Too Stupid to Get Out of Jury Duty?

Well, everybody is mad, and here’s why:   That bitch is guilty!

No matter how many lectures are written about this trial and its coverage in the media, if you followed the whole thing from the beginning, you know she’s guilty.   If your child drowns, you call the police.   You don’t turn up at your boyfriend’s house a few hours later and rent a movie as if nothing happened.

So the question remains: Is this jury just stupid?

I wonder if there’s a reliable source of data on jury selection. I’m cynical enough to believe the old joke about jury duty.   If you’re smart and sophisticated, you probably don’t want to get stuck doing jury service and you’ll probably find a way to avoid it.

An acquaintance explained why she hasn’t been following the Casey Anthony trial on TV: So many children are suffering from abuse every single day, it’s improper to spend so much attention on this one incident.

I admire her self-control and her strong sense of moral duty, but I think that people have a need to feel that justice is possible. The shock of seeing O.J. Simpson or Casey Anthony go free, instead of paying for their crimes, derives from this primal expectation of justice.

I hate those parents who enjoy telling their children that “life isn’t fair.” It should be fair! Unfairness should be unacceptable.

It was perversely gratifying to see Casey all dolled-up in court today. She looked like a Ronette or a stripper. Shedding her librarian look so quickly was another slap in the face but it adds to her mystique as a  psychopath.   I don’t know why I was surprised to learn that there’s at  least  one website devoted to the trial;   If I weren’t already so disgusted with the not-guilty verdict, I might click on the thing about Casey’s preferred snacks from the prison snack-shop or whatever it’s called.

Do you believe that when a jury speaks, justice has been served? Have you avoided jury duty? Do you think the phrase “reasonable doubt” is open to interpretation? And how do you feel about Casey’s hair?

64 Responses to “Too Stupid to Get Out of Jury Duty?”

  1. Heidi Says:

    Oh yeah, guilty as sin, this one! What could be more obvious? Miss Pwecious decided it’d be much more fun to party like a teenager, but the kid was becoming a major bummer. Luckily most shiftless girls shunt the child off to the grandparents, but there’s always the odd sociopath such as this one or Susan Smith who seem to think there’s only one way out.

    Poor kid.

  2. Heidi Says:

    Oh, and nope, never asked to serve.

  3. This guy Says:

    Her smug look in that top photo makes me want to vom. If this guilty babykilling bitch makes ANY money off of this, I will literally barf in real life. Can we start typing “BOL” for “barfing out loud” the way we type “LOL” for “laughing out loud”?

    And never called for jury duty.

  4. the real andrea Says:

    I have been thinking about this “not guilty” verdict non stop since it was announced. Why do I even care? It is just a slap in the face of what is right and true that she was acquitted. I was at work standing around a computer watching the verdict online and I almost fainted when the verdict was announced. I don’t think the jurors understood what REASONABLE doubt is, and they felt it was ALL doubt. They certainly didn’t use their common sense plus the facts to arrive at the verdict. And the fact that they were “sick to their stomachs” to give this verdict? It shows they were wrong. I was comforted by one of the lawyer pundits on TV saying that “karma has a short leash- she will get what is coming to her and what was supposed to happen eventually”, sort of like OJ. He’s in jail now. And just the look that she sported yesterday shows what a psycho/sociopath she is- no more mousy librarian for her. She went to court yesterday camera ready and ready to travel. And yes, the public should BOYCOTT ANYTHING THAT SHE IS INVOLVED WITH THAT MAKES HER ANY MONEY!!!!! Her slimy lawyer, Baez has already signed with a talent agency. The fact that this acquittal will make them millionaires also is sickening. DON’T BUY HER MOST LIKELY TO HAPPEN BOOK. It will be all lies anyway. Even the head of porn company Vivid Entertainment has rescinded his offer for her to make a porn movie. Even he thinks that his consumers won’t flock to see it or buy it. THAT says a lot.

    One more thing- so what “really” happened to Caylee?

  5. the real andrea Says:

    Oh, and yes, I have been called for jury duty several times and was there for 3 days, waiting in a courtroom during a trial for drug possession for my name to be called during jury selection, but my name never came up. That was after I put it off twice. (in NY you can postpone 2X but after that, you cannot). After this, next time I am called I want to serve. We need smart people on juries.

    And go to to sign the petition for “Caylee’s Law” which will make it a federal crime to not report a missing child. It made me feel a tad better.

  6. Peter L. Winkler Says:

    I’m far more concerned about the many defendants who are wrongly convicted and certainly, in some cases, executed for crimes they didn’t commit than the occasional wrongful acquittal.

  7. the real andrea Says:

    And thanks for the opportunity for me to vent. I needed to do that.

  8. Maxine Says:

    When my husband was 17 hes was tied to slew car thefts across 3 counties in AZ. Now remember he was JUST 17 years old. He served 10 years in big boy prison for the crime he commited. 10 years!?? Look it up folks Jack D. Wise. And this dirty bitch got away with murder?!! REALLY!?!?

  9. littlebadwolf Says:

    no, the bitch is not guilty. caylee anthony was alive after the mother was taken to jail. further, the prosecution had no material evidence, and the whole trial was a sham and mockery of justice. why? who did away with the child? those matters remain to be proved.

  10. misfitina Says:

    i am not a violent person, really. But, i want the bitch to hurt and everyone involved in the abuse, killing and cover-up to suffer and then die.

  11. karin Says:

    My first thought when I saw her hair was “oh man, she’s gonna be mortified when she sees herself on video!” And you know she watches every single bit on video.
    I have served on a jury, and I didn’t even try to get out of it, expressly because of what you said. Only dumb people serve on juries. I think it’s my responsibility to change that. If all the smart, sophisticated people (and I consider myself to be both) think they are too good for jury duty, then we deserve what we get in terms of justice. What’s that old saying… “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem?”

  12. Sista Coyote Says:

    If we want to talk about a failed justice system let’s discuss the numerous people sitting in jail who are truly innocent. Let’s discuss people (er, black men) that have served 30 years of their lives in prison only to be released after NEW DNA proves that they never raped/murdered the bevy of people (er, white women) jurors convicted them of. Let’s discuss how when people do go to prison they can learn a trade, go to school, converse via snail mail, exercise, eat 3 times a day, and get yummy snacks. Let’s discuss how the tag line innocent until proven guilty is a sham; it’s actually guilty until proven innocent and when it’s done you’re still guilty and everyone will still want you swinging from the highest of gallows. Ready for a discussion.

  13. Tricia Says:

    Cheers to the real andrea! If it was my friend or family, I would want a caring and compassionate thinker on the jury. I try to remember this when I get called and have to deal with the inconvenience.

  14. Heidi Says:

    Fair point, Peter.

  15. Caroline Says:

    I really tried to see the other side of the story but could not get over the fact that she didn’t report her child missing for A MONTH and partied/got a tattoo while her child was missing. IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE. Why would anyone do that. :(

  16. Juli Says:

    She is a fucking psychopath. Look at that smug little half smile with her stupid hair. Cunt of the year!

  17. Cat Says:

    I am with Peter L. Winkler on this one. I was talking about this with my fiancee yesterday and the question that came up was: Would you rather live in a society where innocent people get convicted and executed for a crime they didn’t commit? or one where sometimes guilty people don’t get punished?
    After some thought I came to the conclusion that I choose the second. I know people will say “Go tell that to the families of victims”. But the same applies the other way around.

    Listen, I believe that sooner or later life gives you back what you deserve. I think instead of being raging mad at the jury, people should be turning to the prosecution. It was they who failed to do their job. I think she looks, smells and sounds like she’s guilty, but as a scientist, it has not been shown to me that she is and therefore, I would not want to be responsible for killing her.

    This is just my opinion of course. I respect and understand yours SW because my more emotional side feels exactly the same way. I hope this doesn’t make me a stupid bitch in your eyes.

  18. Catherine Says:

    The problem is that the prosecution went for the death penalty and therefore had some serious things to prove and THEY didn’t prove it. If they hadn’t been bloodthristy for revenge, there could have been charges that could be proven with a life in prison sentence.

    It’s a disgrace, no doubt, but the prosecution laid a case in front of a jury they didn’t have enough PROOF to remove all doubt.

  19. CR Says:

    I think she’s mentally ill/heartless/a liar but I’m not convinced she’s a killer. To me it seemed like the prosecution tried to twist every piece of evidence to appear like it was Casey’s fault, rather than examine the other leads for any other possible explanation. If mentally ill people kill people every day (hello, SF woman who microwaved her baby), why is it so inconceivable that a mentally ill person reacted completely inappropriately to the death of her child? To me that doesn’t prove guilt, merely total psychological instability. And whether she did it or not – since I personally will never know the truth and do not assume I do – is irrelevant from a legal standpoint when it comes to the verdict, because I would be horrified if a prosecution sought the death penalty on a case that lacks a shred of conclusive physical evidence. Even if she is guilty (which is, of course, totally possible), you just can’t get the death penalty in such a highly publicized case without video of her doing it or her DNA all over the duct tape and the shovel that dug that hole…
    Also, is anyone else squicked out by how Nancy Grace is abusing her “journalist” advantages here? Although, I admit I’m biased against her because I just can’t forget that time she repeatedly pressured Elizabeth Smart to talk about the graphic details of her rape on air, even though the girl had specifically said beforehand that she didn’t want to relive it…

  20. CR Says:

    *sought and GOT the death penalty

  21. lwm Says:

    Getting caught up in hatred toward Casey Anthony only makes us feel better in the short term. Making fun of her bump-it is only instant gratification. Condemning the jury, which was sheltered from our 24-7 media frenzy that is out only to sell news in any way possible, is inane. I feel that Casey Anthony is far from innocent, as with her parents – they know more than they are saying in court and their deep dysfunction as a family is so evident. The focus however should be on figuring out how Caylee really died. (Proclaiming that “the dumb bitch killed Caylee” is not proving how she really died). The obsessive media attention on Casey makes me sick in light of the lingering questions about what really happened to that little girl.

  22. Ann Says:

    I’m 40 years old and received my first-ever jury duty summons 2 months ago. I personally was thrilled to be called upon to serve this important civic duty. I was selected to serve on the grand jury which is a 6 month stint during which all murders committed in my county of residence in FL must be initially tried to determine if there is enough evidence to proceed with a capital murder trial. Furthermore, I nominated myself to be the jury foreperson. So far (thankfully), no one has been murdered in my county, but if they are, I am ready to be called upon and will serve to the best of my capacity.

    And for the record, anyone who thinks Casey Anthony is innocent of murdering her daughter is delusional. I live in central FL and watched this whole thing unfold from the start. Call it media bias or media assassination or whatever you want to call it, but you cannot objectively and intelligently look at the facts of the case and tell me she had nothing to do with it.

  23. Suspended Says:

    I don’t really know anything about this case. It hasn’t gained much coverage in the UK.

    All I can add is that I feel if a “Mother” doesn’t have any concern over a missing child, one that’s been missing for a month, then that is equal to having killed the child herself. A parents job is to love and protect their child, especially a minor. Failing to do that is a travesty, but failing to the degree of Casey is unashamedly criminal.

  24. sweetpea Says:

    Casey Anthony is surely a sociopath – but does that mean she killed her daughter? Assuming for a minute that Calley did in fact drown, how would you expect a sociopath to behave upon learning of her daughter’s death? Probably much like she behaved. Legal analysts throughout this trial have been saying that the prosecution did not have enough evidence to meet the burden of proof. Remember – it is innocent until PROVEN guilty. What was the proof here? We don’t have a cause of death. The evidence is all circumstantial. This is a very unsympathetic defendant and she is bat-shit crazy, but that is not enough to convict someone. In my gut do I think she was involved? absolutely. But that is not how legal cases are built. I think the prosecutor jumped the gun here. I think he should have let her go prior to prosecuting her. Often times, criminals, when left to their own devices, start to dig their own graves.

  25. David Duff Says:

    And with one mighty heave our beautiful hostess tosses trial by jury out of the window. Let us all hope that she never finds herself on a murder charge when she might find the notion of ‘reasonable doubt’ more attractive!

    Do juries make mistakes? Of course they do. It is a human activity, all of which are subject to error. Unfortunately in this case (and others) you will never know for certain if a mistake was made. Perhaps in this case, it was not a mistake by the jury but by the prosecution failing to allay doubts.

    Whatever, it is for those, like ‘Big Sis’, who decry the jury system to come up with something better. Perhaps a TV audience of several millions led by Ms. Nancy Grace could decide matters by sending in their votes!

  26. the real andrea Says:

    Iwm- we know how Caylee died. The prosecution just didn’t prove it to the jury. That poor little girl never had a chance. I keep picturing Casey driving around with the dead body in her car and then throwing it into the swampy woods. Heartbreaking. And remember- boycott her!!!!

  27. Ruth Says:

    Don’t know much about the case, I’m in Australia but I tend to agree with some of Cat’s principles. The sad thing is the jury system is the same here, all the bright intelligent people get out of jury duty.

  28. Tina Says:

    A prison snack shop is called a commissary.

  29. MizLottie Says:

    I got out of serving on a case after the judge passed out a questionnaire asking general questions like type of job, past jury experience, past experience with police, etc. At the end of the questionnaire there were a few lines where you could add anything else you might think pertinent to serving on this case (murder, the accused was a gang banger) and I wrote “There is no such thing as a law-abiding gang member.” “Uhhhh, we’d like to thank and dismiss Juror No. 1, please go back to the jury room, you may return to work.” Ha!

  30. David Duff Says:

    “all the bright intelligent people get out of jury duty.”

    Ruth, I don’t suppose you would care to define the meaning of “bright and intelligent”, would you? Because if you can’t then your comment is literally meaningless. Or, to put it another way, not very bright and intelligent!

  31. kt Says:

    I was more recently part of a grand jury that had to decide on issuing indictments. In the 8 cases that were presented to us, we issued indictments for all of them. We were presented with the prosecution’s statements and arguments, evidence, and witness examinations. During deliberations, I noticed that the few people in my group who were really hung up on “reasonable doubt” were those who didn’t really seem to know what was going on, and for the most part were blase about everything. It’s almost as if they simply wanted to exercise some kind of faux intelligence by all of a sudden questioning and counteracting what the majority of us could intuitively and cerebrally comprehend as being grounds for indictment.

    I do believe that most people are scared of playing a role in the fate of another person’s life and future. In my jury experience, we were merely serving indictment decisions, and yet there were moments I would feel uncomfortable once I’d start to over think and project this potentially convicted person(s) future. But then I had to get over that personal feeling, and follow through with what I knew and understood about their actions and subsequent crimes.

    Jury selection and the legal system as a whole is curious thing. And by curious, I mean that it’s shit. There is little real justice to be found anywhere, and it’s a total game of chess in the courtrooms. I keep going back and forth to see where the fault ultimately lies in the Anthony case. The problem is that fault can be applied to everyone in that courtroom. I was infuriated for the same reasons you and most others share regarding Anthony. I was highly upset at the lack of common sense and intuitive understanding and reasoning of the jury. I do believe that ultimately the prosecution was not strategic enough in laying out their case. Baez and Anthony looked like a crooked but charismatic super couple, and the prosecution were your ugly nagging neighbors. I’m pretty sure that’s the portrayal that the jury perceived, and what played a subconscious role in their decision making. I mean, have you seen the interview with the alternate juror who actually said she was a good mother (based on what her friends testified), and agreed with the defense that this was simply an accident that snowballed? Wow. Really dude? Anyway, that’s all the legal system really comes down to- a pissing contest. This whole fiasco just shows that people at every level can be a complete idiot who has no real idea what they are doing and why.

  32. Sister Wolf Says:

    Peter – Well, I am also concerned that the legal system works better for you when you’re white and when you have money for attorneys (rather than public defenders.) It’s certainly not a level playing field for people who are charged with crimes.

    lwm – You are free to call me inane, but a jury who can’t comprehend that a mother is responsible for her child’s death when she says she “lost” her kid for 31 days and then claims it was an accidental drowning that ended up in a plastic trash bag, that is worse than inane. That is just egregious stupidity.

    David Duff – Perhaps it’s impossible for a prosecution to allay “doubts” when the defense blames everything on child molestation and the defendant adopts the manner of a poor little match girl. The word is “reasonable.” A reasonable person knows that when your child drowns in a swimming pool, you don”t throw her body in the woods and run around laying about nannies for the next month. It is unreasonable to pretend otherwise!

    Tina – Thank you!!!! I love the word commissary, too.

    kt – YES, this is exactly what we need to hear from first-hand experience. Thank you for a thoughtful exegesis of this subject. Your insights re the Anthony case are fantastic. I think you may have nailed it.

  33. David Duff Says:

    Sis, I hear, or at least, read, what you say but 12 ‘good men (and women) and true’, plus, I gather, some of the reserve jurors *all* came to the same conslusion, that is, there were ‘reasonable doubts’ which the prosecution failed to allay.

    You and the others on this thread might not like the result but if you think the jury system is inherently unsafe then you must come up with a better system.

  34. David Duff Says:

    Also, Sis, may I congratulate you on having so many readers who are ‘bright and intelligent’ and not ‘faux intelligent’, either! Such a gathering of fine minds has not been seen in America since the Founding Fathers met!

    Incidentally, I bet ‘kt’ thinks Henry Fonda was absolutely terrific in “Twelve Angry Men” when he stood up “questioning and counteracting what the majority of us could intuitively and cerebrally comprehend as being grounds for indictment”. Even though to some of us it’s obvious that ‘the kid did it’!

  35. annemarie Says:

    I agree with CR. I think.

    To be honest, I have a lot of trouble following/understanding this case. I do think Nancy Grace is very irresponsible. No wonder people like her. She feeds into the appetite for lurid, tabloidy voyeurism that’s called “news” here.

    I find the amount people who think it’s so OBVIOUS that she killed her child quite disturbing. Infanticide is abnormal and extremely rare, and usually the result of a mental breakdown or prolonged psychiatric problems. When the Dominique Strauss-Kahn story broke, everyone said it was OBVIOUS he was guilty just because he’s a horn dog, as though every horny man is now a potential rapist.

    As far as I know (I didn’t pay too much attention to the daily proceedings but have some idea), Casey Anthony did not exhibit psychotic symptoms. The hair and make up were dreadful- truly stupid and tasteless and shocking. I suspect she has a borderline personality disorder. But is that severe enough a condition to murder your own child? Maybe it is. I really don’t know.

    This is a very rambling comment (sorry), but basically, I would summarize it by saying that assuming a person killed their own child (or committed a rape) should be the last conclusion to jump to, not the first. But I am also very confused by the whole bloody thing. I give up!

  36. annemarie Says:

    Kt’s comment is very interesting, esp this bit:
    “During deliberations, I noticed that the few people in my group who were really hung up on “reasonable doubt” were those who didn’t really seem to know what was going on, and for the most part were blase about everything. It’s almost as if they simply wanted to exercise some kind of faux intelligence by all of a sudden questioning and counteracting what the majority of us could intuitively and cerebrally comprehend as being grounds for indictment.”

    It reminds me of that cunt in the Thin Blue Line documentary who had childhood fantasies about being a detective and chasin’ ‘dem bank robbers and then, years later, is responsible for convicting an innocent man, simply because the sudden authority gave her a pleasant shot of self-importance.

    I really don’t know what to think of this case, but I do know that I probably would have been one of the “stupid” jurors. If there’s no evidence, then I wouldn’t have been able to pronounce her guilty. And fuck it, life is going to take care of her. She’s the most hated person in America. It would probably be safer for her to be in prison.

  37. annemarie Says:

    oh jesus, ADDENDUM: I did not mean kt was a cunt. i meant the ones who were previously blase and now found themselves suddenly gripped by the cops n’ robbers drama over which they had deciding power.

  38. David Duff Says:

    Sorry to be a bore on this subject but if anyone is seriously interested in the problems arising from this case, as opposed to just sounding off, please read this:

  39. kt Says:

    Hey David, can’t say I’ve seen Twelve Angry Men, but thanks for the suggestion! PS. Whatever dude.

  40. David Duff Says:

    But here’s another article from the same source but arguing the exact opposite:

    ‘kt’, watch it, it’s a classic. Tosh, of course, the kid did it, but classic tosh!

  41. Iheartfashion Says:

    I’ve been called for jury duty 3 times and managed to get out of it. I agree it’s a very flawed system, and wonder if a pool of “professional jurors”, schooled in the law, would be more effective than a jury of “peers.” and obviously if you’re white and wealthy you stand a much better chance of getting off than the sorry lot stuck with public defenders.

  42. Dave C Says:

    I’m exclusively aware of this trial via the internet, but despite being deprived of the media circus in the USA, I really could not believe that Miss Anthony was found not guilty. The articles found on her computer about various methods of killing were suspect enough, but to not report your child as missing for thirty days is simply beyond credence.

    However, despite a verdict I don’t agree with, I don’t understand the various comments deriding the intelligence of the jury on the basis that they didn’t try and get out of it. In the UK there is no stigma attached to jury service; we see it as a public duty, and to hear that ‘all the bright people get out of jury service’ in the States or Australia is deeply weird. It’s quite possible this jury was indeed stupid, but even though I believe they did make a grievous mistake in this instance, the basic principle of trial by jury remains sound. The title of this blog is ‘Godammit I’m Mad’, (the clue’s in the title) ergo, just because Sister Wolf is angry about one apparent miscarriage of justice doesn’t mean she doesn’t believe in the principle of trial by jury.

    As for all you hippies out there – there is no such thing as karma. She will never get what she ‘deserves’. Life doesn’t care.

    @ Real Andrea – Somebody offered her a porn movie on the proviso that she wasn’t guilty, thus intending to ‘legitimately’ cash in on a child’s death? How about boycotting all his productions anyway?

    Ps. Mr Duff, many thanks for indirectly labelling us all ‘faux intelligent’. If only we had your profound insight into the human condition.

  43. Dane Says:

    “I hate those parents who enjoy telling their children that “life isn’t fair.” It should be fair! Unfairness should be unacceptable.”

    You hit the nail on the head.. why should be be content with unfairness? Isnt that what we have the justice system for?

    I have been following this trial all the way from the other side of the world. This case has been screaming “guilty” since the very beginning. The verdict is an insult to all those who have lost a child in the past and to the memory of little Caylee. Casey should have been executed, over and over again.. but even that wouldnt have made up for the crime she committed. Not only to her own child, but to everyone else who loved that little girl.

  44. Witch Moma Says:

    Had jury duty 8 yrs. ago, HORRIFIC experience. 80% of my fellow jurors were completely unable to analyze data or critically think about the evidence/testimony. It was a child molestation case – many jurors were so overcome emotionally that they couldn’t think clearly – one cried for 3 days. Eventually the “perp” 😉 was acquitted. 2 years later he was back in court & convicted of the same kind of crime. He too, was somewhat mentally challenged. The experience left a very bad taste in my mouth.

    Casey? She did it & will follow in O.j’s footsteps, ending up back in jail w/in 5 years.

  45. Tallulah Eulallie Says:

    Wondering what sort of life Casey will have now. Where will she live after getting out of jail? I can’t imagine that her father would be too keen on having her around after the sexual abuse allegations, especially if they weren’t true. And how will she support herself? Who would hire her? If she thinks she’s going to get a huge payday out of the whole mess, she’s as mistaken as Octomom. If a bottom-feeder like Jerry Springer is backing away from having her on his show, you know her pariah status is firmly established. There’s talk of a book, but if you’ll recall, the publisher never released that OJ book after a massive public outcry. And as for a future love-interest, who would want to be involved with her beyond one night? And if she ever has another child, God forbid, Protective Services will be up her ass until the kid is eighteen, just looking for a reason to take him or her away. Mind you, I’m not feeling a bit sorry for the soul-less twat. I’m just smirking in anticipation. Bitch will wish she’d gone to prison.

  46. Jury couldn't sleep at night Says:

    You are looking at a group of people who couldn’t stomach sending someone to be executed. That’s what it boils down to. They couldn’t live with themselves for killing someone so they let a killer go. From what I understand it was death penalty or walk. If there was a life sentence on the table you can belive they would have put her away.

    she will get pregnant again. Bet on it.

  47. Braindance Says:

    I have only just become aware of the death of this little girl, and I have a lot of questions

    What happened to the dad that is meant to have covered up the death of his granddaughter in the first story Casey told the police?

    “I told you at the very beginning of this case that this was an accident that snowballed out of control … What made it unique is not what happened, but who it happened to.”

    I honestly do not understand that statement above, the fact that it came from a person with power over others and their future sends a chill down my spine.

    This case really confuses me, I do not understand why or how it is come to such a murky conclusion.
    What the dickens was going on in those 31 days the child was missing? Who if not the mother is responsible for the barbaric disposal of the body?
    Was it forensically proved that the child died by drowning? And when was the time of death?

    Why did the prosecution go for the death penalty? Surely if this lady did kill her child to enjoy the rest of her life in shallow pursuits, a lifelong sentence would have been a fate worse than death for her?

    As for jury service, I have never been called up, and hopefully never will.
    I’m pretty sure I have reached that conclusion, not because I am too intelligent, (not much chance of that) but because I am not a strong advocate of the British Justice System, it is flawed and unfair to many members of society, and I do not want to play a part in that.
    But, on the other hand, I do want certain people to be punished for their crimes, but usually it is the 23 year old non educated, socially inept thieving junky they want you to judge and not the politically connected organised crime lynchpin.

    Those who deserve to be judged and punished usually have the friends and money to avert it, is my cynical view and those filtered through the system are people written off by those in power before they are even born, thereby creating a self fulfilling prophecy.

  48. The Queen of Hearts Says:

    I haven’t read any of the comments, so someone may have said this already but I am going to say it (again) because it is my comment (as well).

    The jury did what they were legally required to do whether we like the verdict or not. Do I think Anthony essentially killed her daughter? Yes. Did the prosecution prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? No. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence for all criminal cases. The prosecution didn’t prove with specificity any of the facts surrounding the toddlers death and without specificity you have doubt. You can’t get a conviction for murder (and in this case, even manslaughter) with doubt(s), hence, the jury’s verdicts.

  49. Kellie Says:

    she has this slightly primate look about her. Small brain compartment, long, prominent jawline.

    the system is clearly broken. I like how everyone says “its the best in the world”.

  50. Aja Says:

    You know, I find myself turning away more and more from news like this. It is sad. It doesn’t make me feel good. Nothing is going to bring that little girl back and I refuse to give it any of my attention. I just couldn’t watch it or pay attention.

  51. Erika Says:

    I agree with what Aja said. I gave up television for a reason, mostly to avoid news programs. The ridiculousness of it all. I do read the news sometimes and i have to say it is shameful what happens to children in this world.

  52. RLC Says:

    It’s certainly not uncommon for a jury to reach a ‘not guilty’ verdict for someone who is clearly guilty, purely on a technicality or two. It’s fucking frustrating, too, and it happens especially in rape cases because they can be so hard to gather enough evidence for. But at the same time, I think the law is more concerned with NOT wrongly convicting innocent people than it is with convicting guilty people, and I guess the alternative would be to lower the standard of evidence required for a conviction, which would of course lead to more wrong convictions.

    Juries get it wrong, so do judges. It’s commonly accepted as a ‘fact of life’ but my god it shouldn’t be! It’s so sad when you’re always hearing about these cases in which the very system that was supposed to protect an individual has instead failed them miserably.

  53. David Duff Says:

    ‘Queen of Hearts’, what a very sensible, intelligent comment you wrote above, er, have you ever considered an older man? Um, and I do mean ‘old’, like, very old but still, great fun to be with – so long as I get my afternoon nap and go to bed at nine o’clock with a cup of cocoa. Do let m eknow, ‘Big Sis’ won’t mind sharing me with you.

  54. Andra Says:

    Oi Duff.
    What about me?

  55. Sister Wolf Says:

    Andra – Men are dogs, aren’t they??

  56. JK Says:

    I’m not up at all (well, because of people such as Nancy Grace, maybe “all” isn’t totally accurate) with the case. But it has been my experience that people, who ‘may, most likely were guilty yet were not proved such, in a specific case’ usually revert to form.

    Where’s OJ now?

    The prosecution made two errors, 1) going for a death penalty in a case in which it was obvious would be devilishy tedious to prove, 2) not going for a plea.

    As for “Justice”? I once overheard a Judge being asked, “Sir, off to administer justice?”

    The Judge replied, “Nope. I’m on my way to administer the law.”

  57. Cricket9 Says:

    Frankly, Andra & SW, I find Mr. Duff’s behaviour apalling…

  58. Andra Says:

    Men are fickle bastards.
    But then, we already knew that, didn’t we?

  59. David Duff Says:

    Andra! Shhhhh! No one was supposed to know about us!

    Cricket9, no need to get snippy just because I haven’t made one of my devastatingly smooth advances on you. Stick around, kid, your time could come – er, you are a girl, aren’t you?

  60. Audi Says:

    From what I’ve read it seems fairly obvious that the prosecution didn’t offer up any physical evidence, and without that the jury really couldn’t convict Casey, no matter how strongly they might have BELIEVED that she was guilty. What’s too bad is that they couldn’t get her on failing to report her child missing.

    I would actually like to be selected for a jury (I’ve been called a few times but have never made it to the interview step), but I’m sure I’d be dismissed as soon as they found out I’m a scientist and could actually interpret DNA evidence and such.

  61. Andra Says:

    Duff, Ms Cricket is much too smart to fall for your smarmy advances.
    And furthermore, she has seen the notorious sarong photos!

  62. "not GUILTY AS SIN" Says:

    So when do you not guilty is right call folk go back to the golden oldies of the grassy knoll and we did not go to the moon?

  63. Suspended Says:

    “not GUILTY AS SIN” – Eh???

    Hey Sister Wolf – Check this out (Casey looking for babysitting work.)

  64. sketch42 Says:

    I was sick over this verdict for weeks. Actual nightmares.

Leave a Reply