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

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

Does anyone know why Casey wasn't charge with Desecration of Remains? She admits to the death of Caley, her car has decomposing hair and maggots within it, she did not notify police when her daughter died, she did not properly handle the deceased, and the body was clearly dumped/desecrated? 8+ years for that alone.

She could have been imprisoned for an additional 8+ years for this charge even if she claimed her father dumped the body. She is the mother and released the body to him if that lie were true or not. She is responsible for at least Desecration of Remains!

Answer Question
 
crr6

Asked by crr6 at 12:19 PM on Jul. 6, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 2 (6 Credits)
Answers (11)
  • When did she admit to the death? The accidental drowning?? Was that even one of the charges?
    amazinggrace83

    Answer by amazinggrace83 at 12:22 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • She never admitted to the death!
    older

    Answer by older at 12:24 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • Probably because she hadn't admitted to anything before court. During the opening remarks is when she admitted to knowing about Caylee's death prior to the body being found.
    Quinn525

    Answer by Quinn525 at 12:25 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • Her lawyer admitted to the court that Casey found the body in the pool and that her father disposed of it. Since Casey is the legal guardian of her daughter, it was her responsibility to report the death, obtain a death certificate, and have a proper burial for her daughter. Regardless of who actually dumped the body, Casey admitted through her attorney to the death and deliberate release of Caylees body without utilizing the proper legal channels. That is premeditated evasion of the law and Desecration of Remains, isn't it?
    crr6

    Comment by crr6 (original poster) at 12:34 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • The thing is....did anyone SEE her desecrate? Did anyone believe anything Casey or her parents said? DO you not understand that they needed absolute proof? And since they didn't have it, they went with "Reasonable Doubt".
    You can't convict when there is reasonable doubt. Arghhhhh....how long do we have to discuss this?
    minnesotanice

    Answer by minnesotanice at 12:47 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • You can't convict when there is reasonable doubt. Arghhhhh....how long do we have to discuss this?

    You don't have to discuss it move on to other posts if you are so bothered by it. Even someone as dim witted as you should be able to understand that concept.lol
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 1:01 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • This whole case was fumbled from the beginning. I think the main reason she got away with it is because today's juries think real life is like tv, i.e., CSI shows where there's DNA, fingerprints, etc; and if there isn't, then the person can't possibly be guilty. If the cops had searched the area the meter (?) person had called them about, they would have found the body in time to get some definitive infor. But after 6 months, there was nothing left but the bones. I also think if the prosecutor had gone for a lesser charge than murder one, he might have gotten her convicted. But with a murder one charge, the jury just wouldn't find her guilty without hard black and white evidence.
    grandmab125

    Answer by grandmab125 at 1:41 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • You have an admission to finding her body in the pool. That is proof just like a confession. That eliminates any doubt whatsoever. The body was in her possession by her admission. That makes her culpable of desecration of remains and evasion of the law. What I am looking for is some enlightenment from a mom online who has a legal background who can answer this question for me. The doubt that was raised was regarding the charge of murder. Why is Casey not charged with desecration of remains? Please don't respond unless you have some legal insight. Thank you.
    crr6

    Comment by crr6 (original poster) at 1:45 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • Prosecutions decision-

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 1:48 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

  • Because they cannot prove:
    Where Caylee died, how caylee died, who was there when caylee died, and who did what with the body.
    Its screwed up that she played the system like a fiddle, but wheit comes to evidence, all the prosecution had was circumstancial evidence and a very detailed theory on what happened.
    I think she killed her, but the fact remains they have none of her DNA with the body, tape, clothes, bag. Not one single leaf from the dump site. Nothing that undeniably points to Casey. She is a smart girl, and the state and police botched the investigation:
    Not documenting the heart shaped residue, not investigating in August the dump site after Kronk reported it 3 times..
    The rules for the justice system are there toprotect the innocent. Unfortunately, a murderer figured out how to use it for her own gain.
    Mme.Langley

    Answer by Mme.Langley at 3:32 PM on Jul. 6, 2011

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN