Jump to content

casey anthony trial ..


grimreap

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 327
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

1. As stated the prosecution failed to provide concrete evidence and had too much rhetoric and circumstancial evidence, which no matter how damning or mind numbingly obvious it makes it to the public in court you must present blood stains, murder weapons that sort of shit, reasons for a motive and duct tape arent enough to get someone on a homicide.

 

 

Yeah the way I see it, it's obvious she killed her daughter. Yes, it was all circumstantial evidence, but there was way too many coincidences that all pointed to her killing the daughter.

 

So the first thing people would ask is why she would lie, go partying after the death, search for chloroform on Google, and dump a body - if she were innocent.

 

But the defense knew they had to plant the seed in the jury's mind to explain her irrational behavior - "she's dysfunctional", "she has imaginary friends", "she had a traumatic childhood in which she was molested & abused", and thus all her behavior was irrational & dysfunctional too.

 

It just seems these days, all the defense has to do is provide an alternate story and the jury will consider that provides reasonable doubt.

 

The OJ verdict was bullshit too. OJ's blood was at the crime scene, and the victim's blood was in OJ's car and in his house. That to me is proof. But it seems all the defense had to do, again, was plant the seed in the jury's mind that the LAPD was sloppy with the evidence, dropping blood everywhere, and there were also racist cops trying to frame him.

 

It seems that they think "beyond a reasonable doubt" means that you have to have video footage of the person committing the crime, and all doubt must be 100% erased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole strauss-kahn thing was to send him a message if he does end up walking... which im sure he received loud and clear.

 

 

Who is the porn chick that looks like homegirl? This is like the 3rd random forum ive seen "naked" pictures pop up on... bitch looks just like her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't on that jury.

And neither were you.

And the only trial any of us got to see was the one put on by the media.

 

Yo DAO, you do know every minute of the trial was televised, right?!

People at home saw everything the jurors did.

 

Sadly I know because my wife has the luxury of staying at home to raise my kids and she got sucked in. I'll never forgive her for that, but she's a thin white wealthy mom, so there is more than one demographic that wasted time on this crap.

 

I'm not commenting on the trial, I could give a fuck except for the jokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's the way it's supposed to be.

You open the floodgates to innuendo and gossip to being legally permissible in a court of law, and next thing you know we have shit like this:

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1945430,00.html

 

Whether you personally THINK she is guilty or not is beside the point.

The fact is that there was not enough actual evidence to convict her.

And thanks to the US Constitution, we don't have a legal system that convicts people off of gossip.

 

Personally I think the kid died in some fucked up accident due to horrible parenting and that her and her fam panicked and tried to cover it up.

And that she should have been convicted of some kind of manslaughter or aggravated child abuse.

But what I THINK is beside the point.

I wasn't on that jury.

And neither were you.

And the only trial any of us got to see was the one put on by the media.

 

Trust me, Im glad we dont have a Salem witch trial court system set up, but at the same time how many coincidences and proof of motive do you need before its apprent?

I felt although the evidence wasnt strong enough to get her the chair there was still enough to prove their had been neglect and she should have atleast received manslaughter

and child neglect.

 

Not to mention how does she get convicted on 4 counts of lying tot he fed/supplying false accounts and no one thinks thats enough to atleast raise question on whether she did it or not?

Not to mention the evidence wasnt solid, but there were still alot of damning pieces that were presented.

 

Even if what you think did happen, she shouldnt walk. her and her ex-pig of a father should all be going to prison for child manslaughter, and trying to cover up the death of a child.

 

Its dosent matter what we think, shes already walked. We just voice our opinions becuse we can and this site is one of the only places you can come to get a good argument with diffrent points

of view. youve got your ideas, and ive got mine and its fine becuse she will or wont go to prison regardless of Cunt and DAO.

 

That's actually the reason why a lot of people get convicted.

Rarely if ever does that work the other way around.

 

I agree with this, this just happened to be the 10% percentile and it worked in her favor. It was easy to to let her go in a rapid recession then to argue over evidence for days and days.

 

Yeah the way I see it, it's obvious she killed her daughter. Yes, it was all circumstantial evidence, but there was way too many coincidences that all pointed

to her killing the daughter.

 

So the first thing people would ask is why she would lie, go partying after the death, search for chloroform on Google, and dump a body - if she were innocent.

 

But the defense knew they had to plant the seed in the jury's mind to explain her irrational behavior - "she's dysfunctional", "she has imaginary friends", "she had a traumatic childhood

in which she was molested & abused", and thus all her behavior was irrational & dysfunctional too.

 

It just seems these days, all the defense has to do is provide an alternate story and the jury will consider that provides reasonable doubt.

 

The OJ verdict was bullshit too. OJ's blood was at the crime scene, and the victim's blood was in OJ's car and in his house. That to me is proof. But it seems all the defense had to do, again,

was plant the seed in the jury's mind that the LAPD was sloppy with the evidence, dropping blood everywhere, and there were also racist cops trying to frame him.

 

It seems that they think "beyond a reasonable doubt" means that you have to have video footage of the person committing the crime, and all doubt must be 100% erased.

 

Fucking co-sign to this.

 

Im all for hard evidence(/nh) but how many unexplanible situations and ''circumstancial'' pieces of evidence do you need to atleast hit this bitch on a Manslaughter or child neglect? She basically fucking admitted it,

motive was perfectly there and the whole thing really is an embarassment to the justice system and unfortunatly for a dead little girl.

 

Being a defense lawyer outside of defending a vandal seems like a cake walk these days, easiest job other than a weather man in SoCal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...