# 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:** 4
### Author:  [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)
#### Post date: [July 6, 2011, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/61 "2011-07-06T23:50:22Z")
I love all the threads on this subject. Full of emotion! đ
Thing is, after reading al lot of these and posting a lot, maybe we didnât give Casey enough credit? Maybe sheâs not as much of a partier and not as dumb as we think?
Maybe she was smart enough to wait a few days before a rainstorm (she knows how to Google!), keeps the body in the car for a couple days (giving us the smell) buries it in a spot familiar to her knowing itâs going to fill up with water, giving a chance to speed up or conceal the decomposition of Caylee. She knows that even if sheâs caught, the prosecution will have less to work with.
1 - Yes, both the defense and prosecution, the ME report and even Nancy âI know what happenedâ Grace knows the body decomposed in underground moisture.
2 - NO, I donât believe my scenario either. đ
---
### Author:  [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/62 "2011-07-07T00:35:41Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#):
>
> child-killer
Cite?
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/63 "2011-07-07T00:57:05Z")
> [@Frylock](#):
>
> You are thinking admirably quickly, coolly and rationally for someone in the middle of a panic situationâŚ
>
> If that is literally the entire case, then itâs was a bad conviction.
Frylock, you seem like a rational guy. You and your friend go in the woods together. He dies of a heart attack, a jealous husband shows up, he trips and hits his head on a rock, etc. Do you pretend it didnât happen? Would you sit in jail for 2+ years before saying something?
And letâs say that you are in shock. Do you wait a month without telling anyone?
All I am saying is what is REASONABLE. Not what CAN happen in all sorts of hypos. That is the standard.
---
### Author:  [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/64 "2011-07-07T01:26:17Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#):
>
> Yet another psychic who knows exactly what went on in the jurorsâ minds, as well as what happened during the deliberations. The fact is you know _nothing_ about the jurors and have no idea how they came to their decision, and frankly yours and other similar statements are getting a bit tiresome.
[At least one of the jurors has spoken](http://www.christianpost.com/news/casey-anthony-juror-we-were-sick-to-our-stomach-over-decision-51932/) and it seems they are not exactly happy with their own decision, but felt compelled to find that way. And the impression that they were so compelled could have arisen from many sources including courtroom instructions so yes itâs damn hard to claim one knows how they got there.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/65 "2011-07-07T01:39:08Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> Whatâs the reasonable alternative to my scenario? And this is important: REASONABLE.
One person had a heart attack and died, the other person said, âFuck this, I canât be bothered,â and walked out of the woods.
Iâm getting absolutely sick and tired of you and the others that are acting like the jurors must be morons because they didnât convict. They didnât convict because it was not proved that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. Murder itself wasnât proved, and even if, by the grace of reasonable doubt to the prosecutionâs side (on which side reasonable doubt does not belong), one accepts that Caylee was murdered, they didnât convict because it wasnât proved that Casey did it.
Jesus H. Christ, people! No wonder Nancy Grace has such a following; thereâs millions of other nitwits out there who think the same way she does.
---
### Author:  [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/66 "2011-07-07T02:03:33Z")
> [@jtgain](#):
>
> Frylock, you seem like a rational guy. You and your friend go in the woods together. He dies of a heart attack, a jealous husband shows up, he trips and hits his head on a rock, etc. Do you pretend it didnât happen? Would you sit in jail for 2+ years before saying something?
>
> And letâs say that you are in shock. Do you wait a month without telling anyone?
>
> All I am saying is what is REASONABLE. Not what CAN happen in all sorts of hypos. That is the standard.
Are you confusing the concept of a reasonable explanation with the concept of a reasonable action?
Youâre rightâI am a rational guy. So are you. And neither of us is in a panic-inducing situation. Hence we are able to think logically about reasonable actions in terms of their consequences.
However I know from sad personal experience (donât you?) that lotâs of people are not rational, or even reasonable. It is _reasonable_ to expect that people donât act rationally a lot of times. And because of this, it is _reasonable_ to think that, as in your example, a guy might have very stupidly not told anyone of the death of his friend\*, and might very irrationally have continued with the lie for quite a while afterwards for fear of being caught in the original lie.
Similar thoughts apply to the Anthony case.
Donât ask yourself âwould a reasonable person act like that?â Ask, rather, âDo people really do things like that?â
The prosecutor in the case made a big deal (according to news reports) of the idea that âpeople donât cover up an accident by making it look like a murder.â Itâs true that a rational person in a reasonable situation would probably not do that. But would an irrational person in an unreasonable situation do it? You bet. It doesnât even take that much irratonality. To cover up the accident, which would be your fault, you make it look like a murder, which would be someone elseâs fault. A very plausible, reasonable explanation of the facts predicated on the notion that the people involved are _not_ rational and are undertaking actions that are _not_ reasonable.
---
### Author:  [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/67 "2011-07-07T02:21:53Z")
> [@Frank](#):
>
> One person had a heart attack and died, the other person said, âFuck this, I canât be bothered,â and walked out of the woods.
>
> Iâm getting absolutely sick and tired of you and the others that are acting like the jurors must be morons because they didnât convict. They didnât convict because it was not proved that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. Murder itself wasnât proved, and even if, by the grace of reasonable doubt to the prosecutionâs side (on which side reasonable doubt does not belong), one accepts that Caylee was murdered, they didnât convict because it wasnât proved that Casey did it.
>
> Jesus H. Christ, people! No wonder Nancy Grace has such a following; thereâs millions of other nitwits out there who think the same way she does.
Itâs sort of fascinating how you are annoyed that jtgain (et al) think the jurors are morons because they reached a different conclusion on the case then jtgain, but donât blink an eyelash as you casually dismiss millions of people as nitwits because they reached a different conclusion on the case than _you._
One possible solution might be to recognize that itâs possible for two rational non-morons to reach entirely different conclusions based on the same set of evidence, and then discuss those conclusions without anyone having to turn the whole thing into a tiresome exercise in âIâm smart and people who disagree with me are dumb.â
---
### Author:  [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/68 "2011-07-07T02:32:30Z")
I would trust the jury members who spent every minute at the trial, heard all the evidence, and spent all their concentration on a death penalty case ,than a person who pretends to be an expert because of what they read on the internet or saw on TV.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/69 "2011-07-07T02:35:13Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> One possible solution might be to recognize that itâs possible for two rational non-morons to reach entirely different conclusions based on the same set of evidence, and then discuss those conclusions without anyone having to turn the whole thing into a tiresome exercise in âIâm smart and people who disagree with me are dumb.â
Thatâs a good point, as far as it applies to me, personally, or **jtgain** , personally, neither of whom were a member of the jury.
Who is it in this thread, precisely, who has been damaging the justice system in this country by dismissing the juryâs decision as unreasonable?
---
### Author:  [@storyteller0910](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/storyteller0910)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/70 "2011-07-07T02:43:03Z")
> [@Frank](#):
>
> Thatâs a good point, as far as it applies to me, personally, or **jtgain** , personally, neither of whom were a member of the jury.
>
> Who is it in this thread, precisely, who has been damaging the justice system in this country by dismissing the juryâs decision as unreasonable?
âŚwait. What? Considering the juryâs decision to have been incorrect is _damaging the justice system in this country?_ Thatâs⌠I donât agree with that statement. If I disagree with the results of some given popular vote (say, Prop 8 in California), and state publicly that, in my opinion, the voters acted incorrectly, am I damaging the political system in this country?
* * *
I also donât know what it has to do with my point, which is that itâs possible for you to think the jury was _right_, and for jtgain to think the jury was _wrong_, and neither of you nor any of the jury members necessarily have to be ânitwitsâ or âmorons.â This is a complex case and the discussion could be so much more interesting if everyone could acknowledge that.
---
### Author:  [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/71 "2011-07-07T02:48:19Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> I also donât know what it has to do with my point, which is that itâs possible for you to think the jury was _right_, and for jtgain to think the jury was _wrong_, and neither of you nor any of the jury members necessarily have to be ânitwitsâ or âmorons.â This is a complex case and the discussion could be so much more interesting if everyone could acknowledge that.
Have you made that point to **jtgain** , et al, or only to me?
---
### Author:  [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/72 "2011-07-07T03:16:47Z")
The people who think the jury made a âbad decisionâ that DID actually watch the WHOLE trial, (which is doubtful in most cases) and who think they âknow betterâ than the jury, just donât realize a few crucial things.
-The jury was carefully selected pretrial to minimize **prejudice**.
-The jury was sequestered during the trial to eliminate **prejudice** from the media and mob mentality outside the courtroom.
-The jury was isolated from **prejudicial** information that took place inside the courtroom.
So those few that actually did watch the whole thing might think that they âknow moreâ and that more is always better. Except theyâre wrong, and probably wouldnât want the mob and media influencing their _fair_ trial if they were ever accused of a crime. (Particularly a trial with a mob and media outside that just âknewâ you were guilty.) And if they served on a jury, they probably wouldnât appreciate the mob calling into question their intelligence for making an impartial decision based on the facts and instructions they were given.
---
### Author:  [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/73 "2011-07-07T04:19:12Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> Itâs sort of fascinating how you are annoyed that jtgain (et al) think the jurors are morons because they reached a different conclusion on the case then jtgain, but donât blink an eyelash as you casually dismiss millions of people as nitwits because they reached a different conclusion on the case than _you._
I too have commented about being annoyed with people referring to the jurors as morons. I am not annoyed by their having a different opinion than me, or with disagreeing with the verdict. What is annoying is their insistence that jurors must be morons, rather than people who werenât as convinced by the evidence as they were. But no, only they have the intelligence and insight to figure out exactly what happened in the case, and they have this ability _without having been in the courtroom a single day during the trial_. They have a beef with the verdict or the jurors? Fine. But show a little humility and at least acknowledge that it is even slightly possible that the jurors arenât morons, but thoughtful civic-minded people who did their best to come to a verdict based on the evidence presented to them.
---
### Author:  [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/74 "2011-07-07T04:25:17Z")
The jurors have to be morons, because our justice system specifically selects for morons. People who actually have the expertise to make the decision are filtered out because they might be prejudiced.
If the jurors had even deliberated, you might have some evidence that they were intelligently discussing the case. But not only did they not deliberate, but we have a person who admits they thought she was guilty but felt he couldnât convict her, thus indicating a lack of knowledge of at least jury nullification, if not an understanding of what reasonable doubt is.
---
### Author:  [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/75 "2011-07-07T04:41:13Z")
> [@BigT](#):
>
> The jurors have to be morons, because our justice system specifically selects for morons. People who actually have the expertise to make the decision are filtered out because they might be prejudiced.
>
> If the jurors had even deliberated, you might have some evidence that they were intelligently discussing the case. But not only did they not deliberate, but we have a person who admits they thought she was guilty but felt he couldnât convict her, thus indicating a lack of knowledge of at least jury nullification, if not an understanding of what reasonable doubt is.
While it is conceivable that a defense team wouldnât want a jury to come to a decision, for the prosecution to select jurors who are incapable of making one makes no sense. As for the deliberations, is there some report out I havenât read where the jury explains themselves? Because if there isnât, you have no idea what went on during those ten hours that the jury was out.
ETA: I think you are talking about the alternate juror, correct? It is of course possible to believe in a personâs guilt but also that the prosecution didnât prove their case.
---
### Author:  [@sweepkick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweepkick)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/76 "2011-07-07T05:29:58Z")
> [@voltaire](#):
>
> The people who think the jury made a âbad decisionâ that DID actually watch the WHOLE trial, (which is doubtful in most cases) and who think they âknow betterâ than the jury, just donât realize a few crucial things.
>
> -The jury was carefully selected pretrial to minimize **prejudice**.
> -The jury was sequestered during the trial to eliminate **prejudice** from the media and mob mentality outside the courtroom.
> -The jury was isolated from **prejudicial** information that took place inside the courtroom.
>
> So those few that actually did watch the whole thing might think that they âknow moreâ and that more is always better. Except theyâre wrong, and probably wouldnât want the mob and media influencing their _fair_ trial if they were ever accused of a crime. (Particularly a trial with a mob and media outside that just âknewâ you were guilty.) And if they served on a jury, they probably wouldnât appreciate the mob calling into question their intelligence for making an impartial decision based on the facts and instructions they were given.
Iâd agree with the earlier poster who indicated that they were disappointed when Nancy Graceâs head did not asplode on live television after this verdict.
To that end, many factors color the perception of anyone⌠_anyone_⌠who was not a part of that 12 person team. As Voltaire and others upthread have perfectly illustrated, to say that the jury was flat-out wrong is, wellâŚ
Insulting.
Do you realize what this jury was going through for the duration of the trial? The sequestering, the weeks that they had no access to internet or television, or even discussions with their families. The only thing they knew during this time was details of the case, and perhaps the occasional bad Dukes of Hazzard rerun. Do you even fathom the consequences of this situation? Itâs fucked up, and by God I can guarantee you that these jurors were not simply sitting in their hotel rooms, not giving one thought to the trial at hand.
All this time you and I were sitting back in our Lay-Z-Boys, beer in hand with feet up, cherry-picking details of the trial from Nancy Grace, CNN, Fox, and perhaps even Yahoo!, ensuring that they adhere to our pre-conceived conclusions derived _FROM THE SAME SOURCES_, and come to a decision, without deliberation, mind you, as to whether or not the woman is guilty.
It really _is_ that easy isnât it? For you obviously have access to evidence and scenarios that were clearly not available to the jurors, who have sacrificed their time, lives, and may well be facing future consequences (for example, PTSD).
Gain some perspective guys.
---
### Author:  [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/77 "2011-07-07T05:44:32Z")
> [@storyteller0910](#):
>
> I could also fabricate scenarios where OJ is innocent, where the Duke lacrosse team is guity, where Osama Bin Laden isnât really dead but is actually running the Mets.
Wow, he must _really_ hate New York City.
---
### Author:  [@splatterpunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/splatterpunk)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/78 "2011-07-07T07:25:42Z")
> [@sweepkick](#):
>
> Iâd agree with the earlier poster who indicated that they were disappointed when Nancy Graceâs head did not asplode on live television after this verdict.
>
> To that end, many factors color the perception of anyone⌠_anyone_⌠who was not a part of that 12 person team. As Voltaire and others upthread have perfectly illustrated, to say that the jury was flat-out wrong is, wellâŚ
>
> Insulting.
No, it isnât. Itâs called expressing an opposing opinion. If the precious snowflakes donât like being second-guessed, tough shit. I saw the same evidence the jury did and I would not have voted as they did. I donât give a shit if this offends their sensibilities.
> [@](#):
>
> Do you realize what this jury was going through for the duration of the trial? The sequestering, the weeks that they had no access to internet or television, or even discussions with their families. The only thing they knew during this time was details of the case, and perhaps the occasional bad Dukes of Hazzard rerun. Do you even fathom the consequences of this situation? Itâs fucked up, and by God I can guarantee you that these jurors were not simply sitting in their hotel rooms, not giving one thought to the trial at hand.
Who the hell said they didnât give a thought to the trial at hand? And how does the fact that they were forced to watch Dukes of Hazzard reruns bolster their credibility as triers of fact?
> [@](#):
>
> All this time you and I were sitting back in our Lay-Z-Boys, beer in hand with feet up, cherry-picking details of the trial from Nancy Grace, CNN, Fox, and perhaps even Yahoo!, ensuring that they adhere to our pre-conceived conclusions derived _FROM THE SAME SOURCES_, and come to a decision, without deliberation, mind you, as to whether or not the woman is guilty.
Personally, I didnât watch or read any of those sources you listed. You know why? I watched the trial videos daily, and it constantly pissed me off when I would read or hear some media story that completely distorted or grossly oversimplified the testimony of the day.
> [@](#):
>
> It really _is_ that easy isnât it? For you obviously have access to evidence and scenarios that were clearly not available to the jurors, who have sacrificed their time, lives, and may well be facing future consequences (for example, PTSD).
>
> Gain some perspective guys.
PTSD? For serving on a jury? Jesus wept. I got your perspective right here, pal.
---
### Author:  [@Locrian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Locrian)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/79 "2011-07-07T07:55:10Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#):
>
> Wow, he must _really_ hate New York City.
Bryan, you win again! Best post comment! đ
Even with the opinions and knowledge I may have had in this case as a juror would still lead me to not guilty on murder and manslaughter.
Casey, George, Cindy, Lee and the Kronkman do not give any answers to who is guilty of what and why, not to mention cause of death. But the circumstantial evidence leading to an acquittal or a conviction in this case could never ever be conclusive.
---
### Author:  [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)
#### Post date: [July 7, 2011, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055/80 "2011-07-07T08:37:53Z")
> [@Gray\_Ghost](#):
>
> I can see, barely, how the jury found her not guilty of premeditated murder of Caylee. However, I have difficulty in seeing how Casey was found not guilty of manslaughter [(Section 782.07(3))](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.07.html): (Apologies if this line of thinking has already been posted by someone else in the innumerable threads on the Dope about this case)
>
> [827.03(3)](http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0827/Sections/0827.03.html) states:
>
> Having the child go missing for ~30 days, and not only not alerting the authorities that the child was missing, but intentionally deceiving them that the child was kidnapped, seems to me to be a âfailure or omission to provide care, supervision and services.â Not only is she not providing those, but through her deceit, she is preventing other parties, such as her parents or the State of Florida, from providing those to her child. At a minimum, thatâs neglect.
>
> Since she kept lying, her repeated neglect seems to me to be ârepeated conduct that could reasonably be expected to result in a substantial risk of death to my child.â Itâs a toddler, they canât survive on their own for 30 days. If you let them wander around for 30 days without providing them food, water, or shelter, they stand a pretty good chance of dying. The best face you can put on Caseyâs conduct is that she misled her parents and the police for days while her child was missing. How is Caseyâs conduct not, at the very least, parental neglect that led to the death of her child? Here, I donât think youâd need to establish an actual cause of death for Kaylee; you merely need to establish neglect by the parent, and that such neglect caused the childâs death in some way. That way, you donât need to show pre-meditation, you donât need an actual cause of death, you donât need fingerprints, DNA, or any of the panoply of CSI techniques. You donât need to spend days on duct tape and trash bags, and who discovered the body when. However, I am unfamiliar with FL criminal caselaw, and the degree of culpable causation (proximate, but-for, last clear chance, whatever it isâŚ) that needs to be shown in order for 827.03(3) to stick.
>
> For those of you unfortunate enough to have watched the trial, did the prosecution adequately show to the jury the elements of each criminal charge and the evidence they entered during the trial to prove each element? How did they attempt to prove up premeditated murder or, in the alternative, manslaughter?
If Caylee was actually missing, Casey wouldnât have had to lie. The defense purported that Casey lied to cover up an accidental drowing. So, while Casey was delaying the investigation, Caylee was in no danger at all.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=3)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-unjust-was-the-casey-anthony-verdict/588055.md?page=5)