Disclaimer: I didn't follow the Casey Anthony case, not for one moment. I did, however, hear that...
...she allegedly killed her daughter
...she was found innocent of murder charges this afternoon
...and now there is an uproar. Sign-o-the-times? How the "Casey Anthony is Guilty" Facebook page?
I don't know if Casey Anthony is actually guilty. Certainly it seems like she could be guilty, but that isn't what the jury determined, and in the end that how the system works. Failed? I think that anyone who looks for perfection in anything created by man is always going to encounter that which fails. We are, it seems, perfectly incapable of perfection. At best, let's hope that we get it right most of the time. Maybe this just wasn't one of those times.
For now I say leave Casey Anthony alone. Her trial wasn't an election and we didn't get a vote on her guilt or innocence. The jury did, period.
1 comment:
The latest I've heard (CNN online):
(CNN) -- A prosecutor in the Casey Anthony trial responded Thursday to a remark by one of the jurors who acquitted Anthony, saying the jury should not have considered possible penalties in deciding whether she was guilty.
"I hope that was not what they based it on," Jeff Ashton told CNN.
Juror Jennifer Ford told ABC News that she and the other jurors cried and were "sick to our stomachs" after voting to acquit Anthony, who was accused of murdering 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."
Speaking to CNN, Ashton said the jury "shouldn't have been even considering punishment during the guilt phase."
If convicted, Anthony could have faced the death penalty.
Ashton said the jury was instructed that sentencing was not part of what they should consider.
"If they did it based on the penalty then they didn't follow the law," he said.
Post a Comment