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

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

If not for the media ...

... would you still have a negative opinion of Casey Anthony? Did the jury acquit her because they hadn't been "tainted" by the media? Or did the prosecution just fail to make the case against her beyond a reasonable doubt? Is she guilty in the court of public opinion only?


Asked by -Eilish- at 4:58 PM on Jul. 5, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 28 (33,578 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (21)
  • Not sure... the evidence seemed to be stacked against her in my opinion. The media attention was ridiculous though. I support the constitutional right to a public trial but I absolutely disagree with a glamorized one.

    Answer by katie1317 at 5:00 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Who knows!!!!I saw the trial from beginning to end and I tell you that they did prove the case against her, my husband who has  been a criminal defense lawyer for over 35 years is in shock too!


    Answer by older at 5:03 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • I am sure they all knew she was guilty, given all of the circumstantial evidence. They were confused, Oj style, into not being able to give a guilty verdict because of lack of specific evidence, such as DNA. It is a failure of the judicial system to come to the truth.

    Anyone who finds their child dead in a pool, and instead of calling 911, decides to duct tape her mouth and dump her, is guilty in my book. Very guilty.


    Answer by ImaginationMama at 5:05 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • I wonder if the lead prosecutor smirking during the Defense Attorney's closing statement had any effect on the jury? What an idiotic and unprofessional move-


    Answer by Sisteract at 5:14 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Honestly...the media had me feeling she was guilty...but...NOT SAYING I DO NOT THINK SHE IS GUILTY, BECAUSE I DO...But, when I watched the closing arguments from her lawyer...I knew that she would not get the punishment she deserved. They have NO proof. The only thing they have on her is her lying. There is no known cause of death, no chloroform...and I still can not understand why they could not test the car...if it smelled of death, could they not test it and find something???? It does not make sense..the only thing that does is her parents..they were in on it too. The duct tape, the pool ladder. And why would you have to cover up an accidental drowning? I know what I would have done if it were my child, but...this girl is disturbed, look at that family and how she was raised...they are all LIARS and they don't care who they are lying to. Her parents could have told her what to do, telling her it was best, etc. who knows?

    Answer by luvmy4kidsinAL at 5:25 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • it is sick, media attention or not- it is blatantly obvious this little girl was killed by a member of her family (most likely her own mother). I understand there was no proof or evidence of murder- but not calling for 31 days to report a missing child?! COME ON PEOPLE! This just doesn't make sense to me. I am sick about it !!!

    Answer by cheapsally at 5:32 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • absolutely. the jury was well-informed on how casey didn't report her daughter missing for 31 days. that alone would've been enough for me if i hadn't already known that 3 years ago. i think the prosecution did a fine job.

    Answer by tnm786 at 5:01 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • I actually did not follow the media on this @ all, in fact I just today looked at the newspaper about the trail. I read what they said the prosecutor presented and what her defense attorney presented. The prosecutors evidence seemed much more solid than the defense's (about her father staging the whole murder scene, and that it was just a drowning accident).

    Answer by AF4life at 5:02 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • She didnt report her dd for 31 days. I would have thought she killed her right then without any media telling me a thing.

    Answer by gemgem at 5:04 PM on Jul. 5, 2011

  • Not reporting a 2 yo missing for 31 days = neglect, which is child abuse- How could they have found her not guilty of abuse?


    Answer by Sisteract at 5:10 PM on Jul. 5, 2011