Casey Anthony juror: It made us sick to our stomachs to acquit her
posted at 9:41 pm on July 6, 2011 by Allahpundit
It’s a genuine comfort to know that no one’s under any illusions here.
Casey Anthony juror Jennifer Ford said today that she and the other jurors cried and were “sick to our stomachs” after voting to acquit Casey Anthony of charges that she killed her 2-year-old daughter Caylee.
“I did not say she was innocent,” said Ford, who had previously only been identified as juror number 3. “I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be.”…
“Everyone wonders why we didn’t speak to the media right away,” Ford said. “It was because we were sick to our stomach to get that verdict. We were crying and not just the women. It was emotional and we weren’t ready. We wanted to do it with integrity and not contribute to the sensationalism of the trial.”
More of them should speak up. America’s sweetheart is about to become a bona fide celebrity, rich beyond her wildest dreams, and the only moral cover she has to enjoy it is the perception that 12 people who saw all the evidence think she’s actually innocent. The more the jurors dispel that perception, the greater her disgrace. Which, admittedly, is already pretty great: Her first post-trial job offer, from a porn company, has been quickly withdrawn after people freaked out.
The more I think about it, the more I think she inadvertently benefited at trial from being a serial liar. One of the alleged “tells” in the case is how she behaved after the baby disappeared; for 31 days, she knew her daughter was missing and chose to go on partying rather than report it. For any other defendant, that would be smoking-gun evidence that she had deliberately killed the kid since, had it been accidental, even a child abuser would be expected to show some sort of shock, anxiety, depression, etc afterward. But when you see how freakishly willing Anthony was to lie for her own gain, whether legal or financial, you start to wonder how she would have reacted if, say, she really had stumbled upon the baby’s body floating in the pool. Knowing what we know about her level of self-involvement, is it possible that, rather than calling the cops and possibly facing a charge of child neglect, she might have scooped up the body and dumped it somewhere — and then gone back to clubbing? It’s not likely, but when there’s not much evidence and you’re dealing with a true psychological mark, you can see how the jury might have talked itself into a stomach-churning benefit of the doubt.
On the other hand, if it’s not reasonable to infer that Anthony’s guilty of at least manslaughter based on the facts of the case — the duct tape, the smell in the trunk, the failure to report Caylee’s disappearance, the fact that she was the last person to see the baby — how should a jury proceed with the following set of facts? (This is based on an actual case, not a twisted imagination.) Imagine that a body is found in the woods. It’s too badly decomposed to tell the cause of death, but the cops believe it’s a homicide and manage to retrieve male DNA from it. They track down the guy responsible and he tells police that, yes, he did in fact stumble upon the remains, but the victim was already dead. His DNA is there because, well, he has a sick, strange fetish that we needn’t delve into. No one believes his story, of course. Question: Are those facts enough to convict him of some level of homicide? It’s possible that he’s telling the truth and is merely a happy go lucky pervert who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, just as it’s possible that Casey Anthony didn’t actually cause her daughter’s death but inexplicably covered up an accident and immediately went back to the party circuit. But neither scenario is at all likely. How unlikely does it have to be for a conviction?
Speaking of disgusting scenarios and feeling sick to one’s stomach, I’ll leave you with this link to Barbara Walters’s interview with Anthony’s attorney, Jose Baez, who sure does seem excited about his newfound fame. Remember yesterday after the verdict when he solemnly said, “There are no winners in this case”? Go look at this photo. Never have a lawyer and client been better matched.
Update: The only way this case could get worse: “I’ve thought about adopting, which even sounds weird to me saying it, but there are so many children that deserve to be loved.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4
A few years ago, I interviewed our city’s chief medical examiner for a newspaper article. Among other things, she told me something that other experts have been saying this week –
Jurors expect law enforcement, including the ME’s office, to have the kinds of gee-whiz gizmos that are depicted on TV shows such as the “CSI” franchise. And when that kind of equipment isn’t available (or even doesn’t really exist), the jurors think that the prosecution hasn’t had enough evidence to prove its case.
Great news for criminals.
KyMouse on July 7, 2011 at 9:44 AM
No offense taken.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 9:48 AM
CoffeeMan on July 7, 2011 at 9:48 AM
That’s what I thought when I saw she had her hair down instead of sporting that fuddy duddy bun or whatever that was.
Can’t hit the the streets looking like that.
Gang-of-One on July 7, 2011 at 9:55 AM
Cagey Anthony might have to wait awhile to become rich beyond her wildest dreams. The judge has sentenced her to 4 consecutive years in jail, less time served, for the 4 separate counts of lying to police. This will keep her in jail for over a year, and by then people will be more preoccupied by the normal subject of this blog (politics) to buy anything from this lying b!tch.
If the adoption agency wants to see the child live to the ripe old age of three years, it should find different foster parents…
Steve Z on July 7, 2011 at 10:13 AM
The greater the jurors disgrace also. The defense mentioned the drowning once, in the opening statement, and never mentioned it again. They attacked her father directly as a pedophile without any corroborating testimony or evidence and moved on. This was not a case of the American judicial system working properly. This was incompetent prosecutors (the government is made up of incompetents who can’t make it in the private sector but government employed attorneys are somehow different?), sleazy defense attorneys who were allowed by a judge to throw anything up against the wall to see if it will stick and idiot jurors who watch too much television. The moron jurors acquitted her of aggravated child abuse. If she were arrested for dui with the child in the car she could be charged with that. If she was firing off illegal fireworks in her backyard with children present she could be charged with that. She was the last person to see Caylee alive, Caylee was never seen again until she was found rotting in a swamp. She lied to dozens of people including the police about Caylee. So if the defense had added to their ludicrous excuses that aliens had abducted Caylee or stanists had killed her would the jury have let her off even faster? These morons did not even take notes.
peacenprosperity on July 7, 2011 at 10:14 AM
This young woman makes me sick to my stomach. However…the jurors can say whatever they want to , if it makes them feel better about what they’ve done. They had other options on the list. It didn’t have to be murder 1…but they didn’t use any of them. Not one. Yet…not guilty doesn’t mean innocent? WTF is that?????
capejasmine on July 7, 2011 at 10:16 AM
By the way, I am convinced the defense coached the parents to perjure themselves to save the little pig from the death penalty and then blindsided and threw the father under the bus.
peacenprosperity on July 7, 2011 at 10:18 AM
This case reminds me of the 20th hijacker moussaoui. The jury was told what a sad life he had so they did not give him the death penalty. The defense tried to make the beast seem like a poor, abused little victim and the moron jurors fell for it.
peacenprosperity on July 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM
This is a big problem in small-time cases. Somebody rips off a two-hundred dollar stereo; immediately after hearing a window break, two eye-witnesses see him flee the scene carrying a stereo-sized box and a crowbar… But the jury acquits because no fingerprint or DNA evidence was presented. So the prosecution “didn’t do it’s job.”
The good news is, most of that that golly-gee-whizbang technomagical stuff becomes completely impossible when a household member is the one who committed the crime. So essentially all evidence is circumstantial in those cases and therefore – according to all properly TV-educated jurors – completely irrelevant.
Ergo, no matter how heinous the crime; and no matter how conclusively we know for a proven fact that the suspect clearly worked to cover it up; and no matter how gut-wrenchingly painful it is to ignore all of those indisputable facts; the jury members can always convince themselves it was the PROSECUTION who “didn’t do its job” by handing them them an 8×10 glossy photograph of the murder actually taking place.
In a purely subjective way, it’s a perfect system.
logis on July 7, 2011 at 10:27 AM
Anyone down in that part of Florida should keep in mind this woman may be administering medication to you in a hospital soon. Good luck.
peacenprosperity on July 7, 2011 at 10:35 AM
Wrong. She’ll be out by the end of August at the latest.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 10:40 AM
The prosecutors objected repeatedly to that. But the judge allowed it. I don’t have to look up the Florida rules of evidence; there is no court in the country where anything even remotely like this is considered admissible without an offer of proof. There never has been, and there never will be. It’s not even close.
Like judge Ito, the only thing most judges care about in a high-profile case is not getting appealed. And the easiest way to ensure that is to always let a criminal defendant’s lawyer do whatever he wants.
logis on July 7, 2011 at 10:41 AM
“Not Guilty” means that the jury doesn’t believe that the state proved what they were charging, not that they think the defendant is necessarily innocent. Which in this case, she certainly isn’t.
surrounded on July 7, 2011 at 10:48 AM
I suppose that one consolation in all of this is that Casey will soon find herself surrounded by people who will turn her into a victim, in one way or another.
From what I’ve read, she is pretty lazy, not well-educated, and is focused on today and (perhaps) tomorrow, not the long-term future. She is ripe pickins, I would guess, for opportunists who will probably get her seriously addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, and then take over her life while taking her to the cleaners.
KyMouse on July 7, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Also, the jury isn’t tasked with getting to the bottom of a case and finding out what happened. The investigation has already been done. They are supposed to look at the evidence and testimony resulting from the investigation and presented by the prosecution in order to arrive at the G or NG verdict.
surrounded on July 7, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Since we are assigning blame, I blame the whole damn lot of them. I think the damn trial should have been speeded up. This thing got dragged out to a ridiculous degree, all to this bitch’s advantage.
surrounded on July 7, 2011 at 10:56 AM
In other words, exactly what society has turned middle class white girls into – swoon over black ‘rappers’, concerned about Entertainment Tonight and People Magazine and voted for obama because he was cool, ‘intelligent’ and ‘well-spoken’.
There’s a big surprise.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 11:21 AM
I’ve been following this case since the beginning. I can’t understand how are so many people who never heard of it, this was in the news 24/7 between july 2008 and early 2009. The Anthony’s family was under a huge amount of presure, there were people everyday protesting at the Anthony’s home, the press, the daughter in jail, the grandchild missing. When George Anthony tried to commit suicide it was not a surprise at the time.
Falz on July 7, 2011 at 11:28 AM
Americans only think they have the best legal system because of nationalistic pride. In reality it is a court of laws & nothing to do with justice. Technicalities can be made to work for either side’s benefit. Family and juvenile court is completely secret & totalitarian with not even basic constitutional rights or jury pretenses.
The theory of trial by jury resulting in justice has as much validity in reality as communism as a theory resulting in utopia.
Rea1ityCheck on July 7, 2011 at 11:37 AM
She get out of jail July 13, next week.
Jocundus on July 7, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Really ? Are we really going to crucify defense lawyers for doing their job ? If you are going to take the “every defendant has the right to a defense attorney” seriously, then those people have to be expected to take pride in their work. It’s not their fault there wasn’t enough evidence to convict her.
And, no, a body found with some stranger’s DNA on it most certainly would NOT be enough for a murder conviction. Especially absent any motive or other evidence tying that person to the murder.
Is at least some common sense or logic applicable here ?
Certainly from an uninvolved observer it LOOKS like she is guilty. But by the letter of the law, they didn’t PROVE IT.
There are now columns by Marcia Clark, Alan Dershowitz, and in the Boston Herald this morning from Dan Small, all telling us the system worked. Justice is blind. And it isn’t supposed to be powered by emotion.
deadrody on July 7, 2011 at 11:55 AM
The prosecutors were charged with representing the state without passion or prejudice. They failed that test.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Is there a point to be made somewhere in this rant ?
deadrody on July 7, 2011 at 11:59 AM
So, the prosecution proved enough to make the Jury believe she did it, but they let her off because they didn’t think the prosecution proved it enough?
Jury screwed the pooch on this one. Sorry, but yeah, the jury should be sick to their stomachs on this one. They blew it big time.
Lawrence on July 7, 2011 at 12:02 PM
My bad Patto – cut and paste the wrong commenter/quote.
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 12:03 PM
You think this hideous defense should be “proud” of their work? You cite Simpson/DerShitzky as a creditable source on legal defense?
You’re sick.
Jaibones on July 7, 2011 at 12:04 PM
While this may be true in SOME cases, it most certainly is not the case here. Tons of fancy CSI style evidence was offered. And it was all found wanting for one reason or another. In fact, you could make a case that offering so much CSI style evidence, like the compounds present in the air from a decomposing body – also present in rotting garbage – may have HURT their case.
When you enter evidence that can be explained in a way NOT related to the murder, you are probably worse off than if you had simply not offered the evidence in the first place.
deadrody on July 7, 2011 at 12:07 PM
Whatever. You be sure and tell your lawyer when you are wrongfully accused of a crime that they shouldn’t take pride in their work. I’m sure that’ll work out wonderfully for you.
deadrody on July 7, 2011 at 12:09 PM
The prosecution nullified the jury because the charges exceeded the evidence. Did Anthony deserve a conviction of first degree murder? Perhaps. But the prosecution should have brought charges supported by evidence: child abuse, certainly, and perhaps manslaughter. This acquittal is a miscarriage of justice, but not because of the jury. Rather, this is an example of what happens when the prosecution overreaches.
Moze on July 7, 2011 at 12:09 PM
What you claim is factually wrong.
The American Jury system is about “trial by Peers” who sit on a jury, not just any old trial by jury.
A jury can be made up of anyone selected, volunteered, paid, or whatever.
What makes the U.S. Jury system unique is it is based on a Jury of “Peers”. As in our jury is a random group of people just like ourselves, rather than some specially selected group of jurists that judge everyone.
In this manner justice is served from the perspective of our peers, rather than from the perspective of a judge or some professional legal entity.
We view this as the most fair way of judging ourselves.
Problem is when we as peers hand out a judgment that other’s don’t perceive as “fair” in their minds, we suddenly want to condemn the entire system.
I condemn the jurists in this case for making a wrong decision, but that doesn’t mean the system is bad.
However… despite what I said previously…
If the law says that the prosecutor must prove that a crime occurred, and that is what the judge instructed the jury to determine, and the prosecution had no proof of murder, then the jury probably made a correct decision.
Not necessarily a right decision in context of moral justice, but a correct decision in context of how the law is written.
What this reflects is not that we have a broken jury system, but that we may have a poorly written law.
Lawrence on July 7, 2011 at 12:13 PM
In the U.S. “We the People…” are ulitmately in charge and ultimately responsible.
“We” select our leaders and our judges who create our laws that “We” ratify through our elected leaders.
There is no higher authority in the U.S., then for a final judicial decision other than “We” ourselves, therefore a “Jury of our Peers” is the highest authority we recognize in this nation.
To change our nations Jury by Peer system we would have to rewrite our constitution… starting with the first 3 words.
Lawrence on July 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM
I’ll bet crr6′s left arm that this witch manages to get preggers again soon; she’s an idiot of the first order.
Bishop on July 7, 2011 at 12:25 PM
1. The officials should have checked the meter reader’s tip in August.
2. The testimony from Holloway that George said it was an accident cast huge doubt. Isn’ that hearsay?
3. Why did Cindy lie about the chloroform search?
I believe the parents didn’t want to see their daughter go to jail and did what they could to inject enough doubt for acquittal. They know exactly who killed Caylee.
John Deaux on July 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Abject nonsense. It would require no rewriting to switch to having professional jurors instead of drafting unwilling people at random. Our current system is a glorified roulette game, where one can try to talk the dealer out of ‘winning’.
Uncle Sams Nephew on July 7, 2011 at 12:32 PM
+100
nickj116 on July 7, 2011 at 12:40 PM
There was doubt. There wasn’t *reasonable* doubt.
We live in an era where everybody expects cases to be wrapped up with a nice little bow. Life’s not like CSI: Miami. That’s why you have to sometimes look at the circumstantial evidence and connect the dots. That jury didn’t. They were fools.
nickj116 on July 7, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Btw, BOTH Jurors (one who voted, one who was an alternate) who’ve now spoken to the media have said they bought the accidental drowning theory more than the charge of murder.
Like I said, morons.
nickj116 on July 7, 2011 at 12:43 PM
Except – you left out a Grand Jury in the proceedings, which is standing or called upon – who make specific decisions per the charges being filed.
You know the old Morgenthou statement “anyone can indict a ham sandwhich”, which to me says the beginning proceedings by a prosecution set the stage for the jury of peers and charges against someone can be extremely loose to begin with.
In many cases, there is rift between the indictment threshold necessary (very low) for Grand Juries – and then the messy “jury by peers” evidence and charges they are considering.
Lastly – a “peer” is a pretty loose word, when compared to otehrs – namely the charge against a person, how they act, where they are from, etc, etc. Defense lawyers recuse anyone they believe may have an issue with the evidence, personal beliefs, etc. So whiule the process is shared among the defense and prosecution for selection – that final 12 “peers” isnt as neat and clean as you are stating.
I am an arrogant SOB at times and from NY. What are my chances of getting a true “peer jury” in Florida, as opposed to lets say NY (where my arrogance may be deemed “confident” – a 180 in difference)… it varies greatly. To think a final jury of peers doesnt use their own belief system, bias’, etc. is flat out wrong. Lawyers and judges do their best to Q&A a potential juror – but the end result is not a clinical, legal minded “peer” that is “like” me.
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 12:44 PM
You know, if voting “not guilty” made you sick to your stomachs, that’s a pretty good indication that YOU SHOULD HAVE VOTED GUILTY!
PackerBronco on July 7, 2011 at 12:47 PM
Text book CSI jury.
You-Eh-Vee on July 7, 2011 at 12:48 PM
+1
nickj116 on July 7, 2011 at 12:51 PM
If you can say that “she certainly isn’t” that’s equivalent to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, because in the end the job of the jury is not to evaluate how well the prosecution pled their case but rather to give a verdict on what they think happened and how strongly they hold that belief.
PackerBronco on July 7, 2011 at 12:52 PM
While America’s Media Focused On The Casey Anthony Case
HalJordan on July 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM
That’s completely unfair. Of course every time *I* lie to investigators for five months, and then have MY child’s dead body found stuffed in a garbage bag I ALWAYS want an attorney who will be as self-congratulatorily unethical as is humanly possible.
And if doing that kind of thing makes people like me and Casey Anthony “sick,” well then I guess that means we’re both a couple of evil monsters, huh?
logis on July 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM
The only consolation in all of this, is the fact that she will have to live with herself and the truth behind the tragedy for the rest of her life. God’s Word is still true and will never change, i. e., “God is not mocked, man will reap what he sows” is a universal truth. It cannot be countermanded. Sooner or later the reality of the truth will have a traumatic and probably tragic result on and in her life. It will manifest in some form or another. She will pay in some manner. Her life is marked forever.
Re: the jury, unless we see a copy of their instructions from the judge, we won’t know how restrictive those instructions may have been. They may not have had any other options than were publicized. The court system is too often a joke. And, as we’ve too often seen, a media circus wherein no justice is served. Sad commentary on the society/culture we have managed to excrete in these last decades. God help US.
Roger Brown on July 7, 2011 at 1:09 PM
The jury did their jobs. They deserve praise. It is the prosecution that screwed this up.
And did anyone check Nancy Grace for whiplash? She should her head so much I feared for her safety.
Mr. Joe on July 7, 2011 at 1:13 PM
Interesting article in line with my comments concerning juries, due process and bifurcation of proceedings.
While I dont think computers are the answer – his line of thinking is on par with whats worng with our “system”
Forbes Article
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 1:19 PM
Per Fox news she will be released July 13th. The child is the one who did not get justice!
L
letget on July 7, 2011 at 1:20 PM
Boy howdy, you ain’t lyin’.
I’ve come up with a new Cochranism: “If it makes you sick, you must acquit.”
You know what really grinds my gears? Every joker here that is so emotionally invested that the verdict was wrong probably doesn’t consider the fact that Ms. Ford here may be lying herself in view of public sentiment.
It made them ALL so sick, the first vote was 10-2 acquittal.
You people need to start voting democrat. Some of you know she chloroformed her kid. Some of you know the duct tape was used to suffocate. You make sh!t up in your minds that you consider absolute facts when they are not, you become incapable of using logic.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 1:25 PM
Good point – I also want to add – if they were so sick… why not take more time knowing the ramifications???
11 hours? I spent more time on HA yesterday than 12 people considered the fate of Casey Athony… sickness and all.
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Throw some spaghetti against the wall and see what sticks. Great legal defense.
Affect peoples’ resoning skills and you’ll never have “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt” — for there’s always doubt.
unclesmrgol on July 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM
A tense, foreboding hush crouched over the streets of
Los AngelesOrange County, Florida, as a seething city awaited the sentence to be handed down in theRodney KingCasey Anthony trial./
I personally witnessed the L.A. riots.
Battening the hatches and loading up on guns….
/
cane_loader on July 7, 2011 at 1:52 PM
I don’t know how some of you feel, but my family felt nothing but revulsion when we turned on FoxNews on our nation’s birthday, to be bombarded by this sick media obsession.
We immediately changed the channel. Every time we see mention of the Anthony trial, we turn off FoxNews for the rest of the day.
cane_loader on July 7, 2011 at 1:55 PM
Obama is bombing SIX countries now, including a highly illegal war in Libya and FoxNews runs this meaningless C&%$.
cane_loader on July 7, 2011 at 1:57 PM
Can someone explain to me why this has turned into a blogging monster? This kind of thing happens a lot. Why do you all care so much with regard to this particular case? The attention you’re all affording it is what’s making it a marketable money machine for this monster.
Turn it off. Don’t watch the movie or the newscasts. Don’t watch her interview. Don’t watch her movie. Just stop and go read a book.
cgoode777 on July 7, 2011 at 1:59 PM
I tried a couple dozen times, but could not say this as well as you did. Bravo.
Jaibones on July 7, 2011 at 2:00 PM
And in the end, we find much to agree upon.
Jaibones on July 7, 2011 at 2:02 PM
Why are you telling people what to do, think and watch???
Who the f- are you? And why are you posting within the “blogging monster case” you detest?
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 2:04 PM
You be sure and tell your lawyer when you are wrongfully accused of a crime that they should accuse your mother, father and brother of sexually molesting you — and to be proud of it.
You never know … it’s so crazy it just might work!
Jaibones on July 7, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Btw, I have no idea how I got so wrapped up in this stupid case; I didn’t watch a second of it until it went to the jury. My wife and I turned the channel every single time they brought it up. I hate circus trials.
Apparently I hate scum-sucking defense attorneys and retarded jurors even more…
Jaibones on July 7, 2011 at 2:12 PM
I am guessing because you have a sound moral compass and your instincts know right from wrong.
But apparently thats against the working legal system and Constitution in America or something…
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 2:22 PM
I never realized how many stupid people hang out here also. I stlll maintain that your peers on the jury were too stupid to be able to render a correct verdict. The standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt”, not “beyond all doubt”. If even one of them knew the difference it could be explained to the other clowns. Reasonable doubt is okay while still assigning the blame to who is responsible, and the jury obviously had doubt, just not beyond reasonable, logical doubt.
.
What a joke! Juror #3 even stated that they believed the defenses theory that she drowned in the pool, and covered it up. They even heard from Casey and her parents in the jailhouse tape that the theory was BS.
.
The first alternate juror to come out was a gay liberal, so his opinion doesn’t count.
stacman on July 7, 2011 at 2:35 PM
Out: Belief in the Constitution and the rule of Law
In: Mob rule
The jury got it correct. There wasn’t enough evidence to convict Casey on the murder one charge. Blame the prosecution for trying to get a murder one conviction with a lack of definitive evidence (cause of death, motive).
IMO, Caylee accidently died by drowning or drug overdose and Casey just snapped when she found her daughter. Casey couldn’t deal with being responsible for her child’s death and tried to cover it up. Only a psychologist can explain the reasoning of Casey’s behavior and mental state much better than lawyers, reporters, or observers of this case can.
RedRobin145 on July 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM
True, if she were a normal person. Sadly, since everything she’s said or done from the first time we were unfortunate enough to have heard of her indicates she’s a sociopath, I doubt any of this will phase her much at all.
For example, the way that she broke into smiles and laughter, and then went out and drank champagne with her defense attorney immediately after the trial bears this out. A normal response by a non-sociopath who has just been found not guilty of murdering their own child might have been relief, even a bit of happiness at the idea that they were vindicated. But any response would have been tempered by remembering that their child was still dead, possibly murdered and left to rot in a swamp for months.
I will repeat what others have said before- no normal mother would know her child was missing for a month (most of us freak out if they’re missing for even a few minutes at that age), and then only report it when the grandmother forced her hand. Either she knew where the girl was and obviously couldn’t call police because she had a hand in her disappearance/death, or she really, really didn’t give a crap that the little girl was gone. Either way, sociopath.
SouthernPatriot on July 7, 2011 at 3:29 PM
From Twitter:
@SonniAbatta BIZARRE AND BREAKING: A tree near where Caylee’s remains were found was just struck by lightning. #CaseyAnthony #Fox35
@stevehelling Lightning has struck the site where #caylee’s remains were found. No kidding. #caseyanthony
Purple Fury on July 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM
Btw, those are both local TV journos here in Orlando.
Purple Fury on July 7, 2011 at 3:36 PM
YUM!
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 3:38 PM
Shepard Smith is POS.
BallisticBob on July 7, 2011 at 3:45 PM
Yet another clown who makes ‘facts’ up out of nothing. But, since someone will see this, it will become ‘fact’ to them as well.
I saw no ‘laughter’ from Casey.
And please tell me how she could possibly be ‘out with her defense attorneys drinking champagne’ when she’s still locked up for another week.
Wait, I know! Judge Perry said “You beat the rap, Casey, go out and have a celebratory magnum with your team, but be back in 20 minutes.”
Fool.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 3:46 PM
Newsflash, dumbass: that is not an “opinion.” That is called “idle speculation.”
And, in theory, that speculation COULD have constituted something called an “affirmative defense.” However, this particular affirmative defense was only pled by the voices that live inside your head.
And even more more to the point (because obviously this level of over-explanation is desperately needed here) that particular affirmative defense WASN’T pled by the ONLY person on this particular planet who would HAVE to plead it in order for its consideration to be anything other than a gross miscarriage of justice.
logis on July 7, 2011 at 3:54 PM
That a legal term?
Man, you’ve become mean in your old age, logis.
God love you anyhow.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 4:13 PM
Definition of the word opinion: noun. 1 unproven belief of assessment. 2 view held as probable. 3 what one thinks about something.
RedRobin145 on July 7, 2011 at 4:16 PM
Please Florida, put her in General Population in prison for her last 6 days.
Wade on July 7, 2011 at 4:29 PM
Fox token turd
Wade on July 7, 2011 at 4:29 PM
My apologies, you are absolutely correct that she was NOT out drinking champagne with her defense attorneys, they did that celebrating on their own. I completely misspoke there. However, she did smirk and grin like the freakin’ Mona Lisa. And in the clip I saw (quickly, on TV as I flipped channels) she looked to me like she was giggling. If you don’t think so, that’s your opinion.
For the record, I was in between dashing around running errands with my kids when I wrote that, and was typing quickly. Not sure why I even said it, since I knew very well she was still in custody. Again, my apologies. My point was that her response was not normal. And even if you take the whole response to being acquitted out of the equation, the woman is a textbook case of a sociopath. Not reporting her own 2 year old missing for a month until someone forced her? Check. Partying while child missing? Check. Etc., etc.
But calling people names like “clown” and “fool” because of something like that is just rude and immature. If you felt the need to correct my mistake, that is completely reasonable, and I welcome it. I’m not afraid to admit when I’m wrong.
Seriously, you called me more names, and treated me with more vitriol because of a misstatement than you have the sociopath whose case we’re discussing.
SouthernPatriot on July 7, 2011 at 5:27 PM
Yes. They all are.
More to your point, though, they are all terms that all non-morons should know and be able to respond to as if you didn’t suffer from gross neurological defect.
So, just to clarify: WHO is the one acting like a three-year-old with severe Attention Deficit Disorder here?
Technically that only answers half of my question.
Nevertheless, you may consider your apology accepted in full because, if absolutely nothing else, you seem to be trying your very best.
logis on July 7, 2011 at 5:44 PM
Useless, ignorant, self absorbed, and murderous. The liberal mindset is way more dangerous than anyone is willing to admit. Get paid for being a looser, chastize hard work and success, and convolute reality with political correctness. What a country.
saiga on July 7, 2011 at 6:12 PM
Sign from outside courtroom:
Somewhere a village is missing 12 idiots.
TxAnn56 on July 7, 2011 at 6:25 PM
Did you read the diary entry Casey Anderson made after she killed her kid? The word “chilling” doesn’t even BEGIN to describe what’s going on in that rat’s nest between her ears.
Some people murder because they think their victims are possessed by demons. Some people commit murder because they really wanted that parking space, or whatever was in some guy’s wallet.
But Casey Anderson is worse than any of them. A lot worse. It never even occurred to her that she might need a justification for a fifteenth-trimester abortion. It was just a necessary step on her journey toward personalized self-actualization – or something.
She feels GREAT about what she did. And she will until the day she dies.
logis on July 7, 2011 at 6:43 PM
Making up ‘facts’ or seeing what you want to see is how bullsh!t like
“She murdered her child!”
“She used chloroform to kill her!”
“She suffocated her with duct tape!”
gets started and snowballs into ‘fact’
One more time – Not ONE video, picture or witness could be found to indicate ANY kind of hatred for her child. Not once prior to this deal were the cops ever called to the Anthony home for anything concerning abuse or neglect.
Not once was HRS ever involved with the Anthony family.
In fact, witnesses and the videos of happier times tend to indicate otherwise.
Kids drown in pools and other accidents EVERY DAY in America. Should the parent of every kid go to the ‘lectric chair because people with zero legal vested interest have had their emotions whipped up and inflamed by the likes of Nancy Grace, Greta Van Sustern, et al? You allow the media to basically turn you into democrat ‘thinkers’
All indications are that the child died unintentionally.
Regardless of who started the lies, they occurred and snowballed.
Some speak of the supposed abuse by George or the lies of Cindy. These people lost their granddaughter. They damned sure weren’t gonna lose their daughter. And they continued down the path they were on doing everything they could to prevent the state from taking their child.
Perhaps if any of you are ever in that position, you might start to understand. I’ve never been a parent and I certainly do.
One juror or twelve, so scared of what the public thinks saying they were ”sick to their stomachs’ DOES, however, indicate a lie when considering the first vote out of the gate was 10-2 for acquittal.
Judge Perry is so afraid for the lives of the jurors, he’s doing everything to prevent, or at least delay, the release of their names.
You know who you people remind me of? Rioters in Greece that ain’t getting free stuff. Rioters in L.A. who didn’t like the Simi Valley Jury’s decision. Rioters in Miami after a cop killed a black person. And most recently, the ‘demonstrators’ in Madison pissed because they’d have to contribute a little of their way too high salaries to their own retirement.
In other words, typical democrat mob voters.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 7:22 PM
Agree completely. Everyone should go listen to the full interview with the juror at ABCNews. The woman is dumber than a box of rocks. I’m not exaggerating. She clearly didn’t understand the court’s instructions or the charges, continuing to babble about the death penalty. And, my jaw hit the floor when she was talking about an accident involving the ’3 of them’.Three of them meaning Casey and both her parents, apparently. Did this dumb bitch not hear the testimony? Literally not a single shred of evidence presented to support the accident theory. Zero.
kit9 on July 7, 2011 at 7:28 PM
Why do you think adding more BS within each post helps you in any way?
Speak less, much much less about this issue.
It may minimize your stupidity. Or at least appear that way.
Odie1941 on July 7, 2011 at 7:41 PM
Make that a baker’s dozen; you forgot
LanceAssman.Uncle Sams Nephew on July 7, 2011 at 7:43 PM
Only to you and a few other emotional, mindless clowns.
Go vote democrat, son. It’s about all you can understand.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Dude, my observation about this person was that her own actions- for example, the facts in evidence (non-disputable, such as not reporting her own child missing for weeks) and her behavior recorded on video in the courtroom- suggest to any reasonable person that she’s beyond the typical self-absorbed young mom who’s stressed and carrying a heavy load, and is full steam ahead into sociopathic behaviors.
My comment was entirely in response to another poster suggesting that she’ll have to live with this for the rest of her life; a belief which is entirely reliant upon a normal conscience. One which her past behaviors show that she doesn’t have, because her past behaviors are those of a sociopath.
Unless, of course, you have a logical reason that any normal, good parent would notice their only child missing for 31 days, and just go on partying and clubbing without so much as a drop in the action, much less reporting it.
SouthernPatriot on July 7, 2011 at 8:36 PM
Never said she was a normal mother. I said the kid died because of her possible negligence. The coverup, your 31 days, began at day 1, not day 31.
She didn’t report the kid missing because she already knew, at day 1, what happened. The only reason it was reported at all was because her mother called the fuzz on her.
Everyone reacts differently to situations. She’s one of those useless unwed mothers whose personal life got the better of her.
Yes, more than likely she has a sociopathic personality type much like our last two ‘rat presidents and thus handled the child’s death differently than a normal mother. Perhaps her mind simply used what was normalcy for her to block it out. Perhaps in some twisted way, she thought that if she put enough time distance between the death, she may have thought the problem would simply disappear. I don’t know what was going through her mind.
What I do know is it began on day 1, not day 31. She already knew she was dead. she had already began the coverup. What was the point of a mother like her to report it at all? She KNEW she was dead.
I am not making excuses for the dumb bitch. I have only stated, according to ALL evidence prior to ‘day 1′, she was UP TO THAT POINT, by all accounts, a good mother.
If the stupid prosecutors hadn’t been so emotionally vindictive, and gone for negligent homicide instead of the death penalty, Casey would probably be doing 7-10 years right now instead of getting out on Wednesday.
If the prosecution could have turned any evidence of negligent parenting PRIOR to day one, she’d have been convicted.
If the fat lazy sheriff’s deputy had bothered to take Roy Kronk seriously the FIRST time he called and done his job instead of bitching about getting his pant leg dirty, they might have had the cause of death. And Casey may be doing more time today.
IF, in fact, she did murder her child, she will receive justice at some point. But probably not on your time schedule.
The justice system functioned as intended. It is not up to you to question jurors who were there for the entire thing, who saw more than the public, and were privy to things we were not.
It is no business of yours or mine to exact retribution on perceived ‘stupid’ jurors or on Casey Anthony. She had her day in court. So did the state.
Why don’t you use your possible hatred for Casey Anthony or the stupid jurors and crusade for the hundreds of actual innocent people who WERE judged guilty? And there are plenty.
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 10:17 PM
Deadrody & Lawrence; US Legal system not Justice system
the point is Justice can only be reliably found in the dictionary, so avoid getting involved in the system if you can, and if you do play your cards for as much justice as you can afford and be prepared to be feasted on by lawyers & experts there to ‘help’ you. Pity the innocent or wrongly done that can’t afford it.
Jury of your peers is an oxymoron, a jury of narcistic liars? + jurors aren’t allowed to hear ‘irrelavent?’ evidence like conviction of previous murders etc. Not a level playing field. Juries convict innocents and free guilty all the time, any lawyer will tell you they are a crap shoot and most prefer a judge who they know is at least intelligent and may use common sense as best as possible within the constaints of the law, unless trying to sell a perposterous story then go for jury.
More people in jail in this ‘best’ system than any country in the world and yet crime is rampant.
Rea1ityCheck on July 7, 2011 at 10:21 PM
Oh, stuff it you imbecile. Though you are incapable of understanding the significance of the evidence, others do. There was enough evidence to prove that she murdered her kid. And though cause of death is not an element of first degree murder, only an idiot like you can’t figure out that the child died due to having duct tape put on her face causing her to suffocate.
Blake on July 7, 2011 at 11:10 PM
No, you stuff it, jackwagon!
Lanceman on July 7, 2011 at 11:26 PM
Well said! Its crazy that some people here who scream when activist judges use their feelings to make rulings wanted this jury to do the same despite the evidence. Either you believe in the Constitution and the Rule of Law or you don’t.
RedRobin145 on July 8, 2011 at 12:06 AM
Blake on July 7, 2011 at 11:10 PM
We don’t know when the tape was applied to the child’s face.
We don’t know how the child died, because of a lazy cop.
The jury could have easily found the disgusting pile of dung masquerading as a mother guilty, simply because they hated her guts, but they believed that the evidence failed to provide a reasonable proof of guilt. They have my sympathy.
Slowburn on July 8, 2011 at 12:15 AM
Blake does. After all, he’s smart, unlike those stupid jurors who were there from day one.
Lanceman on July 8, 2011 at 12:30 AM
Strange and idiotic opinions like this one are even funnier when you’ve had a few drinks.
Strange person, your psychobabble-invent-a-theory has exactly the same factual support as my Option A Theory, which is that evil and violent monkeys flew out of George Anthony’s butt and carried the child off to the Okeefenokee swamp, duct taped her, bagged her and tossed her in, and that poor Casey the bar skank was deeply traumatized by the site of smell, flying monkeys, and so she went on a 31 day bender and got another tattoo.
Again — this is just a theory. But of course, so is your Dr. Phil Puke-a-thon of a theory. Turn off the TV before you become a flesh-eating zombie. Live again.
Jaibones on July 9, 2011 at 12:53 AM
FTFY.
Uncle Sams Nephew on July 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4