By now, nearly everyone has heard that Casey Anthony was found not guilty of the murder of her little girl, Caylee Anthony. Not since the O.J. Simpson trial has America been more united in a collective agreement of guilty. Yet the jury acquitted her of all charges except providing false information to law enforcement. The American public is furious.
Marcia Clark, one of the chief prosecutors in the O.J. trial said, in a column in the Daily Beast on Wednesday, that the Anthony case is even worse than the O.J. trial because Anthony didn’t have the star power that OJ did. The public hadn’t been wowed with the athletic prowess, movies and star power of O.J. before hand. There were no surprises and there were no racial overtones that people wanted to avoid. She simply was not found guilty despite all the unanswered questions.
Casey Anthony told endless lies to her parents, friends and authories for a month after her daughter went missing. According to Marcia Clark:
Those lies were—most people agreed (myself included)—the proverbial noose around her neck. What mother sees that her child has drowned in the pool and not only fails to call 911, but then duct tapes her mouth and nose, hides the body in the trunk for days, and then dumps it in the woods? And then goes out to party and lies for a whopping 31 days about where the baby is? Who but a killer mother does that?
The shocker that the defense came up with was that Casey has been sexually abused by her brother and her father–that caused the denial behavior. Additionally, they came up with a tawdry affair for the father, George Anthony.
Clark continued:
And so, every bit of evidence presented by the prosecution could’ve been tinged with doubt. At the end of the day, the jury might have found that they just couldn’t convict her based on evidence that was reconcilable with an innocent explanation—even if the weight of logic favored the guilty one.
Jury instructions are so numerous and complex, it’s a wonder jurors ever wade through them. And so it should come as no surprise that they can sometimes get stuck along the way. The instruction on circumstantial evidence is confusing even to lawyers. And reasonable doubt? That’s the hardest, most elusive one of all. And I think it’s where even the most fair-minded jurors can get derailed.
How? By confusing reasonable doubt with a reason todoubt. Some believe that thinking was in play in the Simpson case. After the verdict was read in the Simpson case, as the jury was leaving, one of them, I was later told, said: “We think he probably did it. We just didn’t think they proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.” In every case, a defense attorney will do his or her best to give the jury a reason to doubt. “Some other dude did it,” or “some other dude threatened him.” But those reasons don’t necessarily equate with a reasonable doubt. A reason does not equal reasonable. Sometimes, that distinction can get lost.
In Scotland, they have three verdicts: guilty, not guilty, and not proven. It’s one way of showing that even if the jury didn’t believe the evidence amounted to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, it didn’t find the defendant innocent either. There’s a difference. And maybe that’s what today’s not-guilty verdict really meant. Not innocent. Just not proven. The jurors will eventually speak out and tell us.
Maybe we need to adopt the three verdict system, like Scotland. Meanwhile is there a place in America that Casey Anthony can go without being a pariah? Most Americans have complete disdain for her. The American ‘innocent until proven guilty’ flew out the window with this young woman. She is seen as a child killer regardless of how many times ‘not guilty’ was spoken.
Meanwhile, here in the greater Manassas area, a mother has charged with the murder of her child. The irony is she was charged on the same day that Casey Anthony was found ‘not guilty. ‘ The Bristow mother left her toddler in a hot car for 7 hours rather than taking him to day care. According to Channel 7 news, this was not the first time. But is that murder or is that something else? Is it gross negligence or at worst, manslaughter? In light of the Anthony case, murder seems like a serious over-reach. This woman at least showed immediate remorse. There will be more to the Bristow case. This lady is NOT Casey Anthony.
A slew of made for TV movies, starring different star look-a-likes, each taking a different spin on the guilt, without actually saying she’s guilty. The of course, it’ll get turned into a Law And Order ______ episode.
@Steve, I would refuse to watch it if that little beast got one penny in royalties from the movie.
Next Casey Anthony will :
1. Accuse Dominique Strauss-Khan of raping her
2. Accuse her mother of raping her
3. Leak a sex video
4. Write an “If I Did It” book and package it with the sex video
Seriously, I doubt that she’ll have a happy life. The American public isn’t really in to financially rewarding people who are clearly guilty of crimes or moral turpitude – OJ’s book didn’t sell, Linda Tripp wasn’t seen as a heroine, Monica Lewinsky had trouble selling handbags, Robert Blake’s not maketable. She will have trouble living a normal life and trouble capitalizing on her “fame”. Wouldn’t be surprised if she ends up turning tricks for meth.
Totally agree, Rick. Let bad karma begin. We know she did it. There are just people out there who are amoral, without conscience, and have a big vacuous hole where the rest of us have morals.
I think it is ridiculous that our local Bristow case is being treated as a murder case. There but for the grace of God go I. We don’t know all the facts but I feel horribly sorry for that family.
I hate to gloat. No, I don’t. I’m like the new Jean Dixon. Every year I make a prediction on what will be one of the biggest news stories of the year. Every year I am right. I predicted last December that a story about a missing or murdered pretty white girl would be one of the biggest news stories of 2011. I’ll be doggoned if I wasn’t right again! Every year. Check back in December for my prediction for 2012.