AGREED! And I'm guilty of having the trial on in my office. I heard the evidence, and since I don't care for the talking heads on all the news channels, made my conclusions from the testimony, and evidence presented. But again, yes, God will hand down justice as he sits in judgement of skank mom, and her "parents." No matter the verdict here on Earth, she will never escape judgement by her creator.
First...one can NOT be found innocent because on IS innocent until proven guilty. So before the trial even begins, she is presumed innocent. She was not proven guilty, therefore she is still innocent. Now the fact that you mentioned #7 tells me that you didnt watch one second of the trial. She did blame her dad and said he was the one that disposed of the body. Ask yourself this too. Why would a man try to commit suicide if he wasnt somehow responsible. Some of his statements in his suicide note was "I blame myself for her[Caylee] being gone" and "Casey does not deserve to be where she is!" But I'm not about to go through the whole trial with you, but thats just one example. There are about 100 others.
I felt like you answered my question as that you would bet that the real killer is Casey Anthony, if the real killer was revealed tomorrow and you had to place a bet. Additionally, I indicated that there was more to your reply by the use of dots. Now, tell me why you believe she would be the guilty one if the real killer was revealed tomorrow? You called her innocent (in capital letters on page one). Seems as though there's enough evidence to satisfy you as to who is the real killer. I'm confused. Help me. I like some of your posts, but Peillie, today, are you "trolling" or "patrolling"???
I think that was why both Casey Anthony and her lawyers looked completely shocked when the verdict came down. Usually there is atleast one person on a jury who defiantly wants to see someone pay for a heinous crime,(especially in this case where she was so guilty) and they would feel badly about themselves for letting a murderer off the hook, and they tend to stand their ground, for moral reasons. In a case like this generally speaking it is a horrible sign when the jury comes to a conclusion within 11 hours, because it means everyone was able to reach a guilty verdict right away. Usually you would expect a case like this to take days to solve, because the people who want the person to pay for the crime see it as their duty to make sure the criminal pays the price, for moral, or spiritual reasons. From what i have read, and heard, it is much more rare for a person to hold out for days to protect a persons innocence, especially against incredible peer pressure, because they can make someone feel terrible about themselves for feeling someone was innocent when it is so obvious to everyone else that the person is guilty. So an elongated jury decision is in favour of the accused, while a quick one usually goes against the accused. It was very strange in this case for all 12 people to come to a unanimous decision within 11 hours, that she was not guilty.
Mr. P... I think Peillie is correct on this, as far as the law is concerned. The key phrase I think you are overlooking is "In the eyes of the law". You, however, IMO are correct in your assumption that just because Casey Anthony and OJ were found not guilty, doesn't make them "not guilty" or makes them "innocent".
For real. They were more shocked than anybody. Lawyers always want the most wishy-washy people they can find to be placed on the jury. These types are easier to manipulate. It worked for the defense.
Agreed. I thought wow, 11 hours? She'll be found guilty of the 2nd degree, and aggragated manslaughter.