It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could Casey Anthony be charged at the federal level???

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
The Fifth Amendment does not protect a person from being tried by two or more separate governments. Thus, both the federal government and the state government are able to charge and prosecute one person for the same criminal act, which is often the case for drug related crimes. As well, two or more states can prosecute and try a person for the same criminal act. People need to start a website for FBI to file murder charges against Casey Anthony on the federal level!!!! THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN ORLANDO HAS JURISDICTION TO REFILE MURDER CHARGES AGAINST CASEY ANTHONY WITHOUT IT BEING DOUBLE JEOPARDY PLEASE GET THIS INFO OUT TO EVERYONE...

I came across this today and wanted to get some feedback from the ATS family...

Any thoughts on this and if you think it will happen, or should happen???

and no, although I do agree with it I did not write it...




posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz
 


Yes if she committed a federal crime...or is suspected of committing a federal crime...but she is not so...there goes that idea...maybe she really is innocent and people would just love to get some revenge...in which case justice seems like less of the motivation!

So which are you after...revenge or justice?

Justice has already been handed down...so that leaves...well...
edit on 26-7-2011 by jerryznv because: ...



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Since the case did not cross state lines.

I do not believe the crime could rise to a Federal level.

Even if it did.

With the same evidence.....It would be the same result.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
yeah its got to be hard to convict someone of murder without a cause of death



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Then what about all other people acquitted for any type of murder?
Wouldn't all those cases also have to be reopened?

What a waste of court time and tax payer money if every murder case was to be tried at state level, and then at federal level if the state didn't get a guilty verdict.

It's not just the person on trial having to go through the trial, it's everyone involved, victims and family members.
In this case, the trial is over. Done. Finished.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Thanks for your input... but I was talking about the negligence charges, not murder charges because I do agree the results will probably be the same...

I should of made that more clear, sorry.


I'm not at all educated in federal/state law so I really did not know if this could happen. That is why I asked.
Even though IMO she did kill the little girl (some how, some way... we will never really know for sure), there just is not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt either way... but I do think there is plenty to prove the negligence charges.

I am not out for vengeance or revenge... just some justice for a little girl that was taken away too soon that no one is fessing up to... and the mom is all smiles about...


I wonder too about what the current poster's reactions would of been if she was sentenced for murder and found guilty? Are you all just excepting the outcome, jumping on a bandwagon or do you sincerely believe she was innocent?
edit on 26-7-2011 by SmArTbEaTz because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-7-2011 by SmArTbEaTz because: because...



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmArTbEaTz
but I was talking about the negligence charges, not murder charges

I don't believe negilegence is a federal crime. The statues are defined at the state level.


Even though IMO she did kill the little girl (some how, some way... we will never really know for sure), there just is not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt either way... but I do think there is plenty to prove the negligence charges.

Your own statement shows that, under the law, you must find her innocent. You are basically proving to everyone this is a personal vendetta against a person because of a feeling of revenge. Claim it all you want, but your own words prove it.


I am not out for vengeance or revenge... just some justice for a little girl that was taken away too soon that no one is fessing up to... and the mom is all smiles about...

Yet that is exactly what you are asking for. Justice was served, and you didn't like the results.


I wonder too about what the current poster's reactions would of been if she was sentenced for murder and found guilty? Are you all just excepting the outcome, jumping on a bandwagon or do you sincerely believe she was innocent?

I know she is innocent. Do you know how? Because a jury of her peers found her innocent of the crimes she was charged of. The prosecutution failed to make a case. Remember, to be found guilty of murder, it has to be "beyond a reasonable doubt".

What you are adjucating is vigilante justice. This means you don't believe in our legal system, that juries should violate their oaths by sentencing someone without proper evidence, and that you would rather have a totalitorian state where the facts don't matter.

Since that is the type of country you would like to live in, why are you even concerned about Casey Anthony in the first place?



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
No, because she did not commit a federal crime. There are other courts in the world that she could not be tried by as well.


edit on 26-7-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
She'll never be tried for the crime again, at ANY level.

What some of the replies made me wonder is: Do you people shouting about "justice was served, get over it" also believe we should get rid of the appeals process? After all if a person is found guilty by jury, why do they get to appeal the verdict over and over? Something to ponder.

Vetter days,



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
The appeal process is used when something was wrong with the first trial. For example, a juror says something racist about the defendant (grounds for appeal), the defense was not given full disclosure by the prosecution (grounds for appeal), etc. Even then, a judge has to see if it sufficiently marred the case as to require a retrial.

My understanding reading about this case is that the prosecution failed to make their case. They wanted 1st degree murder (requiring motive and forethought), yet suppied none of the evidence needed for that.

I do not believe there will be an appeals on this case. It was not caused by a technicality, it was a shear lack of evidence. Reasonable doubt means we have to accept that. Prosecution did not make their case, and as such, Casey needs to be found not guilty.

This is one of the basic tenents of our legal system, and I strongly support that.


edit on 2011/7/26 by TLomon because: typo



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


I fully agree that the system worked like it is supposed to. She will not be retried as she has been found not guilty by her peers. I wouldn't want any other type of system.

But I was under the impression appeals process was only for the guilty party. She falls under double jeopardy (she cannot be charged twice for the same crime). Had she been found guilty she could have appealed at least five times.

So one chance to be found guilty, six chances to be found not guilty. Seems odd to me.

Better days,



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz
 


The only time the feds step into a case is when there is an acquital and they feel that there is a civil rights issue. I can't think of a case such as this where the feds stepped in. She is guilty of lying to police and committed no federal crime.

Also, if anything the evidence used in the trial on both sides continues to become more tainted.

We're done hearing about her. It least I hope we are.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 200Plus
But I was under the impression appeals process was only for the guilty party. She falls under double jeopardy (she cannot be charged twice for the same crime).


You are correct in this regard. My studies falls under civil law, and that was my error.


Had she been found guilty she could have appealed at least five times. So one chance to be found guilty, six chances to be found not guilty. Seems odd to me.


She can request an appeal five times. Requesting an appeal does not guarentee another trial. She also needs to show cause for the appeal.

In actuality, if she was found guilty, the judge would have been forced to declare a mistrial or should had an excellent cause for an appeal. The prosecution withheld evidence from the jury - which would have proved some of their "evidence" was falsified, or at the very least, presented under false pretenses. Serious grounds for appeal there, but since the prosecution refused to comply with the judge on the matter, the judge would have declared a mistrial.



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon

Originally posted by SmArTbEaTz
but I was talking about the negligence charges, not murder charges

I don't believe negilegence is a federal crime. The statues are defined at the state level. ---- TY for that...


Even though IMO she did kill the little girl (some how, some way... we will never really know for sure), there just is not enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt either way... but I do think there is plenty to prove the negligence charges.

Your own statement shows that, under the law, you must find her innocent. You are basically proving to everyone this is a personal vendetta against a person because of a feeling of revenge. Claim it all you want, but your own words prove it.


I am not out for vengeance or revenge... just some justice for a little girl that was taken away too soon that no one is fessing up to... and the mom is all smiles about...

Yet that is exactly what you are asking for. Justice was served, and you didn't like the results.


I wonder too about what the current poster's reactions would of been if she was sentenced for murder and found guilty? Are you all just excepting the outcome, jumping on a bandwagon or do you sincerely believe she was innocent?

I know she is innocent. Do you know how? Because a jury of her peers found her innocent of the crimes she was charged of. The prosecutution failed to make a case. Remember, to be found guilty of murder, it has to be "beyond a reasonable doubt".

What you are adjucating is vigilante justice. This means you don't believe in our legal system, that juries should violate their oaths by sentencing someone without proper evidence, and that you would rather have a totalitorian state where the facts don't matter.

Since that is the type of country you would like to live in, why are you even concerned about Casey Anthony in the first place?


I am not adjudicating (check your typo) anything but my opinion and last I knew you were allowed to do have those in the USA... to date that is. It's not a vendetta... It's a difference of opinion. I chose my side due to because her actions weren't that of a concerned mother. Period. No feelings of revenge either... Call it a gut feeling of guilt I sensed on the smile of her face and the fact that the only thing she was concerned about while in jail was when she was getting out... Not about if they found her daughter...

Since when does our government ever serve justice? If they did our economy would not be in pieces with all the heads of government trying to cover it up. Now would they??? Murders and blue collared crooks go free every day and you want to tell me that's justified? Tell that to your kids when they retire and nothing is there for them... Tell that to the tax payers that have their money lent out to bail out large corporations and foreign banks...

I do not believe in or trust our legal system for several different personal reasons. ~ Mainly because I'm not a sheeple...

So now you don't agree with me... That's fine. I can deal with that, but just as you will always find scientist to back your theory you will always find one's that do not agree with it. That doesn't mean I'm wrong, your right, or visa versa...

Deal with it... You have your line I have mine...

BTW I'm concerned because I'm a father and I'm sick of worthless parents treating their kids like nuisances instead of like the humans that they are in the name of partying and having a good time living a "beautiful life".

You like the outcome great... but if it wouldn't of gone your way you would be here defending your opinion just the same so don't try to call me out because I have a voice and I'm not afraid to use it.

"Juror number 3 has gone on record to state that the decision given has made her sick to her stomach and she did not feel Casey Anthony was truly not guilty. It has also been confirmed that the jury for the 11 hours they were in the deliberation room did not deliberate at all but were said to be playing cards, leaving their notes on their chairs in the courtroom." ~~~ There is your justice...
edit on 26-7-2011 by SmArTbEaTz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz
 


The only time the feds step into a case is when there is an acquital and they feel that there is a civil rights issue.



Ty for the education...



posted on Jul, 26 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz
 


I see no Federal crime has been committed by her. She did not cross State lines. Here is a partial list of Federal Crimes: www.justice.gov...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join