THEY LET THE b***h GO!

Post Reply New Topic

There is actually evidence of abuse, albeit not sexual abuse, out there, from the statements of people who knew Casey. It's not a lot of evidence, but lots of people are assuming Caylee committed murder on even less evidence.

Me, I think both are possible, and neither is anywhere near certain.

I am not defending the woman. I am defending the principle that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. One must prove the guilty are guilty by virtue of a case based on evidence and a line of reasoning that puts the conclusion beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution never even presented a cause of death in the course of the trial. The prosecution did a sh*tty job of presenting its case and the verdict was therefore correct. It is up to the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not for the defendant to prove his;/her innocence.

ruveyn

Link to any of that evidence please. Everything I've read was completely consistent with a drowning - people saw Caylee at the pool, the pool gate was left open, etc. That doesn't say the drowning happened - obviously if you're making up a story you'll make up one that's consistent with the available evidence - but based on what I've seen it can't be ruled out either.


The justice systems of many continental European countries, including for example Italy, have roots in the inquisitorial system and do not contain a presumption of innocence once the prosecutor charges the suspect.


I won't claim our justice system is unbiased, but I will dispute this particular claim. If the woman were black, her daughter would have gotten very little press coverage, and the prosecutor likely wouldn't even have placed a murder charge. For example, in this similar case, where the black mother dumped her dead daughter in the garbage before reporting her "abducted", the prosecutors only charged her with manslaughter:

http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/news/crime/l ... found_dead
http://blackandmissing.wordpress.com/20 ... hya-woods/
http://www.escambiaclerk.com/xml/xml.as ... d=45850191

Caylee anthony was reported as missing on July 15, 2008. One month later, on August 11, 12, and 13, 2008, a meter reader tipped off police as the the location of human remains. Four more months pass. Only after one more tip on December 11 did police investigate and find human remains in a plastic bag. Those remains were identified as those of Caylee Anthony the next day. Cause of death was listed as "Undetermined".

Why did it take the police four months to respond to a tip of "human remains", especially when those remains were reported "... in a forested area near the Anthony residence"?

In my opinion, those cops bungled the investigation, resulting in insufficient evidence to support the prosecution's claims of first-degree murder, which would cause any jury composed of critically-minded individuals to have reached the same verdicts; and by "critically-minded", I mean people that are not easily swayed by emotional appeals, false data, and fallacious reasoning; but instead rely on a literal interpretation of the claims, a stringent examination of the evidence, and a rigid comparison of the claims versus the evidence.

What evidence is that?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Do you think you have discovered who really murdered Nicolle Simpson?

Or are you just trying to impose the idea that "disconcerting" behavior should be counted as evidence in a criminal case?

And by "disconcerting behavior, I also mean trouble with social situations, dislike of changes in routine, apparent lack of empathy, avoiding eye contact, formal style of speaking, inability to recognize tonal changes in speech, unusual facial expressions or postures, preoccupation with only one or few "special" interests, delayed motor development, holds one-sided conversations, and easy to be overstimulated by sudden increases in sensory stimuli ... you know ... the typical Aspie.

It's a major leap of faith to go from "she acts weird" to "she's a sociopathic killer". It's like knowing that a person is an aspie, and then concluding that he or she should be locked away as a menace to society.

Whatever Casey Anthony is, she's certainly not an Aspie. She has a reputation as a party girl - which in itself implies social skills way beyond those of us on WP - and the fact that she can manipulate people by spinning intricate lies puts the nail in the coffin of any speculation of Asperger's.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

How many Aspies do you know personally? I've met several hundred in person running a meetup and working with other organizers over the years, and there were definitely some hard partiers and manipulative liars in the mix. I'm not making a claim for this woman, as I know next to nothing about her, but merely disputing the idea that being social and manipulative are immediate disqualifies for Apsergers.

Dox47, just because someone shows up to an asperger meeting doesn't mean they really do have aspergers just like if someone posts on WrongPlanet it doesn't mean that person has aspergers.

If someone is a manipulative liar and hardcore partier in an aspie meetup, you've probably been had by a fraud.

Some of us Aspies are very adept at "spinning lies", and can even fool a ouijagraph ... I mean, a polygraph machine.

She tried to manipulate people, but failed. It was the bungling police that actually lost the case, since they waited four months between the first tip of the location of Caylee's remains and checking the tip out. Had there been more valid evidence (instead of opinions and assumptions), Casey might be looking at the business end of a lethal injection by now.

Whoever killed that child is likely to get away with it, due to the mis-handled investigation and the prosecution asserting a claim beyond what the material evidence would allow. Heck, they even dropped the charge of "Aggravated Child Abuse" in favor of the more sensational "Capital Murder" charge! At the very least, if they had stuck with the original charge, they might have gained at least one more conviction. As it is, Casey is likely to be released on July 17, 2011.

I'm more likely to say she suffers from a co morbidity of Borderline Personality Disorder, and psychopathia.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I favor Demonic Possession, but I think that about a lot of people.

The body was found near the parents home, the duct tape came from the parents home, The most likely place of death.

Her parents are retired? None of them reported anything?

Then the mother reports it a month later?

That is the one to bring in for questioning, she is trying to get herself clear, and knows something.

The grandmother had actually been led to believe that the child was with Casey who was shacked up with a boyfriend, and who continued to stall her mother. After a month, her mother finally tracked her down through her friends, and demanded to know what happened to the child Caylee.
As an Aspie, I can't tell if you're serious or not about the demonic possession thing.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Deposition by Tony Lazzaro:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/201 ... ny-lazzaro

Inmate letters:

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-nation ... d-caylee-1

Again, not a lot of evidence, but more than there is for Caylee being murdered.

Maybe she was molested by her brother while they were growing up; but she didn't seem so certain about her father. Possibly her father was a physically abusive prick, though we only have her word for that. I fail to see how this is more likely than the scenario that she killed her daughter.
If anything, growing up with abuse can lead to Borderline Personality Disorder, with all the pathological lying and manipulative scheming that goes along with it. If there was actually abuse and denial going on in the Anthony home, that would make it all the more likely that she could grow up to be so self centered and lacking in actual love that she would murder her own child.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Sorry, but you've picked the wrong person to argue with over this .The justice systems of many continental European countries do not have roots in the inquisitorial system, they are the inquisitorial system (civil law) which has roots in the old Roman system of law. They still however have the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. I know this because:

1. They are all signed up to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) which is enforced by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Article 6.2 of the ECHR states that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The ECHR trumps national law.

2. I studied the ECHR and civil law in my first year at law school.

3. I now live in continental Europe in a country with an inquisitorial system, where the bulk of my work is around compliance with European Union law and the ECHR.