Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Casey Anthony case....If you followed the case, can you think of a reason why the jury found her not quilty?

Im curious what your thoughts are on how the jury may have came back with that verdict, in such a short time, too.

 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 4:11 PM on Jul. 5, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

This question is closed.
Answers (13)
  • The reason why the jury found her not guilty is because there is no evidence pointing to Casey. Flat out.

    I've followed this from day 1. Prosecution based everything on theory. They have the who (Casey), the why(motive), but no what (murder weapon).
    I feel she had a fair trial.

    If you (per se) were picked for one of the jury members. It's not like you hear all the crap they say, walk into a room and say "Yes, she did it." Did you not watch the judge go over the papers the jury has to follow?

    And, I'll say it again. If anyone thinks she should have been found guilty, please point out any evidence that points to her.

    Do I think she done it? Based on emotions...yes, I do.

    Don't blame the jury.
    Chloesmom1126

    Answer by Chloesmom1126 at 4:43 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Not enough concrete physical evidence. Remember, they were supposed to know nothing of the case before the trail so they haven't been succumb to the media like they have. They didn't see much of how she acted during the trail. Just how she was when they were in the room. And the defense gave a timeline of what could have happened after she died, unlike the prosecution.
    keisha613

    Answer by keisha613 at 4:15 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Well, it's REALLY hard to convict on first-degree murder. That's why they so rarely go for first-degree. Plus, the jury has to have a unanimous decision, beyond a reasonable doubt, and first-degree means you HAVE to be CERTAIN, and few juries do convict people of first-degree. Had they tried her on a lesser charge, they might have gotten the conviction. I didn't follow the case, per se, but just from my limited knowledge of law, this is often how it turns out.
    musicpisces

    Answer by musicpisces at 4:16 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Well I think she is guilty just based on her behavior,, but they did not have any cause of death,,the didn't find chloroform in her remains, and the evidence was mostly circumstancial....trust me,, I wish some one would duct tape her mouth shut,but sadly this is the way our justice system works,, hopefully she will do something else and go to jail again, just like OJ!
    kimigogo

    Answer by kimigogo at 4:16 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • I didn't follow the case, but I'm curious as well.
    -Eilish-

    Answer by -Eilish- at 4:14 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • succumb to the media like *we have, not they have.
    keisha613

    Answer by keisha613 at 4:15 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • musicpisces .... can you explain the differences in murder charges and what needs to be proven? Do you think the prosecution felt this was a slam dunk case thus not charging her with a lesser degree?
    -Eilish-

    Answer by -Eilish- at 4:20 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • I wish I knew!
    tspillane

    Answer by tspillane at 4:46 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • @Chloesmom ... so you think the prosecution just failed to make a case against her? Not that she is actually innocent?
    -Eilish-

    Answer by -Eilish- at 4:47 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • They were incompetent!
    older

    Answer by older at 4:47 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN