AMEN

Well, that's what happens when you choose to ignore the majority of the evidence and let a murderer walk free. I really didn't expect a guilty verdict on the Capital murder charge but the manslaughter and criminal negligence were a slam-dunk.

There were 12 people on that jury. It is your opinion that they ignored the evidence. If one person said not guilty, then that may have been someone ignoring what was presented. However, 12 people said that the prosecution did not present a case for any of the murder charges. They all wanted to know why and how. The prosecution did not do that. 12 people ALL decided that the evidence was not adequate. I don't think they ignored what was presented to them.

It's very sad that so many people are spewing hate toward people they don't know over a trial that had nothing to do with them.

Actually there was no real evidence more like innuendo and hearsay. Was she guilty? I think so. I was not there so could not say with any degree of certainty which is probably what the jury arrived at.

I think people need to realize the only thing they know about this case is what they've heard on the news. Which is biased to say the least. Going by the news, I want this woman in jail for life, but the news is NOT the jury. Neither are you or I.

Sorry.

So, blame the prosecutor. It is his job, after all, to make a successful case. And it isn't the jury who failed, if anyone, it is him and law enforcement. That is who deserves the full wrath of the blame.

Fortunately, we have laws in this country. All those pinheads who tried her in the court of media should go hang out with the Taliban or some other culture where laws don't matter. Or at the very least, read up on the Constitution. Is everyone out there Michelle Bachmann? Facts matter, not innuendo or suspicion. The prosecution had little proof to work with and the jurors were not vigilantes.

I watched quite a bit of this trial, and I thought the same thing as all of these jurors. There was NO evidence at all, only circumstantial. There was not even a cause of death, and how exactly would they convict when they don't even know how this little girl died? This was NOT a slam dunk and the jury made the right decision. They should not have to live in fear, and most people understand that they are just jurors, and should be allowed to go in peace. The media frenzy and their vilification of the entire Anthony family, should be help accountable. They were on this from day one, and Nancy Grace was the driving force of this........she should be ashamed of herself.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but none of us can (or should) be judgemental about the verdict or the jurors when we were not there, day in and day out to listen to all the evidence(obviously we hear the media). These jurors are simply doing their civic duty, it is disgusting that now, Casey Anthony's choices in life whether truly guilty or not are going to harm "normal" people in our society. They have become innocent victims themselves.....sad. Not only do I grieve now for the loss of a little girl, but the people that were brave enough to serve on this jury....apparently will see their own lives change as well.

We, the general public, are making judgments based on what the media is telling us, which is not always the truth, the whole truth. What the sequestered jury heard may have been more than a bit different. It's up to the judge what information they can use to make their decision. I believe the mother is a LOT MORE CULPABLE in her daughter's death. The problem the jury had was that the prosecution was not able to provide them with the needed EVIDENCE to convict. If the media and public had not been so anxious to put the mother away, perhaps the prosecution would have been able to provide the how, the way and the who WITHOUT A DOUBT and little Caylee would have gotten justice. Without a doubt the true verdict will come - in this world or the next.

P.S. To commenters in general - how about using SpellCheck before you hit "submit". It would make your comments easier to read and lend credibility to your post. Please don't get all hot and bothered about this, it's only a suggestion.

Unfortunately, the real world is not CSI, and not all trials have the benefit of perfect scientific evidence like we see on tv. Circumstantial evidence is still EVIDENCE under our laws. Based on what I understand of the case, personally, I believe Casey should have been convicted.

That said, I agree that the jurors should not be persecuted for their decision. No juror should, they are simply doing their civic duty.

And there is a secret government base on the moon, they control your thoughts thru the TV! give me a break . If you don't agree with what happened tough skit , It went down that way . Respect your fellow Americans .

@dougjeffreys

I'm tempted to break my perfect record of not being suspended from these boards and call you a whole host of names.

So she deserves the death threats she's getting for participating in one of the most fundamental of American institutions, to be judged by a jury of your peers? Thankfully jury selection is random and not volunteers, otherwise with attitudes like yours there would be no justice for anyone. And it's people like you that refuse to accept a jury's decision that keeps this guy's wife on the run. Since you couldn't get Cassie Anthony, might as well try and get someone else eh?

I pity you dude. I really do.

They let a killer go free. They ignored the facts....

Large numbers of Americans have turned criminal justice into a blood sport with fire-breathing dragons like Nancy Grace reigning as Emperor overlooking the fevered crowds of the Coliseum. These are bored, disaffected people who need to focus their attention on news events with REAL, LONG-LASTING IMPLICATIONS FOR ALL OF SOCIETY, instead of using crime as entertainment, titillated daily by the sordid details of a dysfunctional mother-child relationship, all so Nancy Grace can by a new summer home. Wake up, you maniacs.

Oh and you were there and know the facts ? do you know why they sequester jurors? So the freakin media does not pollute them .

You don't know the facts! Fact is they don't even have a cause of death for the poor child. So how the world could the convict her. By the facts she shouldn't have been charged until a coroner says it was a homicide. Fla. DA threw this case together for the media and lost it. And yes I agree a killer did go free.

Juror #12 co-workers are no better than Casey Anthony. Potential murders!

Mob Rule in a so-called free America.

Kevin Bitz

Excuse me?... you must be GOP... only they have the god given right to be always right... or at least they think they do in Texas..... 12 people said... Nope.... good enough for me.... (maybe you have never been on a jury.. it is interesting)... they did their job!

I think you have that backwards...the GOP is saying, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone!"

God knows...and will judge

Let it go!

Kevin and Geno...Get OFF the damned political bandwagon for ONE MINUTE, okay? Whether one agrees with the jury or not, it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH POLITICS! Talk about ONE TRACK MINDS... Come out of the cellar and into daylight, there ARE other issues in the country and the world for pete's sake.

I agree with (1) the fact that the media trial had a preplanned conviction (much like the manipulation of the media to influence an election), (2) we were not on the jury and don't know the complete story of their experience and reasoning, (3) the evidence provided was circumstantial and did not have a direct connection to Casey Anderson, and (4) the cause of death was never provided for the jury to know how the circumstantial evidence applied. There are some unusual circumstances that have not been clearly explained. One of which is, why did it take so long for Casey to report the missing child to authorities? We may never know that. The circumstances do look like she is guilty but the jury responsible for making that decision said that they didn't get the most important facts that would have made the difference. So now that the jury has spoken, like it or not, we must accept it and move on. Do not take matters into your own hands. You are not qualified to serve as punisher nor executioner. That would be another example of shooting the messenger and dealing with the message.

Stop blaming the jurors. Not their fault. Why should juror 12 be afraid to go to work or even live in her own town. It's the State of Florida who bumbled the case and OCSO for not taking Roy Kronk seriously 8/08. The forensics people who contaminated the evidence with their own DNA and drying out the garbage found in Casey's trunk. Stop saying Casey is going to get rich over this, but her parents have already made lots of dough off of their own granddaughter. To Nancy Grace how dare you report false information on your show and deny it. Then when I write to you and call you on it, I get no response.

Lots of information in the Anthony's transcripts. I would read them and then tell me they wern't involved somehow. Cindy sending the OCSO on wild goose chases accusing Casey's friends of being other people (what an imagination like mother like daughter) She accused Amy H of being "Zanny" and her male friends of being "Jeff Hopkins" see how many times she says "that raised a red flag to me" and then tell me who should re-imburse OCSO for the investigation.

Cindy went into work 2 days after Caylee died and planted the seed of a drowning by saying "someone was in our pool, they left the ladder up". Why say that. George called 911 to report his gas cans missing, but when they found Casey's car at the impound lot and smelled like death he said "oh god please don't let it be my daughter or granddaughter" and he continued on to work that day not calling 911 to report the smell. Allegedly Lee faked e-mails from Casey's fantasy employer at Universal saying what she should wear to events and when to be there. All lies.

Most have you have never been on a jury..I have. I was sequested for a month and 1/2 - the paperwork of the "charge" they give you is very confusing and very long. You must follow and agree to every single minute piece of it to be considered a guilty plea. Do I think she did it...Hell yes - But without seeing that "charge" you will never know only those 12 jurors do. It was probably the hardest thing they've ever had to do...but they had to follow the law.

There is no valid cause for this lady and her husband to act like this. She did her duty as the system prescribes. People who think differently didn't serve on that jury and therefore have no informed say about its findings. If she felt threatened she should have sought redress through the same legal system which she served, and is the cause of her apprehension. It is a cowardly bastard who bullies and threatens one for doing their just duty, and this was especially hard duty.

George...You are correct, it did not have any direct connection to Casey Anderson. Ummm, who's Casey Anderson??? Brain farts...dontcha love 'em. However, I do agree with what you have to say.

I think Jose orchestrated the whole thing too. That's why George and Cindy quit visiting the jail and giving fuel for Nancy Grace's fire for one thing and to make it look like there was a breach in the family to make his story more believable. I think that's why they got up and walked out as soon as the verdict was read so they didn't have to hide their feelings. I'm not being critical, just stating my opinion. I hope their lives get better after this.

I think anyone who makes anyone feel threatened or frightened because they don't agree with them should be arrested or fined. Everyone is welcome to their own opinion, but when someone is threatening or vicious because someone else desn't agree with them, they are stepping outside the law and I'm fed up with them. I think Nancy Grace should be the first arrest and Jane Velez Mitchell the second.

I am reatlly tired of people defending this jury and saying that they did the right thing and were just doing their duty. They diliberated only 11 hours on a case that took 6 weeks, and there is speculation that they had really made their decision the first few hours on the first day. They never asked to review a single piece of evidence and they completely ignored the phrase 'reasonable doubt'. Everybody is extremely upset because of those words being left out of the decision making process by this rather ignorant jury. Of course there was no physical evidence, as Ms. Anthony made sure it would take too long to find the body by misdirecting the police at every turn. Her actions after the baby went missing virtually erased 'reasonable doubt' for me, and at last count 75% of the country's population. Those 12 jurors did a lousy job. They spent less time arriving at a verdict for 7 counts than many trials take for a burglary job. If they wanted to be taken seriously, they should have seriously considered the charges and taken their job more seriously instead of worrying about getting out of Orlando and getting back home. Even if they thought she didn't actually kill the child, somebody on that jury should have had the balls to hang the jury to give the prosecution more time to develop a better case. But they didn't....they didn't even think that far. They did a lousy job, so please stop trying to defend these people to us that know they had many more options than what they came up with!

juror defined: a pawn in the game of chess within a court of law.

Her actions after the baby went missing virtually erased 'reasonable doubt' for me, and at last count 75% of the country's population.

We should be very thankful people don't go to death row based on popular opinion-but instead based on actual evidence presented in a court of law, which no one knows exactly except the people who were there in that court room.

I think our disgust with the jury is misplaced.

Justice wasn't served because a prosecutor "went for" "the notch on his/her belt" in seeking a capital punishment conviction. Instead he/she should have set ambition and ego aside, and tried the case based on its merit. He/she should have given the jury manslaughter or murder 2 options.

Thanks to poor case management decisions on the part of the prosector(s), we now have jurors who are being victimized in addition to the original victim, Caylee.

seen too much....I never said death row. That was not a difinitive punishment had she been found guilty. You must have your head buried in the sand if you think that this was the first case that should have been decided by nothing more than circumstantial evidence. If circumstantial evidence was not allowed, Scott Peterson would still be walking free. You, like this rather stupid jury, have been jaded by watching too much CSI. Sometimes, there is no smoking gun, but the persons actions dictate a guilty verdict....if nothing else, manslaughter or child abuse. You can't possibly believe she is guilty of nothing here....you can't possibly be that stupid.

Can someone please help me with this? Since Casey through her lawyers said that Caylee did drown then here is my question.

If a person drowns in your care and you don't call 911 then no charges will be filed against the person, correct? It's okay for that to happen? Because according to Casey this is what happened.

31 days is the only proof I need and the fact the mom called police to report the little girl missing..Hellllo!

The guilt or innocence of Casey Anthony has little to do with the harassment of the jury. Any case requires a thorough examination and if there is a doubt, then there is only one verdict. I've been on a jury and I'd swear that one of the other jurors had the same line of work that the defendant did, burglary. I got in trouble with many of the other jurors for pressing him on the issue of a reasonable doubt. He didn't believe the police but had no reason why he didn't. What a nut case. Those 12 people did what has to be one of the hardest things there is to do; tell the truth knowing you are going to be despised for doing so. I salute them and their patriotism.

Saturday July 9, 2011 the HLN Network basically put all the Jurors on trial. Had what they did occurred 100 years ago and done in a Town Hall; there would have been a lynching by the end of the broadcast.

Nancy Grace has done the impossible - she has surpassed Jerry Springer. At least with Jerry you saw the comedy side of differing views - with Nancy they have to go to commercials just to wipe the foam from her mouth and nostrils. The hate I see in Nancy - I also see here at the Vine. Many comments are so irrational here that many of us suspect that the person we have issues with is/are actually a paid Troll paid for by Fox and their like.

PS; Dear Seeder; please don't use this format - it is slow and half the time the post never shows up in this format.

Stevefoo, I couldn't have said it better myself. What a bunch of morons. They failed miserably by letting a killer go free. I'm so sick of hearing them say they did not have the who, what, when, how and why questions answered. They had the skeletal remains of a beautiful child last seen with her liar mother who never reported her daughter missing until Cindy Anthony forced the issue. Duhhhhh.

@ Stevefoo: If you don't defend the jurors no matter which decision they made, you're an enemy of our justice system. Unless they had some ulterior motive for coming to this particular decision well, this is just the way it works. You can't always agree.

You have no idea what happened in this case. You expect Casey Anthony to behave in a normal fashion after the death of the little girl? You have made your assumptions based upon the speculation and suppositions of Nancy Grace. What would make a young mother react that way? I have no idea but, I would venture to guess that the one person she feared most and could not face, would be her mother. Casey lived in a world of make believe and lies how could she process the situation the way a normal person would. I imagine that she was running from the terrible truth and in complete denial. We have no proof nor any inclination as to exactly what happened. We are not permitted to pass judgement on another human being. Leave it to God. Move on and stop listening to Nancy Grace. Nancy Grace is in it for the ratings which equals money.

I think it was Juror #3 that said the State didn't show Cause of Death. Why the heck didn't they ask the judge if that was necessary to convict? It's not necessary to show the cause, it's not even necessary to have a body. Manner of Death was clearly homicide.

ccrider....I am an enemy of our justice system. It is horrendously designed. In order to be on this particular jury, these people had to prove that they knew nothing about a case that has made headlines all over the country for 3 years, which tells me that they are basically social misfits and very ill-informed people. Because of the way the jurors were selected, Florida lawmakers are frantically trying to enact new laws for jury selection. They would not do that if they system wasn't flawed. Don't be so naive to think that just because it's an American system that it is without flaw. It is our right to view injustices within the system and demand change. This has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with their decision....it is an obvious problem that needs to be changed.

The system should use people like me who are physically unable to work rather than pull people away from their jobs. We can still do some functions - why not use us or the unemployed or retired?

Ever who sets up our systems, they don't think things through - but most of the time that is intentional - to protect their big biz buddies.

How many of you think the US Chamber of Commerce is related to the Government? They are not - they are a lobby group for big business and their intent is to make it so civilians rights are reduced or taken away. They control who becomes our Judges - and they only favor one party. If they set up a system that caught people (convicted) people like Casey Anthony - then those same laws would catch them (big biz) too. Who do you think is behind Tort Reform (which BTW actually caused Ins premiums to go up where Tort is the law), you got it - the Chamber of Commerce and their bought and paid for Judges.

Stevefoo, I agree with you! It is unfortunate there are idiots out there threatening the jury. However, they did a piss poor job and the fear this woman might be guilt because they all know they didn't dilberate on anything. If 1st degree wasn't acceptable, because there wan't enough evidence.,

there definitley was for child neglect. Not reporting your daughter "kidnapped" for 31 days is neglect. How can they find her guilty of lying to police and not ask themselves, why did she lie and what was she hiding? ALL those jurors just wanted to call it a day and go home. I do not wish for any harm to come to any of them, but I hope they are tormented with guilt for allowing a killer go free.

The prosecution put on a good case and on another day, in another location Casey would have at least been found guilty on the lesser charges. All of that is pretty obvious but many noticed that Casey went on the run and lied and pretended Caylee was alive, and because of the decomposition in her car, and because of the hair strand in her trunk, and because she was last seen with the child, and because the rare tape at her home was also found attached to Caylee's once beautiful face in 3 layers that would cover any child's nose and mouth, perhaps we jumped to conclusions. Perhaps it was everyone but Casey and all the evidence the prosecution presented was ignored because the defense said something in an opening statement about drowning but didn't bother to prove it when evidence phase started. Perhaps some do not know what a circumstantial case is and really did think that bones lacking evidence of cause are necessary for that type of case.

In any case the jury's decision is final and it is what it is. I admire them for serving no matter how strange their conclusions were. I doubt that any sane person has anything but best wishes for the jury so just because someone finds their judgement to be way off base, it does not mean they want to attack them. Our system may have some issues but there are many more trials where the system works.

fasey; I expect all adults to act like adults - even if they caused an accident or even murdered someone - they need to step up and be accountable. Only a person who never transformed from teen punk to mature adult would try and avoid justice.

O J and Casey would have done themselves a big favor by stepping up and at the very least shown remorse - instead they basically gloated. Casey is getting very bad advise post trial - by refusing to mend things with her parents she is showing that healing is not part of her make-up.

Stevefoo - I'm with you. I took business law classes and our system is flawed to protect the rich. In theory it is a good system - but it is easily manipulated.

stevef00 - a juror from another big trial was interviewed this past week and said the same thing that you said, which is that the jurors did not do their job, that they should have deliberated for a longer period of time and reviewed evidence. I think that this juror was from the O.J. trial. The fact that the Casey Anthony jurors took so little time tends to indicate that their decision was based on emotion, not on evidence. Too many were too ignorant and fell for the inane arguments of the defense.

A better method of selecting jurors needs to be developed. Attorneys should not be allowed to interview jurors and select those whom they feel are sympathetic to their side. Unless a potential juror has a physical or mental handicap that prevents him or her from begin able to sit in the courtroom or reason critically, the first 12 people should be required to serve...period. The method of jury selection that is currently used allows the attorneys to select people who have the propensity to become emotionally involved without being able to consider the evidence from an objective standpoint. People are selected who are too ignorant and unsophisticated to understand scientific explanations for collection and analysis of evidence.

AlohaBear - thank you for suggesting that people click on spell-check before submitting posts. I say the same thing all the time, but people are too ignorant to understand that when readers have to take time to figure out what the heck they are trying to say with all the misspelling and grammatical errors, it's next to impossible to infer their main points.

Dougieffreys, they couldn't even prove the baby was murdered. The only thing the prosecution proved was that she was dead. They found no cause of death. Even though the majority of us believe Casey to be guilty, the evidence wasn't there and I wouldn't have convicted her based on it either but I can separate rational thought from my emotions and I'm glad the jurors could too. No matter what anyone thinks, she didn't get away with anything, everyone knows who she is, knows her face, her life is going to be hell forever, whether she's guilty or not.

Only in America :-(

Yes, a person can be convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. Presuming of course, that it can be conclusively shown that a murder took place. In the case of Scot Peterson, there was proof of the murder of Laci and the unborn child. Circumstantial evidence was then used to convict Scot Peterson of that murder.

In the case of Caylee Anthony, murder was not proved. The coroner testified that she could not determine the cause of death. This is what the jury has been trying to say. If you can not say with certainty that a murder took place, how can we say that this person did it? The prosecutor failed to prove murder, and then failed to prove that Casey Anthony was guilty of it. No one posting here can state how the child died if the coroner can't. If you can't say how she died, you can't say that Casey killer her.

What you may think you know, or what you believe, or what you might wish had been proven, are not grounds for a verdict of guilty. The jury came back with the only decision available for them to make. That they came back with that verdict quickly only indicates how totally the prosecution failed in establishing that a murder had taken place.

Lying to the police is not proof of murder. It is lying to the police. Period. How many drinks have you had tonight? Uh, only two. Lying to the police. Everyone does it at some time or other, and it is not conclusive proof that a murder took place, or that the person who is lying is the murderer. She could have been covering for someone else. Maybe not. But that is what reasonable doubt is all about.

As for Nancy and Jane, if public opinion was all it took for a person to be executed in this country, they would both be sitting on death row. From the blogs I've read (hundreds) the opinion seems almost unanimous. They are slime.

Robert Lee....I must disagree with you on this major point. If you were to research it, you would find that there have been many cases where a guilty verdict was given even though the prosecution was not able to provide a body! I stated it earlier and I will state it again. Circumstantial evidence and reasonable doubt were real victims of this trial. It is just not reasonable for a mother to not report her baby missing for 31 days. It is not reasonable that consistent lying to the police and misdirection to the authorities does not show some sort of guilt. And, most importantly, were I a totally innocent person, I would want to take the stand in my defense. And please....spare me the diatribe about our judicial system not dictating that the defendant take the stand. To me, it should be mandatory.

Robert Lee - where it concerned my workers compensation claim the instructions to my doctors was; on a more probable than not basis, what percentage of my injuries were caused by the work I did.

The coroner http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2011/06/caylee-anthony-was-murdered-coroner-says-in-court/ on a more probable than not basis did say it was likely to be murder.

Jo Ann-666954 to answer your question,

No person who discovers the body or acquires the first knowledge of the death of a person shall fail to report the death immediately to a physician whom the person knows to be treating the deceased for a condition from which death at such time would not be unexpected, or to a law enforcement officer, an ambulance service, an emergency squad, or the coroner in a political subdivision in which the body is discovered, the death is believed to have occurred, or knowledge concerning the death is obtained.

For those who want her head on a platter, she was not charged with this and so couldn't have been convicted.

No person shall fail to provide upon request of the person to whom a report is required , or to any law enforcement officer who has reasonable cause to assert the authority to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death, any facts within the person's knowledge that may have a bearing on the investigation of the death.

Providing false information under this rule was "lying to the police" for which she was convicted and sentenced to 4 years in prison.

This should of been a guilty vertict right off the start. The lying, fluirting, the ho-ing around in clubs, she leaves her daughter with someone, (lie) it was proven, for 31 days Cindy didn't see Caylee. I would of went nuts. I love my grand-daughter and have custody of her, so these sort of things wouldn't get out of hand. I wouldn't go two days without talking to my grand-daughter. If Cindy loved her so much, at least a week of not seeing her would of been enough she should of went and looked for her. Now what? All kinds of people are going to be suing all kinds of other people. This would give me a heart attact, the way she looked at her mom and dad. She might of had a judge, but the real Judge will be waiting with Caylee. Sorry Caylee, your mother is a cronic liar and the only thing she cares about is herself. You were a beautiful little girl, now you are a beautiful little angel. Everything was there to make her guilty, but the jurors, didn't get in. They should of wrote a pro and con list. God Bless you and you are in Heaven now. No one can hurt you.

Stevefoo, please cite a case that you are familiar with where murder was not proved and someone was convicted of that murder based on circumstantial evidence. Theoretically it could occur if there was OVERWHELMING circumstantial evidence. Financial gain, combined with opportunity, combined with etc etc. The only thing the prosecution conclusively proved in this case is that Casey Anthony lied to the police. Again, that is neither proof that a murder was committed nor that Casey Anthony committed that murder.

drainbrammage, I think the bar for a worker's compensation case is considerably lower than for the death penalty. And rightly so.

I remember in the OJ Simpson trial I knew way before the end that the jury would find him not guilty not because I thought he was innocent but because I knew the jurors were dying to go home after being sequestered so long. If they argued over his innocence they would have been there several more days but it was easy to just find him not guilty and go home shortly after. I could see that was his lawyers' plan all along. I made the mistake of telling someone I worked with what I thought the verdict would be. I was branded an "OJ lover" and worse even though I believed he was guilty as sin. I had to put up with harassment for weeks after the verdict and I wasn't even a juror. I was just reading the news and forming an opinion like everyone else. Some people do get a little bit psychotic over murder trials. I'm glad I've never actually been on a jury.

And before I get flamed I do believe that Casey is also guilty of murder just like OJ. She just didn't act or show emotion like someone that just lost a child. If she didn't actually commit the murder herself I would say that she was at least involved in some way.

Wow, Stevefoo, it's interesting that you think you know so much when you certainly got me all wrong. I've never seen CSI in my life. I also never said whether I thought Casey Anthony was innocent or guilty, but you seem to think you can read my mind. She certainly looked and acted guilty and the whole nine yards; but if the prosecutor could not prove it, she could not get convicted. That's how the system works in this country. No one said you had to like it, though I'll bet you would if you were on trial for murder (whether innocent or guilty) with a possibility of the death penalty and you REALLY looked guilty. I'll bet you would want the standard of proof to be extremely high if you were the accused in a case like that. It doesn't matter whether I believe Casey is guilty of anything. The only thing that matters is what the jury thought. And the fact remains that YOU WEREN'T THERE.

Robert Lee; you are correct, the Standard of Proof does have three levels and More Probable is lesser than Reasonable Doubt - so what is beyond reasonable in this case? What is reasonable to me says either an accident or murder was involved in this case. It was not reasonable to not file lesser charges in addition to murder charges.

Now the jury is paying for the prosecutions failure to be reasonable. HLN should be attacking the lack of action by the prosecution - instead they went right for the throat of the jury on Saturday 7/9/11. But the smugness of the media is what converts its sheep - left and right.

I think the confusion and how massively dysfunctional this family is worked like a charm. The fact that nobody seems to care a darn who in fact did kill the baby, but instead every excuse known to man has been given for this woman by the jurors that have spoken, does not speak well for our society. The defense was across the street laughing and drinking, embracing for a job well done. Meanwhile the baby is rotten in the swamp and nobody is declaring their intent to find the killer. Much like OJ, this jury did not want to think this young woman was capable of murder, even though she never told a soul her baby was missing. Nobody, including the jurors that have spoken, have given any sort of explanation for the fact that 31 days passed without a word that the baby had gone missing. As we know, life went on for the mother. The baby came be replaced apparently with another one. Still....who killed the baby and how? Remember OJ swearing to find the killer? Never happened did it? This story is the same. The killer got off thanks to the jury.

E K Kid; the rich followed your advice. They don't like our systems so they moved their headquarters and residences to other countries...lol.

Breaking News: Jurors have spoken and acquitted Casey Anthony may invest future monetary proceeds towards franchised child day care centers conveniently located for easy drop off.

I blame the media. NANCY GRACE and the rest of the CNN crazies. Stirring the pot. Their coverage of the case was like a Jerry Springer Horror show. These people (Vinnie, Jane, Nancy, etc.) should be held responsible if anything happens to any members of the Jury.

Then we'll see if they like our jury system. The Jury was right in this case.

E K Kadiddlehopper and everyone else!

NANCY GRACE HAD N O T H I N G - I REPEAT - N O T H I N G to do with the verdict. She stands up for the little guy (you) against the interests of big money. You don't have to like her, but shut up about her effect on this trial. SHE HAD NONE. And the people with strong opinions WATCHED the trial, they aren't parrotting Nancy Grace.....sheesssssh...ya'll are as irritating as she can be with your constant bellyaching!

Nancy Grace is fricken NUTS!! She is sick in the head. POT STIRRER. Vinny and Jane seemed to lose their mind also. They feed off off Jerry Springer followers. 90 percent of the protesters at the court house didn't have teeth or a job!!

If anything happens to any of the jurors, Nancy Grace should be arrested and spend a few nights in jail waiting for her trial.

One group knows for sure that the defendant is guilty. The other group knows she is innocent. And both are willing to beat the crap out of the other to prove it.

The level of brain damage in this country is absolutely astounding.

Her name remains a secret. She’s known simply as juror number 12. And while she has a certificate from Florida’s 9th Circuit, embossed with calligraphy thanking her for her duty as a member of the Casey Anthony jury,

She is known only as number 12? Then how does the author know that she has a certificate written in calligraphy? How does the media know to contact her husband for interviews? Why does he provide interviews if she is trying to get on with her life? Why give the name of the Publix grocery store instead of "a grocery store"?

She had to retire now and go into hiding instead of a couple of months so she could get started on writing the book "My Experiences as Juror 12".

The depth of stupidity and ignorance in humanity will never cease to amaze me.. For all of you that want to blame this jury, shame on you!!! The people that should be to blame are the Florida prosecutors, not the defense, regardless of what dog and pony show they rolled out. There is ZERO burden on the defense to prove anything!! Baez could have come out in costumes and juggled balls of flame for two months and it would have meant nothing so your cries about his lies and stories are irrelavent. The prosecution had a case built on nothing. There only piece of real damning evidence was the 31 day waiting period to report the missing girl but what excactly does that mean? As a father of 4, I freak out when I don't know where my kids are for 10 minutes but I'm not this girl and don't know what the circumstances of this death are. I believe she had something to do with her child's death or knows what happened but what I think, you think, the world thinks is nothing. It was only what the prosecution could prove.. somebody said chloroform well you had two prosecution witnesses saying that there were traces of chloroform found in her trunk, one said above normal limits but the other, which the prosecution decided not to call but Baez did call said it was within known normal limits.. this happened for the whole trial, it seemed like Baez called more of the prosecutions witnesses than the prosecution did, and they usually contradicted what the prosecution had to say, maybe that's why they decided not to call them.. anyways nobody on this forum knows what happened and if you do then shame on you for not giving your evidence to the prosecution so they could get a conviction

If you weren't on the jury, you have NO right to criticize or make judgements.

Idiotic people think they know it all, when they don't know jack sh*t.

Solving a crime is kin to solving a puzzle or taking an IQ test. It is presumed, along with reasonable doubt, the jurors also can resort to reasoning and basic human logic. The root word here is, reason. A puzzle is solved, like an IQ test, with connecting the dots or building a case, dot by dot, evidence by evidence, circumstance by circumstance. What is reasonable, what is logical.

Most murder convictions are circumstantial or no credible witnesses exist; the key word is credible, and in multiple witnesses reporting varying descriptions, circumstances and events, this also presents no more credible than circumstantial. In statistic after statistic, the great majority of murders are caused by people who know the murdered victim; therefore, the FBI and crime experts first target, family, and with murdered children always first, parents. Then the circle spreads wider to friends and individuals who merely know the victim.

The manner of death in this murder is, murder. Many first degree convictions have resulted without even having a body to present, and many have presented, with a pile of bones and no cause of death. This isn't about CSI or fiction t.v., where nothing is realistic or even remotely reasonable, and where the jurors don't even have to think! Fiction is fantasy and not reasonable, common sense or logical. Now, who had the motive and the opportunity. We know Caylee was murdered. Her little body was wrapped in articles from Caylee's bedroom and the family home. We know for five weeks and until Casey was finally found, CAylee was not reported missing, and her normal behaving mother, just happened to know she was missing, duhhh. And, based on reasoning and logic, most mothers report a missing child immediately and basic, common sense should dictate, never is an accident made to look like a murder. We know Casey's cell phone evidence indicates she was in the right spot, at just the right time that Caylee died. We know, from the Anthony's attorney, even Casey's parents believe Casey was not innocent.

We know a very uncommon duct tape with a rare factory name was found in the Anthony garage and on missing posters the Anthony's and search teams posted for the missing little Caylee, and we know duct tape held the mandible in place after the decompostion of Caylee's body, and we know in normal circumstances and in decompositon, the mandible falls away from the skull. We know the mandible was held in place in Caylee's skull by duct tape. Again, very basic reasoning.

We know from varying, credible sources, Casey's car alone, smelled liked decomposition or death, and common sense and logic dictate food wrappers would not constitute the overwhelming odor of human decomposition. Even her own parents, detected the smell of death, and we heard Cindy's 911 call, that something "is wrong here'. The car smells like decomposition or death. And, Cindy said, the "car smells like something died here." duhhhh

And, did the defense prove Casey innocent with all their, frequently cartoon and humorous and ludicrous pronouncements? Without a shred of evidence of all their theories, all of which were about as credible as the swamp monster killing Caylee. So, from reasoning, logic and common sense, who would be the most viable, credible murder of her own child, duhhhhhhh And, countless families are dysfunctional, duh, only the vast majority never kill anyone!

Oh, Caylee died because of this and that, a drowning victim tossed into the swamp, and the evil, swamp monster did it, duhhh.

I don't feel a morsel of pity or sorrow for this outrageously, dumb and unreasonable jury, as able to connect the dots as amoeba; my sorrow and pity goes to a helpless, defenseless, unprotected and unloved, little Caylee. A monster and psychopath of a mother and a clueless, unreasoning and exceedingly stupid jury. In the future, all jurors need to undergo IQ tests and sanity hearings, post haste.

There needs to be professional jurors. The jurors in this case were uneducated hillbillies who did not even understand all the forensic evidence presented to them, nor did they re-examine it when they deliberated over the verdict! These idiot jurors couldn't even come up with a motive for the crime, which was as plain as the nose on my face! This girl is a sociopathic, yuppie slut who wanted to get rid of her child so she could party and do what she wanted-it's as simple as that! This case is another OJ!

Scott, I love your reasoning..."who did not even understand all the foresnic evidence presented to them." Therein is the problem -- failure to understand and formulate the big picture. You also pointed out, deliberation. Did they deliberate? Really deliberate. Hee haw, they didn't even take notes! Oh, whata hoot!

As a medical professional, and if, indeed, Cindy had conducted all those horrible googles, would she have googled, "neck breaking" or would she have googled, as a medical professional, broken neck? Neck breaking is active voice. Duh, like someone is goin break someone's neck.

As hard as I try, I can strum up no sympathy for the jurors. If a bus is running out of control without brakes and a driver, do the jurors have the intellect to, perhaps, jump outta the way! duhhhh Tragically, they have unleashed to innocents and an unsuspecting public, a human monster. If Casey can murder her own little baby, well, watch out America.

Where is the 'star chamber' when you need it?

This is just like the OJ jury: "We know she did it, but the state never proved it..." WTF?????

Our society and media have acted so self-righteous and judgmental with this 24/7 case at the expense of innocent victims. Society fell prey to media stories out there seeking ratings and profits regardless of rumors, facts, or the lack of facts at the expense of innocent victims (i.e. Jury, neighbors, etc.). The media is guilty of endangering and ruining the lives of many persons (esp. the Jury, who followed the Constitutional Laws) for that "one piece of gold". In the beginning, the Media hounded a peaceful working class neighborhood with families on a 24/7 basis for weeks without showing any respect, human decency, safety, or concerns for the neighborhood. Now the media and society are after the Jurors for not presenting the their predetermined (before the trial) verdict of guilty. Most importantly, the media is guilty of inciting the public to show violent anger by giving them the National TV time 24/7. Little was done in moderation, and too much was done with speculation or the passing of rumors. Then we have the self-righteous, naive sectors of society, who the lack the educated understanding of how trials work. Those persons have quickly acted like vigilantes with out-of- control emotions. They are so quick to believe all that media has to say without questioning the facts or intentions coming from the source. Finally, you have an overzealous, grandstanding Prosecutor with 35 years of experience that failed miserably to do the job and to compete more efficiently against a Defense Attorney with just 3 years of experience. The Prosecutor, Ashton, less than 12 hours after the verdict did not attend the sentencing hearing the next morning, due to the fact that he was too busy being the first person on National TV for attaining the first impression and his first piece of gold. All above parties are guilty of showing little human decency while displaying more interest leaning towards monetary value or visual fame at the expense of innocent victims, who were just obeying the Law. Now everyone wants to see this home once again regardless of disturbing the peace or safety in a working class neighborhood with families. At least the police are there this time unlike the many weeks before the trial. Do some of these people need to point the finger back at themselves instead?

How come the media never asked (or spent too little time not inquiring) on important questions if really interested in the truth such as:

!.) Why did Casey adamantly turn down the "plea deals" when she was well aware that she was facing the death penalty? She says she is innocent, but what or who is she covering up for and why?

2.) Why did it take the grandparents 30/31 days to report the missing grandchild? Aren't they guilty of negligence as well?

3.) Casey's mother has tried visiting her twice, but was refused. Why? Did her mother know something and had chosen to ignore it, or cover it up (even with Casey knowing about it)?

4.) Why did Casey's father choose not to visit Casey alone? Was he ashamed to face her face her? Was he covering up something?

stevefoo, I agree with your point of view. If Scott Peterson had this jury he would be on the golf course today. I find it hard to believe 12 jurists could come to the same conclusion after deliberation of the facts presented. I expected a hung jury at least. Jose Baez has a troublesome past record and never followed up on his accusations during his first presentation to the jury. Did these facts completely go over their heads? a complete rush to judgement.

Peterson, male = guilty

Anthony, female = not guilty

ever see a man cry his way out of a ticket? Me neither. ever hear of a man offer to give a b...... to get out of a ticket?

So Casey Anthonys defense story pretty much stated that the death of little caley was a tradgic accident in which she assumes no responsibility for... Oh thats right, It wasn't Her responsibility to ensure the safety of her helpless 3 year old toddler... I'm sorry- I must of had her confused for lil Caley's Mother- And, If this rambling story of an accidental drowning did in FACT cause the little girls death-

(In which case, Anthony and whomever had become aware and made the choice to cover it up)- Is probly only going to assume responsibility for the crime of covering up the truth...(IF THAT)... How do they suppose they explain why on earth you'd need to DUCT tapping a 3 year old babys mouth shut who had already supposedly died from drowning? what purpose does duct tape serve if the child is lifeless?....ANOTHER LIE!... But whats worse is we actually excepted her explanation as an exceptional reason for her sorry excuse for a decent human being.... And then we even tried to pay to here her fabricated fairytail lie... Sum one outta pay her a million$ 2 jump in front of a bus.... & it would B wort every Cent-

Anytime a baby's bones are found with duct tape,tossed in the trash, and the last person seen with that baby flees and pretends the child is alive, and when evidence the baby decomposed in that parent's trunk, that parent will be found guilty of murder or manslaughter with or without knowing exact cause of death. Babies are not thrown away or taped up for garbage, dumps, or swamps.

If this were a stranger abduction we'd know what to call it and yet it is no different. People have been found guilty of murder with less evidence than Casey left behind.

If you have read all the news there were 6 out of the 12 that wanted to find her guilty of manslaughter and child abuse, I blame them 6 for letting the other six persuade them to change their decision.

As far as the prosicuter not doing his job, what more did you want him to do, the death was never reported, by the time Cindy called the police to report Caylee missing the body had probably already been picked to bones, and by the time the body was found all the evidence was washed and eaten away. Ashton and Linda used the only evidence they could in the situation they were handed.

As far as Casey is concerned I hope she rots in hell for at the least not reporting Caylees death when it happened, that would have helped the Prosicuters do their job. She is guilty of at least 1 of those crimes that she was "found not guilty" for.

drainbramage, Nancy Grace is NOT with FOX news. She is with HLN. Just WHO'S the troll here?

What many people fail to realize is the the Jury did NOT say that Casey Anthony did not kill her daughter, but only that the prosecution did not PROVE it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Since virtually none of the people who criticize the decision sat through all of the testimony, they are hardly in a position to complain.

My time on earth has been taken from me, I am now in heaven looking down and what I see is making me cry. Why is everyone fighting all the time? People who didn't even know me or my family are saying some really bad things. What happened to me was the worst, but I have forgiven. I miss my mommy, grandma, grandpa, and uncle. They all loved me. Please make up with whoever you are fighting with. I don't blame anybody for letting mommy out of jail. It was making me sad to see her in there everyday. Thank you everybody for giving me all the stuffed animals (I loved them) and for praying for me. Some of you even tried to help by passing a new law in my name. It will help all of the other kids who are missing and get hurt, and maybe the world will not be such a bad place to live. I will always watch after my family and make sure they don't get hurt, but I want everyone else to stop fighting and hurting each other. It doesn't help. My wish is for peace on earth. I am being taken care of here by alot of people. We sing and dance all day long. I hope to see things getting better on earth.

Love and kisses,

Caylee

@JuneBaby - Your post might be taken more seriously if it could be easily read. If the jury took as little time with reviewing the evidence as you did with checking your post for sense & spelling errors, it's no wonder Casey was found Not Guilty.

I am not trying to be the spelling police. I just wish I didn't have to decipher someone of these posts like they are written in some kind of code.

Aggie, sorry if I offended you with the Bachmann reference. I just couldn't think of anybody in the news that's clueless to use as a reference. Most people got it. This has NOTHING to do with politics and it's interesting that your intrpretation is that it was. Had I used Charlie Sheen would you have assumed it was a Hollywood reference?

That having been said, since you bring it up, there is a similarity between the attitude towards this case and the general political awareness, or lack thereof. If people would take the time to actually delve into the situation, whether it's criminal or political, rather than simply repeat what the talkinghead entertainers spew out maybe society as a whole would be improved. Nobody on this post can begin to honestly know what those jurrs were exposed to. They were doing the best job with what they had to work with and anyone who can't understand that needs to take a deep look inside and see what makes them assume they have all the answers when they don't even know the questions.

If people would spend more time woring about their own lives instead of worrying about people who had a tough disicion to make with what they were givin, then they they would have a better life. THE STATE HAD NO CASE FOR MURDER!!!!!! Now you want to talk about neglect, lies, she would be in jail for long time. The jury made the right call

I honestly think she did this and was involved with her daughters death. I think the system failed like so many times it often does. I agree with so many people out there who is upset and yes it upsets me as well. Do we need the outcry for justice yes we do and thats why so many states are wanting to make this new law for not reporting your child missing in 48 hrs so the outcry and anger went somewhere now do we need to be after the jury the answer is no even though I feel like reasonable doubt works both ways. There was doubt in evidence that Casey Anthony wasnt involved and thats where the puzzle gets crazy!!!! I strongly agree with other comments of the fact she was a she and not he is also something that stands out like a sore thumb. If this was a man he wouldnt have ever gotten out of this. Our justice system hasnt been just for years so many great people in law but always like most things so many who shouldnt be in law. Its like so many other careers most want the money that come along with a job or the benifits that go with it one or the other. So many in our justice system simply dont care period!!!!! Its always a game with everyone in that branch of sytem. Notice how you go to court for like a divorce cost you thousands but in the end iinstead of when things arent followed you have to again go get a lawyer again and pay out again to get the papers followed????? Has anyone noticed ???? Its always been a cycle of give me money with the law. We need to end the lack of common sense which always takes a back seat to everything anymore!!! Why???? From what I gather back in time it meant alot when this was used and it stood for something now when the one with common sense shows up everyone calls them the crazy one. Listening to Casey Anthonys defense makes no one conversating with them sound like a conversation even is occurring????? Just listen to them they sound as crazy as Casey and back and forth like they became liars by being around her to long. Shame on our justice system not the jury period. By the way no one has brought up the JUDGE?????? I thought the judge takes in consideration of the jury no one said he had to follow it to the "t" am I not correct on this????I do hope the new law is passed and I hope our justice system finds ways to correct the internal problem they have. I do know of people who went to jail and got life sentence for nothing which was proved and during court of appeals again found out all handed over to courts by prosecution was all false and yet he thats rite he served ten yrs so way to go to our justice system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wont ever serve on any trial in our courts period!!!!!

@Kevin Bitz-Bringing political parties into this is just plain stupid. I happen to lean towards the conservative side. But I find the behaviour of those slamming the jury irresponsible and childish. They don't like the verdict so now they think they have a right to victimize the jurors. These people did not sit on the jury they did not see the 'evidence' or lack there of. They sat in their comfortable homes watching a few clips on tv and watching the media convict Anthony on her personality. That is the sad state of affairs today. The media plays far too big a role in deciding things. They are bias on court cases they are bias politically doing severe damage to our system. News media is supposed to bring the facts and leave opinion out of it. Sadly that is no longer the case. They throw in their own personal opinion and the opinion of the owners of the news station/paper/cable network and there you have it. They convict a person based on the things they say not the facts whether it be Anthony or someone else. The media needs to stop and the people ranting and threatening the jurors should stop and beware that threatening bodily harm to another person is a crime. Get a clue people and grow up. You don't have to like the verdict. However, think of it this way even free she will be imprisoned. Who is going to hire her for a job, who is going to ever date her......she is likely to live a very pitiful existense so if you believe her to be guilty don't worry she will be virtually a prisoner.

Drain: OJ male = NOT GUILTY. Get off the gender, its doesn't fly.

@scott-3039433

There needs to be professional jurors

That sounds something like Congress and look how well that works. Anyone that's paid to make decisions has potential to be persuaded by such payment one way or the other.

The jury DID ignore the evidence. They even ignored part of what the defense said. Cayseys own lawyer said that Caylee drowned. That she didnt even report it is as much child abuse as you can get. Now add that when the body was discovered 7 months after missing and 6 months after being reported missing, not by Caysey, but by Cayseys ,mother, what part of Aggravated Child abuse did the jury think didnt apply? Now, take out the lawyers claim that she drowned. Then it is even more clear that the evidence was ignored.

This jury would have found Lee Harvey Oswald not guilty of killing JFK because no one saw him do it and he had no motive.

My only hope is Caysey gets the justice in the real world this jury didnt provide in court.

if state of florida had only spent about nine million more dollars they might have proved beyond any little doubt but maybe not.

I was under the impression that Casey Anthony was charged with first degree murder. I guess you advocate for cases that can't be proved to just deliver a verdict on whatever pops to mind?

"your honor we know talons was on trial for murder but we can't find him guilty because the state did not prove their case. however, we all just KNOW he's guilty of something so please sentence him for child molesting". Sound reasonable to you?

howzee

I suspect that the prosecution knew how tenuous but really had no choice but to bring it to trial. Remember it is a one shot deal, once jeopardy is applied, they can't go after her again.

The ideal judgement in this case for the prosecution would have a been a mistrial without prejudice as that would have allowed for a retrial.

One more thing, then I am done. The jury didn't have to believe the story about the drowning or any of the other things the defense proposed. All they had to do was to have reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. A person could act guilty if they KNEW who did it even if they weren't the actual killer, especially if it was possible the killer was a family member (Of course I have no idea if any of this is the case, just sayin'). The entire family certainly did act strange and not exactly consistent-or truthful from what I hear. I was looking at old stories about the trial, and they state that the prosecution did not prove unequivically that the stench in the car was from a dead body-there were experts who testified on both sides. Also, they did not prove child abuse. There was absolutely no prior evidence of abuse, and lying is not equivalent to child abuse. Even lying about your child's dead body is not the definition of child abuse even though it is horrible. Besides they never proved the drowning story either, and that was NOT necessary as I said above-the defense did not need an airtight case; the proscution did. Lying may mean you know who killed your child or who did things to your daughter as well as meaning that you killed her. As of now it is not a felony (and apparently not a crime) not to report your child missing by a certain time. In other words it is apparently not currently against the law to go a month without reporting your child missing. That is why a bill is being introduced to MAKE it a crime. I think it's called Caylee's Law.

Um, sally, Um hopefully someday that remedial education will kick in. She was charged with

• First-degree murder
• Aggravated child abuse
• Aggravated manslaughter of a child
• 4 counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer:
  • That she worked at Universal Orlando in 2008,
  • That she left Caylee with a babysitter named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez,
  • That she told Jeffrey Hopkins and Juliette Lewis that Caylee was missing,
  • That she received a phone call from Caylee on July 15, 2008.
• That being said, 1st degree murder also carries the lesser crime of 2nd degree murder, as well as felony 3rd degree murder.
• Aggravated child abuse also carries the charge of child abuse.
• Before you slam me, at least get your facts correct.

if this juror believed in her decision - felt strongly enough to say "not guilty" .. then why hide?

she didn't believe in her decision and a) went along w/ everyone or b) they all made an agreement to find not guilty so they could go home after being sequestered 6+ weeks.

everyone on here can be an armchair lawyer / juror / whatever, but could someone explain to me how it was "ok" to convict Scott Peterson on circumstantial evidence and not Casey Anthony?

and did you ever hear that "the gloves didn't fit" in the OJ trial because they were blood soaked and they shrunk? they would have fit had he tried on the exact same gloves in the same size. it was a dog and pony show .. just like in the Anthony trial.

Baez made up a few lies .. that had absolutely NO TRUTH to them and couldn't provide anything to back up those lies. but the jury was fooled or misunderstood "reasonable doubt." nothing Baez said provided reasonable doubt that she was not guilty.

a travesty of justice.

because just saying and or believing in something will not tolerate or equal the wrath of a million folks who have emotional beliefs waving in the air like flags...

Im guessing there are folks who are unwilling to participate in this discussion because of fear of retribution by unscrupulous flamers...

Patty; the O J verdict only applies to celebrities and the rich - totally different demographic than ordinary male and female citizens.

I know the gender thing flies because I am guilty of it every day. I give my wife and many other women leeway where I would call BS in a heartbeat if they were male. Just the way our society is - if I was a woman I'd rule the world (just kidding), but as we have seen, Ms. Anthony totally has that attitude.

Aggie (#1.85); my statement about Fox and my statement about HLN are two separate statements - they are not intended to be linked - your inability to differentiate them puts the troll spotlight back on you - or at the least makes you a finger pointer. You know what they say about finger pointing.

Maybe she has already HEARD from some of those co-workers.

jury would still be in session had I been on it. I would have sttod firm for a guilty verdict or at the very least a hung jury so she could be re-tried. They she wouldn't have to be ashamed. She would have done what was best and not what was convenient. If that were the case- she could hold her head high and go on with her life. It is a shame but no sympathy for her- only for Caylee.

usesomecommonsence, try using some common sence. You have no idea what the jurrors heard. You obviously weren't there. No one said she was hanging her head in shame. She is scared for her life. Try reading the story again.

exactly. i have no pity for these jurors who took only 10 hours to reach a verdict in such a case. they are clearly incompetent and just wanted out so they jumped to a quick decision

Usesomecommonsense, you can't decide a case based upon YOUR convictions. The law requires that jurors decide upon the evidence alone. Jurors who do as you say you would have done have been the reason that innocent people have been convicted and guilty people have gone free - improper behavior and disregard of proper procedure.

In this case there had been some tampering and concealing of evidence by someone, and the condition of Caylee's body was such that the coroner couldn't reach a firm conclusion as to how she died. Because of this the prosecution had difficulty proving conclusively that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. The jury had to go with what they were handed and by all counts they pored over it looking for that conclusive proof to convict Casey with. By all accounts it hurt them deeply that they couldn't deliver the guilty verdict as they strongly suspected that she had in fact murdered her own child, and most of them viewed Casey as an absolute scumbag.

Most people have never sat on a jury, let alone a murder trial. It's not a walk in the park and its sure as hell not like they depict on Tv or in the movies. you can lose weeks or even months of your life as you are cut off from your job, family, friends, etc. Some of the stuff you see will haunt your dreams for years to come. Jurors deserve to be treated with a hell of a lot more respect than they often get.

Guilty of lying to Police, but that was because she is just a liar, no other reason. She just lied to lie. Well everybody of course she didn't do it. Scott Peterson was convicted on less.

Of course she did it. Justice will come in another way and form.

bill-lifd5127 did you know they showed the trial on t.v??? I watched it along with millions of americans who actually feel the same way I do. She was and is guilty and although I don't feel anyone byt Casey Anthony should be harmed- this juror and the other 11 shoudl feel shamed and mortified bu their actions and they should not be able to profit or go on with life as normal. They were wrong. It is plain and simple and they can't hold their head up because they know in a few days this child murderer will be walking on the streets. I hope they don't know a minutes peace and have nightmares every night with this poor innocent child in them. I guess they really should have contemplated their actions prior to ending this in 10hrs. Oh well- still no sympathy on my part but I do know what they heard. I didn't say she was hanging her head in shame I said she should be!!! You might want to read the post again. I understand your opinion but I totally disagree as do most AMERICANS!!!

Ron, your so right and I hope they all leave Florida. I dont want such dumb people in my home state. I watched every minute of this trial and you would have to be the stupid person not to vote guilty. Casey didnt video tape herself murdering her child so this jury just couldnt vote guilty unless they saw it with their eyes. For them if you cant see it , it didnt happen. That is a sign of very low mentality.

Krell67

You are 100% right!!! No one wants to let a child murderer go free, but if there isn't enough evidence to support a conviction then a jury who is RESPONSIBLE OF THEIR SWORN DUTIES will come back with a not guilty verdict and rightly so!

The court of public opinion has found Casey Anthony guilty even though they have not heard the evidence that the jury heard let alone the INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN TO THEM BY THE JUDGE!!

I personally think that Casey Anthony is a scumbag piece of sh*t who should just go away and rot somewhere because she failed to report her daughter missing and she was out partying and living it up the whole time, but I also fail to see the ability to convict her of intentionally killing her child without evidence to back it up!! She is scum, she is worthless and she will get hers one of these days because if history has taught us one thing that one thing is that Karma is a bitch!

The knee jerk reactions of the American public will no doubt lead to ignorant unnecessary laws being put on the books that will attempt to satisfy the revenge that some so desperately seek!! This has become a topic that has divided the rational and the irrational, the irrational want revenge and blood as well as a system that convicts every single person who it comes into contact with regardless of the means necessary to get that conviction up to and including jury tampering, evidence tampering/manufacturing, perjury, bribes and unethical prosecutorial conduct and outright lying by the police and all witnesses! This go's against everything that this country was built upon!!

What's up with these idiots? Would they want to e convicted when the state doesn't offer

evidence to support their conjecture? I think it's time that we do away with the idiotic gun permit laws and let people arm themselves so they can at least defend themselves when mob rule takes over.

I find it telling that they would choose to attack a woman for doing her duty as a citizen rather than to chance some guy flattening their nose for their comments.

DougJefferies, wrong. There should be NO threats and/or intimidation directed to any of these jurors or jurors in other 'controversial' cases. They were just doing their job. The majority agrees that Casey is guilty but in the court of law proof must be made beyond reasonable doubt which was not done.

So far, the majority of people seem to believe that there wasn't enough evidence to convict... only because the jury said so. I would question their truthfulness. That's the same cop-out they used in the O.J. Simpson case, the Robert Blake case, and the Michael Jackson case. The only thing lacking was a signed confession by the accused. Get real folks... the jury was either stupid or incompetent, or both.

That's my opinion and I am sticking to it!

valley-3730471

Ron, your so right and I hope they all leave Florida. I dont want such dumb people in my home state.

It seems all the dumb people in your state and all the other states are the ones that convicted her via the media or their own personal beliefs or hatred for her over the last 3 years. It's so easy to jump on the guilty bandwagon so you're not the odd person out and don't want to offend your friends or relatives but on the other hand it's hard for some to stand up for the LAW and what is right instead of making idle threats behind a keyboard. Right or wrong Casey Anthony was found not guilty (NOT INNOCENT) by a jury of her peers in a Court of Law. If the state would have leveled proper charges against her and not taken it personally (IE: Smirks, laughter etc.) and gone for the juggler she would have been sentenced to prison. I watched the trial and it seemed that the prosecution failed to do their homework and felt they had a slam-dunk and didn't cover all their basis especially underestimating a young defense attorney that was backed into a corner and came out swinging. If one of the charges would have been felony child neglect I feel she would have been behind bars for quite some time.

usecommonsence, I absolutely know that the tial was on TV. That's the whole point. It was on TV. Do you really believe that the media outlets let you see everything? NO! They need their ratings. Also, The televised portion you saw was just that. A portion. At no time did the networks put the entire days trial events on the tube. A trial day lasts from 8-16 hours a day. The TV affiliates aired just a portion of that. You act as though you sat there all day long in the jurors seat and heard the WHOLE THING. What happened during the trial when the networks decided on a commercial break? What about what happened after the networks chose to ga to their regular scheduled programs after that mornings trial coverage? Do you know? So don't prsume to tell me how much you watched on the TV. You didn't see or hear the whole thing.

Edited trial shown on TV??? Where do you live?? I live in Orlando, and all 4 local stations had gavel to gavel coverage, not edited parts.

So we saw the exact same trial as the jurors.

Fact: Casey was found guilty of lying to the police.

Fact: Jose Biaz says Caylee drowned

Who do you think told him that story?

Fact: Casey, the now convicted liar.

Jurors seemed to replace beyond a reasonable doubt with beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Fact: Caylee's mouth + nose was covered with duct tape, same duct tape that was in the Anthony home.

Pretty obvious she did it. Look at the charges, second one is an easy fit.

Fact: No one should be harassing the jurors.

Anyone who is condeming those you think they did an injustice, and tell us you weren't there. Well, I saw the WHOLE trial and if I was on the jury, we have hung, because I would not have settled for at least child neglect. 31 days people is neglect. Also how long would that low life gone on if it hadn't been for her mother demanding to see Caylee? Common sense is sure lacking.

They should have understood the law, if they did not want to kill her I understand, but let her off with nothing, AMAZING! If it was an accident, she did nothing to protect her child, GUILTY ! If you are with someone that robs a store and all you do is drive the car, GUILTY !

She says kid drown..same story as cell mate about her dead kid....Cindy says see typed for chlroform...um she was at work....not guilty...sounds bout right....

I say the same as OJ trial....the jury did its job but they were wrong...does it mean death threats? of course not but letting a baby killer go tends to enrage some

David - you must have been taking a bathroom break when the duct tape evidence was covered. The duct tape was not found on Caylee's mouth. It was found under her jaw. Nor was there any DNA or epithelial tissue on the duct tape as there would have been had it been placed across her mouth and then fallen off. This is why the coroner could not state a conclusive cause of death.

Patty - if all mothers who failed to protect their children from harm were sentenced to death, there would be very few women left in this country. And 31 days of failing to report a missing child is not neglect if the child is already dead. You can't neglect a dead child. If you want her found guilty of neglect for that, then you have to maintain that she really thought the child was alive and neglectfully did nothing to help in finding her. So if she was guilty of neglect, then she damn well couldn't have been guilty of murder. She had to have believed the child was alive. Take a position.

For weeks we have heard nothing on the HLN news (?) except the Casey Anthony trial. Did all their producers take a vacation? There certainly must be something else to talk about. The amount of time devoted airing this case is ridiculous.

I totally agree, Use Some. The root word of reasonable is reason, intelligent reasoning and basic logic of which this jury, obviously was clueless. I, too, watched the entirety of this trial. I could not intelligently reason how anyone, with the basic sense of reasoning and intellect of, at least a five year old, could not conclude reasonably and intelligently, that Casey was guilty of murder in the first degree, and she premeditated the murder.

Jury deliberation is like solving a puzzle or taking an IQ test. Just merely connecting the reasonable and logical dots is all that was needed. I propose, in the future, no one should sit on a jury without first, submitting to a sanity hearing and an IQ test.

And, we are supposed to feel sorry for this jurist. Tragically, I only feel sorry for a helpless, defenseless little girl who was murdered by her own mother. a mother without soul, without conscience, a mother who cared so little about her little baby, she kept it a guarded secret for over a month Caylee was missing. Now, because of idiocy, we have a psychopath who is free to hurt, ruin and murder all over again.

Well she should have the strength of her conviction and go back into work. I'm sorry but I just don't feel the pain for this juror. She's going to sit on a jury, make a decision, then whine about not wanting to go back to work because her decision isn't well received by some of her coworkers. If she really felt justice was served she could walk into work without worrying about what other people might think.

The morons on the Jury deserve everything they get.

Everyone on this board realizes that Caylee isn't the only child that was killed recently right? All of this anger over one case? What about justice for all of the other victims....

To the person that mentioned they watched the trial on tv with millions of other people, you were able to do what the jurors could not which was to watch the 24/7 coverage of the case. Your opinion is formed by not only the trial but by all of the other crap that you saw on tv.

If the prosecution can't prove that Casey did it, she is not guilty of 1st degree murder. How she got off of the child neglect charges I can't answer but I was not on the jury nor do I watch tv.

I like to base my decisions on my own research.

Maybe if they didn't want to be threatened and persecuted they should have convicted the guilty bitch who killed her baby girl. So now the 12 people who denied justice for a murder are begging for protection? I'm sorry but I don't feel sorry for you. Next time make better choices.

I watched the trial on my computer. No talking heads, you saw what the jury saw. When the jury left the room, the camera turned to the eagle on top of the flagpole. So I only saw what the jury saw and heard, and I found she was guilty.

So that's what you call listening to the evidence, and deciding that the state has not met its burden of proof? "Being an idiot"?

There's an idiot here, but it's not the juror.

Unemployed-1930902-------------Guilty by a jury of her peers is the United States way the prosecution had such a flimsy case she was found innocent. Maybe you should take up reading about the united states judicial system while sitting there waiting for a job to fall into your lap.

She's an idiot? Why? When is it a true idiot like yourself that can't grasp the fact that the jury based their decision on the EVIDENCE presented to them? Why is it you just can't accept the fact the prosecutor FAILED to present enough valid evidence to get even a manslaughter conviction, let alone a first degree murder conviction. Of course mindless minions like yourself didn't sit through the trial. The only place you got your news from was on here or the tv.

Before making such a stupid statement maybe you and others like you should volunteer for the next trial like this one. Then maybe you could make an unpopular decision but a decision that was based on the EVIDENCE presented. Some how I just don't see that happening. Some people are just gutless wonders. You're at the head of the line.

It scares me that there are people like you who call themselves Americans. Your failure to understand the most basic concept of the American judicial system is freightening

Unemployed for reasons other than the economy I see

Someone that is unemployed calling a juror an idiot. Now we know why you are unemployed. Your totally unable the grasp the fact that they found that the prosecution did not present enough evidence to find her guilty of murder, but not even enough to find her guilty of child abuse. And they did it in less that 12 hours! Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Why don't you stay home and watch more Nancy Grace.

I agree!!

I think that is the very reason why a lot of people today do not want to serve on a jury and will do everything in their power to get released. It is really ashamed that is has come to that. I blame the media and some of the commentators on TV for a lot of this. Even though our court system is not one hundred percent perfect, we are closer to perfection than any other country in the world. In other words, if I am going to get into trouble, I certainly had rather do it here at home and not some other country where you can look wrong and they will jail you.

I've seen an alarming trend lately, in that people claim to know the inner thoughs and motivations of people they don't agree with. None of these people were in that jury room. I believe the jury did what they felt was "most right" considering the evidence they had been given, but many people claim to somehow know the jury had some devious motive. It's a sad day when Americans are filled with anger and hate because they didn't agree with a decision that had nothing to do with them. This is not reality T.V.! Those jurors are real people who did not ask to be invovled in a media circus, and these idiots think it somehow right to destroy their lives. The people hating on the jurors are no better than the person who murdered that little girl.

All of you are sure that the people that want blood are irrrational, taliban, or stupid. What is rational about infanticide? I myself have though of killing people who were in my way or not meant to live but I put my child's life in front of my wrath. Look at her though she kills her child then throws her life to the wolves in a sad attempt to escape what she had done. NO ONE fails to report there child missing and is not guilty! Think about it rationally how long does your kid have to be gone before you would call the cops? The people who want blood are the rational people because only someone completely irrational would believe her defense or defend the not guilty verdict on someone who blatantly left their child's life in a trunk like old garbage. You would probably defend that the defendant in the case of my hometown murder Adam Longoria should recieve amended charges because he did his civic duty working as a drug informant for my police department. The same snitch murdered, raped, and then burned a little girl up his charges will be less though no matter what if convicted because of his work as DRUG INFORMANT he helps get drugs of the streets and keep child murdering pedophiles out there. BOOGEYMAN works for your hometown cops. C. Anthony will hopefully meet with an untimely and wicked death!

This case is a great example of why people should not try to get out of jury duty. Seems they scraped the bottom of the barrel to get these 12....

j. morrison - have you read your own post? "I myself have thought about killing people who were in my way or not meant to live?" Jesus man, are you serious? Someone call the cops and get this lunatic locked up!

David, you are so correct. We feel guilty. Time after time, we have wiggled out of jury duty, and the really stupid idiots, don't. Had I been on the jury, it would have hung; they could not have beaten me to divorce my reasoning and logic. And, how long, did these idiots think, contemplate and reason both the prosecution and the defense? Gosh, I think, they just wanted to get home to their trailer parks and sit in front of their itzy bitzy tv screens and watch hee haw or sing country music while sipping their mind, numbing brewskies and home brew.

America is stunned and horrified. Where did they get this jury -- whoops, they scoured every hill country and trailer park in Florida. Geez...

For a thought lock me up? But let her walk free for freedom sake right. Did you read the rest of my post where I explained how your police department employ the murdering pedophiles because I didn't see you quote that?

J.Morrison:

The people who want blood are the rational people

Wanting the blood of someone who just did their civic duty is not rational. Emotional, sure. But not rational.

because only someone completely irrational would believe her defense or defend the not guilty verdict on someone who blatantly left their child's life in a trunk like old garbage.

No one's saying that the jury bought her defense. However, the prosecution failed to disprove her defense. If Caylee had been "blatantly" left in the trunk, we wouldn't be having this discussion because it would have brought a guilty verdict. However, the prosecution couldn't prove it. They couldn't prove that Caylee was murdered, although circumstantial evidence pointed to homicide.

But they couldn't prove it. And in the United States, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defense doesn't have to prove their alternate explanation, the prosecution has to disprove it.

It's not the most ideal situation in cases like this. I would have loved to see a guilty verdict. I think Casey Anthony is a lowlife in my personal opinion. But personal opinions don't convict people.

I'm soo sick of hearing oh the poor juror's, o the poor Anthony family, boo hoo, boo hoo. the jury had enough evidence to convict her of neglect/child abuse, I mean if i was on the jury i wouldn't even need what they presented, Any mother that doesn't care about a 2 year old child being missing for 31 days, is guilty. whether they have finger prints or not. She is responsible for that child. The jurrors, screwed up and now they're trying to blame it on everybody else. They all get what they deserve.

i take it none of you have ever been on a jury before do you know what reasonable doubt means with no evidense theres no crime they did there job the prosecuter should resign immediatly for waisting tax payers money it was a very fair trial and verdict the athorities need todo there jobs better.

I don't believe anyone has threatened any of the jury, people have let them know how they feel, but last I read, no threats. The women from Publix was too ashamed to face her co workers that's why she fled. Read the article again

Petunia:

No specific threats, no. Because their names have been withheld from the public. And rightfully so. No one needs to know who they are. However, just reading this board and some of the venom directed at the jurors makes me understand why she doesn't want to return to face her co-workers.

With your lack of ethic, I can see why you're "unemployed"

"Reasonable doubt" does not constitute innocence! The jury did not request anything to look at and they only took 11 hour to let a murderer go free. They are ashamed of themselves, otherwise they would have no problem defending their decision.

I agree 100%.

DgoTown, when did they say they were ashamed. Maybe you want them to feel ashamed and by saying it to yourself enough you put your own words into their mouths. She fears for her life, BUT IS NOT ASHAMED. Though I would be ashamed to be related to you

Naw, DgoTown, they are too stupid and outta of it to even request anything, and especially, not even take notes. What mindful, reasonable, thinking folks don't even take notes, duhhhh.

Boy, I would jump off a cliff -- if I were related to any of these morons.

The jury doesn't owe anybody an explanation for their decision. Time for the sign carrying self righteous so called humans to get on with their angry lives and leave these people alone. The 12 lives were interrupted with this long enough. They should all get together on tv and tell the judgemental nuts to kiss their butts! That lady should have gone back to work at Publix and if she was harassed in any way by co workers she should have reported it and had it on record. If the child was murdered, it is a shame that her murderer is walking free somewhere, but they will face the one true judge someday. I hope these people carrying their signs are being watched very closely.

It's called "trial by jury", actually:

The U.S. Constitution, in Article III, section 2, contains the provision that

"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury."

The jury was not voting on killing another human being...they were voting on evidence to determine if Caylee was dead because of the actions of her Mother. Two different things. Now if determined that Casey was guilty and the death penalty was the punishment, as a practical matter the appeals process would have taken decades and her sentence would have been reduced to life in prison. If memory serves me correctly only two women have been executed under Florida law. It's not like she was in Texas were they celebrate killing and are proud of the numbers the "legal" system kills. And yes I live in another state on the Texas border and meet many people from Texas and a good deal of them are PROUD of how great the death by legal system is.

Well, I am a Texan born and bred for over 66 years and I can tell you that I do not believe in the death penalty. That is my opinion and my right to my opinion. Take a look at the civilized World, how many Nations still have the Death Penalty?

I too think it is sad that this woman was facing the death penalty. That is all that was talked about regarding this case. I agreed with the defense that murder doesn't justify a thing, but a great deal of American's are not at the point in life. People talk about strange reactions, now this juror has left the state. Talk about Casey acting unusual now there is a juror that has left the state. What is she guilty of? She did what she was supposed to do, but now she feels that her life is in danger, how ironic.

I am sorry to have read this article. Seems like this whole country is on a death bend. Sick!

No, the jury does not decide the sentence.

testing - login & settings not working

Can you honestly in your own mind and in your gut. 100% say she didn't do it?

Jim,

Neither we nor the jury had to say that. The jury had to find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. They didn't. The prosecution presented such a weak case they couldn't even get a manslaughter conviction out of the jury. You and some of the other people on here need to remember the most basic premise of the US judicial system: the defense doesn't need to prove the defendent is not guilty. The prosecution must prove they are guilty.

you must have no idea how the justice system works, Jim. Reasonable doubt is not when you believe that the person is innocent 100%, it is when you do not believe 100% that she is guilty. If there is another REASONABLE explanation, then you do not convict. The system is built to protect the innocent, and if for each innocent person not convicted, there are probably more guilty not convicted. That is how it is designed. maybe Casey Anthony is one of those guilty that got an aquital, maybe she is just a very, very stupid person that freaked out and handled a horrible accident in a very asinine way. We will never know. I am sure you will say that you know, for a fact that she is guilty, but you don't. In truth none of us will ever know if she is guilty or innocent, she is the ONLY one who KNOWS that, so just sit back, relax and realize that maybe this "screwed up" justice system will save your azz someday.

That's the point .. can you honestly in your own mind and in your gut 100% say she did? I don't like the verdict either, but we weren't in the jury room or in the courtroom to see and hear all the evidence (or lack thereof) that the jury did.

I think octopus was referring to the juror not the defendent. I do believe that is what the article was about.

Actually, under United States criminal law, direct and circumstantial evidence are weighted equally. More often than not cases must be decided on circumstantial evidence and it's an entirely legitimate, lawful means of conviction.

The whole trial was on TV, so it was like being in the court room. We even saw more than the jury, cause often they were sent out of the room. Not reporting your child missing should in some way have been child neglect, and she should have been guilty of that.

The few jurors that have come out have all said they believe she did it and that they were sick to find her not guilty- so doesn't his mean that they think 100% percent she is guilty or why would they say they think she did it? Also just because the death penalty was on the table doesn't mean they would have had to vote for death- they get to vote on that also and the judge weighs his decision on their vote so if they voted not guilty because of this then they shared less than one brain cell.

The jury had three options. Guilty. Not guilty. Innocent. yes a jury can say innocent ( we do not believe the defendant did this). One juror even said we found her not guilty on the lack of evidence; we did not say she was innocent. Nancy Grace should be banned from tv for life. She has stirred up a lynch mob. And some whaco somewhere may act on her decision of guilt.If you check out grace's stint as a prosecuting attorney, you will see she did not do very well. That's why she now only talks.

We almost all feel Casey is guilty in some form. We all felt OJ was guilty in some way.The juries decided otherwise. And Earnhardt is dead. Get over it.

Jim, I would be willing to bet that there were people on the jury that may have, at the very least, suspected that she did it, however, they could only base their decision on the testimony and evidence given during the trial. The prosecutors f*#cked it up to the point that they had no choice, except to say "not guilty". It su*ks but that's the U.S. judicial system.

they may be weighted equally, but the validity of that evidence can still be treated as suspect. For example with DNA evidence, it rarely ever identifies a specific person, so if you ever hear it being presented in a court, it will be described as, 1 in 10,000 people or something like that. It will never be described as absolute, unless it is 100% absolute.

Now having been presented with this, you would have to make a judgement call as to how much weight to give that piece of evidence.

Now it is actually quite unusual for a case like this to even be presented to a court with the level of flimsy evidence that was presented here. Pretty much the prosecution was betting their case on her being a cold hearted b*&%h and her persona.

Oldman, the jury had the options of guilty of capital murder or a lesser murder charge, or not guilty. That is it. There was no "innocent" option.

Terriels, I agree with you 100%. So many rubes like OLDmanNOeyesandPoopforBrains haven't a clue about how the "justice" system in this country works....well, it works badly, because, increasingly juries are seeded having precious little brains and education. Too many of the comment here bear witness to that sad fact. IN fact, it's proven that criminal defense lawyers weed out potential jurors WITH (advanced) degrees and go for... hmmm, how shall we put it? the average un-educated American. This is the result. We reap what we sow in America. The good news is.... a vast majority, and OVERWHELMING majority of Americans, according to polls conducted by a broad spectrum of news agencies indicate that 65% are at odds with this "jury's" decision in the Casey Anthony Case.
Again, my heart goes out to dear Caylee -- her family TOTALLY betrayed her. Shameful!!

Evita, how can you say that our judicial system acts poorly or badly. We have a Constitution that protects each and every one of our citizens. If we didn't have this system we would be at the mercy of dictators like those in the Middle East. God forbid, any one of us would find ourselves in a Court of law and on trial for our lives and we did not have the guarantee of the presumption of innocence. And yes, many innocent people have been in this situation. Just because a Prosecutor says you are guilty does not mean that is the gospel truth. I am not defending Case Anthony because I, like everyone of those commentors on this board, have absolutely no knowledge of exactly what happened. Least of all, Nancy Grace, who in my opinion, is just as guilty of manufacturing a hate filled lynch mob environment as any one else. I hope that her show is canceled.

how can you say that our judicial system acts poorly or badly

Ask the Brown and Goldman family..

I was simply pointing out that:

A.) This juror was simply doing what was required of her as a voting citizen of the United States. For the public at large to "go after her" and disrupt her life simply because they disagreed with the outcome of the trial is utterly ridiculous and shameful.

B.) It doesn't matter what you and I think of the case; in fact, I had assumed that she did it. However, the evidence was not there. I'm not going to start a little lynch mob because this case didn't "please me."

In this particular case, had she been convicted, the majority of people would have felt that "justice had been served." But really? What if it were you on the stand and you had been vilified by the mass media as a "bad parent" and the circumstantial evidence surrounding your case was immense yet you were in fact innocent?

This was a victory for our justice system. Whether or not she was 100% innocent doesn't matter; there simply was not enough true, hard evidence to say that she was 100% guilty.

And that's all that matters.

fayse and octopus - I agree with you both, but I'm curious. Do you find it as amazing as I do to read comments about the competence of the jury written by people who can't write or spell, and then further criticize the system for letting people with less than college degrees be dropped by the defense counsel?

A jury of your peers, means a jury of people similar to you. Casey Anthony was an average minimally educated young girl with little experience in the world. And she was tried by a jury of her peers.

Thank God she wasn't judged by an "expert" like Nancy Grace.

The problem is that she WAS judged by tyrant shrew Nancy Grace. The "lynch mob" trial by Nancy Grace is what is causing such an uproar among the citizens of the USA! The evidence was NOT there and the mob did not succeed. Trying this as a death penalty case was a fatal mistake.

Evita Luisa

Terriels, I agree with you 100%. So many rubes like OLDmanNOeyesandPoopforBrains haven't a clue about how the "justice" system in this country works....well, it works badly, because, increasingly juries are seeded having precious little brains and education. Too many of the comment here bear witness to that sad fact. IN fact, it's proven that criminal defense lawyers weed out potential jurors WITH (advanced) degrees and go for... hmmm, how shall we put it? the average un-educated American.

++++++++++++++++++++

Obviously, if our juries are average un-educated Americans, you have served on many of them. Your comments bear witness to that fact.

BTW---the prosecutors "weed out" potential jurors just like the defense attornies do.

I am guessing, they had little in which to weed, or they had to scoop the bottom of the barrel. Why should I feel sorry for a jury of morons when they just unleashed a sociopath or psychopath onto an unsuspecting public. Now, this monster is free to murder or torture unsuspecting souls, most of which, are exceedingly innocent and unsuspecting, just like a little two year old girl. Now, duh, we are discussing a little girl, barely older than a baby, who will never reach maturity to even chance, being on a jury of complete idiots. duhhhh

skor154 said: "Why should I feel sorry for a jury of morons when they just unleashed a sociopath or psychopath onto an unsuspecting public." Seeing that lack of feeling sorry for other human beings (empathy), is one of the hallmarks symptoms of psychopathic behavior, it looks like you are at one with the one you diagnosed.

Krell67, you are a disgusting rube and I will write MSNBC to complain about your rants and your vulgar language. You literally harass those with whom you have a disagreement and taunt people posting like a junior high school bully. Positively the worst of the worst.

Evita, better read your own posts - you do a fair amount of name calling yourself.

And juries always have the option of declaring a person innocent. read the laws.

Doug, Oh yes, I watched the OJ trial and the jurors were vilified. Is it any wonder that most people try to get out of jury duty?

That didn't stop the jurors from going to the barbecue that OJ threw after the trial.

Jury was evil not us humans who have some sense of morality and justice. They allowed a child killer to go free. It is a true shame but no sympathy for her or any of them on my part.

They didn't allow Casey Anthony to go free. They didn't have the conclusive evidence that she was guilty of the murder charge she was tried for. Huge difference. I have no doubt in my mind that Casey Anthony will screw up somewhere and get her just desserts and that come Judgement Day she will stand before the Judge from Whom nothing is hidden - one way or another justice wil be served upon her. But we have to abide by the rule of law on this earth, not by mob mentality or social convention.

don't you have to have a soul to go before HIM?

@usesomecommonsense, please revisit your id name. Apparently you and common sense are complete strangers.

Nope, no "soul" necessary. All will come before Him on Judgement Day and answer for their deeds. She won't be able to lie her way out of it there and her attorney won't be able to blow smoke for his actions either.

Guilty has a G in it. Quilty is what you sleep under on your mom's Couchy in the basement.

OMG you are advocating violence against a juror. where the common sense in that?\

so you disagree with the verdict. do you also want to harm anyone that you find offensive
?

sorry Steve 2824689- Didn't know the spelling police where out there. Forgot to hit spell check! Guess I won't make that mistake again! Thought you might actually want to comment on the article that we are all commenting on....

no I do not advocate violence against a juror- no one has threatened her- Her threat is perceived and my guess is that is because she is ashamed and knows what she did was wrong. No one even knows who she is at this point. I never said she deserved violence. I said she doesn't deserve our sympathy

usesomecommonsense:

hmmm yes, because if you are a jurist, this is what you should say to yourself, "I think I am going to convict this person whom I don't believe is 'guilty beyond a reasonable doubt' as the prosecution didn't prove their case, because I believe that I am going to be a victim of mob justice after I make that decision"

What kind of justice is that?

But in my opinion they did prove their case. I know my opinion means nothing at this point but I am allowed to it just as you are. I do not believe that these 12 people gave this case the proper consideration that it deserved- my opinion only. If they are having nightmares or perceived threats against them then they only need to look to their own actions... something is causing them to feel like this. If they are absolutely sure they made the right decision then they should not be concerned in any way. I truly believe some are second guessing their quick decision. Ask questions, take notes, discuss and consider all the evidence. That would take more than 10hrs. They already had their minds made up when they went behind closed doors. I don't believe that they considered everything all together or they would have at the very least found her guilty of manslaughter or child endangerment/abuse.

usecommonsence

How do you know these are perceived threats? You made the comment earlier to my post about this trial being on TV. Did you not see the mob outside the courthouse making threatening comments about the jurors after the verdict? They were calling for the blood of those jurors.

Hey doesn't usesomecommonesense, All of the jurors, the judge, and the entire prosecuting team, as well as The Anthony's and their team of lawyers have all received written threats. Look on facebook, twitter, etc. letters, notes dropped on the porch, phone messages. Most are loonies, but which one is the real nutcase that will act?

I too watched the entire trial and have been following this case from the beginning. There were other charges that Casey was charged, Aggravated manslaughter of a child. Definition: where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to recklessness or criminal negligence." jurors had a choice to find Casey Guilty of this charge but failed to read the definition. Casey was negligent and reckless in the death of Caylee. Apparently the jury heard only what they wanted to hear. As juror #3 said, they didn't know what punishment to impose if they were to find Casey guilty . Juror's don't punishment, that's the judges job. I truly believe they really didn't listen carefully to the evidence or instructions. Many said that the jurors didn't take many notes with all the evidence that was presented.

The jury can also ask the judge questions if they do not understand any of the charges, paperwork, process, etc..... So no smoking gun here but LOTS of circumstantial evidence and testimony about Casey Anthony's character and behavior that required the jurors to connect the dots...which obviously they didn't! The prosecution failed to treat these jurors as dumba$$e$ and connect the dots for them...

Bottom line: dumb jurors that were picked and played very well by the defense, but juror #12 doesn't deserve vigilante justice...she was doing her civic duty.

Funny how your screen name speaks of common sense but you use none. No matter the verdict of this trial there were going to be people who favored the verdict based on the merits of the case and those who disagreed, so basing their decision on any form of public opinion (which would be the wrong thing to do anyway) is irrelevant. The jury did nothing more than fulfil their duty to uphold the law based on the evidence that was presented to them. You mention that they should have thought about it before returning with the verdict they did (which is incorrect to assume that they did not) and imply they took the lazy way out. Quite the contrary is true. They had access to everything associated with the trial, evidence (which I can present 1000 pieces of circumstantial evidence that doesnt mean anything), and the judges instructions. The fact that their decision came as quickly as it did points to the fact that they realized they could not convict beyond a reasonable doubt on the merits of the case. As far feeling sorry for them, you should definately feel for the jurors. It is one of the hardest things a person may ever have to do in their life and should never be taken lightly, regardless of if you agree with the decision. I would lastly point out that it would have taken just 1 juror holding to a guilty vote that would have caused a different outcome. While we will never know the original split on the vote, the fact that not a single one felt so overwhelmingly strong for a guilty vote speaks volumes about the lack of a case presented (when compared to a chunk of public opinion).

The prosecution DID do it's job. The jurors did NOT do their job. From their statements it's evident that they did not understand the evidence OR go by the judge's instructions. They took very few notes and rushed to a verdict. They did not even take time to go over the evidence when deliberating!! THE LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT MANNER OR TIME OF DEATH HAS TO BE PROVED---impossible with a only a skull left. Death penalties can be given sometimes even when the body has not even been found. WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND? LAZY IGNORANT JURORS LET A MURDERER GO FREE!

Oh but the law DOES require that murder has to be proved. There wasn't enough evidence to even prove motive let and neither the coroner nor the forensics detectives could conclude from the evidence that Caylee had been murdered or that Casey had committed murder. Yes I think the sociopathic little tramp did it, but if I were on a jury and could not conclude that from the evidence then I could not decide for a conviction no matter how I felt about it.

You are exactly correct. I posted that opinion right after the Prosecution rested its case. The did not prove their case and then after they rested, they wanted ( and were permitted to ) present more evidence. These people are aiming their anger in the wrong direction. The judge, jury and defense did what they were supposed to do under the law. The Prosecution did not. Another direction of anger should be pointed squarely at Nancy Grace for her venomous vitriol, and hatred, she made this a National circus.

I agree with OWENS ! Uneducated people should not be on a jury ! Sorry constitution !

To be honest I didn't follow this case, but the follow-up is very interesting. How are the 12 jurors supposed to be anonymous yet a bunch of network television channels are trying to land an interview with the 1 juror who disagreed with a "Guilty beyond Resonable Doubt"? (In case you weren't aware, jury duty involves deciding the case from the presumption that they're innocent. -If you got to England its the reverse-) And further, how is it that they know it was just 1 Juror who disagreed. Someone squealed if you ask me. Voting and Jury Duty are two things that are supposed to remain anonymous. It is for their protection, that way the parties who lose (or win) can't silence the people who didn't agree with them. Finally: How can it be that you are letting your emotions get the best of you so easily? Didn't it occur to you that the media had an agenda in this? No, I'm not talking about some secret conspiracy by that. News channels make it by making you interested. Of course they are going hype up a story and paint it as a product to sell. In our world it pays to be scandelous and so the media plays to the crowd; paints the case as one-sided and rallies attention to their articles. Now its as clear as day that the case didn't go as they planned, the masses who followed the quaint little yellow-journalism that the media spoon fed them are suddenly left confused because they think they know it all. It's a problem with trust. Too many are ready to give trust to anyone that appeases their own sense of identity.

At any rate, the case is decided. Let it go. If she's guilty she'll pay for it. If not, then she won't. Life's too short to get your panties in a knot because of something as trivial as this. Your need for vengence won't bring the little girl back.

I did watch and listen to the evidence. I still found her guilty, So few people have went to prison for lessor evidence then what we all heard in this case. Beyond a Resonable Doubt, is what needs to be established and I feel what I heard it was. The how, to me with Bias bringing in her father to say after 3 years Caylee drowned in a pool was a bloy to mislead the jury and made them doubt what really happened. They seem to not listen after that. To me the question was: If Caylee drowned in the pool by accident then why not call 911, the excuse they gave was unreal. To also fine Caylee with duct tape around her face not once but 3 times..WHY!! if she drowned then why was duct tape but on her face, to keep the water out. Come on I seen this was all a bloy from the beginning I just cant see why the jurors wouldnt have asked the same ?. There was 6-6 verdict. So why would 6 guilty change to Not guilty why just not let it be a Hung Jury and that way she would go back to jail and Prosecution could try again. That would have been the most logic instead of all changing to not guilty. I could see that 1st degree murder was out, but at least one of the other charges she should have been found guilty. Like I said WHY change to not guilty and not just have a Hung Jury . They could go home and let a new trial begin. But like all said its over, BUT IS IT REALLY OVER!!! How about when the verdict was read A LIGHTENING BOLT HIT THE TREE WHERE Caylee WAS FOUND AND SPLIT THE TREE. TALK ABOUT AN OMEN. Someone else was upset over a little girl who got no closure and died in vain with noone around to help her. To sit and watch a mother with no remorse either, but how could you if you have no Heart.

Evita Luisa====As you so gloriously stated "{CIRCUMSTANTIAL}" woo hoo lets convict every criminal on circumstantial evidence. It is better for one hundred guilty to go free than to convict an innocent person. Time they get some cops and prosecutors who can build real cases.

@Evita, yes preach it! No sympathy whatsoever for these idiots. They let a murderer get off and practically spit in the face of the dead girl by only deliberating FOR TEN HOURS...WTF???

So funny how most the people on here are now stating that the Prosecution didn't do their job and not enough evidence...blah blah blah. 2 weeks ago everyone and their brother was saying how good they were doing and she is guilty...blah blah blah. Talk about sheep, I get so sick of the lack of people thinking for themselves. Well the media said it, so I guess that's the truth! It's crap. I watched everyday of the trial, I live in Orlando, I got to see non stop coverage, even got to hear the unbleeped F words from Baez and company.

There was plenty of evidence to convict her of something. If they didn't feel the death penalty was in order than so be it. Unfortunately I agree those that felt they just wanted to go back home, hell one of the jurors had a cruise vacation planned. Had they found her guilty they would of had to stay sequestered (sp) even longer. To many people watch those CSI and Law & Order type shows and are expecting the "smoking gun" evidence. In real life that mostly doesn't happen. Look at Scott Peterson's case...he was convicted and sitting on death row right now with less evidence than this trial. He was convicted (according to the jurors) because it was his "duty" to protect his wife and unborn child. They never determined what the EXACT cause of death was either. Common sense prevailed in that case.

Do I feel bad for the jurors? No, they were selected to do a job and failed. Regardless of the verdict, there was no way they went over 31 days of all the evidence presented to them. Not once did they have a question or request to see any video or hear any audio. Do I wish them ill will, no. However I was raised by the slogan you have to sleep in the bed that you make. I also believe that Casey will ultimately be judged again by someone that truly matters, and may have to carry that sentence for eternity!

THANK YOU for saying that. Had they taken the time to go over the evidence and more time to deliberate I don't think there would be so much outrage over their decision. As Linda Drane Burdock said, her "worst fear was that common sense would not prevail". I too watched every moment of the trial and can not disagree more with their verdict. However, the jurors should be left alone but shame on anyone who makes money or fifteen minutes of fame from the death of a child.

Evita you are 100% right, some of the jurors didn't even finish high school !

If you weren't on the jury, then shut up.

This jury reflected the lowest standard of American intelligence and basic, common reasoning and logic. Unfortunately, they reflect the low majority of American thinking and reasoning. Over 80% of every American believes, unequivocably, Casey murdered Caylee. This is good news.

Tragically, this jury is in the low minority of common reasoning and logic, horribly limited in their abilities to assess reality and resort to common sense and reasoning. Throughout the trial, they didn't even take notes or, perhaps, they could not write the English language. Sadly, reasoning and justice was not served. We are all clueless as to their insanity and recklessness; they have permitted a murdering, human monster to be free to unleash her pathology of the human mind onto an unsuspecting and un-deserving American public. Whom will Casey destroy next?

That is the biggest concern, they just did not deliberate this case at all. If they were out for 11 hours, you know at least half of that was spent trying to get the two with any brains at all to change their minds. A case with this much at stake, and they could not have even gone over every bit of evidence presented by both sides. They deserve America's hate as much as the Anthony family.

FACT. Casey Anthony knew her daughter was missing and did nothing about it. For all we know, the little girl could have been alive and been saved if party mom would have told someone. She should have spent more prison time for that alone!

For those who defend this Jury. Ms. Ford, Juror #3 said in an interview that the death penalty was a big part of her decision. Well folks, the jury instructions don't allow you to use the penalty to determine guilt!! Thats a violation of their oath.

And Casey could have been found guilty of MURDER – SECOND DEGREE, FELONY MURDER – THIRD DEGREE, MANSLAUGHTER, AGGRAVATED CHILD ABUSE, CHILD ABUSE, ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CRIME all of which do NOT OFFER THE DEATH Penalty and were in their Jury Instructions. I mean if they don't even know what's in the Jury Instructions, how can we come to any other conclusion, but that they were incompetent.

Skor154: Try not to take this personally but where did you pull that number out of? And further, "Common Sense" is a vague term that does not hold much water I'm afraid. Because in America alone 300 million live and work, and not one of them shares something called Common Sense. What you are advocating is not common sense but emotion. You're angry that case went another way; Understandable. But PLEASE, don't keep it up. Your statement of 'American intelligence...common reasoning/sense' is there 3 times. Yet the second to last sentence you write is: "an unsuspecting and un-deserving... public" I mean, seriously; the case didn't bring about your sense of justice (Justice or Vengence? It's curious how people use one word to apply for themselves and another to apply for those they hate. In our world, I find, they are one and the same) but all of us are powerless to bring the girl back. No amount of justice, or mob riots, or cries of 'the humanity!" will change that. Do you plan on being angry about this the rest of your life? A life spent in anger does not equal a life well lived. Trust me on that.

not the jurors' fault, they were Given what they had to work with by the parties involved. Leave them alone.

You people want truth?
Here's truth...

This jury decided to return a controversial verdict in a controversial trial to get BIG BUCK offers for interviews. The anonymous juror spoke of here was paid handily and will now get even more to "reveal" herself later.

I feel NO SYMPATHY for people who turned a little girl's death into their windfall.
Shame on all of them...

And not having sympathy toward another human is not something to be proud of when they are in danger, that's when empathy kicks in.

"Throughout the trial, they didn't even take notes or, perhaps, they could not write the English language." Talk about reasoning, this is funny. As soon as I heard Nancy Grace say these words, I knew to check other sources and as usual she was lying, just trying to inflame the audience, it worked.

Another said: some of them didn't even finish high school. And this tells you what, that both of you are narcissistic and arrogant as if not finishing high school leaves you without critical thinking skills? Rosa Parks, did not finish high school, but had critical thinking skills.

This is how prejudice begins.

No note taking, no questions...well maybe they asked what was for lunch... They will never realize how their slackness and rush to get it over with, made them appear lazy and incompetent.

They should have at least deliberated 24 hours.

I'm curious, why 24hours and not, say, 22.5 hours, or 23 hours. This is dangerous territory. Because you have a standard in your mind does not mean that it is the standard they should have in theirs. They did what they needed to do not because they were "lazy" and not because they "weren't taking notes" because they were. Nancy Grace told her viewers they weren't taking notes. For me, because Grace can lie without a twitch, I checked other sources and wouldn't you know, she was lying.

One thing to note if you watched the trial...you saw more than the jury did. I didn't watch the trial, but from the reports I heard, a good amount of the televised content might have been with the jury not in the court room. If so, then there could be parts of evidence argued before the judge to be admissible, were ruled out of order, and thus the jury doesn't get that information.

As far as the juror herself is concerned, this is a bothersome story. If I recall, this jury had to be bussed in from another county to try and minimize a poisoned jury (that is, one that would convict the defendant regardless of the evidence). It was hard enough after the OJ Simpson verdict (when there was a lot more physical evidence), something like this just makes it harder to assemble a jury, especially for a murder trial.

okay already, this case is over, get it? please move on there is another unsolved case out there that should be getting the attention now. How about it Ms. Grace, little Kyron Harmon has been missing for over a year now. The popular opinion is that his stepmother Teri Harmon had something to do with his disappearance. Teri Harmon is still walking around free. Her husband divorced her and she cannot see her young baby. Come on people why has this case not become a National story" was there not enough money in it for Nancy?

Here's the thing: Judge Perry's jury instructions said, (reasonable doubt) may not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. In other words the law does provide for this very scenario where all evidence is circumstantial.

Pretty sure most people (including the jury) had an abiding conviction of guilt. I am puzzled as to why they did not follow this part of his instructions and find her guilty, their only doubt was probably premeditated or not. I would like to hear their reasoning on this.

Yes, I'd like to hear their reasoning on that too Sharon-in-Tampa, but it really seems there simply was NO REASONONING on that and so many other aspects that they should have covered but didn't. It seems if you were able to ask them questions like that... they would simply go "....HUH ???!?"

That is why there is so much animosity towards them, not simply because of their decision... but because they ignored the complex Rules and Procedures and Protocols that they were supposed to follow... not the least of which is to CONSIDER ALL THE EVIDENCE. You'll never hear them talk about how not knowing the "When" and "How" , outweighed in their minds, the collective weight of the Mother not Reporting for 31 days, the Bizzare Partying, the child's corpse carelessy dumped, the abundance of bizzare internet Death-Scenario searches, and on and on.... If they have a valid rationalization for that ... THEN STATE IT... If they don't state it, then again, it shows they ignored their instruction to consider all the evidence, and a plethora of other instructions as well... The animosity is therefore quite valid ESPECIALLY in light of the fact that they left after 11 hours when they quite plainly had not at all finished their responsibilities in thorough way.

I feel sorry for Juror 12, but their Job entails alot more than just "Showing-Up" and "Going through the basic Motions". Just taking your seat in the Jury box and the deliberation room doesn't mean that the job was done up to the high standards it was meant to adhere to. There is a strong likelihood she was in WAY OVER HER HEAD, If that is not so then, her temptation to be plain Lazy and get it over with got the best of the situation...

Right now as the system stands... the Judge and attorneys have Oversights built in to, at least for the most part, hold them to a set of Professional standards. But once the Jurors get the case, that's it !.... they are free to follow or ignore the laws and Judge's instruction's or do it any way they please.

So clearly what is needed here is some Jury Reforms such as PreRequistite testing to show that the Potential Jurors first off, can actually handle the Complexities... and; some type of mechanism in place to hold them, at least to a reasonable degree, to the complex set's of instuctions and law's built in for the purpose of making a Quality Deliberating Process, and not an obvious shambles, such as this one was.

A detailed Deliberation Questionare/Checklist would fit that bill, Meaning they have to take the time and effort to write out in their own words their Reasoning on most all aspects that are important... (such as the ABIDING GUILT issue you mention), Not for the purpose of "Justifying the Verdict"... but JUST TO SHOW THEY UNDERSTOOD and did their job properly. Then they should submit that to the Judge WITHOUT THE FINAL VERDICT ATTACHED... so the Judge could review it while blind to their verdict, before either 1) accepting the unknown-at-that-time-verdict... or 2) saying ..."hey you didn't clearly understand this or that legal point, now go back and fix it before the verdict is accepted'....

Of course the NaySayers would come out of the Wood-Work if that were proposed, but at the same time they would follow the familiar pattern of offering no better alternative, which would mean that instead of improving the system, and improving our lives, we would continue to live with the same Gaping Flaws that caused the OJ fiasco, AND this current situation...

Just curious, Did you go into the trial already thinking that she might be guilty?

child abuse is not murder.

That was child neglect of which she was not charged, there was no proof as to child abuse. BIG difference.

criminal abandonment might be more appropriate because with child abuse, the most that you cold probably have happen is that you lose the kid. It sounds like she didn't really want the kid anyways.

Amen she should have been convicted of that for sure!

Not everyone who thinks Casey Anthony is guilty relied on the media to form an opinion. I watched the trial, and I disagree with the verdict based on the evidence that was presented. By the way, many -- if not most -- criminal cases are circumstantial. As to whether the state overreached, that's a possibility. At the same time, reading some of the comments made by the jurors who have spoken to the press has made me wonder if they understood their instructions. One of them kept saying that the state didn't prove a motive, for example. Legally, the state is not required to do so. One of them was considering the penalty phase during deliberations, which is also prohibited. This same juror said something about part of someone's testimony that was factually wrong as well. So no, I don't think juries are infallible. I respect our justice system, but juries can and do make mistakes. I'd like to think they get things right more than they get things wrong, but that's not always the case. Still, no juror should ever be made to suffer for their decision. I feel pretty bad for the juror in this story, honestly.

Some people have a conscience and arent prepared to execute people, unless they have more.. Like a motive that makes sense. Obviously you arent one of those Jennifer. Better hope you're never in a position to depend on the public to decide fairly your guilt or innocence. Yes it can happen.

Sadly there are far too many people like Jennifer, ready to condemn everyone so easily..

just because they found her guilty wouldn't mean that she would be put to death. They could have voted for life in prison and the judge takes this decision very seriously when he determines life or death. That is a sad excuse for what they did if that is why they did it.

Jennifer:

You are correct, a state does not legally need to provide motive, but it does help the case a lot. But it wasn't just motive, it was also that the state couldn't even prove how caley died. They had very little forensic evidence, so without that AND without the motive, it makes it extremely difficult to prove their case.

@ Jonathan-2055273

Your correct that the lack of motive, and the ability to prove exactlly how she died mad it difficult... but only difficult to prove first degree murder.

A lot of people seem to forget that there were other charges that Anthony was acquitted of as well including child abuse, and man slaughter. Even if you by the defense excuse that the girl drown... that still would be negligent homicide (manslaughter), or at the absolute least a prime example of child abuse. Yet the jury acquitted on those charges as well... clearly against the evidence.

There is no way to look at it.... the jury dropped the ball on this one. Still through, I don't get the uproar. Its a shame, but its not really anyones business... so I don't get why anyone would be threatening the jury.

Not sure if there was anything directly linking her to the killing though. I didn't watch the trial, or pay much attention to it during the trial, and most definitely would not watch Nancy Grace because I think she is evil (regardless of her intentions). I was as shocked as anyone because I only saw bits and pieces where the father's testimony seemed to destroy what the defence was suggesting.

However, after the verdict, I did do some research (thank back surgery for the time to do that), and I questioned why anyone would consider there was enough evidence to bring it to trial. My biggest question is why were they not able to provide any link between the remains and Caley, and that would have gone to any of the different charges. So even if they could have chosen manslaughter, the prosecution still had to connect the body to casey. I am not sure that if I was on the jury if I would have not made those same decisions. The shortness of the deliberations also indicates that they obviously weren't convinced going into them.

Now I am reasonably sure that she did it, but reasonably sure is not the same thing as beyond a reasonable doubt. On top of that, I have no clue what the difference was between what evidence the jury did hear and what was reported (with what was reported being a greater than what was presented).

@Freedom4Everyone:

Your comment made me laugh because you automatically assumed that I'm for the death penalty when I gave no indication either way. For the record, I oppose it. Anyway, my point was that the jurors should not have been thinking of potential sentences during deliberations because doing so violated their duty. Had they found her guilty of first degree murder, there would have been a sentencing phase, and that's when it would have been legally appropriate.

A motive that makes sense? Criminals do things all the time that don't make sense to reasonable human beings. Mothers that appeared to be good, loving mothers sometimes kill their kids (Susan Smith, anyone?). My point is that motive is such a complex thing that it's nearly impossible to explain exactly why someone kills someone. You can try to explain it as best as you can, but you're probably not going to know with 100% certainty. That, my friend, is why it's not legally required to prove a motive. It helps to have some idea, but it's not needed from a legal perspective.

@Jonathan:

There were actually several things that linked her to the body. I thought that the state did a great job proving that there'd been a dead body in her car. As to the dump site, Caylee, who lived with Casey and her grandparents at the grandparents' house, was found in a shirt that hadn't ever been seen by her grandmother, but she was photographed wearing it when she was with Casey, so the shirt Caylee was found with can be tied to Casey, who most likely kept it in a diaper bag. The Winnie the Pooh blanket found with the remains hadn't been seen in the Anthony home since May of 2008, so it was likely with Casey as well. Not only that, but Casey searched for ways to make chloroform online, and guess what was found in the trunk of her car? Traces of chloroform. I could go on and on, but all the evidence points to Casey.

A Jar of air! Traces of chloroform, chloroform is in every carpet and a jar of air, talk about grasping at straws. Nothing linked anyone, but the media held the trial on emotions, I hope you never get tried on emotions for any thing. That is why we have a jury of 12, at least they have a chance to get it right and media hype and opinions of people who do not get to see the evidence do not count. How many were tried and hanged in the old west and even in modern times on circumstance and emotion? One would be too many, but we know that is not true. Stick with the facts and in this case there are no facts!

Protesters need to learn how to spell before exercising their freedom of expression!!! I don't know if anyone has noticed, but the lady holding the "Juror 1-12 "GULITY" of Murder" sign should have sat this protest out!!! THANK GOD SHE WASN'T ONE OF THE JURORS!!! ROTFL

Hope like all get out you never serve on a jury. Some people like evidence before they are convicted!

Hey Jennifer B. ... excellent points... BTW , don't waste any Time/Energy on this "Freedom" guy, he's all over all kinds of chat rooms and pretty much makes NO-SENSE at all in most all of his post's... It's like debating a Third-Grader or something... I found that out too !....

she SHOULD have been found GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER and the state DID NOT overreach for anything ...

they gave them that choice ... in my view the WORST JURORS I've ever heard of....

now Casey can get back out there and party again, like she did when her daughter was missing and she was telling lies about it ...