Is no one discussing the fact that the defence claimed that Casey was sexually abused by her farther? I don't want to minimise it if it actually happened but If this is a lie like everything else she said, then this is the second worst thing she has ever done. Imagine being her father giving her support and then be hit by that just so your sociopathic daughter can get off scot free.

If it meant saving my daughter from the death penalty, I would have probably ran with it.

I was thinking about that claim they made. True or not, though I find it hard to believe because of her clear compulsive lying, it doesn't explain anything else about the daughter being "kidnapped" or why the car smelled like a corpse, or even why the body was found in the manner it was. It all seems to me like Casey wasn't ready to be a parent and felt the best way to deal with it was to kill her child, who she was probably already neglecting, and just lie through her teeth. This wasn't just on a whim, the woman planned this. Though it was crappy planning, somehow she knew that she would get away with it, especially if she claimed something that would point to her being put in this situation by some traumatic situation. I honestly believe that she made up the whole molesting because she wanted sympathy. She lied about everything else, and not in a normal at way for when your child goes missing. I mean, she could've been telling the truth for once in her life, but after everything else she lied about and how casually she did so, it's not likely her story was true at any point.

Yeh it caught me completely in different zone. Fuk what was that sudden argument about sexual abuse where did that came from like w t h was that. It was disgusting how he discussed but it would be like death if it was a lie for her father who loved her.

@Flappy Hands Why do you think their whole family are baby killers?

Part of me wonders if it was punishment of some kind because he was the parent who wasn’t going along with her bullshit. She’s never gone after her mom because she’s protected her and defended her lies

Andyy L no he didn’t - he is alive and was on dr.Oz just two years ago

its a lie. this never happened and it's sickening that she even allowed it to happen I can't imagine how badly that broke their lives

@Sanay rj obstruction of Justice for lying to police. And basically she got time served because she was remanded.

@Andyy L he did not kill himself. He attempted suicide he claims. But stopped or woke up

@Mimi nope even in a healthy household people can still do stupid things outside of the house like skipping college or doing street fights whatever

@Hanf Peter yes it is<br>If she didn't kill her then who did? They didn't try to find that person after she rescued

@Hanf Peter yes it is
If she didn't kill her then who did? They didn't try to find that person after she rescued

@Hanf Peter this is so bad although they had this much of evidence by her actions before the court she still got away

@Ruthless RiderR6 she had a good lawyer🤦♀

That was the only moment I saw that there could have been something deeper in Kaileey's words. How possible would it be for her to grow up like this in a healthy family? I'll copy paste a theory that I found at least interesting from another comment - ....  never involving kid’s dad in this is kinda weird. And are we sure she is lying about her dad? Idk. I feel like there are a lot of things that jury didn’t disclose to media. Maybe she was cold blooded inhuman person cuz of her kid being her dad and her?

There are people who were only touched by their father in a normal loving way, and then they lie about being raped in childhood... Or even worse, accusing someone else at a party who they just accidentally bumped into, or was a friend who just kissed his lady friend on the cheek, and then accusing them for rape... That's what's truly fucked up...

@Andyy L He didn't kill himself, stop reading youtube comments and taking them as fact

@Andyy L No he didn't, he is still alive. He got wasted and texted some people that he was going to kill himself but he didn't. Stop trying to make this family of baby killers seem sympathetic.

She's a compulsive liar. She's been getting away with lying her entire life.

@Andyy L I wouldn't doubt it as a father I would be pissed!

@Sanay rj the way i understood it, she was declared completely innocent due to lack of evidence, meaning there is no penalty at all

I didn't understand what was the penalty for her after all?


Imagine leaving your child with a babysitter nicknamed Xanny

its a code word, for her using “xanax” and giving it to her kid to put her to sleep so she could go clubbing


She Googled “foolproof suffocation” hours before her daughter was suffocated... GUILTY; next.

She Googled “foolproof suffocation” hours before her daughter was suffocated... GUILTY; next.

@brii Girl..I didn’t even say God’s name!

@brii Girl..I didn’t even say God’s name!

@Just a Texas Girl dont use the Lords name in vain

@Just a Texas Girl dont use the Lords name in vain

@Yousef AlSharif Ideally, the jury would hear a story of the crime that is backed up by rigid and irrefutable evidence.  Ideally.  What often happens is the jury forgets that evidence is a necessary component and vote on the most dramatic or sensationalistic or lurid story. The state most famous for sending people to prison, or to death row, based on the emotions elicited by a collective story is Texas.  There a a crap ton of innocent people in prison in Texas just because the prosecution presented a story that conformed to the narrative that the jury found true "in their gut" rather than through evidence.

Using story format is mostly because that is how humans tend understand the world - through narrative.  But to put someone in prison, there MUST be evidence to support that ruling or we're still living in the same world that burned witches.

@oliviatree If the job of the jury is to judge the evidence not the story, why is the trial then presented in such a story telling manner? Why isn't it then presented in a rigid mathematical manner? Do you know what I mean?

@oliviatree If the job of the jury is to judge the evidence not the story, why is the trial then presented in such a story telling manner? Why isn't it then presented in a rigid mathematical manner? Do you know what I mean?

@J B  Please, I'm not saying convictions don't happen with circumstantial evidence alone.   I'm saying the bottom line is the prosecution could not convince THIS jury "beyond a reasonable doubt" (mainly due to a failure to prove the cause of death) that the charges were worthy of a guilty verdict.  Circumstantial or forensic, it just wasn't enough.   Though only two of the twelve jurors could not be convinced, in the end that's all that mattered.

in your eyes thats what that means. But these jurors need to quit being coaxed by prosecutors into finding an assailant to put these crimes at ease when no evidence exists. This is all cirmonstancial and not hard evidence. People forget that they need to prove "without a reason of doubt" before finding people guilty. Shame to those that use their option on the case at hand. It is the states job to prove without a shadow of a doubt otherwise. QUIT BEING A PART OF THROWING INNOCENT PEOPLE IN JAIL!!! idts

@Dark Passenger so why do you google things like that all the time if you don’t think of hurting anyone??

@Dark Passenger so why do you google things like that all the time if you don’t think of hurting anyone??

@Artlover Not true.  "REASONABLE" doubt.  If direct evidence were a must for conviction, then nobody who disposes of the body beyond recovery would be convicted.  Circumstantial can rise above reasonable doubt.  This case is one of them.

@Artlover Not true.  "REASONABLE" doubt.  If direct evidence were a must for conviction, then nobody who disposes of the body beyond recovery would be convicted.  Circumstantial can rise above reasonable doubt.  This case is one of them.

@Geostrategic Insights why wasnt that evidence presented, surely they need all the evidence they can get?

genuinely  curious

@Geostrategic Insights why wasnt that evidence presented, surely they need all the evidence they can get?

genuinely  curious

@Richard P she was a skeleton by the time they found her in the swamp.

@Richard P she was a skeleton by the time they found her in the swamp.

@Bryan Hann that's what I'm saying.  The prosecution authority would bring fresh charges.  It wouldn't be the same case, they would have to open a new case based on the new investigation.

@Bryan Hann that's what I'm saying.  The prosecution authority would bring fresh charges.  It wouldn't be the same case, they would have to open a new case based on the new investigation.

@00 00 If found guilty, a new trial could me ordered that might reverse the conviction. But if found not guilty, the tried person cannot be tried on the same charges. I believe this is the case in all Commonwealth countries.

//The prosecution authority would bring a new case if they had new evidence.  It would be a new set of proceedings.//

I am sorry to inform you that it does not work this way. Now if the tried person testified that they did not commit a crime and later admitted to committing the crime, this admission could be used in a charge of perjury -- but not in a charge related to the original crime. (If charged only with murder, and the jury found the charged person not guilty, they may not then me charged with a lesser crime of manslaughter.)

I hope this helps! 🤣🤣🤣

@Bryan Hann If new evidence came forward that this woman did kill her daughter she would just get away with it? Wouldn't it be re opened as a fresh case?  I have seen trials get thrown out in the uk where I am originally from and then re set.  I just seems ludicrous to me that they would allow a  criminal to get off scott free.  New evidence means a new case.  If she went to police now and said "I did it,I killed my daughter" you are telling me they would just tell her she was free to go?  The prosecution authority would bring a new case if they had new evidence.  It would be a new set of proceedings.

@clerp So your reply does not answer my question.

@clerp So your reply does not answer my question.

@00 00 //New evidence such as this would be possible grounds for a retrial.  Even if a murder trial is over, someone can still be trialed again if fresh evidence is discovered.//

Not in the US. Indeed, not in any jurisdiction I know of that operated under the English Law tradition.

And it is 'tried again'. 😊

@Just a Texas Girl I think that was to get rid of her mom cause she was gonna ask about Caylee and couldn’t dodge I contact in person like the jail visit

@Just a Texas Girl I think that was to get rid of her mom cause she was gonna ask about Caylee and couldn’t dodge I contact in person like the jail visit

@Geostrategic Insights why was the Google evidence not available for the jury? x

@Geostrategic Insights why was the Google evidence not available for the jury? x

Bruce Sanders you just proved the point of the defense honestly everyone can twist the words of law for their own gain beyond reasonable doubt was made to seem like it had to be beyond all doubt but in reality the hourly was incapable of thinking for them selves. Any person that can think would know nothing is beyond all doubt honestly even stuff we believe as fact can be spun a different way

Jorel Decker very right she was willing to throw her own father under for her own gain and all that stems from the fact they were soft on her, regardless of being a sociopath (which is actually rewarded in our community) she is a disgusting human being and beyond a fake person. But I would like to know more about her psychological evaluations something isn’t right

N. D. M. What makes a group of men 200 years ago fit to say what is wise and just in today’s age a lot of the stuff they wrote was vague for the sole reason of trying to make those rules as relevant for as long as possible that’s a fact unfortunately the fact they are vague give the opportunity of criminals to weasel their way out

you should look at all the casey videos on YARtv on youtube they show how the case was faked!

you should look at all the casey videos on YARtv on youtube they show how the case was faked!

@Just a Texas Girl  exactly! I swear the jurors got paid or something

@Just a Texas Girl  exactly! I swear the jurors got paid or something

Wasn't there  any autopsy to find water in the child's lungs? Then the Defence's case would fall apart

Wasn't there  any autopsy to find water in the child's lungs? Then the Defence's case would fall apart

it’s her moms fault Casey grew up to be this sociopathic girl, but now we see it led to Casey being a psychopath.

it’s her moms fault Casey grew up to be this sociopathic girl, but now we see it led to Casey being a psychopath.

Catherine ...you’re full of it. The directive is not “beyond all ...”, it is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. What does this mean? It means your doubt cannot be unreasonable. The jurors heard nothing reasonable to suggest it wasn’t pre-meditated murder. But the defense was slicker than owl sh_t on an ice flow when he said “they must ‘prove’”. He deceived the jury. The prosecution never has to ‘prove’. They only must show that there is no ‘reasonable’ doubt.

And what she wrote in her journal saying she made the right decision and hope her happiness continue. GUILTY !

And what she wrote in her journal saying she made the right decision and hope her happiness continue. GUILTY !

Not guilty. She googled "foolproof" like you said. Thats an accurate search result

Not guilty. She googled "foolproof" like you said. Thats an accurate search result

@00 00 life isn't fair. Second, the US was built on freedoms and individuality, not justice and community. The victims can always sue them if they find or think there is enough evidence. That has a lower threshold of required evidence while not including incarceration or a death penalty. For instance, see what happened to O.J. Simpson. The rule exists to stop the government from harassing citizens by coming up with all kinds of "new" evidence, real or imagined, to re-trial until they get what they want. It avoids the kangaroo court system that European Monarchies and Tyrants (one and the same in the mind of the founding fathers) used against those they didn't like. "That didn't stick? Well what about this? That didn't stick? Well what about this?" It also helps avoid mob justice in the courts that this comments section is filled with. Also, it allows for nolification  or the idea that the people can override laws they disagree with by jury decisions; and the government can't retaliate. The philosophy is built on maximum freedom and rights of all individuals (including the accused or even guilty so the innocent won't suffer indignities or worse), not on justice that is subjective.

@N. D. M. But if new evidence comes up, what about the victim and their families right to a new trial?  What about justice the safety of the community?  If fresh evidence presents itself that this woman could have murdered her daughter it is strongly in the public's interest for her to be put back on trial and jailed if she is found guilty.  For her to remain at large if a court can prove that she actually murdered someone is a huge miscarriage of justice.  I don't know how this goes against the concept of liberty and justice at all.  It's perfectly fair.  Sitting one trial should not make someone exempt from another if fresh evidence comes forward.

@00 00 I completely disagree. The founding fathers of the USA put that in the original Constitution for a Wise and Just reason. Again, the objections show a lack of history education.

@00 00 I completely disagree. The founding fathers of the USA put that in the original Constitution for a Wise and Just reason. Again, the objections show a lack of history education.

@N. D. M. I am not from the USA so I was under the impression that you could bring a re-trial.  People seriously need to speak up against such a corrupt legislation...

@N. D. M. I am not from the USA so I was under the impression that you could bring a re-trial.  People seriously need to speak up against such a corrupt legislation...

it would diffidently make her the number 1 suspect but you need actual evidence that she killed her child like a eye witness or video of the killing or dumping of the body or a confession if she is convicted of killing her child on that alone it is like me saying you looked up suffocation and you killed her child

@Ellen Raine it would be a great way to take advantage of caseys lying under pressure

@Ellen Raine it would be a great way to take advantage of caseys lying under pressure

That could have been a search, by either Casey or her father, to find a way to stage the (already dead) body to look like a murder in case it was ever found.  Just another theory...

That could have been a search, by either Casey or her father, to find a way to stage the (already dead) body to look like a murder in case it was ever found.  Just another theory...

@Just a Texas Girl messed up search results dosen't mean automatic murder im sure everyone in this chat would be in jail if thats the case

@Just a Texas Girl messed up search results dosen't mean automatic murder im sure everyone in this chat would be in jail if thats the case

So, what I'm confused around here is the narration of the video and the message. Aside from obvious reasons to disbelieve Casey Anthony I'm trying to understand how the narrator speaks with authority and certainty regarding diagnoses such as sociopathy or pathological lying. Not because I belive it's not true (I agree with the ideas), but more because of the certainty in the delivery here. Has there been some previous diagnosis of Casey, or perhaps have I misunderstood the nature of the video as more factual, when in fact what it's intended as is one person's well educated, (but not clinically diagnosed) view of what the 'something'  about casey is? I'm certainly not criticising, just curious about the production's intent.

Artlover That’s total bs. If you watched the trial and read the mountain of evidence you’d know that. Circumstantial evidence is just as strong as forensic evidence. Only the ignorant think convictions are only made with DNA.

Artlover That’s total bs. If you watched the trial and read the mountain of evidence you’d know that. Circumstantial evidence is just as strong as forensic evidence. Only the ignorant think convictions are only made with DNA.

oliviatree nope this is wrong information. Completely wrong.

oliviatree nope this is wrong information. Completely wrong.

oliviatree WRONG it totally matched up as mom was at work during the searches and Casey was logged in using her account.

oliviatree WRONG it totally matched up as mom was at work during the searches and Casey was logged in using her account.

It’s like OJ. You knew he did it but they didn’t prove it.

It’s like OJ. You knew he did it but they didn’t prove it.

He didn’t mention the chloroform searches that were found on her pc.

He didn’t mention the chloroform searches that were found on her pc.

Jamie Ferguson Oh you poor naive fool. Imagine a justice system where people are prosecuted based on circumstantial evidence like google searches.

What other evidence do you love in this way? IP logs? Equally broken evidence that doesn’t prove a thing.

Google searches don’t mean anything! They are circumstantial and that’s as far as it goes. Christ.

@Stained Glass "evidences of human decomposition" would have resulted in dna, which could have easily been matched to Caylee. You're merely talking about the mention of a stench. That's not evidence of human decomposition. It's barely admissable in court as part of a witness testimony, but would not be considered an actual piece of evidence.

I'm not saying she didn't kill Caylee, but based upon the evidence, you cannot convict her of first degree murder. If we did off of such a lack of evidence, lots of people could be convicted of murders and crimes they didn't commit. (We know those in the cases to which I'm referencing didn't commit the crimes because we've found more evidence to prove otherwise.)

@Jeffrey Bone In the U.S. once you've been acquitted of a crime you can't be tried for that crime again. Statements made in opening and closing arguments are not facts and are not evidence. Attorney's get a great deal of leeway in their statements made in court and his statement was based on what his client told him. Since she doesn't have to take the stand, she doesn't have to give evidence to support the accusation.

That is the main problem with this type of documentary. They always present the evidence to support their opinion in this case guilty. In the end,  common sense tell you that if jurors found her not guilty, there is 99 % chance that we would have come to the same conclusion.

That is the main problem with this type of documentary. They always present the evidence to support their opinion in this case guilty. In the end,  common sense tell you that if jurors found her not guilty, there is 99 % chance that we would have come to the same conclusion.

"acquittal after acquittal after acquittal. until the stench of it rises so high it chokes the whole f in lot of them"

"acquittal after acquittal after acquittal. until the stench of it rises so high it chokes the whole f in lot of them"

@Dark Passenger only is such events didnt actually occur. IF you search for how to acid down a body... THEN your nieghbor who you have been feuding with goes missing... THAT is not circumstancial.

@Dark Passenger only is such events didnt actually occur. IF you search for how to acid down a body... THEN your nieghbor who you have been feuding with goes missing... THAT is not circumstancial.

@Mike Sirname Yes, women could inherit independently of their brothers, husband and sons from their fathers.   Yes, widows were entitled to at least some of the wealth if their husbands died (I'm not going to say all, because titles came with inheritance and that definitely went to eldest sons.  Widows did have rights of inheritance, however and possibly support from their sons, if I recall correctly.)  To start looking into this, maybe look into the history of Aragorn and the lands that were conferred upon the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella.

@Mike Sirname You are very welcome.  The most interesting set of laws was Castilian, which gave women rights of ownership and negotiation.  This is probably due to Queen Isabella being prominent and in competition with the Muslims of the southern half of Spain who allowed women the same rights. They were extremely progressive for the time.

@Mike Sirname Well since you are asking...I was arguing/discussing a certain feminist topic on another forum where someone contended that English Common Law was the most woman friendly code of laws ever formed ever.  So my huffy ass had to go research the various forms of early legal codes in Europe and their implications for modern jurisprudence.  Fun stuff.  Not lying.  And no, English Common Law is not the most feminist friendly legal code in early times.  Castilian law is much better, the law that was transported to most of Latin America.  Even Islamic laws were more feminist than the English.  So I learned about Salic Law which had a huge impact on Europe overall (and caused many a war over succession) and still echoes through the culture as authority based law,  as does Roman Law which is very prevalent in places like Germany.

New evidence such as this would be possible grounds for a retrial.  Even if a murder trial is over, someone can still be trialed again if fresh evidence is discovered.

New evidence such as this would be possible grounds for a retrial.  Even if a murder trial is over, someone can still be trialed again if fresh evidence is discovered.

I agree that she was guilty. But you just watched a video about how a murderer got away with it, and presumably that wouldn’t be enough to convict you if  someone you knew died or disappeared. No single internet search item proves anything. Neither does some facial expression, speech pattern, or whether she acted as you think someone should. Put together, you are starting to develop a case.

@The Betty Strong Encounter Agreed.  They should have concentrated on the suffocation searches instead.

@The Betty Strong Encounter Agreed.  They should have concentrated on the suffocation searches instead.

@Artlover There's no evidence that Casey or anyone else connected to the case had the knowledge or equipment to synthesize chloroform. It's absurd to suggest that Casey was cooking up chloroform in a secret laboratory when she could have just drugged Caylee with OTC meds. Huge misstep by the State.

@Artlover There's no evidence that Casey or anyone else connected to the case had the knowledge or equipment to synthesize chloroform. It's absurd to suggest that Casey was cooking up chloroform in a secret laboratory when she could have just drugged Caylee with OTC meds. Huge misstep by the State.

Defence would have simply claimed that she was feeling suicidal.

Defence would have simply claimed that she was feeling suicidal.

@Dark Passenger MOST cases are solved via circumstantial evidence. Perhaps you should stop watching tv shows where they pretend all cases are solved via forensics.

@Dark Passenger MOST cases are solved via circumstantial evidence. Perhaps you should stop watching tv shows where they pretend all cases are solved via forensics.

@Mike Sirname The state fucked up incredibly and didn't check one of the browser's history. The defense was expecting the evidence and came up with a lie to refute. This was all discovered later on. More evidence would prove ONLY Casey was home and able to do those searches concerning full-proof suffocation. It's pure luck she got away with it. The day she was arrested is the day she deleted all the history.

too bad the jury and judge hadn't finished the 3rd grade.

too bad the jury and judge hadn't finished the 3rd grade.

That wouldn't have worked anyway, because when you search for "foolproof suffocation" you will find that the whole page is filled with articels about some girl named Casey...

That wouldn't have worked anyway, because when you search for "foolproof suffocation" you will find that the whole page is filled with articels about some girl named Casey...

@The Betty Strong Encounter Someone in that house looked up how to make it.  That is not in dispute.  Unfortunately, the state could not prove that it was Casey.  However, they did they find it in the trunk of the car?  How did it get there?  Also, why did the trunk of the car smell like a decomposing body (the garbage did NOT make that smell).  Yet more unanswered questions.  The prosecution failed Caylee.

@Geostrategic Insights That evidence would very likely have caused one juror to refuse to agree to any verdict other than guilty. Then the rest of the jurors fall in line or there's a mistrial and they can try again.

@Geostrategic Insights That evidence would very likely have caused one juror to refuse to agree to any verdict other than guilty. Then the rest of the jurors fall in line or there's a mistrial and they can try again.

@Mike Sirname So interesting.  Thanks for that.  Again, I see the benefits of both systems.  Too many juries in this country are manipulated into bad verdicts, and DA's hide evidence whenever they can.  I feel there is way too much emotion in the USA that gives the public a voice at trials which is detrimental to the law and fairness.  I had lawyer friends when I lived in Germany and their training was much more rule based than the US system but that did take the power somewhat out of the hands of individuals, even judges who were only given authority based on extensive legal knowledge rather than trial procedure.  I think that the legal system of the USA is vastly different from anywhere else in the world. The only benefit of our system I can see is that any case, absolutely any case at all, can set precedent that has far reaching implications under our system.  Again, thanks for the explanation!

I watched a review of this trial by Marcia Clark who said the reason why a few of the incriminating search terms weren't presented was because one of the prosecution's team researchers searched only one search engines, but missed checking another search engine during the trial. After the trial was over, the prosecution team discovered there was more incriminating keyword searches done under this secondary search engine. Too late to present at that time..

@Catherine Actually,  the selection of a juror is very much psychologically driven. Also, you would be shocked at how much a jury is not permitted to see or know. It is surprising to me that so many are actually convicted of anything given the limited scope of whst can be presented to a jury. It is not easy to find people who have no awareness of current affairs and local news, ie ignorant

@HeyLook ItsABirdItsAPlaneNoItsAReallyLongUsername but he's not a white woman

@HeyLook ItsABirdItsAPlaneNoItsAReallyLongUsername but he's not a white woman

Geostrategic Insights why wasn’t that evidence of the google search not presented? Genuine question not sure if I missed something

Geostrategic Insights why wasn’t that evidence of the google search not presented? Genuine question not sure if I missed something

@HeyLook ItsABirdItsAPlaneNoItsAReallyLongUsername What about O.J.?

@HeyLook ItsABirdItsAPlaneNoItsAReallyLongUsername What about O.J.?

Except the State claimed that Casey used chloroform to incapacitate Caylee. Where did she obtain the chloroform? How did she dispose of it? Why bother with chloroform at all if she was just going to suffocate Caylee? The State never answered these questions.

Except the State claimed that Casey used chloroform to incapacitate Caylee. Where did she obtain the chloroform? How did she dispose of it? Why bother with chloroform at all if she was just going to suffocate Caylee? The State never answered these questions.

@Dark Passenger That's the rub:  Too much circumstantial and not enough direct evidence.  In following the letter of the law, the jury came up with the only decision they could, unfortunately.  The prosecution failed.

@Dark Passenger That's the rub:  Too much circumstantial and not enough direct evidence.  In following the letter of the law, the jury came up with the only decision they could, unfortunately.  The prosecution failed.

@Mike Sirname Wow!  France is going to jury-less trials???  So judges will ultimately have all authority over criminal trials?  Interesting.  I know that Salic Law, as opposed to Common Law, is very different.  On the one hand, the trials are not sensationalized like they are in the UK and USA.  On the other, no judgement by one's peers just feels...wrong, to me.  ;)

oliviatree - Not true. That’s why jury nullification exists.

oliviatree - Not true. That’s why jury nullification exists.

@Artlover Thanks for the new information!  Yes, the investigators and the prosecutors were incompetent which should be where the scorn of the public should be focused.  Our justice system isn't going to get any better with players like these bozos.

@Artlover Thanks for the new information!  Yes, the investigators and the prosecutors were incompetent which should be where the scorn of the public should be focused.  Our justice system isn't going to get any better with players like these bozos.

I Google stuff like that all the time, but never plan on hurting anyone.

Circumstantial at best.

I Google stuff like that all the time, but never plan on hurting anyone.

Circumstantial at best.

White woman + Really good defense = not guilty unfortunately.

White woman + Really good defense = not guilty unfortunately.

@Geostrategic Insights i'm always annoyed by people who attack juries. They are random people that are plucked out their day to day lives and burdened with the task of making a tough decision with someone's life. Plus, the presentation of the trial is unique to them only, they are only privy to certain details. It's easy to sit back with hindsight and all of the available information from the press and pass judgement on them. A not guilty verdict is the prosecution's fault. End of story.

@Abe Buckingham It was for the prosecution to claim, and then prove, that for the jury, which they did not.  It would have opened up a whole new area of doubt which Baez would have jumped on.  They were extremely inhibited by the decomposition of the body for creating a believable timeline - but they only have their own cops to blame for that.

@Mike Sirname because lawyers spin stories.  They use or neglect evidence to fit their narrative.  The full truth never sees the light of day.

@Mike Sirname because lawyers spin stories.  They use or neglect evidence to fit their narrative.  The full truth never sees the light of day.

@Mike Sirname Because the timeline that the DA set up at trial showed that only George, Casey's father, could have done that search.  The DA had to choose what theory of the crime they presented at trial and the search didn't fit into their theory so they left it out.  Baez would have jumped on it if they presented it as another piece of flawed evidence by the DA.

The time of death was uncertain given the decomposition of the body. No one saw Caylee alive after the 9th when she searched for foolproof suffocation but she claims the drowning occurred on the 16th. That explains away her journal and internet search history. It's not a believable lie given the physical evidence.

@Catherine Yes, precisely, though I think a whole lot of juries base their judgements on their emotions and the stories told by DAs (especially in Texas) and the miscarriages of justice are many.  The job of the jury is to judge the evidence, not the story.

@Catherine Yes, precisely, though I think a whole lot of juries base their judgements on their emotions and the stories told by DAs (especially in Texas) and the miscarriages of justice are many.  The job of the jury is to judge the evidence, not the story.

It doesn't matter what the juries personal opinions are of her, they can only make a decision on the evidence provided during the trial & if there was enough evidence to prove beyond all reasonable doubt if someone is guilty or not. Its a hard thing to do to ignore your personal & gut feelings to do the job of a juror correctly, this is why lawyers screen & questions potential jurors. If jurors were allowed to make decisions from their own personal feelings & opinions there would be an awful lot of injustice & vice versa. I assume there are many people who have been a juror for awful crimes & believed that someone was guilty but had no choice to decide innocence based on the evidence or lack of it. There are many problems that can occur when a juror lets their personal feelings make their decision.

The timeline of the Anthony family didn't match up for Casey doing that search which is why it wasn't presented at trial.  Baez would have jumped on it as another flimsy piece of evidence.

The timeline of the Anthony family didn't match up for Casey doing that search which is why it wasn't presented at trial.  Baez would have jumped on it as another flimsy piece of evidence.

That evidence was unfortunately not presented at the trial. That being said, the jury was stupid enough to probably still give a not-guilty verdict.

That evidence was unfortunately not presented at the trial. That being said, the jury was stupid enough to probably still give a not-guilty verdict.

Jamie Ferguson She goggled ALOT of things AND HER MOTHER SAID SHE HERSELF DID IT! What in gods name.

Jamie Ferguson She goggled ALOT of things AND HER MOTHER SAID SHE HERSELF DID IT! What in gods name.


i got jodi arias vibes from the first videotaped interview (@33:00) 😭😵💫


usually when people lie (even good liars), your bullshit meter can detect SOMETHING to an extent. but casey’s ability to make up people and tell completely fake stories is so seamless and natural. it’s terrifying to think that people like this exist

She was always that way since middle school smh

Some people are just like this. Pathological liers exsist and will exsist. Now the real question is...what will you do when u encounter one?

It's so obvious that she was lying after showing a complete lack of emotions, and even telling her best friend that they are useless when she started crying. I'm truly shocked that she got away with this. I mean how is all of this not enough evidence? And where is the father? This case seems very suspicious to me in many aspects, more than just the made-up stories...

Idk people still haven’t figured out that it’s not mango in the ice cream I make

I hate to say this but it's a freaking talent !

Except she’s so terrible at alibis and improvising. Crazy how cops caught her in the act of wasting their time going to fake addresses and pretending she works at Universal and she tries to lie her way out of that.

Guess you’ve never met a banker or a politician.


The way she moves her arms are as artificial as when you do debate there is no emotion here


The phone calls, Caylee’s clothes, Casey’s debunked lies, the car, not a single call to police until her mom did it for her, the surveillance footage from that same day Caylee went missing, using her name in PAST tense with her parents for a few seconds or so, her search history the day Caylee was last seen showed homicidal intent, especially when you learn about the duct tape covering her airways, she went and partied for the entire time after, the diary entry written BY CASEY saying that she made the “right choice” after her daughter “went missing”, and the body was found not even 2 miles from the house. The defence tried to say she drowned, when again, there was duct tape over Caylee’s airways upon her discovery. AND YET, WITH ALL OF THIS CLEAR EVIDENCE, THEY DECIDED SHES NOT GUILTY???

@Locutus well not exactly its more complex and ofc evidence and other things also ensured her freedom but if this was a man doing something like this that could cause some bias , or if it was a person of color. im just saying that could’ve played a big role, shes a woman, a white woman.

because she is a white woman.. if this was a person of color or even a man they would not being getting off with this

Unfortunately, Baez used all these distracting stories to raise reasonable doubt to the jury. I found it reprehensible, but it was effective. The jury has to believe, according to evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt to convict. I disagree with them, but that's what happened.

@MerkMD Not enough evidence that she didn't either. The prosocution's fault for not trying to charge with child negligence or second degree murder. Easy to see the flaws in the judicial system.

@Bruce Hidden That wasn't the choice of the jury. Try Prosecuting Attorney.

@Lightning McNigga dude, this is coming out of hate;

yes I know she probably did it and she deserves to be in prison for the rest of her life, but you know why the Lady Justice is blindfolded?  cuz she does not care about the optics or what seems to be the case, it is about the evidence, there is no leap of reasoning allowed. they could not pin it 100% on the mother and so she got out.

a mother being happy after her child goes "missing" is not a crime.
searching for a way to kill people does not mean you killed one or going to.
being an idiot or being disgusting is not a crime.
lying does not make you a killer.

yeah, each one of of these is disgusting, but even all together is not enough evidence to put someone in jail without a leap in the argument. the justice system does not work based on optics, hate, or love, it does work based on evidence, and people are innocent unless proven guilty. now some times, it just doesn't work as expected, but I don't see it in this case. the final verdict of the jury seems reasonable, the prosecution managed to show that the mother is an asshole and wasted a lot of time, but could not prove that she was guilty without a reasonable doubt.

the justice system is a binary system, not a statistical one. in fact, statistics is what makes stereotypes, and we don't want stereotypes in the justice system. it does not matter if all this evidence point in almost definitely the mother doing some shenanigans, what matters is that it is "almost definitely", not "definitely". read MarkMD's comment right here.

@Olavi Murto The judge presides, not prosecute. It's for the prosecution to choose the charge.

@Tony Arcieri If Casey had been a hairy, big dude called Tony, would she have got away with this? No.

@Ana Alves It is such a loss to the world that Caylee's amazing skills of duct taping her own mouth and nose then, after placing herself in a bag, hiding herself in a swamp are never to be realised to the world [grim sarcasm].

@MerkMD Your concept of the standard of proof is absurdly high. There is absolutely no one else who COULD have committed this murder, would have had the motivation to do so, or opportunity. There are STRONG indications on all three counts that it was Casey. Proof does not need to be more than overcoming the boundary of "reasonable doubt". Is there ACTUALLY any "reasonable doubt" that Casey murdered Caylee? Really?

@Charlie D I agree with much of what you said, however they didn't need to find her not guilty on ALL charges. Murder in the first? Yes, possibly prosecutorial overconfidence. The rest? The jury was bamboozled by a slick defence.

@Kanticia Oglesby they were smoking feminism

@Bruce Hidden the jury doesn't pursue charges lol they are not involved until after charges have been brought. They decide if the evidence proves the defendant committed the crime.

@Leah vapes86 some of the jurors have come out and said they wished they had pushed for that.

@MerkMD This is a good point... But it seems like more evidence COULD have been obtained. Remnants of human remains in the car trunk maybe? It seems like a more thorough investigation was blocked by the defense somehow.

@Olavi Murto because the prosecution didn't even take into consideration that it was second degree they only persued first degree which made second degree out of the question entirely. The only way I can see how she could have possibly walked out of that courtroom a free woman is if she sold her soul.

@MerkMD If it was just 1-2 things, it would be a coincidence, but all the shit put together is more than enough evidence.

@Wrath apparently the only part the jury was listening to was that Casey's dad allegedly sexually abused her in the past

@Leah vapes86 The jury can’t pass their own verdict or sentencing, they can only vote on whether the defendant is guilty of the charges presented. In this case the prosecution had to prove it was 1st degree murder beyond any reasonable doubt, which includes clear preconceived intent. That’s already very difficult to prove and with this there wasn’t enough physical evidence to prove it was 1st degree.

Now if the prosecution had ONLY charged her with manslaughter or child negligence I think she would’ve been found guilty, since there was sufficient evidence to prove it. But the defense got the jury to feel sorry for her troubled life of sexual abuse and focused on Casey’s character assassination by the media & prosecution. Once the seeds of doubt and confusion were planted in the jury it was enough. This whole case was drawn out and overblown getting national media coverage so I’m sure the jury felt a lot of pressure as well. In the end I believe they decided that any guilty ruling would be unfair and a result of the prosecution using the death of a child to make them feel angry at Casey instead of using the evidence to prove it. Also, juries are more likely to vote either “guilty on all counts” or “not guilty on all counts” instead of compromising, so that’s probably why Casey got to walk.

@Olavi Murto makes no sense to me either there are people that have been taken up on first-degree murder charges that end up with manslaughter instead so why not in this case?

@Charlie D that makes no sense even though they were going for first degree murder the jury could have come back with a verdict of second-degree non premeditated they didn't need to let her go because they couldn't prove it with premeditated

@Charlie D the jury was correct in their judgement? I want what you're smoking

And that her dad, a former cop, reported that the car smelled like a dead body.

@Charlie D yeah only her confession would be enough evidence for 1st degree

@Charlie D If they can't prove it was premeditated, how can the system be so that then the verdict is "not guilty" instead of maybe the judge changing the charge to 2nd degree and not premeditated? Makes no sense to me.

@Charlie D 1:06:23 "aggrevated child manslaughter" that turned out not guilty too?!

Yeah, it's a horrible decision but the way the 'justice system' works unfortunately. For some reason, the prosecutors went after a 1st Degree Murder charge which I believe means a premeditated act. Which is apparently extremely hard to prove. Even though she did google searches before hand, there's still a possibility for that being innocent (I was listening to a true crime podcast and searched something they spoke about etc) all the strange shit she did after, the lies, the diary etc, the not calling the police all doesn't prove she planned and acted on killing her daughter, so the jury found her not guilty of this. If it was second degree murder or manslaughter, she mostly likely would have been found guilty and sentenced to prison. However proving she planned it wasn't possible through the courts. I guess the prosecutors wanted her to get as long in prison as possible so went for the maximum charge with the longest time, but this ended up working against them. I have no doubt she killed her daughter, but I believe the jury was 'correct' in their judgement, I'm sure they all knew she did it, but in the court and the evidence, its not enough to prove intent. Plus a lot probably wasn't admissible etc. Disgusting all around and the system needs changed.


This was so unnecessary..if she didn't want to be a mom she could have put her up for adoption or had her parents raise her (they obviously loved Caylee). Casey is a disgusting excuse for a human being.


She created entire characters and back stories. I didn't know it went that deep. She's a complete psycho.

Harper Mac  Just because someone is a Liar doesn’t mean they would be a good writer or author.

@Harper Nicole she just wanted to party and spend time with her boyfriend.

Shame she didn't apply herself to something worthwhile.With some college courses in creative writing she would have been a good writer and maybe even could have gotten published.Sadly she was to lazy


This is disgusting. Lawyer was a Beast tho.


Hey Casey, if you’re watching this. Everyone knows you did it.

@Brian Hale Stephanie Harlowe, link in description, does an in depth study of this case.

@Khedran Jesus, now i have to watch this again to see if I pick up on any of that. Thank you for tagging me that was interesting

@Brian Hale Xanax medication comes in one form known as Xani Bars. Xani the Nanny is code for drugging someone, in this case her child, and while shes passed out Casey would go party. I believe this final time, as she had a pattern of doping her kid when she would go out, she OD'd her THEN duct taped the face in case it wasnt strong enough and the child would survive. Would explain the "foolproof" portion AS WELL as to why she kept the body in the car a couple days. And yes, moms do dope their kids , my first ever gf's mother also did this her as kid for example. That woman is also a monster.

Even though she did not go to jail, she will be punished as she will be rejected by everyone and will never find a job or be accepted. Everyone knows who she really is

@Bingus McDrangus I never said I thought i would be a good judge or jury or lawyer. I don't get why everyone thinks I did. I said that I wasn't a jury because you would think they have a good understanding of what is strong evidence.

@Hilary Tsai *your - and nice one, you think my profile pic is 'cool and smart'?? damn Hilary, is that the best you could think of

@urdadshog You're profile pic is similarly so :)

@Hilary Tsai oh my gosh guys this commenter put a passive aggressive smiley face at the end of their aggressive comment they're so so cool and smart

@Bingus McDrangus imagine simping for casey anthony

@Marko Bighead to make it more clear: as A jury you’re expected to
A. Look at and interpret the evidence
B. From your perspective, interpret what happened and if it’s conclusive
C. Talk with and discuss with other members of the jury

What youre asking for is a bunch of computer simulations with the probability the crime was committed based on the evidence provided

@Marko Bighead ah. Lets use ur logic again
We have evidence that the killer used this knife to kill Jane
We have evidence the only fingerprints on the knife, is Mr. Bean.
Mr. Bean was close to the victim and had many arguments with them
Can you convict him?
By ur logic apparently not, because despite all the evidence, you can’t “prove” Mr. Bean killed Jane, because we don’t have video evidence, or 100% proof that they killed.

If your logic was applied we probably would’ve caught like 2% of murderers up until video evidence was allowed LMFAOO

@Martin Stu I like how this video doesn’t even make any sense to comment this on, as it had no effect on her because of just how inhuman the murderer is. And no the system is a lot worse than what “people like him” say lmao

@Icylapras24 Exactly. You're no Jury. And your thought process makes the idea of you ever being on a jury terrifying.<br>You convict based on the evidence. None of her journal entries were evidence of any crime or an admission of any crime.

@Icylapras24 Exactly. You're no Jury. And your thought process makes the idea of you ever being on a jury terrifying.
You convict based on the evidence. None of her journal entries were evidence of any crime or an admission of any crime.

@Martin Stu I never said I should be in charge of the system. I just said that I think that casey admitting that she had made a decision in her life she did not regret, considering her child has stopped her from what she wanted to do, and this was 12 days after the missing report, is in my opinion, really hard evidence against her. It has nothing to do with the interrogation

666 likes so I'm not going to like this. but I do like this so I'm commenting

@Bingus McDrangus we get it, you were part of the jury. It’s ok, all of America knows you couldn’t pass your SAT’s.

Shed be like: <b>very calmly</b> Zenaida fernandez Gonzalez.

Shed be like: *very calmly* Zenaida fernandez Gonzalez.

@Bingus McDrangus anyone who watched this video entirely could reason easily. You seem to lost your reasoning and observing power, sad.

@Bingus McDrangus actually shut up. Watch the video, did you see the diary entry, 12 days after the child's death? That to me is evidence enough (although I'm no jury i think I'm reasonable enough).

My theory she convinced the kid to 'play a game' where she had her duct tape herself. A child doesn't know better. Was probably already in the bag, and mom zipped it up and walked away. This, in a messed up way allowed her conscience to be free of guilt. "I didn't do it". There's a few points where you can see she thinks she will be fine because deep down she feels that she didn't TECHNICALLY do it and withholds pieces that would make her look bad. Seems typical in children with a parent who is a lawyer or police. They know the system. They know from the beginning what not to say.
So I think everyone DOES know, everyone except her because she deep down feels, she didn't do it. And technically she didn't. And that's good enough for people like her.

My theory she convinced the kid to 'play a game' where she had her duct tape herself. A child doesn't know better. Was probably already in the bag, and mom zipped it up and walked away. This, in a messed up way allowed her conscience to be free of guilt. "I didn't do it". There's a few points where you can see she thinks she will be fine because deep down she feels that she didn't TECHNICALLY do it and withholds pieces that would make her look bad. Seems typical in children with a parent who is a lawyer or police. They know the system. They know from the beginning what not to say.
So I think everyone DOES know, everyone except her because she deep down feels, she didn't do it. And *technically* she didn't. And that's good enough for people like her.

She's probably grinning at the fact that even though we all know she did it, she could lie herself put of it.


Wow! Not guilty of all charges even if you are a child's KILLER! Casey's attorney lies about her maybe she did something for him to help her out of her messed! Yeah! Some woman or anyone can do anything for money, sex, and to get away with crime! What she wants him to say about her so he did! There was enough evidents that really points her out! Why didn't they put the child on autopsy! There was smelly decomposed body in the vehicle, ducted tape around her mouth and buried in a baby's 👶 blanket! Who could do that to a child? Where was the investigators? Did anyone investigated 🔎 the crime?  Where is she now? Still party every night 🌙 while no one's to worry about? Kaylee was the prettiest girl and she didn't have to died in the hands of a monster!👹 NO JUSTICE FOR KAYLEE! Casey don't deserve to be called MOTHER! SHE'S LIES ABOUT EVERY SINGLE WORD OUT OF HER MOUTH 👄 TO OVER POWER THE AUTHORITIES! It's just like, you can lie about, you killed your child and walk free upon the earth 🌎 like nothing happened! So lying about everything you did wrong can put you on a good spot!🤑😈


i hope everyone in that jury is ashamed of themselves and regrets this every single day

@Voil Velev but im not in defense of this lawyer but you guys need to understand this is their jobs this case probably boosted his carrer reputation to a all time high and brought him alot of new customers not all jobs are honourable jobs Cia Fbi and Dea agents dose things 10 times worse then this but we still close our mouths because it’s supposedly their jobs just to make things clear i do dont agree with that lawyer i do not condone his actions although im not pointing Any fingers at him

It's a shame how the case ended, but blaming the impartial jury is a very wrong and stupid take.

it was obviously a murder case .. first of all why did the mother not reported her child missing ..  even when you watch the first minutes where the grandmother called the police , casey's response when her mother told her the 911 wanted to talk to her  was like she does not want to be cooperative ..
as the evidence also had that the child was seen with a ducktape on his mouth and nose a sign that she was  murdered .. most evidence also is the diary  where she said she never regret the decision she made ..
i feel disgusted how the  lawyer defended casey although at the very start casey was lying the whole time in the police station about saying locations , jobs and even making up names  and people that never exist ..
i hope the people who helped casey will find theirselves being haunted by the poor little girl ..

Casey is innocent.   There's no physical evidence that she did something with Kaylee, she's just a congenital liar.  Leave this poor woman alone she lost her child.

@extremely subpar Finding the right charge is the prosecutors job.

@extremely subpar Finding the right charge is the prosecutors job.

@white240490 pretty sure u would have a different attitude if it was someone u loved that was killed

@Biosquid239 I believe that she's guilty. I think she's a piece of shit. But without enough hard evidence to prove it, you can't convict someone. The justice system isn't perfect here, and it's these few cases that go the wrong way, it's not that often.

People keep saying the "without reasonable doubt" but neglect to give a possible way this couldve been a coincidence. The pool thing is wayyyy to far fetched and faulty to believe, and if you actually think that its possible I'm concerned

@Lourdes McKay If the state can't  prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was her, the jury can't just go with a guilty verdict. The prosecution didn't make a good enough case. But yeah everything involved probably has nightmares. Except for Casey.

@Marina If I remember correctly, there was disagreement about whether the duct tape was found over the child's mouth, or whether it was on the bag the child was found in. I'm not quite sure how they couldn't figure this out, because the police took photos of the crime scene. We can see those photos, but because they're photos of a minor (Caylee), the photo is blurred, so it's impossible to tell where the duct tape is. But the jury would have seen the photo without the blurring.

@KuuYami It's so conflicting honestly because the entire case was just handled terribly. But personally, I ask where was that jury's common sense? No one is going to put duct tape over someone who's already dead's airways. Sure, you can disassociate after an incredibly traumatic event and do some crazy things but any good mother on the planet's first instinct would have been to dial 9-1-1 and perform CPR, even if the child was beyond the point of return.

@Lourdes McKay its OJ Simpson all over again, shes going to subtly admit to doing it once the statue of limitations elapses, pin this comment once that happens and its just going to be a big bummer for humanity

@KuuYami oh yeah. Great. That makes up for everything.

@KuuYami oh yeah. Great. That makes up for everything.

You have to ne proven guilty beyond any doubt. There was not enough evidence. Her actions point to her having done this 100%. But there was still no hard evidence.

Lacey I still to this day don't understand how she got off🙄🙄 OUR GREAT JUSTICE SYSTEM AT ITS WORST

1:24
But why show a pic of Alanis Morrisette?

1:24
But why show a pic of Alanis Morrisette?

It's just anoter proof that american justice system is great joke

It's just anoter proof that american justice system is great joke

@Voil Velev whoa whoa whoa... it is the law that all people accused of a crime have a right to legal representation unless they choose to waive that right, and defense attorneys exist solely to fulfill that legal right. Everyone has a right to a trial, and in that trial, both parties have the right to make their arguments, and lawyers make those arguments for their clients because they understand the law in ways a layperson never could. If that system were not in place, criminal justice would entirely be a caste system. The jury are the ones who decided the case, not the lawyers, who were doing their appointed responsibility, for which refusing to do so would see them barred from the profession, which is merely interpretating the law for their client.

@Sunny but i mean there is SO much evidence to prove that this woman did do it you don’t have to look that far into it to see

@Lourdes McKay why do you think she walked free ? it's because of past experience, many innocent people went to prison because they were sentenced based on emotions.

it is not their fault, the police didn't bring a good evidance.<br>they were doing their jobs, you do not sentence someone based on emotions.

it is not their fault, the police didn't bring a good evidance.
they were doing their jobs, you do not sentence someone based on emotions.

@GijsInc Thank you for saying what we defense attorneys have to say every-time someone gets acquired…🙄🙏

What can we expect from Florweirda? This state is effed up on so many levels.

What can we expect from Florweirda? This state is effed up on so many levels.

@Voil Velev even guilty people deserve criminal defense, as messed up as this is, it's not the attorneys fault or responsibility to hand out justice.

@Voil Velev this is an asinine and frankly a fascist take. The defense's job is to represent the defendant. They are an integral part of living in a free and just society. Without them you would be defenseless in the face of the entire court system.

This means that you can't ever blame lawyers for what crimes their defendants. It's their job to get the lowest possible sentence for the defendant, guilty or not, no matter what. That's a good thing, even if in this case Casey got away with her crimes because of it. It's THAT important! I think if you'd meet most defense lawyers (not all) you'd find they're very ethically minded people. That's why they do the job (besides the pay, but don't forget public defense lawyers!)

@Tiffany Jackson yes if true, but prove it

@Tiffany Jackson yes if true, but prove it

@white240490 "She was obviously guilty". Imma stop you right there, chief, thats really all you need to say. Thats it. Nothing else.<br>And their jobs are still dirty and they have no basic human shame and concience.

@white240490 "She was obviously guilty". Imma stop you right there, chief, thats really all you need to say. Thats it. Nothing else.
And their jobs are still dirty and they have no basic human shame and concience.

@GijsInc she was sleeping with the lawyer. That is an issue

@GijsInc she was sleeping with the lawyer. That is an issue

Now you are blaming the Jury for calling out the mistakes/lack of proof/ from the prosecution?! Dude, its not their fault. They did their job, and they did it good this time.

@Possibly, Gluttony bro dont you agree with me?

@Possibly, Gluttony bro dont you agree with me?

@pronoe I'm not a lawyer, but the fact there was no coroner that gave an actual cause of death is an issue. I know which way I would have voted if I were in the jury. But I think if the prosecution pursued lesser charges she would have been convicted (Like negligent manslaughter, I forget what degree it is).

@KuuYami What's the reasonable doubt in this case? She built a web of lie to cover what happened to Caley, the babysitter doesn't exist, her attorney told the jury Caley drown in the pool... Then convict her of misshandling a dead body (or whatever it's called). It is beyond me how she could simply walked out free.

How can they not know how she was murdered. You don't put duct tape over anyone's nose and mouth that are already dead.

@KuuYami the circumstantial evidence was than enough for a conviction. the probability of all the evidence being a coincidence was basically 0.

@Voil Velev while I agree she was obviously guilty, her lawyers are only doing their jobs and they did a good job of it.

Same. Seriously sad. This poor child was completely failed by all of em 💔 now this monster is just living her life free on the street. Smh

Ultimately I think what the dude said at the end was right.

Ultimately I think what the dude said at the end was right.

one of them recently spoke out and said they regret not trying harder to pursue a lesser accusation (neglect, child endangerment, etc.) to get something to stick. hopefully others feel the same and will speak out to prevent something like this from happening again

the jury can only use what was given them to consider in court, not on Nancy Grace.

As fucked up as it is, they did their job. It hard to cope with, sure. But Prosecution couldn't prove that she was murdered (At least it wasn't enough for that jury)

Some good things that came out of this though:
She was convicted of 4 counts of lying to law enforcement, and one count of check forgery.
$217,000 payment (For lying to cops and the search for Caylee)
Caylee's Law.

So yes, she may be free now but we ended up with a case law to make sure something like this never happens again.

Same. I hope they’re haunted for the rest of their lives.

Same. I hope they’re haunted for the rest of their lives.


the text on the screen is satisfying for some reason


I flew in a plane for 3 full days over different locations in Orlando searching for the body of Caylee.  We utilized the airplane we used for work to see if we could see anything in and around the woods near the Anthony's house and along the woods and banks of waterways in the area.  When they found her not guilty, I lost my mind.  I am commenting on here after stopping the video at the 8:00 mark.  I can not watch this or listen to this any further because it makes me that upset. I am sure this video is very informative, well put together and will help many understand things that probably were too young during this time period...but thank you to the people that are able to make such a video and make sure people will always remember this monster.

@Evelio DLeon unreal, "truth is stranger than fiction", couldn't be more accurate.

Patrick Hanson unfortunately you share the same first name: Patrick McKenna. He’s a private investigator now and she works with him and helps with his business.

Can’t make this stuff up. We live in a shitshow world.

May Allah bless you for trying to find her..brings faith back in to humanity

Aiman Pietrini she lives in South Florida with of all people the lead investigator in her case.

I’m originally from Miami and I wish I was back home there right now. Sickening.

Thank you, God bless you. You cared more about this baby than her own mother ever did.

That's crazy to hear. I hope something will happen to her

You’d be surprised how many people will stay at home and not help even if it happened in their own back yard.

Thank you for doing that. I know it didn’t end up the way you or any of the searchers wanted, I just wanted to thank you.


this woman hasn't shed a tear for her daughter.. Her own best friend is crying for Casey's daughter.......

She was genuinely happy when her parents were focused on her but as soon as they mentioned her daughter she shut down and was clearly angry I think she got so jealous that she literally killed her daughter and she literally called the cops to get attention I think this girl has

After seeing what had happened to Casey with evidences, my heart pained. The only thing I wanna add is that Justices is a lie & the so called Justices System is a big joke. Anyone with cash and good contacts can get away.

After seeing what had happened to Casey with evidences, my heart pained. The only thing I wanna add is that *Justices is a lie* & the so called *Justices System is a big joke.* Anyone with *cash* and *good contacts* can get away.

She literally only shed a tear when it was about herself

@The Executed Code and that's why American system sucks, jury who doesn't know anything about law will decide the fate

@billy 9 god when she said that... my heart SUNK. so disgusting

We can all thank 😊 the jury of the century
Great job they did finding her not guilty
Fantastic

And she responded with, "omg, calling you guys is a waste..." lol, tf


I cannot believe this woman is walking around free.

I cannot believe this woman is walking around free.

@ThePersonBehindThisIs Asian you sound extremely uneducated on the subject. A miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion. That means that the fetus died due to a complication both medical or traumatic. This has no political bearing at all, regardless of what side you’re on (pro-choice/life).

@sosolidbaleb you think innocent people should get thrown in prison wrongfully?  Awesome!  What law school did you go to

@sosolidbaleb you think innocent people should get thrown in prison wrongfully?  Awesome!  What law school did you go to

I live in Florida, & nearly the Same exact thing happened to my only Son when he was just 3 years old, on new Years Eve 2017/2018, while he was left alone with his Mother, & Grandmother. He was found in a Canal, behind the Apartment Complex, where no Cameras or lights were located. It happened on the Loudest night of the year, just after the sun had gone down. When discovered by Coral springs Police Department, he had a Large Visible Red Mark on the back of his Neck, that was NEVER explained. His Mother lived on the Second Level, exterior wall, up against the canal, that surrounded the entire Structure on three sides, & the fourth was up against a road. At three years Old, my Son could NOT Negotiate the staircase on his own, in one Direction, OR the other, without me helping him, as is normal for any three year old, on a dangerous concreate staircase. It must have been almost twenty steps. So the spin that CSPD believed from Allison was, that while she was napping after a Big Day out, & that her infallible 62 year old Mother, whom had a serious AXE to grind with me, was supposed to be watching my Son, Jack. Whom they said, pushed a footlocker that weighed twice as much as him, across the carpeted Living room floor, of their 800 Square foot apartment, to the front door. Then unlocked the Dead bolt the was near the top of the Door frame (I have Photos) then opened the door, that normally flew open, & was on a chain to keep from ripping free, due to the wind coming off of the Canal, & let himself outside. Then closed the door behind his three year old little self. While no one heard, or saw anything. Allegedly Allison had woken up, & couldn't find Jack in the tiny little apartment (ROLLING EYES). So she then asked her all knowing, wise, Oracle of Delphi Mother, Debora. Where is Jack? to which she (lied) had no answer. It was 6:38, December 31, 2017. My phone Rang, & it said Allison. she has been ignoring my Calls to come see, & pick up my child for 90 days at least by this point. I answered the Phone, & the Verbatim that came out of my mouth is as Follows " Allison, you had better tell me my child is Fucking Alive, & Breathing" all I heard was indiscernible screaming. I repeated myself. I then heard her state in plain English (Please tell my Husband what happened to his child) I proceeded to loose my shit. The CSPD had alerted Hollywood PD to my location, & they shortly their after surrounded my house. The CSPD Closed the case inside of 16 Hours. They NEVER filed any charges against the both of them, & took pity on them both because of their blubbering. Additionally they both were MORE than easy on the eyes. I was Spitting Venom, to the CSPD, on on every Social media Site I was a part of. The Lead SVU Det. from CSPD called me, & said " so I hear you're going around online, telling everyone that Allison is a baby killer?" to which my response was "where did you read that?"  She then said 'I personally haven't read anything, this is just what I'm told" We had a VERY colorful conversation, that I will not bore you with the Details of because I think at this point you are starting to see a Manifest Observable Trend of Behavior. The LEAD SVU DET. called me no less than FIVE more time, Both attempting to Threaten, & broker with me. I don't think she was expecting, or was ready for what she heard next.

         Allison then Motioned for a Restraining order to which Michael G. Kaplan, of the 17th Circuit Vigorously issued, with glee I might add. Additionally the Hearing was Dually used to make public statements to Banish any Notion put Forward By Myself, about the lack of effort on the part of the CSPD to bring charges against the mother of my only Son, & to fortify the concept of the mental health of Allison's Mother, whom DID have a history of Mental health issues, & suicidal ideations. (It was a Ludacris cross between a dog, & pony show, & the dismemberment of William the Wallace) Then they went on to suggest that at just Three years old, too young to make such a determinization, as stated by the DSM, that he was somehow limited, & that's how he houdinied himself into the position he was "FOUND" in. The 17th Circuit treated me like a criminal. They then Gave Allison her two year restraining order, took my Firearms, to which I resisted greatly for a years time, Until they Jailed me, with no hope of release, until I willingly surrendered my Property in a Most Perverse of Circumstances. I couldn't help but observe that they took large sadistic measure of Pleasure out of that, & relished in it, Disarming a Disabled Veteran, who's son just Died in an EXTREAMLY suspicious fashion, while NOT charging the Party RESPONSIBLE for his Well being at the time of his Death. I mean, could you find a MORE Luciferin practice?

           By the Time our Divorce paperwork had gone though, NOT a YEAR later, she was Living on the other side of the Continent, already 9 Months Pregnant, with someone else's child, who was still active duty. Her second string choice that she knew from NAVY "A" school, that she never took seriously, while we both were Enlisted (Another Story). "JAMES" was trying to "Romance the stone" the entire time we were trying to repair our Marriage, whom her mother was endlessly trying to Broker, & interject herself in. (Narcissistic Mother Disorder).

         Ladies, & Gentlemen of the Jury, I hear put forth the Obvious Notion that my Only Son was Murdered to eliminate a Liability, & to sever ties with a Husband whom did not meet the Approval of the Mother In Law. I will let you Draw the conclusion of whom most likely did the unthinkable.

        I humbly await your Deliberation.

You can thank the fine people of Florida..

You can thank the fine people of Florida..

@John the most funny thing is that isnt the case.
Prosecutors laugh at fools like you.

They are not about the victims or "justice" but a good sentence, thats what pays them better.
Theres plenty, pleeeeeeeenty of cases of people being wrongly accused just for the sake of a sentence. In this case she play the victim good enough to not being charged.

What a good example of simpery and delusion in a just system that doesnt exists.
The judicial system exists only to protect the powerful, the rich, and those who serve them.

@sosolidbaleb I have news for you fam, “all your views are stupid” is not an argument.

@sosolidbaleb I have news for you fam, “all your views are stupid” is not an argument.

@John No way dude, guilty until proven innocent is better.  If it turns out they were innocent, compensate them.  It sucks but it beats letting 10 lunatics run around.

What's really disturbing is how some guy could be oblivious to her situation and get romantically involved with her, have a child together and she could just repeat everything and potentially cover her tracks better this time around.

You would love brazilian law system where the victim and cops go to jail and murderers walk free.

You would love brazilian law system where the victim and cops go to jail and murderers walk free.

...it REALLY is un-frickin-believable, isn't it?! Like???

...it REALLY is un-frickin-believable, isn't it?! Like???

@John At least with the innocent person in jail no one else gets hurt, unlike releasing 10 psychos into the wild. Just saying.

@John At least with the innocent person in jail no one else gets hurt, unlike releasing 10 psychos into the wild. Just saying.

@The Eye Is Watching I agree with your ratio

@The Eye Is Watching I agree with your ratio

@Nicholas Limon couple points wrong there. You don’t need dna to prove a murder case. And despite what tv shows, you don’t even need a body. And you can use just circumstantial evidence if it’s strong. People misunderstand the definition of circumstantial evidence a lot, and strong circumstantial evidence, especially multiple of strong ones, can win a case. There is so much here that they should’ve won, but it looks like they aimed too high with their charges and argued their case poorly.

@John Agree with Blackstone's formulation and I understand innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, so maybe we need a better system for choosing intelligent jurors, as this woman is as guilty as the day is long. O.J. ring a bell, or was that a bit of payback so we didn't harm those 'wittle' egos...

I like many others believe she is 100% guilty and was a horrible mother but I also think the prosecution was terrible and lacked the experience to even try a case of this magnitude.<br>They did very little as far as facts , timelines , and investigation. And relied solely on emotions and not facts .It was Too many questions and the lack of answers provided by prosecution that allowed her to walk.

I like many others believe she is 100% guilty and was a horrible mother but I also think the prosecution was terrible and lacked the experience to even try a case of this magnitude.
They did very little as far as facts , timelines , and investigation. And relied solely on emotions and not facts .It was Too many questions and the lack of answers provided by prosecution that allowed her to walk.

@Antonio Balea no one wants to go to prison.

@Antonio Balea no one wants to go to prison.

@Vanz Who? And none of that has any tangible proof to it. Supposition, sure. Likelyhood yes. But that doesnt mean a damn thing when someone must be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.

@C B on the contrary death will likely hold no repercussions. Theres no logical reason to think it would.

@C B on the contrary death will likely hold no repercussions. Theres no logical reason to think it would.

@Wolves1fan karma is a desperate construction of hope with no basis in reality.

@Wolves1fan karma is a desperate construction of hope with no basis in reality.

@sara _ yes she is  she started her own private investigator office in florida

@sara _ yes she is  she started her own private investigator office in florida

@sosolidbaleb no what he said is true, if a guilty man walks free the justice system has failed but if a innocent man has been convicted then not only has the justice system failed but it has also wronged someone

@ThePersonBehindThisIs Asian Miscarriage is not deemed murder. That's a lie. Abortion is, however.

@ThePersonBehindThisIs Asian Miscarriage is not deemed murder. That's a lie. Abortion is, however.

@Suh Dude so this doesn't happen to men then? just women? 🤨 yeah that's bullshit.

@Suh Dude so this doesn't happen to men then? just women? 🤨 yeah that's bullshit.

@dacymark it's literally not though, that COULD be a factor but it also could literally just be fucking absurd and have nothing to do with her gender. so no, not point blank. just maybe lol it's not like this is a common thing

American justice system... very effective

American justice system... very effective

@John English isn't my first language, so I probably do mean convicted. But my point is that we seem to get the worst of both worlds. Lots of guilty people go free and at the same time lots of innocent people are convicted. But you're right, we don't know the numbers so I can't say which is more common.

@The Alpacaa when we see millions of arrests, obviously there are going to be some errors. We should always strive to do better. However, this basic framework was the best humanity has ever come up with. Unfortunately we’ve piled laws on top of laws.

We hear about the innocents wrongly convicted often. Which is good. We should. What that number really is would be impossible to say.

I think you meant convicted. Not the same as charged.

@wolfdeerbra she got a drink poured on her head. Hardly a fight.

@wolfdeerbra she got a drink poured on her head. Hardly a fight.

@John That would make more sense if innocent people didn't get charged all the time, but they do.

@John That would make more sense if innocent people didn't get charged all the time, but they do.

I can. She's a woman. What else is there to say?

I can. She's a woman. What else is there to say?

I still can’t believe she was found innocent of aggravated child abuse. At the minimum, she should have been charged and tried for neglect of a child. I was in high school during this case and found the jury’s decision of innocence pertaining to aggravated child abuse absolutely absurd. From both a legal and personal standpoint, I cannot see how the jury said she neither abused nor neglected Caylee. A decade later and I’m still interested in this one obvious miscarriage of our criminal justice system.

@sara _ uhh yeah you must not have been around much when this trial was happening. It was national news, especially when she was found not guilty.. the outrage was far and wide.

@Haydn Williams yeah totally, lets just not talk about the corpse smell and weird google searches about suffocating children

@Haydn Williams yeah totally, lets just not talk about the corpse smell and weird google searches about suffocating children

It was all circumstantial evidence. The prosecution did their job, but there were no DNA prints.

It was all circumstantial evidence. The prosecution did their job, but there were no DNA prints.

She is not free, in the sense she is out, but she has hell to pay and she has either stayed in hiding or changed her face to accomplish that.  It will all rain down on her in a severe way in one way or another. She is after all the most hated mother in America!

@Maltyfred Last Name she just needs to stop playing the victim card and own up to it. Maybe write a book like OJ.

@Maltyfred Last Name she just needs to stop playing the victim card and own up to it. Maybe write a book like OJ.

I am first baffled that she didn't bother changing her name, but moreso that she had the gall to remain in Florida.  She has to know she will never have peace from being harassed. I guess chalk it up to more evidence of her Narcissism. I realize her court ordered profiles indicated nothing, but man the Narcissism just permeates from her.

@wolfdeerbra crazy huh? Whole state knows what she looks like.

@wolfdeerbra crazy huh? Whole state knows what she looks like.

Tbh I'm surprised no one has taken her out themselves, vigilante style.

Tbh I'm surprised no one has taken her out themselves, vigilante style.

She is free in the court of law but, she can’t even leave her home. The world knows she is guilty, and if she is seen; she will be hounded by the people.

@JC82 cumbee well the prosecution didn’t exactly do a fantastic job with the evidence. Also the fact that there was no confirmed cause of death means that either situation posed, was only a possibility.

Quite a compliment you give this garbage.. Woman? I don't see anything close to it! 🤔<br>Said with a 😊

Quite a compliment you give this garbage.. Woman? I don't see anything close to it! 🤔
Said with a 😊

Hopefully karma will get her nobody that lies this much and kills her daughter and get away with it will escape something  bad happening to her her whole life look at oj it took awhile but he did some time at least later In life

@sara _ yes, in fact she got in a bar fight in Florida 4 days ago

@sara _ yes, in fact she got in a bar fight in Florida 4 days ago

ikr, she literally got into a bar fight 4 days ago too like why isnt she in jail

ikr, she literally got into a bar fight 4 days ago too like why isnt she in jail

@Haydn Williams a rusty butcher knife with DNA and fingerprint evidence is more innocent

@Haydn Williams a rusty butcher knife with DNA and fingerprint evidence is more innocent

Yeah who googles suffocation around the time her baby was murdered?!

Yeah who googles suffocation around the time her baby was murdered?!

@Megan Axelía Carrington-Ráðvarðardóttir don't worry.  She literally lives in dexter's back yard,  so..

@Megan Axelía Carrington-Ráðvarðardóttir don't worry.  She literally lives in dexter's back yard,  so..

My thought exactly.. no justice whatsoever..she got away for sure..

My thought exactly.. no justice whatsoever..she got away for sure..

Honestly I think there was some fuckery happening and somebody was on her side anyway they will be judged when they die and karma's a bitch

@Tigris Panthera this isn't about gender but mentions the patriarchy in the very next sentence. bizarre.

@Tigris Panthera this isn't about gender but mentions the patriarchy in the very next sentence. bizarre.

@ThePersonBehindThisIs Asian you've made me beyond sad today that you couldn't take five seconds to research before spewing your diarrhea out of your mouth. Its Georgia. And the law would only be ineffect if a woman is found to be directly RESPONSIBLE for causing her own miscarriage. That is in fact murder and dangerous to the individual who does it.

@Suh Dude this isn’t shouldn’t be about gender, everyone should be held accountable. the patriarchy and justice system is fucked up

She had the same attorney who got Arron Hernandez off his 2nd murder trial which he was obviously guilty about

She had the same attorney who got Arron Hernandez off his 2nd murder trial which he was obviously guilty about

@Jack Campbell your first comment was poorly phrased. There isn't much to do with 'privilege' in this case, since it's absurd all around. It sounded like a poorly disguised attempt at dissing women, but I'm guessing that wasn't the intention.

And I say women privilege because if this is a man 0% chance the jury says he gets away with it. But again I understand the way y’all think I contest it because I’m an evil villain but really I’m just like you and you and you. Male values still exist.

@Jack Campbell the way u said ur first comment could be interpreted in so many different ways. And yeah, it is, force birth (or pro lifers) believe so and i heard Texas(or was it in another state/country, idk) made a law that it is infact murder and its the mother's fault. Fucking ridiculous.

@ThePersonBehindThisIs Asian miscarriage isn’t killing someone. it’s still someone dying tho. miscarriage can happen to anyone my mother had a miscarriage she didn’t choose to do anything. This lady obviously should’ve never had a kid.

@Jack Campbell Women privilege, a man says. Funny.

@Jack Campbell Women privilege, a man says. Funny.

@wolfdeerbra wow, so she's still clubbing and bar hopping which is the main reason she killed the girl.

@wolfdeerbra wow, so she's still clubbing and bar hopping which is the main reason she killed the girl.

@Jack Campbell lmao nah. If a woman miscarriages, they're a fucking murderer. Its really sick really, this is why im pro choice.

@Suh Dude ugh the system is so twisted in that way. Whether its being rich or being overlooked because of your gender or race, its just  stupid that things like this even happen in society. I hate it deeply as a women that women like this are on the street. Any parent wouldnt want this mother around any of their kids.

@wolfdeerbra Yeah,  I should of just done that myself. Sorry.

@wolfdeerbra Yeah,  I should of just done that myself. Sorry.

@enriktigasna I was about to say now I know where those dislikes came from LMAO.

@enriktigasna I was about to say now I know where those dislikes came from LMAO.

Well, do something about it to ensure the safety of your people... she isn’t safe to be on the streets. Take the matter into your own hands hahah

@wolfdeerbra How did you find that out?  Just curious.

@wolfdeerbra How did you find that out?  Just curious.

@sosolidbaleb it should never be guilty until proven innocent. you say it's wrong but if you ever get wrongfully sentenced, like people have and lost years of your life that you'll never get back, which has happened, Im sure your tune will change right quick. This case however is fucking bizarre.

Blackstone’s formulation: it is better that 10 guilty people go free than one innocent person be charged.

It ain’t a perfect system, but innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the best we got.

More so still free in FLORIDA... she just got into a bar fight 4 days ago in West Palm Beach.<br>In case anyone is wondering.

More so still free in FLORIDA... she just got into a bar fight 4 days ago in West Palm Beach.
In case anyone is wondering.

Its a bit disturbing Women that do this get released into society when they do stuff like this.

Its a bit disturbing Women that do this get released into society when they do stuff like this.


Only could happen in FLORDIA where all the PHYSO'S come from!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The justice system failed that innocent child. Disgusting. The system has one job and can’t do it right. Embarrassing.

They went too far. They should have instructed the jury to find for 2nd degree.

Justice system fails more often than you realize. There are hundreds of innocent people serving time for crimes not committed and hundreds of criminals walking free.

The justice system has way more than one job.

@Thicker Constrictor thank you for providing one clear voice of reason in these comments. I just posted a parent comment questioning all of these people saying that the justice system failed, before I saw your comment.

#BelieveHer #MeToo #AlwaysBelieveWomen #BlameThePatriarchy #GiveMeYourMoney

The prosecution failed the child. You have to prove beyond A reasonable doubt the charges that you are filing. They failed. The jury knew she killed her daughter. The judge knew she killed her daughter. I know she killed her daughter. But I wouldn't have voted guilty. The evidence was circumstantial, there were too many holes, and again this isn't because people think she's innocent. The jury did not think she was innocent. That's not what they're voting. It's not guilty or innocent. It's guilty or not guilty. And the fact was they didn't know. They know she did something but they failed to prove first degree murder.

@Agentixc Of course humans are flawed and the justice system is not a perfect machine. Who are you trying to argue? I just pointed out that the justice system failed. It’s not “spilling humanly hatred”, whatever that means. The justice system has failed numerous amounts of times, enough times that I believe it is valid to call it out when it fails. Also it’s a comment section where people can comment whatever they want. Your heartstrings got pulled? So did mine, but for different reasons. My heart aches for that child and every other person who was not served the justice they deserved. I’ll comment what I want to comment. If it bothers you ignore it, just like how I will be ignoring any other comment you write after this.

@Dome You are exactly the kind of juror the defense wanted. I'll bet you voted for Biden too.

The system's job is to keep us down. To ensure that we remain at the bottom of the pyramidal power structure of Earth.

@emarythomp Hmm, you are a tricky one. The justice system are humans. If you still don't get it, its no hope for you. Bye.

@Dome No shit humans make mistakes. How does that disprove anything the original commenter said? Again did the justice system not fail that little girl? The jury is an extension of the justice system is it not?

@emarythomp it means that humans make mistakes. I don’t know if you watched the damn thing, but at the end that lawyer really pulled the heart strings of those judges, including my own. Even tho I knew she was guilty that lawyer made me feel more sympathy for her. Don’t make the mistake of thinking humans are not flawed.

@Noah Adams Why does he need to propose solutions for bringing up a clear problem? Unless your statement is alluding to the fact that you think the justice system ISNT flawed…..

@Dome what does this event mean? He never mentioned anything about machines or people? Are you saying it wasn’t the justice system that failed her when that’s literally what happened in the video?

What are your proposed modifications then?

I'ts just people. Not machines. Go spill your humanly hatred on something else please.

Shes writing a book and movie.... We gotta do something


She’s the perfect person to describe: “You never know the psychopath sitting next to you, you never know the murder sitting next to you.”

That’s quite the literal interpretation of a pretty metaphorical line.

@Elijah Idk man, there's a lot more scenarios for murder than just antisocial personalities... Who knows, I'm literally the devil lol.

@Joey johnson if successful they often find positions of perceived power in society. Police, lawyers, politicians especially, some religious leaders especially, and a few CEOs come to mind. Like Zuckerberg, Bezos, etc. They will do anything if it advances their position no matter who they trample. The sad thing is that our society promotes this behavior.

She's scary af. Imagine meeting this kind of person and hanging out with them. Who knows what else she might've done and got away with it. Frightening.

It's more of a "you definitely know the person next to you murdered her daughter and is pretty bad at lying about it but no one else seems to pick up on even the obvious clues"

@Galaxy Eyes 777 well if they have aspd you wouldn't because they blend in perfectly with the rest of ud

@Galaxy Eyes 777 i think the lyric was meant to be murderer? idk haven’t heard the song in a while

Pretty sure if there was a murder happening next to me, I would fucking know it.


casey: searches shot girl, suffocation, lies about almost everything, hides the fact her child is missing for 31 days<br>jury: not guilty

casey: searches shot girl, suffocation, lies about almost everything, hides the fact her child is missing for 31 days
jury: not guilty

@Denizhan Karaca But not even manslaughter, or child endangerment!<br>Nothing!

@Denizhan Karaca But not even manslaughter, or child endangerment!
Nothing!

That's jury's for you, once listened to a life long criminal and his comments regarding jury's, he said they could never be trusted and that they let him go free when he really should have got time many times, other times when he didn't do the crime and the case was weak he got some time, totally unpredictable was his view of them in a lifetime of contact with them and a lifetime of knowing others that had plenty of contact with them!

They need putting down. <br>Her lawyer must have been convincing. But they are just stupid.

They need putting down.
Her lawyer must have been convincing. But they are just stupid.

@Rebecca Serti I feel terrible for whatever country you live in the. If you are going to sentence a human being to DEATH you better be able to prove without a reasonable doubt they committed the crime not "this is suspicious" remember sending them to DEATH I certainly wouldn't want to live in a place were people are sentenced to death on suspicion without concrete proof.

@VDH yes it’s female privilege all the way.

@Saad khan on one of those 9-11 calls videos some black woman shot and killed all 4 of her kids and she got 7 years probation and just had to show up for time out from 4pm-8pm

@Eva Lavinia Bucur I agree. I’m saying “shot girl” had no relevance other than her desire to party.

@Joseph Dale suffocation was not enough. Maybe she found her child suffocated and that's the reason she searched.

Foolproof suffocation, on the other hand, was clear as hell ^_^

Pretty, manipulative white girl, good attorney who she was sleeping with, etc etc. Nobody ever called her out on her bullcrap.
Easy to raise enough doubt.
I really feel for those grandparents.

In her defense, a shot girl is a girl who works at a bar, giving shots of alcohol. She was most likely researching a new party job.

The suffocation search was enough though.

@Saad khan yea yea everyone is racist.. 2+2=5

@Wild Bill Slunksauce . That is UNreasonable doubt. And if a man had been on trial, the jury would have convicted him. Time and time again, the jury finds «doubt» when a woman is on trial, where a man would be convicted even if they found no corpse at all.

She got off because it took them so long to find the body that by the time they got it, you couldn’t tell how she died. That’s reasonable doubt in and of itself. Heartbreaking that the body was just a mile away and it took them that long to find it. Circumstantial cases are really hard to prove, especially if the defendant has a sociopath for a defense attorney.

Had she been a man, she/he would have been convicted.

@olivia grace hey bro chill, online comments arent gonna convert anyone.

@aman turn to Christ and repent before it’s too late because He loves us so much He died for us and God His Father raised Him from the dead and loves us 🥰

@Saad khan turn to Christ and repent before it’s too late because He loves us so much He died for us and God His Father raised Him from the dead and loves us 🥰

@Denizhan Karaca turn to Christ and repent before it’s too late because He loves us so much He died for us and God His Father raised Him from the dead and loves us 🥰

@Saad khan I do not watch BET or television in general.

@Saad khan No. That is just what Liberals like to say so that minorities keep voting Democrat. By the way, it works. They have been voting non-stop for the same party since 1932.

@Matthew Anthony OJ was a superstar, celebrity who had top of the line lawyers and the world cheering on as he was a god in sports. Not like Casey here. The comparison doesn't work. I'm saying if it was a normal, non-white male in this exact situation, they would've been in jail in a second.

@Saad khan You mean people of color like O.J. Simpson?

Female tears and a shady lawyer can do a lot to create doubt

@aman i agree. the attorney was good, but could have been better. We still dont technically know how the baby died. we cant just say she did it because it seems like she did. there are hundreds of ways she could have died. there is absolute reasonable doubt. sucks, but true.

@aman reasonable doubt? No. That's very UNREASONABLE doubt! Looks t all the evidence that's pointing to her. Any doubt would be completely unreasonable.

Hard to belive to she gets a not guilty and now is free.

That indeed is very suspicious, but is it enough to send someone to death row, I'm not so sure. To me it looks like the prosecution did a shitty job providing real evidence like camera footages, witnesses, fingerprints, dna etc., perhaps because they were too confident that a mom not reporting her child missing is enough proof. Perhaps she actually wanted her dead, but didn't act on it. And then she was killed by someone else & the mother was just happy about it. This of course is a long shot, but not impossible. It was prosecution's job to show there are no other possibilities but the mother killed her. They failed to do so.

@aman she didn't report her missing child, her car smelled like death and she made up false narratives and non-existing people. Anybody with a sane mind would say she's guilty and in any other country she would have been convicted of first-degree murder.

@Bianca Nsn basically everywhere. That's what attorney do

Guess what you need actual proof to sentence someone to death
She was charged for lying to police but that proves nothing about her guilt.
Reasonable doubt? Check.


32:07 - who tf would hate call the grandparents? i mean come on people.