The fury over the verdict in Casey Anthony’s murder trial is certainly understandable.  Anthony’s conduct was not merely suspect but criminal.  She lied to the police, as she lied to every one else.  Worse still, she left her child to rot for over a month while she kept the death a secret.

The prosecution tried to go beyond these facts.  They tried to depict Casey Anthony as a party girl, which may be true, but then tried to convince the jury that the defendant had murdered her child so that she could go unimpeded in her life as a party girl.  This bill of goods the jury did not buy.

At trial, the prosecution showed the jury a picture of the corpse’s head with duct tape on it.  The prosecution then superimposed over that picture a photo of the living child with her smiling mother.  By introducing the superimposed photos, the prosecution sought to prejudice the jury against Anthony.  But none of this constituted evidence.

The prosecution did not prove its case.  It did not prove that the child was murdered, or even how the child died.  The coroner opined that the death was a murder, but the coroner merely rushed to conclusions without the necessary underlying facts.  For no scientific evidence was introduced.

The outcome of this case leaves us without closure.  The matter of this child’s death and possible murder is left unresolved.  But in light of the evidence presented, the jury’s verdict was appropriate.


About jalesy55

Charles Lupia is a playwright, freelance writer and lawyer. His blogs cover a range of topics, from politics to entertainment.
This entry was posted in law and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to THE ANTHONY JURY

  1. James Graham says:

    I agree totally and Iam NOT a defence lawyer … The fact that she is a lier and is prone to being a bad mother and party girl does NOT make her a murderer.. I am also Tired of hearing the naysayers slandering the names of her attorneys for doing their jobs,and in a very precise way.
    I would like to know if any of these same folks were in the same spot if they would change their minds about the methods that Jose Baez and company used to defend their client–remember in this GREAT COUNTRY –the presumption is INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT——
    I REST MY CASE……….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s