Home› A Moving Train

WM3 still in jail...casey anthony free..whats your thought

joe2468joe2468 Posts: 3,049
edited July 2011 in A Moving Train
its crazy that this day in age people can kill and still walk away free ....when there is countless amount of people in jail..on death row for murders they did not commit ...


it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


whats your thoughts ?
have you seen the colors of my fathers eyes
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • zmanzman Posts: 502
    GUILTY vs NOT GUILTY

    its all about the evidence.
  • zmanzman Posts: 502
    its not what you THINK, its what you can PROVE
  • mvwmvw Posts: 1,690
    My thought is this should not be in the live section of this forum.
  • binxbinx Posts: 21
    joe2468 wrote:

    it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


    whats your thoughts ?


    Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what we think or what we saw on TV. The prosecution was not able to prove their case and that's all it takes to walk. Good news is that she has a much higher authority to be judged by and it is definitely less flawed.
  • Gvn2flyGvn2fly Posts: 753
    binx wrote:
    joe2468 wrote:

    it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


    whats your thoughts ?


    Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what we think or what we saw on TV. The prosecution was not able to prove their case and that's all it takes to walk. Good news is that she has a much higher authority to be judged by and it is definitely less flawed.
    Well said my friend.
  • ARazorbackguy1ARazorbackguy1 Posts: 456
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.

    I find it sad that people supporting the WM3 are so quick to judge others, for isn't that the same type of judging that did the WM3 in?
    Straight down the center for a hot chicken dinner!
  • supersonicyearssupersonicyears Posts: 2,619
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.

    I find it sad that people supporting the WM3 are so quick to judge others, for isn't that the same type of judging that did the WM3 in?
    It's not the same. Not in the least the same. Look at the evidence. They basically had nothing on the WM3. They had a lot on the CA case.
    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.
    "In the age of darkness
    want to be enlightened"
  • Better DanBetter Dan Posts: 5,684
    supersonicyears wrote:
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.

    I find it sad that people supporting the WM3 are so quick to judge others, for isn't that the same type of judging that did the WM3 in?
    It's not the same. Not in the least the same. Look at the evidence. They basically had nothing on the WM3. They had a lot on the CA case.
    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.


    I disagree with the CA verdict and agree with your points above, but can still see the jury's POV when it came to the murder charge. The above proves she was a bad mother who not only didn't care that her child was abducted or missing, but celebrated life after the fact. Of course, to most people (including me) this makes her seem guilty. But to the jury, this was not the same as her murdering the child, and while there was proof that she was a bad person, and there wasn't enough direct proof (for the jury) to say she committed the murder.

    What pisses me off is that she even got off on the child abuse charge! Even if the jury didn't think she killed her baby, how is partying while your baby is missing, not reporting it right away, and then lying to investigators who are trying to find her not a form of child neglect? She was the last person to see the child and never said where she went so how can we walk scott free? Ugh! I'm just getting myself riled up again :o
    2003: San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, Seattle; 2005: Monterrey; 2006: Chicago 1 & 2, Grand Rapids, Cleveland, Detroit; 2008: West Palm Beach, Tampa; 2009: Austin, LA 3 & 4, San Diego; 2010: Kansas City, St. Louis, Columbus, Indianapolis; 2011: PJ20 1 & 2; 2012: Missoula; 2013: Dallas, Oklahoma City, Seattle; 2014: Tulsa; 2016: Columbia, New York City 1 & 2; 2018: London, Seattle 1 & 2; 2021: Ohana; 2022: Oklahoma City
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    supersonicyears wrote:
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.

    I find it sad that people supporting the WM3 are so quick to judge others, for isn't that the same type of judging that did the WM3 in?
    It's not the same. Not in the least the same. Look at the evidence. They basically had nothing on the WM3. They had a lot on the CA case.
    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.
    Have you actually read the case file, instead of taking eddies word for it?
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    zman wrote:
    its not what you THINK, its what you can PROVE

    Exactly.

    It's also more about what the jury believes was proven.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    supersonicyears wrote:
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.


    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.

    None of that is proof that Casey murdered her. That is only proof that she was a terrible mother.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • LizardLizard So Cal Posts: 12,091
    A different time, different place.
    So I'll just lie down and wait for the dream
    Where I'm not ugly and you're lookin' at me
  • Cradles Broken GlassCradles Broken Glass Posts: 1,409
    This was the first thing that came to my mind too.
    Hearts and thoughts they fade....
    fade away...

    I am at peace with my lust.....for Eddie.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,495
    know1 wrote:
    supersonicyears wrote:
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.


    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.

    None of that is proof that Casey murdered her. That is only proof that she was a terrible mother.


    Terrible mother? C'mon now, she takes being a terrible mother to a whole new level.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    joe2468 wrote:
    its crazy that this day in age people can kill and still walk away free ....when there is countless amount of people in jail..on death row for murders they did not commit ...


    it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


    whats your thoughts ?

    there no comparisson to the two cases.......ask Charlie Manson.


    Godfather.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    I think the WM3 case exemplifies why we should support the Casey Anthony judgement. I haven't followed the trial & have no opinion about her guilt or innocence, but apparently there was not enough evidence to prove that she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The beauty of our justice system (which we think is the reason we are the best country in the world) is that it is meant to protect the innocent - not that it is meant to sacrifice some innocent people so as to ensure conviction for every single guilty person. We simply can't go around convicting people without enough evidence, no matter how bad we want to or how heinous the crime. The WM3 demonstrate the horrible consequences of convicting people based on what we believe instead of what the facts do or don't tell us.
  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    binx wrote:
    joe2468 wrote:

    it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


    whats your thoughts ?


    Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what we think or what we saw on TV. The prosecution was not able to prove their case and that's all it takes to walk. Good news is that she has a much higher authority to be judged by and it is definitely less flawed.


    It's funny how many people have said that she will have to answer to a higher authority....Whatever makes you feel better.

    I find it amazing how people assume she did it because she is a terrible mother. I don't know if she did it or not. Neither do you. But what I do know is that being out partying when your daughter is missing doesn't make you a murderer. Taking a month to report someone doesn't make you a murderer. Is she a fucked up, terrible mother? Obviously....but I don't know if she is a murderer or not. And neither do you.
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    binx wrote:
    joe2468 wrote:

    it also amazes me that there is NOT ONE PERSON that i know ...NOT ONE PERSON who watched the entire trial as part of their job (news anchors) that thinks she is innocent ...


    whats your thoughts ?


    Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what we think or what we saw on TV. The prosecution was not able to prove their case and that's all it takes to walk. Good news is that she has a much higher authority to be judged by and it is definitely less flawed.
    She has mental issues.. nobody is going to ultimately judge her in the end. There is no magic man on the cloud who is going to banish her soul to an eternal hellfire of pain and suffering, but whatever helps people sleep at night... It's a shame though she's free to possibly cause more harm to society.
  • OnTheEdgeOnTheEdge Posts: 1,300
    Welcome to a America. Where political correctness is taking over plain simple common sense.
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Welcome to a America. Where political correctness is taking over plain simple common sense.
    :roll: It's your "common sense" that this country was founded to escape from. And what you're calling political correctness is what distinguishes our nation from those without justice.

    (Do people really not get what they are advocating for with this stuff?)
  • keeponrockinkeeponrockin Posts: 7,446
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Welcome to a America. Where political correctness is taking over plain simple common sense.
    What evidence proves she killed the child?
    Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    keeponrockin wrote:
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Welcome to a America. Where political correctness is taking over plain simple common sense.
    What evidence proves she killed the child?

    I would really like to know the answer to this question. I haven't followed the case at all & have just started learning about it since the acquittal. Maybe there is evidence & I just don't know about it yet. Someone, please enlighten me on this issue. What is this evidence that so many people seem to think should have resulted in a conviction?
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    _ wrote:
    I would really like to know the answer to this question. I haven't followed the case at all & have just started learning about it since the acquittal. Maybe there is evidence & I just don't know about it yet. Someone, please enlighten me on this issue. What is this evidence that so many people seem to think should have resulted in a conviction?
    I speak from rational and emotional (as I have children), but not reporting your child missing after 31 days is incomprehensible, she should be charged something for that right there. Her reason for her child missing was kidnapped by her nanny who was nonexistent... The court did its job and did not convict her based on lack/no evidence.
    Now lets take a look at the Scott Peterson case, and we see similar circumstantial evidence but no physical evidence and he is now on death row.

    This was trial by media, she was an Attractive Female, and that is why she was not convicted.
    If this were a man he would be on death row.
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Welcome to a America. Where political correctness is taking over plain simple common sense.

    what on earth are you talking about...?
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    Blockhead wrote:
    _ wrote:
    I would really like to know the answer to this question. I haven't followed the case at all & have just started learning about it since the acquittal. Maybe there is evidence & I just don't know about it yet. Someone, please enlighten me on this issue. What is this evidence that so many people seem to think should have resulted in a conviction?
    I speak from rational and emotional (as I have children), but not reporting your child missing after 31 days is incomprehensible, she should be charged something for that right there. Her reason for her child missing was kidnapped by her nanny who was nonexistent... The court did its job and did not convict her based on lack/no evidence.
    Now lets take a look at the Scott Peterson case, and we see similar circumstantial evidence but no physical evidence and he is now on death row.

    This was trial by media, she was an Attractive Female, and that is why she was not convicted.
    If this were a man he would be on death row    .

    :lol: Well that's a new one!
  • supersonicyearssupersonicyears Posts: 2,619
    know1 wrote:
    supersonicyears wrote:
    ARazorbackguy1 wrote:
    The OP should know better than to cast stones when you don't truly know what happened in the CA case.


    Do you have children? If your child was missing for a day let alone a month, would you be out partying with your friends? Or, would you be out of your mind contacting everyone and anyone that could help you find them? There was no justice for that poor little baby. At least not yet, One day, when Casey's facing God there will be.


    edited: because it wasn't more clear.

    None of that is proof that Casey murdered her. That is only proof that she was a terrible mother.
    The jurors have come forward and said "we didn't think she was innocent we just didn't have enough evidence from the prosecution to show how she died" are you kidding me??? Casey was the last seen with her daughter she made up people to cover her daughters wherabouts, she searched the internet for how to make chloroform that was found on her daughter and it appeared that duct tape had been on the nose and mouth. If she claimed the baby died by drowing, why would she put duct tape on the babies face afterward?? The jurors are idiots with no common sense. Sorry.

    edited: because it wasn't more clear.
    "In the age of darkness
    want to be enlightened"
Sign In or Register to comment.