Casey Anthony not guilty on major charges

[The Poet]

A local cop here I chat with often stopped to talk to me about this verdict. Though he thought she was guilty, he said it was further evidence that "the system works". Reasonable doubt existed with no hard forensic proof, and maybe "CSI" thus holds some blame for teaching jurors to expect it. The only thing that shocked this officer was the fact that they deliberated only 7 hours, so when he heard they were finished he figured it was a guilty verdict.

(No offense intended to those "on the job" around here, but this is one reason I've lived in this town for over 30 years . . . we have one damn good police department, and damn few problems.)

As for the woman herself, it's been said already . . . she'll get hers if she's guilty, some day. Karma's a beech which does not spare the rod.

[Ashcan Bill]

I suspect at least some members of the jury aren't happy either, but they went with the law rather than their emotions. Tough call, but even though I think she's guilty as hell, I can't fault their verdict based on the evidence presented to them.

However, there's always the chance she'll come here for a visit, pull some stunt in keeping with her nature, and end up in front of a Nevada judge and jury like O.J. did.

We're a little short on sympathy and understanding out here.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by Ashcan Bill

I suspect at least some members of the jury aren't happy either, but they went with the law rather than their emotions.

Yup....exactly as they are supposed to.

[G G]

Originally Posted by Ashcan Bill

I suspect at least some members of the jury aren't happy either, but they went with the law rather than their emotions.

This is exactly what I have been saying on some discussions on FB today.

Originally Posted by icehog3

Yup....exactly as they are supposed to.

I agree Tom. you have to make your decision as a juror based only on the facts presented in the courtroom. I was on a jury once where to DA presented us 3 or 4 different possible crimes we could find for. The strictest one carried a mandatory sentence. The hardest charge was burglary of a dwelling with a firearm, cause the dudes supposedly stole a firearm from one of the houses they burgled. Now they abslolutely proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the clowns burgled the residence caue they had an eyewitness that saw them leaving the residence and they had all the folks stuff in their truck when they were caught. The guy who lived in the house testified that the last time he saw the firearm was several months before the burglary happened. In Florida stealing a firearm in the commision of a burglary is the same as bringing one with you.The DA absolutely didn't meet the burden of proof to justify a guilty finding by the jury. Somehow I wound up being elected as foreperson somehow, and the first thing I did was take a vote. The vote was (I think) 2 for burglary of a dwelling and 6 for burglary of a dwelling with a firearm. I explained my postition to the 6 jurors. One of the women on the jury that was prolly 20 years older than me said to me "Greg, you know in your heart that they stole that gun" and I said "yes maam, I do". But the instruction was to judge the case based on the evidence presented in the trial. It was like the old movie "Twelve Angry Men" but eventually the vote was 8 to 0 for the lesser charge. I also have to say it was mainly arrived at because it was getting close to supper time and a couple of them changed their vote so they could go home. But even though I believe they absolutely did it, (just like this case) I believe we rendered a just verdict. I was actaully angry at the DA for having that charge included cause I feel like he was just hoping that we would act on emotion and not on the facts. Just my two cents worth.

[MrsSledn]

Originally Posted by The Poet

A local cop here I chat with often stopped to talk to me about this verdict. Though he thought she was guilty, he said it was further evidence that "the system works". Reasonable doubt existed with no hard forensic proof, and maybe "CSI" thus holds some blame for teaching jurors to expect it. The only thing that shocked this officer was the fact that they deliberated only 7 hours, so when he heard they were finished he figured it was a guilty verdict.

(No offense intended to those "on the job" around here, but this is one reason I've lived in this town for over 30 years . . . we have one damn good police department, and damn few problems.)

As for the woman herself, it's been said already . . . she'll get hers if she's guilty, some day. Karma's a beech which does not spare the rod.

I didn't follow this trial at all. But am hearing about it on Facebook. So I turned on CNN and heard all the talk from the attorney's involved.

7 hours for this trial.... OJ's trial... The jury deliberated for a total of 4 hours. And his trial was MUCH longer.