The jury had no choice. There was no evidence at all that she killed her daughter. These kind of tragedies are society's fault. People who cannot handle family life should be able to find someplace else for the kids legally so that they do not have to kill them or go mad.
They were not required to prove it 100%. The burden of proof was beyond a reasonable doubt. No reasonable person could have thought she was not guilty. Life is cheap these days.
No justice for Caylee. For the defense, this case was about winning regardless of who and what was in their way. Any case can have reasonable doubt if you look hard enough and when you come up with a ridiculous story as the defense did.There should be some accountability for defenses tactics. Common sense should have a place in these trials. Now Casey can continue to conceive other children, and get rich on book deals. Nice justice system.
What legal system do you live under where they don't have to prove something 100%?
I haven't followed this case and do not know details of what evidence was presented, but from what i've heard most of the evidence was circumstantial, no matter how much it makes you believe she is guilty, none of it proves it (or so i've heard).
If you'd go with your gut and vote guilty, I hope i'm never wrongly accused of something and find you on my jury. (insert "i wouldn't get myself wrongly accused" response here).
Te real thing people are upset about is that they know people get away with terrible crimes all the time and this just brught it out in the open and rocked their world an they have no way to process it. Watch for riots in atlanta
To 6:52 am, I live under the US justice system. The burden on the state is they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not equate to 100%. Surely you are not that illinformed? You say much of the evidence was circumstancial. So what? Do you not know that circumstancial evidence is responsible for putting many many behind bars. Circumstancial evidence is given great weight in our system. I have to laugh at you claiming all they had was circumstancial evidence. There have been many people convicted of murder where ther was never a body, weapon or means of death found.
She did it. I have to wonder how much money changed hands between the jury and the media , movie moguls, and book publishers. It makes me sick to to think that all of the circumstantial evidence that was given was ignored. Scott Peterson was convicted on a lot less. That little girl will not get justice because the killer is going to walk free and party with her money from the media. Somebody said, well who did it then, they need to investigate more and find the killer, they already did that but our justice system has more rights for criminals that should not be in place, fair trial sure, corrupt trial, no.
I didn't feel she did it.. Think she knows how and when it happened. Whether a friend or someone she didn't know but they didn't prove to me that she was murdered her. I feel their was no choice but to let her go. Not enough evidence to prove it to me. Sorry folks that feel she did it remember this is my opinion.
I think its a horrible injustice on the part of the jury. There was plenty of evidence wether it was proven 100% or not. The lies she told one after another and waiting 31 days to let anyone know her 2 year old child was missing should have been the first real clue that she was guilty. I watched this trial and I have no clue how anyone of those jurors seen her as anything but guilty. She rarely showed any emotion even when they spoke of the remains of her daughter but oh boy when they said she wasnt guilty she cried because she was "happy"! How sad! My only hope now is that the real judge and jury have no mercy on her soul!!!
At least Caylee is in the comfort of her real Father's arms. Sometimes you have to take comfort in that and know that Caycee will ultimately face her true judgement. I wouldn't want to be there for that one.
A shocking amount of ignorance about how our courts work. The simple fact is this: the prosecution couldn't even prove how Caylee died, let alone whether her mother was responsible. There was no evidence of motive, no evidence of premeditation, no hard facts directly tying Casey to her daughter's murder. Do I think she's innocent? Of course not. But the bottom line is that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, and they made a huge mistake in going for Murder 1 (and the death penalty) on a case with nothing but circumstantial evidence. This is the way the courts work, and it's disturbing to hear people say that she should have been convicted, in essence, on a hunch.
Also, for the record, being a lousy, disinterested parent doesn't make you a murderer. Having worked in both social work and education, the number of parents I've met who could plausibly let their kid die and then go party is disturbingly high.
To: 4:51 PM You said "Justice will be when someone kills her or she eventually overdoses in some crack house. We can only hope that she suffers while doing it."
How terrible for you to have so much anger in your heart! God is the only true judge!
Anonymous 7:19 is correct. The Prosecutor lost the case when the decision was made to charge the defendant with a crime that they could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And to Anonymous 8:51, do you have the same contempt for the school bigshot in Cincinnati who remembered the donuts, but left her infant daughter in the SUV to die of heat exposure? She was never charged with anything because she was never prosecuted. Where was the justice for her little girl? By the way, the woman was recently on Oprah.
People have been convicted on circumstancial evidence, anybody remember Carrie Cabertson, he killer was convicted of murder and they didn't even have a body to prove she was dead, I have a hard time believing that they let her off, like it's been said, OJ trial all over again, then to here she is planning to have another kid.
It's O.J. Simpson all over again. How can defense lawyers sleep?
ReplyDeleteThe Prosecution couldn't prove it 100%.
ReplyDeleteThe jury had no choice. There was no evidence at all that she killed her daughter. These kind of tragedies are society's fault. People who cannot handle family life should be able to find someplace else for the kids legally so that they do not have to kill them or go mad.
ReplyDeleteThey were not required to prove it 100%. The burden of proof was beyond a reasonable doubt. No reasonable person could have thought she was not guilty. Life is cheap these days.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we will get lucky and she disappears off the face of the Earth in her own shallow grave.
ReplyDeleteShe is guilty, anyone who could look at the case and believe she didn't do it must have an IQ under 60.
No justice for Caylee. For the defense, this case was about winning regardless of who and what was in their way. Any case can have reasonable doubt if you look hard enough and when you come up with a ridiculous story as the defense did.There should be some accountability for defenses tactics. Common sense should have a place in these trials. Now Casey can continue to conceive other children, and get rich on book deals. Nice justice system.
ReplyDeleteWhat legal system do you live under where they don't have to prove something 100%?
ReplyDeleteI haven't followed this case and do not know details of what evidence was presented, but from what i've heard most of the evidence was circumstantial, no matter how much it makes you believe she is guilty, none of it proves it (or so i've heard).
If you'd go with your gut and vote guilty, I hope i'm never wrongly accused of something and find you on my jury. (insert "i wouldn't get myself wrongly accused" response here).
Te real thing people are upset about is that they know people get away with terrible crimes all the time and this just brught it out in the open and rocked their world an they have no way to process it. Watch for riots in atlanta
ReplyDeleteTo 6:52 am, I live under the US justice system. The burden on the state is they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not equate to 100%. Surely you are not that illinformed? You say much of the evidence was circumstancial. So what? Do you not know that circumstancial evidence is responsible for putting many many behind bars. Circumstancial evidence is given great weight in our system. I have to laugh at you claiming all they had was circumstancial evidence. There have been many people convicted of murder where ther was never a body, weapon or means of death found.
ReplyDeleteA big part of the problem is that they let anyone be on a jury. I think they need an iq test for potential jurors. Look at the OJ jury.
ReplyDeleteShe did it. I have to wonder how much money changed hands between the jury and the media , movie moguls, and book publishers.
ReplyDeleteIt makes me sick to to think that all of the circumstantial evidence that was given was ignored. Scott Peterson was convicted on a lot less. That little girl will not get justice because the killer is going to walk free and party with her money from the media. Somebody said, well who did it then, they need to investigate more and find the killer, they already did that but our justice system has more rights for criminals that should not be in place, fair trial sure, corrupt trial, no.
I didn't feel she did it.. Think she knows how and when it happened. Whether a friend or someone she didn't know but they didn't prove to me that she was murdered her. I feel their was no choice but to let her go. Not enough evidence to prove it to me. Sorry folks that feel she did it remember this is my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI guess Caylee committed suicide. Life is cheap. In a nation where you can kill babies in the womb why worry about one little girl tossed in a swamp?
ReplyDeleteI think its a horrible injustice on the part of the jury. There was plenty of evidence wether it was proven 100% or not. The lies she told one after another and waiting 31 days to let anyone know her 2 year old child was missing should have been the first real clue that she was guilty. I watched this trial and I have no clue how anyone of those jurors seen her as anything but guilty. She rarely showed any emotion even when they spoke of the remains of her daughter but oh boy when they said she wasnt guilty she cried because she was "happy"! How sad! My only hope now is that the real judge and jury have no mercy on her soul!!!
ReplyDeleteAt least Caylee is in the comfort of her real Father's arms. Sometimes you have to take comfort in that and know that Caycee will ultimately face her true judgement. I wouldn't want to be there for that one.
ReplyDeleteI once had a lawyer tell me, "Just because you are going to court, doesn't mean you will get justice."
ReplyDeleteJustice will be when someone kills her or she eventually overdoses in some crack house. We can only hope that she suffers while doing it.
ReplyDeleteA shocking amount of ignorance about how our courts work. The simple fact is this: the prosecution couldn't even prove how Caylee died, let alone whether her mother was responsible. There was no evidence of motive, no evidence of premeditation, no hard facts directly tying Casey to her daughter's murder. Do I think she's innocent? Of course not. But the bottom line is that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, and they made a huge mistake in going for Murder 1 (and the death penalty) on a case with nothing but circumstantial evidence. This is the way the courts work, and it's disturbing to hear people say that she should have been convicted, in essence, on a hunch.
ReplyDeleteAlso, for the record, being a lousy, disinterested parent doesn't make you a murderer. Having worked in both social work and education, the number of parents I've met who could plausibly let their kid die and then go party is disturbingly high.
To: 4:51 PM You said "Justice will be when someone kills her or she eventually overdoses in some crack house. We can only hope that she suffers while doing it."
ReplyDeleteHow terrible for you to have so much anger in your heart! God is the only true judge!
Anonymous 7:19 is correct. The Prosecutor lost the case when the decision was made to charge the defendant with a crime that they could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And to Anonymous 8:51, do you have the same contempt for the school bigshot in Cincinnati who remembered the donuts, but left her infant daughter in the SUV to die of heat exposure? She was never charged with anything because she was never prosecuted. Where was the justice for her little girl? By the way, the woman was recently on Oprah.
ReplyDeletePeople have been convicted on circumstancial evidence, anybody remember Carrie Cabertson, he killer was convicted of murder and they didn't even have a body to prove she was dead, I have a hard time believing that they let her off, like it's been said, OJ trial all over again, then to here she is planning to have another kid.
ReplyDelete