Casey Anthony

[LAM]

They had ZERO forensic evidence linking Casey to murder.

and how were murders solved before forensics?

 

[LAM]

Again, a man of reason.

Only in america, huh LAM!

not really a surprise in a state with drive through liquor stores and well Rick Scott...

 

[flexxthese]

You say that now, but pass her the salt instead of the pepper, and we'll find you 3 mos. later in an open field with a plastic bag duct taped shut around your neck!

I have no kids, plenty of booze that I don't drink anymore, and served equal jail time, I think we'd get along great! Plus, you could tell that chick likes to get the shit beat out of her in the sack.

 

[DOMS]

I wonder...if I killed her, waited a month to report it, do you think I'd get off Scott free?

 

[Evil Eagle]

and how were murders solved before forensics?

Based on emotion, no telling how many innocent people died as a result or spent their lives rotting in a prison cell. There is no reason to use tactics from the 1800's whenever we have the ability to process forensic data.

You're arguing with emotion instead of logic, and it will back you into a tight corner someday.

Sent from my Android device

 

[awhites1]

lawl

 

[Big Pimpin]

Based on emotion, no telling how many innocent people died as a result or spent their lives rotting in a prison cell. There is no reason to use tactics from the 1800's whenever we have the ability to process forensic data.

You're arguing with emotion instead of logic, and it will back you into a tight corner someday.

Sent from my Android device

YouTube Video

 

[flexxthese]

Based on emotion, no telling how many innocent people died as a result or spent their lives rotting in a prison cell. There is no reason to use tactics from the 1800's whenever we have the ability to process forensic data.

Your arguing with emotion instead of logic, and it will back you into a tight corner someday.

Sent from my Android device

That's what i'm saying. it's truly a shame how the general public thinks. They're all outside court screaming and crying that our justice system has failed and is flawed and Oj this and oj that....Firstly, in the OJ case, there WAS plenty of evidence tying OJ to the crime, however it was no admissible in court due to many reasons. in casey's case, there is NO evidence tying her to the murder. Sure we want to know who did it and what happened, but we have no proof that casey had anything to do with the murder of her daughter. Just because it doesn't make sense, doesn't show she did it. So if all these people get their heads out of their ass, they'll see the justice system has done it's job.

 

[awhites1]

 

[Big Pimpin]

As much as I hate to say it, this is what makes our legal system the greatest in the world. We all know the bitch is guilty but the sorry ass prosecutors office obviously didn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt and Casey's attorneys convinced the jurors of this. It happens every day. Casey got her day in court and the prosecutor lost. That's not her fault.

Casey didn't win, the prosecutor lost.

 

[flexxthese]

ps. is it too late for her to collect the life insurance for caylee? She might want to pay off those back taxes before she gets locked up for that.

 

[LAM]

You're arguing with emotion instead of logic, and it will back you into a tight corner someday.

actually I'm not. I had half my criminal justice degree finished before getting in trouble with the law and had to change majors, I'm quite knowledgeable in the subject.

 

[IronAddict]

I have no kids, plenty of booze that I don't drink anymore, and served equal jail time, I think we'd get along great! Plus, you could tell that chick likes to get the shit beat out of her in the sack.

Perfect!

 

[Evil Eagle]

actually I'm not. I had half my criminal justice degree finished before getting in trouble with the law and had to change majors, I'm quite knowledgeable in the subject.

And I was one class short of my criminal justice degree when I found out the police academy I was trying to get into wouldn't take me because of my hearing. Does that mean anything? No. Even if you had a degree doesn't make you more right than the next person.

Sent from my Android device

 

[LAM]

there was plenty of circumstantial evidence just not for 1st degree murder. the DA should have went for negligent homicide and/or manslaughter which is much easier to prove given there was not even remains from the body to determine the cause of death.

We had a long debate about this with some of my friends on metro over dinner years ago.

 

[flexxthese]

there was plenty of circumstantial evidence just not for 1st degree murder. the DA should have went for negligent homicide and/or manslaughter which is much easier to prove given there was not even remains from the body to determine the cause of death.

We had a long debate about this with some of my friends on metro over dinner years ago.

Curious, what evidence do you see that the jury didn't that shows she did it? Did you notice manslaughter and other murder charges were brought against her in the same case but all were found not guilty? So I guess it wasn't easier to prove because they didn't do it. Sure, so much of the story doesn't add up, sure there's bits and pieces that say she knew something, but I don't recall anything that showed without a doubt she did it.

 

[Evil Eagle]

Curious, what evidence do you see that the jury didn't that shows she did it? Did you notice manslaughter and other murder charges were brought against her in the same case but all were found not guilty? So I guess it wasn't easier to prove because they didn't do it. Sure, so much of the story doesn't add up, sure there's bits and pieces that say she knew something, but I don't recall anything that showed without a doubt she did it.

Thats because there wasn't anything. Hell, they couldn't even prove HOW she died. It's a shitty ordeal for sure.

Sent from my Android device

 

[flexxthese]

Thats because there wasn't anything. Hell, they couldn't even prove HOW she died. It's a shitty ordeal for sure.

Sent from my Android device

shhhhh I know, I was just trying to patronize lam.

 

[LAM]

Curious, what evidence do you see that the jury didn't that shows she did it? Did you notice manslaughter and other murder charges were brought against her in the same case but all were found not guilty?

they didn't try to prove it was manslaughter, they tried to prove it was premeditated that is what the prosecution focused on. overcharging is very common in the US criminal justice system.

they could have used the lack of evidence of a "real nanny" when Kaylee wasn't with Casey and was not with George or Cindy to build a case around that.

 

[flexxthese]

Manslaughter was an actual charge brought against her in this case. One which she was found not guilty of. Even if the prosecution focused harder on that charge, I still don't see a guilty verdict. There's still no proof that she was in any way responsible for her death. Okay so she didn't have a legit nanny, so she must have had something to do with her death. I just don't see a good case being brought from that.

i do however think there was a third party. possible a drug dealer/addict that she had caylee stay with so she could have time away. And something went wrong there. That would explain why she was not worried after her arrest, she 'knew' caylee was okay. iirc, she was planning on getting immunity on child neglect chargers after being bailed out the first time she was arrested and picking up her caylee alive and well and moving on with her life. I think imo when she got out, that's when she herself found out something went wrong. What do you do then? Admit you were a dipshit and take the manslaughter, neglect etc charges or deny deny deny to the very end and hope for the best? If any of you know or were hard drug addicts, you'd understand the lying portion of casey's defense from day 1. There is no rhyme or reason to the lies they tell and they don't have to make sense, because in their head it makes perfect sense and they feel like they're pulling the wool over everyones eyes even if that's hardly the situation.

and ps. don't take anything i say personally, if i sound like i'm attacking you or your opinions i don't mean to. I just love a good debate <3

 

[LAM]

Manslaughter was an actual charge brought against her in this case. One which she was found not guilty of. Even if the prosecution focused harder on that charge, I still don't see a guilty verdict. There's still no proof that she was in any way responsible for her death. Okay so she didn't have a legit nanny, so she must have had something to do with her death. I just don't see a good case being brought from that.

negligent homicide

 

[flexxthese]

what about it?

 

[irish_2003]

there goes my chance for a conjugal visit....maybe when i move back to florida we'll hookup one night.....i just won't fall asleep afterward til she leaves

 

[flexxthese]

there goes my chance for a conjugal visit....maybe when i move back to florida we'll hookup one night.....i just won't fall asleep afterward til she leaves

And don't sniff her panties unless you like licking the sticky side of duct tape.

 

[Little Wing]

i think most parents who kill their kids do not premeditate it. that's what fucked this case up. stupid stupid stupid. not guilty of premeditation does not mean not guilty of killing her child.

 

[LAM]

you don't have to prove malice aforethought.

she was the sole care giver it would have been much easier to prove the Kaylee died under Casey's watch via an "known manner" of death. the child is last seen with Casey alive on this date, goes missing and/or unreported for 30 days, then the remains shows up in a laundry bag from the Anthony household on this date. they could have filled in the gaps from there.

I've been smoking weed for 20 years now, know plenty of dealers never known a single one that would have watched somebody's crying 2 year old that wears diapers, not going to happen.

people are convicted all the time with out bodies and or murder weapons so you don't even need hard evidence like that.

 

[flexxthese]

little wing - in my understanding of all of the charges, premeditation was not required. am i right lam? For the murder charges, they just had to prove 1 of i forget how many states of mind or intents..something along those lines. It's been a few years since i studied criminal justice.

lam, that was the...3rd i think, charge against her. And like you said, their focus was not on that charge but they did touch base on it in closing arguments and rebuttle. And sure, people are convicted all the time of crimes without hard evidence, but would you feel comfortable taking someones life based on speculation? I wouldn't even feel comfortable being the prosecutor gong up there and giving some story of how i *think* the gaps of story are filled and saying "judge her based on this story i'm telling you." Not to mention the second you started with a mother goose tale the defense would surely object and you'd be standing there without a leg to stand on.

the prosecution was made up of an excellent team, and executed their side very well. I think if they felt they had a better shot at going for a different angle, then they would have. But the fact that they didn't, could either show they felt too comfortable in an easy guilty verdict, or they weren't comfortable enough to stray from murder 1.

Just to throw it out there, what about a dealer/pedophile? What about as collateral? She had no job, no funds were coming in, she couldn't even afford gas. I don't know, just throwing ideas out there as I still feel there is a third party involved and that she didn't directly have anything to do with it other than some arrogant drug fueled decision.

 

[Little Wing]

it's just very sad and ugly for that little girl. i have kids and can't even imagine not knowing where they are every minute when they are that young. can they try and go after her for anything else or are they through? she has to know a lot more than she is saying.

you mean like maybe she let someone hold her daughter for collateral? what a sick fucking world it is when things like that are not only possible but probable.

 

[maxpro2]

people are convicted all the time with out bodies and or murder weapons so you don't even need hard evidence like that.

Even if you have "enough" evidence, the jury must still review it and give it weight. Clearly the jury had doubt and wasn't convinced. Case closed.

 

[LAM]

lam, that was the...3rd i think, charge against her. And like you said, their focus was not on that charge but they did touch base on it in closing arguments and rebuttle. And sure, people are convicted all the time of crimes without hard evidence, but would you feel comfortable taking someones life based on speculation? I wouldn't even feel comfortable being the prosecutor gong up there and giving some story of how i *think* the gaps of story are filled and saying "judge her based on this story i'm telling you." Not to mention the second you started with a mother goose tale the defense would surely object and you'd be standing there without a leg to stand on.

the prosecution was made up of an excellent team, and executed their side very well. I think if they felt they had a better shot at going for a different angle, then they would have. But the fact that they didn't, could either show they felt too comfortable in an easy guilty verdict, or they weren't comfortable enough to stray from murder 1.

Just to throw it out there, what about a dealer/pedophile? What about as collateral? She had no job, no funds were coming in, she couldn't even afford gas. I don't know, just throwing ideas out there as I still feel there is a third party involved and that she didn't directly have anything to do with it other than some arrogant drug fueled decision.

I told the gf from day 1 that they shouldn't have made it murder 1 and death penalty, there just wasn't enough to support that. Not a big history in the US with women and the death penalty.

they should have made in negligent homicide and desecration of a human corpse.