Casey Anthony was found NOT guilty of the murder of her daughter
- Thread starter aerosol
- Start date
The law is supposed to be based upon general moral standard. What is above the law is the inherent morality of humanity. When the evidence of Casey's heinous crimes are put to the standards of this foundation evident at the very core of minds, Casey Anthony is by all definitions a child abuser, liar, and perjurer.
This universal fact is not open to interpretation. This is no opinion.
Let us say that I start my own court system and laws identical to America's. Then a case is argued for the existence of gravity. The jury concludes unanimously that gravity no longer exists. By definition of the utterly false law,
gravity no longer exists. I jump off of a cliff. The gravity pulls me down and kills me. The jury concluded that, by law, gravity does not exist; but they did not rewrite the laws of physics and therefore I am dead due to gravity. No jury can rewrite what Casey Anthony did.
She also may or may not have committed murder. There is plenty of evidence for her being a murderer, however she did enough finger-pointing to confuse the jury. The law is inferior to the human race's concept of right and wrong as the law is its corrupt manifest. It forever shall be as it is corrupt.
This universal fact is not open to interpretation. This is no opinion.
Let us say that I start my own court system and laws identical to America's. Then a case is argued for the existence of gravity. The jury concludes unanimously that gravity no longer exists. By definition of the utterly false law,
gravity no longer exists. I jump off of a cliff. The gravity pulls me down and kills me. The jury concluded that, by law, gravity does not exist; but they did not rewrite the laws of physics and therefore I am dead due to gravity. No jury can rewrite what Casey Anthony did.
She also may or may not have committed murder. There is plenty of evidence for her being a murderer, however she did enough finger-pointing to confuse the jury. The law is inferior to the human race's concept of right and wrong as the law is its corrupt manifest. It forever shall be as it is corrupt.
by definition, yes; doesn't make it actuality or truth though.
and as others have mentioned, I'm sure it was more due to a lack of hard evidence and "reasonable doubt" more than hard proof that she did not commit murder.
As predicted, jurors are coming out and saying they believe she is guilty and wanted to put her away. The only reason she couldn't be convicted is because it took so long to find Caylee that the evidence was degraded beyond usefulness in a court of justice.
What I say is not a point of view inasmuch as it reflects that which was presented by a court of law, and a jury
There is 100% certain proof she did not commit murder. That became known fact the moment the jury
anyone see this yet?? "caylee's law"
http://www.news10.net/rss/article/144688/2/Caylees-Law-online-petition-builds-interest-after-verdict
http://www.news10.net/rss/article/144688/2/Caylees-Law-online-petition-builds-interest-after-verdict
Well, this is the one of the few times where, by the time I got to the little quick reply box on the page, I completely forgot about my initial reactions because of the comments I skimmed through.
I can understand all of the views here in the thread. I think the conflicts (mostly those who are disagreeing with aeon on his opinion of the matter and aeon himself) are arising from the use of terms and the source of their definitions. If this were a much more lax discussion where the terms had more common definitions, such as the most non-contextual definition one could find in the dictionary, I don't think the arguments above would exist (maybe they would, though; I'm not a mind reader, after all). [MENTION=947]aeon[/MENTION] is clearly using the words as they are defined in Florida Law, not as they are defined in a non-contextual scope. I really don't see why I'm the only one who sees this and isn't offended with what aeon has said so far... In all actuality, he's just repeating what's actually happened in a legal context.
(Just for reference, what I say below, like much of what @Pslam and others have done above me, is in a general context of what I believe to be moral and ethical, and not in the general context of what the law defines as legal or illegal. If you wish to argue with me on that level, I probably won't join you and stay on my level, thus resulting in a fruitless debate with mismatched definitions of terms. You've been warned.)
Now, regarding this verdict... I really saw it coming. I just had a gut feeling that, even with all the evidence we were seeing through the news (which the Jury had no access to), this woman wouldn't be convicted by a court of law for murder. It's not the first time this has happened in court, American or foreign (from an American's perspective). I accept the jury's decision, since there's nothing anyone can do to change it; even if someone killed Casey, the jury's original decision would still stand, so the act probably would not bring closure to the hearts and/or minds of those who cared about this case (then again, this would depend on the individual's perception of karma on universal justice). Legally, this issue has come to a close, and no matter what happens, Casey cannot be tried again on U.S. soil (without some serious changes to the legal code). I admit, however, that I am very curious as to the conversations that the jury had in the jury room... of course, the idea of being a bug on the wall in most any jury discussion has always intrigued and, dare I say, excited me.
I wish she would have, if not for murder, been convicted of child abuse or neglect, because I think that's the least she deserves for the acts she's committed. I mean, she didn't report that her child had gone missing for a month, but instead went out to party; I'm not sure how many other cases we see that better demonstrate the concept of neglecting a child. It almost seems to me that she managed to wipe the girl's existence from her mind once she disappeared. /wishful thinking fallacy/bias
I can understand all of the views here in the thread. I think the conflicts (mostly those who are disagreeing with aeon on his opinion of the matter and aeon himself) are arising from the use of terms and the source of their definitions. If this were a much more lax discussion where the terms had more common definitions, such as the most non-contextual definition one could find in the dictionary, I don't think the arguments above would exist (maybe they would, though; I'm not a mind reader, after all). [MENTION=947]aeon[/MENTION] is clearly using the words as they are defined in Florida Law, not as they are defined in a non-contextual scope. I really don't see why I'm the only one who sees this and isn't offended with what aeon has said so far... In all actuality, he's just repeating what's actually happened in a legal context.
(Just for reference, what I say below, like much of what @Pslam and others have done above me, is in a general context of what I believe to be moral and ethical, and not in the general context of what the law defines as legal or illegal. If you wish to argue with me on that level, I probably won't join you and stay on my level, thus resulting in a fruitless debate with mismatched definitions of terms. You've been warned.)
Now, regarding this verdict... I really saw it coming. I just had a gut feeling that, even with all the evidence we were seeing through the news (which the Jury had no access to), this woman wouldn't be convicted by a court of law for murder. It's not the first time this has happened in court, American or foreign (from an American's perspective). I accept the jury's decision, since there's nothing anyone can do to change it; even if someone killed Casey, the jury's original decision would still stand, so the act probably would not bring closure to the hearts and/or minds of those who cared about this case (then again, this would depend on the individual's perception of karma on universal justice). Legally, this issue has come to a close, and no matter what happens, Casey cannot be tried again on U.S. soil (without some serious changes to the legal code). I admit, however, that I am very curious as to the conversations that the jury had in the jury room... of course, the idea of being a bug on the wall in most any jury discussion has always intrigued and, dare I say, excited me.
I wish she would have, if not for murder, been convicted of child abuse or neglect, because I think that's the least she deserves for the acts she's committed. I mean, she didn't report that her child had gone missing for a month, but instead went out to party; I'm not sure how many other cases we see that better demonstrate the concept of neglecting a child. It almost seems to me that she managed to wipe the girl's existence from her mind once she disappeared. /wishful thinking fallacy/bias
One thing might be interesting, though. Despite the semantics of the definition of murder according to the court system, a child died and a child was murdered. There is enough speculation to point the finger to the mother, that she may have been involved.
I'm not one for definitions according to the law. In this case, the law worked, but it wasn't effective. If the purpose of law is to see justice for the victim, then justice was not done in this situation. Which really sucks, because there are far too many cases where the victim is put on trial and denigrated over the defendant - and it becomes a lesson of who was the better lawyer (not necessarily what was right and what was wrong).
That being said, Casey Anthony's life is over (ask OJ Simpson how well he's doing now). That woman won't be able to go anywhere or do anything...and she could be sued in civil court for one reason or another and still lose everything. Or, someone could be angry enough at her to do something drastic. I hope she has a good bodyguard lined up.
I'm not one for definitions according to the law. In this case, the law worked, but it wasn't effective. If the purpose of law is to see justice for the victim, then justice was not done in this situation. Which really sucks, because there are far too many cases where the victim is put on trial and denigrated over the defendant - and it becomes a lesson of who was the better lawyer (not necessarily what was right and what was wrong).
That being said, Casey Anthony's life is over (ask OJ Simpson how well he's doing now). That woman won't be able to go anywhere or do anything...and she could be sued in civil court for one reason or another and still lose everything. Or, someone could be angry enough at her to do something drastic. I hope she has a good bodyguard lined up.
The fact that there has been no justice for this beautiful little girl is absolutely heart-breaking.
That's what makes me so angry. The defense was celebrating their victory. When a little girl and the defendants daughter is dead and was killed / died horribly and frankly didn't get the respect or the care she deserved.
If her mother cared at all or not. It is time for somber reflection, not celebration.
Last edited:
I agree completely. Although her mother didn't seem to care much about her during the time she was "missing", so it's hardly surprising. But still, I was horrified and disgusted to see the defence jumping for joy. This outcome is just so sad and disappointing.
I'm quite disgusted by how much popularity this case has gotten.
I wanted to hear about the earthquake in New Zealand yesterday
so I turned on the news and EVERY station was about Casey
Anthony, even international stations.
I'm trying to determine why everyone here feels the need to be
so passionate about the event. Why you're all choosing to voice
your opinions and thoughts on this matter. Because you care?
Reading your posts it doesn't sound so much like you care about
her or the little girl, but about being "just" and what is "truth"
and what is "right". Outside of the human perspective, these things
don't really exist. *shrugs*
I wanted to hear about the earthquake in New Zealand yesterday
so I turned on the news and EVERY station was about Casey
Anthony, even international stations.
I'm trying to determine why everyone here feels the need to be
so passionate about the event. Why you're all choosing to voice
your opinions and thoughts on this matter. Because you care?
Reading your posts it doesn't sound so much like you care about
her or the little girl, but about being "just" and what is "truth"
and what is "right". Outside of the human perspective, these things
don't really exist. *shrugs*
I just found out something interesting. Lightning struck the tree right next to where Caylee Anthony's body was found.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/07/lightning-strikes-tree-near-caylee-anthony-memorial-site/
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/07/lightning-strikes-tree-near-caylee-anthony-memorial-site/