# How unjust was the Casey Anthony verdict?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [July 6, 2011, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055 "2011-07-06T16:37:39Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 11
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/201 "2011-07-08T18:08:16Z")
> [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#):
>
> As for what really happened, I think it’s possible the boyfriend accidentally killed the girl and Casey lied to protect him.
It’s possible, sure. What evidence is there?
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/202 "2011-07-08T18:12:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> It’s possible, sure. What evidence is there?
No evidence is required to show that a boyfriend committed homicide, because no such person has been charged. The evidence of coverup has resulted in a conviction.
---
### Author:  [@Crazyhorse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazyhorse)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/203 "2011-07-08T18:18:12Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#):
>
> No, you’re wrong. The Medical Examiner indicated a cause of death: homicide. They could not determine the means of homicide, but they did conclude the cause was homicide based on the available evidence.
Homicide doesn’t mean murder. The available evidence also included that this was a tiny child, completely dependent on her custodians to survive any illness, accident or foul play or harm she could bring on herself. If she died of influenza because nobody took her to a doctor that negligence could be ruled a homicide even though the cause of death was the flu. If you have a tiny child dead by the side of the road there has to be someone else in some way responsible for them winding up there so its a homicide - the coroner’s way of saying “I don’t know exactly how she died but it couldn’t have happened without the involvement or negligence of another person” that is a far cry from evidence of murder.
Failure to be shown a conclusive cause of death has been cited as the number one reason the jurors had doubt. They were there and I wasn’t but from what I’ve heard and read I believe there was never a conclusive cause of death presented.
---
### Author:  [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/204 "2011-07-08T18:33:59Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> It’s possible, sure. What evidence is there?
>
> Regards,
> Shodan
None, but there doesn’t have to be. He isn’t on trial.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/205 "2011-07-08T18:34:03Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> Actually, for me the hard part to accept is that there is some innocent explanation for a mother lying repeatedly about her daughter’s death. If the circumstances were innocent, she has no reason to lie. If they’re not, there’s every reason.
But we know that Anthony was a habitual liar. She lied about things she didn’t even have to lie about. Ironically, this means her lies _aren’t_ evidence of guilt.
---
### Author:  [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/206 "2011-07-08T18:35:36Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> But we know that Anthony was a habitual liar. She lied about things she didn’t even have to lie about. Ironically, this means her lies _aren’t_ evidence of guilt.
Like her own lawyer said, she is a slut and a liar. But that doesn’t make her a murderer.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/207 "2011-07-08T18:37:52Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> Isn’t that why the defense’s medical expert testified that the tape was applied post-mortem?
Didn’t know about that. Do you know what reasons the expert gave for this conclusion?
---
### Author:  [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/208 "2011-07-08T18:58:13Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#):
>
> Why? Here’s a portion of the jury instructions:They had all kinds of options. I didn’t sit through the weeks of the trial, so I won’t pretend that I understand every aspect of it, but no plausible scenario exists (for me) where she is not at least guilty of the least of these homicide charges, and I could well have been convinced of one of the more serious ones, depending upon the entirety of the evidence. But there’s no reasonable scenario where a little girl’s body dumped in the woods with duct tape affixed to her face wasn’t the result of unlawful homicide.
Isn’t there still the problem that even if you conclude some minimum level of homicide has occurred, who did it isn’t exactly clear?
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/209 "2011-07-08T19:08:06Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> Didn’t know about that. Do you know what reasons the expert gave for this conclusion?
IIRC, it was that skin would’ve very probably attached to the duct tape unless the tape had been stuck on after decomposition had set in. Spitz, was it?
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/210 "2011-07-08T19:19:09Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> IIRC, it was that skin would’ve very probably attached to the duct tape unless the tape had been stuck on after decomposition had set in. Spitz, was it?
Did the prosecution have an expert testifying that the duct tape was (or could have been) attached prior to death?
---
### Author:  [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/211 "2011-07-08T19:35:43Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#):
>
> A fact provided is how Casey behaved after the crime occurred. The jury is free to draw whatever inference from that they’d like. If they infer a “guilty mind,” that (along with the rest of the evidence) absolutely could lead them to believe the person is guilty. I’m not sure why you think juries can’t do this. They do it all the time. They are the ones applying the “reasonable man” standard, and if they think it’s unreasonable that a guiltless Casey behaved the way she did, then they’re free to do so and to weigh that conclusion along with the rest of the evidence.
Its the rule against stacking inferences, which all debaters should be aware of.
It is fair to infer that because of Casey’s behavior, she had something to hide. But we can not further draw an inference based on the previous inference. Stack inferences far enough and you can prove the sun is made of ice. (Maybe. I’m not trying to prove that can logically get done by ignoring this rule, jsut an illustration.)
---
### Author:  [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/212 "2011-07-08T19:57:28Z")
> [@Max\_Torque](#):
>
> Correct to a point. When the defense makes spectacular claims, however, as her attorney did in his opening statement, those claims need to be backed up.
Not as a matter of law they do not. There still is no burden on the defense. However, the prosecution of course can remark on it. This isn’t an issue of a shifting burden of proof, but of trial strategy.
> [@Max\_Torque](#):
>
> There’s a term we learn in law school: _res ipsa loquitur_. It means, “the thing speaks for itself.” Let’s say a man is walking down the sidewalk, and a piano falls on his head. Being the only person around, you dash up the stairs of the building he was standing next to, and the only person in that building is on the top floor next to an open, piano-sized window. Regardless of the fact that you didn’t see him push the piano out the window, it defies reason to explain the falling piano in any other way.
Yes, but it is rebuttable. It does not establish conclusive proof. The guy standing next to the window might be a cop who chased the criminal who got away in a helicopter and then ran over to the window to see what had been done, and that is an entirely plausible scenario. When I was lectured the professor was sure to point this out in _res ipsa loquitur_ discussion.
> [@Max\_Torque](#):
>
> The issue isn’t the lack of scientific evidence linking her to the crime, it’s that jurors have come to _expect_ such evidence, to such an extent, that they will not convict in its absence, regardless of how strong the other evidence is..
But in this case without it you will wind up having to stack inferences in order to conclude that a form of homicide occured.
> [@Max\_Torque](#):
>
> If I were convicted based on evidence as strong as that presented in this case, I’d deserve it.
And it still would have been up to the jury’s judgment.
---
### Author:  [@Disgruntled\_Penguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Disgruntled_Penguin)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/213 "2011-07-08T20:56:24Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> What if you dash in and see two guys by the window?
What if you dash in and see no one at the window but when you turn to leave someone else dashes in and sees you?
---
### Author:  [@Disgruntled\_Penguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Disgruntled_Penguin)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/214 "2011-07-08T21:02:48Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> Yep. But also that the duct tape is clear evidence of homicide.
Really?
> [@](#):
>
> Orlando (CNN) – Duct tape found on Caylee Anthony’s skull was placed there after the toddler’s body had decomposed, not before she died, a forensic pathologist testified Saturday as the murder trial of the girl’s mother ended its fourth week on a contentious note.
>
> Prosecutors claim Caylee’s mother, Casey Anthony, used chloroform to make her daughter unconscious then used duct tape to cover her nose and mouth, suffocating her. The girl’s skeletal remains were found in a wooded field six months after her family last reported seeing her.
>
> Dr. Werner Spitz said he believes the tape was placed on the body long after the flesh had disappeared to hold the jaw bone on, perhaps because someone wanted to move it.
[http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/18/florida.casey.anthony.trial/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/18/florida.casey.anthony.trial/index.html)
The jury heard this testimony.
---
### Author:  [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/215 "2011-07-08T21:28:53Z")
There was testimony that a “heart shaped” sticker may have been on the duct tape at one time.
> **[Casey Anthony CSI: Outline of Heart Decal On Duct Tape](https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/casey-anthony-trial-csi-finds-heart-shape-caylees/story?id=13830078)**
>
> FBI latent print specialist Elizabeth Fontaine testified today in the Casey Anthony murder trial on the 10 ways she looked for fingerprints on duct tape that was found on Caylee Anthony's skull. Fontaine said she found the pattern of a heart shaped...
Can the jury infer that whoever wrapped the skull with tape might have had tender feelings for the deceased?
---
### Author:  [@Disgruntled\_Penguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Disgruntled_Penguin)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/216 "2011-07-08T21:39:49Z")
> [@mlees](#):
>
> There was testimony that a “heart shaped” sticker may have been on the duct tape at one time.
>
> [Casey Anthony CSI: Outline of Heart Decal On Duct Tape - ABC News](http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/casey-anthony-trial-csi-finds-heart-shape-caylees/story?id=13830078)
>
> Can the jury infer that whoever wrapped the skull with tape might have had tender feelings for the deceased?
To me, this only helps the defense. A cold hearted sociopath wouldn’t have feelings for the deceased. Someone who could do what the prosecution claimed and never even show an inkling of remorse or even concern over 31 days just doesn’t care enough about the victim to put a heart on the tape unless it’s some kind of irony.
Now, someone who is disposing of a loved one who accidentally drowned and didn’t want the jawbone dropping off when disposing of the body as Dr. Spitz suggested very well might put the sticker on as well. Still doesn’t fit the defendant very well but it fits better than it would for the murdering Casey.
---
### Author:  [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/217 "2011-07-08T21:50:01Z")
> [@Disgruntled\_Penguin](#):
>
> To me, this only helps the defense. A cold hearted sociopath wouldn’t have feelings for the deceased. Someone who could do what the prosecution claimed and never even show an inkling of remorse or even concern over 31 days just doesn’t care enough about the victim to put a heart on the tape unless it’s some kind of irony.
>
> Now, someone who is disposing of a loved one who accidentally drowned and didn’t want the jawbone dropping off when disposing of the body as Dr. Spitz suggested very well might put the sticker on as well. Still doesn’t fit the defendant very well but it fits better than it would for the murdering Casey.
Right. I was thinking along the lines of a possible manslaughter related charge (a drug assisted baby sitting attempt gone wrong).
Also, would “accessory after the fact” have to be included as another [seperate] charge, or could Casey, assuming she helped bury the corpse (and not reporting it to the authorities), have been convicted based on the charges that were actually filed against her?
---
### Author:  [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/218 "2011-07-08T21:57:58Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> But we know that Anthony was a habitual liar. She lied about things she didn’t even have to lie about. Ironically, this means her lies _aren’t_ evidence of guilt.
I think they are evidence of guilt. But guilt of what crime? Negligence? Definitely lying to the police or obstruction or whatever the charge was called. This is the question, what crime?
I’d have convicted of neglect IF it were a lesser included of Murder, but I’m thinking at least in her jurisdiction it isn’t considered lesser included. If it isn’t and it wasn’t charged, and I were the prosecutor and I still had time, I would seriously consider that I file neglect charges against Anthony.
---
### Author:  [@David42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David42)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/219 "2011-07-08T22:02:08Z")
> [@mlees](#):
>
> There was testimony that a “heart shaped” sticker may have been on the duct tape at one time.
>
> [Casey Anthony CSI: Outline of Heart Decal On Duct Tape - ABC News](http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/casey-anthony-trial-csi-finds-heart-shape-caylees/story?id=13830078)
>
> Can the jury infer that whoever wrapped the skull with tape might have had tender feelings for the deceased?
If they believe it is a fact that the sticker was there, then yes, this is a reasonable inference. But the inferences have to stop there. You may not then infer a further fact from the inference that someone who loved Caylee put the sticker on.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [July 8, 2011, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/220 "2011-07-08T22:08:45Z")
> [@David42](#):
>
> If they believe it is a fact that the sticker was there, then yes, this is a reasonable inference. But the inferences have to stop there. You may not then infer a further fact from the inference that someone who loved Caylee put the sticker on.
Can you give a cite for this injunction against stacking inferences?
I understand the argument that stacked inferences should often be avoided. What I’m asking for is a citation for the idea that it’s an explicitly formulated rule that is supposed to apply in certain legal contexts, and particularly, that the rule applies to juries.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=10)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=12)