Casey Anthony judge: There was enough to convict

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 6 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Casey Anthony judge: There was enough to convict


www.wftv.com


Judge Belvin Perry told NBC's "Today" show that he thought there was sufficient evidence for a conviction on a first-degree murder charge, even though much of the evidence was circumstantial.


When he read the jury's verdict, Belvin said he felt "surprise, shock, disbelief" and read it twice.

"I just wanted to be sure I was reading what I was reading," Perry said.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 6 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   
I'm not surprised by Perry's statements and couldn't agree more. I watched most of the trial and was also floored when the jury returned a not guilty verdict. The entire ordeal was a circus, but I thought Perry held it together the best he could and was very no nonsense.

Perry also said he thought prosecutors were better attorneys than Baez, who the judge described as "personable." All the defense had to do was create reasonable doubt, which they did, he said.


His next comment truly comes as no surprise to me. Anthony seemed as though she's a true sociopath who can conform to whatever a situation demands and insists on having things her way.

The judge said he saw two sides to Anthony. The one she showed to jurors was a wrongfully accused mother grieving for her child. The other was a woman wasn't afraid to shout and swear at her attorneys, as she did when they talked to her about a possible plea deal for aggravated murder.

"There were always two sides to Casey," Perry said. "The public persona that she wanted the jury to see and there was a side that she showed when the jury wasn't there."

I don't doubt that she treated her mother with contempt and played her parents against one another. I also feel as though she thought her daughter was getting in the way of her being with the man/men she desired.


The judge also said he thought justice had been served with a jury verdict.

"Justice will finally be served one day by the Judge of Judges," Perry said. "She is going to have to live with this and deal with this for the rest of her life."

Again, couldn't agree with you more, your Honor.

www.wftv.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 6-5-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   
The judge postponed Casey Anthony's Bankruptcy Trial, I wonder why? Was she able to conceal any income, from publishers like Star or National Inquirer ??
edit on 8-5-2013 by mislead because: Checking into sies that possibly paid to publish her information



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


She murdered her kid.

Justice was not served.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by Afterthought
 


She murdered her kid.

Justice was not served.


Well why do we even need jury's and lawyers than?

Just send every case to you for you decision. You apparently are all knowing.
edit on 8-5-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest


Well why do we even need jury's and lawyers than?

Just send every case to you for you decision. You apparently are all knowing.


I am with this case.

The lady murdered her kid.

I know plenty of people that think the same way too.....











posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So you are smarter than the people on the jury?

Interesting.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So you are smarter than the people on the jury?

Interesting.



No.

Did you watch the trial?

I mean it was on DAILY.

So are You saying you would have voted her not guilty?

Spit it out, instead of focusing on me.




posted on May, 8 2013 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


What was on daily? All the evidence? All the testimony? All the litigation? Were you in the jury room when they deliberated? You see, we can easily form our opinions here, outside of that jury-box and lay down our judgements based on spurious and not always complete information that the jury gets.

Another consideration is what the prosecution aimed for. They went big and when you go that big, you can fall pretty hard. First degree murder and sought the death penalty? In my estimation, that was mistake number one by the prosecution.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


There was enough to form an educated opinion, when it comes down to it.

Second, A Judge is saying " There was enough to convict". That says a lot, unless your going to throw the baby out with the bathwater............




posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


Its Ironic.

I served today. Jury Duty.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Well it is a good thing we have at a minimum, at least 12 of our peers deciding and not one black robed seer doing the convicting now isn't it?

To me his statement points out the obvious: the State failed to make their case. That is the end point. It is the State that must prove the charge against her and they went big and guess what? Proving first degree murder is no easy task. Even many people were holding their breath today regarding the Jodi case. It is a huge hurdle for a reason.

ETA: Thank you for that civic duty. It is important and too many of us try and weasel our way out of it.
edit on 8-5-2013 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


I know.

The prosecution failed.

And there's a murdered child, that has no justice.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:08 PM
link   
There may have been enough to convict if the jurors were all completely ignorant, like most people are.

That whole case was a joke, how could anyone find a juror who hadn't heard of the case since it was all over the TV for what?, Years?!.

Nevermind the schmoe who claimed to be an expert at forensic whatever, who claimed he could SMELL human decomposition in a coffee can of air collected from her car trunk.

Nevermind how the body was found by fella near the house who was taking a piss in the woods.

Nevermind the fact that most of the evidence was circumstantial.

I talked to a whole bunch of people about this case, most of them said she shouldn't even get a trial because of the way the media twisted it into one of those "Poor Little Dead Kid" cases which people get all emotional about, and kindly lose their minds over it. Scarier still, they were potential jurors, EEK!!!!.

I live in mortal fear of being tried by a jury of my peers because I know exactly what they are.

She was saved by a high powered lawyer who donated his time, otherwise she would have paid "The Po Persons Penalty", guilty of nothing but not being able to afford adequate legal representation.

Oh, and another thing. If you have a couple thousand dollars, you can get a diploma that states you are a trained forensic something or other, Really!, pay the cash and take an online test and get it mailed right to your house .It was done by an undergrad as a research project, and the story was on FRONTLINE on the educational channel. Look it up, it was about forensic medicine, or rather the lack of it, most of that crap you see on TV is just someone's overactive imagination, the technology doesn't even exist yet....

Anyway
edit on 8-5-2013 by MyHappyDogShiner because: Wanted to add something.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 



Well why do we even need jury's and lawyers than?

Just send every case to you for you decision. You apparently are all knowing.


SHE’S INNOCENT!!!

I know because I saw her golfing with OJ this afternoon!



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:19 PM
link   
So what, I don't get it, guilty or not-guilty?



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner
 


The jury was tainted from the beginning. Her daughter's disappearance was all over the news and lots of people were involved in the search before Casey was even arrested. Then, all the dang lies that woman told....

The judge states that the prosecution did it's job and he's also stating that he saw sides of Casey that the jurors didn't get to see such as her screaming and cursing at her attorneys. There is evidence that wasn't shown to the jury and I'm also betting that the jury was extremely tired of being sequestered. I'm just glad I didn't get called to sit on it.
edit on 8-5-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 
I stopped watching TV so I wouldn't even hear about that BS media circus anymore, everybody on the street was blabbering their no-brained opinion on the case anyway, there was no escaping it.

I would not have wanted to sit on that trial either, but then when I do have jury duty, I am always chosen as the alternate and never get to deliberate anyway....

They do their own brand of jury tampering, they possess ALL of the information they need to make sure the case goes the way the prosecution wants it to.


.



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
I'm just glad I didn't get called to sit on it.


It was a mess, that's for sure.


BTW, S&F



posted on May, 8 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Before I turn in for the night, I'd just like to say that had I been on the jury, it would've been hung.
I would've stuck with the guilty verdict and not been swayed no matter how bad the other jurors were trying to change my mind. I would've held fast to my beliefs given the evidence presented and that would've been that.
If Casey would've had to sit through another trial to arrive at the verdict she wanted, so be it.




top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join