As with a lot of things in life, when it comes to the Casey Anthony verdict, I'm kind of in the gray (grey) area. I saw a poll taken shortly after the verdict was announced and about 49% of people thought she was guilty, while 51% thought she was either not guilty or that she was guilty of a lesser crime than murder.
I think I fall into that third group right there, from a legal standpoint. A lot of people went the common sense route and stated that she had to have been part of the murder since she didn't report that her daughter was missing for 30 days. I too agree that that's a little (very...) messed up, but common sense, unfortunately, doesn't equal hard evidence.
I do wonder why Ms. Anthony wasn't found guilty on the charge of aggravated child abuse. That decision puzzled me some. However, when it came to the charge of murder, I don't believe there was enough hard evidence to convict her. Do I think she was likely guilty? Probably. I also have suspicions about her ex-husband and even the grandparents. But, unfortunately, since the child's body wasn't found quickly, there wasn't any way for the police to contract DNA sampling or any other bits of evidence which could have led to the responsible party (or parties) for the child's death.
One other thing I wanted to mention is that I think it's pretty ridiculous to compare this trial and verdict to O.J. Simpson's. The only things these two cases had in common were: 1) They were highly publicized, 2) Involved murder and 3) Both were found not guilty. That's it. If we want to look at things from a black-and-white perspective, then sure, I suppose we could say the two cases were similar, but I think we'd just be kidding ourselves in the process.
There was evidence showcasing that O.J. Simpson was guilty of murder. However, some of this evidence was not permissable due to a couple slip-ups by those investigating the crime. In Casey Anthony's case, there wasn't that hard evidence which was presented. If one were to look back at the details of both cases, they'd see there were minimal similarities between the two. Every attorney I heard speak on television laughed at the notion that the two cases were much alike.
In any case, like O.J. following his not guilty verdict, Casey Anthony's life is not going to be an easy one from this point forward. Whether she was found guilty or not, the public was going to look at her in a certain manner which would signify a tough road ahead for her. If she was at all guilty in the death of her daughter, I'm glad this will be the case. If she wasn't guilty, it would truly be a shame for her to have to endure so much for the rest of her days, but it's difficult for me to believe, even without the hard evidence, that she didn't play some part in the child's death. Like I said, common sense tells me she was involved. Unfortunately, common sense doesn't stand up in court. Evidence does and there was a minimal amount of that.
I think I fall into that third group right there, from a legal standpoint. A lot of people went the common sense route and stated that she had to have been part of the murder since she didn't report that her daughter was missing for 30 days. I too agree that that's a little (very...) messed up, but common sense, unfortunately, doesn't equal hard evidence.
I do wonder why Ms. Anthony wasn't found guilty on the charge of aggravated child abuse. That decision puzzled me some. However, when it came to the charge of murder, I don't believe there was enough hard evidence to convict her. Do I think she was likely guilty? Probably. I also have suspicions about her ex-husband and even the grandparents. But, unfortunately, since the child's body wasn't found quickly, there wasn't any way for the police to contract DNA sampling or any other bits of evidence which could have led to the responsible party (or parties) for the child's death.
One other thing I wanted to mention is that I think it's pretty ridiculous to compare this trial and verdict to O.J. Simpson's. The only things these two cases had in common were: 1) They were highly publicized, 2) Involved murder and 3) Both were found not guilty. That's it. If we want to look at things from a black-and-white perspective, then sure, I suppose we could say the two cases were similar, but I think we'd just be kidding ourselves in the process.
There was evidence showcasing that O.J. Simpson was guilty of murder. However, some of this evidence was not permissable due to a couple slip-ups by those investigating the crime. In Casey Anthony's case, there wasn't that hard evidence which was presented. If one were to look back at the details of both cases, they'd see there were minimal similarities between the two. Every attorney I heard speak on television laughed at the notion that the two cases were much alike.
In any case, like O.J. following his not guilty verdict, Casey Anthony's life is not going to be an easy one from this point forward. Whether she was found guilty or not, the public was going to look at her in a certain manner which would signify a tough road ahead for her. If she was at all guilty in the death of her daughter, I'm glad this will be the case. If she wasn't guilty, it would truly be a shame for her to have to endure so much for the rest of her days, but it's difficult for me to believe, even without the hard evidence, that she didn't play some part in the child's death. Like I said, common sense tells me she was involved. Unfortunately, common sense doesn't stand up in court. Evidence does and there was a minimal amount of that.
Comments
Post a Comment