RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs

RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarkSteven -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 9:03:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy The cases arent even close in the quality of evidence. Both verdicts were correct under the law. Um. I'm not sure I buy the idea of being "correct" under the law. These were jury trials, and that implies some variability. There seems to be an idea in some of the posters that the law should be like physics - examine all the evidence dispassionately and arrive at a cut and dried answer. While some of the law is indeed cut and dried, a lot of it is subject to interpretation.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 9:51:45 PM)
OK, so this was an interesting thread, despite the whole disturbing Jack Ruby side track. But does anyone else believe that there was a possibility, however remote, that the jury was RIGHT? Maybe she really didn't do it? The fact is, you are judging her on incomplete facts, unless you were on the jury. In other words, you only see what someone else wants you to see. Thank god it isn't the jury of public opinion that decides guilt or innocence in this country, because you can't believe everything you read in People. If it was that obvious she was guilty, no matter how inept the police, prosecution or court was, she would have been convicted. Yes, I do remember OJ, but come on, the State in that case was shockingly inept and corrupt. Most smaller cities aren't going to be that obvious. The fact is, all this instantaneous publicity at trial leads to bad results. The prosecutor and the judge are both elected officials. Maybe they were more concerned about saving face and getting reelected than they were about making sure the trial was tight. I find televised, high profile trials so repulsive, that I would never watch one. I was in law school when the OJ thing was going on and I only watched about two hours. The first was when the judge ordered that they were going to work all weekend, and the idiot female prosecutor said she couldn't because she didn't have day care. The other was when they announced the verdict, and only because that was inescapable. Question, do you think they really would have hired an expert on ice cream melting in a DV case if OJ hadn't been a famous guy? no, people kill their wives all the time, and they get a two day trial. These televised trials are an opportunity for the judge and prosecutor to grandstand, and they sure as hell don't want to look bad. Same with this case. We will never know, because the family won't sue, like they did in OJ.

tazzygirl -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 10:22:59 PM)
Im curious as to why it matters if the jury was right. That is our justice system. The defense didnt have to prove she was innocent. The prosecution failed to prove she was guilty according to the jurors. I also imagine the Judges job would have been easier had it not been a media circus. You can thank Nancy Grace and the rest of the media for that.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 10:28:42 PM)
If the judge had wanted to take steps to limit the media, he could have. I think he just likednseeing his name in the paper. It will be interesting what the jurors have to say about their decision. With OJ, they were pretty clear that they were saying fuck you to the LAPD.

tazzygirl -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 10:54:41 PM)
Juror 14 was on TV. The rest, so far, have refused to talk. And the OJ trial was much more than that.

Marini -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 11:14:28 PM)
What's next for Casey? Interviews? talk show circuit? writing a book? Going on tour? A reality show? I bet she will capitalize off this in some form or fashion. What has our world come to?

tazzygirl -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 11:18:07 PM)
Im sure she will. There is also the possibility of civil suit from her parents. If that happens, its no different than the OJ book deal where the money had to go to the family. The grandparents could sue for that and she wouldnt see a dime.

Marini -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 11:32:40 PM)
tazzy , I have tried hard to avoid watching any of the trial, etc. I just wanted to know the verdict. I was listening to talk radio and a lawyer stated casey's mother will be lucky not to face perjury charges for stating she was the one researching chloroform. I doubt the grandparents will file a civil suit!

BitaTruble -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/5/2011 11:41:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini tazzy , I have tried hard to avoid watching any of the trial, etc. I just wanted to know the verdict. I was listening to talk radio and a lawyer stated casey's mother will be lucky not to face perjury charges for stating she was the one researching chloroform. I doubt the grandparents will file a civil suit! Per Florida law, the grandparents (Casey's parents) are precluded from filing a civil suit because they are related to the defendant. Caylee's paternal grandparents could, however, file a civil wrongful death lawsuit if they met all the burdens. Since no one knows who Caylee's real father is, I doubt a civil suit will be forthcoming on any front.

tazzygirl -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 12:00:47 AM)
Hmm.. curious if the father could also file. Since they have the child's and the mother's dna, could he potentially step forward and file himself?

BitaTruble -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 12:13:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Hmm.. curious if the father could also file. Since they have the child's and the mother's dna, could he potentially step forward and file himself? He would not be precluded for the relative clause (being related to the defendant by less than 3 degrees) but would probably run into the same problem of meeting the burden that a paternal grandparent would in that quantitatively, he was not a significant presence in Caylee's life so has no what is termed vested interest nor any loss due to the death, wrongful or otherwise of Caylee. The father, whoever he may be, appears to have been nothing more than a sperm donor. We only know for sure who it wasn't at this point.. and not who it was. We know it wasn't the father, brother or ex-fiance and anyone else is going to have a hard time proving they now have a vested interest, suffered a loss (financial; present and future) and were a significant presence in Caylee's life. There are other burdens as well and other states have other factors or lessor/greater factors.. but the statute I read was strictly for Florida.

SilverMark -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 4:34:15 AM)
Instant revisionist history....Nancy Grace....shrill bitch[8D]

EternalHoH -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 5:06:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet despite the whole disturbing Jack Ruby side track. Is a discussion on the potential of nutjob vigilantism really that disturbing to you? Upsetting more frail minds are we?

SternSkipper -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 5:44:49 AM)
quote: Speaking of the news.........could someone PLEASE put a permanent ball gag in Nancy Grace's mouth! Hahahahaha... Didn't see this before I posted my request for sanity (the state, not the lunatic) to return the soothing background sounds in my office. But anyway, right on sister! Funny aside, I got stuck late one night last week sitting up with heartburn watching the history channel. they had a program on (might've been modern marvels) that heralded the history of the Taser. At some point I daydreamed about giving the thing a try on Grace, because her caterwauling was one of the things I got treated to on my flips to find something that late that wasn't an infomercial.

Lucylastic -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 6:00:05 AM)
Id like to have a go with a cattleprod, end of hijack

juliaoceania -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 6:12:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Im curious as to why it matters if the jury was right. That is our justice system. The defense didnt have to prove she was innocent. The prosecution failed to prove she was guilty according to the jurors. I also imagine the Judges job would have been easier had it not been a media circus. You can thank Nancy Grace and the rest of the media for that. As despicable as this woman is (and I try not to watch such trials because they upset me) and as much as I think she probably accidentally killed her child, the jury acted correctly if they felt the prosecution did not prove their case. I think a lot of people forget the point above, it is the prosecution's case to lose, not the defense's to win. I think that what I dislike most about such commentators like Nancy Grace is that she really doesn't believe in our system of justice, because if she did she would not disparage the right to a trial that anyone accused of a crime has, nor the right to be represented by a staunch advocate in the form of a defense attorney. Her attitude is that we should do away entirely with trials and defense attorneys altogether and just let prosecutors decide everything. She is one scary bitch.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 7:00:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy The cases arent even close in the quality of evidence. Both verdicts were correct under the law. Um. I'm not sure I buy the idea of being "correct" under the law. These were jury trials, and that implies some variability. There seems to be an idea in some of the posters that the law should be like physics - examine all the evidence dispassionately and arrive at a cut and dried answer. While some of the law is indeed cut and dried, a lot of it is subject to interpretation. There are standards of proof. There are situations where they are clearly met and ignored (OJ), met and theres a conviction (Scott Peterson) and met and theres an acquittal, Anthony. I dont disgree that there are other trials where the standards arent clearly met, and jury's could be swayed in one direction or another during deliberations, these 3 arent close to that, so there is indeed a correct verdict.

Marc2b -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 7:00:51 AM)
quote: She is one scary bitch. What is really scary is that she used to be a prosecuter. Considering her contempt for due process I can't help but wonder how many innocent people are sitting in prison right now because of her.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 7:04:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini What's next for Casey? Interviews? talk show circuit? writing a book? Going on tour? A reality show? I bet she will capitalize off this in some form or fashion. What has our world come to? Interviews, talk shows, books absolutely. Reality show? doubtful. Capitalize and "whoa is me what has our world come to"? Nonsense. That has always been the case, thats why there have been laws barring those convicted from profiting from a crime for at least 50 years.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs (7/6/2011 7:06:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Im sure she will. There is also the possibility of civil suit from her parents. If that happens, its no different than the OJ book deal where the money had to go to the family. The grandparents could sue for that and she wouldnt see a dime. Why would the parents sue? You dont think all of that was discussed as a defense strategy?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875