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

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Two Casey Anthony Convictions Overturned But Don’t Freak Out Just Yet - What do you think?

Posted by on Jan. 26, 2013 at 10:45 AM
  • 19 Replies

Two Casey Anthony Convictions Overturned But Don’t Freak Out Just Yet

Posted by Lindsay Mannering on January 25, 2013

casey anthonyOnce again, Casey Anthony has been found not guilty. An appeals court in Florida was tasked with deciding if Casey should've been convicted of four counts of lying to detectives during the investigation into her daughter Caylee's disappearance in 2009. If you'll remember, she was acquitted of the murder charges brought against her, but was slapped with four misdemeanours of lying to law-enforcement. Now, two of those convictions have been overturned.

Judges on the Court of Appeals found that, yeah, she may have told four separate lies, but her various false statements only count as two under the double jeopardy principle.

Even though Casey's gotten off yet again, there's still some good news for those of you out there who'd like to see her punished.

The fact that this appellate court hearing has finished up means that her civil suit can head to trial. Do you recall Zenaida Gonzalez? She's suing Casey for defamation -- Casey claimed it was "the nanny" Zenaida Gonzalez who kidnapped Caylee. She'd made up the name, but there's a real woman out there in Florida that shares the moniker and she wants payback for the pain Casey's caused.

That trial's set to start somewhere in August. Before that Casey and her lawyers might appeal the remaining two convictions of lying to law-enforcement.

Casey's been laying low since her murder acquittal and no one really knows where she is. She wasn't at the appeals court hearing, and I'm not sure if she'll need to be at the civil case this summer, but one thing's for sure: if all her convictions are overturned and she's found not guilty of defaming Zenaida Gonzalez, people are going to go nuts.

Many believed she murdered her daughter and want Casey to pay for Caylee's death, but by the way things seem to be turning out, she may get off 100 percent scot-free. Again.

Thoughts?

by on Jan. 26, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
glitterteaz
by Ruby Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM

I think it is stupid this lady is suing since there was NO direct link to her being the child's nanny. Now if she had been and that link was made causing her issues sure live it up and sue. This however had no connection Casey made the name up she never knew the woman and she never hired her. Therefore, any harassment made to the lady was by people assuming it was her, so her problem is with them. I mean she could have said any name in the world and someone would have that name. It has to be connected to be anything but a frivolous lawsuit.

Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:09 AM
3 moms liked this


Quoting glitterteaz:

I think it is stupid this lady is suing since there was NO direct link to her being the child's nanny. Now if she had been and that link was made causing her issues sure live it up and sue. This however had no connection Casey made the name up she never knew the woman and she never hired her. Therefore, any harassment made to the lady was by people assuming it was her, so her problem is with them. I mean she could have said any name in the world and someone would have that name. It has to be connected to be anything but a frivolous lawsuit.

I disagree. She dragged that lady through the mud. Even thought it's been 'proven' she had no part in murdering or kidnapping that poor little girl she has huge losses. I think that suing will gain nothingbutlost time, though, What will Anthony pay her with?


glitterteaz
by Ruby Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:18 AM

actually the media and those making assumptions drug the lady thru the mud NOT Casey. She just made up the name. Had she said John Johnson was babysitting OMG the number of guys they would have hounded. But she made up a name that was odd most likely, so no one would find one in the area. Fail cause they did but there was not a link, so that is all on the media imho.

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting glitterteaz:

I think it is stupid this lady is suing since there was NO direct link to her being the child's nanny. Now if she had been and that link was made causing her issues sure live it up and sue. This however had no connection Casey made the name up she never knew the woman and she never hired her. Therefore, any harassment made to the lady was by people assuming it was her, so her problem is with them. I mean she could have said any name in the world and someone would have that name. It has to be connected to be anything but a frivolous lawsuit.

I disagree. She dragged that lady through the mud. Even thought it's been 'proven' she had no part in murdering or kidnapping that poor little girl she has huge losses. I think that suing will gain nothingbutlost time, though, What will Anthony pay her with?


glitterteaz
by Ruby Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:19 AM

I do agree that this suit is not going to gain this woman anything but more lost money to file the suit

Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:30 AM
2 moms liked this


Quoting glitterteaz:

actually the media and those making assumptions drug the lady thru the mud NOT Casey. She just made up the name. Had she said John Johnson was babysitting OMG the number of guys they would have hounded. But she made up a name that was odd most likely, so no one would find one in the area. Fail cause they did but there was not a link, so that is all on the media imho.

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting glitterteaz:

I think it is stupid this lady is suing since there was NO direct link to her being the child's nanny. Now if she had been and that link was made causing her issues sure live it up and sue. This however had no connection Casey made the name up she never knew the woman and she never hired her. Therefore, any harassment made to the lady was by people assuming it was her, so her problem is with them. I mean she could have said any name in the world and someone would have that name. It has to be connected to be anything but a frivolous lawsuit.

I disagree. She dragged that lady through the mud. Even thought it's been 'proven' she had no part in murdering or kidnapping that poor little girl she has huge losses. I think that suing will gain nothingbutlost time, though, What will Anthony pay her with?


A stunt perpetuated by Anthony's lie makes her responsible IMO

glitterteaz
by Ruby Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM

I think the person who leaked it to the media is more responsible

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting glitterteaz:

actually the media and those making assumptions drug the lady thru the mud NOT Casey. She just made up the name. Had she said John Johnson was babysitting OMG the number of guys they would have hounded. But she made up a name that was odd most likely, so no one would find one in the area. Fail cause they did but there was not a link, so that is all on the media imho.

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting glitterteaz:

I think it is stupid this lady is suing since there was NO direct link to her being the child's nanny. Now if she had been and that link was made causing her issues sure live it up and sue. This however had no connection Casey made the name up she never knew the woman and she never hired her. Therefore, any harassment made to the lady was by people assuming it was her, so her problem is with them. I mean she could have said any name in the world and someone would have that name. It has to be connected to be anything but a frivolous lawsuit.

I disagree. She dragged that lady through the mud. Even thought it's been 'proven' she had no part in murdering or kidnapping that poor little girl she has huge losses. I think that suing will gain nothingbutlost time, though, What will Anthony pay her with?


A stunt perpetuated by Anthony's lie makes her responsible IMO


sevensmommy
by New Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 4:42 PM

I feel like whether or not this is stupid to take her to sue her for this I hope that someone gets some sort of justice against casey whether or not she killed her little girl there is something off about how she didnt know where she was and all the lies she told I think she needs to spend some time in a jail cell to think about all that happened and if she did kill that innocent baby girl she should have time to feel like crap about it instead of getting to walk around free and do as she pleases.

momtimesx4
by Gold Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 5:15 PM

Florida wins again.

glitterteaz
by Ruby Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 5:26 PM

After all the media circus I doubt she is truly free. now if she moved out of the USA ya she is free. But, as far as I have read she had to stay in the USA>

Quoting sevensmommy:

I feel like whether or not this is stupid to take her to sue her for this I hope that someone gets some sort of justice against casey whether or not she killed her little girl there is something off about how she didnt know where she was and all the lies she told I think she needs to spend some time in a jail cell to think about all that happened and if she did kill that innocent baby girl she should have time to feel like crap about it instead of getting to walk around free and do as she pleases.


valhallaarwen
by Bronze Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 5:42 PM
1 mom liked this

The judge is right as well as all the legal experts when they made the statement that the prosecutor overcharged and yuo have to follow the law and the constitution.  I don't care if you think she did it or not, the truth of the matter is the prosecutor has no clue what he was doing in this case (for reference please look at any episode of Perry Mason for an example), in the main case there was no forensic evidence that directly pointed to Casey and you cannot find someone guilty based on emotion.  The judge followed the law in this case.  And folks like Jane Velez Mitchell are upset and pointing to what the public thinks, but she was shot down by Judge Joe Brown who told her that doesn't matter what regular folks think, you have to follow the law. 

Actually, I like what Judge Joe Brown said that in the last 20 years, too many people are trying to convict folks on emotion and that is wrong.  The public is getting riled up and not thinking clearly and automatically assumes that the person charged did it.  Now imo, I think she did it, but there was no clear proof she did it.  Just like OJ (imo, there was no clear cut evidence to point to him, and too much screwed up the case) and Robert Blake. 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

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

Already Joined? LOG IN