Casey Anthony verdict: Not Proven

By on July 5th, 2011 in Uncategorized

A Florida jury today returned a verdict of Not Proven in the Casey Anthony trial.

Well, not really, because for some reason the rest of the world has not yet adopted that useful Scottish verdict, AKA “we know you did it, but the prosecution didn’t prove its case”.

11 Comments and discussion on "Casey Anthony verdict: Not Proven"

  1. Don Armstrong says:

    Actually, Bob, it doesn’t necessarily mean that. It can mean ” Maybe you, maybe someone else, maybe even an improbable accident. What we DO know for a fact, and the only fact we know for sure, is that the investigators did a piss-poor job, and there’s no proof of anything!”
    Sometimes that isn’t the investigator’s fault, but usually…

  2. BGrigg says:

    We had a similar case in Canada, only it was the father who killed both of his children. He even admitted it to the police and everyone who would listen. He was found “not criminally responsible by virtue of his mental state”. The rest of the world (sans Sweden) needs to adopt the Scottish verdict of “Guilt, by insanity” should have been available to the Canadian jurors. Why is Sweden exempt? Because they have no provision in their judiciary laws about insanity defenses. They can still “involuntary commit” people to the nuthouse.

  3. brad says:

    Do note that they still convicted her using a catch-all: lying to police. Whatever one thinks of the main charge and innocent verdict, I find charges like “lying to police” to be an abomination. This fall under the heading of “we don’t like you, and we’re gonna convict you of something“. Besides which, it’s not clear to me just how one can legally require people to tell the truth. Lying may be unethical, but illegal? Besides, in addition to outright lying, people may simply be confused or mistaken.

  4. Robert Bruce Thompson says:

    No, it actually does mean the jury is sure that the accused is guilty but that the prosecution didn’t prove its case. In the other situations you mention, the jury rules Not Guilty.

    I agree that we have a Constitutional right to lie to the police. But Martha Stewart and others have been convicted and sent to prison on charges of lying to the police about something that wasn’t a crime in the first place.

  5. BGrigg says:

    I don’t think there is a Constitutional right to LIE, but there certainly isn’t any penalties spelled out to prevent someone from lying. Nor is there anything to prevent the States from enacting laws that do.

    I do note that we can lie to ourselves, our wives, friends, family, coworkers, boss, but not the cops, and never the courts. We had a murder case in Canada not that long ago where the accused was acquitted of the murder charge, but was nailed on a perjury rap, which ended up putting him in jail for longer than the murder charge would have.

  6. Miles_Teg says:

    I wonder if people who plead not guilty and are then convicted should be charged with perjury…

    There was, of course, the OJ Simpson case where he got off the criminal charges but was sued by the families. I was a juror in a similar case, where a guy got off a number of charges of Culpable Driving Causing Death but later lost his civil case for an insurance payout after his insurer denied his claim and the court sided with the insurer.

  7. BGrigg says:

    I’ve long thought that should be the way it is. Admit your guilt and take your punishment has always been the best course for me over the years. Not that I had a lot of punishment coming my way. Of course, I never murdered or raped anyone, so none of my “crimes” were ones I cared to lie about. Most of them were eating the last cookies or some such.

    And in a way, that is how the system works. Most judges in Canada give lighter sentences to people who admit their guilt and are remorseful, and harsher ones to those who deny their guilt and are defiant. I presume it works the same in most courts around the civilized world, and perhaps Texas.

  8. Dimitrios says:

    I think Martha Stewert basically showed the entire country that if the police ask you questions the first thing you should do is shut up and the second thing you should do is shut up.

    The prosecution did a piss poor job here. I mean how can you charge someone with first degree murder and not get a cause of death. Very stupid on their part and the jury, based on the evidence at hand, did the right thing. Did she get away with murder, yeah she did, but the burden of proof is on the prosecution and they presented a very bad case.

  9. OFD says:

    A miserable little mess of a case which the continent hung all over for three years and it got roughly a thousand times more media attention than it warranted, while children are being murdered all over the world.

    And yes, it is a good rule of thumb to STFU when being interrogated by the police, even at the lowest traffic stop levels, and yes, they lie to us all the time in an effort to jam us up. Most of us here are not active criminals but I have noticed over the years that the law enforcement trend is for them to go after us small fry with hammer and tongs, while the big fish usually skate.

    Typical situation: you get pulled over for a defective left rear signal and going seven miles per hour over the limit. While he/she is writing your citation, you notice several operators flying by at 20,30, 40 MPH over the limit and even one obvious drunk weaving all over the highway, as you continue to sit there while they run all your info through the databases and make sure your insurance company is notified so they can tack on huge surcharges for the next three, four or five years. Revenue instantly for the town/city/county/state and the insurance vampires. Icing on the cake: the cop who stops you is not even from your town; he is moonlighting on your street, dressed like he just got done dumpster-diving, and as a deputy county sheriff, his HQ is a dumpy little building thirty miles away.

    Or, you are late, OK, way late, in filing your taxes. Expect, at some point, an IRS agent to arrive in person at your residence with a summons and later, threats to take your paychecks and send you to prison. Meanwhile skeezy little bean-counter scroats like Geithner and the boyz on Wall Street routinely skate to the tune of billions.

    There is a LOT of anger out here, and every time these lousy job reports come in, and people keep getting laid off, or have to take temp and contractor gigs with no bennies, they are seething. Once the Euros topple, things will get very mean and ugly here, and the tabloid coverage of bullshit like this latest mess won’t be enough to tamp down the explosion.

  10. CowboySlim says:

    Well, hang on to your hat. In two months, IIRC Sept 8, they will be starting the trial of Michael Jacksons MD drug dealer, as advertised by TrueTv.

  11. OFD says:

    In two months we are gonna see at least one of the Euros topple and more rioting like we are now seeing in Malaysia and other places. First rumblings here were the early summer dust-ups by the so-called flash mobs at beaches and rec areas in major cities. Mainly just assaulting random victims for the hell of it, and heavily racially charged. Just what we need now.

    The tabloid stuff on the TV and the internet is just a sideshow.

Comments are closed.

Next / Previous Posts

Previous:  «

Next:   »