I Know Longer Believe

[joviroxx]

Whether it was the police, the prosecution, the jurors or the judge--someone failed this baby and a guility person has walked free. The system failed at some level. That doesn't mean we throw out the system. It means we look at what failed and we try to fix it.

 

[luvsJack]

I don't understand your statement. If the prosecution failed to prove it's case, that does not mean the system failed. She may be innocent? If the prosecution proved it's case every time, everyone would be convicted. THAT would be a broken system.

Just because it wasn't the verdict you wanted, doesn't mean it's broken.

She may be innocent??? What innocent parent doesn't report their child missing?

The defence was that the child accidently drowned and so her grandfather and mother threw her out like yesterday's garbage. THIS is what gave them reasonable doubt?

Its not about it being the verdict I wanted. In THIS case, there was too much that pointed to her being involved with this child's death in some way. If the prosecution had evidence he didn't use or didn't dig deep enough or decided to go ahead and try without enough evidence to prove the charges--then he failed and the system didn't work.

 

[EllenFrasier]

I know longer believe in our court system.
I used to believe the the rich and famous got off without paying for crimes but now I think different.

The day a mother that kills her child walks free is the day that makes me feel our system is broken.


Waiting for this "mother" to stand at the gates......

Was there proof beyond a reasonable doubt presented to the jury that Casey killed her daughter? I think she's a nut, but that doesn't mean she killed her.

 

[bombygriz]

For those of you who have seen the musical (or film) Chicago...

Though you are stiffer than a girder
They'll let you get away with murder
Razzle dazzle 'em...

 

[dngnb8]

just because it the verdict you wanted doesn't make it perfect

Please show where I said I got the verdict I "wanted"

If you cannot quote the statement, then I expect you to apologize for posting something that is a lie

 

[Carly_Roach]

She may be innocent??? What innocent parent doesn't report their child missing?

The defence was that the child accidently drowned and so her grandfather and mother threw her out like yesterday's garbage. THIS is what gave them reasonable doubt?

Its not about it being the verdict I wanted. In THIS case, there was too much that pointed to her being involved with this child's death in some way. If the prosecution had evidence he didn't use or didn't dig deep enough or decided to go ahead and try without enough evidence to prove the charges--then he failed and the system didn't work.

To not report a missing child isn't a crime. At least it isn't now nor was it a crime in 2008.

The jury didn't find CA innocent, they found her not guilty of the counts listed against her. Big difference. And all the words presented (yesterday's garbage, etc) in order to elicit a prescribed response won't change the fact that the jury voted, the county accepted the vote, the case is over and our system worked.

 

[joviroxx]

Was there proof beyond a reasonable doubt presented to the jury that Casey killed her daughter? I think she's a nut, but that doesn't mean she killed her.

For me? yes! And I can list it along with my commonsense linking it all together.

 

[dngnb8]

Do you believe that a woman who did not report her baby missing for 30 days is innocent? Do you have children? Or a pet? Would you be able to allow your child to be missing for even a day?

Ah yes, the Emotional Plea. Obviously I have no children or pets because I dont believe like you.

I never had the horrific ordeal of a child missing for days or months but ds did disappear for an hour or more when he was about that age. Let me tell you the absolute HORROR that goes through your mind and heart and soul in the moment you realize they are missing. Within that hour we called the sherriff's office. my father home from work and dh (before he was my dh) from his job to help us find my baby. There is no way on this earth that someone who didn't have anything to do with her child's death let her be gone for 30 days without reporting it. Absolutly no way.

Ive never said, implied that Casey was a good momn

I believe strongly in "innocent until proven guilty".

Not according to your recent posts

I also believe in "if someone shows you who they are, believe them". She showed us who she was long ago. That doesn't help much in court, I know but it is a fact.

Being a dirtbag <> to killing a child. So much for

I believe strongly in "innocent until proven guilty".

Whether it was the police, the prosecution, the jurors or the judge--someone failed this baby and a guility person has walked free. The system failed at some level. That doesn't mean we throw out the system. It means we look at what failed and we try to fix it.

Fix it how, until you get what you want? What you want, and believe, is what determines a system is right or wrong?

 

[luvsJack]

I am not making fun of others. I'm espousing my opinion which, as you've said yourself, can be ignored.

I find myself wryly amused at all the angst and drama over this case, but I'm not yet perturbed enough to rise to the bait of others who want me to get angry enough at their accusations so I might say something that can be intepretted as a personal attack and they can report me.

I do, however, take exception with those who attack our American justice system and say it's broken whenever a case doesn't come out the way they want it to. The loser ALWAYS says justice wasn't done or the court system is flawed. The winner knows that you win some, you lose some. That's life.

I find whole "Our system is broken!" attitude to be quite childish and indicative of the mob mentality that precipitated the creation of the American justice system in the first place. I'm quite proud of our American justice system and would much rather 10 murderers go free than 1 innocent person be put to death.

So the system is perfect in your opinion and there is never any room for improvement?

I don't think the system needs to be thrown away, but there is always room for improvement. There is always a place for looking at our mistakes and figuring out a way to prevent them in the future. Looking for improvement is hardly childish.

And there is a difference in saying "the system is broken" and that it failed. Its a good system, but not perfect. And it does fail sometimes. It failed with OJ and it failed now. Someone dropped the ball, and for that reason it failed.

BTW, not sure who you are talking about reporting anyone, but I have never reported anyone nor do I intend to start anytime soon. But your remarks in the post I first quoted could have been seen as highly insulting to others on this thread.

 

[NEVERENOUGHWDW]

Was there proof beyond a reasonable doubt presented to the jury that Casey killed her daughter? I think she's a nut, but that doesn't mean she killed her.

I believe so.....

 

[lisajl]

unfortuantely, she was not charged with child neglact-she was charged with child abuse which has a totally different legal meaning and standrd of evidence. She was found guilty on the charges of lying in the case.

I do believe she did it
i do not believe the prosecution proved first/second degree murder (premediated) within the legal requirement

i guess the system did work.

ita

 

[luvsJack]

Ah yes, the Emotional Plea. Obviously I have no children or pets because I dont believe like you.



Ive never said, implied that Casey was a good momn



Not according to your recent posts



Being a dirtbag <> to killing a child. So much for





Fix it how, until you get what you want? What you want, and believe, is what determines a system is right or wrong?

Not an emotional plea, a question. I have no clue whether you have children or not--I don't know you. I was simply trying to explain the feeling one gets when a child is missing and I knew that a parent would know that feeling.

Not reporting her child missing for 30 days is equal to a heck of a lot more than "not being a good mom".

She showed us her guilt, apparently some just don't believe her. So you think maybe she just thought her child was playing at someone's house for 30 days? Or that she left her at with a non-existing nanny? Or maybe she left her in the castle with Mickey and Minnie? Why did she not report this child missing?

Someone dropped the ball on this case. Whoever it was failed this child.

I don't want to fix it to get what I want. But, if mistakes were made they should be learned from.

 

[jmpurdy]

I think the system became flawed when jury consultants became the norm. Choosing someone who may be beneficial to one side or the other. I find this manipulative and wrong. It gives the 'edge' to one side before the trial even begins. These choices early on can be the foundation for a decision that may not be 'justice'. I find the idea of jury consultants to be somewhat distasteful and it feels to me like a game being played. Let the prosecution and defense work it out with the judge alone when choosing jurors. I know it won't happen, but this one area that I don't feel made the 'system' better.

 

[luvsJack]

To not report a missing child isn't a crime. At least it isn't now nor was it a crime in 2008.

The jury didn't find CA innocent, they found her not guilty of the counts listed against her. Big difference. And all the words presented (yesterday's garbage, etc) in order to elicit a prescribed response won't change the fact that the jury voted, the county accepted the vote, the case is over and our system worked.

Ok, what "not guilty" parent doesn't report their child missing? Its not a crime, but it certainly should be and it certainly points to guilt.

I am not trying to elicit a prescribed response. Someone threw this baby's body away like garbage. How else would you describe it?

And again, the system did not work. A child is dead and no one is facing justice for that child. The system failed.

 

[luvsJack]

We have the best system in the world.

Yes, we do but that doesn't make it perfect. That doesn't mean that it doesn't fail sometimes.

 

[U2_rocks!]

Being responsible for someone's death is NOT the same as murder in the first degree. I don't know why the prosecution decided to go after such a high charge - I think it was emotions talking (they are human after all). If they had pursued a lesser charge they may have been able to make it stick. It wouldn't have been nearly as satisfying, but it would have been better than what actually happened (the not guilty verdict).

 

[NikitaZee]

Being responsible for someone's death is NOT the same as murder in the first degree. I don't know why the prosecution decided to go after such a high charge - I think it was emotions talking (they are human after all). If they had pursued a lesser charge they may have been able to make it stick. It wouldn't have been nearly as satisfying, but it would have been better than what actually happened (the not guilty verdict).

Completely agree.

 

[Carly_Roach]

I think the system became flawed when jury consultants became the norm. Choosing someone who may be beneficial to one side or the other. I find this manipulative and wrong. It gives the 'edge' to one side before the trial even begins. These choices early on can be the foundation for a decision that may not be 'justice'. I find the idea of jury consultants to be somewhat distasteful and it feels to me like a game being played. Let the prosecution and defense work it out with the judge alone when choosing jurors. I know it won't happen, but this one area that I don't feel made the 'system' better.

I agree. Unfortunately, jury consultants are here to stay as are cameras in the courtroom (which I don't, on the face of it, disagree with. Court should be public).

And here's another germ of an idea to think on: in just about every circumstantial case that turned into a media circus, the defendant walked. The few media circus cases where the defendant didn't walk (Manson, Dahmer, Smith, etc), the prosecution had hard evidence and/or eyewitnesses on their side.

So in effect, could it be proposed that the media and all it's attending peanut gallery viewers hold some of the responsibility of these "cold blooded killers" going free? If not for their attention, the round-the-clock broadcasting of every detail, and the public call to metaphorically "get a rope", would the circumstantial evidence against CA have been enough to convict? I believe so.

So in essence, could not the very people ripping their clothing, turning on their porch lights and going through pallets of kleenex in their grief for poor Caylee Anthony be the very ones responsible for setting Caylee's murderer free?

Hmmm.....

 

[Lanshark]

Two high profile cases televised for the masses to be entertained and two, seemingly, incorrect verdicts. There is a common denominator.

 

[Carly_Roach]

A child is dead and no one is facing justice for that child. The system failed.

Many children die each year. Many children are murdered each year. This has been going on since time began. Hundreds of thousands of children die at the hands of another the world over. While you and others mourn the loss of that ONE child whose precious face has been flashed across the screen countless times, there are many others the world over, just as precious, who've died in the past week who get no justice or even attention.

However, having said that, there are also many dead American children whose murderers are caught, tried and put in jail or put to death with as little brouhaha as possible. Which means....

....the sytem works.

As for no one "facing justice" for that child...that's God's business. Not ours. Let Him tend to it.