The Casey Anthony Verdict

I haven't blogged in a while but I thought this was would be a good time to get back in the swing of things.

Regarding the Casey Anthony verdict:

I tried to warn people who were getting all wrapped up in the trial and the guilty verdict they were sure was going to follow! I think the media, the prosecution and many of my friends and family got swept up in the emotional aspect of Caylee Anthony's death and that's understandable.

For better or worse our criminal justice system is based on evidence and the presentation of that evidence needs to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the person charged with the crime committed it. In civil cases the standard is lower (a "preponderance of the evidence").

The problem (as this rising 2L sees it) is that the state was never able to offer any concrete proof, or smoking gun. The state based its case on highly circumstantial evidence, the erratic behavior and mountain of lies of Casey Anthony and they thought that was going to be enough. It wasn't.

We had a formal poll in my Florida Practice class and I would say 85% of people thought she was going to be convicted of Murder or Manslaughter. I was one of the three people that said not guilty. Of friends (non-law school) and family that I talked to about the case everyone of them thought she was going to be convicted. I tried to explain to them what "beyond a reasonable doubt" meant. Thinking that someone committed a crime is different than being able to prove it. I almost wish the State had not brought charges. If they had looked at the evidence and been absent of political and social pressures (I'm advocating that they operate in a vacuum which is not possible) they would have known their case was too weak. If she had been convicted the precedent that would have been struck would have been dangerous.

In our modern culture of gut reactions and Twitter it's easy to make a snap decision about something or someone... In fact our culture oftentimes demands it. The 12 jurors on this case were presented with all the evidence from both sides and came to the decision that the State had not proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all that matters. In regards to the outcome of the case, it doesn't matter if I think Casey killed her daughter and it doesn't matter if you think she did or did not.

The worst thing people can do is to contribute to the "She'll get what's coming to her" sentiment. It takes many guises: Some will say that "she'll get what she deserves in hell," or "Someone's going to get her after she gets out." One, it goes against everything the justice system stands for to say that someone should be tried for their crimes but if the result isn't pleasing (even if it's displeasing to the majority of people) that someone would be justified in killing Casey Anthony. Such actions attack the validity of our court system and do us ALL a disservice. Two, it's extremely troubling when people who present themselves as Christians think that it's their right to judge what they think God is going to do. For all you know Casey murdered her child, accepted Jesus Christ, and is working toward salvation... I'm not a Christian (any more) but I always hated when people tried to judge another's faith or substitute their judgement for God's. You can not know someone else's heart, anymore than you can know what God will do.

I guess the parting moral of the story is that criminal justice is served when two sides present their cases in a good faith manner and a jury decides the case. Whether or not justice is done is not dependent on your assessment of whether the jury "got it right" or not.