Casey Anthony

[SlingShot]

State should of put Child Neglect as one of the charges. They could of got her very easy on that.

[Future MDPilot]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

State should of put Child Neglect as one of the charges. They could of got her very easy on that.

Yes.

[Havok]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

State should of put Child Neglect as one of the charges. They could of got her very easy on that.

Wouldn't have mattered. The state tried to push the murder charges with the lying aspect and didn't even touch on any of the child abuse (which she was tried for) aspect of the case from what I remember. They wanted that murder conviction and nothing else.

[BRAVO29ER]

Just like I said...the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Russell James]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

State should of put Child Neglect as one of the charges. They could of got her very easy on that.

They did.

They charged her with Murder, Manslaughter, Aggravated Child Abuse, lying to the police...

The charges were accurate to the facts. The Grand Jury got it 100% right, the trial jurors are idiots.

[Ironheadspearo]

why do so many people get so emotionally involved in this type of stuff? will it make any difference in your life if she had been condemmed to the needle for lethal injection? hell im just glad this stupid crap is off the news finally.... who cares

[Lou_Dorchen]

Originally Posted by Banshee

Prosecution didn't prove it's case and went for capital punishment with such a burden of proof.

Actually they didn't. She was also charged with child abuse and manslaughter. None of those are death penalty eligible crimes. It was not a case of all or nothing.

Originally Posted by Havok

Gotta love it when people complain about a verdict, but try their hardest to get out of jury duty. If you want to fix the system then why don't you do your civic responsibility and actually not try to get out of jury duty. Then you might be able to convict more of these "guilty" people because you so smart and all.

Never said I was. Just repeated someone else's quote.

I've been called for jury duty several times and I've always been released on the 1st cut. I never even get interviewed by the lawyers. I'm an engineer, so I'll likely never get chosen. Defense attorneys do not like educated jurors.

Originally Posted by Banshee

Unless you have smelled a dead human body...and done so as part of your job on a daily basis, could you testify to this. You need to have experience as in an "expert" to testify that the smell you smelled was consistant of that of decomposing human remains based on 23 years of law enforcement experience with "X" police department.

Her dad was a cop and he testified he smelled human decomposition in the trunk.

[PoorMansCamaro]

Originally Posted by Ironheadspearo

why do so many people get so emotionally involved in this type of stuff? will it make any difference in your life if she had been condemmed to the needle for lethal injection? hell im just glad this stupid crap is off the news finally.... who cares

because it's OUR justice system at work. lots of people care about our justice system. even if it has nothing to do with us, personally.

[Steve Dallas]

The only good that comes of this is Nancy Grace's apoplexy resulting from the verdict.

[PoorMansCamaro]

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

The only good that comes of this is Nancy Grace's apoplexy resulting from the verdict.

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

State should of put Child Neglect as one of the charges. They could of got her very easy on that.

Originally Posted by Havok

Wouldn't have mattered. The state tried to push the murder charges with the lying aspect and didn't even touch on any of the child abuse (which she was tried for) aspect of the case from what I remember. They wanted that murder conviction and nothing else.

Originally Posted by Russell James

They did.

They charged her with Murder, Manslaughter, Aggravated Child Abuse, lying to the police...

The charges were accurate to the facts. The Grand Jury got it 100% right, the trial jurors are idiots.

Child Neglect is different than the other charges. It would have been a lesser than the others, but still a felony. The fact that she didn't report her child missing or didn't know where she was for 31 days and admitted by her would have been enough to convict on that.

[Banshee]

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Actually they didn't. She was also charged with child abuse and manslaughter. None of those are death penalty eligible crimes. It was not a case of all or nothing..

Burden of proof is higher for capital murder than that of a life sentence. If the prosecution couldn't make that burden, they should have went for the lesser. If you can't prove she killed her daughter, how can you prove AND convict a person for aggrevated child abuse and aggrivated manslaughter of a child?

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Her dad was a cop and he testified he smelled human decomposition in the trunk.

True...but again, unless you have specific trace evidence, a cadaver dog hitting on the car and yard AND her father testifying is circumstantial testimony WITHOUT any other trace or corroborating (direct) evidence. You can't convict someone of capital murder with only circumstantial evidence. I should say it's possible, but highly unlikely. Scott peterson was convicted on a high degree of circumstantial evidence that corroborated direct evidence. The marina reciept Peterson had and her body located a short distance away..

[BigRed585Lbs]

I would have figured that this discussion would have happened over on a Mustang forum. Oh, well.

[Lou_Dorchen]

Originally Posted by Banshee

Burden of proof is higher for capital murder than that of a life sentence. If the prosecution couldn't make that burden, they should have went for the lesser. If you can't prove she killed her daughter, how can you prove AND convict a person for aggrevated child abuse and aggrivated manslaughter of a child?

No, the burden of proof is not any higher. FYI, not all those convicted of capital murder get death, just being convicted of it is not an automatic death penalty.

And they did go for lesser charges as well, so I have no idea why you say they should have went for lesser charges.

Originally Posted by Banshee

True...but again, unless you have specific trace evidence, a cadaver dog hitting on the car and yard AND her father testifying is circumstantial evidence WITHOUT evidence. You can't convict someone of capital murder with circumstantial evidence.

So now you raise the bar.

And you can get a conviction with just circumstantial evidence on ANY charge. Forensics (like DNA) and ballistics are circumstantial evidence. We've even executed people using just circumstantial evidence, Ted Bundy is a good example.