Casey Anthony - guilty, or not?

[NJFemmie]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

When I lost a child, drinking and dancing was the furthest thing from my mind, I'm trying really hard to wrap my mind around the partying, the "the kids out of town", the blaming 2 POC, the breaking in her own parents shed for gas cans, duct tape, I mean I could go on and on. Sociopaths can go on with life without skipping a beat, she's got a taste for it she won't stop, they never do.

You're right - they never do. In their minds, whatever they do is justifiable. Maybe not to you or me or anyone else, but in their minds, everything, including lives - are expendable. I'm not necessarily stating that every narcissist/sociopath in the world is a killer, but the ones that are, are very dangerous and cunning people indeed. They push on with no conscience whatsoever.

On another note: There is a juror who is speaking about it now, and she says that the only reason why she was acquitted was because of the evidence -- no one knows how Caylee died - it wasn't because of what they felt in their hearts. I don't think she is back peddling - one of the first things she said was what has been said in here - she's not guilty, but she's not innocent. I think the majority of people feel that way with very few feeling that she was actually innocent.

Makes me wonder if the defense team had their own doubts about her, which I am sure they did. They called her out as a liar right off the bat ... so how can they not? Which makes me think about this supposed book deal that is in the works ... not that I would ever consider buying it - but with four counts of lying to the police and authorities - the book should be considered fiction. Her side of the story means absolutely nothing - it would be all lies anyway I imagine.

[cinderella]

(sorry, that should've read: And you *know* what, Femmie...)

even if she came out and blatently said she did do it, and even elaborated on how/why she killed Caylee, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING they can do to her - she has been acquitted, and cannot be tried again for the same crime - that's Double Jeopardy. Except, of course, she cannot run nor hide from the people's wrath. Even if she never said anything, she still has to face the public, and a good majority of the public is outraged and angry. Somebody may just be angry enough to 'off' her. All I know is, no matter where this woman goes, she will have no peace. Not because she cares or feels any remorse over Caylee, but because of the hell people are going to give her. So essentially, she will never be 'free', even if she is not in jail.

Originally Posted by NJFemmie

You're right - they never do. In their minds, whatever they do is justifiable. Maybe not to you or me or anyone else, but in their minds, everything, including lives - are expendable. I'm not necessarily stating that every narcissist/sociopath in the world is a killer, but the ones that are, are very dangerous and cunning people indeed. They push on with no conscience whatsoever.

On another note: There is a juror who is speaking about it now, and she says that the only reason why she was acquitted was because of the evidence -- no one knows how Caylee died - it wasn't because of what they felt in their hearts. I don't think she is back peddling - one of the first things she said was what has been said in here - she's not guilty, but she's not innocent. I think the majority of people feel that way with very few feeling that she was actually innocent.

Makes me wonder if the defense team had their own doubts about her, which I am sure they did. They called her out as a liar right off the bat ... so how can they not? Which makes me think about this supposed book deal that is in the works ... not that I would ever consider buying it - but with four counts of lying to the police and authorities - the book should be considered fiction. Her side of the story means absolutely nothing - it would be all lies anyway I imagine.

[princessbelle]

Release date....

Casey Anthony walks on JULY 13. Next Wednesday.


The law was followed. The judge could do no more than issue her the maximum amount of time.

I don't get why her time served for bad checks can now go retro to the offence she was just charged on. However, that is evidently the law.

Again, it is what it is.

Signing that petition for Caylee's Law.

Maybe, possibly...something positiive out of this...

[NJFemmie]

Please sign this petition and share on your FB pages and twitter accounts:

http://news.change.org/stories/more-...s-law-campaign

They have over 370K signatures already and need more for Caylee's Law.

Whether you agree with the verdict or not - no child should go missing and unreported like this again.

[scootebaby]

thanks NJ signed!

and agreed...no matter personal thoughts this bill should be signed,and hopefully it will get passed!

[NJFemmie]

Yup, that's kinda how a lot of people feel .... like we've been given a huge fuck you.

[girl_dee]

George and Cindy had their lawyer prepare a statement for the press, which has just been released, saying:
"The family may never know what happened to Caylee Marie Anthony. They now have closure for this chapter of their life. They will now begin the long process of rebuilding their lives. Despite the baseless defense chosen by Casey Anthony, the family believes that the jury made a fair decision based on the evidence presented, the testimony presented, the scientific information presented, and the rules that they were given by the Honorable Judge Perry to guide them."



CLOSURE?

[princessbelle]

Originally Posted by sassy_girl

George and Cindy had their lawyer prepare a statement for the press, which has just been released, saying:
"The family may never know what happened to Caylee Marie Anthony. They now have closure for this chapter of their life. They will now begin the long process of rebuilding their lives. Despite the baseless defense chosen by Casey Anthony, the family believes that the jury made a fair decision based on the evidence presented, the testimony presented, the scientific information presented, and the rules that they were given by the Honorable Judge Perry to guide them."



CLOSURE?

Thanks for posting Sassy girl. Well isn't that spiffy they can find closure. I, for one, cannot and will light my porch light every night for this little girl.

More than that...for all the little people of this world who have been murdered or abused and their murderers/abusers walk free.

This whole thing is just sickening.

[Gráinne]

Anyone else notice that the web /newspapers don't show her sobbing; they show her laughing or smirking.

I think justice failed here, laws and proceedures nonwithstanding. I hope guilt eats her from inside the rest of her days (but I doubt it). She'll have more money than Job by the following Monday.

[scootebaby]

Of course the TVs and websites and newspapers are gonna ONLY show her laughing and smirking. The general public wouldnt want it any other way. I know im one of the outsiders where this is concerned,but as i was telling Jo last night...there ARE ppl out there that support Casey(and have from the beginning) and they are posting and commenting and interviewing but THEY dont get any media time whatso ever bc that would take attention off of the media circus surrounding all of this.

And i dont mean this too any particular person in here,more a general /observation from me,but this has been going on for over 3 yrs..Remember she was last seen on JUNE 16th 2008--we are now in July 2011...where were the porch lights,the support,the ppl trying to get laws passed then? was the public waiting to see if she would get put to death? would that have changed things? would the porch lights not be on now? would there not be a petition for Caylees Law?

My point is this--after the initial media crush there was VERY little about this in the news or on the lips of ppl. Im truly curious as to the why.

oh and something that came to me last night--bc im known to look at different scenarios/possibilities--George Anthony was a retired HOMICIDE detective...he would know(or at the very least have some knowledge of procedure) what would really be needed to get a conviction,and knew it would never be found....so could he have been more involved? could Caylees reaction be to him "throwing" her under the bus--on top of any other crime perpetrated upon her in her life by him? I personally feel she did not act alone in this.

As someone said we will NEVER know all the facts surrounding this case,and altho i understand the emotion response i also know that things can be misconstrued all the time--and does, and people pay the price.


just my thoughts at the moment!

[Heart]

Here we go:

http://news.yahoo.com/brothers-3-4-f...002109465.html

These children went missing, mother had police contact, told them what she knew, and the children were discovered -- murdered, apparently by her abusive boyfriend, who had a long history of violence. He's been arrested.
While this mother could not be charged under Caylee's Law, as she DID contact authorities, how many will blame her anyway -- for being involved with an abuser/criminal?

In the 1980s Hedda Nussbaum's adopted daugher was killed by her abusive husband Joel Steinburg. They were both arrested, he for murder, she for neglect. She turned state's evidence and was granted immunity. There was a huge national outcry against her even though he had permanantly re-arranged her face, (I mean this literally -- she looked nothing like she did before she met him), tortured and terrified her and the child for years. He was convicted of manslaughter and receivedof 8-25. She had to go into hiding because of the public's rage against her for "allowing" it to happen.

My point? One of our favorite past-times in this country is blaming mothers.
I'll lay bets that most of you can name five killer mothers off the top of your heads. Now try and name five killer fathers. (Father's are ten times more likely to be responsible for the death of a child.)

In another case in NH, a mother begged and pleaded with authorities to find her children who did not return on time from court-ordered visitation. The police did nothing, sending the mother to family court which took days. In the meantime, the kids were killed by her ex. Caylee's Law is intended to punish bad parents (especially bad mothers), but what about systems such as police, child welfare, courts, that neglect the needs of families, the fears of violence survivors, enact racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, and homophobic biases, and hold mothers and fathers to vastly different standards?

Seriously. Can we move beyond this case and get to some of the deeper issues?*

Heart

*I don't mean anyone here personally, I just mean the discourse in general.

[cinderella]

Heart, that is an excellent idea - you should start a thread dedicated to "deeper issues". But, as far as your comment of "can we move beyond this case..." I started this thread specifically for the discussion of 'this case' - to get opinions on whether Casey Anthony was guilty or not, and it still remains the focus of the thread.

That said, I have read your comments with great interest. They are enlightening, and give much food for thought. I welcome your input and any further comments you wish to share with us. But I respectfully request that you not try to change the intended purpose of this thread. Thank you.

Originally Posted by Heart

Here we go:

http://news.yahoo.com/brothers-3-4-f...002109465.html

These children went missing, mother had police contact, told them what she knew, and the children were discovered -- murdered, apparently by her abusive boyfriend, who had a long history of violence. He's been arrested.
While this mother could not be charged under Caylee's Law, as she DID contact authorities, how many will blame her anyway -- for being involved with an abuser/criminal?

In the 1980s Hedda Nussbaum's adopted daugher was killed by her abusive husband Joel Steinburg. They were both arrested, he for murder, she for neglect. She turned state's evidence and was granted immunity. There was a huge national outcry against her even though he had permanantly re-arranged her face, (I mean this literally -- she looked nothing like she did before she met him), tortured and terrified her and the child for years. He was convicted of manslaughter and receivedof 8-25. She had to go into hiding because of the public's rage against her for "allowing" it to happen.

My point? One of our favorite past-times in this country is blaming mothers.
I'll lay bets that most of you can name five killer mothers off the top of your heads. Now try and name five killer fathers. (Father's are ten times more likely to be responsible for the death of a child.)

In another case in NH, a mother begged and pleaded with authorities to find her children who did not return on time from court-ordered visitation. The police did nothing, sending the mother to family court which took days. In the meantime, the kids were killed by her ex. Caylee's Law is intended to punish bad parents (especially bad mothers), but what about systems such as police, child welfare, courts, that neglect the needs of families, the fears of violence survivors, enact racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, and homophobic biases, and hold mothers and fathers to vastly different standards?

Seriously. Can we move beyond this case and get to some of the deeper issues?*

Heart

*I don't mean anyone here personally, I just mean the discourse in general.

[Heart]

Whenever I hear/read about making parents more responsible/accountable, I consider how we live in one of the most family UNfriendly countries in the world, (so-called "family values," notwithstanding). With no universal child-care, afterschool or health care, no meaningful paid maternity/paternity leave, ever-shrinking access to free family planning and mental health care, not to mention lack of affordable housing and livable wages in many sectors, it's a wonder most parents do as well as they do.

This has nothing to do with this awful case, per se, but if we had these things in place, as many other devloped countries do, it would be a heck of a lot easier to weed out the truly pathological parent from the over-stressed, under-resourced parent.

But these issues are complex, and require long-term solutions. It's easier to rant about a head-line grabbing case, whipped into a frenzy by the Nancy Graces of the tabloid media, and push through rightous and emotional legislation that may hurt innocent parents and their children.*

Heart

*not personal to anyone here, just my viewpoint.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Heart

Whenever I hear/read about making parents more responsible/accountable, I consider how we live in one of the most family UNfriendly countries in the world, (so-called "family values," notwithstanding). With no universal child-care, afterschool or health care, no meaningful paid maternity/paternity leave, ever-shrinking access to free family planning and mental health care, not to mention lack of affordable housing and livable wages in many sectors, it's a wonder most parents do as well as they do.

This has nothing to do with this awful case, per se, but if we had these things in place, as many other devloped countries do, it would be a heck of a lot easier to weed out the truly pathological parent from the over-stressed, under-resourced parent.But these issues are complex, and require long-term solutions. It's easier to rant about a head-line grabbing case, whipped into a frenzy by the Nancy Graces of the tabloid media, and push through rightous and emotional legislation that may hurt innocent parents and their children.*

Heart

*not personal to anyone here, just my viewpoint.

Yes, very complex and right now the pittiful few and under-funded services in the US are under attack so that a very few can continue to pay less in taxes that support these services than the many.

When will the US get the priorities in line with needs and the things that can make a difference in child rearing and parent support? Being able to identify pathological parents is vital to stopping these kinds of things from happening.

There are counties right now that are cutting the school week to 4 days- and the US is falling below in education around the world.

I also am having trouble with the "mother blame" that goes on. No, I do not see the verdicts here as just at all and I can't even watch video of this little girl- haven't been able to since the start of this case. But, so much of what promotes these kinds of horrible actions in our country just never seem to get addressed.

[Toughy]

Seriously. Can we move beyond this case and get to some of the deeper issues?*

Thank you Heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You beat me to the punch. I truly sincerely worry when folks run about and sign on-line petitions for laws they haven't even read. GREAT care must be taken in how these laws are written so there are no unintended consequences. This is pure reaction and is not really going to help. Considered action makes far more sense.

----------
I still don't understand why folks think she deserved the death penalty when there are no facts as to who killed the child, how the child was killed and why it happened. Facts are needed in our system, not conjecture and emotion. Justice is never served when emotion and vigilanteism are disguised as fact.

edited to add: part of me wishes Casey would sue Nancy Grace for defamation, libel and slander. I hate Nancy Grace and all the pundits like her.....they do way more harm than good....

[girl_dee]

These tragedies are coming out of the woodwork..

This one today:


<snip>

MONTREAL - Some Quebecers called for the death penalty as anger raged at a former doctor who was found not criminally responsible for killing his two young children.

Guy Turcotte, 39, admitted to stabbing five-year-old Olivier and three-year-old Anne Sophie 46 times in his rented home in Piedmont, north of Montreal, on February 20, 2009.

The 11 jurors accepted the defence's argument that Turcotte suffered from depression, anxiety and was suicidal after he found out his estranged wife was having an affair with a friend.

He had sent an e-mail to his ex-wife on the day of the killings that read "you want war, you'll have it."

The court also heard that little Olivier tried in vain to talk his father out of killing him, crying "no papa," before Turcotte plunged the knife into his stomach. The trial judge ruled that the jury was not allowed to hear that Turcotte refused to pay for his children's funerals.

Law enforcement officials and ordinary citizens blasted Tuesday's verdict, saying it sends the wrong message to fathers going through messy divorces.


<snip>


If this was not a case of *I'll get even with the ex* I don't know what was!
I am sure the mother is to blame here too. grrrrrr

What law could have protected these kids??

[Jess]

Originally Posted by Heart

Whenever I hear/read about making parents more responsible/accountable, I consider how we live in one of the most family UNfriendly countries in the world, (so-called "family values," notwithstanding). With no universal child-care, afterschool or health care, no meaningful paid maternity/paternity leave, ever-shrinking access to free family planning and mental health care, not to mention lack of affordable housing and livable wages in many sectors, it's a wonder most parents do as well as they do.

This has nothing to do with this awful case, per se, but if we had these things in place, as many other devloped countries do, it would be a heck of a lot easier to weed out the truly pathological parent from the over-stressed, under-resourced parent.

But these issues are complex, and require long-term solutions. It's easier to rant about a head-line grabbing case, whipped into a frenzy by the Nancy Graces of the tabloid media, and push through rightous and emotional legislation that may hurt innocent parents and their children.*

Heart

*not personal to anyone here, just my viewpoint.

I totally agree that these issues are complicated and need to be addressed thoroughly when creating laws to protect children/ families.

The change.org petition was the immediate reaction of a concerned, well meaning citizen, who "acted" and if nothing else, will bring attention from law makers to begin to research the proper actions to take regarding missing, exploited and abused children. It is merely a stepping stone and without proper legalese would never become an actual law.

While it may not be THE answer legally, it is a beginning and is bringing about discourse such as this. For that, I am grateful. I firmly believe that the more concerned citizens become aware and involved in the process, the more comprehensive our laws can become. It will be voices exactly like yours Heart, whom have the first hand knowledge of the inner workings of our social systems that will be and are some of the most needed.

Thank you for what you do for families. I can only imagine the frustration on the part of people who are in the trenches trying to sincerely get "actual" support where it is truly needed and that is usually way before this type of incident ever happens.

[Mister Bent]

Originally Posted by Heart

Whenever I hear/read about making parents more responsible/accountable, I consider how we live in one of the most family UNfriendly countries in the world, (so-called "family values," notwithstanding). With no universal child-care, afterschool or health care, no meaningful paid maternity/paternity leave, ever-shrinking access to free family planning and mental health care, not to mention lack of affordable housing and livable wages in many sectors, it's a wonder most parents do as well as they do.

This has nothing to do with this awful case, per se, but if we had these things in place, as many other devloped countries do, it would be a heck of a lot easier to weed out the truly pathological parent from the over-stressed, under-resourced parent.

But these issues are complex, and require long-term solutions. It's easier to rant about a head-line grabbing case, whipped into a frenzy by the Nancy Graces of the tabloid media, and push through rightous and emotional legislation that may hurt innocent parents and their children.*

Heart

*not personal to anyone here, just my viewpoint.

As a single parent who has experienced the family UNfriendliness up close and personal, I could not agree with you more. Especially the importance of "weed(ing) out the truly pathological parent from the over-stressed, under-resourced parent." There is a vast difference between those two creatures, and we should be wary of enacting any law that would trap the latter into the net with the former. But then, I find it hard to believe that even the most stressed out parent wouldn't report their child missing within a few hours, let alone 24 (or whatever the requirement) and that alone would serve as a weeding out process (though I'm not saying that's sufficient).

Like you, I am wary of knee jerk legislation, and would need to very carefully read all the fine print before I lend my signature.

[cinderella]

I too had a 'knee-jerk' reaction to this suggestion, but thanks to Heart's post, I don't think I will subscribe.

General 'Blanket Laws', as Heart put it, can seem to be a great thing, but ultimately can be dangerous and have serious repurcusions. I am a passionate Latin woman who tends to jump at conclusions, and want to 'get on the bandwagon' whenever something like Caylee's Law is suggested. But, thankfully, time and age has taught me a valuable lesson - be wary of 'good things'...they may not be so 'good' after all is said and done. In retrospect, I can see how this law can be a good idea gone bad...

Again, thanks for opening up my eyes, and conscienceness, Heart.

[JustJo]

Originally Posted by cinderella

I too had a 'knee-jerk' reaction to this suggestion, but thanks to Heart's post, I don't think I will subscribe.

General 'Blanket Laws', as Heart put it, can seem to be a great thing, but ultimately can be dangerous and have serious repurcusions. I am a passionate Latin woman who tends to jump at conclusions, and want to 'get on the bandwagon' whenever something like Caylee's Law is suggested. But, thankfully, time and age has taught me a valuable lesson - be wary of 'good things'...they may not be so 'good' after all is said and done. In retrospect, I can see how this law can be a good idea gone bad...

Again, thanks for opening up my eyes, and conscienceness, Heart.

I still think there is a need for such a law....it simply needs to be thought out and written carefully.

I don't think any of us need fear that a proposal is going to be lifted straight from Facebook or change.org and passed as law. It will be discussed, changed, and altered many times before anything is done.

I think petitions of this sort are valuable in that they tell our legislators that we see a gap in the law...and put them on course to addressing it.