Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

If convicted of Premeditated Murder, should Casey Anthony get the Death Penalty ?


Mickalino

What do you think of the new site?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think of the new site?

    • Amazing
      30
    • Cool
      24
    • Could be better
      5
    • A letdown
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

My feeling is the prosecution should have made some kind of deal that guaranteed that she does NOT get the death penalty - reason is because the possibility of her getting the death penalty is apparently causing her parents to lie under oath, for the purpose of saving her life.

In related news......here's a Separated By Birth for you

The Judge in the Anthony case vs. Mr Cleveland from Family Guy. What do you think ?

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRD1cXKvI-r_6A0HVz-B5r0W5u4bX-xwpgRaHn10jua8Sy_uq7Psg&t=1

4975319023_4026c51505_z_thumb.jpg?1284087590

Link to comment
Share on other sites

0 chance a suspect gets the death sentence in a completely circumstantial case. And there is 0 proof her parents are lying under oath.

Are you following the case at all ?

First of all, it's not just circumstantial.

Secondly, there are virtually proven facts that her parents are lying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you following the case at all ?

First of all, it's not just circumstantial.

Secondly, there are virtually proven facts that her parents are lying

There is 0 physical evidence linking Casey Anthony to the death of her daughter.

No DNA

No fingerprints

The stain in the car was there before

The duct tape didn't match the roll found at the house

Te prosecution used a never before used science as key evidence - smell capture

And they have 0 evidence her parents are lying. They have opinions about whether they are. (0 evidence presented to date)

I have no doubt she is guilty as sin, but the burden of proof is on the state. The defense only has to raise reasonable doubt. There is almost no way the prosecution can get a conviction on 1st degree murder, much less a death sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is 0 physical evidence linking Casey Anthony to the death of her daughter.

No DNA

No fingerprints

The stain in the car was there before

The duct tape didn't match the roll found at the house

Te prosecution used a never before used science as key evidence - smell capture

And they have 0 evidence her parents are lying. They have opinions about whether they are. (0 evidence presented to date)

I have no doubt she is guilty as sin, but the burden of proof is on the state. The defense only has to raise reasonable doubt. There is almost no way the prosecution can get a conviction on 1st degree murder, much less a death sentence.

Where is the proof that the stain was already in the car ?

What do you have to say about all the searches on Casey's computer for "Chloroform and Neck-Breaking" ?

Her mother claims she did the searches.

Problem is :

1) The searches were not just general Google searches, but also on CASEY'S Myspace AND Photobucket account. It's not reasonable to believe her mother would log on to those personal accounts of Casey's, to do those searches.

2) The mother claims she "accidentally stumbled" on the Chloroform sites, while searching for Cholorophyll. But computer records show those sites were visited 84 times. That's not "accidentally stumbling"

3) Those sites were BOOKMARKED in her computer, not just visited. You don't bookmark sites, that you "accidentally stumble" on.

4) The mother works for the State, and they have undisputable records that show she was AT WORK during the times those sites were visited on the computer.

5) The mother claims she did those chlorophyll searches because her dog ate something she thought poisoned her. But records show she never brought the dog to the vet.

That's far from the 0 proof you claim. No reasonable person can look at all that strong evidence and conclude she is telling the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the proof that the stain was already in the car ?
Direct testimony under oath. Which is 100% more evidence than the prosecution presented that the stain was made by a decompsing body.
What do you have to say about all the searches on Casey's computer for "Chloroform and Neck-Breaking" ?

Her mother claims she did the searches.

Direct testimony under oath.
Problem is :

[1) The searches were not just general Google searches, but also on CASEY'S Myspace AND Photobucket account.

Notoriously unreliable. Casye and Cindy shared access all the time. It is very difficult to prove who used a shared computer. It is he said/she said, but in this case both parties are saying the same thing.
2) The mother claims she accidentally stumbled on the Chloroform sites. But computer records show those sites were visited 84 times
She in fact said she searched intentionally for chloroform because the dogs were acting sluggish. As someone who works with nurses, there is a distinct possibility she knew about chloroform (likely knew about it).
3) Those sites were BOOKMARKED in her computer, not just visited. You don't bookmark sites, that you accidentally stumble on.
She did not stumble onto them. She searched for them. She said so under oath. When crossed, she said the prosecution never asked her in her deposition. That's on the prosecution.
4) The mother works for the State, and they have undisputable records that show she was AT WORK during the times those sites were visited on the computer.

That's far from the 0 proof you claim. No reasonable person can look at all that strong evidence and conclude she is telling the truth.

She is an exempt employee. Meaning there are days she is listed as at home, where she is actually at work. If you are exempt, all timesheets do is state you worked 8 hours. I am exempt. Some days I work 12. Others I work 6. My timesheet will sat I was at work 8 hours each day. It is common. All they have stated they have is timesheets. If Ashton had more, he woulda grilled her about it.

The fact that I know so much about this case sickens me. My wife DVRs every minute of it and we watch it at night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted "undecided." I'm not sure I'm someone who believes in playing God. I think Casey Anthony is guilty as charged even though I'm not supposed to assume guilt until it's proven. I also despise her not only for what I believe she's done but for being a snotty, lying, brat in general. I also hate her eyebrows. Eyebrows like that tell me right away that i'm dealing with someone who wants to appear compassionless.

However, I'm not sure I could advocate putting anyone to death. Life in a maximum security prison might be worse than death anyway. I just hope I never face the prospect of either fate.

Oh- and I should add that what she has, is and intends to put her family through is vile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Direct testimony under oath. Which is 100% more evidence than the prosecution presented that the stain was made by a decompsing body..

Lying under oath is a LOT more common than you believe. And you want to automatically take her statements as 100% infallible truth, simply because she was under oath, not even considering her extreme motive to lie under oath, not to mention all her inconsistencies ?

Direct testimony under oath.Notoriously unreliable. Casye and Cindy shared access all the time. It is very difficult to prove who used a shared computer. It is he said/she said, but in this case both parties are saying the same thing.She in fact said she searched intentionally for chloroform because the dogs were acting sluggish.

You're not addressing my point - that the computer records indicate the searches were done on several of Casey's PRIVATE accounts which require PASSWORDS.

She did not stumble onto them. She searched for them. She said so under oath. When crossed, she said the prosecution never asked her in her deposition. That's on the prosecution.

She said she intended to search for Chloryphyll, but instead clicked on Chloroform. That's stumbling.

Also, her disposition contradicts her statements under oath.

Then there's her explanation for the "Neck-Breaking" searches - it was just a pop up that came up.

SERIOUSLY ? You remember a single pop-up, on of many pop-ups, that came up about 6 years ago ?

Here story is so full of holes and inconsistencies, if you look at the whole picture, and not just nitpick or rationalize on individual points, then it's clear that she is lying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lying under oath is a LOT more common than you believe. And you want to automatically take her statements as 100% infallible truth, simply because she was under oath, not even considering her extreme motive to lie under oath, not to mention all her inconsistencies ?

As I understand it (and I'm absolutely no expert) Testimony under oath must be taken as truth until proven otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody that murders another individual should get the death penalty.

Why should they get to take one's life and get to live off people's taxes?

If you don't want them to die by execution, put them in a room and let them starve to death.

There's NOTHING anyone can say to convince me to allow a murderer, ESPECIALLY of your own child, to live.

As for the case, hell yeah Casey's guilty. There's no doubt in my mind, but I'm skeptical that they'll give her the death penalty and part of my gut is telling me she'll get off completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it (and I'm absolutely no expert) Testimony under oath must be taken as truth until proven otherwise.

nah, juries don't have to do that...well, unless a prosecutor pointing out all the holes in someone's testimony is considered being "proven otherwise", that is. Juries always have to determine if someone's testimony can be trusted. But it's rare when someone's testimony isn't put under a microscope by the opposing attorney, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...