+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: Facebook forums (/forum-14.html)
+--- Forum: General facebook and life forums (/forum-25.html)
+--- Thread: What do you think about Casey Anthony being 'not-guilty'? (/thread-36937.html)
- Animal luvr - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
if she was the murderer, i think it's horrible.
i hope Caylee gets justice one day. R.I.P
- Megan - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
Everyone please STFU about the Casey Anthony case
- Murphy - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
There just wasn't enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that she murdered her daughter.
- Mark - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
dont think shes innocent..
- preston - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
the casey anthony case was messed up. she is completely 100% guilty, but shes found innocent, and she became a free woman.
- RandomGuy - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
It doesn't matter how much you think she is guilty. Even if you are a psychic and could see what happened. If you were on that Jury you would have had to find her not guilty as their was no evidence. There was no cause of death even. You couldn't prove she did anything. That is what it means to be innocent until proven guilty. The prosecution didnt meet their burden of proof.
To answer shawna and others who think like her the question was "if it was an accident why would she cover it up?"
1 theory is she was using chloroform to knock out her daughter and make her sleep. That is child abuse. If she did that but held it on too long and Caylee died then that is Aggravated Child abuse and Manslaughter. This would be an excuse to hide the body without it being murder. Another could be she abused Caylee but in an unrelated accident she died in the pool. I think an autopsy would be required in that case and possible former child abuse could be found. Her dad as a cop could know this and help her cover it up to protect his daughter.
These are all plausible alternate theories to what happened. No murder at all as far as the law is concerned. That is why she couldn't be found guilty of murder or anything other than lying.
- eve - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
i think she should be guilty i saw that on news
- Chris Sonnet - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
Let's see, she didn't bother to report her missing child for 30 days and lied to the police, not a good woman.
- incredibility - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
It's a contradicting verdict. They pronounced her innocent for murder and everything else, but guilty for lying to the police. Didn't she lie to the police by saying she didn't kill her? That the chloroform in her trunk was not hers? How is it that you can go partying with your friends while your 2 year old daughter has been missing for a month? She says the nannie took her, but there was no nannie.
Pronouncing her innocent just made her very very rich. Sooner or later there's going to be a book and movie rights, and that idiotic lawyer of hers (who was only experienced with the traffic side of the law) is going to become filthy rich as well.
Sometimes the world baffles me.
- helloooo - 11-09-2012 08:48 PM
The evidence makes me almost certain that she's guilty. However, I'm NOT certain.
So if I were a part of that jury, I'd say that she were innocent just because there isn't any evidence that would make me 100% sure that she killed Caylee.
R.I.P. Caylee :-(