Casey Anthony?

[jshain]

<p>Goal!!! Wambaugh’s head, what else??? Great setup by Morgan.</p>

[soozievt]

<p>This is not the World Cup thread! :rolleyes:</p>

<p>(though the World Cup is going great and is a happier story!!)</p>

[teriwtt]

<p>

I hate to admit it, but I think there will be some “hero” who may try to vindicate Caylee’s death by going up close and personal with Casey.

</p>

<p>aka, Dexter!</p>

[07DAD]

<p>

aka, Dexter!

</p>

<p>No, actually. </p>

<p>It is always interesting to me when someone goes to a fictional person when there are real live examples of someone who has done the deed.</p>

<p>Scott Roeder and Paul Hill are (were) real people who decided to kill for their view of justice and/or morality. The woman who rammed the Casey look alike’s car in Oklahoma said she was doing it “to save the children.”</p>

<p>If and/or when someone gets to Casey it won’t be make-believe. But I suppose those who have been part of the lynch mob will find a way to distance themselves from the actual act. </p>

<p>You know– Oh, that’s unfortunate. The killer must have already had mental problems. I was only exercising my right to discuss my opinion that Casey got away with murder. I have no responsibility for what happened.</p>

[teriwtt]

<p>Yes, I realize there are real incidences of vigilante actions, but Dexter already lives in Florida! I did think that the one TV show on right now with the main character being a vigilante killer happens to be based in Florida, where all of the Anthony events have taken place is kind of spooky. I mean, Dexter could have been staged in one of 50 states, but it’s in Florida.</p>

[EPTR]

<p>07Dad,
The majority of the people on this thread, myself included, do not wish vigilante justice for Casey.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, the reality is that the world is full of unbalanced and/or angry people who may not have the self restraint to exercise self control and who may have the misguided idea that they are “saving the children” or delivering the consequences that they feel the jury did not.</p>

<p>Feeling that Casey was responsible for her child’s death does not, necessarily, equate with wanting harm to come to her.</p>

[07DAD]

<p>I suggest that it is not “vigilante justice” to murder some one who has stood trial for something and been acquitted. It is murder.</p>

<p>

Unfortunately, the reality is that the world is full of unbalanced and/or angry people who may not have the self restraint to exercise self control and who may have the misguided idea that they are “saving the children” or delivering the consequences that they feel the jury did not.

</p>

<p>And, people who yell “jump” at a mentally unbalanced person standing on a building ledge “do not want harm to come to that person.” </p>

<p>

Feeling that Casey was responsible for her child’s death does not, necessarily, equate with wanting harm to come to her.

</p>

<p>You are a very honest person to place necessarily in that observation.</p>

[sunnyflorida]

<p>She will go from one incarceration to another. This woman will not be able to go to the mall, the grocery store, or even the gas station. She will be a prisoner in her own home for quite a long time. What goes around comes around. Her freedom will not set her free.</p>

[EPTR]

<p>07Dad,
I stand corrected. Vigilante was not the correct word to use considering the fact that the jury found her not guilty. Even if it was vigilante justice it would still be murder, though. No?</p>

<p>I used the word necessarily in my statement because I cannot state with certainty the way that others feel. I do know that I do not want to see harm come to Casey.</p>

[EPTR]

<p>

And, people who yell “jump” at a mentally unbalanced person standing on a building ledge “do not want harm to come to that person.”

</p>

<p>Sadly, I think they do.</p>

[soozievt]

<p>I find those who wish physical harm on Casey really disgusting. It was reported that there was some facebook page people join about hating Casey Anthony and the kinds of remarks posted there and wishing she’d be killed and so on reflect a kind of attitude that I can’t relate to. While I don’t think this young woman is innocent, I would never wish harm on anyone. I also would never have wanted her to get the death penalty. The wishing of harm to another to me is not all that different than the minds of criminals who choose to cause harm to others. </p>

<p>I don’t think the fact that one feels Casey was involved in some way in her child’s death and is not innocent of all wrongdoing in this case, should be lumped with those who wish her harm.</p>

[mom2collegekids]

<p>***Casey Anthony’s Attorney: We Need to Start Respecting the Verdict ***</p>

<p>No we don’t. </p>

<p>The legal system and the CJ system have to respect it, but private citizens are under no obligation to do so. </p>

<p>The CJ and Legal System would be wrong to do anything to her (punishment wise). </p>

<p>And, the public would be wrong to do anything illegal to Casey. </p>

<p>But, we’re free to think what we want about her, not want her books to sell, and not want her to profit in any way because of Caylee’s death and her awful behavior. </p>

<p>Most of us didn’t respect the OJ verdict. Many of us haven’t respected other verdicts. We’ve laughed at those verdicts, joked about them, and have rolled our eyes. That’s our right. We don’t have to show “respect” to verdicts that we don’t agree with. </p>

<p>We can "“vote” with our pocketbooks, our choice of TV watching, etc. We can prevent Casey from profiting from this situation. That’s our right.</p>

<p>She is a multi-convicted Felon. We have the right to look at her with the same distain we would with any convicted Felon…especially one who stole from a friend and stole her identity. Every employer has the right to say “no, I won’t hire you. You’re a convicted thief.”</p>

<p>That said, we don’t have the right to do anything illegal in response.</p>

<p>*Quote:
And, people who yell “jump” at a mentally unbalanced person standing on a building ledge “do not want harm to come to that person.”</p>

<p>===================
Sadly, I think they do. *</p>

<p>I agree…and it’s very sinful behavior to yell, “jump”. To encourage any disturbed person to cause harm to himself is just pure evil.</p>

[kluge]

<p>Well, for those of you who seem to feel a need to fret over what you feel is a miscarriage of justice, here’s a sampling from the hundreds of documented, unquestionable miscarriages of justice where innocent defendants have been convicted of crimes they didn’t commit. Maybe you could take some time to consider whether a balanced sense of priorities would lead you to spend more time worrying about people who have been wrongly convicted than obsessing over a single instance where you think someone was wrongly acquitted.

In 1978, along with friends Dennis Williams and Willie Rainge, Kenneth Adams was convicted of gang-raping and murdering a twenty-three year old woman and murdering her fiance. The victims were abducted from a filling station close to where the male victim worked. The female victim was repeatedly raped in an abandoned townhouse in what is now Ford Heights and then both victims were shot and killed. Adams was sentenced to seventy-five years in prison, Williams to death, and Rainge to life without parole…
With the help of David Protess, Rob Warden, and a team of journalism students from Northwestern University, the four men gained access to the evidence for DNA testing. They also discovered that the police had been tipped to the identity of the actual perpetrators, but did not pursue the lead. Eventually, DNA testing exonerated all four men and implicated three other men, two of whom confessed and pleaded guilty to the crimes in 1997.

</p>

<p>

In 1989, Steven Barnes was convicted in upstate New York of a murder he didn’t commit based on questionable eyewitness identifications and three types of unvalidated forensic science. Nearly two decades later, DNA testing obtained by the Innocence Project proved his innocence and he walked out of the Utica courthouse a free man on November 25, 2008.

</p>

<p>

In March 2003, Gene Bibbins became the 125th person in the United States to be exonerated by postconviction DNA testing. Bibbins had spent more than 15 years in prison for a 1986 rape that he did not commit.

Ricardo Rachell was convicted in 2003 of a child sexual assault he didn’t commit. Although DNA testing was available at the time of his arrest and a sample was collected from Rachell, no testing was conducted before his trial. He served more than five years before DNA testing proved his innocence and led to his release on December 12, 2008.</p>

<p>He was officially cleared when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted his writ of habeas corpus on January 14, 2009. In February 2009, prosecutors filed charges against another man in the case, saying the DNA profile from the crime scene matched him.

</p>

[lizard]

<p>Casey Anthony was in protective custody around the clock for the last three years to make sure she didn’t get hurt or hurt herself. Now that she is out, she is probably in as much risk of harm from herself as from others–she’s got a lot to deal with. She hopefully has supervision now that will protect her; it’s going to be a long time if ever before we’ll likely hear about her partying on the town.</p>

[jsanche32]

<p>Kluge, I really hate reading about miscarriages of justice. It ****es me off to no end how prosecutors/police officers can be so unethical/immoral.</p>

<p>A lot of them don’t care one iota about the actual truth. They’re only worry is their conviction rate.</p>

[limabeans]

<p>

A lot of them don’t care one iota about the actual truth. They’re only worry is their conviction rate.

This is exactly correct. I have heard of many young lawyers who got started working with the government and prosecutors, but eventually left that side because of unethical practices and because the focus was simply on how often they could convict. Not sure why that was so important. Can someone explain.</p>

[lizard]

<p>Politics. I know in Florida, right or wrong, being hard on crime works election time.</p>

[mom2collegekids]

<p>kluge quote: *Well, for those of you who seem to feel a need to fret over what you feel is a miscarriage of justice, here’s a sampling from the hundreds of documented, unquestionable miscarriages of justice where innocent defendants have been convicted of crimes they didn’t commit. *</p>

<p>Thank you for providing an even greater reason why the general public does not have to respect jury verdicts.</p>

<p>*It ****es me off to no end how prosecutors/police officers can be so unethical/immoral.</p>

<p>A lot of them don’t care one iota about the actual truth. They’re only worry is their conviction rate. *</p>

<p>While there are bad seeds in every profession, I would not make THAT broad-brush statement against prosecutors. I would say that defense attys only care about getting their clients off and don’t give a rat’s patootie about actual truth.</p>

[jsanche32]

<p>That is not the same thing^^^</p>

[mom2collegekids]

<p>Casey’s defense atty, Dorothy Clay Sims, asked if she would trust Casey Anthony to babysit her children… lol</p>

<p>[Would</a> Casey Anthony’s defense attorney trust Casey to babysit her kids? – The Joy Behar Show - CNN.com Blogs](<a href=“http://joybehar.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/13/would-casey-anthonys-defense-attorney-trust-casey-to-babysit-her-kids/]Would”>http://joybehar.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/13/would-casey-anthonys-defense-attorney-trust-casey-to-babysit-her-kids/)</p>

<p>She couldn’t bring herself to say, “yes, I would trust her with my kids (grandkids)”…gee, what a surprise.</p>