Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be astonished that Casey Anthony has been found not guilty?

67 replies

GastonTheLadybird · 05/07/2011 20:18

I am completely shocked. If she didn't do it, who did?

Coverage on Fox News, jurors refusing to talk to media. Terribly sad for all involved :(

OP posts:
microserf · 05/07/2011 20:19

i am completely, completely shocked.

that poor little girl, what a great mom she had.

Greythorne · 05/07/2011 20:20

Unbelieveable

thisisyesterday · 05/07/2011 20:23

i have to admit to only knowing what i've read on wikipedia and online.... but i was shocked

i know poeple on FB who are in the US who have been watching the trial on tv, although i don;t know if it's full or partial coverage... they all seemed utterly gobsmacked

i can only assume that the jurors know more than we do, or that they were not sure beyond reasonable doubt that she did it

does anyone know how long they took to reach a verdict? and was it unanimous?

Original poster
GastonTheLadybird · 05/07/2011 20:26

I just don't get it. Commentators on Fox - I know, I know, it's Fox - seem to think that if there was a lesser charge she would have been found guilty but that the jury weren't willing to put her in prison for 30yrs.

The whole case just absolutely sickens me. How could you not report your two year old child missing for over a MONTH?! It's fucking horrible.

OP posts:
Original poster
GastonTheLadybird · 05/07/2011 20:29

Jury deliberated for 10 hours thisis, they didn't ask to review any evidence either.

OP posts:
takethisonehereforastart · 05/07/2011 20:33

Really!? I thought for sure they would find her guilty, but I admit I know only a little about the case and mainly through other people discussing it. It's heartbreaking to know what that little girl went through and awful to think she may never have justice.

StewieGriffinsMom · 05/07/2011 20:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

chandellina · 05/07/2011 21:04

i am having the same reaction. astonishing and upsetting. however in the jury's defense, the evidence was entirely circumstantial and the exact cause of death couldn't even be established. That meant all the defense had to do was introduce reasonable doubt. Considering how rubbish her lawyer was it shows how weak the prosecution case really was, despite all the incriminating evidence (that mainly just proved what a bad mother she was, not that she was a killer). Unfortunately it has echoes of OJ Simpson - everyone knew he did it but guilt could not be firmly established by prosecutors.

thisisyesterday · 05/07/2011 21:10

10 hours? wow

i guess they just couldn't be certain enough. I'd need to be pretty bloody sure about it to be able to say guilty if i knew they would face the death penalty

StewieGriffinsMom · 05/07/2011 21:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

thisisyesterday · 05/07/2011 21:11

i wonder if she'd been facing jail rather than death whether the outcome would have been different?

chandellina · 05/07/2011 21:17

the sentence would have depended on what she'd been found guilty of. I found this "guide":

? Guilty of capital first-degree murder (premeditated)
Sentence: Death by legal injection or life in prison with no chance of probation.

? Guilty of first-degree murder, non capital (premeditated)
Sentence: Life in prison with no chance of probation.

? Guilty of second-degree murder (non-premeditated)
Sentence: 16-3/4 years to life in prison with a chance for probation.

? Guilty of manslaughter (Anthony didn't intend for Caylee to die)
Sentence: Up to 15 years in prison.

? Not guilty

In addition to a murder verdict, the jury will also decide on the following charges:

? Aggravated manslaughter of a child
Sentence: Maximum of 30 years in prison.

? Aggravated child abuse
Sentence: Maximum of 30 years in prison.

thisisyesterday · 05/07/2011 21:22

so does it work the same as over here where you are tried for a specific thing ie manslaughter? or do the jury decide what (if anyhting) you are guilty of?

i don't really know enough about it tbh. were they arguing that she accidentally killed her?

Original poster
GastonTheLadybird · 05/07/2011 21:23

They found her not guilty on the two lesser offences too - the ones that had 30 yr sentences. I believe she was found guilty on four charges, misinforming the police etc, she is allegedly going to be released in a few days.

Agree that the case should not have been televised and the way that the general public has behaved is horrible. I haven't seen the misogyny that you mention SGM but I have only really read UK coverage - are you in the US?

OP posts:
CheerfulYank · 06/07/2011 02:30

I believe it was argued that Caylee accidentally drowned in the family swimming pool and that Casey Anthony and her father covered up her death.

They also argued that Casey was sexually abused by her brother and father, teaching her to lie and not show emotion, which is apparently why she did not seem to care that her daughter was dead/missing.

"Reasonable doubt" is all that has to be established, yes.

sweetness86 · 06/07/2011 06:25

It is just like the OJ simpsom case its obvious she did 'it' unable to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
Its sick though that poor little girl is never going to get justice Casey makes me sick .
She will more than likely be lynched on the outside now anyhow.

BabeRuthless · 06/07/2011 06:33

I've been following this & it's absolutely horrible. Whatever happened, a little girl was badly let down by her family whether it was through neglect resulting in an accident or something more malicious.

In the end the physical evidence wasn't there & the jury didn't want to commit with there being a death penalty.

No one comes out of this with any credit Sad

queenmaeve · 06/07/2011 09:17

It is such a sad state of affairs. I cant believe in this day and age of forensic science that they couldnt secure a conviction.

TotemPole · 06/07/2011 09:48

If it was an accident, why did the remains have duct tape on the face?

Filibear · 06/07/2011 09:57

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

redrollers · 06/07/2011 10:30

I don't understand it at all. The reporting doesn't seem to explain it at all
She died in the swimming pool?

YaMaYaMa · 06/07/2011 10:35

I didnt know they'd found any remains, I thought they'd only been able to establish that her body had been in the boot of Casey's car at some point, but I only read about the case when it first began.

Insomnia11 · 06/07/2011 10:44

From what I read about the case and trying to peer through the witchhunt, gossip, innuendo and misogyny it seemed more likely that the little girl had drowned and they had covered it up due to worry about being charged with neglect rather than murder.

I don't think she is innocent of any crime whatsoever but almost certainly there was more than reasonable doubt of her being guilty of first degree murder.

MarioandLuigi · 06/07/2011 10:48

From what I have read Kaylee's body was found in a swamp and the prosecutors believed that Casey has murdered her and dumped the body.

Casey admitted that Kaylee had died in an accident and she helped her father cover up the accident.

MarioandLuigi · 06/07/2011 10:49

Caylee, not Kaylee, sorry.

Swipe left for the next trending thread