Mitigating Factor: Casey's Parents

[Gypsy Road]

I'm on the fence whether or not Casey's parents or how they raised her will affect things during the penalty phase (if there is one - which I think there will be). But I'm leaning towards - the Anthony's and their behavior won't matter. Casey KNEW right from wrong when she killed Caylee. I think that can be proven by looking at her actions (not reporting, covering up the crime, cleaning up the trunk, disposing of the body, and all the other crap she did yadda yadda yadda). JMO! She may be a psychopath, but whatever mental defect/disorder she has - does not change the fact that she knew killing Caylee was wrong.

[The World According]

Originally Posted by BellaBlue

I don't mean to be misunderstood...I don't attempt to make excuses for Casey Anthony or my own daughter....or anyone else for that matter. there are just different things that make up reasons for everything that happens in life. I guess. I don't begin to understand any of them. My heart breaks for how my own daughter's life has turned out...yet I am so thankful...it has not turned out as Casey Anthony's life has turned out. No matter what anyone tells me I still can not explain how a mother can cause her own child's death. But I do accept that there are things in life I can not explain. There are things in life that are just evil...I get that...but there are also things in life that are of mental problems...that I get too....It is not an excuse...but a cause I think.... Please forgive me for being I guess what you would call as simple minded....I come here for all the great minds that come together to find answers to all these impossible questions...

Thank you for posting your deeply personal story. It helps us that cannot imagine, get a glimpse behind the closed door. I think you are a brave and strong lady. People read here from all over the world. You may never know the light your candor shines on someone's life. Again, we welcome you here.

Like you, there may be parents sitting on the jury thinking to themselves, if not for the grace of God, there would be my daughter or son. They may see little bits of mom and pop or even Casey in their own family and we cannot discount the empathy that may bring. In the end I think the pictures of Caylee and the idea of what might have been, a full life...gone too soon will bring a very harsh punishment for Casey.

[BeanE]

Andrea Lyon will be out to spare KC's life, not CA and GA's reputation or feelings. She's a tiger who wants to win at any cost.

Going through the allowed and disallowed mitigating factors, Andrea has extremely little she will be permitted to work with. I believe, therefore, she will aggressively attack the parenting of CA and GA, saying CA was emotionally abusive, and GA emotionally neglectful, and that this resulted in mental/emotional issues in KC that led to KC killing Caylee.

I believe this is why she specifically chose the mitigation specialist she did. Mitigation specialists come from a wide variety of backgrounds. Barrett's background is social work. I've been reading up on what mitigation specialists do, based on their specific backgrounds. My money is on Barrett developing a history of emotional abuse leading to mental/emotional issues (not insanity - insanity's not needed for mitigation).

I think the jury will accept and understand the explanations developed and presented. People want explanations, people want to know why. I don't know if the defense will be able to take the majority of the jury that one step further necessary where they will see this explanation as mitigating to the extent that they feel KC's life should be spared. I think they could lead some jurors to it, but I just know if they can lead a majority to it.

Please note, before jumping on me, that when I say accept this explanation of why KC killed Caylee, I do not mean that the jury will see it in any way as an excuse for killing Caylee. There is no excuse for KC killing Caylee, and I am confident the jury will know that.

In no way do I think any juror will think it was 'okay' for KC to kill Caylee, or that it was in any way CA or GA's fault that KC killed Caylee. Just simply what I said, that they could understand and accept this explanation of how KC came to kill Caylee.

Okay, you can jump on me now. :-)

[The World According]

No jumping on Bean E. That is rule 57! LOL!


I agree with you. After studying a bit recently about the visitors to Casey and what they specialize in, and listening to Professor Lyons seminars..... it is going to be brutal for mom and pop.

I hope that Brad has seen what we have all seen and read the writing on the wall and prepares them accordingly that she is going to be downright cruel to them. Perhaps some of the defense investigators questioning of them as of late has given them hints to what is to come and thus the are somber and uncharacteristically private right now.

Cindy, if you are reading here, brace yourself. The penalty phase is going to make brother Rick's letter look charming by comparison. Sure Andrea will apologize to them , profusely and in advance, but it is going to be brutal.

Brother Rick to Cindy in an e mail:
"Email from Rick to Cindy
August 21 2008 at 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: won’t do Greta

Cindy, George did wrestle his dad and put him thru the window. That is why George had to start his own business. Don’t lie to me about it. Mom filled me in on Casey so don’t lie to me about her. She STOLE dads check and bought a stupid phone at AT&T so don’t lie to me about the $354!!!! Mom has the god damn statement! I know I re verified with mom today!!! The sitter IS the whole case! Are you that dumb??? The house could be JOE BLOWS for Christ’s sake. are you that naive??? You really are that stupid. I can’t believe it. My sister is a moron. You need help. You are delirious! I WAS trying to help you. Your grand daughter is dead!! there I said it. Casey has killed her someway either by accident or on purpose. Casey is a narcissist Read up on it. You and George have been walking through life with blinders on. Casey made you both look like fools at my wedding. Did you forget I told you she was pregnant!!! You are a nurse for Christ’s sake. You are a fool. Casey has buffaloed you and George for a long time. I also know about George and the internet and he paid most of it back from his workers comp check. Casey ran up the tab. Mom knows and told me you idiot. You think what you d is secret? You are living a fantasy!! Wake the hell up sister!! George’s debt was paid over time in Ohio. I remember the settlement and that was from 1989. You think I am as dumb as you? You are not only in denial but are missing your brain. The article of clothing of the sitters was verified by who? Casey? No one ever saw the sitter so how could they have proven to be hers. What drugs are you on. You are so stupid I can’t take it. You should make the Guinness book of world records for being gullible. The only thing that God knows is Casey is a liar and you are stupid. Casey knows where Caylee is and when all the evidence is in she will get the death penalty for murder. You have to be a moron for destroying evidence with washing pants that smell like a dead body. If they were in the car and the smell was in the trunk how could the pants stink? Think use that think on your shoulders. If the cops didn’t think you were stupid they would bring charges against you and George for destroying evidence. I disowned Nate for lying for Pam and I can disown you for your ignorance. I see how Casey is so screwed up between you and George as role models. Saying Casey will be mother of the year I nearly tossed my groceries. She will be mutha of the year. Those people in prison will have a field day with her. You better tell her to confess and ask for solitary. It is her only hope. Do you think I care anymore after you attacked me. You are in another universe. You and George ARE on your own. Good luck with that.
Oh by the way, EVERYONE ON GRETA THINKS CAYLEE IS DEAD INCLUDING GRETA! DO YOU EVER WATCH HER SHOW? WHAT A MORON YOU ARE!!! MENTAL HOSPITAL HERE YOU COME!!!"

[Searchfortruth]

Originally Posted by The World According

No jumping on Bean E. That is rule 57! LOL!


I agree with you. After studying a bit recently about the visitors to Casey and what they specialize in, and listening to Professor Lyons seminars..... it is going to be brutal for mom and pop.

I hope that Brad has seen what we have all seen and read the writing on the wall and prepares them accordingly that she is going to be downright cruel to them. Perhaps some of the defense investigators questioning of them as of late has given them hints to what is to come and thus the are somber and uncharacteristically private right now.

Cindy, if you are reading here, brace yourself. The penalty phase is going to make brother Rick's letter look charming by comparison. Sure Andrea will apologize to them , profusely and in advance, but it is going to be brutal.

Brother Rick to Cindy in an e mail:
"Email from Rick to Cindy
August 21 2008 at 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: won’t do Greta

Cindy, George did wrestle his dad and put him thru the window. That is why George had to start his own business. Don’t lie to me about it. Mom filled me in on Casey so don’t lie to me about her. She STOLE dads check and bought a stupid phone at AT&T so don’t lie to me about the $354!!!! Mom has the god damn statement! I know I re verified with mom today!!! The sitter IS the whole case! Are you that dumb??? The house could be JOE BLOWS for Christ’s sake. are you that naive??? You really are that stupid. I can’t believe it. My sister is a moron. You need help. You are delirious! I WAS trying to help you. Your grand daughter is dead!! there I said it. Casey has killed her someway either by accident or on purpose. Casey is a narcissist Read up on it. You and George have been walking through life with blinders on. Casey made you both look like fools at my wedding. Did you forget I told you she was pregnant!!! You are a nurse for Christ’s sake. You are a fool. Casey has buffaloed you and George for a long time. I also know about George and the internet and he paid most of it back from his workers comp check. Casey ran up the tab. Mom knows and told me you idiot. You think what you d is secret? You are living a fantasy!! Wake the hell up sister!! George’s debt was paid over time in Ohio. I remember the settlement and that was from 1989. You think I am as dumb as you? You are not only in denial but are missing your brain. The article of clothing of the sitters was verified by who? Casey? No one ever saw the sitter so how could they have proven to be hers. What drugs are you on. You are so stupid I can’t take it. You should make the Guinness book of world records for being gullible. The only thing that God knows is Casey is a liar and you are stupid. Casey knows where Caylee is and when all the evidence is in she will get the death penalty for murder. You have to be a moron for destroying evidence with washing pants that smell like a dead body. If they were in the car and the smell was in the trunk how could the pants stink? Think use that think on your shoulders. If the cops didn’t think you were stupid they would bring charges against you and George for destroying evidence. I disowned Nate for lying for Pam and I can disown you for your ignorance. I see how Casey is so screwed up between you and George as role models. Saying Casey will be mother of the year I nearly tossed my groceries. She will be mutha of the year. Those people in prison will have a field day with her. You better tell her to confess and ask for solitary. It is her only hope. Do you think I care anymore after you attacked me. You are in another universe. You and George ARE on your own. Good luck with that.
Oh by the way, EVERYONE ON GRETA THINKS CAYLEE IS DEAD INCLUDING GRETA! DO YOU EVER WATCH HER SHOW? WHAT A MORON YOU ARE!!! MENTAL HOSPITAL HERE YOU COME!!!"

Thanks so much for posting this e-mail from Rick, I had forgotten some of it and it does my heart good everytime I read it. My hats off to Rick and Shirley, bless them.

[CarrieK]

I, too, agree with JBean. Andrea Lyon will have the job of humanizing KC, presenting to the jury that KC is a human being with feelings and emotions, and that somehow her human needs of love, respect, and validation have not been met by her parents. It will not be argued as an excuse for her behavior, IMO, but will be put forth as a cause for KC's seeming lack of love and respect for her own daughter. I think Andrea Lyon will have to show that KC didn't learn how to love Caylee, and will place the blame for that directly on CA and GA. Lyon will try to invoke sympathy from the jurors by showing KC was a "victim" of her upbringing who never learned to love. While, personally, I don't think this argument has much weight, Lyon doesn't have a whole lot to work with.

I'm sure that some of the mitigation arguments will be placed on the fact that KC has no prior record as well. That's a standard mitigation argument when it applies.

It seems as though, given the evidence released thus far, one argument that could be raised during trial could be that there is no way to prove that KC purposely murdered her child. I'm thinking that, barring any new evidence to the contrary, since the ME was not able to provide a cause of death, that issue will be raised to suggest that KC did not murder Caylee, but that a tragic accident occurred. How much of that will make its way into reasonable doubt that an actual, purposeful, premeditated murder had taken place? I wonder if such an argument is able to be used during mitigation, even after a guilty verdict is found?

At any rate, if there is a conviction of murder in the 1st deg, Andrea Lyon has her work cut out for her in mitigation. A jury who ponders the evidence and finds KC guilty of the highest charge will most likely have already decided that the mitigating evidence pales in comparison to the evidence supporting KC's conviction. JMO.

[wenwe4]

If I were the Social Worker, Jeanene, I would be looking for patterns of behavior in KC's background that might indicate undiagnosed bipolar disorder. One way to argue a mitigating factor would be to show where KC was in a manic phase (which might be well supported by her constant texting at all hours). Her patterns established so far is to deny, deny, deny until the very last second that she is confronted and then admit and expect all will be forgotten and everyone should move on from here. (ie: the pregnancy, highschool graduation, employment, Caylee is missing). I would be looking at times in her school history where there might have been identified problems and GA & CA swept it under the rug. I would want to know if there are cyclical patterns of manic phases in her behaviors previously. I would be looking for learning disabilities, interaction with peers, what happened when she did get in trouble (ie: school or neighbors) in the past, any consequences for negative behaviors? Medical records, a history of head or brain trauma, domestic violence, issues of child abuse and/or neglect in KC'S childhood, etc.

[essies]

Originally Posted by wenwe4

If I were the Social Worker, Jeanene, I would be looking for patterns of behavior in KC's background that might indicate undiagnosed bipolar disorder. One way to argue a mitigating factor would be to show where KC was in a manic phase (which might be well supported by her constant texting at all hours). Her patterns established so far is to deny, deny, deny until the very last second that she is confronted and then admit and expect all will be forgotten and everyone should move on from here. (ie: the pregnancy, highschool graduation, employment, Caylee is missing). I would be looking at times in her school history where there might have been identified problems and GA & CA swept it under the rug. I would want to know if there are cyclical patterns of manic phases in her behaviors previously. I would be looking for learning disabilities, interaction with peers, what happened when she did get in trouble (ie: school or neighbors) in the past, any consequences for negative behaviors? Medical records, a history of head or brain trauma, domestic violence, issues of child abuse and/or neglect in KC'S childhood, etc.

Well, JBarrett is working very hard! On 11/14 (according to the logs) she visited with KC from 8:46 pm to 6:20 am 11/15!!
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0...Y2E1NDIy&hl=en

I think it shows that she knows she has got her work cut out for her! Here are her credentials-
Jeanene Barrett is the Mitigation Specialist for the CJCC. Jeanene joined the CJCC in March, 2008 after having worked within the child welfare field for over eleven years. She is also a Criminal Justice adjunct faculty member at Westwood College. Jeanene received her M.A. in Social Work from the University of Chicago School of Social Service Administration, M.S. degree in Human Services Administration from Spertus College, and a B.S. in Criminal Justice from Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_in...ty_seminar.asp
Too bad we don't know how much time she has logged with G&C!!

[elementary]

I'm really enjoying everyone's take on this.

Considering that the perp is a pathological liar and fantabulist, I can't imagine that the mitigation specialists are spending endless hours asking the perp about her experience of growing up in that family. Are they, indeed, buying everything she's selling? Or are they probing for something else that might help? If so, I can't imagine what that would be.
Or, are they coaching her in how to be and present as a victim?

[BeanE]

Originally Posted by essies

Well, JBarrett is working very hard! On 11/14 (according to the logs) she visited with KC from 8:46 pm to 6:20 am 11/15!!
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0...Y2E1NDIy&hl=en

I think it shows that she knows she has got her work cut out for her! Here are her credentials-
Jeanene Barrett is the Mitigation Specialist for the CJCC. Jeanene joined the CJCC in March, 2008 after having worked within the child welfare field for over eleven years. She is also a Criminal Justice adjunct faculty member at Westwood College. Jeanene received her M.A. in Social Work from the University of Chicago School of Social Service Administration, M.S. degree in Human Services Administration from Spertus College, and a B.S. in Criminal Justice from Southern Illinois University, Carbondale.
http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_in...ty_seminar.asp
Too bad we don't know how much time she has logged with G&C!!

We may need to Baker Act poor Jeanene before this is all over.

MOO

[JBean]

So it sounds like some of you think that she will admit to guilt in the sentencing phase to allow for certain mitigating factors?
I don't think she will do that, jmho of course.

[wenwe4]

Originally Posted by elementary

I'm really enjoying everyone's take on this.

Considering that the perp is a pathological liar and fantabulist, I can't imagine that the mitigation specialists are spending endless hours asking the perp about her experience of growing up in that family. Are they, indeed, buying everything she's selling? Or are they probing for something else that might help? If so, I can't imagine what that would be.
Or, are they coaching her in how to be and present as a victim?

It really is all about how the person presents themselves. For instance, if I were interviewing a client and they told me they had bugs crawling out of their skin, that would give me information about how they are thinking. This is valuable irregardless of whether the are telling the truth, it is the truth they are going to present to you (and you deal with what is presented to you). It isn't all about their version of what is true, it is how they are functioning within their "truths". There could be value in mitigating factors for the defense, which they are legally bound to present to the court.

[BeanE]

Here are the mitigating factors I found that look to be pertinent to a defendant's parents/family:

6.8.9 OTHER STATUTORY MITIGATING FACTORS

(1) Family background

Generally, family background problems can be considered as a mitigating circumstance.604 Usually this mitigating circumstance becomes an issue worthy of significant weight when the defendant has a “troubled background with a family history of instability, poverty or abuse.”605 While it is unclear how much weight a “good family background” should be given, it is error to completely reject this mitigator as worthy of no weight.606

(5) Mental problems that do not qualify under other statutory mitigating circumstances

This mitigating circumstance covers a variety of different situations. It has been applied in a case where a psychologist referred to the defendant as an “emotional cripple” who was brought up in a negative family setting.617 It applies in a case involving posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of extended sexual abuse by the defendant’s stepfather.618 (Both are one word) Usually, the testimony or other evidence establishing this mitigating circumstance does not rise to the level of "extreme" mental or emotional disturbance, or "substantial" incapacity. It is something less than “extreme” or “substantial.” However, the evidence must still be considered by the jury and the judge as a mitigating circumstance. The trial judge must allow the evidence to be presented, and it must be considered in the sentencing order.619 In Stewart v. State,620 the Court stated that it was not error for the judge to find the statutory mental mitigators did not exist, but it was error for the judge not to find the same evidence as nonstatutory mitigation. Depending upon the facts, it would generally be appropriate to give less weight to mental problems that do not rise to the level of “extreme” or “substantial.”

(6) Abuse of defendant by parents (physical, mental, or sexual)

It is well established that a disadvantaged childhood, abusive parents, and lack of education and training, are mitigating in nature. Although in some cases family background and personal history may be given little weight, such evidence must be considered by the Court and discussed in the sentencing order. Mitigating evidence is not limited to the facts surrounding the crime but can be anything in the life of a defendant that might militate against the appropriateness of the death penalty for that defendant.621 The nonstatutory mitigator of defendant's abusive childhood should
not be rejected, even if the defendant demonstrated good behavior in adult life.622


6.9.7 THE DEFENDANT HAS THE SUPPORT OF FRIENDS AND FAMILY

Evidence of positive “family relationships and the support (the defendant) provided his family are admissible as nonstatutory mitigation.”681 It is error not to consider this mitigation, but the error may be harmless if these factors are otherwise considered.682 The reverse, negative family relations such as abandonment as a child, are not always mitigating.683

[elementary]

Originally Posted by wenwe4

It really is all about how the person presents themselves. For instance, if I were interviewing a client and they told me they had bugs crawling out of their skin, that would give me information about how they are thinking. This is valuable irregardless of whether the are telling the truth, it is the truth they are going to present to you (and you deal with what is presented to you). It isn't all about their version of what is true, it is how they are functioning within their "truths". There could be value in mitigating factors for the defense, which they are legally bound to present to the court.

Thanks! "How they are thinking" makes so much more sense. But isn't this the purview of psychiatrists? (Or does an MSW carry as much weight?)

For example, the above sounds like someone not quite right, in a psychotic sort of way. What about someone who does not present as delusional? What thought processes might mitigation specialists see?

[Jenny60123]

Originally Posted by JBean

So it sounds like some of you think that she will admit to guilt in the sentencing phase to allow for certain mitigating factors?
I don't think she will do that, jmho of course.

I agree. I don't see Casey ever saying she had a hand in this, no matter what. I just don't see it in her makeup.

[BeanE]

Originally Posted by Jenny60123

I agree. I don't see Casey ever saying she had a hand in this, no matter what. I just don't see it in her makeup.

Me either. I don't think she'll ever admit guilt. I don't think she'd ever allow her attorneys to indicate admission of guilt. I think mitigation will be presented as 'if' she did it, rather than 'that' she did it.

[wenwe4]

Originally Posted by elementary

Thanks! "How they are thinking" makes so much more sense. But isn't this the purview of psychiatrists? (Or does an MSW carry as much weight?)

For example, the above sounds like someone not quite right, in a psychotic sort of way. What about someone who does not present as delusional? What thought processes might mitigation specialists see?

A psychiatrist is a Doctor who specializes in medications for management of mental health issues

A psychologist is a Doctor who specializing in testing and diagnosis of mental health issues

An MSW is not a Doctor. However, in this instance, the MSW is also a mitigation specialist. Her job is to look at KC's entire life history and be able to present any factors to the court that might be considered "mitigating" in an effort to lessen the severity of the sentence. MSW's are often schooled in diagnosis and treatment (ie: therapy), as well as look at the whole person in their environment.

Wow, your question is loaded in asking what thought processes mitigation specialists might see. I would say they would probably see everything under the sun. I can't tell you what everyone else might be thinking. But I think I understand what you are trying to ask. Mitigating factors would also include good things about a person (ie: they are a good parent, they held down a steady job for 10 years, they are actively involved in a church or community group, etc).

[JBean]

Originally Posted by Jenny60123

I agree. I don't see Casey ever saying she had a hand in this, no matter what. I just don't see it in her makeup.

I agree. I don't think any of her mitigating factors will have to do with family issues or anything that "caused" her to do this because that would be an admission of guilt. Since they cannot say she is innocent during the sentencing phase, I still think they will just beg for leniency.
Remember she will have many( 8 or 9??) felony convictions by that time and that will hurt her a lot imo.

[JBean]

This is a ink to the brand new jury instructions including changes as of October and the background. there is some good reading in here.
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/d...9/sc05-960.pdf

[BeanE]

Originally Posted by elementary

Thanks! "How they are thinking" makes so much more sense. But isn't this the purview of psychiatrists? (Or does an MSW carry as much weight?)

For example, the above sounds like someone not quite right, in a psychotic sort of way. What about someone who does not present as delusional? What thought processes might mitigation specialists see?

The mitigation specialist with social work background makes referrals for any mental health related evaluations, tests, or treatment they deem necessary for their client.

Many counselors and therapists are MSWs. I think perhaps most are, but I'm too lazy to look it up. My knowledge is based only on having always seemed to have an inordinate number of friends who are psychiatrists, psychologists, and counselors of various kinds. lol.

[BeanE]

Something to consider:

There is no requirement that mitigating factors be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Florida's jury instruction provides if the jury is "reasonably convinced" of a mitigating circumstance, they may consider it as established. The United States Supreme Court addressed a claim that the defendant had to prove a mitigating circumstance by a preponderance of the evidence and found no constitutional infirmity to this Arizona requirement.542 Unfortunately, individual justices on the Supreme Court of Florida often refer to the burden of proof to prove mitigating circumstances as “greater weight of the evidence.”543 This is not the standard, unless being “reasonably convinced” is synonymous with “greater weight of the evidence.” The Court has used the terms interchangeably.544 However, it is safe to assume that being “reasonably convinced” is a lesser burden of proof than “greater weight of the evidence.” In one case, the Supreme Court stated the burden of proof to be met “when a reasonable quantum of competent, uncontroverted evidence of a mitigating circumstance is presented.”545

[Novice Seeker]

With all the information coming out about personal habits of some who lives under the same roof and George & Cindy's


1. confrontational behavior toward everyone
2. attempts to obstruct the investigation
3. Latest business controversy with their "foundation"
4. income from selling videos, pictures and other things which belonged to
Caylee
5. statements that change depending on who is asking the questions
6. being forced via court order to turn over documents the SA requested
over and over
7. dining at the Ritz eating crab puffs while strangers worked thru the night
for Caylee

[JBean]

Originally Posted by Novice Seeker

With all the information coming out about personal habits of some who lives under the same roof and George & Cindy's


1. confrontational behavior toward everyone
2. attempts to obstruct the investigation
3. Latest business controversy with their "foundation"
4. income from selling videos, pictures and other things which belonged to
Caylee
5. statements that change depending on who is asking the questions
6. being forced via court order to turn over documents the SA requested
over and over
7. dining at the Ritz eating crab puffs while strangers worked thru the night
for Caylee

So are you saying that since GA and CA eat crab puffs KC's life should be spared?

[TorisMom003]

I think that the defense is going to have to walk a very fine line with trying to blame any of this on Casey's upbringing. There are many, many people who had the same type of family life that Casey had that have gone on to live normal lives without committing acts of violence towards anyone. All it would take is for one juror to have a similar background (upbringing) as Casey for the rest of the jury to realize what a lame excuse this is. It does not matter if you were loved as a child or not, had a strict upbringing or lax one, had parents that covered for you or made you own up to your mistakes......none of that makes it acceptable to do the things that Casey has done. Casey knows right from wrong, Casey had normal friends that she behaved normally around. You can only blame the parents to a certain extent and that still does not excuse what a person has done and if they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law or not.

JMO

[wenwe4]

Other mitigating factors to spare the dp could be:

1) No previous history w/the law (prior to 7/08)
2) "Good Parent" as reported by many friends and relatives
3) No evidence of violent behaviors in the past
4) "Good ?" student (I am guessing since she was close to graduating)
5) "Employed for a period of time" - except she just didn't show back up to work
6) No previous CPS reports (until after Caylee missing) - again I am assuming
7) Had long term relationships (ie: friends & neighbors) in the community prior to 7/08.
8) Has support of friends and family (at least GA, CA, & LA)
9) Has positive attributes in which she could still be a contributing member of the prison society (ie: likes to clean house and cook for others)

ps: don't beat me up please - just offering ideas