EPTOn July 06 2011 04:46 mathershop wrote:
i believe it only can happen if solid evidence will be found
i believe it only can happen if solid evidence will be found
No she cannot, even if she confesses she is still innocent.
Casey Anthony not guilty - Page 11
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
iamho
United States3347 Posts
No she cannot, even if she confesses she is still innocent. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32073 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:45 IntoTheBush wrote: Looks like justice took a day off... Unfortunate, but it just proves that with the right legal representation you can literally get away with murder.  most people seem to be in agreement that the prosecutor didnt exactly do such a hot job and the arugment largely rested on circumstantial stuff?? | ||
|
MozzarellaL
United States822 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:43 MaxField wrote: It is obvious what he means though. He was did not win his case in civil court, and was charged with a monetary penalty, but in criminal court he is still not guilty. Pretty obvious both in this situation are guilty. Wrong yet again. The families of the victim sued him on behalf of the victims for wrongful death and battery. The jury agreed that it was more likely than not that OJ did kill the victims, and awarded the victims' estates monetary damages for things like lost wages, pain and suffering, etc., etc. That is remarkably different from a criminal court proceeding. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:44 3clipse wrote: Right, what you know from the media obviously trumps the mountains of evidence and testimony presented to the jurors. I'm not saying it's probable that she didn't do it. With my limited knowledge, I think it's probable that she did. But I recognize that: 1. I really don't know enough to make a truly well-informed decision, and 2. I think society should refrain from demonizing or incarcerating suspects who "probably" committed a crime. Letting the guilty go free sucks, but it's preferable to wrongful convictions. Do you realize I don't care, it's my opinion she did it based on a whole slew of factors from search terms, going to a party that night and every other night after her daughter is missing 31 days, and getting a tattoo that says "beautiful life". To making up stories that someone abducted her daughter that didn't exist etc. It's pretty obvious she did do it. I'm honestly not that upset, the world is fucked up this is nothing new but to tell people to think "nah she was probably innocent" is a joke, she murdered her own little girl. | ||
|
Persev
United States127 Posts
| ||
|
relyt
United States1073 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:46 mathershop wrote: i believe it only can happen if solid evidence will be found Nope, can't happen no matter what after the verdict is in. They can try to charge her with other crimes though. | ||
|
hYdrA-MeNo
Mexico344 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:33 acker wrote: You can't neglect something that's dead. That's why the charge was dropped. Someone gets it lol | ||
|
Eknoid4
United States902 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:36 dacthehork wrote: Actually I would call her a villain or a psychopath. She was partying the entire time. Yes though you are right, I should not use my common sense on this case and instead defer to a legal system for determining my judgment. Again it just means the jurors, 12 people, decided it was not without a reasonable doubt, not that she did not do it. She obviously did kill her child IMO. The justice system is wrong a lot of the time. they could not get a "smoking" gun, but it was pretty clear to most people. There's nothing obvious about it and what you call her has nothing to do with what she is. The people with all the evidence and the express job of giving her a fair ruling without years of media exaggeration are the ones who made that decision, not just 12 random people asked on the street. Just because you think she did it doesn't mean you're qualified to make that decision. | ||
|
VeNoM HaZ Skill
United States1528 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:47 Hawk wrote: most people seem to be in agreement that the prosecutor didnt exactly do such a hot job and the arugment largely rested on circumstantial stuff?? The latter largely being the reason for the prior. Circumstantial evidence is like an opinion, you can't make everyone see it the way you do. | ||
|
relyt
United States1073 Posts
| ||
|
Charger
United States2405 Posts
| ||
|
AzurewinD
United States569 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:50 VeNoM HaZ Skill wrote: The latter largely being the reason for the prior. Circumstantial evidence is like an opinion, you can't make everyone see it the way you do. They did what they could with what they had. They did as well as anyone could have expected them to do. Unfortunately (or fortunately) neither the prosecutors or the defense had or presented enough evidence to support their own claims, let alone dispute the claims of the other party. It was just a mishmash of contradicting stories and contradicting witnesses, at least that's how I felt following the trial on and off. The real tragedy is that whether Anthony is guilty or not, justice wasn't served to the person(s) responsible for Caylee's death. This pretty much sums it up eloquently and clearly. | ||
|
hYdrA-MeNo
Mexico344 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:50 relyt wrote: Lol, I bet my friend they she would be not guilty, just won myself $50. Whether she is guilty or not, obviously the justice system won't be right all the time and never will be, but I still think we have the best justice system in the world. I agree with this we do have the best system because to be able to convince 12 people that you didn't not do something is no small task and is almost impossible to convince them all on the same decision. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:49 Eknoid4 wrote: There's nothing obvious about it and what you call her has nothing to do with what she is. The people with all the evidence and the express job of giving her a fair ruling without years of media exaggeration are the ones who made that decision, not just 12 random people asked on the street. Just because you think she did it doesn't mean you're qualified to make that decision. Im not qualified to make an opinion? Nice point, I didn't say I'm going to execute her or something I just said imo she murdered her daughter. It's not like I believe my opinion will actually change anything. your point is stupid, just because she was innocent in court doesn't mean it's wrong to still think she is a murderer. Not to mention having an freedom of opinion... honestly I don't understand how any normal person would think she isn't a murderer. | ||
|
Vinski
505 Posts
| ||
|
hYdrA-MeNo
Mexico344 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:53 dacthehork wrote: Im not qualified to make an opinion? Nice point, I didn't say I'm going to execute her or something I just said imo she murdered her daughter. Lets say you believe the defenses argument that she died in the pool. And all that Casey did was hide the body is that murder? or just stupidity IMHO its just a stupid decision to hide a body but is no way near enough to kill someone over it. despite what you belive | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:51 Charger wrote: Unfortunately (or fortunately) neither the prosecutors or the defense had or presented enough evidence to support their own claims, let alone dispute the claims of the other party. It was just a mishmash of contradicting stories and contradicting witnesses, at least that's how I felt following the trial on and off. The real tragedy is that whether Anthony is guilty or not, justice wasn't served to the person(s) responsible for Caylee's death. The defense doesn't have to prove anything, just to poke holes in the prosecution's case. The burden of proof wholly lies in the prosecution. Not to mention that juries can only convict on the charges that they were asked to consider. They can't convict suspects of lesser charges if the prosecution doesn't include those lesser charges. | ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
| ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:19 Phenny wrote: From the liveblog on wftv.com Comment From Kevin in Fairfax, VA Kevin in Fairfax, VA: ] They didn't say she is innocent. They said she is not guilty as charged. This is an extremely important point to take note of. Kevin is a moron trying to show how intelligent he is by playing semantics. in·no·cent/ˈinəsənt/ Noun: An innocent person, in particular. Adjective: Not guilty of a crime or offense | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On July 06 2011 04:56 hYdrA-MeNo wrote: Lets say you believe the defenses argument that she died in the pool. And all that Casey did was hide the body is that murder? or just stupidity IMHO its just a stupid decision to hide a body but is no way near enough to kill someone over it. despite what you belive Actually I believe in guilt regardless of intention. Also the whole going out that same night and participating in a show off your rack contest etc. A normal person would have called the police/ambulance, and even in that case it's the parents responsibility to protect their children from drowning, and In my opinion a murder charge would be fine. Do you understand that people's opinions do not have to match the legal systems in the country they are born? For instance I am very in favor of punishments like giving murder charges for DUI/car accidents/negligence/manslaughter/having a very young child drown while watching them / leaving a baby in a car in summer etc. | ||
| ||
