Moderator: Andrew
YoungJRNY wrote:You're the member of the Orlando jury in the case of Florida VS Casey Anthony in the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. We the MR jury find the defendant....
G.I.Jim wrote:I can't honestly say without having sat in on the jury. Its not up to her lawyers to prove she's innocent. I have no doubt that she either had something to do with the murder, or that she knows who did it. Its up to the prosecutors to prove without a SHADOW OF A DOUBT that she committed the murder. They threw up every piece of evidence they had, and the jurors came back with a "not guilty" verdict. They've obviously seen many things that we aren't aware of, and yes Sean, the media does distort things.
Its not my place to judge. I know that if she had anything to do with it, she will find justice sooner rather than later. There are a lot of strange people in this world, and what if she's just a little off? She could have had absolutely no involvement other than being a terrible parent. Could you imagine being innocent, and have the entire world against you for a crime you didn't commit? While it's highly unlikely, it is entirely possible. Nobody here knows, and to say you do is ridiculous. Again, she will be judged (just like the rest of us). I hope she didn't do it, but we'll probably never know.
Jana wrote:G.I.Jim wrote:I can't honestly say without having sat in on the jury. Its not up to her lawyers to prove she's innocent. I have no doubt that she either had something to do with the murder, or that she knows who did it. Its up to the prosecutors to prove without a SHADOW OF A DOUBT that she committed the murder. They threw up every piece of evidence they had, and the jurors came back with a "not guilty" verdict. They've obviously seen many things that we aren't aware of, and yes Sean, the media does distort things.
Its not my place to judge. I know that if she had anything to do with it, she will find justice sooner rather than later. There are a lot of strange people in this world, and what if she's just a little off? She could have had absolutely no involvement other than being a terrible parent. Could you imagine being innocent, and have the entire world against you for a crime you didn't commit? While it's highly unlikely, it is entirely possible. Nobody here knows, and to say you do is ridiculous. Again, she will be judged (just like the rest of us). I hope she didn't do it, but we'll probably never know.
The threshold the State has to meet isn't "without a shadow of a doubt." Their burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.
G.I.Jim wrote:Jana wrote:G.I.Jim wrote:I can't honestly say without having sat in on the jury. Its not up to her lawyers to prove she's innocent. I have no doubt that she either had something to do with the murder, or that she knows who did it. Its up to the prosecutors to prove without a SHADOW OF A DOUBT that she committed the murder. They threw up every piece of evidence they had, and the jurors came back with a "not guilty" verdict. They've obviously seen many things that we aren't aware of, and yes Sean, the media does distort things.
Its not my place to judge. I know that if she had anything to do with it, she will find justice sooner rather than later. There are a lot of strange people in this world, and what if she's just a little off? She could have had absolutely no involvement other than being a terrible parent. Could you imagine being innocent, and have the entire world against you for a crime you didn't commit? While it's highly unlikely, it is entirely possible. Nobody here knows, and to say you do is ridiculous. Again, she will be judged (just like the rest of us). I hope she didn't do it, but we'll probably never know.
The threshold the State has to meet isn't "without a shadow of a doubt." Their burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.
Well, apparently it wasn't proved "beyond a reasonable doubt".
Jana wrote:G.I.Jim wrote:Jana wrote:G.I.Jim wrote:I can't honestly say without having sat in on the jury. Its not up to her lawyers to prove she's innocent. I have no doubt that she either had something to do with the murder, or that she knows who did it. Its up to the prosecutors to prove without a SHADOW OF A DOUBT that she committed the murder. They threw up every piece of evidence they had, and the jurors came back with a "not guilty" verdict. They've obviously seen many things that we aren't aware of, and yes Sean, the media does distort things.
Its not my place to judge. I know that if she had anything to do with it, she will find justice sooner rather than later. There are a lot of strange people in this world, and what if she's just a little off? She could have had absolutely no involvement other than being a terrible parent. Could you imagine being innocent, and have the entire world against you for a crime you didn't commit? While it's highly unlikely, it is entirely possible. Nobody here knows, and to say you do is ridiculous. Again, she will be judged (just like the rest of us). I hope she didn't do it, but we'll probably never know.
The threshold the State has to meet isn't "without a shadow of a doubt." Their burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt.
Well, apparently it wasn't proved "beyond a reasonable doubt".
Just educating you.
Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
AR wrote:Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
You're right Dan.
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
She'll get hers one day.
YoungJRNY wrote:AR wrote:Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
You're right Dan.
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
She'll get hers one day.
She actually looks like a girl I dated off and on for 3 years awhile back. Almost down to a T. This bitch is straight up evil though. I hope I turn on the T.V one day and I see her gutted on the roadside like what was done to Nicole Brown Simpson.
AR wrote:
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
AR wrote:Caylee Anthony
My daughter
Yeah, just hits home like you wouldn't believe.
Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
Saint John wrote:AR wrote:
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
No, you're not the only!![]()
And being a pig, she'd be a perfect candidate for the old Donkey Punch or Strawberry Shortcake. For those unaware of the terminology
:
The Donkey Punch is when your engaged in anal sex and when your about to ejaculate you punch the poor little lady in the back of the head so her anal cavity tightens making the orgasm all that more better (for you of course).
The action in which the male ejaculates on his partner's face, and then the male punches his partner's nose, which causes blood to stream forth. The semen and blood fluids create a red and white image, just like the icing and filling of a strawberry shortcake.
Angel wrote:Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
I respectfully disagree.
I think the state did prove their case. I find it unfortunate that all it takes to create "reasonable doubt" is the defense creating an imaginary theory that they had NO evidence to back up. I understand it's the state's burden to prove her guilt and the defense does not have any responsiblity to prove anything, however, if you're going to stand up in opening statements and make claims of sexual abuse, accidental drowning, etc I think you better have some evidence to back it up. I think the jury really messed this one up.
I think she should be required to have her tubes tied so she can't do this again!
AR wrote:YoungJRNY wrote:AR wrote:Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
You're right Dan.
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
She'll get hers one day.
She actually looks like a girl I dated off and on for 3 years awhile back. Almost down to a T. This bitch is straight up evil though. I hope I turn on the T.V one day and I see her gutted on the roadside like what was done to Nicole Brown Simpson.
Dude, my daughter looks a LOT like Caylee Anthony. With you on wishing TotMom her downfall - soon.
Jubilee wrote:I think people are just letting their emotions run wild and cloud their judgement here. There is nothing more tragic than the death of a child. We all, as humans, feel compelled to protect our young and mete out swift and certain justice to those who transgress. I get that. What I don't get is why people are so emotionally invested in the position that this woman MUST be guilty. Noone is saying it's okay to wait a month to report your child missing. Noone is saying it's okay to fabricate a bunch of lies to feed to the police. It's not, and for those things, she was found guilty. It was never established how the child died, so we don't know if there was an actual murder. Without knowing the cause of death, there's no way to determine if there was any child abuse or any negligence (that's not to say Tot-Mom wasn't neglectful, but that's totally different).
The uncomfortable truth is there just wasn't enough evidence to pin this one on Casey Anthony.
Rick wrote:Jubilee wrote:I think people are just letting their emotions run wild and cloud their judgement here. There is nothing more tragic than the death of a child. We all, as humans, feel compelled to protect our young and mete out swift and certain justice to those who transgress. I get that. What I don't get is why people are so emotionally invested in the position that this woman MUST be guilty. Noone is saying it's okay to wait a month to report your child missing. Noone is saying it's okay to fabricate a bunch of lies to feed to the police. It's not, and for those things, she was found guilty. It was never established how the child died, so we don't know if there was an actual murder. Without knowing the cause of death, there's no way to determine if there was any child abuse or any negligence (that's not to say Tot-Mom wasn't neglectful, but that's totally different).
The uncomfortable truth is there just wasn't enough evidence to pin this one on Casey Anthony.
Her behavior was not that of a worried or bereft mom when her child was missing. She's out dancing and having a grand ole time. Doesn't even report her missing for more than a full month. Her abandoned car tested positive for chloroform and the trunk had maggots and the smell of "a decomposing human body". The prosecution claims the child died from suffocation, from duct tape over the nose and mouth. The defense claims she drowned. She told a long string of lies to the authorities and anyone else that questioned her.
Technically they didn't have enough evidence to put Casey Anthony taping the child's respiratory passages closed, but from the evidence I just listed, her behavior, and just a gut feeling, she's guilty as hell. If she didn't actually chloroform and duct tape the kids nose and mouth, she was there when it was done.
People's emotions will run wild in a case like this. People are emotional creatures. We get mad and upset because someone got away with the murder of a child.
Rick wrote:Jubilee wrote:I think people are just letting their emotions run wild and cloud their judgement here. There is nothing more tragic than the death of a child. We all, as humans, feel compelled to protect our young and mete out swift and certain justice to those who transgress. I get that. What I don't get is why people are so emotionally invested in the position that this woman MUST be guilty. Noone is saying it's okay to wait a month to report your child missing. Noone is saying it's okay to fabricate a bunch of lies to feed to the police. It's not, and for those things, she was found guilty. It was never established how the child died, so we don't know if there was an actual murder. Without knowing the cause of death, there's no way to determine if there was any child abuse or any negligence (that's not to say Tot-Mom wasn't neglectful, but that's totally different).
The uncomfortable truth is there just wasn't enough evidence to pin this one on Casey Anthony.
Her behavior was not that of a worried or bereft mom when her child was missing. She's out dancing and having a grand ole time. Doesn't even report her missing for more than a full month. Her abandoned car tested positive for chloroform and the trunk had maggots and the smell of "a decomposing human body". The prosecution claims the child died from suffocation, from duct tape over the nose and mouth. The defense claims she drowned. She told a long string of lies to the authorities and anyone else that questioned her.
Technically they didn't have enough evidence to put Casey Anthony taping the child's respiratory passages closed, but from the evidence I just listed, her behavior, and just a gut feeling, she's guilty as hell. If she didn't actually chloroform and duct tape the kids nose and mouth, she was there when it was done.
People's emotions will run wild in a case like this. People are emotional creatures. We get mad and upset because someone got away with the murder of a child.
AR wrote:Saint John wrote:Easy verdict and the jury got this one right. Not only did the state not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they really didn't prove much of anything. The jury did what the law compelled them to do, and that's find her not guilty. But that doesn't mean she's not a disgusting human being.
BTW, am I the only one who finds that pig hot in a trashy way.
Angel wrote:Rick wrote:Jubilee wrote:I think people are just letting their emotions run wild and cloud their judgement here. There is nothing more tragic than the death of a child. We all, as humans, feel compelled to protect our young and mete out swift and certain justice to those who transgress. I get that. What I don't get is why people are so emotionally invested in the position that this woman MUST be guilty. Noone is saying it's okay to wait a month to report your child missing. Noone is saying it's okay to fabricate a bunch of lies to feed to the police. It's not, and for those things, she was found guilty. It was never established how the child died, so we don't know if there was an actual murder. Without knowing the cause of death, there's no way to determine if there was any child abuse or any negligence (that's not to say Tot-Mom wasn't neglectful, but that's totally different).
The uncomfortable truth is there just wasn't enough evidence to pin this one on Casey Anthony.
Her behavior was not that of a worried or bereft mom when her child was missing. She's out dancing and having a grand ole time. Doesn't even report her missing for more than a full month. Her abandoned car tested positive for chloroform and the trunk had maggots and the smell of "a decomposing human body". The prosecution claims the child died from suffocation, from duct tape over the nose and mouth. The defense claims she drowned. She told a long string of lies to the authorities and anyone else that questioned her.
Technically they didn't have enough evidence to put Casey Anthony taping the child's respiratory passages closed, but from the evidence I just listed, her behavior, and just a gut feeling, she's guilty as hell. If she didn't actually chloroform and duct tape the kids nose and mouth, she was there when it was done.
People's emotions will run wild in a case like this. People are emotional creatures. We get mad and upset because someone got away with the murder of a child.
I think it's obvious that the family threw themselves under the bus to protect her and it disgusts me that it worked.
Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests