your opinion now.

Brian37 wrote:

But, let me ask you this. Even without duct tape. IF IF IF IF IF IF IF, they had found Casey's fingerprints on the garbage bag at the dump site, and car tire prints from Casey's car at the dump site, even without cause of death, wouldn't it be easier to convict her of something?

I think if they had found a tire track or finger print at the dump site, Casey would be sitting on death row. 

Of course if there had been her fingerprints on the garbage bag or tire tracks that matched the car or Casey's fingerprints or DNA on the duct tape it would be a slam dunk case for conviction of some form of murder, manslaughter or wrongful death of a child.

There wasn't though.

Where is our disagreement? "There wasn't enough" DUH, which is why there was a "not guilty" verdict.

You keep wanting to assume that I don't want to separate an opinion, from a legal verdict AND the two are not the same.

All fingers point to Casey, and dead bodies don't end up in garbage bags most of the time unless a murder is involved. But no matter what we think, as the jury RIGHTFULLY said, "It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what the state can prove, and the state failed to do so".

I don't know why you think we are in disagreement. This seems to be arguing semantics.

THE JURY WAS RIGHT IN IT'S VERDICT and from a legal standpoint Casey Anthony is legally innocent. That is the end of the story. So until or unless Casey fucks up and does something else illegal. If she is smart she'll stay clean from now on, but my guess is that she will do something stupid again in the future and end up with some other charges. But until then she IS a free person and is afforded the same rights under our constitution as all should have.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Where is our

Brian37 wrote:

Where is our disagreement? "There wasn't enough" DUH, which is why there was a "not guilty" verdict.

You keep wanting to assume that I don't want to separate an opinion, from a legal verdict AND the two are not the same.

All fingers point to Casey, and dead bodies don't end up in garbage bags most of the time unless a murder is involved. But no matter what we think, as the jury RIGHTFULLY said, "It doesn't matter what we think, it matters what the state can prove, and the state failed to do so".

I don't know why you think we are in disagreement. This seems to be arguing semantics.

THE JURY WAS RIGHT IN IT'S VERDICT and from a legal standpoint Casey Anthony is legally innocent. That is the end of the story. So until or unless Casey fucks up and does something else illegal. If she is smart she'll stay clean from now on, but my guess is that she will do something stupid again in the future and end up with some other charges. But until then she IS a free person and is afforded the same rights under our constitution as all should have.

 

OK then.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.