Casey Anthony found not guilty of murdering daughter

ORLANDO, Fla. — Casey Anthony's eyes welled with tears and her lips trembled as the verdict was read once, twice and then a third time: "Not guilty" of killing her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee.

Outside the courthouse, many in the crowd of 500 reacted with anger, chanting, "Justice for Caylee!" One man yelled, "Baby killer!"

In perhaps the most disputed and dissected verdict since O.J. Simpson was acquitted in 1995 of murdering his wife, Anthony was cleared of murder, manslaughter and child-abuse charges after weeks of wall-to-wall TV coverage and armchair-lawyer punditry that one of her attorneys denounced as "media assassination."

Anthony, 25, was convicted only of four misdemeanor counts of lying to investigators who were looking into the child's June 2008 disappearance.

After a trial of a month and a half, the Florida Ninth Judicial Circuit Court jury took less than 11 hours to reach a verdict in a case that had become a national cable TV sensation, with its CSI-style testimony about the smell of death inside a car trunk and its storyline about a seemingly self-centered, hard-partying young mother.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43636855/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/



So this case has been in the news for years and with it telivised on many TV stations the trial was seem by millions. Many people are outraged over the verdict and see that the mother got away with murdering her own daughter. But was there enough evidence to prove her guilty beyond a resonable doubt?

There was no motive for the mother to kill her only child that was proven in the courtroom.

There was no actual cause of death that could be proven because the childs body was to decomposed.

There was only circumstantial evidence that wasn't well established by the prosecuters on this case either.

So who did kill the little girl then and why? Just like the OJ Simpson trial and he was not found guilty either. Perhaps the father killed the girl because he molested her and didn't want to be caught???? But that wasn't why the police accused her mother of killing the girl. Many unanswered questions in this case , how do you feel about it?:shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I was surprised and shocked when I heard the verdict. While I thought the case did not warrant murder in the first degree, I certainly felt there was overwhelming evidence supporting a manslaughter verdict.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I can't even see where manslaughter could be proven with the circumstantial evidence they have shown. What do you see that makes you think manslaughter would be proven in this case?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The evidence:

- She was the last person to see her daughter.
- Decomposed Hair
- Smell of human decomposition
- Body found just blocks from her home
- Inconsistent stories (e.g. abducted, accidental drowning, etc.)
- Defendent has spun a number of different stories to explain the absence of her daughter, when a version is proven false she creates another story.
- chloroform searches on the PC
- Defendent behavior after daughter went missing (I don't know about you but if my 2.5 year old child went missing even for a few hours I would be very upset. I certianly would not be out partying.)

 

So where amongst all that can you prove she actually killed her own daughter? Remember motive must be proven as well, so where's her motive?

 

I am not a lawyer, but I do know that motive is not always a requirement to prove murder or manslaughter. The motive was proven in my book. I believe that the evidence indicates she was using drugs (i.e. chlorform) as a babysitter and as a result the child died.

 

Negligent manslaughter, not only negligence about the alleged pool drowning, but also negligence about habitually lying to family for 31 days, and then habitually lying to and misguiding the authorities for three years.

Casey Anthony was Caylee's only parent, and she had full custody of her, both physical and legal. As such, Casey was responsible for Caylee's life, and so, she is responsible for her death.

Consider the father who chucked his little boy out of the truck in the middle of the desert. Let's say no one found him for a long time (ie, until he was merely a skeleton). The father arrives at his destination without the boy, and claims that the boy began the trip with him, but that, somewhere along the way, the boy merely vanished -- no explanation given. A year later, the skeleton is found and positively identified. Would it be legal for a parent to simply have a child go missing and end up dead, and then lie for three years about it and not be held responsible? What if the missing person was the person's elderly relative or a spouse or SO?

Traditionally and technically, motive is not required to be proven as an element of crimes in America. Motive can certainly help a jury (and society) draw conclusions, but it is not an element to be proven.

There were other charges that they could have brought against Casey: unlawfully disposing of human remains and interfering with a criminal investigation.

Casey also tried to "throw under the bus" her mother (for allegedly leaving the pool ladder out and allegedly making the internet searches of chloroform) and her father (for allegedly disposing of Caylee's body to make it look like murder).

 

Maybe, based on Cindy's statements, the authorities should now charge grandma Cindy with keeping an attractive nuisance (the pool) and grandpa George for illegally disposing human remains (chucking them in the woods). It couldn't get any weirder than it already is, right? At least charge Cindy with perjury in a capital case (what's the penalty on that, 20 years?).

 

Not likely.

The DA would only look vengeful if they went after the grandparents now.

 

Then perhaps it might have been her father who was molesting the child and wanted to get rid of his problem by throwing her body away in the woods so none of his DNA would be found?

 

I think Cifo was being sarcastic.

 

Yeah, a little sarcastic; however, she did aver to these people committing these crimes and others.

I think what remains in everyone's mind across the country is, how can a little child die and the body thrown out like trash, and no one is legally responsible for any part of it? Nothing, nada.

This whole thing was freaky though. I mean, how about the guy who kept finding/refinding the remains? Who behaves that way? I mean, months of calling/recalling the police and poking at the remains and not being there to bring the police right to it? Shucks, I really wasn't sure I wanted the $255,000???

 

I would think that people across the country would want the right person who was actually proven responsible for her death, if it was murder, to be put into jail or given the death sentence. Without someway to determine the actual cause of death or what motive was there for her death, to be shown.

 

I guess it's not a crime to lack responsibility for a child's life to the point where it's deadly. Just wait and see, there'll be copycat deaths like this one:

Along with not needing to prove the motive, it may also not be required to prove cause of death. Casey could have admitted to unlawfully ending Caylee's life and could have provided enough corroborated evidence surrounding the death/disposal to be found guilty.

 

I don't say she wasn't irresponsible, I only said she didn't have any motive for her daughters death. I agree she is an irresponsible lying and deceitful woman but to go any farther and say she murdered her daughter due to those failures in her would be stretching things beyond a reasonable doubt, wouldn't you agree?

 

Again not likely.

She has spent the last 3 years in jail after all.

My only hope now is that morbid interest by people with nothing better to do with their time doesn't let her cash in on this tragedy via the media.

Arthur

 

Well, hope springs eternal...

But, I think it's pretty obvious she will make a pretty penny, when all is said and done.

Sad, but true...

 

Yeah, you're probably right, but still hopefully not any more than it takes to pay off the lawyers.

 

I didn't follow the case before, but saw it today everywhere on the headlines. The mum should be charged at least with manslaughter. Maybe she didn't kill her, but:

• she didn't report it until 31 days since the child was missing. If I lost my pets, I would definitely reported it after 24 hours. Latest one week. Her 2 years old toddler was missing and she didn't report it until 31 days since the last time she saw her? What kind of mum is that? And how did this lady get away with this???
  
• during this 31 days period, witness said she went partying and made new tattoos (you can even find her partying photos in google, looks like a wild party to me). So her child was gone for days/weeks yet she went partying and made tattoos which read "beautiful life"? Something is seriously strange with all those
  
• she made up lot of lies. 'Where was your baby?', asked people, and she replied with 'she is with Zanny (her nanny)/ she is on the beach', etc. Turned out this was imaginary nanny as well. Other lies: 'the baby was actually accidentally drown in the pool and dad tried to cover this up'. If she knew that the baby was accidentally drown and she was afraid to be charged by manslaughter in the first place, why would the baby dumped at a swamp in a laundry bag with her mouth sealed with a duct tape??? why stop her/them to burry her child properly???? And how did she get away with all these?????

Don't know the rest of the story, but I hope now the poor child is in a better place. Can't imagine how terrible her life would be in the hand of such a terrible mum.

Rest in peace, little Caylee.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

She can't be charged again for the same crime.

I wonder what the verdict would have been if she had only been charged with manslaughter?

In hindsight I think the prosecutors made a tactical error by going for a murder conviction with as little evidence as they had.

Arthur