NP Rank:
Casey Anthony - A Swift Not Guilty Verdict!
It's easy to think that Casey Anthony is guilty of something, but the State has only proved she's guilty of one thing, "giving false information to a law enforcement officer in reference to a missing person."
How can you prove what you don't know happened. The State doesn't know that Caylee Anthony was murdered, they think she was murdered, according to their expert, because of the manner in which her body was disposed of. How can you decide a murder has occurred because of how a body was disposed of. The relevant fact is, that in the case of Caylee Anthony's death, the cause of death is unknown . . .
The State points to duct tape as the murder weapon, but there's no evidence that the tape was placed on a live body, and there are serious questions if it was on the body at all. Most significantly, there's no evidence that Caylee Anthony died of asphyxiation from the application of tape to her nose and mouth. Caylee's cause of death is unknown . . .
The State infers that chloroform was used on Caylee Anthony. There's evidence that somebody in the Anthony household, probably Casey, did a search for chloroform on their home computer; but there's no evidence that Casey possessed chloroform, or the ingredients used to make it, nor is there reliable evidence that chloroform was used on Caylee. Caylee's cause of death is unknown . . .
The State did not prove that Caylee Anthony was murdered, and they did not prove that the instruments of death were chloroform or duct tape; or that chloroform or duct tape caused Caylee's death, and they most certainly did not prove that Casey Anthony used chloroform, duct tape, or both, to bring about Caylee's death. Consequently, the Casey Anthony jury cannot find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Casey Anthony used chloroform, duct tape or both, to end her daughter's life.
Casey Anthony will be found not guilty on all counts related to her daughter's death, but she will be found guilty on all four counts of "giving false information to a law enforcement officer in reference to a missing person." She will be credited for time served on the convictions, and she will be granted her freedom on the spot.
The Casey Anthony trial is, another instance in American jurisprudence, in which evidence of bad character is used to convict, instead of factual evidence of guilt . . .


Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (15)
at 13:24 on July 4th, 2011
Simple question should be, 'did Casey kill Caylee' ? If the jury can't answer that simple question, they shouldn't convict.
at 18:54 on July 4th, 2011
Should I ever carry a dead body around in the trunk of my car for several days, I sure hope you are on my jury.
at 00:18 on July 5th, 2011
But can you prove that Casey was the person who killed the child then put the body in the trunk, drove the car, and dumped a body? No. If not then you wont have a case. She may have been partying and lying after the child had passed but that doesn't mean she did it. The Jury can only charger her from the facts, not if they think she did it or not. I'm sure she had something to do with the death of her daughter but will never know the real truth.
at 05:44 on July 5th, 2011
It's not "beyond a shadow of a doubt"... it is beyond a reasonable doubt. I find the expectation or belief that anyone ELSE put that child in that trunk, unreasonable. Therefore, I have "no doubt" it was Casey.
at 07:32 on July 5th, 2011
I think if anyone put Caylee in the trunk, it probably was the father George Anthony. Also there was only circumstantial evidence Caylee was in that trunk. Nothing really was solid evidence.
This isn't because you think it, it's true. There must be actual facts and evidence tying Casey to the murder and cover up. I did not see that in definitive fashion to say absolutely she murdered Caylee.
at 07:30 on July 5th, 2011
Casey can be the biggest pathological liar in the world but it doesn't mean that she is a killer. To convict her as a killer it needs to be proven in court without shadow of a doubt. But there is a DOUBT!!!Cause of death? Place of death? Was she killed or it was an accident that was covered up? Does George Anthony tell people the truth? Does Roy Kronk tell people exactly how he found the remains? Can we trust Dr. Vass????If we put our emotion on the side then we can't give her a guilty verdict according the law. My heart hurts to see this beautiful child dead and I will never understand Casey's behaviour. However, I would never give Casey a guilty verdict if I have a DOUBT. I would prefer a guilty person go free than convict somebody in murder who is innocent.
at 07:38 on July 5th, 2011
Again, it is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt". It is beyond REASONABLE DOUBT.
at 07:50 on July 5th, 2011
Indeed, Just a Thought, the standard is reasonable doubt, even in those cases not based solely on circumstantial evidence.
If the standard were beyond a shadow of a doubt, odds are there would be very few convictions.
at 07:42 on July 5th, 2011
Beyond the shadow of a doubt is sometimes used interchangeably, although mistakenly, with beyond a reasonable doubt, especially in courts of law[3]. Some feel the former an impossible standard of proof in court, while the latter is more logically accommodating, allowing for the limits of human reason[4].
at 07:55 on July 5th, 2011
Well, thank you Ms. Karen. The expectation of "beyond a shadow of doubt" is ridiculous. That proof is only gained with a point blank confession. You are right; there would be very few convictions if that were the defining benchmark.
at 08:36 on July 5th, 2011
You're welcome, JaT.
at 09:39 on July 5th, 2011
After deliberating for 10 hours over the past 2 days, the jury has reached a verdict.
The judge is scheduled to announce the verdict today, July 5, at 2:15 PM.
at 10:44 on July 5th, 2011
Not Guilty
at 10:56 on July 5th, 2011
So what's the next distraction du jour, psyops agents? You have hijacked NowPublic.com, so I think this is an appropriate forum in which to pose the question.
But please... no more false flag terrorist attacks. You've already got blood on your hands, even if you guys weren't the ones to pull 'em off...
at 19:26 on August 22nd, 2011
If you believe George has done all the cover up....then you believe he put on Casey's smelly pants and put the baby in the woods....If you believe the accident then you have to believe all the story not just some parts...George can't wear Caseys pants....He can't love his daughter so much to cover this crime up and then let her rott in jail for 3 years ...George was the one who did all the yeard work around her play house...George took Caylee for walks and ride in wagon....George loved his grandaughter by all the things he did for Caylee....Casey just has her lies...You are what you do not what you say......You can say alot but that's not who you are....you can punch holes in anything....If you wake up in the morning and the roads are all wet and there are puddles of water everywhere...you say Oh it rained last night...You didn't see it rain but it did rain. Caylee is dead..She didn;t kill herself...she didn't die of natrual causes...Only Casey said she dies of a accident....But manor of death was at the hands of someone else....And Casey worn those pants she was with Caylee. She lied lied lied...