I agree with the verdict.
Put those rotten vegetables down for a second and hear me out on this.
Do I like her character? No. Do I like what happened to her daughter? Absolutely not. Do I wish that "mothers" like her should be sentenced to having their ovaries removed with a spoon? Definitely.
But I also believe that no one should be convicted on such charges without solid concrete evidence, especially in felony cases and even more especially in capital cases.
I didn't watch the trial. I knew enough people who were to be reasonably sure that I was getting fairly accurate Cliff Notes. I was out for lunch this afternoon when the verdict came in and watched as the wave of outrage swept through the pub. I didn't know all the counts that the jury was sent to deliberate on, so I asked if Reckless Endangerment was among them. No one could tell me. Everyone was outraged that she didn't get Murder One and sent to Death Row.
I do believe in capital punishment, but I also believe that anyone sitting in cell awaiting execution should have been proven beyond all doubt that they belong there. Casey Anthony doesn't make that grade. Circumstantial evidence, even in a massive amount, does not equate to concrete proof. They could prove that she lied. They could not prove that she either intentionally or unintentionally killed her daughter.
Yes, she might party hard, do drugs, drink like a fish, act like a bimbo, and whatever else... and I'm glad that she couldn't be convicted for that. I'm glad because it means that the jury was taking the law seriously and not condemning someone based on circumstances and personal character. Hell, I personally don't know that many people who would be able to stand up against the Court of Public Opinion on their character if that was the determining factor in such cases.
Do I think she had some responsibility in her daughter's death? I do. Call it a gut feeling. But gut feeling isn't concrete evidence either.
Okay, now feel free to pelt me with rotten vegetables.
0 comments:
Post a Comment