The Shocking Verdict! Yet Justice Was Served!
I really was shocked when I heard this "not guilty" verdict on the radio. I had to pull over and absorb what was just said and determined by these jurors. I never thought they could pull themselves beyond the highly emotional elements in this case and deal with ONLY the FACTS and the lack of corroborating EVIDENCE and render a correct verdict of not guilty; but they did.
The prosecution did not prove their case. They were pushing for a murder conviction when they didn't even have proof of cause of death. Our justice system says that they must prove their case "beyond a reasonable doubt" and without a known and provable cause of death, there's doubt. The prosecutor's job is to proceed when they feel they have enough evidence to back and prove their case. They had nothing but speculation, circumstances based on speculation and the strange behavior of the defendant to pursue this case on. They spent a lot of taxpayer money on a murder trial that didn't fulfill the basic elements for murder. I suppose if they want to create a new law or crime for "Suspicious Circumstantial Death", then they might have had a conviction. The prosecution was wrong to bank on circumstances and emotion.
The other thing that is disgusting in this case is the sideline "quarterbacking" by the media and the likes of Nancy Grace and other prominent legal analysts watching over this case. They did nothing more than to chum the waters with more emotional speculation that only help lead the public in believing that it was legal to find her guilty of murder when cause of death was never determined. Any lawyer should live by the golden rules of our constitution and that in order for our justice system to work correctly, that they must uphold it and play by the rules. I'd say 98% of the general public was seeking a guilty verdict to satisfy their own anger and disgust and had little regard or understanding for the law and it's protections. The media has the opportunity to educate and speak of the realities or it can feed their ratings and try to affect the outcome of the public's reaction to the verdict.
My final point of disgust is the reaction of a supposed civilized public. Death threats, lynching and other threats of "other forms of justice" only shows how difficult it is to find qualified and non-prejudicial jurors in highly emotional cases such as this. If for a single moment, anyone could place themselves in any situation where they find themselves accused of something that they did not do and were faced with a prosecution that can use every tactic under the sun; spend unlimited amounts of money to out play you and banks on the fact that they have the applied credibility over you the defendant; you might take a strong second look at how this justice system should be required to protect you, your family and your reputation from wrongful prosecution. It's all a matter of perspective that most people don't understand or refuse to examine because it doesn't directly affect them. It's just wrong to foster hate because you don't like the outcome and that you don't like that she didn't get what you feel she deserves. Based on the public's reaction, I believe that the public wanted to put her to death for the way she acted, not because the prosecution failed to prove she committed murder. I'm sorry folks, but this ain't about you and your feelings.
Let's be clear, there are no winners here. A beautiful child is dead and a family is torn and damaged forever. Something happened, mistakes were made and only Casey knows what really happened. I can be assured it wasn't murder because nothing presented proves it was. This was more a horrible accident due to someone's negligence, which is highly more probable. Had Casey reacted normally to an accidental death, well things would have been quit different except that a small innocent life still tragically ended. These jurors did do their job correctly and got this verdict right by the letter of the law and by their duties as jurors. This is the only good thing that came from this trial.
The prosecution did not prove their case. They were pushing for a murder conviction when they didn't even have proof of cause of death. Our justice system says that they must prove their case "beyond a reasonable doubt" and without a known and provable cause of death, there's doubt. The prosecutor's job is to proceed when they feel they have enough evidence to back and prove their case. They had nothing but speculation, circumstances based on speculation and the strange behavior of the defendant to pursue this case on. They spent a lot of taxpayer money on a murder trial that didn't fulfill the basic elements for murder. I suppose if they want to create a new law or crime for "Suspicious Circumstantial Death", then they might have had a conviction. The prosecution was wrong to bank on circumstances and emotion.
The other thing that is disgusting in this case is the sideline "quarterbacking" by the media and the likes of Nancy Grace and other prominent legal analysts watching over this case. They did nothing more than to chum the waters with more emotional speculation that only help lead the public in believing that it was legal to find her guilty of murder when cause of death was never determined. Any lawyer should live by the golden rules of our constitution and that in order for our justice system to work correctly, that they must uphold it and play by the rules. I'd say 98% of the general public was seeking a guilty verdict to satisfy their own anger and disgust and had little regard or understanding for the law and it's protections. The media has the opportunity to educate and speak of the realities or it can feed their ratings and try to affect the outcome of the public's reaction to the verdict.
My final point of disgust is the reaction of a supposed civilized public. Death threats, lynching and other threats of "other forms of justice" only shows how difficult it is to find qualified and non-prejudicial jurors in highly emotional cases such as this. If for a single moment, anyone could place themselves in any situation where they find themselves accused of something that they did not do and were faced with a prosecution that can use every tactic under the sun; spend unlimited amounts of money to out play you and banks on the fact that they have the applied credibility over you the defendant; you might take a strong second look at how this justice system should be required to protect you, your family and your reputation from wrongful prosecution. It's all a matter of perspective that most people don't understand or refuse to examine because it doesn't directly affect them. It's just wrong to foster hate because you don't like the outcome and that you don't like that she didn't get what you feel she deserves. Based on the public's reaction, I believe that the public wanted to put her to death for the way she acted, not because the prosecution failed to prove she committed murder. I'm sorry folks, but this ain't about you and your feelings.
Let's be clear, there are no winners here. A beautiful child is dead and a family is torn and damaged forever. Something happened, mistakes were made and only Casey knows what really happened. I can be assured it wasn't murder because nothing presented proves it was. This was more a horrible accident due to someone's negligence, which is highly more probable. Had Casey reacted normally to an accidental death, well things would have been quit different except that a small innocent life still tragically ended. These jurors did do their job correctly and got this verdict right by the letter of the law and by their duties as jurors. This is the only good thing that came from this trial.
Comments
Post a Comment