It's so obvious she killed her daughter. It pisses me off that she was able to get away with it. I'm so upset right now.

It's so obvious she killed her daughter. It pisses me off that she was able to get away with it. I'm so upset right now.

Karma - you never get away with anything.

Karma - you never get away with anything.

The prosecution, the jury, both grandparents, her mother and friends and family all failed Caylee. The only decent people I see are the cops who arrested Casey and tried to interrogate her during her Universal fantasy trip. What is so special about Casey that all these people protect her? Especially her parents, who created this monster by essentially allowing her to lie her way through life. They had a choice, to stand by their daughter or their granddaughter, and they chose Casey.

Here's hoping to new evidence being found that finally pins Casey to this tragedy, lets hope for a better prosecutor, and a better jury panel. Even if the prosecution did a piss poor job of proving beyond a REASONABLE doubt (not zero doubt, or no doubt), why would the jury not hold her accountable of her lies and complete guilt? It was obvious to me from the phone call to the police operator, her lies only helped to solidify her guilt in my mind. Her parents are almost as bad as her.

I guess she opened a private investigation company now too :/

I guess she opened a private investigation company now too :/

@Captainmac 100 ps the court and systems are the opposite... They rather let guilty go free than inoccent in jail....they can get the guilty another time...and it's a crime to false imprison.

If it broken it don't work...if it's flawed it's not perfect. But it works.
Lol I've been silenced... I missed some messages from you....some other response to you was for the other dude lol apologies.

As for my spelling.. You know what I mean correct?  Or how do you know to correct it? And if you don't understand why not ask? As for grammar Don't =do not.. Would you like me to talk more like that....is this the problem?

It is good you see the point I am making btw....the other guy has no clue...I do not disagree with most you say again I missed them... I was too busy arguing with other guy...while you two, too busy trying to embarrass me for spelling etc...any how.. I am done trying to explain...

@robert gibson Dude she's blatantly flaunting that she's messing with everyone while her kid is missing??? I don't need another scenario to focus on with this OBVIOUSLY NOT INNOCENT woman is infront of me.

You're a literal joke and I love how NO ONE has agreed with you.

@robert gibson Dude she's blatantly flaunting that she's messing with everyone while her kid is missing??? I don't need another scenario to focus on with this OBVIOUSLY NOT INNOCENT woman is infront of me.

You're a literal joke and I love how NO ONE has agreed with you.

@ hypeman18 the fucked up thing is you not even willing to entertain any other possible scenario.... With nothing other than she lied....wtf? You wouldn't make a jury.

@ hypeman18 the fucked up thing is you not even willing to entertain any other possible scenario.... With nothing other than she lied....wtf? You wouldn't make a jury.

@robert gibson If it's FLAWED then it DOESN'T WORK lol. There you go with your dyslexia blatantly going the wrong way with how things connect. You couldn't be more wrong.. it's hilarious.

@robert gibson If it's FLAWED then it DOESN'T WORK lol. There you go with your dyslexia blatantly going the wrong way with how things connect. You couldn't be more wrong.. it's hilarious.

@Captainmac 100 Bro the system is flawed... Ofcorce.... But it works...this case in particular is an excellent example of the system working correctly.... You'd rather someone go to jail who is inoccent than the guilty go free?... No inoccent should be in jail man...this is a social issue though not the court.

@Captainmac 100 Bro the system is flawed... Ofcorce.... But it works...this case in particular is an excellent example of the system working correctly.... You'd rather someone go to jail who is inoccent than the guilty go free?... No inoccent should be in jail man...this is a social issue though not the court.

@robert gibson Lol also if the court truly worked.. it wouldn't be as easily exploited as it has for decades. Mafia made it a joke.  John Dillinger used it to his advantages during his sentencing. Women get leniency on a constant basis. Saying "it works" is like saying "a car never needs gas or electricity" lmao

@robert gibson Lol also if the court truly worked.. it wouldn't be as easily exploited as it has for decades. Mafia made it a joke.  John Dillinger used it to his advantages during his sentencing. Women get leniency on a constant basis. Saying "it works" is like saying "a car never needs gas or electricity" lmao

@Captainmac 100 your/our society has come to rather see an inoccent in prison than a guilty go free....That's why we at this point.

@Captainmac 100 your/our society has come to rather see an inoccent in prison than a guilty go free....That's why we at this point.

@robert gibson Dude it's also your GRAMMAR that's dog crap. Lol.. honestly pretty difficult to make out what you're trying to say half the time. Like talking to a 10 year old.

The court obviously DOESN'T work if a woman was literally breaking TWO laws and got punished for neither. Did you understand that dur durrrrrppp lmao?

@robert gibson Dude it's also your GRAMMAR that's dog crap. Lol.. honestly pretty difficult to make out what you're trying to say half the time. Like talking to a 10 year old.

The court obviously DOESN'T work if a woman was literally breaking TWO laws and got punished for neither. Did you understand that dur durrrrrppp lmao?

@Captainmac 100 no that's not the court that's your society.... The court works... Your society is broken... Do you see difference... Dude Albert Einstein was also dyslexic man....dont make out I'm dumb because I can't spell man.. Not cool...lol....I understand all the words...the problem is I don't think you know the words you use...let alone mine....do you understand what I'm saying here?..,

@Captainmac 100 no that's not the court that's your society.... The court works... Your society is broken... Do you see difference... Dude Albert Einstein was also dyslexic man....dont make out I'm dumb because I can't spell man.. Not cool...lol....I understand all the words...the problem is I don't think you know the words you use...let alone mine....do you understand what I'm saying here?..,

@Chimene all religion... Is essentialy the same. My problem is I know too much about various religions...yous all pagan... Evolved. For me do god exists... I don't know....I do know that the religions are clearly wrong...no "God" of religion makes any sense... Now I have to ask you to define the word "god" to be shure we talking about the correct god of your choice? Edit.. Just got the Buddhism part...funny thing is that would probably be the way to go for me...however it's nonsense. Like the rest.

The Conservative I'm having is with everyone... This is why you think I, don't know the religion you hail from.

@Chimene all religion... Is essentialy the same. My problem is I know too much about various religions...yous all pagan... Evolved. For me do god exists... I don't know....I do know that the religions are clearly wrong...no "God" of religion makes any sense... Now I have to ask you to define the word "god" to be shure we talking about the correct god of your choice? Edit.. Just got the Buddhism part...funny thing is that would probably be the way to go for me...however it's nonsense. Like the rest.

The Conservative I'm having is with everyone... This is why you think I, don't know the religion you hail from.

@Captainmac 100 the gender bais is from both your end...dont you think a man can use same defence?

@Captainmac 100 the gender bais is from both your end...dont you think a man can use same defence?

@robert gibson Oh my god.. it's "blooded".

Also that's very evident that she didn't care.. about anything lol. Must be nice to be a woman in court. Shout out to Dalia dippolito

@robert gibson Oh my god.. it's "blooded".

Also that's very evident that she didn't care.. about anything lol. Must be nice to be a woman in court. Shout out to Dalia dippolito

@Captainmac 100 yes all part of her plan....again if we going for murder it has to be part of plan....Otherwise we need different crime....

And the objective was to get off with murder... You know she can't be tried again right?......why go through life looking over shoulder? To confess without confessing...That is not smart?

@Captainmac 100 yes all part of her plan....again if we going for murder it has to be part of plan....Otherwise we need different crime....

And the objective was to get off with murder... You know she can't be tried again right?......why go through life looking over shoulder? To confess without confessing...That is not smart?

@robert gibson end of what? Dude is English your 2nd language?

@robert gibson end of what? Dude is English your 2nd language?

@Karad Jans no nothing to do with gender....its Circumstance... End of..

@Karad Jans no nothing to do with gender....its Circumstance... End of..

@Captainmac 100 If this isn't case then her defence... Is more likely.... She had so many defences pre pland, it's scary how smart she is....IF she did it.

@Captainmac 100 If this isn't case then her defence... Is more likely.... She had so many defences pre pland, it's scary how smart she is....IF she did it.

@Captainmac 100 that was the plan...confuse...she pland it all man...she smart as fuck...those cops wer at 2 steps behind her whole time.

@Captainmac 100 that was the plan...confuse...she pland it all man...she smart as fuck...those cops wer at 2 steps behind her whole time.

@Captainmac 100 the thing is if she did do it....she is guilty of.. murder... And is extremely smart... The case was brought forward wrong....I'd go down route...she meticulously pland everything... Down to the last thing....she couldn't believe her luck...That's why she was laughing out loud at universal... Getting to waste time to the fullest... Longer it go on harder it's to prove what actually happened. It's the investigators job to shut this shit down asap...not aid in the shirad... Get facts...too busy trying to make her look like lier...phone call could have discredited all...and did..before they got to universal.... Etc... Blame the prosecution and investigater ... Mainly prosecution. She don't care how she looks...she cares what you can prove...outsmarted at every time.. You know why they didn't go down this route??? Because they would have to admit they been outsmarted. She wanted them to paint her as lier..etc...etc..etc..

@robert gibson Yes we may not know for a fact that it was her.. but it doesn't take away how obvious it is that she knows much more than she lets on and the FACT that she did commit two crimes during this investigation and wasn't punished for either. Both of which we just spoke about.

@robert gibson Yes we may not know for a fact that it was her.. but it doesn't take away how obvious it is that she knows much more than she lets on and the FACT that she did commit two crimes during this investigation and wasn't punished for either. Both of which we just spoke about.

@Captainmac 100 the it's gender argument is just so wrong...it's circumstances... All you have is circumstantial evidence..... Against the person.... Circumstance that can be explained by.. X... We no clearer on what actually took place... You and I..etc...guess she killd her daughter.... Nun of us know. This is why she HAD to be fund not guilty of charges brought forward.

@Captainmac 100 the it's gender argument is just so wrong...it's circumstances... All you have is circumstantial evidence..... Against the person.... Circumstance that can be explained by.. X... We no clearer on what actually took place... You and I..etc...guess she killd her daughter.... Nun of us know. This is why she HAD to be fund not guilty of charges brought forward.

@robert gibson the undoubtedly correct crimes were extreme negligence and obstruction of justice. Those two are unquestionably true. I'll give you that it's not proven that she killed her kid.. even though it's extremely obvious that she knows alot more than she actually told. But those first two are undoubtedly crimes she committed and was never punished for.

@robert gibson the undoubtedly correct crimes were extreme negligence and obstruction of justice. Those two are unquestionably true. I'll give you that it's not proven that she killed her kid.. even though it's extremely obvious that she knows alot more than she actually told. But those first two are undoubtedly crimes she committed and was never punished for.

@Captainmac 100 even at the negligence it's hard.... Is abandonment negligence?

@Captainmac 100 even at the negligence it's hard.... Is abandonment negligence?

@Captainmac 100 If she was charged with correct crime like negligence.. That sticks... Then build case for ... X....

@Captainmac 100 If she was charged with correct crime like negligence.. That sticks... Then build case for ... X....

@robert gibson Well good thing now that nobody got charged and convicted lol. Even with one of the most obvious people present who already broke laws by lying to the investigator's who were searching for the truth of your death. That must suck.

@robert gibson Well good thing now that nobody got charged and convicted lol. Even with one of the most obvious people present who already broke laws by lying to the investigator's who were searching for the truth of your death. That must suck.

@Captainmac 100 it's nothing to do with gender at all.

@Captainmac 100 it's nothing to do with gender at all.

@Captainmac 100 yes I agree she knows... It's not the same...Let's just say if I'm murderd I want all involved and charged with correct crime.

@Captainmac 100 yes I agree she knows... It's not the same...Let's just say if I'm murderd I want all involved and charged with correct crime.

@robert gibson Lied to detectives during an investigation-crime. Lol now shut up

@robert gibson Lied to detectives during an investigation-crime. Lol now shut up

@Captainmac 100 no that's not the argument... "Inoccent don't lie" is what you said....past case shows inoccent do lie....etc...etc...tell me what she did? What crime? how she did it? Why?

@Captainmac 100 no that's not the argument... "Inoccent don't lie" is what you said....past case shows inoccent do lie....etc...etc...tell me what she did? What crime? how she did it? Why?

@Captainmac 100 that's just personal credulity... The statistical facts sho different... Inoccent People lie all the time....inoccent people confess to crimes thet didn't do etc..etc...I think she did it too...just not sure it's murder... Did she act alone? Etc etc...I'm not defending her... It's the law I'm defending... You got to get her for correct crime...Otherwise the perpetrator could be free and so on again...

@Captainmac 100 that's just personal credulity... The statistical facts sho different... Inoccent People lie all the time....inoccent people confess to crimes thet didn't do etc..etc...I think she did it too...just not sure it's murder... Did she act alone? Etc etc...I'm not defending her... It's the law I'm defending... You got to get her for correct crime...Otherwise the perpetrator could be free and so on again...

@Hypeman 18 Fr fr. I've seen dumb people but jesus!. Guy is on mars lol.

@Hypeman 18 Fr fr. I've seen dumb people but jesus!. Guy is on mars lol.

@Captainmac 100 how many "obviously guilty"  people who we know are inoccent now for a fact? Look it up....

@Captainmac 100 how many "obviously guilty"  people who we know are inoccent now for a fact? Look it up....

@Captainmac 100 it possible it was the dad (grandfather)....etc..ect..ect...the prosecution fails to look for what actually happened... They have hypotheses and just ran with it.

@Captainmac 100 it possible it was the dad (grandfather)....etc..ect..ect...the prosecution fails to look for what actually happened... They have hypotheses and just ran with it.

@Hypeman 18 Oh my god you aren't joking lol. There is always that one guy who has to play captain slow bus.

@Hypeman 18 Oh my god you aren't joking lol. There is always that one guy who has to play captain slow bus.

@robert gibson Wtf no she wasted their time with giving them lies and non existent leads. Which is against the law during an investigation. Wtf is wrong with you?

@robert gibson Wtf no she wasted their time with giving them lies and non existent leads. Which is against the law during an investigation. Wtf is wrong with you?

@Captainmac 100 this is an excellent example of the court system working correctly.

@Captainmac 100 this is an excellent example of the court system working correctly.

@Captainmac 100 how do any of this prove murder? How you know defence isn't true?

@Captainmac 100 how do any of this prove murder? How you know defence isn't true?

@Captainmac 100 all they proved is she is a lier... The cops wasted own time etc..etc..I already said this and more...

@Captainmac 100 all they proved is she is a lier... The cops wasted own time etc..etc..I already said this and more...

@robert gibson You can prove that she LIED to investigators which in it of itself is AGAINST THE LAW. Something Rachel Buffet did and was actually punished for.

@robert gibson You can prove that she LIED to investigators which in it of itself is AGAINST THE LAW. Something Rachel Buffet did and was actually punished for.

@Captainmac 100 Yupp big facts.. it's because she's a woman that she's getting leniency. You get SIMPS like robert over here who for some reason wants to play devils advocate for a woman lying to police while looking for her own daughter.. totally not suspicious at all.

@Captainmac 100 Yupp big facts.. it's because she's a woman that she's getting leniency. You get SIMPS like robert over here who for some reason wants to play devils advocate for a woman lying to police while looking for her own daughter.. totally not suspicious at all.

@Hypeman 18 I'll ask you this how do you prove something you didn't do? You can't.... This is why it's the burden of the prosecution to provide proof... You did it....Can't prove a negative....

@Hypeman 18 I'll ask you this how do you prove something you didn't do? You can't.... This is why it's the burden of the prosecution to provide proof... You did it....Can't prove a negative....

@robert gibson You also aren't spelling correctly either lol. She broke laws when she lied to detectives during their search. Which in it of itself is an immediate red flag when coming from the MOTHER OF THE MISSING CHILD.

Again.. shout out to Rachell Buffet.. who DID serve time because she lied to detectives during their investigation.. who unlike Casey.. didn't even openly admit to it.

@robert gibson You also aren't spelling correctly either lol. She broke laws when she lied to detectives during their search. Which in it of itself is an immediate red flag when coming from the MOTHER OF THE MISSING CHILD.

Again.. shout out to Rachell Buffet.. who DID serve time because she lied to detectives during their investigation.. who unlike Casey.. didn't even openly admit to it.

It's because she's a woman. You get dumb people who think there's more to it or something. Like she lied to police, made up the nanny which wasted their time, googled foolproof suffocation techniques, car smelled like dead body, body was found less than a mile away from the house.. yet she walks free lol.

The U.S court system is such a joke. Had this been a dad.. i promise you that man would be serving life for atleast negligence and lying to detectives.

It's because she's a woman. You get dumb people who think there's more to it or something. Like she lied to police, made up the nanny which wasted their time, googled foolproof suffocation techniques, car smelled like dead body, body was found less than a mile away from the house.. yet she walks free lol.

The U.S court system is such a joke. Had this been a dad.. i promise you that man would be serving life for atleast negligence and lying to detectives.

@Hypeman 18 I'm not defending her at ALL...learn to read... I'm defending the law.... Masive difference.... I'm defending YOUR rights....I hope to??? You never accused of a crime you didn't do....you in for a big <b>shock</b> If you are.

@Hypeman 18 I'm not defending her at ALL...learn to read... I'm defending the law.... Masive difference.... I'm defending YOUR rights....I hope to??? You never accused of a crime you didn't do....you in for a big *shock* If you are.

@robert gibson "lol know it isn't"
It's "NO IT ISN'T" haha you can't even spell let alone KNOW THE LAW.

Shout out to Rachell Buffet! Who was locked up because SHE LIED TO POLICE 😂😂😂😂😂😂

@robert gibson "lol know it isn't"
It's "NO IT ISN'T" haha you can't even spell let alone KNOW THE LAW.

Shout out to Rachell Buffet! Who was locked up because SHE LIED TO POLICE 😂😂😂😂😂😂

@Hypeman 18 the crime is obstruction...she didn't obstruct...she led them were they asked her to go....see the fucking point yet.....

@Hypeman 18 the crime is obstruction...she didn't obstruct...she led them were they asked her to go....see the fucking point yet.....

@robert gibson I imagine her dad had enough common sense to realize his daughter lying to police about their granddaughters disappearance didn't sit well with him😂😂😂😂

I'm beginning to think your her boyfriend who's loyalty is undying LMAO. "Just cause she lied and created false leads... doesn't mean that she had anything to do with it!!.. makes perfect sense for a mother to send police on waste of time searches!".

@robert gibson I imagine her dad had enough common sense to realize his daughter lying to police about their granddaughters disappearance didn't sit well with him😂😂😂😂

I'm beginning to think your her boyfriend who's loyalty is undying LMAO. "Just cause she lied and created false leads... doesn't mean that she had anything to do with it!!.. makes perfect sense for a mother to send police on waste of time searches!".

@Hypeman 18 lol no it isn't... How many people in jail for laying to police?

@Hypeman 18 lol no it isn't... How many people in jail for laying to police?

@Hypeman 18 I'm beginning to think your her dad lol...you want her to take the fall so bad... I personally want to know what happened? It definitely appears you to close to the case..to be objective.

@Hypeman 18 I'm beginning to think your her dad lol...you want her to take the fall so bad... I personally want to know what happened? It definitely appears you to close to the case..to be objective.

@robert gibson Ever heard of "OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE" lying to police and detectives during an INVESTIGATION is a CRIME!!..

Ya know why??.. cause telling them that the kidnapper is someone who DOESN'T EXIST is a waste of their time and man power that could be better spent on honest leads.

@robert gibson Ever heard of "OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE" lying to police and detectives during an INVESTIGATION is a CRIME!!..

Ya know why??.. cause telling them that the kidnapper is someone who DOESN'T EXIST is a waste of their time and man power that could be better spent on honest leads.

@Hypeman 18 yes she guilty of laying...That's not a crime.... Only if in court...the point is she may be involved in much more than you "think" and that's the point.. You think. Police allowed the time waste...she cant be done for that..they a did that too (Accomplish) . Etc. Etc...Bro a crap lawyer would rip this case a new one!

@Hypeman 18 yes she guilty of laying...That's not a crime.... Only if in court...the point is she may be involved in much more than you "think" and that's the point.. You think. Police allowed the time waste...she cant be done for that..they a did that too (Accomplish) . Etc. Etc...Bro a crap lawyer would rip this case a new one!

@robert gibson I WITNESSED her lying to police and giving them FALSE LEADS.. something someone who's VERY GUILTY and is trying to cover their tracks would do.

My point is better than yours 😂😂😂. The mother is lying and giving false leads.. SHADY AF for someone who wants to find her kid.

@robert gibson I WITNESSED her lying to police and giving them FALSE LEADS.. something someone who's VERY GUILTY and is trying to cover their tracks would do.

My point is better than yours 😂😂😂. The mother is lying and giving false leads.. SHADY AF for someone who wants to find her kid.

@Hypeman 18 "SHE DID IT" did you witness it....?.... What did she do????? How did she do it??? Why did she do it????? If you not got point yet you never will....

 you think god will punish her for it? Lol if that is common sense... I will stick with plain old sense.

@Hypeman 18 "SHE DID IT" did you witness it....?.... What did she do????? How did she do it??? Why did she do it????? If you not got point yet you never will....

 you think god will punish her for it? Lol if that is common sense... I will stick with plain old sense.

@Hypeman 18 Bro you are the problem..... Dont jump to conclusions..... Without all the facts....you making same mistake as prosecution and investigers..... How many "obviously guilty" people we know for fact now are innocent? (actually look it up).... You are totally ignorant of reason......

@Hypeman 18 Bro you are the problem..... Dont jump to conclusions..... Without all the facts....you making same mistake as prosecution and investigers..... How many "obviously guilty" people we know for fact now are innocent? (actually look it up).... You are totally ignorant of reason......

@robert gibson I have 0 doubt that she either helped or did it herself. Only a person trying to not get locked up would have done everything she did.

An honest person genuinely seeking their child would have done the OPPOSITE of everything she did.

Lying to police is also AGAINST THE LAW in it of itself

@robert gibson I have 0 doubt that she either helped or did it herself. Only a person trying to not get locked up would have done everything she did.

An honest person genuinely seeking their child would have done the OPPOSITE of everything she did.

Lying to police is also AGAINST THE LAW in it of itself

@Hypeman 18 you telling me you have 0 doubt?...

@Hypeman 18 you telling me you have 0 doubt?...

@Hypeman 18 you still don't see why?... I think...she did it too...but I'm not prepared to send a lifetime victim to prison for crime she not guilty of...while the actual perpetrator is free to continue.

@Hypeman 18 you still don't see why?... I think...she did it too...but I'm not prepared to send a lifetime victim to prison for crime she not guilty of...while the actual perpetrator is free to continue.

@Hypeman 18 look up..in this thread.....like I sad before.... I explain that....she is wasting time..... The cops at fault here...3 minute phone call would have discredited... She can't believe her luck... To smart for them.... Now that don't prove she killd anyone.... It proves only that she is a lier...and will lie to no end....that don't mean she did what your accusing....

@Hypeman 18 look up..in this thread.....like I sad before.... I explain that....she is wasting time..... The cops at fault here...3 minute phone call would have discredited... She can't believe her luck... To smart for them.... Now that don't prove she killd anyone.... It proves only that she is a lier...and will lie to no end....that don't mean she did what your accusing....

@Hypeman 18 keep in mind you letting the actual perpetrator go free is the point.

@Hypeman 18 keep in mind you letting the actual perpetrator go free is the point.

@Hypeman 18 here's the reason for behaviour.... (best Guess)... Her dad has been abusing her like the defence states..(hypothetical)...she is keeping secret her dad and her wer abusing child....dad accidently kill child....etc..etc...etc...now you want to convict her of murder? Keep in mined I'm talking murder as defined..in law...what she was charged with.... See the point yet?

@Hypeman 18 here's the reason for behaviour.... (best Guess)... Her dad has been abusing her like the defence states..(hypothetical)...she is keeping secret her dad and her wer abusing child....dad accidently kill child....etc..etc...etc...now you want to convict her of murder? Keep in mined I'm talking murder as defined..in law...what she was charged with.... See the point yet?

@Hypeman 18 your correct except not excuse... Explanation.... There's a difference.... Man the argument... Hitler evil....Isn't explaining anything...... The reason for me saying this now is...if we just dismiss REASONS... How do you stop it happening again?

@Hypeman 18 your correct except not excuse... Explanation.... There's a difference.... Man the argument... Hitler evil....Isn't explaining anything...... The reason for me saying this now is...if we just dismiss REASONS... How do you stop it happening again?

@Hypeman 18 I can come up with many reasons why..... If you think about it am sure you can too....

@Hypeman 18 I can come up with many reasons why..... If you think about it am sure you can too....

@Chimene THANK YOU lol. Somebody with common sense.

@Chimene THANK YOU lol. Somebody with common sense.

@robert gibson It's a pretty fair assumption to focus on her given how SHADY AF she had been about it since DAY 1.

@robert gibson It's a pretty fair assumption to focus on her given how SHADY AF she had been about it since DAY 1.

@Hypeman 18 and let's be honest.... Day 1....she main and only suspect.... They no looking for what happened.... They looking to convict that's all.

@Hypeman 18 and let's be honest.... Day 1....she main and only suspect.... They no looking for what happened.... They looking to convict that's all.

@Hypeman 18 how do we know she was aware? For those 31 days? How do you KNOW she didn't leave child with...  x...  these questions are unanswered.... The fact is possible her dad.... She could have been being manipulated, etc...etc.... The investigators never even explore the possibility...you the guy that's it.....no other possible... Wrong....this is why OJ walked too.

@Hypeman 18 how do we know she was aware? For those 31 days? How do you KNOW she didn't leave child with...  x...  these questions are unanswered.... The fact is possible her dad.... She could have been being manipulated, etc...etc.... The investigators never even explore the possibility...you the guy that's it.....no other possible... Wrong....this is why OJ walked too.

@Hypeman 18 yes I agree I THINK... You Think.... We all think.....but what do you KNOW?...if she had a bad lawyer she still would have walked.... The circumstantial evidence was presented poorly.....they didn't do there job properly. End off....we will never know what happend.

@Hypeman 18 yes I agree I THINK... You Think.... We all think.....but what do you KNOW?...if she had a bad lawyer she still would have walked.... The circumstantial evidence was presented poorly.....they didn't do there job properly. End off....we will never know what happend.

@robert gibson Well if being negligent was to the point that for a MONTH your kid is gone and dies before any police are called then yeah... go to prison and throw away the key😂😂😂. For one she either killed or knew that her daughter had died and like with most of her life... tried to get out of it.

@robert gibson Well if being negligent was to the point that for a MONTH your kid is gone and dies before any police are called then yeah... go to prison and throw away the key😂😂😂. For one she either killed or knew that her daughter had died and like with most of her life... tried to get out of it.

@Hypeman 18 you obviously don't know the law.....is killing someone murder? Because that's what she was being tried for.....murder... I say it's more than possible she killd her child but murder? Is it possible she covering? Yes... Etc...etc...Let's hope you never accused with you on jury.

@Hypeman 18 you obviously don't know the law.....is killing someone murder? Because that's what she was being tried for.....murder... I say it's more than possible she killd her child but murder? Is it possible she covering? Yes... Etc...etc...Let's hope you never accused with you on jury.

@Hypeman 18 the "let her baby sit your kids" you know how dumb that is?..... If there's nothing else, she is guilty of is negligence of her child.... Let's put all the neglectors in jail for murder?  This your solution?

@Hypeman 18 the "let her baby sit your kids" you know how dumb that is?..... If there's nothing else, she is guilty of is negligence of her child.... Let's put all the neglectors in jail for murder?  This your solution?

@Hypeman 18 oh and you correct "shot on the dark" do you know what that means. You are guessing... And spot on with "idk" you don't know why you want to jail her....

@Hypeman 18 oh and you correct "shot on the dark" do you know what that means. You are guessing... And spot on with "idk" you don't know why you want to jail her....

@Hypeman 18 yes you *feel*...you have no clue what happened... The possibility is endless..... You need to have a specific crime... Can't just go round putting folk in jail because you *feel*....

@Hypeman 18 yes you *feel*...you have no clue what happened... The possibility is endless..... You need to have a specific crime... Can't just go round putting folk in jail because you *feel*....

@Hypeman 18 lol you fool "she did it" what??...did she do?

@Hypeman 18 lol you fool "she did it" what??...did she do?

@Ната that's the point....disappearance... Dont prove murder... Dead body don't prove murder... Killd dead body...still not proof of murder.... Murder requires intent...planing....Here in no way was proof of murder.... We know she died...we know something went wrong... We dont know if she murderd her daughter... For all we know an accident happened not even involving mother...and she panic... So many avenues Un checked...was it possible that she is guilty of manslaughter... And inoccent of murder... Etc... That's what double jeopardy is to prevent.. Got to try "me" for the correct crime... I got him the gun I'm guilty of illegal distribution of gun...not guilty of the murder etc.....Otherwise gun shops are responsible for all murder/manslaughter committed by guns they sold...and the actual murderer / killer could still be free...I hope you understand the point.

@Ната no think about it...prevention/deterrent of taking you (inoccent) to court..the law double jeopardy makes it <b>law</b> you can't try it again..it's not prevention that's inability.... It was designed to stop ✋ prosecution from from rushing to conclusions. And bring false charges. take the law murder it don't stop you from killing it stops you doing it again... Jail is the prevention/deterrent.... Murder is a specific crime...to murder you must plan it.....Otherwise it's not murder under the law definition.

@Ната no think about it...prevention/deterrent of taking you (inoccent) to court..the law double jeopardy makes it *law* you can't try it again..it's not prevention that's inability.... It was designed to stop ✋ prosecution from from rushing to conclusions. And bring false charges. take the law murder it don't stop you from killing it stops you doing it again... Jail is the prevention/deterrent.... Murder is a specific crime...to murder you must plan it.....Otherwise it's not murder under the law definition.

@robert gibson so, whats the point? There has to be evidence of murder. Mere disappearance isn't enough to convict.

@robert gibson so, whats the point? There has to be evidence of murder. Mere disappearance isn't enough to convict.

@robert gibson double jeopardy? No, how can it prevent you from being tried the first time?
It is only there to prevent another retrial.
I'm assuming it was written for the innocent people. The people that wrote it realized that innocent people will be arrested and tried sometimes and wanted to at least minimize their problems by assuring that after the "not guilty" verdict they're left alone forever.
And no overzealous DA can continue to go after them. It does happen, for whatever reason, the law enforcement people want to keep prosecuting someone. This is there so that it doesn't happen.
Your logic, that someone on trial is automatically guilty, is flawed. No one is guilty until found so in court.
And while innocent people should never end up in court, it does happen. The system takes that into consideration. That's why we have trials. If it was as you say "arrested, then guilty", we wouldn't need trials at all.

@Ната for instance if you trying to convict for murder... Of x... But all you know is evidence of disappearance... It may be the case I did kill... X....but I didn't murder..x..do you know the difference?...

@Ната for instance if you trying to convict for murder... Of x... But all you know is evidence of disappearance... It may be the case I did kill... X....but I didn't murder..x..do you know the difference?...

@Jesper I absolutely understand what you’re saying. So there is evidence which would be proven to be fact and there is circumstantial evidence which is not proven to be fact at all. This is one case that I would say there is beyond enough circumstantial evidence to prove guilt. That being said, 99.9% of Convictions are based upon circumstantial evidence and should have been found innocent and not sent to prison. It Hass to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and most citizens are ignorant the jury pool is ignorant and doesn’t even comprehend what that means. Everything is against the American citizens, from the patrol officers to the detectives to the prosecutors to the Jury and the fact that it cost money to run a jail if it is funded by the government and it’s profitable if it is privately owned is a big factor in everything working against us.

@Ната then it's for the guilty not inoccent.... It's definitely to prevent you from beginning tried first time round...no second chance.

@Ната then it's for the guilty not inoccent.... It's definitely to prevent you from beginning tried first time round...no second chance.

@robert gibson no, double jeopardy was created to prevent retrials after acquittal. Burden of proof is there to hopefully avoid convictions of innocent.
Miranda laws are there to help the innocent not give incriminating statements.
And grand jury is there to prevent indictments, if the proof is not there.
There are a bunch of mechanisms in place that are supposed to protect the innocent at every step.

@robert gibson no, double jeopardy was created to prevent retrials after acquittal. Burden of proof is there to hopefully avoid convictions of innocent.
Miranda laws are there to help the innocent not give incriminating statements.
And grand jury is there to prevent indictments, if the proof is not there.
There are a bunch of mechanisms in place that are supposed to protect the innocent at every step.

@Ната just to be clear... Double jeopardy was created to prevent inoccent being tried at all...(The first time)....if you inoccent you shouldn't be at court in first place....Burdon of proof. And the worst thing you can do if you innocent is talk to the police.... It only helps them build circumstantial evidence against you...if you a witness to a crime that's different but you have to be an actual witness you know what happend... No good if you in as "witness" if you have no idea. Best to stay quite... Give nothing... Anything you think might be useful to them probably is in case against you...

@Ната just to be clear... Double jeopardy was created to prevent inoccent being tried at all...(The first time)....if you inoccent you shouldn't be at court in first place....Burdon of proof. And the worst thing you can do if you innocent is talk to the police.... It only helps them build circumstantial evidence against you...if you a witness to a crime that's different but you have to be an actual witness you know what happend... No good if you in as "witness" if you have no idea. Best to stay quite... Give nothing... Anything you think might be useful to them probably is in case against you...

@robert gibson yeah I know)) she was charged with murder but under the double jeopardy law or clause or whatever it is, couldn't be charged again when she actually killed him (did she actually kill him or just wanted to? Can't remember, been a while)

@robert gibson yeah I know)) she was charged with murder but under the double jeopardy law or clause or whatever it is, couldn't be charged again when she actually killed him (did she actually kill him or just wanted to? Can't remember, been a while)

@Biały with you on the jury you'd better hope you're never accused of anything.

@Biały with you on the jury you'd better hope you're never accused of anything.

@Ната oh aye it's definitely for the innocent.... this leads to my original post and point...it's the investigator and more to the point the prosecution that's at fault in both these cases.... They assume they got there guy so don't investigate other possible avenue... If the charge her for negligence that's the charge that would stick...now you have time to build case for x...what ever the charge may be....and justice may have been carried out....

But the prosecution too often successfully convict without hard evidence. This is the problem.. And why double jeopardy was created.to prevent inoccent being tried the first time..it's not supposed to get to court if you innocent. It's the prosecution job to go after the crime of x....cops gather information "evidence" the prosecution decide what changes to bring forward. And because they used to getting conviction with less circumstantial evidence. This is actually an example of a good jury than good defence...a poor lawyer would get her off this charge, Presented the way it was.

@Biały you think this circumstantial evidence proves murder? Please explain?

@Biały you think this circumstantial evidence proves murder? Please explain?

@Biały no one is saying that<br>..the argument is for what crime?

@Biały no one is saying that
..the argument is for what crime?

@Ната he well out from that incident. But did go to jail for robbery.

@Ната he well out from that incident. But did go to jail for robbery.

Gibson of course, and guilty people will hide behind that law. He will never tell all because he will be tried again. Though isn't he already locked up for robbery?<br>But I think the law was written to protect the innocent first. At least that's my hope.

Gibson of course, and guilty people will hide behind that law. He will never tell all because he will be tried again. Though isn't he already locked up for robbery?
But I think the law was written to protect the innocent first. At least that's my hope.

@Ната sorry my bad...I know what you mean...the point you made is that "imagine being innocent and being tried twice" etc.. My question was why not tell all...if OJ can't be tried?...  "Obvious can be" well that's contradiction... The actual law double jeopardy... is like I said you got to be sure! You can't just go half ass accusations. The reason OJ can't do tell all is that they would charge him with a different degree of murder..... Plus perjury etc....

@Ната sorry my bad...I know what you mean...the point you made is that "imagine being innocent and being tried twice" etc.. My question was why not tell all...if OJ can't be tried?...  "Obvious can be" well that's contradiction... The actual law double jeopardy... is like I said you got to be sure! You can't just go half ass accusations. The reason OJ can't do tell all is that they would charge him with a different degree of murder..... Plus perjury etc....

@Ната ps the movie is named after the law double jeopardy. She is being charged under the law murder. Hope I'm understood.

@Ната ps the movie is named after the law double jeopardy. She is being charged under the law murder. Hope I'm understood.

@robert gibson I already forgot the original question and the points, the thread is too long to dig. <br>Can you explain?

@robert gibson I already forgot the original question and the points, the thread is too long to dig.
Can you explain?

@Biały I'm talking about by law. She didn't have to name anyone or do anything at all.
Heartless has nothing to do with it, juries aren't allowed to bring emotions into their decisions.
The evidence wasn't there. To convict someone of murder, you have to prove HOW the victim died. This wasn't proven.

@Biały I'm talking about by law. She didn't have to name anyone or do anything at all.
Heartless has nothing to do with it, juries aren't allowed to bring emotions into their decisions.
The evidence wasn't there. To convict someone of murder, you have to prove HOW the victim died. This wasn't proven.

@Ната not if time is served. Lol yes I remember the movie.... The crime can't be tried again.... And would be thrown out so fast you'd not see it for dust....how can you be sure the person done it....that was your point being flung back at you lol....was the point of asking original question.

@Ната not if time is served. Lol yes I remember the movie.... The crime can't be tried again.... And would be thrown out so fast you'd not see it for dust....how can you be sure the person done it....that was your point being flung back at you lol....was the point of asking original question.

@Ната "she didn't have to name anyone." nope, mother of 2 years old kids should be able to answer the question who is taking care of her kid. Only someone heartless can watch all this evidence and say that he is not sure if she should end up in jail... and that is my beat why she was able to win her freedom, jury also wanted to be free...

@Ната "she didn't have to name anyone." nope, mother of 2 years old kids should be able to answer the question who is taking care of her kid. Only someone heartless can watch all this evidence and say that he is not sure if she should end up in jail... and that is my beat why she was able to win her freedom, jury also wanted to be free...

@Ната I agree with you on loads of points you made here..throughout this comment section...I fully understand why someone innocent wouldn't want to go through it again...and why we have/had double jeopardy law in first place...to stop people being convicted of crime they didn't commit. it is infact a crime to imprison falsely... Double jeopardy ment if you accuse me I had better have done it... For instance my wife runs off you say I killed her I go jail she turns up I'm released I kill wife no jail I done my time..get my point?

@Ната I agree with you on loads of points you made here..throughout this comment section...I fully understand why someone innocent wouldn't want to go through it again...and why we have/had double jeopardy law in first place...to stop people being convicted of crime they didn't commit. it is infact a crime to imprison falsely... Double jeopardy ment if you accuse me I had better have done it... For instance my wife runs off you say I killed her I go jail she turns up I'm released I kill wife no jail I done my time..get my point?

@robert gibson I'm not sure. From 1 point of view, if the person is obviously guilty, he got away. <br>From another point. If someone is innocent and he spent years and tons of money and nerves fighting the crime, is found not guilty and then to start the process over... cruel

@robert gibson I'm not sure. From 1 point of view, if the person is obviously guilty, he got away.
From another point. If someone is innocent and he spent years and tons of money and nerves fighting the crime, is found not guilty and then to start the process over... cruel

@Ната was thinking more on the subject of double jeopardy... It must be reformed in US too...why else wouldn't OJ or woman here not just Wright a tell all? Make a fortune can't be charged with murder again? Why not?...Can't be charged with much other than obstruction / perjury. What's to stop the state going for those charges now? Why did prosecution try for murder? Why not negligence and build later a case of murder... Those are two separate crimes.

@Ната was thinking more on the subject of double jeopardy... It must be reformed in US too...why else wouldn't OJ or woman here not just Wright a tell all? Make a fortune can't be charged with murder again? Why not?...Can't be charged with much other than obstruction / perjury. What's to stop the state going for those charges now? Why did prosecution try for murder? Why not negligence and build later a case of murder... Those are two separate crimes.

The more I think about this case she'd need to have the worst lawyer in the world to be convicted of murder. She may be the coldest most calculated murderer ever...the state screwd the case big time... She was way to smart for the cops and prosecution. Had them 2 steps may have been 5 steps behind the whole time. Those cops and prosecution were the ones that wer naive. She had me too....I thought she was dumb lol...if she done it she is sharp as a razor.... And pland it all methodically... Those prosecutors should be sacked! For gross incompetents. And the cops need re training.

You know why she laugh out loud at universal? She can't believe her luck they letting her waist time.....to the absolute fullest.

A phone call could have taken 3 minutes to discredit...but they went TV show on it....Let's visit with you...I starting to think those cops are part of pedo ring.....why allow the shirad? Ether incompetents or involved.

If shes not in prison anyone paid too much for it...

If shes not in prison anyone paid too much for it...

@Michal Satin yes for me and I'm sure the law it's first breath defines "life". I do however think there's a point of no return, before birth. And shouldn't be done without full consultation (options). By no way in my opinion do "life" start at conception. If that was the case I'd ask the person making that point...who is responsible for still birth? I fully understand you understand my point..the fact you reinforce my point of what to do with unwanted kids...tells me this. The funny thing about this is those that argue "morality" often are the most immoral people.

@Michal Satin yes for me and I'm sure the law it's first breath defines "life". I do however think there's a point of no return, before birth. And shouldn't be done without full consultation (options). By no way in my opinion do "life" start at conception. If that was the case I'd ask the person making that point...who is responsible for still birth? I fully understand you understand my point..the fact you reinforce my point of what to do with unwanted kids...tells me this. The funny thing about this is those that argue "morality" often are the most immoral people.

@AnCap Asuka no one had access to her home? She lived with her parents.

@AnCap Asuka no one had access to her home? She lived with her parents.

@Chimene another example if "god" and "heaven" exist what did she do that was wrong? She sent her child to "heaven" or do you go to "hell" if you're murderd? Why punish at all on earth? She ensuring "eternal bliss in heaven" for her innocent child....see the point I'm making?

@Chimene another example if "god" and "heaven" exist what did she do that was wrong? She sent her child to "heaven" or do you go to "hell" if you're murderd? Why punish at all on earth? She ensuring "eternal bliss in heaven" for her innocent child....see the point I'm making?

@Chimene I infact am a very reasonable person. This is why I don't accept god hypotheses. I'm against religion. You provide excuse rather than explanation. So for instance saying she 😈 takes out the need for why? Why she done it matters. How she did it matters. <b>If</b> she did it MATTERS. Etc... Punishment/treatment matters here on earth. Death is nothingness.

@Chimene I infact am a very reasonable person. This is why I don't accept god hypotheses. I'm against religion. You provide excuse rather than explanation. So for instance saying she 😈 takes out the need for why? Why she done it matters. How she did it matters. *If* she did it MATTERS. Etc... Punishment/treatment matters here on earth. Death is nothingness.

@Chimene you miss the point..your explanation gives the opportunity to etc.... You are the one devoid of reality... That's the point. Materialistic?  What gives that impression... Couldn't be farther from the truth.

@Chimene you miss the point..your explanation gives the opportunity to etc.... You are the one devoid of reality... That's the point. Materialistic?  What gives that impression... Couldn't be farther from the truth.

@Chimene again unfortunately that's fantasy. What was "life" like before you wer born? It's the same in death. Free will? Non argument what free will did that child have? Why is a child born with disabilities? Why me Etc... Again we don't have all the facts.

@Chimene again unfortunately that's fantasy. What was "life" like before you wer born? It's the same in death. Free will? Non argument what free will did that child have? Why is a child born with disabilities? Why me Etc... Again we don't have all the facts.

@Zack Fair I dare you to come find me zack😂  you seem like great fun

@Zack Fair I dare you to come find me zack😂  you seem like great fun

@Jesus save watch it all...That's the problem... Dont jump to conclusions without the facts.

@Jesus save watch it all...That's the problem... Dont jump to conclusions without the facts.

She really got away o my word am not going to watch the next 70 percent

She really got away o my word am not going to watch the next 70 percent

@robert gibson Thanks man. After my previous comment studied about it a bit becise i was not satysfied with my lack of opinion. And yes i understand what you mean and i agree. I dont think that you are allways obliged to save a life no matter the cost (like donating your organs, paying all of your money or something like that). Also the problem with foster homes (what to do with kids after they are born). And in the end i still don't think that life begins at conception so these arguments are a bit  useless because its again very hard to draw the line.

@robert gibson Thanks man. After my previous comment studied about it a bit becise i was not satysfied with my lack of opinion. And yes i understand what you mean and i agree. I dont think that you are allways obliged to save a life no matter the cost (like donating your organs, paying all of your money or something like that). Also the problem with foster homes (what to do with kids after they are born). And in the end i still don't think that life begins at conception so these arguments are a bit  useless because its again very hard to draw the line.

@Ната #1 UK law is basis for us law. #2 I'm familiar with both and couldn't remember if us followed suit. Thanks though for clarification.

@Ната #1 UK law is basis for us law. #2 I'm familiar with both and couldn't remember if us followed suit. Thanks though for clarification.

@robert gibson what does uk law has to do with usa law? <br>No, from what I'm seeing, this is still the case: no retrials for same crimes.

@robert gibson what does uk law has to do with usa law?
No, from what I'm seeing, this is still the case: no retrials for same crimes.

@Chimene also surly "god" don't "deal with her" for something that's part of his plan?

@Chimene also surly "god" don't "deal with her" for something that's part of his plan?

@Chimene it's like saying devil made her do it...it diminishes her guilt / responsiblity... And the fact is we don't know what happened.

@Chimene it's like saying devil made her do it...it diminishes her guilt / responsiblity... And the fact is we don't know what happened.

@Chimene unfortunately that's fantasy.

For the very last comment you made to me... I am unable to reply... I have been silenced.... It's unfortunate as I would like to continue that line of conversation.... I know you will not see this...to be honest I have not looked at the subject in detail for a long time...if you define "god" it makes this conversation well easier. You Buddhist Christian that's a new one for me... That's the problem with religions Cherry picking that's how we ended up with diverse Christianity in first place.. Divers religion really. We sun worshipers... At end of the day.... And at beginning of all religion lol

@Chimene unfortunately that's fantasy.

For the very last comment you made to me... I am unable to reply... I have been silenced.... It's unfortunate as I would like to continue that line of conversation.... I know you will not see this...to be honest I have not looked at the subject in detail for a long time...if you define "god" it makes this conversation well easier. You Buddhist Christian that's a new one for me... That's the problem with religions Cherry picking that's how we ended up with diverse Christianity in first place.. Divers religion really. We sun worshipers... At end of the day.... And at beginning of all religion lol

@Howling Eclipse what's obvious?
she is a liar that's all that's obvious. How you know it's wasn't....?..... And she covering. I'm positive she knows what happened I'm not positive she did it...the prosecution fails to prove the narrative "20+ and free" . It infact don't make scenes. Why kill why not just leave with parents? They both staying at parents already. Bringing me to think it's possible she telling some truth with the abuse... How you know it's not her dad or etc? We will never know what really happened.

@Howling Eclipse what's obvious?
she is a liar that's all that's obvious. How you know it's wasn't....?..... And she covering. I'm positive she knows what happened I'm not positive she did it...the prosecution fails to prove the narrative "20+ and free" . It infact don't make scenes. Why kill why not just leave with parents? They both staying at parents already. Bringing me to think it's *possible* she telling some truth with the abuse... How you know it's not her dad or etc? We will never know what really happened.

@Ната I'm sure double jeopardy has been reformed... It has in uk anyway.

@Ната I'm sure double jeopardy has been reformed... It has in uk anyway.

@One Punch Flan it's rarely no choice to father. And your whole argument is invalid. What gives you the right to force anyone to do something they don't want to?
Do you know how many children are abused by parents that not only don't want to be parents they shouldn't be. Can't afford to be etc...
How many kids in foster homes etc... Any idea of the damage that causes to a "life". Question are you pro death penalty?

@One Punch Flan it's rarely no choice to father. And your whole argument is invalid. What gives you the right to *force* anyone to do something they don't want to?
Do you know how many children are abused by parents that not only don't want to be parents they shouldn't be. Can't afford to be etc...
How many kids in foster homes etc... Any idea of the damage that causes to a "life". Question are you pro death penalty?

Fun fact: she’s currently trying to start a private investigation firm to profit off of her situation. Absolute bullshit that stuff like this slides in the law system. Instead of people getting what they deserve, they benefit from their crimes. Ridiculous.

Fun fact: she’s currently trying to start a private investigation firm to profit off of her situation. Absolute bullshit that stuff like this slides in the law system. Instead of people getting what they deserve, they benefit from their crimes. Ridiculous.

@Zack Fair lmao bet you’re a Casey Anthony sock account😂

@Zack Fair lmao bet you’re a Casey Anthony sock account😂

@Michal Satin I I know it's your choice (no pun intended) but o would like to sway you to pro choice.  I totally agree with depends on how you define "life", however pro choice is the only choice (pun intended) how many children are in foster homes? How many children get abused by people who don't only not want to be parents they shouldn't be.<br>The pro choice pros far out wagh the negative.... The negatives far out wagh the pro life pro. Pro life= all negative realy no pro to it.

@Michal Satin I I know it's your choice (no pun intended) but o would like to sway you to pro choice.  I totally agree with depends on how you define "life", however pro choice is the only choice (pun intended) how many children are in foster homes? How many children get abused by people who don't only not want to be parents they shouldn't be.
The pro choice pros far out wagh the negative.... The negatives far out wagh the pro life pro. Pro life= all negative realy no pro to it.

@Kitty Kat that's not evidence of anything other than she lies. This don't prove murder, How you know it wasn't the boyfriend or grandfather etc...?

Loads of people lie about the dumbest things, some of them confess to crimes they didn't commit.. I'm in no way saying she is innocent... Just that's not proof guilt.

I wonder how many innocent people would be jaild and guilty go free using your logic. Well you lied about that so your a???

@Kitty Kat that's not evidence of anything other than she lies. This don't prove murder, How you know it wasn't the boyfriend or grandfather etc...?

Loads of people lie about the dumbest things, some of them confess to crimes they didn't commit.. I'm in no way saying she is innocent... Just that's not proof guilt.

I wonder how many innocent people would be jaild and guilty go free using your logic. Well you lied about that so your a???

@Digger Gardi no, just checked. Cannot be tried again for the same crime.
Only 2 exceptions are, if the crime is different and a different jurisdiction can try you for the same crime. Though I'm not sure how this works, maybe if the crime was committed in multiple jurisdictions.

So, no, safe to say, she will never be retried.

@Digger Gardi no, just checked. Cannot be tried again for the same crime.
Only 2 exceptions are, if the crime is different and a different jurisdiction can try you for the same crime. Though I'm not sure how this works, maybe if the crime was committed in multiple jurisdictions.

So, no, safe to say, she will never be retried.

@Jesper glad to see someone else that knows the difference between thinking and knowing for a fact. Definitely a dangerous game to play giving up the burden of proof.

It was a failure by the investigator/prosecution... After all who knows, it may have been??? And she "protecting"... I always feel slightly dissatisfied at prosecution explanations....because they always nothing more than theory without confession. Just best geuss as evidence *suggests*.

@Jesper glad to see someone else that knows the difference between *thinking* and knowing for a fact. Definitely a dangerous game to play giving up the burden of proof.

It was a failure by the investigator/prosecution... After all who knows, it may have been??? And she "protecting"... I always feel slightly dissatisfied at prosecution explanations....because they always nothing more than theory without confession. Just best geuss as evidence *suggests*.

@nikolas it's the prosecution not the jury at fault.... Her lawyer made a good argument... Keep in mind the jury didn't get to see her interrogations... How she didn't get found guilty of negligence I'll never know...the proof of that was 31 days no report.... But can totally see why not guilty of murder etc...even though I "know" (think) she did it....as I have so many questions about this? It's the biggest flaw in the system is prosecution present hypotheses/theory as facts...instead of doing what they supposed to be doing (finding out what happened)... To gain <b>conviction*...That's all that matters to prosecution. Cops try to fined out what happened. But are constantly trying to trap you, truth gets so distorted who knows what actually happened? Only her and anyone else involved... Fact of the matter is, it was a big mistake by the cop at start in thinking he didn't need confession... It is "obvious" to *assume</b> her guilt but proving it is different matter. You know what they say about those who "ass u me ". From this did they prove she did it? In your mined?.... For me the answer is no. I'm still no clear on what happend... I mean the prosecution case is she did it to be "20+ and free" That's no motive.. She lived with her parents she could have just left the child with her parents...?... Possibley she was abused? This then opens more questions and possibilities.... Prosecution / investigators fails to prove she did it no doubt... I hope I'm understood. Now We will never ever know what happened because of the failure of the state...officials... She has no need to tell all.

@nikolas it's the prosecution not the jury at fault.... Her lawyer made a good argument... Keep in mind the jury didn't get to see her interrogations... How she didn't get found guilty of negligence I'll never know...the proof of that was 31 days no report.... But can totally see why not guilty of murder etc...even though I "know" (think) she did it....as I have so many questions about this? It's the biggest flaw in the system is prosecution present hypotheses/theory as facts...instead of doing what they supposed to be doing (finding out what happened)... To gain *conviction*...That's all that matters to prosecution. Cops try to fined out what happened. But are constantly trying to trap you, truth gets so distorted who knows what actually happened? Only her and anyone else involved... Fact of the matter is, it was a big mistake by the cop at start in thinking he didn't need confession... It is "obvious" to *assume* her guilt but proving it is different matter. You know what they say about those who "ass u me ". From this did they prove she did it? In your mined?.... For me the answer is no. I'm still no clear on what happend... I mean the prosecution case is she did it to be "20+ and free" That's no motive.. She lived with her parents she could have just left the child with her parents...?... Possibley she was abused? This then opens more questions and possibilities.... Prosecution / investigators fails to prove she did it no doubt... I hope I'm understood. Now We will never ever know what happened because of the failure of the state...officials... She has no need to tell all.

I agree  not enough evidence on this crime they say Bolney  the car  - she goes on partying after the fact her composer  no grief  what so ever she  did it and she got away with it periode  no one else committed this crime and how she got out of it is beyond me  evidence her car  should have gave them a huge clue ..

I agree  not enough evidence on this crime they say Bolney  the car  - she goes on partying after the fact her composer  no grief  what so ever she  did it and she got away with it periode  no one else committed this crime and how she got out of it is beyond me  evidence her car  should have gave them a huge clue ..

Her home is googable. What is stooping you from arming yourself, training and handling this? BE the HERO America needs.

Her home is googable. What is stooping you from arming yourself, training and handling this? BE the HERO America needs.

Just hope they really making the reality TV show Even if it's not funny at all. In the end

Just hope they really making the reality TV show Even if it's not funny at all. In the end

@caromela Stop telling court what to do or not.

@caromela Stop telling court what to do or not.

@Zack Fair double negative. Since that wasn’t proven in court by DNA, I wouldn’t make the claim.

@Zack Fair double negative. Since that wasn’t proven in court by DNA, I wouldn’t make the claim.

i just started and saw this, and I absolutely hate injustice, so I think i'll head to another video so i dont get mad

i just started and saw this, and I absolutely hate injustice, so I think i'll head to another video so i dont get mad

Same it angers me. It's so obvious. I don't get how she got away with this

Same it angers me. It's so obvious. I don't get how she got away with this

just because we have know. the fact the state brought a poor case is the problem. had the jury given a guilty verdict it would create implication in the future that none of us want. a case closed without a solid conclusion

just because we have know. the fact the state brought a poor case is the problem. had the jury given a guilty verdict it would create implication in the future that none of us want. a case closed without a solid conclusion

@Ducky Feathers So was OJ Simpson. Strange, they never found the killer huh?

@Ducky Feathers So was OJ Simpson. Strange, they never found the killer huh?

@Digger Gardi no, I'm pretty sure no matter what evidence emerges she cannot be tried again. The only thing is, I think that law is on a state by state basis. I would have to check fl law

@Digger Gardi no, I'm pretty sure no matter what evidence emerges she cannot be tried again. The only thing is, I think that law is on a state by state basis. I would have to check fl law

It's Florida... Insane shit happens there daily.

It's Florida... Insane shit happens there daily.

@gabi OK so you get to kill your child before it's born and a father has no say. Personally I think that's a crime against humanity. If women have the choice to not have a child and kill it. Then is fathers should have the choice to not want to be in the child's life. However this conversation doesn't really need to be in this comment section.

@gabi OK so you get to kill your child before it's born and a father has no say. Personally I think that's a crime against humanity. If women have the choice to not have a child and kill it. Then is fathers should have the choice to not want to be in the child's life. However this conversation doesn't really need to be in this comment section.

@Jason Gardner Another race baiter. Let rational adults talk please.

@Jason Gardner Another race baiter. Let rational adults talk please.

@A M how did you come up with 0.7% number. Prove it

@A M how did you come up with 0.7% number. Prove it

@Alanna Jackson race card. Why am I not surprised.

@Alanna Jackson race card. Why am I not surprised.

@Fifi abortion is definitely murder. If you have an abortion you killed your child there's no question.

@Fifi abortion is definitely murder. If you have an abortion you killed your child there's no question.

@Jesper exactly man, this happend a lot in the past. When you have real prove, the least mistakes will be made. A lot of people have been misjudged in the past, mostly because their wasnt enough evidence in the end. This sometimes even caused unguilty people to stay in jail for the rest of their lives. I personally find it really sad to see someone get a way with such a crime,  but its not the fault of the judges because they probably decided by the evidence that was given, but there wasnt any really😑

@Jesper exactly man, this happend a lot in the past. When you have real prove, the least mistakes will be made. A lot of people have been misjudged in the past, mostly because their wasnt enough evidence in the end. This sometimes even caused unguilty people to stay in jail for the rest of their lives. I personally find it really sad to see someone get a way with such a crime,  but its not the fault of the judges because they probably decided by the evidence that was given, but there wasnt any really😑

@Kitty Kat i understand what you are saying, and i thought about that the same way at first. Like a big part of this comment section is saying and you to, it seems very obvious that she killed her daughter. But like a lot of people said, you cant prove her guilty from her strange behavior and lies continuesly trough the investigations. Im sure that the judges (or at least some of them) that voted her unguilty didnt do that simply out of stupidity. I think that if you have a job like the judges or those investigators, you learn and you know that you just cant decide whether someone is guilty or not just by listening to what you think and what you find logical. Youve gotta come up with diehard prove.
When someone only judges by their experience, intuition and feeling then their is a way bigger change of making mistakes. At least in this scenario.
Im not trying to say that your totally wrong. Im also sure that she killed her daughter and its really sad to see  her getting away with such a crime....

I’m just here to read all the expert’s opinions. Lol. Not guilty.

I’m just here to read all the expert’s opinions. Lol. Not guilty.

Being pissed off about it and shouting in social media is exactly what got her off the hook though. If this case had not been blown up by media, that defense lawyer would have had absolutely nothing to derail the jury from all the other evidence pointing to only her being able to kill her child. Simply stunning what he did, and that the jury fell for it, but that's the world we live in now.

Being pissed off about it and shouting in social media is exactly what got her off the hook though. If this case had not been blown up by media, that defense lawyer would have had absolutely nothing to derail the jury from all the other evidence pointing to only her being able to kill her child. Simply stunning what he did, and that the jury fell for it, but that's the world we live in now.

@Kitty Kat none of these prove she killed Caylee. In court it's what you can prove not what you know or think.

@Kitty Kat none of these prove she killed Caylee. In court it's what you can prove not what you know or think.

in the words of how to get away with murder: there is no such thing as justice there's only the best liar👁👄👁

in the words of how to get away with murder: there is no such thing as justice there's only the best liar👁👄👁

@Kitty Kat circumstantial evidence isn't really good enough

@Kitty Kat circumstantial evidence isn't really good enough

@nikolas they all probably new but you can't do anything without some form of hard case

@nikolas they all probably new but you can't do anything without some form of hard case

Wait she is free ? I m at begining of the video video said smelling car baggage and she is free? WHAT ?

Wait she is free ? I m at begining of the video video said smelling car baggage and she is free? WHAT ?

That's what a good lawyer gets her. To get away with murder

That's what a good lawyer gets her. To get away with murder

@Jesper It is proven, it's just that prosecution didn't put forward their evidences properly. The duct tape, the Google search, body in the trunk for a couple of days (even if she drowned, nothing explains keeping the body in the trunk for that long, also where did the duct tape come in that case?). The diary, what she did later (no sign of sadness, if she actually saw her kid die, and was lying to herself, she would be in pain!) If she saw her daughter drown, what explains her Google search "foolproof suffocation"? That makes no sense. There is proof, the jury is not able to put together and understand the scenario, the prosecution didn't put forward it in the best way.

@Jesper It is proven, it's just that prosecution didn't put forward their evidences properly. The duct tape, the Google search, body in the trunk for a couple of days (even if she drowned, nothing explains keeping the body in the trunk for that long, also where did the duct tape come in that case?). The diary, what she did later (no sign of sadness, if she actually saw her kid die, and was lying to herself, she would be in pain!) If she saw her daughter drown, what explains her Google search "foolproof suffocation"? That makes no sense. There is proof, the jury is not able to put together and understand the scenario, the prosecution didn't put forward it in the best way.

She got away with it because the degraded evidence left room for doubt as to whether she did it or someone in her family did it, which was the defence's argument if I remember it correctly. If they had found the body sooner before the evidence degraded it may have been different but yeah she does appear to have gotten away with murder, or at best covering up an accident like a drowning or something. There was really just the evidence of that tape combined with her behavior and really that behavior is what we are all upset about because that's what makes us feel certain she's guilty.

She got away with it because the degraded evidence left room for doubt as to whether she did it or someone in her family did it, which was the defence's argument if I remember it correctly. If they had found the body sooner before the evidence degraded it may have been different but yeah she does appear to have gotten away with murder, or at best covering up an accident like a drowning or something. There was really just the evidence of that tape combined with her behavior and really that behavior is what we are all upset about because that's what makes us feel certain she's guilty.

@John Charles hold on there dude, you don't know me so don't start making assumptions. If there's no "reasonable doubt" how is it she won the case? Clearly you didn't take time to understand what I said but rather you jumped right in to respond

@John Charles hold on there dude, you don't know me so don't start making assumptions. If there's no "reasonable doubt" how is it she won the case? Clearly you didn't take time to understand what I said but rather you jumped right in to respond

I know its no ethical or right to get invested into cases like this but this shit was the dumbest shit server your right and it pissed me off to man...

I know its no ethical or right to get invested into cases like this but this shit was the dumbest shit server your right and it pissed me off to man...

@Collin Phiri so first you say it's not what you know it's what you can prove in court....then you say the defense has to prove their innocence that the prosecutors don't have to prove their guilt because how else would innocent people get put in jail if that's how it really worked. this proves what you said is a myth.  You realize that you just made both of those points in unison and acted like they meant the same thing when they are the exact opposite. Why would they have to prove their innocence if the prosecutor can't prove their guilt it's not what you know it's what you can prove in court I thought u said? But it's a myth clearly...

@Collin Phiri so first you say it's not what you know it's what you can prove in court....then you say the defense has to prove their innocence that the prosecutors don't have to prove their guilt because how else would innocent people get put in jail if that's how it really worked. this proves what you said is a myth.  You realize that you just made both of those points in unison and acted like they meant the same thing when they are the exact opposite. Why would they have to prove their innocence if the prosecutor can't prove their guilt it's not what you know it's what you can prove in court I thought u said? But it's a myth clearly...

@Collin Phiri that's not what you said,  and either way you're just trying to get out of the fact that what you said is objectively wrong. I don't know what made you think that's how you spell innocent but it also lets me know just how experienced you really are with law and how you're just repeating something your dad or a teacher said that you have no real understanding of how it works in the real world. If you don't get why what you said is wrong, it's because you're not there to prove your innocence they are there to prove your guilt you're supposed to be innocent till proven guilty so why do you need to prove your innocence. You don't need to prove your innocence you just need to prove Reasonable Doubt. There was no reasonable doubt that she at the very minimum was responsible for her daughter's death when the police asked her how does it help us find your daughter to tell us all these lies for a month she admits "it doesn't." So why would she not want the police to find her daughter there is only one thing that's reasonable... she killed her.

seriously... I HATE this justice system. it’s so disappointing and heart breaking for caylee 😞

seriously... I HATE this justice system. it’s so disappointing and heart breaking for caylee 😞

How she got away with this is absolutely absurd, disgusting and complete reflection on the justice system. Shame on her and the jury.. I wonder if the jury on this case "sleeps pretty well at night"?.. hope they don't. We're talking about a 3 year old for god's sake! NO mother would act like this if not guilty. Wtf!? Disgusting she's walking free with a smile on her face sleeping well at night. God bless you Caylee.

How she got away with this is absolutely absurd, disgusting and complete reflection on the justice system. Shame on her and the jury.. I wonder if the jury on this case "sleeps pretty well at night"?.. hope they don't. We're talking about a 3 year old for god's sake! NO mother would act like this if not guilty. Wtf!? Disgusting she's walking free with a smile on her face sleeping well at night. God bless you Caylee.

@nikolas yeah its fucked. Nobody does life for selling pot tho...

@nikolas yeah its fucked. Nobody does life for selling pot tho...

shes socially ostracized though. she did spend a few years in jail. she had to declare bankruptcy with the cost of the search. there was also a law called caylees law enacted in several states because of this case.

shes socially ostracized though. she did spend a few years in jail. she had to declare bankruptcy with the cost of the search. there was also a law called caylees law enacted in several states because of this case.

The only people that don't think so were apparently that jury.

The only people that don't think so were apparently that jury.

@nikolasThe whole jury system is completely broken tbh.

@nikolasThe whole jury system is completely broken tbh.

Thank you for your comment. At least I did not waste an hour and 9 minutes of my time. The decision of the jury is utterly disgusting.

Thank you for your comment. At least I did not waste an hour and 9 minutes of my time. The decision of the jury is utterly disgusting.

@Jesper She did not know or care where her child was for over a month while she partied and got tattoo and began her new life.
She showed no emotions towards recovering and finding her daughter.
She searched suffocation and smothering on the day her child went missing and was found suffercated.
She lied about her daughters baby sitters.
She consistently lied and took the police to a place she worked years ago, then just laughed and said she was lying.
She never offered the police any help in their investigation and offered nothing to suggest she was innocent.
Is this now a free woman? its an absolute disgrace.
She accused her father of child abuse to try and get off?

@Jesper She did not know or care where her child was for over a month while she partied and got tattoo and began her new life.
She showed no emotions towards recovering and finding her daughter.
She searched suffocation and smothering on the day her child went missing and was found suffercated.
She lied about her daughters baby sitters.
She consistently lied and took the police to a place she worked years ago, then just laughed and said she was lying.
She never offered the police any help in their investigation and offered nothing to suggest she was innocent.
Is this now a free woman? its an absolute disgrace.
She accused her father of child abuse to try and get off?

@Jose You don’t understand what burden of proof means.

@Jose You don’t understand what burden of proof means.

@John Charles if you can prove your incense you won't be jailed. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that innocent people don't end up in jail and guilty people roam free, it's just how well they presented their case. Hence I said that

@John Charles if you can prove your incense you won't be jailed. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that innocent people don't end up in jail and guilty people roam free, it's just how well they presented their case. Hence I said that

Yeah, this may be the only one of these videos that I can't finish because it's so upsetting.

Yeah, this may be the only one of these videos that I can't finish because it's so upsetting.

I am fucking blown away how she could get away with this.

I am fucking blown away how she could get away with this.

Reading these replies I am baffled at the people defending this verdict. Throwing arguments like "they didn't prove anything" "reasonable doubt". Casey had proven means, motive, and opportunity. There have been MANY cases with the same situation or less that have brought in a guilty verdict with this system working. If you are defending the verdict you could be convinced of anyone's innocence because of your misunderstanding of reasonable doubt and a lack of logic. Yes, you should be convicted with circumstantial evidence and people do any the system is made to convict people with circumstantial evidence. Just because a piece of evidence in circumstantial does not mean you throw it out. The jury was swayed by a defense attorney and Caylee was failed to the point people defend her mother and the system that failed her. Shame.

So much evidence yet still she goes free. Damn, that's fucked up.

So much evidence yet still she goes free. Damn, that's fucked up.

What pisses me off more is that she can come out today and say “yea I killed her” and there is nothing that can be done about it.

What pisses me off more is that she can come out today and say “yea I killed her” and there is nothing that can be done about it.

Same.. I jumped when she got off Scott free. Looks like she was able to lie herself outta the system as well.

Same.. I jumped when she got off Scott free. Looks like she was able to lie herself outta the system as well.

@Ната  I didn't say she did have to, but if she were to not know who took her child, there's no sign of a break-in, at the very least she can be charged with neglect.
Two people had access to the home, her and her boyfriend.
The body was hidden, so the pool story doesn't make sense, the body was wrapped in a blanket which would have been in the house or car, and since the body had to have been transported, the evidence of the mother smelling death in the trunk is enough to fit the circumstances.

The tape was on her head, not used to hold the blanket around her, it's not like the tape was on the blanket and somehow ended up on her head, that doesn't make any sense, there's no reason for the tape on the body if not to block her air.

You keep saying you have questions, but you have yet to say what those questions are.
I have questions about many killers and terrorists who were convicted of their crimes, that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
The prosecution had plenty of evidence to convict, the defense used her sociopathy to have her lie and cause confusion among the jury, there's no evidence that she died of drowning in a pool, there's no evidence Casey was abused as a child, yet they managed to drop those in on the jury and then told them to only listen to what is known, but they did it in a way that disparaged the prosecution rather than the defense.
The jury had enough to convict, they just didn't.

It doesn't matter if it was her or her boyfriend who actually put hands on her to kill her, she was party to it in some manner, there's no scenario where she isn't.

How are you saying there's no evidence on the prosecution side, yet you believe the defense story which has literally no evidence for any of it.
You're clearly coming from a position of bias. If you were actually objective, you'd not say that.

@Jason Adams the jury didn't say she's innocent. They just said that the case wasn't proven but they feel that she's guilty of something.
I agree with that formulation.
Also, the case was broadcasted, I doubt the jury heard anything that the public did not hear.

@Jason Adams the jury didn't say she's innocent. They just said that the case wasn't proven but they feel that she's guilty of something.
I agree with that formulation.
Also, the case was broadcasted, I doubt the jury heard anything that the public did not hear.

@Ната your saying it like it doesn't already happen.

@Ната your saying it like it doesn't already happen.

@Stuff OnMyduck I'm ok with the system. It worked like it was supposed to. She is guilty of something, everyone agrees on that, the jury too.
But what exactly  - no one knows, everyone just has their own theories. And we cannot convict people on theories.

You want her convicted and you're willing to change the system. But people like you don't realize that one day it might be you that's on trial. And that's when you will wish that theories and guesses aren't accepted in court.

@Stuff OnMyduck I'm ok with the system. It worked like it was supposed to. She is guilty of something, everyone agrees on that, the jury too.
But what exactly  - no one knows, everyone just has their own theories. And we cannot convict people on theories.

You want her convicted and you're willing to change the system. But people like you don't realize that one day it might be you that's on trial. And that's when you will wish that theories and guesses aren't accepted in court.

@Ната  my point? My point is to stop people like you from thinking this should be the norm. If you just sit and accept it nothing will change. Innocent people will get arrested. Guilty people will be free. You're a fool if you think one person can change an entire system.

@Ната  my point? My point is to stop people like you from thinking this should be the norm. If you just sit and accept it nothing will change. Innocent people will get arrested. Guilty people will be free. You're a fool if you think one person can change an entire system.

@Digger Gardi I don't think you understand what a cold case is. She can never be tried again for this death, no matter what emerges.
I'm not saying that's good, but that's how it is.
If the evidence emerges, I will be the first one to agree that she is guilty. But she will not go to trial for it, double jeopardy will apply.

I'm not defending her, she's def guilty of something, I just don't know what exactly she did.

And what alibi? This isnt about an alibi, they didn't know what happened or when, alibi plays no part here.

@Digger Gardi I don't think you understand what a cold case is. She can never be tried again for this death, no matter what emerges.
I'm not saying that's good, but that's how it is.
If the evidence emerges, I will be the first one to agree that she is guilty. But she will not go to trial for it, double jeopardy will apply.

I'm not defending her, she's def guilty of something, I just don't know what exactly she did.

And what alibi? This isnt about an alibi, they didn't know what happened or when, alibi plays no part here.

@Stuff OnMyduck what does my happiness or lack of have to do with the system? No matter what system is used, there will always be wrongful convictions and people getting away with crime. Someone will always be unhappy.
What's your point?
We have laws and they have to be followed. You don't like the laws and the current system - offer something better, go to the legislators and get it passed.
The current system is that is has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. It wasn't.

@Stuff OnMyduck what does my happiness or lack of have to do with the system? No matter what system is used, there will always be wrongful convictions and people getting away with crime. Someone will always be unhappy.
What's your point?
We have laws and they have to be followed. You don't like the laws and the current system - offer something better, go to the legislators and get it passed.
The current system is that is has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. It wasn't.

@Stuff OnMyduck there's no perfect system, this is the best available. You either end up locking up a bunch of innocent people (and it's already happening) or you let some guilty loose.
You don't have to give me examples for the mentally challenged, I understand what was written above 500 times. I just don't agree.

Scott Peterson's case was also circumstantial, but there are no questions left about his case, guilty, killed his wife because he wanted to be with the gf and didn't want the baby. There was proof that he wasn't happy about the pregnancy and all kinds of proof that he was planning a life with his gf. So even though there was no evidence of the murder, he was convicted and rightly so.

In her case, to me, there's no clear cut story. She, by all accounts, was a good mother, like all young people, wanted to go out but people don't kill their kids because of that.
Searches don't mean much, I search all kinds of stuff. And she wasn't the only one who had access to the computer. Also, forensics had issues with the time stamps and how many times it was search, time spent on each page, etc.
The cause of death wasn't proven.

Something happened with her daughter. What exactly - no one knows, people can only guess.
You're saying she suffocated her, others were saying she gave her too much xanax and the duct tape was there so that she didnt make noise in the trunk while she was out partying. The other theory is the drowning. There are many.
The point is that no one knows. And you cannot convict someone on first degree murder if you don't know.
Maybe if the prosecution chose a different charge and a different strategy for the case, it would've worked.

@Ната would you still be happy I'm a free man? I mean your dogs are dead. You're probably your morning/depressed. But I'm actually as happy as I can be. I'm obviously guilty of somthing. Does it seem like a good system?

@Ната would you still be happy I'm a free man? I mean your dogs are dead. You're probably your morning/depressed. But I'm actually as happy as I can be. I'm obviously guilty of somthing. Does it seem like a good system?

@Ната  I didn't want it to get personal but I want you to understand what people are coming from. Also I understand this is different from humans but still.

Let's say I am a dog sitter for your dogs. You come back for them and I tell you I have no idea where they are. You freak out and call the cops. Then I change the story and say somebody took them but I still don't know where they are. Im a suspect because I was last with them. Turns out the person I mentioned doesn't exist. My lawyer says there's no proof that I did somthing to your dogs. Investigators finds there corpses in a lake with ducktape around there muzzles. They also find I was searching "how to kill pets". My lawyer says it could've been an accident or it was delibrate but there is still no proof of either. I end up walking off free only charged with lying. Im free to go own a dog or dog sit for anyone. What would you think? I'm obviously guilty of neglect OR SOMETHING and you would want me to get punished. But guess what? No proof I did anything. I just smile and whistle away. Does that still sound correct or understandable?

@Stuff OnMyduck yes. That's exactly how the system works. The prosecution has to prove it. I like that system. If I ever end up charged with something, I like that people aren't going to be guessing, that there has to be proof.

@Stuff OnMyduck yes. That's exactly how the system works. The prosecution has to prove it. I like that system. If I ever end up charged with something, I like that people aren't going to be guessing, that there has to be proof.

@Ната exactly you're agreeing with the defendant if your not agreeing with the prosecutor. Which the whole point of one is to prove someone's innocence.
Defendant:
"You don't have proof she did it. There's some really highly suspicious activity, but nothing you can proof are linked because you need MORE evidence"
You and the jury:
"You're right. She probably didn't do anything. Alright stay happy and enjoy the rest of your life! What do you mean the little girls death? Ah whatever she's already dead"

@Ната exactly you're agreeing with the defendant if your not agreeing with the prosecutor. Which the whole point of one is to prove someone's innocence.
Defendant:
"You don't have proof she did it. There's some really highly suspicious activity, but nothing you can proof are linked because you need MORE evidence"
You and the jury:
"You're right. She probably didn't do anything. Alright stay happy and enjoy the rest of your life! What do you mean the little girls death? Ah whatever she's already dead"

@Stuff OnMyduck I'm not protecting her at all. I'm saying that the prosecution didn't do a good job and defense did. <br>I'm with the jury: she is guilty of something but not sure exactly of what.

@Stuff OnMyduck I'm not protecting her at all. I'm saying that the prosecution didn't do a good job and defense did.
I'm with the jury: she is guilty of something but not sure exactly of what.

@Ната why? Why do you want to protect a sociopath so much?

@Ната why? Why do you want to protect a sociopath so much?

@Jesper exactly two wrongs don't make a right. You should get mad at people being falsely accused AND people guilty of somthing not get charged anything. In no scenario is she innocent. My point is,  just because she was found not guilty doesn't mean she was innocent or not involved. And that's the fault of the shitty prosecutor *AND THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM*. People like you though for some foresaken reason only believe the lady is just weird and had no involvement in the child's death whatsoever. You could give less of a shit about the poor child. You just want to support the lady and her party life (did you know she was planning on making a movie about how amazing her partying life was during her childs death?)

@Stuff OnMyduck what makes you even bring that up? Why would that justify someone else getting falsely convicted. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I despise when people get wrongfully accused/convicted. I also don’t like it when someone walks free when they shouldn’t, although it is better than having an unreliable system. You guys misinterpret all I’m saying and bring other things up so there is no point in answering anymore. I’ve said mine. Nice chatting with yoy

@Stuff OnMyduck what makes you even bring that up? Why would that justify someone else getting falsely convicted. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I despise when people get wrongfully accused/convicted. I also don’t like it when someone walks free when they shouldn’t, although it is better than having an unreliable system. You guys misinterpret all I’m saying and bring other things up so there is no point in answering anymore. I’ve said mine. Nice chatting with yoy

@AnCap Asuka she didn't have to name anyone. The police have to prove their case, she has no legal obligation to help.
At least 2 people had access to the home. She had access to the car but it wasn't proven that the body was there. The science they tried using was innovative and I guess the jury didn't accept it.
The manner of death was ruled a homicide only because of duct tape, otherwise, the coroner couldn't tell.
And the cause of death was undetermined.
 Tape around the passages was her opinion, though an educated one. There was only a skeleton left.

But none of this matters. None of this proves that she did it. Yes, most likely but too many questions.
The clubs and stuff is definitely weird but here I'm buying the defense's story, she was fucked up in the head from childhood and acted and thought different than others.

To me the motive makes no sense. To you it does. It's a matter of opinion.

The prosecution didn't do a good job here, the defense did. That's what it comes down to.

@Ната It can't be shown that anyone else had access to the child, her car, or her home, she couldn't name anyone who took the child after her initial claim was proven false.
They absolutely showed that her death was ruled a homicide and that she had tape around her air passages after she had searched for 'suffocation' two different ways. People have been put away after having less evidence of intent.

Her motive makes sense, she was a young girl dating someone who got to go to clubs and party at night, she had a child and had a responsibility to care for that child and couldn't go out like that. After losing her child, she did engage in the party life, even getting a tattoo.
The flagrant disregard for her child's well-being shows that she lied about searching for her by herself. If she had already exhausted her attempts to where she had given up and partied, she should have gotten other people involved.

There's always questions in these cases, that doesn't mean the defendant should always be not guilty.
Saying you don't have any questions about pretty much any other case kind of shows to me a bias. There's always unanswered questions.

@Mateo Hodge probably so. That's why a good lawyer can make or break a case. Jose baez turned out to be very good. He went on to win 10 (i think) large cases with almost no losses. This cannot be an accident (winning Casey's only could've been written off as an accident, stroke of good luck). He's good. As much as I don't like him.

@Mateo Hodge probably so. That's why a good lawyer can make or break a case. Jose baez turned out to be very good. He went on to win 10 (i think) large cases with almost no losses. This cannot be an accident (winning Casey's only could've been written off as an accident, stroke of good luck). He's good. As much as I don't like him.

@AnCap Asuka it wasn't proven that she did any of it.
And in your example, that alone isn't enough evidence.
They didn't prove intent in her case. Sort of, kind of, but as I said, I still have questions. Jury did too.
The prosecution's motive (that she wanted to kill her daughter so she can go out to clubs) didn't make sense to me. And the entire case falls apart because no one can say why she would want to kill her daughter. Yes, motive isn't part of the required elements but without it and with shaky evidence, there are issue with the case.
The body was found too late and the cause of death couldn't be determined. Also, the way it was found was suspicious. The search party story was suspicious.
Scott Peterson was convicted on circumstantial evidence but in his case, there are no questions.
In her case there are.
Actually, I was much more convinced of her guilt before the trial. But when I heard the closing, I started to see his point.
I don't believe the defense's story either but he had a lot of good points. Prosecution messed up here, that's all. Left room for doubt. And he was able to instill that doubt in the minds of the jury.

She's covering for somebody -- I knew she'd be found not guilty

She's covering for somebody -- I knew she'd be found not guilty

@Ната It doesn't matter if it was on accident or on purpose though.
Putting tape over someone's mouth and nose after searching 'foolproof suffocation' is proof enough of intent.

If we have to have perfect evidence directly showing someone committing the murder, then pretty much no one would go to prison for murder unless it was on camera.
The FBI could do a firearm trace on a firearm, find that it belonged to the primary suspect, see that he had access to the firearm and ammunition used, see that he had motive, but according to y'all, the primary suspect shouldn't be convicted of murder because there's no evidence showing them committing the murder. Someone could have stolen his firearm and ammo and brought it back after conveniently killing the person the suspect had a grudge against.

@Jesper It's not that they didn't have evidence that she either killed her or was party to her death, it's that they didn't have evidence that directly showed that Casey directly killed her.
You don't need beyond a reasonable doubt evidence to convict someone, it just makes it much harder.

The mother saying that Casey's trunk smelled like a dead body at least shows that Casey was party to her death, if not directly, then indirectly. Someone with access to her home, her car, her daughter killed her. How did they get access to those things if not through Casey?

They had plenty of evidence to convict, the defense had enough room to instill doubt in the jurors.
It really was the perfect case of defense vs the prosecutor.

I genuinely can't believe the defense won with the way they went about it. The whole part of the accidental drowning in the pool would have made me question his stance if I were a juror, and the whole bit of her being molested by her parents is exactly what he talked about in his closing statement, emotional manipulation with no evidence, but his closing statement did finally hit the nail on the coffin for the prosecution.

@Jesper I was talking about men being falsely accused and imprisoned with shit evidence. And I don't know about you someone who killed their child roaming free doesn't sound safe to me. What I'm saying is it's still garbage in no way is it good. But screw it if innocent people get punished like nothing why shouldn't this sociopath?

@Jesper I was talking about men being falsely accused and imprisoned with shit evidence. And I don't know about you someone who killed their child roaming free doesn't sound safe to me. What I'm saying is it's still garbage in no way is it good. But screw it if innocent people get punished like nothing why shouldn't this sociopath?

@Stuff OnMyduck i dont remember anything about a rape, sry. yes, a murderer shouldnt walk free but they should also not be imprisoned without sufficient evidence that proves BEYOND any doubts that she is is guilty. neither outcome is good but this is honestly better in the long haul. one (maybe) murderer walks free. at the same time our justice system did not risk punish any innocent person. if it starts doing that then we are headed in a bad direction

@Stuff OnMyduck i dont remember anything about a rape, sry. yes, a murderer shouldnt walk free but they should also not be imprisoned without sufficient evidence that proves BEYOND any doubts that she is is guilty. neither outcome is good but this is honestly better in the long haul. one (maybe) murderer walks free. at the same time our justice system did not risk punish any innocent person. if it starts doing that then we are headed in a bad direction

@Stuff OnMyduck if my searches were pulled, I'd be on death row.
They found the girl's body after the ruling? After what ruling? Those searches were presented at trial and the body was found by then.
I stand by what I said, not enough evidence.

@Stuff OnMyduck if my searches were pulled, I'd be on death row.
They found the girl's body after the ruling? After what ruling? Those searches were presented at trial and the body was found by then.
I stand by what I said, not enough evidence.

This is not a unique outcome, as there is rarely any justice in this world.

This is not a unique outcome, as there is rarely any justice in this world.

@Ната after the ruling they found the google searches on casey's computer on how to suffocate someone and the little girls body. If you still think "maybe" go look into after the court ruling

@Ната after the ruling they found the google searches on casey's computer on how to suffocate someone and the little girls body. If you still think "maybe" go look into after the court ruling

@Jesper I don't understand how you still think this case was a good thing and proofs our system is a good one. A murderer gets off scott-free and a person gets falsely acused of rape doesn't.

@Jesper I don't understand how you still think this case was a good thing and proofs our system is a good one. A murderer gets off scott-free and a person gets falsely acused of rape doesn't.

Fuck that. I'm not watching the full video then

Fuck that. I'm not watching the full video then

late term abortion my guy this is only the beginning

late term abortion my guy this is only the beginning

I watched the trial and was in disbelief when she was found not guilty. However, months later, after hearing the jury and their reasoning, rewatching the trial, I realized that I agree. The evidence just wasn't there. No one knows how caylee died. Yes, we have a ton of theories but that's all they are, theories.
Did she kill her on purpose? Did she kill her by accident? Did she really drown?
I actually can't believe that Casey killed her, just can't imagine what she was counting on, I'm more inclined towards some accident and her being afraid to tell her mother.
But none of this matters, these are all theories, there's no evidence. And the prosecution's theories didn't ring true to me.
Also, as much as I despised Jose baez, he did a really good job planting doubt and reminding the jury that if they still have questions, the case was not proven.
So, I'm with the jury, as much as I originally was against their decision.
She's obviously a nut case and maybe killed her daughter but we have laws, that's what it comes down to.

I think there is still a possibility she made it all up to protect herself from facing reality since that was her coping mechanism to her relationship with her father

I think there is still a possibility she made it all up to protect herself from facing reality since that was her coping mechanism to her relationship with her father

These defense lawyers are socipaths... They should rot in hell too

These defense lawyers are socipaths... They should rot in hell too

@nikolas they had no proof. She definitely did it, but they couldn’t prove it

@nikolas they had no proof. She definitely did it, but they couldn’t prove it

She definitely killed her daughter. Blame the inept prosecution, not the jury for why she isn’t in jail today. If they hadn’t gone for the death penalty which has a very high burden of proof, Casey would be behind bars right now.

She definitely killed her daughter. Blame the inept prosecution, not the jury for why she isn’t in jail today. If they hadn’t gone for the death penalty which has a very high burden of proof, Casey would be behind bars right now.

@Eli G I'm sorry but for a jury to get this wrong is on the prosecution. You're saying this is a slam dunk. The jury didn't see it that way. Your peers didn't see it the way you did. Ask yourself why

@Eli G I'm sorry but for a jury to get this wrong is on the prosecution. You're saying this is a slam dunk. The jury didn't see it that way. Your peers didn't see it the way you did. Ask yourself why

They literally found a hair from Caylee in her mother's trunk that had started turning dark at the roots consistent with a dead body and they're like, "oh in the trunk?" Oh well let's forget about that.

They literally found a hair from Caylee in her mother's trunk that had started turning dark at the roots consistent with a dead body and they're like, "oh in the trunk?" Oh well let's forget about that.

@nikolas a world of due process. Do you want some innocent people in jail or some guilty people free?

@nikolas a world of due process. Do you want some innocent people in jail or some guilty people free?

@Jesper thank you for representing my point of view (mine and certainly plenty of others) in the comments. <br>The "innocent until proven guilty" premise is getting shaken up these days. By extension, it also applies to respecting the levels of doubt when dealing with varying degrees of offences.

@Jesper thank you for representing my point of view (mine and certainly plenty of others) in the comments.
The "innocent until proven guilty" premise is getting shaken up these days. By extension, it also applies to respecting the levels of doubt when dealing with varying degrees of offences.

@Rodrigo Ramirez yep but there's a lot of scenarios where they were the ones that caused it and they get away with it. It's sickening really. I still believe that they are witches Pier at the ones that do that and get away with it

@Rodrigo Ramirez yep but there's a lot of scenarios where they were the ones that caused it and they get away with it. It's sickening really. I still believe that they are witches Pier at the ones that do that and get away with it

Part of the explanation is that in the current feminist atmosphere, the dogma that females are never perpetrators of violence is ingrained in people's minds. That idea is patently wrong, as facts prove. When facts contradict people's ideologies, they tend to double down on their beliefs. When this woman was acquitted, obviously the jury did not  believe that she would murder her daughter in cold blood, presumably because females cannot be perpetrators. The only explanation that squares with that view is that she must have been really sick, thereby relieving her from any responsibility.

Part of the explanation is that in the current feminist atmosphere, the dogma that females are never perpetrators of violence is ingrained in people's minds. That idea is patently wrong, as facts prove. When facts contradict people's ideologies, they tend to double down on their beliefs. When this woman was acquitted, obviously the jury did not  believe that she would murder her daughter in cold blood, presumably because females cannot be perpetrators. The only explanation that squares with that view is that she must have been really sick, thereby relieving her from any responsibility.

Jesper <br>Innocent people are already and have been getting convicted on BS “evidence” so what are you talking about? If this was a black mom she would be rotting in prison

Jesper
Innocent people are already and have been getting convicted on BS “evidence” so what are you talking about? If this was a black mom she would be rotting in prison

My ex and her mother did the same thing to my three children, and severely hurt my oldest son. The police and the town knew that it was planned her acting like they don't know anything about that. The kids that passed away put it on video and told the police before it happened. They still to this day are trying to put me in jail because I want them in trouble for what haven't. Even down to my family is manipulated

My ex and her mother did the same thing to my three children, and severely hurt my oldest son. The police and the town knew that it was planned her acting like they don't know anything about that. The kids that passed away put it on video and told the police before it happened. They still to this day are trying to put me in jail because I want them in trouble for what haven't. Even down to my family is manipulated

"did you slaughter tousand animal legaly in your slaughterhouse" yes i plaid guilty "here a paycheck thansk for you hard work"

"did you slaughter tousand animal legaly in your slaughterhouse" yes i plaid guilty "here a paycheck thansk for you hard work"

Exactly. We all know she killed that child and even though she thinks that she fulled everyone. She is going to have to live with that guilt for the rest of her life.

Exactly. We all know she killed that child and even though she thinks that she fulled everyone. She is going to have to live with that guilt for the rest of her life.

I’m also very upset. Iv got a headache and can’t stop thinking about the little girl. Mother should have been given the death penalty. And if the grandparents didn’t ask about the little girl. She would not have been to court.

I’m also very upset. Iv got a headache and can’t stop thinking about the little girl. Mother should have been given the death penalty. And if the grandparents didn’t ask about the little girl. She would not have been to court.

@caromela but explain all the lies she told the car in impound the smell from the car waiting 31 fucking days to call and when she called she was calm "I have nothing to say to them" hell I am a father and I would flip this world upside down  trying to find them AND I WOULD HAVE CALLED THE COPS ASAP

@caromela but explain all the lies she told the car in impound the smell from the car waiting 31 fucking days to call and when she called she was calm "I have nothing to say to them" hell I am a father and I would flip this world upside down  trying to find them AND I WOULD HAVE CALLED THE COPS ASAP

@Harry Gilmanashe was a known meth user and he didn't do meth and wound up dead on the floor with it in his system?

@Harry Gilmanashe was a known meth user and he didn't do meth and wound up dead on the floor with it in his system?

@Harry Gilmana yep buddies mom just poisoned his dad and they are doing nothing.

@Harry Gilmana yep buddies mom just poisoned his dad and they are doing nothing.

@Jesper Just not true. 400 pieces of evidence were presented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Caylee_Anthony

@Jesper Just not true. 400 pieces of evidence were presented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Caylee_Anthony

The jury probably got annoyed by the prosecutors over dramatic pauses. Shit was annoying asf 😂

The jury probably got annoyed by the prosecutors over dramatic pauses. Shit was annoying asf 😂

@Mastashake you can’t say she used that tape because the body was buried exactly like the pets were, which George Anthony did. The defense just poked great holes in the defense’s story. If you have doubt about one thing, you can’t convict of murder. You were watching the talking heads all day talk about it.  Nothing is damning with a sequestered jury.

@Mastashake you can’t say she used that tape because the body was buried exactly like the pets were, which George Anthony did. The defense just poked great holes in the defense’s story. If you have doubt about one thing, you can’t convict of murder. You were watching the talking heads all day talk about it.  Nothing is damning with a sequestered jury.

@TheFun Mugen  It's gross you are using this case to spout your talking points on abortion and rape allegations. This isn't about you.

@TheFun Mugen  It's gross you are using this case to spout your talking points on abortion and rape allegations. This isn't about you.

@TheFun Mugen Pro life people only care about babies before they are born.

@TheFun Mugen Pro life people only care about babies before they are born.

So, what's the lesson here? Lie and you can get away with murder? It's so depressing.

So, what's the lesson here? Lie and you can get away with murder? It's so depressing.

@TheFun Mugen Are you saying that pro lifers would have made the right decision, which btw, in your case sounds biased

@TheFun Mugen Are you saying that pro lifers would have made the right decision, which btw, in your case sounds biased

@TheFun Mugen if any person thinks that she isn't the murderer then they are crazy no matter if they are pro-choice or pro-life. I am pro choice but it doesn't mean that I don't have the ability to see what a stupid verdict this was. My blood boils. I can't belive the jury members were so blind.

@TheFun Mugen if any person thinks that she isn't the murderer then they are crazy no matter if they are pro-choice or pro-life. I am pro choice but it doesn't mean that I don't have the ability to see what a stupid verdict this was. My blood boils. I can't belive the jury members were so blind.

@C - well its true. its not like everyone who has ever died, died of murder. you can acturally die from other things as well

@C - well its true. its not like everyone who has ever died, died of murder. you can acturally die from other things as well

I know. She is a pathological liar that was able to manipulate anybody who came across her!

I know. She is a pathological liar that was able to manipulate anybody who came across her!

@Tanaphar Plus Masks  so you think that the opinion of a person alters the reality?

@Tanaphar Plus Masks  so you think that the opinion of a person alters the reality?

@Jesper . "just beacuse someone can smell a dead body doesnt mean that that body was a crime of murder. it only proves that it was there, not what exactly happened to it." - Really ??? I hope you know how stupid that sounds

@Jesper . "just beacuse someone can smell a dead body doesnt mean that that body was a crime of murder. it only proves that it was there, not what exactly happened to it." - Really ??? I hope you know how stupid that sounds

@Tanaphar Plus Masks 'What the court finds' isn't always correct.  While there are so many checks and balances that are in place to try and ensure that justice is always served, it'd be stupid to try and say that they are never wrong.  There are countless examples of juries being wrong.  Ignoring this is insanity.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks 'What the court finds' isn't always correct.  While there are so many checks and balances that are in place to try and ensure that justice is always served, it'd be stupid to try and say that they are never wrong.  There are countless examples of juries being wrong.  Ignoring this is insanity.

@Jesper you, sir, have a very balanced opinion and I very much look up to you right now. Thank you for sharing.

@Jesper you, sir, have a very balanced opinion and I very much look up to you right now. Thank you for sharing.

a person who's that smart like her deserves to be free its a waste to be in jail,do what she did and get away with it if you can.

a person who's that smart like her deserves to be free its a waste to be in jail,do what she did and get away with it if you can.

Sameee !! Like if she was “Innocent “ who did it then ?? So many questions unbelievable system!

Sameee !! Like if she was “Innocent “ who did it then ?? So many questions unbelievable system!

The defendant actually convinced the jury to act like robots instead of humans, by removing emotion from the verdict. Therefore everyone in there was not “convinced” but turned. Since when do robots claim EVIL, and humans update to the next operating system? Maybe we do

The defendant actually convinced the jury to act like robots instead of humans, by removing emotion from the verdict. Therefore everyone in there was not “convinced” but turned. Since when do robots claim EVIL, and humans update to the next operating system? Maybe we do

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Imagine loving the taste of boots this much lol. The only way shit changes is by complaining and pointing out errors. It attracts and informs other people, and shit actually gets done. Stirring up enough noise works even when people are in the wrong... Look at cancel culture.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Imagine loving the taste of boots this much lol. The only way shit changes is by complaining and pointing out errors. It attracts and informs other people, and shit actually gets done. Stirring up enough noise works even when people are in the wrong... Look at cancel culture.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks unfortunately you cant start a new society without getting taxed, subjected to law, and threat of violence from the current government

@Tanaphar Plus Masks unfortunately you cant start a new society without getting taxed, subjected to law, and threat of violence from the current government

@Ναντέζντα Κρούπσκαγια Ah, np! I had to put them in their place, they were being completely irrational. lad to see someone agrees ^^

@Ναντέζντα Κρούπσκαγια Ah, np! I had to put them in their place, they were being completely irrational. lad to see someone agrees ^^

@Fifi Thank you for your comments... As I was reading the thread I was puzzled because nooooone seemed to call this person out. This had nothing to do with rape, men getting falsely accused many many MANY times (???), abortions or I don't know what.

@Fifi Thank you for your comments... As I was reading the thread I was puzzled because nooooone seemed to call this person out. This had nothing to do with rape, men getting falsely accused many many MANY times (???), abortions or I don't know what.

Ναντέζντα Κρούπσκαγια

@Princess Princess that doesn’t mean the state proved their case though.... you must not have watched the trial in its entirety.

@Princess Princess that doesn’t mean the state proved their case though.... you must not have watched the trial in its entirety.

Tanaphar Plus Masks you must not know much about this case or how she was basically caught admitting to murdering her daughter when she was vacationing in the Bahamas like 2 months after she was found innocent. Meaning she only came clean because she knew that after being found guilty she could freely admit it with no repercussions

Tanaphar Plus Masks you must not know much about this case or how she was basically caught admitting to murdering her daughter when she was vacationing in the Bahamas like 2 months after she was found innocent. Meaning she only came clean because she knew that after being found guilty she could freely admit it with no repercussions

@Taran Jene the jury sat though the case, you obviously didn’t if you think that evidence was clear. Get over it.

@Taran Jene the jury sat though the case, you obviously didn’t if you think that evidence was clear. Get over it.

@Lynda G it’s circumstantial, but her lawyer also argued that there was a time glitch on the computer or something, so the times aren’t indicative of her making those searches. Basically, the state never proved that Casey made the search.

@Lynda G it’s circumstantial, but her lawyer also argued that there was a time glitch on the computer or something, so the times aren’t indicative of her making those searches. Basically, the state never proved that Casey made the search.

@Mitchell Gwr Their arm must hurt after that reach "THIS WOMAN KILLED TODDLER, THIS IS MY CHANCE TO PUSH PRO-LIFE BULLSHIT ON PEOPLE REEE"

@Mitchell Gwr Their arm must hurt after that reach "THIS WOMAN KILLED TODDLER, THIS IS MY CHANCE TO PUSH PRO-LIFE BULLSHIT ON PEOPLE REEE"

@TheFun Mugen as per your “pro choice jury will find her not guilty” , I’d like to say you are wrong . I’m pro choice and believe that early weeks of pregnancy a woman has the Chou e to continue with or terminate pregnancy. However, when it comes down to actually killing a child, I’m fist in line to find this POS guilty! Even if she was only pregnant and purposely had a miscarriage I believe she should be guilty!! Being Pro-Choice or Pro-Life has nothing to do with it 😕

@TheFun Mugen as per your “pro choice jury will find her not guilty” , I’d like to say you are wrong . I’m pro choice and believe that early weeks of pregnancy a woman has the Chou e to continue with or terminate pregnancy. However, when it comes down to actually killing a child, I’m fist in line to find this POS guilty! Even if she was only pregnant and purposely had a miscarriage I believe she should be guilty!! Being Pro-Choice or Pro-Life has nothing to do with it 😕

@Tanaphar Plus Masks 'Be the world you're in'? Worst saying I have ever heard. So accept everything and challenge nothing in life? Why do you think courts have an appeal process?

@Tanaphar Plus Masks 'Be the world you're in'? Worst saying I have ever heard. So accept everything and challenge nothing in life? Why do you think courts have an appeal process?

@TheFun Mugen  men being found guilty of rape accusations that they did not commit, while a sad instance, is incredibly rare. men are statistically speaking, more likely to be raped themselves, than to be falsely accused or convicted of committing a rape. also, juries are randomly selected, you have no way of knowing who was on that panel or how they would have ruled in another case. you should be more concerned with a system that lets men go free when there is ample evidence they have raped someone, with a system that incarcerates mothers who have had miscarriages because of our restrictive and inhumane anti-abortion laws, with a system that has forced pre-teens that have been impregnated by rape to give birth to those children, with a system that incarcerates minorities at disproportionate rates and punishes them much more severely. this particular case is of course a tragedy but you are only using it to spout your backwards views. it is so disgustingly disrespectful to this poor child and to countless others. have some fucking taste, pal.

Yes... circumstantial evidence was way too high for this case...  just the position of the body puts Casey or her boyfriend at the scene...

Yes... circumstantial evidence was way too high for this case...  just the position of the body puts Casey or her boyfriend at the scene...

@TheFun Mugen pro choice ppl don’t love abortion, who told you that 😂

@TheFun Mugen pro choice ppl don’t love abortion, who told you that 😂

She's obviously very odd personality; kinda like psychopath but that being said ; just coz you're psychopath doesn't necessarily mean you're a killer. I think what happened is accident ( because of how disconnect she is with reality by her nature ) which killed her daughter; and because she got scared, then she tried to forget it by partying like crazy and then her survival instincts kicked in and tried to find way out of it. She was trying to get most out of her life to forget loss of her daughters life.  That being said she clearly lied a lot.  In eyes of media obviously everyone will think she killed her daughter but that's because we want justice served. You have to understand though that she always been weird personality from what we know. I think she wasn't protecting her daughter well enough to prevent accident to happen. I think she neglected her job as a parent. But I don't think she wanted to kill her despite having such a weird quirks. She should get in prison for neglect tho.

She didn't call 911 her mother did, if her mother didn't who knows how long it would have been

She didn't call 911 her mother did, if her mother didn't who knows how long it would have been

@TheFun Mugen Exactly, it says beyond rwasonable doubt not unequivocal.

@TheFun Mugen Exactly, it says beyond rwasonable doubt not unequivocal.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Nothing i've said would be ''my mistake''. Perhaps some of your comments are ''your mistake'' though. All I've done in my comments is talk about what you've said and point out the complete illogicality of the comments in question. When you say ''Your mistake is thinking that your second sentence is my position'', you're actually saying that you don't believe what you've previously stated as your opinion.

I have also never mentioned anything specifically about this case and you've decided to randomly throw the majority of your comment in there without it logically making any sense, once again.
I get the impression you're trying to come across as intelligent but it's rather obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Nothing i've said would be ''my mistake''. Perhaps some of your comments are ''your mistake'' though. All I've done in my comments is talk about what you've said and point out the complete illogicality of the comments in question. When you say ''Your mistake is thinking that your second sentence is my position'', you're actually saying that *you* don't believe what you've previously stated as *your* opinion.

I have also never mentioned anything specifically about this case and you've decided to randomly throw the majority of your comment in there without it logically making any sense, once again.
I get the impression you're trying to come across as intelligent but it's rather obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Your comment basically says that what the court finds will always be the truth, as if no one has ever been falsely charged etc. So yes, your comment says that even if someone murders someone that they haven't actually murdered someone. It makes no sense logically.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Your comment basically says that what the court finds will always be the truth, as if no one has ever been falsely charged etc. So yes, your comment says that even if someone murders someone that they haven't actually murdered someone. It makes no sense logically.

I'm skimming through the video because this is super long for me to watch, first she said her child was kidnap by a nanny that doesn't exist, then agree to do an investigation. Then, they found the child corspe by a swamp with ducktape around the child nose, mouth and all, and at the end of the case they all agreed on and admit that the child already die earlier due to drowning. Does she receive a treatment therapist after this case? Is this case really about her daughter justice or about her life. So many questions that's confusing me. Why go through all of this with misleading information she provide at first? She knew what happened from the start. I'm not going further anymore with this case, this is case really is about the power of words in my opinion.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks How is talk outside of that irrelevant. You're basically saying hey corruption should be allowed, murder doesn't exist if you're not found guilty even though you've murdered someone.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks How is talk outside of that irrelevant. You're basically saying hey corruption should be allowed, murder doesn't exist if you're not found guilty even though you've murdered someone.

She's white and objectively good looking. What did you expect

She's white and objectively good looking. What did you expect

@Tanaphar Plus Masks only murdering moms lie. Loving good moms ALWAYS KNOW WHERE THEIR TODDLER IS.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks only murdering moms lie. Loving good moms ALWAYS KNOW WHERE THEIR TODDLER IS.

It pisses me off because I think trying to prove murder was the last thing they should have tried. I feel she did it, but you have to PROVE things in courts. they didn't have enough evidence of the act & should have waited until they could PROVE it to charge her, or got her on something else.. That Def lawyer should be sued for defamation by the father though.

It pisses me off because I think trying to prove murder was the last thing they should have tried. I feel she did it, but you have to PROVE things in courts. they didn't have enough evidence of the act & should have waited until they could PROVE it to charge her, or got her on something else.. That Def lawyer should be sued for defamation by the father though.

I don't know about everybody else.  But as a parent if my kid is missing even an hour.  With me having no idea where she is.  I am in panic mode.  I am calling the cops, posting on social media,  and out searching nonstop. I think they say if you don't find the missing person in 72 hours. That there is a good chance you won't. I honestly think she did it.  But I am not a judge, jury, or detective.  So I won't speculate saying it is guaranteed she did it.

I don't know about everybody else.  But as a parent if my kid is missing even an hour.  With me having no idea where she is.  I am in panic mode.  I am calling the cops, posting on social media,  and out searching nonstop. I think they say if you don't find the missing person in 72 hours. That there is a good chance you won't. I honestly think she did it.  But I am not a judge, jury, or detective.  So I won't speculate saying it is guaranteed she did it.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks thank you for such a lovely comment. I did re-read all the comments properly again which is why I better understood where you were coming from and your views on the case, which are factually correct - she is 'innocent' whether we agree with it or not. I just think it's such an injustful case that it's hard to be scientific about it instead of emotional.

I do actually aim to remember that I am not always right, there's nothing wrong in that and being wrong, that's how we learn, I don't always have to be right and I'd rather admit I'm wrong than argue for the sake of 'winning'.
It was great conversing with you and I learnt a lot, thank you xx

@Tanaphar Plus Masks thank you for such a lovely comment. I did re-read all the comments properly again which is why I better understood where you were coming from and your views on the case, which are factually correct - she is 'innocent' whether we agree with it or not. I just think it's such an injustful case that it's hard to be scientific about it instead of emotional.

I do actually aim to remember that I am not always right, there's nothing wrong in that and being wrong, that's how we learn, I don't always have to be right and I'd rather admit I'm wrong than argue for the sake of 'winning'.
It was great conversing with you and I learnt a lot, thank you xx

When the system works against those it was defined for

When the system works against those it was defined for

@King JamesIX the duct tape was never found around her mouth and nose. It was found nearby. They aren't even sure it was anything to do with the child as the evidence was destroyed. It was assumed it was on Caylee as someone thought it had a heart sticker on it but it was destroyed before they could properly check. Being that it was found very close by but not on her actual body, there is no way of knowing if it was used to murder her or, for example, hold whatever she was wrapped in shut.

@King JamesIX the duct tape was never found around her mouth and nose. It was found nearby. They aren't even sure it was anything to do with the child as the evidence was destroyed. It was assumed it was on Caylee as someone thought it had a heart sticker on it but it was destroyed before they could properly check. Being that it was found very close by but not on her actual body, there is no way of knowing if it was used to murder her or, for example, hold whatever she was wrapped in shut.

@JustPaul yes I'm a regular internet/YouTube lawyer over here

@JustPaul yes I'm a regular internet/YouTube lawyer over here

Yea!  How old are you?  I only ask cuz at 30, i watched this and all of its development and was just dumbfounded when she was found not guilty!

I felt like a shell for about a week!

Yea!  How old are you?  I only ask cuz at 30, i watched this and all of its development and was just dumbfounded when she was found not guilty!

I felt like a shell for about a week!

@Tanaphar Plus Masks ???? I'm not understanding your point?

IF she was innocent and wanted her daughter found she WOULDN'T lie.
In no way am I implying that she "didn't lie" as she clearly did, that was the point I was making - if you're innocent and care about your child, you wouldn't lie but she did lie. My comment above was in response to someone who claimed that "there was no proof she'd lied" yet she told cops she'd spoke to her daughter that morning despite the fact that her daughter was proven to have been long deceased when she made that claim. Not to mention her lies about working at Disney (is she crazy, she thought she could say whatever she wanted and it wouldn't be checked out - THAT'S insane) and that bloke Jason etc etc soooooo many lies - she's guilty af!!!!

P.s......I would NEVER use Wiki to support my case and I'd never look to Wiki for information 🤦♀🤦♀🤦♀🤦♀

@nikolas If you have much experience with juries and jury duty, you will see  that they are carefully (de) selected and bullied by the court.  NOT a jury of peers.  This is reason for the idea of jury nullification.

@nikolas If you have much experience with juries and jury duty, you will see  that they are carefully (de) selected and bullied by the court.  NOT a jury of peers.  This is reason for the idea of jury nullification.

@King JamesIX having watch this video I would say she was guilty and she should have been convicted but the jury did not agree. They deliberated for 10 hours.
I did do some further reading on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Caylee_Anthony and this is what one of the jurors said
I did not say she was innocent" and "I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be." She added, "I'm not saying that I believe the defense," but that "it's easier for me logically to get from point A to point B" via the defense argument, as opposed to the prosecution argument. Ford believed George Anthony was "dishonest." She said the jury "was sick to [their] stomachs to get [the not-guilty] verdict"

As the states attorney stated "The delay in recovering little Caylee's remains worked to our considerable disadvantage." I think he is right

@Tanaphar Plus Masks It's not a contradiction. Stop looking for arguments where they don't exist.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks It's not a contradiction. Stop looking for arguments where they don't exist.

@Jesper the amount of lies she tells is a huge indication - she told the police that she'd spoke to her daughter THAT day during that call to the police that her mum made. WHY would you make that up and possibly hinder the police in finding your missing daughter! That's just ONE of the many proven lies. If your child is missing you DON'T wait a month before you notify anyone and you DON'T make up lies.

@Jesper the amount of lies she tells is a huge indication - she told the police that she'd spoke to her daughter THAT day during that call to the police that her mum made. WHY would you make that up and possibly hinder the police in finding your missing daughter! That's just ONE of the many proven lies. If your child is missing you DON'T wait a month before you notify anyone and you DON'T make up lies.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks prosecutors presented the evidence as clearly and plainly as possible. They did their jobs.

The defense created an air of doubt on the evidence to give the idea that the evidence didn't prove anything conclusively. It worked. Clearly defense did a great job.

A child is dead and a cold blooded, selfish, monster of an excuse for a human being runs free to lie and possibly hurt someone else later on. That sucks.

What was so hard to understand about that exactly?

@Tanaphar Plus Masks prosecutors presented the evidence as clearly and plainly as possible. They did their jobs.

The defense created an air of doubt on the evidence to give the idea that the evidence didn't prove anything conclusively. It worked. Clearly defense did a great job.

A child is dead and a cold blooded, selfish, monster of an excuse for a human being runs free to lie and possibly hurt someone else later on. That sucks.

What was so hard to understand about that exactly?

@Tyler Rae you should probably look for more information about the evidence against them before saying stuff like that.

@Tyler Rae you should probably look for more information about the evidence against them before saying stuff like that.

@Roy Dullman I don't think anyone did anything wrong. The prosecution did everything they could and the evidence was staggering and should have been enough on it's own. The defense, however, also did their job perfectly.

Hence the result.

It sucks. There's a skeleton in that woman's closet and positive reinforcement dealt in recompense for bad behavior. No doubt sociopaths get away with far more crime than normally functioning people.

@Roy Dullman I don't think anyone did anything wrong. The prosecution did everything they could and the evidence was staggering and should have been enough on it's own. The defense, however, also did their job perfectly.

Hence the result.

It sucks. There's a skeleton in that woman's closet and positive reinforcement dealt in recompense for bad behavior. No doubt sociopaths get away with far more crime than normally functioning people.

@King JamesIX wow thanks, I have read a little more about this case and opinions of jurors. If anything, if it's so obvious, you should blame the prosecution in this case, they failed to convince a jury that she was guilty. <br>I just think trial by jury is a fundamental right, sometimes they might get it wrong, as they may have in this case, but we still need jury trials.

@King JamesIX wow thanks, I have read a little more about this case and opinions of jurors. If anything, if it's so obvious, you should blame the prosecution in this case, they failed to convince a jury that she was guilty.
I just think trial by jury is a fundamental right, sometimes they might get it wrong, as they may have in this case, but we still need jury trials.

Are you basing that on a 1 hour video on YouTube. The jury would have sat through hours of arguments and were not convinced that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she murdered her daughter. If we sat through the trial in its entirety perhaps we would have reached a different verdict

Are you basing that on a 1 hour video on YouTube. The jury would have sat through hours of arguments and were not convinced that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she murdered her daughter. If we sat through the trial in its entirety perhaps we would have reached a different verdict

When she said they were "at the end of the hallway" and "there's two doors" and "it's just a matter of which door now". That was actually the most honest thing she said. She was correctly and accurately putting an analogy together that wouldn't be recognized until after the gavel rang in that room.

When she said they were "at the end of the hallway" and "there's two doors" and "it's just a matter of which door now". That was actually the most honest thing she said. She was correctly and accurately putting an analogy together that wouldn't be recognized until after the gavel rang in that room.

@nikolas so many people saying she's not guilty under your comment  . I pray don't have kids they're giving me I'd murder my child vibes literally . Sick . Imagine if this were a black woman with the SAME exact evidence against her... she'd be six feet under already . She got away with murdering her child the evidence is clear as day .... sad really really sa d

@nikolas so many people saying she's not guilty under your comment  . I pray don't have kids they're giving me I'd murder my child vibes literally . Sick . Imagine if this were a black woman with the SAME exact evidence against her... she'd be six feet under already . She got away with murdering her child the evidence is clear as day .... sad really really sa d

@Tanaphar Plus Masks so humanity is apathetic and self-serving

@Tanaphar Plus Masks so humanity is apathetic and self-serving

@Julie Zhu I understand that innocent until proven guilty. That statement has saved a lot of innocent people from being incarcerated and gave them an opportunity to a fair trial. In this case... wow...just wow

@Julie Zhu I understand that innocent until proven guilty. That statement has saved a lot of innocent people from being incarcerated and gave them an opportunity to a fair trial. In this case... wow...just wow

@AimyiiMarie81 Innocent until proven. And they don't have enough evidence to prove it otherwise.

@AimyiiMarie81 Innocent until proven. And they don't have enough evidence to prove it otherwise.

@Tyler Rae Well I absolutely hate the argument of: " it is true for me " and the personal belief stuff. It is not based on reasoning. But what I would like to clarify is the thing I meant about life beginning, I meant for some "Soul"  (which does not exist) or consciousness or idea of self-awareness. There are things some people consider the beginning of life. And science has not proven they exist at conception. If you still agree that the essential thing that defines humans a human starts at the beginning it still does not matter. When someone is from your perspective misguided and believe that the essential thing for life is later than he honestly believes it, even as wrong as it may be. Based on this wrong assumption he makes a choice based on some morality he justifies. And so he is not a cold-blooded MURDERER just a MISGUIDED person. And you will not convince anyone that life beings at conception by calling them a murderer. And I would agree that humans are extremely bad species, evil and stuff, but when you think about it more people never even think about this stuff(what is their morality based on). So more people in the world are just mindlessly following the ideas that give them meaning. The pursuit of money, physique, traveling you name it. In my language, you would call it a "Modla" a thing that is an earthly goal that you use to fill the missing space when you don't see meaning in life(and they are not necessarily bad things just when placed and used as meaning for life). AHAHAHa I don't think you made it this far but if yes thanks for reading my rant.

@Jesper I understand your point completely.

@Jesper I understand your point completely.

@TheFun Mugen Oh of course you say this. Why did you bring rape into this anyway? People like you always make it a competition smh.

@TheFun Mugen Oh of course you say this. Why did you bring rape into this anyway? People like you always make it a competition smh.

@TheFun Mugen Hun, what does being pro - choice have to do with this. You must have pulled a muscle stretching that far lmao. She deserves to be in jail definitely and this story infuriates me, but she chose to have that child. Poor child was brought into this world not wanted and them brutally murdered. It's sad, but maybe she would have been better off not being born to that "person" in the first place. Abortion is not murder, but this story is.

@TheFun Mugen Hun, what does being pro - choice have to do with this. You must have pulled a muscle stretching that far lmao. She deserves to be in jail definitely and this story infuriates me, but she chose to have that child. Poor child was brought into this world not wanted and them brutally murdered. It's sad, but maybe she would have been better off not being born to that "person" in the first place. Abortion is not murder, but this story is.

burh! you should have mentioned, "spoiler alert"

burh! you should have mentioned, "spoiler alert"

@TheFun Mugen TOTALLY! !!! i LOVE TO EAT LATE TERM ABORTIONS! THEY ARE DELICIOUS! WE WAIT TILL THE LAST TRIMESTER BEFORE HARVEST!!! HMMM YUMMY

@TheFun Mugen TOTALLY! !!! i LOVE TO EAT LATE TERM ABORTIONS! THEY ARE DELICIOUS! WE WAIT TILL THE LAST TRIMESTER BEFORE HARVEST!!! HMMM YUMMY

Even with her daughter being found with duct tape around her mouth and nose... And her last google searches.... Those few things alone should've been enough evidence to link her directly to the murder of her daughter. Wtf is wrong with these sociopath apologists??

Even with her daughter being found with duct tape around her mouth and nose... And her last google searches.... Those few things alone should've been enough evidence to link her directly to the murder of her daughter. Wtf is wrong with these sociopath apologists??

It's not what you think you know, it's what you can prove

It's not what you think you know, it's what you can prove

@TheFun Mugen They are just as f*ck*d as anyone who gets screwed over in this sad existence we call life. Tell me my man. How many naysayers have you won over, without just creating a separatist community that agrees with you? And when are you going to change us humans for the better that the past 2000 years of modern humanity couldn't?

@TheFun Mugen They are just as f*ck*d as anyone who gets screwed over in this sad existence we call life. Tell me my man. How many naysayers have you won over, without just creating a separatist community that agrees with you? And when are you going to change us humans for the better that the past 2000 years of modern humanity couldn't?

@TheFun Mugen Nanananananananana Batman!

@TheFun Mugen Nanananananananana Batman!

@Jesper You are confident that every jury would have concluded that the evidence does not prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the sociopath pathological liar lady did kill her daughter? No one here have their pitchforks out in the literal sense and are not marching down to city hall to actually  demand recourse. Plus no one is questioning the entire legitimacy of the legal system, which is funny because humanity can never actually have a legitimately fair legal system. The point is there are other factors involved outside the statutes and case law that have caused this unfortunate error to happen. Namely subjectivity.  Although I agree with you if someone does not see things you do, no matter how trivial it is, calling them an idiot is incorrect and will not solve any problems or help you to communicate any rational points across to anyone other than people who already agree with you.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks People question things and come to their own conclusions, whether through bias or logical evidence through pre-mandated legal parameters. Unless you want to build a machine that can make all people think like you. Be  the world you're in. There, that's a nice start to an infinite spiral.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks People question things and come to their own conclusions, whether through bias or logical evidence through pre-mandated legal parameters. Unless you want to build a machine that can make all people think like you. Be  the world you're in. There, that's a nice start to an infinite spiral.

I guess one of the reasons why America has such high wrongful conviction numbers is because u guys are the jury, making emotional judgement based on circumstantial evidences. God bless u guys if ya'll were ever made a clueless drug mule or get framed for something u didnt do. "Innocent until proven guilty" is not ur sole right, it applies even to ur worst enemy.

I guess one of the reasons why America has such high wrongful conviction numbers is because u guys are the jury, making emotional judgement based on circumstantial evidences. God bless u guys if ya'll were ever made a clueless drug mule or get framed for something u didnt do. "Innocent until proven guilty" is not ur sole right, it applies even to ur worst enemy.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks she DID murder her daughter, whether you like it or not.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks she DID murder her daughter, whether you like it or not.

She literally got away with murder. It's sick.

She literally got away with murder. It's sick.

@Jose exactly. and if you dont know for a fact she shouldnt be convicted. no matter how tough it is to see that piece of shit human walk free, we cant judge because of the "obvious". do you imagine how much easier it would be to frame people if that was all it took to get a conviction? this was the prosecutions fault, the jury believe it or not did the right call based on the evidence and lack there of. english is not my native language so no hate boys

@Jose exactly. and if you dont know for a fact she shouldnt be convicted. no matter how tough it is to see that piece of shit human walk free, we cant judge because of the "obvious". do you imagine how much easier it would be to frame people if that was all it took to get a conviction? this was the prosecutions fault, the jury believe it or not did the right call based on the evidence and lack there of. english is not my native language so no hate boys

OJ jury:"we are the worst jury ever"<br>Anthony jury:"hold our get out of jail free card"

OJ jury:"we are the worst jury ever"
Anthony jury:"hold our get out of jail free card"

@TheFun Mugen Well you are completely generalizing people who are pro-choice. I don't think anyone is pro-choice because they want to murder children, there may be exceptions and they are then wrong. The difference between pro-life and pro-choice is the decision based on whether life starts in the mother's womb the moment an egg is fertilized, when the baby is born, basically whenever you consider the beginning of life. So no sane person is for killing children. Abut the case, it was not proven in the court and that is a blunder (in my opinion based on the facts I know). I absolutely agree she is guilty and a terrible human being but pls don't generalize. (and btw I'm not gonna state if I'm pro-life or choice because I am not sure on that issue)

Me too makes me so heartbroken shes a monster

Me too makes me so heartbroken shes a monster

@Tanaphar Plus Masks I would also recommend anger management classes. Maybe that would help you not be such a spiteful person after someone disagrees with you online.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks I would also recommend anger management classes. Maybe that would help you not be such a spiteful person after someone disagrees with you online.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Are you ok? Maybe you should take a breather and log off so you stop being so triggered. Don't take the internet so seriously :)

@Tanaphar Plus Masks Are you ok? Maybe you should take a breather and log off so you stop being so triggered. Don't take the internet so seriously :)

@Tanaphar Plus Masks also, if you want to keep insulting me that’s fine. Stay mad, keep getting heated over people disagreeing with you. Hope you have a good day/night wherever you are despite the fact that you are choosing to be demeaning towards random ass people online❤❤

@Tanaphar Plus Masks also, if you want to keep insulting me that’s fine. Stay mad, keep getting heated over people disagreeing with you. Hope you have a good day/night wherever you are despite the fact that you are choosing to be demeaning towards random ass people online❤❤

@Tanaphar Plus Masks who is saying anything to a court??? This is the internet. People can say whatever they want. Stop policing people’s language when their goal isn’t to prove anything to you or argue with you? How do you not understand that lmao, clearly you have been living under a rock and don’t get how the internet works.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks who is saying anything to a court??? This is the internet. People can say whatever they want. Stop policing people’s language when their goal isn’t to prove anything to you or argue with you? How do you not understand that lmao, clearly you have been living under a rock and don’t get how the internet works.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks lmao are you ok? People don’t have to justify every reason that they think the court came to a wrong conclusion to random people on the internet, especially people like you who just condescend to feel smart. It’s called having an opinion, get over it😂

@Tanaphar Plus Masks lmao are you ok? People don’t have to justify every reason that they think the court came to a wrong conclusion to random people on the internet, especially people like you who just condescend to feel smart. It’s called having an opinion, get over it😂

@Tanaphar Plus Masks “she didn’t murder her daughter. What the court finds the court finds” The courts get shit wrong all the time. This logic doesn’t make sense, and people are entitled to their opinions on closed cases.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks “she didn’t murder her daughter. What the court finds the court finds” The courts get shit wrong all the time. This logic doesn’t make sense, and people are entitled to their opinions on closed cases.

@UC7k64skN-eMKUOiaRcGDJYA that’s circumstantial evidence that the defense eloquently shot down with reasonable doubt. The state’s case had a lot of issues. Especially the forensics. They tried to introduce junk science that the defense argued against. If she was guilty, it was the state’s mismanagement that got her a not guilty verdict.

@UC7k64skN-eMKUOiaRcGDJYA that’s circumstantial evidence that the defense eloquently shot down with reasonable doubt. The state’s case had a lot of issues. Especially the forensics. They tried to introduce junk science that the defense argued against. If she was guilty, it was the state’s mismanagement that got her a not guilty verdict.

@TheFun Mugen you tell me there was plenty of evidence that she killed her daughter yet you provide none, just like the prosecutor. just beacuse someone can smell a dead body doesnt mean that that body was a crime of murder. it only proves that it was there, not what exactly happened to it. what i feel about men getting falsely accused and/or convicted of rape? i despise it, as one should. that is exactly the reason for my comment. i dont want people to get wrongfully convicted. how could you not see that? if the prosecutor can't provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant should NEVER be convicted. how horrible it may be, a system that convicts people without evidence is not a system i want to be a part of.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks i know, that's why i said that i feel 100% sure because i know i can't be since it hasnt been proven

@Tanaphar Plus Masks i know, that's why i said that i feel 100% sure because i know i can't be since it hasnt been proven

@Tanaphar Plus Masks I agree. The state’s case was shaky at best. I couldn’t find her guilty of murder based on that. These people have never seen the full case, only what talking heads like Nancy grace have said.

@Tanaphar Plus Masks I agree. The state’s case was shaky at best. I couldn’t find her guilty of murder based on that. These people have never seen the full case, only what talking heads like Nancy grace have said.

The problem was the state’s case. They didn’t prove that she killed her daughter. They brought in junk science that was able to be refuted, then they also didn’t do a full investigation of the computer. I would’ve said not guilty too based on the evidence presented.

The problem was the state’s case. They didn’t prove that she killed her daughter. They brought in junk science that was able to be refuted, then they also didn’t do a full investigation of the computer. I would’ve said not guilty too based on the evidence presented.

@TheFun Mugen lol bit of a stretch with the antiabortion speech there buddy

@TheFun Mugen lol bit of a stretch with the antiabortion speech there buddy

@AimyiiMarie81 i agree with you, on one thing. i also think she did it, i feel 100% sure on that. although, you are not "stupid" for thinking otherwise, because it wasnt proven. i know it sucks but i on one hand appreciate this ruling. i want her to be sentenced to jail but at the same time, it needs to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. if we start convicting people without proof and rely more on guts and "the obvious", then we are going in a baaad way and many more will be wrongfully convicted.

@AimyiiMarie81 i agree with you, on one thing. i also think she did it, i feel 100% sure on that. although, you are not "stupid" for thinking otherwise, because it wasnt proven. i know it sucks but i on one hand appreciate this ruling. i want her to be sentenced to jail but at the same time, it needs to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. if we start convicting people without proof and rely more on guts and "the obvious", then we are going in a baaad way and many more will be wrongfully convicted.

I can’t even begin to comprehend the stupidity of the jury.  Shits insane... she gets freedom despite murdering her daughter and having no remorse while people are doing life for selling Weed.   What is the world we live in?

I can’t even begin to comprehend the stupidity of the jury.  Shits insane... she gets freedom despite murdering her daughter and having no remorse while people are doing life for selling Weed.   What is the world we live in?