Why casey anthony?

I dont get it...

Whats the big deal with casey anthony?

These kinds of things happen everyday all over the world. Im not saying the news shouldn't cover it, but why so much?

Who decides which mother-daughter homocide is a big deal?

Nancy Grace?

Is it because Casey is good looking so she gets extra prime time?

I dont get what the deal is.

I doubt it is because of her looks....if anyone actually thinks that women is attractive

As someone who is an avid watcher of this trial.....that would be me .....

Because it is what appeared to be an average normal mother who tried to commit the perfect crime that she would get away with....she premeditated the murder of her little girl in a horribly disgusting way complete with fictious kidnappers...and after the murder she went about being a tramp and party girl as if nothing happened....and a month after murdering her little girl finally gave in and admitted she was missing. She thought she could easily woo law enforcement and told one lie after another.

The court case is facinating....the evidence and expert testimony is far better than the OJ trial or most trials one could be witness too....the new lies that are coming out in an attempt to plead innocence is the stuff that movies are made of....

This does not happen every day. If you followed the case and knew of all the ups and downs and craziness of it all....you would know...this is truly a unique and bizarre case of an evil woman and an innocent little girl....

I actually find her attractive. -__-

as for the case, I have no comment.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


I'd agree that the case is fascinating. A lot of murders are crimes of passion... especially on a child. People snap and kill their kids. She thought about this for months. Maybe even longer.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


I don't know about attractive...she was pretty hot in the early days of the investigation and the photos of her at the clubs were okay...strictly from my perspective of course. Now days though I am going to have to agree that she is looking a bit plain and unattractive, but what should we expect coming strait from a jail cell and no facilities available for the hair and make-up?

Maybe a little bit odd, but I also am a close follower of the trial and catch most of the highlights on HLN in the morning while I am checking out the latest weather developments in the nation.

She is definitely one sick twisted woman...or person rather, and seems almost animal like in even trying to show emotion when the rare opportunity comes up for her to act like she cares.

I am going to have to say though I have not totally dismissed the idea that she herself is not guilty of murder and that her father is the one that committed the crime of murder...not that Casey is not guilty of accessory to murder, but I don't think she was there when the actual act was committed. I think there is some of the story we will only hear long after this trial is over.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
I doubt it is because of her looks....if anyone actually thinks that women is attractive

As someone who is an avid watcher of this trial.....that would be me

.....

Because it is what appeared to be an average normal mother who tried to commit the perfect crime that she would get away with....she premeditated the murder of her little girl in a horribly disgusting way complete with fictious kidnappers...and after the murder she went about being a tramp and party girl as if nothing happened....and a month after murdering her little girl finally gave in and admitted she was missing. She thought she could easily woo law enforcement and told one lie after another.

The court case is facinating....the evidence and expert testimony is far better than the OJ trial or most trials one could be witness too....the new lies that are coming out in an attempt to plead innocence is the stuff that movies are made of....

This does not happen every day. If you followed the case and knew of all the ups and downs and craziness of it all....you would know...this is truly a unique and bizarre case of an evil woman and an innocent little girl....

edit on June 16th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

Hmm i really find it hard to believe she could get away with killing her kid. I mean she mightve accidently snapped and tried to hide it, but i cant see someone "planning out" the killing of hteir kid, and then partying and staying in town. If you have any amount of a brain youd high-tail it out of town and change your name and everything.

But i tend to give people more credit then is due, so who knows.

reply to post by demonseed


Are you following the case? I would assume not...
Because computer forensic evidence shows...............
It was very much premeditated. The woman is a pathological liar. There is evidence after evidence of this (recording interviews). The woman is self-centered beyond belief and evidence shows (video/phone calls) that she was more concerned about herself than her missing child. Probably because she knew her child was dead.

She knew her child was "missing" for a MONTH and never told anyone. Instead, she partied hard, lied to everyone, stole from her friends to support herself...and the absolute ridiculous list goes on and on. The woman is someone psych experts will be studying until the day she dies. She is a classic psychopath....

I would suggest one watch the trial - watch archives of it. There is no way anyone could come away believing she is innocent

She's the cutest psychopath I've ever seen. Other than that, I think the coverage is because of the circumstances around it. I believe she's guilty. There are texts and emails that indicate that she killed her daughter because she was getting in the way of Casey's partying. Harshing her mellow, so to speak.

/TOA

The little heart affixed to the duct tape over little Calee's mouth?

The body buried in Casey's pet graveyard at the end of her street?

Zanida Gonzales?

"Bombshell Tonight!"

I like Nancy but this Casey Anthony needs to fess-up. What a waste of primetime...

I don't want to play the devil's advocate here but I am going to point out that knowing your child is dead and partying, carrying on as normal, etc...does not make her guilty of the actual crime of murder. Having knowledge and possibly even planning it does not constitute the actual act itself.

She may be a heartless psychopath but does that mean she actually committed the murder...I am going to have to say no...it does not prove it at all. As this trial goes on and more evidence is brought out (listening to her brothers testimony was a chin scratcher) I am just not convinced she actually committed the crime of murder.

She may very well be protecting the person who did (provided she is not guilty herself) but at this point in time I don't sway to the side of it being an act that she perpetrated on her own.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
reply to post by demonseed

 

Are you following the case? I would assume not...
Because computer forensic evidence shows...............
It was very much premeditated. The woman is a pathological liar. There is evidence after evidence of this (recording interviews). The woman is self-centered beyond belief and evidence shows (video/phone calls) that she was more concerned about herself then her missing child. Probably because she knew her child was dead.

She knew her child was "missing" for a MONTH and never told anyone. Instead, she partied hard, lied to everyone, stole from her friends to support herself...and the absolute ridiculous list goes on and on. The woman is someone psych experts will be studying until the day she dies. She is a classic psychopath....

I would suggest one watch the trial - watch archives of it. There is no way anyone could come away believing she is innocent

edit on June 16th 2011 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)

"She knew her child was "missing" for a MONTH and never told anyone."

that's the part that confuses me.

So if she killed her, why did she stay in town?

But thats ok, you answered my question.

The reason shes on the news versus the other crazies is because she is ever crazier?

Not a bad answer.

Originally posted by jerryznv
I don't want to play the devil's advocate here but I am going to point out that knowing your child is dead and partying, carrying on as normal, etc...does not make her guilty of the actual crime of murder. Having knowledge and possibly even planning it does not constitute the actual act itself.

She may be a heartless psychopath but does that mean she actually committed the murder...I am going to have to say no...it does not prove it at all. As this trial goes on and more evidence is brought out (listening to her brothers testimony was a chin scratcher) I am just not convinced she actually committed the crime of murder.

She may very well be protecting the person who did (provided she is not guilty herself) but at this point in time I don't sway to the side of it being an act that she perpetrated on her own.

Evidence shows difference. Forensic evidence. Im not sure how anyone could have watched the entire prosecuting presentation complete with evidence after evidence and have any feeling she might be innocent. Im not talking about reading talking points...but actually watching the trial and listening to experts speak on the evidence.

Have you been watching the trial...listening to testimony and all the evidence and experts? Not listening to Nancy Grace, but actually closely watching it?

reply to post by jerryznv


Has anyone ever told you that your avatar looks like a bald clown laughing with his fists raised beside his face?

About the trial: I, too have not really paid much attention to the coverage, as I believe the media has nothing else better to do than to extensively sensationalize this mess, why? I have no idea.

However, GEL put it into a different perspective for me, and now I realize how entertaining this is for some audiences, and I suppose the networks have realized this before I did, and are capitalizing on the opportunity to draw in more ratings, and/or people just have nothing more positive to talk about during their day.

Edit add* Also Jerryznv - If you do not think that she is guilty, at least in planning her own child's demise, let alone personally acting in it, then I think you are delusional.

reply to post by greeneyedleo

I doubt it is because of her looks....if anyone actually thinks that women is attractive

To the Contrary

She doesn't seem to ever wear make-up in Court and lost her tan to become more frail like most likely to appear innocent for her Trial since the Defense is grasping at anything/excuse to try and get people to believe she isn't guilty.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2730b66f56b3.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3c3a9ca19e5c.jpeg[/atsimg]

Actually; with me being a male; i find her quite attractive non-the-less. I guess women won't see her as attractive though only natural right?

But I think most men would agree with me she at-least used to be or with some tan and make-up on is quite attractive.

Attractive(Fertile) Natural Selection Evolution

I've been watching small parts of the trial and seen several hours on the matter. I think many have come to see here a guilty with the amount of times she has changed her story.

Which sort-of implies she is guilty.

reply to post by demonseed


How can I know what goes on in the mind of a psychopath?

What I can touch on is that many killers - even serial killers - do not just leave town. Green River Killer who murdered dozen of women lived close to his kill zone. If she strayed from her normal lifestyle, that would raise flags. People would know something is up. But because she is a psychopath, she was able to go about her normal life, partying, hooking up with guys, lying, and so on.......

This is a woman who was used to lying and getting away with it. So she prepared for a murder - she did MUCH research. Comittied it. Lied up down and all around and believed she would also get away with this. Fact is, she was stupid and did not realize that science is much more powerful than her lies. And lies have a way of tripping you up and making you make mistakes.

Any case like this would hit the news. The reason it is in the news so much is because the trial is going on now and it is a VERY interesting trial. Not the first trial to make the news so much You just see so much of it right now, because it is happening right now.

reply to post by TheUniverse


I also want to input my thought on this...

She is attractive (in a physical sense), but her current hair-style does her no justice.

The trial is facinating. That her parents believed anything that came out of her mouth is absolutely unbelievable. I am the mother of four grown children and I can tell you ---which one will tell the truth, who you have to dig it out off and who will probably lie to you. She evidently has a history of not telling the truth. How can they possibly believe that "Zanny the Nanny" took their grandaughter and the lame excuse she gave of being afraid to call the police!
That whole family is a dysfunctional mess but I do not believe that she was molested by her father and brother!! I think she is willing to destroy the reputation of her parents, brother and anyone else that she can in order to save her butt.
I hope she gets the death penalty.
That she could do that to an innocent and beautiful child and carry on like nothing is wrong makes her totally evil in my book!!

Originally posted by Kevinquisitor
reply to post by jerryznv

 

Has anyone ever told you that your avatar looks like a bald clown laughing with his fists raised beside his face?

About the trial: I, too have not really paid much attention to the coverage, as I believe the media has nothing else better to do than to extensively sensationalize this mess, why? I have no idea.

However, GEL put it into a different perspective for me, and now I realize how entertaining this is for some audiences, and I suppose the networks have realized this before I did, and are capitalizing on the opportunity to draw in more ratings, and/or people just have nothing more positive to talk about during their day.

Edit add* Also Jerryznv - If you do not think that she is guilty, at least in planning her own child's demise, let alone personally acting in it, then I think you are delusional.

edit on 16-6-2011 by Kevinquisitor because: (no reason given)

No I have not heard that one...but now that you say something about it...I could see how it might resemble a clown...kind of funny actually.

As for the trial and the coverage it is recieving, I would think you are right in the idea that it is entertainment for some audiences...almost certainly the people that watched this story break and have made it a point to stay up on the current developments.

Not all that different than the O.J. trial...when it first became news, and the months of trial that followed afterward. Granted O.J. was famous before he ever found a life in crime, but I think the coverage of the trial in his case and this one are pretty similar.

I am a bit delusional I suppose then...because I do think there is a difference. She may have planned, talked about, made arrangements, bought duct tape and garbage bags, but does that mean she committed murder? Maybe, maybe not though. The forensic science and evidence does suggest strongly that she is guilty of murder according to the prosecution, but we have yet to hear all the rebuttal to the prosecutions case too. I reserve judgment on the scientific evidence until it has been disputed by experts from the defense's table.

Much like we do here on ATS, I don't just listen to what one expert says is fact, and instead reserve my judgment until I hear all the experts. I can pool the data and make an informed decision base on it all, not just what I am supposed to hear. I will do the same in the coming days of this trial...so yes I suppose I am delusional.

I watch this trial as often as I possibly can .. I love that I can watch it live.. I put my laptop in the kitchen, with extra speakers so I can do my morning stuff while I listen.
I've always been fascinated by true crime novels and documentaries, and SOMEtimes think I've lost my calling as some sort of an investigator.. LOL
Anyway,
That woman is SO ugly inside, I don't see HOW it's possible to call her "cute" on the outside. It's clear that someone that thinks that about her, doesn't know what a monster she is.. There are numerous ways her little daughter could have died according to what they've found so far, and each way is uglier than the next..

The defense cross examined ALL experts testifying about the evidence. Most of the time they stood there dumbfounded and stumbled in trying to dispute what experts said. Failed. Miserably. The trial is now in the defense stage....and they are bringing in their own experts....and failing miserably.

The defense started out this trial saying that her daughter drowned and the father placed her in the shed. That is their defense. It is her only defense. However, there is absolutely ZERO evidence to show this. This is Casey's [new] defense. So she is the ONLY evidence/witness. In order for that defense to work, she will have to testify. And if they allow her to do that, they might as well execute her right there.

And this is not entertainment for me. I am a criminal forensic major and have much more reason to watch....