Oracion 35 Posted July 6, 2011 It's sickening.Wait till the after-coverage. People are still gonna be talking about this for awhile I'm sure.inb4NancyGrace Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 I already had one highschool friend remove me on facebook because I commented he was an arrogant jackass for calling the jury "incompetent" for their decision. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 Wait till the after-coverage. People are still gonna be talking about this for awhile I'm sure.inb4NancyGraceI already had one highschool friend remove me on facebook because I commented he was an arrogant jackass for calling the jury "incompetent" in his status. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dojima 7619 Posted July 6, 2011 A lot of people don't understand just how high the quantum of proof is in criminal proceedings. You can't just be pretty sure they did it. If anyone, blame the prosecutors, not the jury. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlackStone 66 Posted July 6, 2011 I do blame the prosecutors. They fucked up real bad here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 I do blame the prosecutors. They fucked up real bad here.Were you in that courtroom? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
I <3 People of Color 2 Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) BlackStone said: Edited September 8, 2017 by I <3 People of Color Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shuda51 25 Posted July 6, 2011 The biggest problem was that the prosecution did not have enough direct evidence. All the evidence was circumstantial. Still, there was alot of it, there was enough of it, and I've seen innocents get convicted with far less than that.Look, is there the chance she's innocent? Yes. There is. However, she's still guilty on many things. Her sentence should have been alot worse. She lied to the police on 4 different occasions (which she was sentenced on). That right there tells me something else is hiding in this story. She also waited 31 days, THIRTY ONE DAYS, to tell anybody the kid was missing. And you're telling me that's not some form of child abuse?Personally, I believe she's guilty. HOWEVER, there is still that one small chance, that slight doubt, that she's innocent. What was shown, merely shown, did not remove all plausible doubt.That said, I think there's still alot more to this case that hasn't been explored or explained properly. We're missing alot of information that I think should have been there. In the words of PW:JFA : "The miracle never happen." We'll never know the full truth now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drunkula 1635 Posted July 6, 2011 http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/05/jury-reaches-verdict-in-casey-anthony-trial/good now courtTV can go back to playing random worlds dumbest vids for me to watch during commercials of other shit Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christmas 643 Posted July 6, 2011 Were you in that courtroom?Why should that be necessary? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlackStone 66 Posted July 6, 2011 The biggest problem was that the prosecution did not have enough direct evidence. All the evidence was circumstantial. Still, there was alot of it, there was enough of it, and I've seen innocents get convicted with far less than that.Look, is there the chance she's innocent? Yes. There is. However, she's still guilty on many things. Her sentence should have been alot worse. She lied to the police on 4 different occasions (which she was sentenced on). That right there tells me something else is hiding in this story. She also waited 31 days, THIRTY ONE DAYS, to tell anybody the kid was missing. And you're telling me that's not some form of child abuse?Personally, I believe she's guilty. HOWEVER, there is still that one small chance, that slight doubt, that she's innocent. What was shown, merely shown, did not remove all plausible doubt.That said, I think there's still alot more to this case that hasn't been explored or explained properly. We're missing alot of information that I think should have been there. In the words of PW:JFA : "The miracle never happen." We'll never know the full truth now.This. I feel sorry for the kid the most, and the grandparents that loved her dearly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Big Shot 84 Posted July 6, 2011 If she wasn't white and if she was a guy. She would have been guilty. That's the sad truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christmas 643 Posted July 6, 2011 If she wasn't white and if she was a guy. She would have been guilty. That's the sad truth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Contract Killer 24 Posted July 6, 2011 One of the conflicting evidence is that the dead daughter was duct taped around her mouth and nose. This would be useless if the victim was dead by drowning beforehand. It points at the fact that someone must of (the mother) duct taped her daughter's mouth and nose to shut her up and suffocate her. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlackStone 66 Posted July 6, 2011 What you did there.I see it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Groov 568 Posted July 6, 2011 Since she ain't being charged she is going to be really fucked cause society and going treat her well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iyedol 16 Posted July 6, 2011 Going to play the race card here. If she was black, not only would she be in jail the entire family would be there also.I take back, if she was black who would have cared. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christmas 643 Posted July 6, 2011 Going to play the race card here. If she was black, not only would she be in jail the entire family would be there also.I take back, if she was black who would have cared. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 Why should that be necessary?Are you really that stupid? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fat Black Woman 257 Posted July 6, 2011 I say we kill the bitch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iyedol 16 Posted July 6, 2011 Most people knew who OJ was. Can anyone on this forum say they knew this person? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christmas 643 Posted July 6, 2011 Are you really that stupid?Please tell me why I cannot criticize the prosecution simply because I don't have 100% of the information of what went on in the courtroom (as if knowing the evidence of the case and all the relevant information wasn't enough).If you believe that, then the president, police, government in general, etc. cannot be criticized for their actions because "we weren't there".But hey, insults are easier to sling than actual content, right?ETA: He believes there was enough evidence to convict Casey Anthony, the prosecutors did not get a conviction, therefore in his mind they failed. How is that unreasonable? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 Please tell me why I cannot criticize the prosecution simply because I don't have 100% of the information of what went on in the courtroom (as if knowing the evidence of the case and all the relevant information wasn't enough).If you believe that, then the president, police, government in general, etc. cannot be criticized for their actions because "we weren't there".But hey, insults are easier to sling than actual content, right?ETA: He believes there was enough evidence to convict Casey Anthony, the prosecutors did not get a conviction, therefore in his mind they failed. How is that unreasonable?Because neither of you know all the evidence, the way it was presented, how the defense responded, etc. Snippets from news organizations aren't going to give you the same view the jury had. The circumstances that led to her acquittal may have had nothing to do with the competence of the prosecution, and it's stupid as fuck to assume you know otherwise. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Christmas 643 Posted July 6, 2011 Because neither of you know all the evidence, the way it was presented, how the defense responded, etc. Snippets from news organizations aren't going to give you the same view the jury had. The circumstances that led to her acquittal may have had nothing to do with the competence of the prosecution, and it's stupid as fuck to assume you know otherwise.The evidence has been presented pretty well to the public. There was no evidence to lead to a murder one conviction, but there very well seemed like enough to get a manslaughter conviction. The prosecution chose to get greedy and pursue a murder one/capital sentence, and it ended up fucking them over.I can very well make that statement without issue, and it is silly for you to make such a statement when such statement would apply to just about any criticism of any politician, event, person, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Goldentongue 3616 Posted July 6, 2011 The evidence has been presented pretty well to the public. There was no evidence to lead to a murder one conviction, but there very well seemed like enough to get a manslaughter conviction. The prosecution chose to get greedy and pursue a murder one/capital sentence, and it ended up fucking them over.I can very well make that statement without issue, and it is silly for you to make such a statement when such statement would apply to just about any criticism of any politician, event, person, etc.Dear god.Just go back to watching Law and Order. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites