Tuesday, May 7, 2013
The judge in the Casey Anthony trial recently gave an interview about his experience presiding over the most famous criminal trial since OJ. He talked about the two faces of Casey Anthony and expressed his shock over the lack of a conviction in the case. He was stunned when he read the verdict and actually had to re-read it because he couldn't believe it. He felt that although it was circumstantial, there was plenty of reasons to convict. The other thing he talked about was Casey herself. The sad victim that she portrayed when the jury was present was far different from the cursing, demanding woman she was when the jury left the room. Casey Anthony knew just what she was doing. There is no doubt in my mind that Casey was guilty of something that should have put her behind bars. There's got to be at least 100 reasons why I feel that way. Why didn't that jury see them? It seems to me that they looked for proof-positive of her guilt and overlooked or misunderstood exactly what "circumstantial" evidence is. People have been convicted with less. People who didn't murder their innocent toddler. Casey Anthony is living in a prison of sorts. She'll be 30 years old in a few years and what is her life like? She cannot go out in public freely. She doesn't have a job or any kind of career. Although she does have supporters out there (there are wack-jobs everywhere), she certainly will never ever have anything resembling normalcy. Is that punishment enough? Well...it is all the punishment she will receive in this lifetime. Maybe we can learn a lesson from the judge's story about what really went on behind the scenes. Being a juror has got to be a difficult thing to do but maybe people have to educate themselves better about our legal system and what constitutes guilt. Had the jurors on the Casey Anthony trial asked more questions perhaps the outcome would have been different. Maybe Caylee would have had justice.