# 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:** 2
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/21 "2011-07-06T18:35:05Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> (specifically, I think they misunderstood or misapplied the “reasonable doubt” standard).
As have all of the posters in the many threads (and people at work and in the neighborhood) that keep vomiting up the same “The prosecution just didn’t prove their case” meme. You don’t need DNA, fingerprints, or a murder weapon. You don’t even need a body.
The standard is not, Do we have a videotape of her committing the crime at the 50yard line during halftime of the Super Bowl. The standard is “reasonable doubt” which everyone seems to think, “If I can think of a scenario, even if it involves unicorns or aliens, that makes Casey Anthony innocent, then that is reasonable doubt.”
Nothing could be further from the truth and the public really needs educated on this point.
---
### Author:  [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/22 "2011-07-06T18:36:42Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> As have all of the posters in the many threads (and people at work and in the neighborhood) that keep vomiting up the same “The prosecution just didn’t prove their case” meme. You don’t need DNA, fingerprints, or a murder weapon. You don’t even need a body.
>
> The standard is not, Do we have a videotape of her committing the crime at the 50yard line during halftime of the Super Bowl. The standard is “reasonable doubt” which everyone seems to think, “If I can think of a scenario, even if it involves unicorns or aliens, that makes Casey Anthony innocent, then that is reasonable doubt.”
>
> Nothing could be further from the truth and the public really needs educated on this point.
But there was reasonable doubt! No DNA, no motive, no cause of death, no prior history of abuse of the child, to name a few items.
---
### Author:  [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/23 "2011-07-06T18:43:18Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#):
>
> There is no way to determine whether CA had anything to do with the death of her child. It’s not like we are trying to determine the temperature of a glass of water and can just stick a thermometer in it. To determine objectively whether CA killed her child (and, if so, whether it was first-degree murder or not) we would have had to somehow ride alongside in CA’s head during the period iin question, which is not currently possible.
>
> Therefore, all you are doing is comparing your opinion of what happened to the verdict. But, our society has determined that we will believe the jury–we didn’t decide that you personally get to decide someone’s guilt or innocence. So, you are free to have your own opinion on the matter, but it amounts only to the proverbial hill of beans. Also, some of us are perfectly wiling to simply accept our society’s method for determining the truth and we don’t form our own opinions on the matter at all.
That’s correct, but wasn’t the trial televised? I have little interest in this sort of thing and I don’t have a TV, but I know the closing arguments were on TV while I ate at a restaurant the other day. If people were able to see the entire trial, then they may not be able to determine with absolute certainty what happened, but they can tell as well as the jury can whether the prosecution proved its case or not.
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/24 "2011-07-06T18:44:06Z")
> [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#):
>
> But there was reasonable doubt! No DNA, no motive, no cause of death, no prior history of abuse of the child, to name a few items.
Many murders do not have the three things that you just mentioned. It is reasonable to infer from circumstances.
Witnesses see two friends walk together into a remote area of the woods. Only one comes back. He never reports his buddy missing. A month later, person two’s body is found in a demcomposing state in those same remote woods.
That’s murder. What other reasonable explanation is there? No need for DNA, a murder weapon, fingerprints, etc.
---
### Author:  [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/25 "2011-07-06T18:49:46Z")
So people should be convicted of first degree murder based on your failures of imagination?
---
### Author:  [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/26 "2011-07-06T18:50:41Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#):
>
> Therefore, all you are doing is comparing your opinion of what happened to the verdict. But, our society has determined that we will believe the jury–we didn’t decide that you personally get to decide someone’s guilt or innocence. So, you are free to have your own opinion on the matter, but it amounts only to the proverbial hill of beans.
Sure. I don’t disagree with any of this (well, I think our society has determined that we will _abide by_ the jury’s decision, not that we will “believe” it). In any meaningful sense, my opinion on the subject doesn’t matter at all. But my opinion on who belongs in the Hall of Fame won’t get Keith Hernandez in, either; won’t stop me from having the conversation, because, I mean, why else am I even here?
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/27 "2011-07-06T18:50:46Z")
> [@DianaG](#):
>
> So people should be convicted of first degree murder based on your failures of imagination?
What’s the reasonable alternative to my scenario? And this is important: REASONABLE.
---
### Author:  [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/28 "2011-07-06T18:54:20Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> What’s the reasonable alternative to my scenario? And this is important: REASONABLE.
Accidentally killing someone and trying to cover it up seems pretty reasonable to me.
---
### Author:  [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/29 "2011-07-06T18:54:53Z")
> [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#):
>
> But there was reasonable doubt! No DNA, no motive, no cause of death, no prior history of abuse of the child, to name a few items.
Even if I grant these, they are not adequate, in my view, to constitute reasonable doubt (and that’s leaving out the fact that I think the motive was clear, and don’t know what “no DNA” is meant to imply or even _mean_, in this context)?
> [@](#):
>
> So people should be convicted of first degree murder based on your failures of imagination?
This is not a good presentation of the issue. My ability to “imagine” a scenario is quite good - I write for a living. I could fabricate a thousand different scenarios is which Casey Anthony is entirely innocent; I could also fabricate scenarios where OJ is innocent, where the Duke lacrosse team is guity, where Osama Bin Laden isn’t really dead but is actually running the Mets. “I can imagine a scenario in which it is possible this person is innocent” is not adequate to establish reasonable doubt.
---
### Author:  [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/30 "2011-07-06T18:55:59Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> That’s murder. What other reasonable explanation is there? .
Negligent or reckless homicide. voluntary manslaughter (intentional killing based on a belief in justification that is incorrect). Accidental death. Self defense.
Really. You think if two people are near each other, and one ends up dead, that not only proves one person killed the other, but that they planned to kill them? How do you know it wasn’t in the heat of passion, or basically an accident?
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/31 "2011-07-06T18:56:28Z")
> [@markm](#):
>
> I bow to your pedantic superiority as I made an off-the-cuff post to a thread in between bites of my lunch. I shall endeavour to not let it happen again.
There really is a big difference between the two though, despite your annoyance at it being pointed out
---
### Author:  [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/32 "2011-07-06T18:57:12Z")
> [@Ludovic](#):
>
> Accidentally killing someone and trying to cover it up seems pretty reasonable to me.
Exactly. That is not first degree murder. And there are other reasonable explanations. Maybe the guy was bit by a snake or had a heart attack. The other guy panics or goes into shock and tries to hide the body. Horrible thing to do, but it’s not murder.
---
### Author:  [@Yllaria](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yllaria)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/33 "2011-07-06T18:57:41Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> . . . Witnesses see two friends walk together into a remote area of the woods. Only one comes back. He never reports his buddy missing. A month later, person two’s body is found in a demcomposing state in those same remote woods. . . What other reasonable explanation is there? . . .
Aneurism? Bee sting? Gang of bikers? Angry, stalking husband of the woman he was having an affair with? If the body shows no cause of death, it could have been a lot of things.
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/34 "2011-07-06T19:01:33Z")
> [@Ludovic](#):
>
> Accidentally killing someone and trying to cover it up seems pretty reasonable to me.
It does? First, he’s your friend; you don’t want to get him to a hospital? Next, even if he died straight up, you know that people saw you going in together. His wife or friends or someone is going to ask where he is. Pretending that nothing happened won’t work. People will be out in those woods looking for him, and they will be looking at you.
If it is accidental, you want to make sure his body is found so that you can prove your story that it was an accident, not have it found 2 months later when results are inconclusive.
So, no. I submit that it is not reasonable in that scenario to accidentally kill your friend and pretend like nothing happened. Possible? Yes. Reasonable. No.
\*And BTW, people have been convicted of murder one on scenarios like I have described.
---
### Author:  [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/35 "2011-07-06T19:03:01Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> It does? First, he’s your friend; you don’t want to get him to a hospital? Next, even if he died straight up, you know that people saw you going in together. His wife or friends or someone is going to ask where he is. Pretending that nothing happened won’t work. People will be out in those woods looking for him, and they will be looking at you.
>
> If it is accidental, you want to make sure his body is found so that you can prove your story that it was an accident, not have it found 2 months later when results are inconclusive.
>
> So, no. I submit that it is not reasonable in that scenario to accidentally kill your friend and pretend like nothing happened. Possible? Yes. Reasonable. No.
>
> \*And BTW, people have been convicted of murder one on scenarios like I have described.
I am glad you don’t work in the legal profession.
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/36 "2011-07-06T19:04:35Z")
> [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#):
>
> I am glad you don’t work in the legal profession.
Again, people have been convicted on this type of evidence.
Why? When their buddy is killed accidentally or of a heart attack, or by a jealous husband, they don’t pretend like nothing happened and assert a 5th amendment right.
---
### Author:  [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/37 "2011-07-06T19:10:12Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> As have all of the posters in the many threads (and people at work and in the neighborhood) that keep vomiting up the same “The prosecution just didn’t prove their case” meme. You don’t need DNA, fingerprints, or a murder weapon. You don’t even need a body.
Still, you do need some evidence that a murder occurred, and if you want to try someone for it, you need some evidence that they were the one who committed it. In this case, no one knows how Caylee died. She could have been murdered, she could have been accidentally overdosed, she may have wandered unwatched into a swimming pool and drowned, or she may have died in any of a number of other ways. And if you can’t demonstrate how someone died, you can’t demonstrate that they were murdered. And that’s just the first hurdle. If, once you’ve been able to prove that a person has been murdered, you want to charge someone for it, it becomes necessary to furnish proof beyond a reasonable doubt that that particular person was the one who committed the murder.
Neither was possible in this case.
Sometimes a person can be convicted of murder without a body, a weapon, or manner of death, but usually there is some sort of forensic evidence strongly suggesting that that the person was indeed murdered (a large blood stain found through the use of Luminol, for example) and additional evidence strongly pointing to the suspect as having committed the murder. But again, in this case there was absolutely no evidence to prove that Caylee was murdered, and absolutely no evidence to prove that if she had been murdered, Casey was the one who did it.
---
### Author:  [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/38 "2011-07-06T19:11:14Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> It does?
Reasonable enough to believe that the jury could have a reasonable doubt. Are you saying that people never panic? That sounds pretty _un_reasonable to me.
---
### Author:  [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/39 "2011-07-06T19:11:16Z")
Clearly any time someone dies and jtgain didn’t see them clutch their chest first, there’s been a murder!
---
### Author:  [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/40 "2011-07-06T19:12:25Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> Sure. I don’t disagree with any of this (well, I think our society has determined that we will _abide by_ the jury’s decision, not that we will “believe” it). In any meaningful sense, my opinion on the subject doesn’t matter at all. But my opinion on who belongs in the Hall of Fame won’t get Keith Hernandez in, either; won’t stop me from having the conversation, because, I mean, why else am I even here?
OK, glad you recognize that. But the difference about your opinion in the two scenarios (ie, the CA verdict and KH in the hall of fame) is that many people think they are doing something different in the first scenario. That is, they don’t simply think they have an opinion, they think they are determining whether the verdict is “just” in some objective sense. But, looks like you recognize that the two scenarios are exactly te same–you simply have an opinion.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=1)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=3)