Casey Anthony
I kinda feel like I have to post about Casey Anthony's trial since the grandparents forced us to watch it constantly during the holiday weekend -- a weekend that was not a holiday for the people involved in the trial. Court was in session the whole time, including both Sunday and the 4th of July holiday Monday.
I want to state up front that I did not watch the details of the case, I just had them explained to me by the grandparents and I watched some of the closing arguments (but not much). So this set of observations is based on that.
Casey Anthony was acquitted on all charges except for four counts of lying to the police. I do not find this surprising in the least (based on what I know of the case).
First of all, the only thing the prosecutors ever proved, and at that, beyond a SHADOW of a doubt (not even just reasonable doubt), was that she lied about various things. Thus, it makes sense that she was convicted of lying to the police.
Their big case, the capitol murder trial -- they didn't prove shit. They cobbled together a bunch of circumstantial events, and then tried to use the fact that Casey Anthony and her family were dysfunctional, shitty people, to prove that she killed Caylee. That is bull.
Dear Prosecutors:
- Just because you're a liar doesn't mean you're a murderer.
- Just because you're generally a jerk doesn't mean you're a murderer.
- Just because you like having sex ("a slut") doesn't mean you're a murderer. In fact, this point is so specious, as a judge, I would've thrown this argument out based on lack of relevance. I mean seriously, what the fucking fuck, Florida! Everyone has sex! People have to have sex (generally) to make kids! A kid like Caylee! Caylee wouldn't have even EXISTED if Casey Anthony wasn't "a slut". FUCK YOU. This argument is so stupid you deserve to lose this case just on this point alone! (OK not really, but it is a stupid conclusion to attempt to draw and completely irrelevant)
Ductape. The ductape on what was left of the body I think pretty well shows there was some foul play involved. It doesn't show who did it, just that the kid was probably murdered or that her death was covered up (if it did happen to be an accident).
Chloroform. If you're gonna kill someone, you use poison. Drugs. Knife. Gun. Caylee was two. As much as I hate to say this, any adult could snap a toddler's neck without any trouble (physically). Chloroform is used to knock someone out, not kill them. This does not show intent to murder at all in my opinion. And furthermore, they didn't really show definitively that (afaik) chloroform was even used on Caylee at all. They just showed some internet searches for it and I think maybe Casey had some in her car or somewhere else in her possession (not sure on that last point, but we'll include it here anyway to give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt). I'll also add that Casey's mother was a nurse, and that Casey lived with her parents, so it may make sense that the family had it around for some non-violent purpose (if indeed chloroform is ever used for such).
The Internet Searches. How many people went and googled "chloroform" while watching the proceedings of this case? Ooops! Well NOW you're FUCKED! The cops will be by shortly to haul you off and convict you in some murder case you had nothing to do with, just because you ran an internet search for something that may have been used! Searching for something does not mean that you have used it, or even that you were intending to use it, or even that you were even interested in using it for anything at all. I have searched on stuff about Nazis, weird, kinky sex things (I'll blame someone else on my f-list for that one ;P you know who you are), guns and ammo, and probably other things that would be considered suspicious. Oh well! Doesn't mean I killed anyone, believe any of the Nazi beliefs, used/did any of those things, or even considered using/doing any of those things. And sure, there was a lot of lying on the part of Casey and her mother surrounding this point. And, as it turns out, Casey WAS convicted for lying (her mother's a big fat liar too, but she wasn't on trial). BUT, even if Casey lied about it, it doesn't mean she murdered Caylee.
Generally, when you as the prosecutor take a murder case to court, you need a few things to pretty much guarantee victory:
- [x] The body
- [ ] The murder weapon (or method of death)
- [ ] Motive
- [ ] Opportunity (i.e., you need a time of death and an alibi for anyone suspected of being directly involved)
Wow, gee, look how many of the things they didn't have! Well SHIAT. Is it any wonder they lost?
The burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove their case. To prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. They did really nothing but show that Casey is a crappy person, a bad mother, and likes to have sex (take note, guys! she's kinda cute...).
So, in the end, the prosecution took the case to court too early. They didn't have enough real, concrete evidence, and now they can't ever try Casey for it again, even if they do get in new evidence that proves Casey was involved in Caylee's death. It could be the case that they wouldn't ever get any new, useful evidence in, in which case, I guess it makes sense for them to go forward with the trial. But they had to have known going in that they had a damn good chance of losing based on all this lack of any hard evidence tying Casey to the murder.
Bottom-line: The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey was involved in Caylee's death. The burden was on them, and they couldn't show anything more than that Casey was a pathological liar. And this may make you mad, but it is GOOD that the jury acquitted her given the severe lack of evidence, because if it was you up there on trial for a crime you didn't commit, you'd want the jury (your peers) to do the same for you.
And speaking of that: As far as all legality is concerned, Casey was acquitted, meaning CASEY DID NOT MURDER HER DAUGHTER CAYLEE (no matter what your personal opinion is). So calling her a murderer is untrue. Saying that she did it is untrue. It is merely your personal opinion, based on the fact that you just don't like Casey for whatever unrelated reason, despite the fact that you almost assuredly don't know her at all.
And now:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/07/07/florida.casey.anthony.next/index.html
Dear state of Florida. YOU LOST. YOU GET TO PAY THE BILL. If you want to extort the money for the court costs for the four counts of lying, be my guest. But those counts are minor (all misdemeanors), so you shouldn't be getting much for them. In fact, I'll wager that rarely is a "lying to police" (solely) case ever taken to trial, so you probably shouldn't even attempt to get money for that either. If you do, you'd better trot out some precedent for recouping court fees for solely a "lying to police" trial. Meanwhile, the the majority of the costs, for the capitol murder and child abuse stuff -- just no. She was acquitted, so in following with logic (which you seem incredibly deficient in), you were the ones who brought what turned out to be a frivolous yet expensive case to trial, not her. It's your fault for wasting everyone's time and money. You get to pay for it. (have fun, taxpayers!)
Texas Equusearch wanting $112,000 back for its expenses searching for Caylee -- take it up with the state of Florida. Casey was acquitted, meaning there are no reasonable assumptions to be made that Casey knew where Caylee's body was since the beginning. If they claim the body was never missing, then they need to say who it was that knew where the body was the whole time. George (the dad)? He disposed of the body? But what was really decided about that? What about the suicide note? And at another point, someone else claimed the body had been moved. What. Who knew about its location the whole time? Who? Who should pay the $112,000, when Casey was acquitted? Good luck with that, Texas Equusearch!
However, I'm totally on-board with the defamation suit. That's karma for you -- lying and blaming a murder on someone else, even if you're just making up a name. That's what you get, Casey! Go get her, Zenaida!
I want to state up front that I did not watch the details of the case, I just had them explained to me by the grandparents and I watched some of the closing arguments (but not much). So this set of observations is based on that.
Casey Anthony was acquitted on all charges except for four counts of lying to the police. I do not find this surprising in the least (based on what I know of the case).
First of all, the only thing the prosecutors ever proved, and at that, beyond a SHADOW of a doubt (not even just reasonable doubt), was that she lied about various things. Thus, it makes sense that she was convicted of lying to the police.
Their big case, the capitol murder trial -- they didn't prove shit. They cobbled together a bunch of circumstantial events, and then tried to use the fact that Casey Anthony and her family were dysfunctional, shitty people, to prove that she killed Caylee. That is bull.
Dear Prosecutors:
- Just because you're a liar doesn't mean you're a murderer.
- Just because you're generally a jerk doesn't mean you're a murderer.
- Just because you like having sex ("a slut") doesn't mean you're a murderer. In fact, this point is so specious, as a judge, I would've thrown this argument out based on lack of relevance. I mean seriously, what the fucking fuck, Florida! Everyone has sex! People have to have sex (generally) to make kids! A kid like Caylee! Caylee wouldn't have even EXISTED if Casey Anthony wasn't "a slut". FUCK YOU. This argument is so stupid you deserve to lose this case just on this point alone! (OK not really, but it is a stupid conclusion to attempt to draw and completely irrelevant)
Ductape. The ductape on what was left of the body I think pretty well shows there was some foul play involved. It doesn't show who did it, just that the kid was probably murdered or that her death was covered up (if it did happen to be an accident).
Chloroform. If you're gonna kill someone, you use poison. Drugs. Knife. Gun. Caylee was two. As much as I hate to say this, any adult could snap a toddler's neck without any trouble (physically). Chloroform is used to knock someone out, not kill them. This does not show intent to murder at all in my opinion. And furthermore, they didn't really show definitively that (afaik) chloroform was even used on Caylee at all. They just showed some internet searches for it and I think maybe Casey had some in her car or somewhere else in her possession (not sure on that last point, but we'll include it here anyway to give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt). I'll also add that Casey's mother was a nurse, and that Casey lived with her parents, so it may make sense that the family had it around for some non-violent purpose (if indeed chloroform is ever used for such).
The Internet Searches. How many people went and googled "chloroform" while watching the proceedings of this case? Ooops! Well NOW you're FUCKED! The cops will be by shortly to haul you off and convict you in some murder case you had nothing to do with, just because you ran an internet search for something that may have been used! Searching for something does not mean that you have used it, or even that you were intending to use it, or even that you were even interested in using it for anything at all. I have searched on stuff about Nazis, weird, kinky sex things (I'll blame someone else on my f-list for that one ;P you know who you are), guns and ammo, and probably other things that would be considered suspicious. Oh well! Doesn't mean I killed anyone, believe any of the Nazi beliefs, used/did any of those things, or even considered using/doing any of those things. And sure, there was a lot of lying on the part of Casey and her mother surrounding this point. And, as it turns out, Casey WAS convicted for lying (her mother's a big fat liar too, but she wasn't on trial). BUT, even if Casey lied about it, it doesn't mean she murdered Caylee.
Generally, when you as the prosecutor take a murder case to court, you need a few things to pretty much guarantee victory:
- [x] The body
- [ ] The murder weapon (or method of death)
- [ ] Motive
- [ ] Opportunity (i.e., you need a time of death and an alibi for anyone suspected of being directly involved)
Wow, gee, look how many of the things they didn't have! Well SHIAT. Is it any wonder they lost?
The burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove their case. To prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. They did really nothing but show that Casey is a crappy person, a bad mother, and likes to have sex (take note, guys! she's kinda cute...).
So, in the end, the prosecution took the case to court too early. They didn't have enough real, concrete evidence, and now they can't ever try Casey for it again, even if they do get in new evidence that proves Casey was involved in Caylee's death. It could be the case that they wouldn't ever get any new, useful evidence in, in which case, I guess it makes sense for them to go forward with the trial. But they had to have known going in that they had a damn good chance of losing based on all this lack of any hard evidence tying Casey to the murder.
Bottom-line: The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey was involved in Caylee's death. The burden was on them, and they couldn't show anything more than that Casey was a pathological liar. And this may make you mad, but it is GOOD that the jury acquitted her given the severe lack of evidence, because if it was you up there on trial for a crime you didn't commit, you'd want the jury (your peers) to do the same for you.
And speaking of that: As far as all legality is concerned, Casey was acquitted, meaning CASEY DID NOT MURDER HER DAUGHTER CAYLEE (no matter what your personal opinion is). So calling her a murderer is untrue. Saying that she did it is untrue. It is merely your personal opinion, based on the fact that you just don't like Casey for whatever unrelated reason, despite the fact that you almost assuredly don't know her at all.
And now:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/07/07/florida.casey.anthony.next/index.html
Dear state of Florida. YOU LOST. YOU GET TO PAY THE BILL. If you want to extort the money for the court costs for the four counts of lying, be my guest. But those counts are minor (all misdemeanors), so you shouldn't be getting much for them. In fact, I'll wager that rarely is a "lying to police" (solely) case ever taken to trial, so you probably shouldn't even attempt to get money for that either. If you do, you'd better trot out some precedent for recouping court fees for solely a "lying to police" trial. Meanwhile, the the majority of the costs, for the capitol murder and child abuse stuff -- just no. She was acquitted, so in following with logic (which you seem incredibly deficient in), you were the ones who brought what turned out to be a frivolous yet expensive case to trial, not her. It's your fault for wasting everyone's time and money. You get to pay for it. (have fun, taxpayers!)
Texas Equusearch wanting $112,000 back for its expenses searching for Caylee -- take it up with the state of Florida. Casey was acquitted, meaning there are no reasonable assumptions to be made that Casey knew where Caylee's body was since the beginning. If they claim the body was never missing, then they need to say who it was that knew where the body was the whole time. George (the dad)? He disposed of the body? But what was really decided about that? What about the suicide note? And at another point, someone else claimed the body had been moved. What. Who knew about its location the whole time? Who? Who should pay the $112,000, when Casey was acquitted? Good luck with that, Texas Equusearch!
However, I'm totally on-board with the defamation suit. That's karma for you -- lying and blaming a murder on someone else, even if you're just making up a name. That's what you get, Casey! Go get her, Zenaida!