Jump to content
IGNORED

Post on Amy's FB page


ophelia

Recommended Posts

Hey!

did you guys read Amy's post about the Casey Anthony case and her wish for the death penalty? I'm not really into the whole thing, I just saw it a few times on the news when we were traveling through the USA and I'd like to know your opinion about it. I started reading about it in german newspapers and there they say that somehow this case has caused a big discussion about the whole crime persecution system, but I don't know if thats might be exaggerated.

I found it also really interesting to read the comments to that post. Of course a lot of people agreed her (which didn't surprise me that much) but there were also people who disagreed with her and argumented against the death penalty especially from a Christian background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think that Casey should have been convicted, but I'm against the death penalty, so I don't think she should have been put to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Casey is probably guilty, but I rarely think that more killing is the answer. (I do support it in very rare cases where there's no option, like in the case of Bin Laden, but that's a little different from the death penalty anyway).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Casey is probably guilty. However, there was alot of circumstantial evidence brought up during the trial, the COD of that poor child could not be pinpointed and reasonable doubt swirled around. Had the prosecution gone for a manslaughter charge or felony child neglect resulting in bodily harm, Casey would have very likely been found guilty. But there wasn't enough definitive proof for a murder charge. I would have hated to be on that jury, sure that the mom hurt her child but lacking the proof required for a murder charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that I was not surprised at the not guilty verdict. I do think that Casey Anthony is guilty, but the fact of the matter is that her the jury could not convict her with the evidence provided.

The minute the cable tv talking heads latched on to the case, and then televised the trial, I just knew it would end this way. Any time a case with circumstantial evidence at best becomes a media circus, the members of the jury take the phrase "beyond reasonable doubt" very seriously, as they should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she is probably guilty as well. I'm pro death penalty, but there honestly wasn't proof for it IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she is probably guilty as well. I'm pro death penalty, but there honestly wasn't proof for it IMHO.

DamnPrecious, what are your arguments for the death penalty? I really can't see any good reason that a state/government/whatever should have the right and power to end someone's life. To my mind it puts those institutions right down to the same level as muders etc.

I don't wan't to offend you or anything, but I'm really curious since I never met anybody who argumented for the death penalty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DamnPrecious, what are your arguments for the death penalty? I really can't see any good reason that a state/government/whatever should have the right and power to end someone's life. To my mind it puts those institutions right down to the same level as muders etc.

I don't wan't to offend you or anything, but I'm really curious since I never met anybody who argumented for the death penalty!

I'm going to PM you because I don't want to debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here was the issue with Casey Anthony's case

The prosecutors did not have any physical evidence to put her at the crime of the scene. One of the BIGGEST things the courts look for are the hard proof evidence. All the prosecution had were just circumstantial evidence, which yes it does seem all fine and dandy, but that never holds up properly in a court room. Yes, they found the blanket, and yes, she did have a funky smell in her car, but forensics could not link that back to Casey. It doesn't matter if they found internet search on her computer on "chloroform", the defense could argue back that her parents also had access to her computer, her car, her home, etc. Yes, she lied through her teeth about her whereabouts and not reporting her missing but what if she was protecting someone? You can't use that as your reasoning to convict her. The FBI forensics lab ran so many tests, most of which came back either negative or inconclusive. The prosecution should have spent more time trying to find physical evidence to link her to the crime, but they didn't. I know so many of us want to believe she did it, especially with her partying pictures, lying to the law enforcement, and not reporting her missing, but you can't base your case off that and hope the jurors will convict her. I think the prosecution became too obsessed with Casey that they did not want to see if any other people could have possibly committed the crime. Obviously, this crime was personal and not committed by someone random, so they should have looked at her family members, Caylee's father, her friends, etc.

I'm majoring in biotech/emphasis on forensics, and one of the biggest things we learned is that circumstantial evidence rarely stands up in court. You need physical evidence that links the suspect to the crime that they committed. That's exactly what the defense argued about--lack of physical evidence. A lot of people are comparing this to the OJ simpson case but they are both different. For OJ's case, he did commit the crime but chain of custody was broken which guarantees the suspect a "not guilty" verdict. For Casey Anthony, lack of physical evidence did it for her and because this wasn't declared a mistrial, they can't retry her. The law enforcement now needs to find more evidence and find somebody else who might have done this. Maybe she did do it, but she could have helped. There is still hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. I don't follow these cases all that closely due to media coverage. I'm a bit wary of the media myself so I tend to take things with a grain of salt whenever things like that pop up. I'm just glad that the jury seemed to take their job seriously and were aware of the part that media can play in cases like these. It's great we have the freedom of the press, media, etc- but that whole thing is a double-edged sword and I can see it playing out like that in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just glad that the jury seemed to take their job seriously and were aware of the part that media can play in cases like these.

Except now at least one of the jurors is willing to sell his story to the highest bidder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should be de-friended anytime now. I lectured her on how the law works and how that law was not made by Christians, but Deists.

*insert death penalty device of choice here for my "friendship"*

FWIW, none of us can really sit in judgment because we didn't see the evidence as a juror could, even if any one of us watched every second of the trial. The perspective is just different if you're sitting in that box (spoken as a former juror or a couple of trials).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand Amy's emotional reaction to the case. A child dies and it doesn't appear that the killer will be brought to justice. Maybe she was just venting her feelings at that moment.

Even though I believe that Casey Anthony was guilty, I understand why the jury returned with the verdict that they did. There wasn't any hard evidence to connect her with the murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

debrand, agreed. One of the prosecutors said that a "dead bones" case is very tough to convict because of the doubt.

The system isn't perfect, but is right more often than not. I find that the televised cases (Florida is famous for this) should not televise cases. A sequestered juror wouldn't be able to watch TV, read a paper or go online due to the publicity of the case. Thank goodness CA stopped with that nonsense after OJ, but Florida seems to feed off this crap, ever sincce the "grey dot" in the William Kennedy Smith trial.

Note how the defendants all get off scot-free in these high profile cases. The jury wants to get the hell out of Dodge and as someone mentioned, make book deals. This is why trials need to be kept on the down-low; the chance for a fair verdict is more likely to be reached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here was the issue with Casey Anthony's case

The prosecutors did not have any physical evidence to put her at the crime of the scene. One of the BIGGEST things the courts look for are the hard proof evidence. All the prosecution had were just circumstantial evidence, which yes it does seem all fine and dandy, but that never holds up properly in a court room. Yes, they found the blanket, and yes, she did have a funky smell in her car, but forensics could not link that back to Casey. It doesn't matter if they found internet search on her computer on "chloroform", the defense could argue back that her parents also had access to her computer, her car, her home, etc. Yes, she lied through her teeth about her whereabouts and not reporting her missing but what if she was protecting someone? You can't use that as your reasoning to convict her. The FBI forensics lab ran so many tests, most of which came back either negative or inconclusive. The prosecution should have spent more time trying to find physical evidence to link her to the crime, but they didn't. I know so many of us want to believe she did it, especially with her partying pictures, lying to the law enforcement, and not reporting her missing, but you can't base your case off that and hope the jurors will convict her. I think the prosecution became too obsessed with Casey that they did not want to see if any other people could have possibly committed the crime. Obviously, this crime was personal and not committed by someone random, so they should have looked at her family members, Caylee's father, her friends, etc.

I'm majoring in biotech/emphasis on forensics, and one of the biggest things we learned is that circumstantial evidence rarely stands up in court. You need physical evidence that links the suspect to the crime that they committed. That's exactly what the defense argued about--lack of physical evidence. A lot of people are comparing this to the OJ simpson case but they are both different. For OJ's case, he did commit the crime but chain of custody was broken which guarantees the suspect a "not guilty" verdict. For Casey Anthony, lack of physical evidence did it for her and because this wasn't declared a mistrial, they can't retry her. The law enforcement now needs to find more evidence and find somebody else who might have done this. Maybe she did do it, but she could have helped. There is still hope.

Agree. None of us were the trial, so how could we really know how good the evidence was. I feel sorry for the jurors who will probably be branded their entire lives as horrible people who let a killer go free.

The Court of Public Opinion is a little too strong in this country for my taste. We are all so outraged at the death of someone we never knew, who had no connection to us, and we say how we think her alleged killer should be treated.

You know what my take on this trial is?

Every day children are sold into sex slavery around the world.

Every day children in the US go to bed hungry

Every day in the US children are abused, neglected, gone missing, or killed in street violence

Every day children die of AIDS in Africa

Where is the outrage here? Where is the Court of Public Opinion here? Why can't we be as outraged at all of the injustices done against children as we are about the death of a single, cute, doe-eyed suburban white girl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree. None of us were the trial, so how could we really know how good the evidence was. I feel sorry for the jurors who will probably be branded their entire lives as horrible people who let a killer go free.

The Court of Public Opinion is a little too strong in this country for my taste. We are all so outraged at the death of someone we never knew, who had no connection to us, and we say how we think her alleged killer should be treated.

You know what my take on this trial is?

Every day children are sold into sex slavery around the world.

Every day children in the US go to bed hungry

Every day in the US children are abused, neglected, gone missing, or killed in street violence

Every day children die of AIDS in Africa

Where is the outrage here? Where is the Court of Public Opinion here? Why can't we be as outraged at all of the injustices done against children as we are about the death of a single, cute, doe-eyed suburban white girl?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but she didn't she go to the media first. I may be wrong, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. Thank goodness CA stopped with that nonsense after OJ, but Florida seems to feed off this crap, ever sincce the "grey dot" in the William Kennedy Smith trial.

Ah but the esteemed Dr Conray Murray's trial is going to be televised so the millions of Michael Jackson fans can get their fix. Remember Michael's trial and the travesty of justice that happened there. It was no secret he liked little boys, someone got to that jury and he walked free.

It's like a wreck on the side of the road or a crash of a plane, you can not stop watching. :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the Murray case being tried in CA or TX, because that's where he's licensed to practice?

If it's CA, then it's definitely an LA thing; we've had some very high-profile cases in the Bay Area over the past couple of years and no cameras were allowed in the courtroom. Fair verdicts - one not popular in the Court of Public Opinion, resulting in looting - were achieved in both cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the death penalty in extreme cases and they know the person is guilty as sin ex.Charles Manson. Im not saying whether or not this case warrants the death penalty but if serious crimes aren't punished, they continue. I wouldn't doubt if some jury tampering was going on. It is sad when any child is harmed whether Sean Paddock, Jon Benet Ramsey or doe-eyed Caylee Anthony. Justice was not served.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the death penalty in extreme cases and they know the person is guilty as sin ex.Charles Manson. Im not saying whether or not this case warrants the death penalty but if serious crimes aren't punished, they continue. I wouldn't doubt if some jury tampering was going on. It is sad when any child is harmed whether Sean Paddock, Jon Benet Ramsey or doe-eyed Caylee Anthony. Justice was not served.

I know next to nothing about the Casey Anthony case (in fact, I knew absolutely nothing about it until after the conviction when I briefly looked it up. I was shocked the case had been going on for years, because I generally try to keep up with the news and I'd never even heard of it before a few weeks ago). BUT, I don't think that punishments deter serious crimes. I agree that people who have committed completely egregious things should never be allowed to see the light of day again, because they have done egregious things and are clearly a danger to society, but I don't think that punishment really acts as a deterrent against crime.

I mean, I get confused when Christians says things like "If it weren't for the fact that I'd be sent to hell I'd do bad things" because I know so many people who don't believe in hell who don't need the threat of hell to not do bad things. Similarly, I think most people don't steal, rape, and murder because they inherently believe it to be harmful and wrong, not because they're afraid they're going to be punished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been involved in DP cases. I've been inches from some of the worst pieces of shit you can imagine and stood in the rooms where people have died horribly. I strongly support the death penalty... but not in this case.

In any circumstantial evidence case you have to rely on getting people to accept that the standard is beyond a REASONABLE doubt and not beyond ALL doubt. Seeking the DP on this case was overcharging, which is what sunk them in the end. If this had been a "normal" murder case they would have charged felony obstruction, disposal of a body, child neglect charges for failure to report the "kidnapping" etc. It wouldnt have been all or nothing and she would have been convicted on atleast some of the felony charges. She also would have likely entered a plea to a lower charge.

Nancy Grace is a pompous ass. A lot of this is her fault for blowing this thing way out of proportion. In the end, though. Casey may walk free tomorrow but my guess is she will be in prison or dead within 5 years. The IRS may get her, she may pick up drug charges because she's gonna party hard, or she'll get killed... Karma is a bitch...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the jury got it right. I don't know enough about this case to have a feeling of "she did it" or "she didn't do it", but I do know that if the prosecution couldn't even figure out how the child died, that they were never going to succeed in getting a murder charge to stick. I think they jumped the gun and went to trial way before they were ready. Most likely due to pressure from the media and court of public opinion. If people like Nancy Grace would quit getting everyone riled up and allow the government to do their jobs, more of these cases would be solved and the criminals brought to justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the grey dot?

I actually thought it was blue... the media "dotted" the face of a rape victim so they could televise her testimony. The dot slipped a couple of times... It was a complete mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Amy probably posted about Casey Anthony on FB because tons of other people are posting stuff FB or Twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • Trending Content

  • Recent Status Updates

    • 47of74

      47of74

      Yeah, that's me.  Though to be fair I am trying to learn Italian and Spanish.

      · 0 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      IT'S BASEBALL SEASON!!!!!
      ⚾❣️
      · 3 replies
    • mango_fandango

      mango_fandango

      It’s not supposed to be mosquito season right now but I still appear to have been bitten twice on the side of my foot. Bastards. I know I shouldn’t scratch but it’s so tempting… 😑
      · 0 replies
    • Therapy Outside the Box

      Therapy Outside the Box

      Hello,
       
      I'm brand new to this forum. It was suggested to me by former and outspoken Remnant Fellowship member (Natasha Pavlovich) that I join this forum and put out here what I do. She also warned me that no one on here trusts, or trusts easily, and that I'd likely be assumed to be a Remnant plant or spy until vetted and verified as not that. Fair enough. 
      In short, and in truth, I'm a psychotherapist with 25 yrs experience in Franklin TN (less than three miles from RF incidentally) with a special interest in working with people formerly associated with cults, cult-like or any and all high control intitutions. I'm especially interested in working with those desiring not only deconstruct, recover and learn to thrive post-indoctrination, but those desiring to recapture or cultivate an authentic sense of theology without walls, or spirituality with borders. 
      To date, I've worked with former Amish, Mennonite, LDS/FLDS, FOG, and a those representing a whole slew of evangelical, fire and brimstone fear/shame/guilt-inducing institutions.
      I am especially interested in working with former Remnant Fellowship and Scientology members. I view RF as basically Scientology without the budget. 
      I'll leave it there. Much more can be gleaned about me through my website: therapyoutsidethebox.com or IG: @ therapyoutsidethebox
       
      Peace,
       
      Chris Hancock, LCSW
      Franklin, TN

      · 3 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      I have a friend with untreated autism and ADHD. I've tried so fucking hard to help. He refuses. It's a mess. I'm really really tired.
      · 0 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      Making Jill Duggar's brownie recipe because why not stay up late.
      · 2 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Party on aisle 15....

      Also no interest if fully paid in so many months.
      · 0 replies
    • WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

      WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

      Happy Supper Bowel Sunday!!  No, wait. That isn't right...
      Anyway, enjoy the game (or the half time show, or the ads)!
      And a very happy Sunday to everyone who doesn't care about the NFL! 
      · 0 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      I'm a huge baseball fan. This year, MLB TV showed Liga Dominicana games in December and January and it was a fucking revelation. The players had so much fire and joy. The announcers with their charming DR accents were a blast, though I could hardly keep up with the Spanish. DItto the Serie del Caribe. As a White Sox fan, the MLB season is going to suffer by comparison. Te amo los Tigres del Licey!
      · 2 replies
    • bea

      bea

      I've just realized how long I've been on FJ.  Holy cow.
      · 0 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.