Caylee's Civil Rights

[AnaTeresa]

well, technically....all of them?

re: Civil Rights

A lot of these rights are protections for citizens from the government. An individual person generally cannot violate another person's civil rights. Take freedom of speech, for example. This means that, within reason, you are allowed to say what you will. Another person cannot really restrict that. If they hit you to shut you up - that's assault, not a restraint on speech. The restraint would be if there was a city ordinance that said you couldn't talk about X topic.

Generally, civil rights are the idea of equality before the law.

Now, more broadly - as far as the basic human rights that all people have, then yes, an argument could be made that Casey violated those rights. However, we don't have laws based upon that, as those concepts are the backbone of different laws that we make, such as murder statutes, robbery, etc. Also, a lot of the punishment of crime is left to the states because of the way our civil rights were set up. They believed that the people were more likely to have justice served by more local-based governments.

I understand that people are frustrated with the ruling, but a civil rights violation is not likely to go anywhere. Other things, like a civil trial, or finding other criminal violations, would probably have more luck.

 

[GiantPickle]

I don't mean any offense to all the posters at WS, but I think it's wrong for ANYONE to presume to speak for Caylee no matter who they are. I see it here all the time though. We really have no idea whether she would have wanted what we wanted in this case. I wanted the DP because Casey deserves it, not because "Caylee would have wanted it." :twocents:

I don't think I have read a single WS'er or even a single member of the SA who said "Caylee wants Mommy punished" or anything to that extent. Everyone says Caylee deserves justice - it was up to the jury to decide what that justice is.

No matter what you believe about how Caylee passed on, the one undeniable fact is that Mother of the Year didn't think enough of that baby to give her body the respect she most certainly deserved. No matter who dumped the baby in the woods - Casey knew she wasn't going to the morgue when she left the backyard.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

It occurs to me that if this were a mob boss/al capone/drug lord type, they would not stop until they found something to put the person away, and everyone would be cheering for that. However in this case - with a child murder - it seems as if there is little or no motivation to keep bringing charges. I wonder why that is?

 

[AnaTeresa]

I think if it were a mob boss or a drug lord, they would have committed significantly more criminal actions that could be successfully investigated, and generally there's a greater motivation because those persons pose a higher risk to the population at large.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I think if it were a mob boss or a drug lord, they would have committed significantly more criminal actions that could be successfully investigated, and generally there's a greater motivation because those persons pose a higher risk to the population at large.

Not sure they target children though. I do think ICA would. moo

 

[AnaTeresa]

Not sure they target children though. I do think ICA would. moo

Children are often the victims of mob/gang violence, even if they are not the "targets." Furthermore, there's no proof that Casey is some sort of serial murderer. Ultimately it comes down to social cost/benefit.

 

[Kat]

Casey Anthony Speaks With FBI Agent Nick Savage Videos ...
www.truveo.com/Casey-Anthony-speaks-with-FBI-Agent-Nick-Savage/id/3218501345

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/?watchId=cb3f10a3-b17d-4024-b705-ebb21a956860

Thank you BB!

FWIW, IMHO if the FBI doesn't go after her for lying to them---this young lady won't be able to keep her nose clean. In the words of her own brother she's a "con artist". A leopard can't change it's spots. She's going to get caught just like OJ did because of her ego IMHO. She is probably thinking she's invincible right about now. I am crossing my fingers and toes that the FBI does persue charges. If not though it won't be long before she tries to scam someone. JMHO

 

[luvmygarden]

Casey Anthony Speaks With FBI Agent Nick Savage Videos ...
www.truveo.com/Casey-Anthony-speaks-with-FBI-Agent-Nick-Savage/id/3218501345


http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/?watchId=cb3f10a3-b17d-4024-b705-ebb21a956860

And ICA bs continues. She even gets her attorney down there for nothing. She never intends to discuss and thing with Nick Savage she just lies and said no one ever contacted her, then says she should have contacted them but....
she didn't.
This is the kinda crazy we will be listening to in interviews if she ever does any. Now that the trial is over does she need an attorney present to go on her
celebrity tours? She is going to thumb her nose at society and dig herself in a deeper hole. I wonder who she will bring down with her in all her studded glory.

 

[KateNY]

The Feds have Crimes Against Children division, which would cover the initial purported 'kidnapping' They have a rapid response team to get them involved immediately. ( why Nick Savage was involved so soon)

Plus IIRC they were involved in following up on out-of-state tips, etc.
( ie that sighting at the airport..Atlanta? was it)

Besides the issue of lying to a Federal agent, wonder if they can sue for reimbursement of their investigative costs...chasing all those tips down.

Hope there is something, anything, that can stick a wrench in that in that Bella Vita

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/vc_majorthefts/cac

 

[Bathbuddys]

I saw this and am wondering if anyone else has seen it or knows if this is true....

Sheila
LEVI PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS>>>>Double Jeopardy does not apply if they file federal charges against her for violating the civil rights of her child. She can receive a life sentence if convicted. Anyone who waits a month to report their child missing has violated their civil rights!! Everyone needs to contact the feds, state atty and atty general in FL and get them to prosecute the crap out of her that way!!!! GET ON IT PEOPLE!!

https://www.facebook.com/levi.page?sk=wall

Hi,
Is there a petition we can sign and usually when you pass around the petition we need to know the law or subject defined so we know what we are supporting. Please advise.

 

[krkrjx]

I apologize in advance if my question has been asked and answered. I just can't keep up with the threads. I know Casey can't be tried for Caylee's death again due to double jeopardy. Can the feds put her on trail for violating Caylee's civil rights? I know that some old murders where there was an acquittal, years later the feds took the defendants to court for violating the civil rights of their victims and got convictions.

Caylee as victim had no civil rights. Those are reserved for the perp.

(Please know that I'm not snarking at you...I'm just blowing off steam again. I am angry that a baby killer is free mostly due to her having substantially more rights than her victim, by law.)

 

[pearl]

Caylee as victim had no civil rights. Those are reserved for the perp.

(Please know that I'm not snarking at you...I'm just blowing off steam again. I am angry that a baby killer is free mostly due to her having substantially more rights than her victim, by law.)

All US citizens have the same civil rights guaranteed to us by the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. Her rights as a US citizen were violated when she was killed.

 

[krkrjx]

All US citizens have the same civil rights guaranteed to us by the first ten amendments to the US Constitution. Her rights as a US citizen were violated when she was killed.

I understand how the US Constitution reads. But how it actually works is what I have questioned for a long time. The reality is, while all citizens have the same civil rights in normal day to day life...when a person is murdered their killer is allowed a much louder voice. The killer has a defense attorney who can, by law, imply things at trial that they are not required to prove. The prosecutors (who are essentially the voice of the victim) must back up everything they say in court.

The killer has the right to appeal a verdict that is not in their favor. The prosecutor (again, as advocate for the victim) has no right to appeal.

It would be wonderful if all citizens really did have equal rights. But I see too many instances where the scales of justice are lopsided and it is always in favor of the perpetrator.

 

[beach]

Thread topic:

Caylee's Civil Rights

I can feel us starting to veer fastly. Let's be careful not to derail and get way off track here.

At this point I haven't removed any posts but I will have to if it doesn't stay on topic. I know it has been a while since we've posted on a lot of topical threads - just remember, we're not on the Sidebar here.

:tyou:

 

[beach]

Update:

Okay, I had to move the posts. If you are missing one, I have moved them to the Sidebar. I will probably move them again when I can find a better topical thread where they belong.

 

[Just Jayla]

re: Civil Rights

A lot of these rights are protections for citizens from the government. An individual person generally cannot violate another person's civil rights. Take freedom of speech, for example. This means that, within reason, you are allowed to say what you will. Another person cannot really restrict that. If they hit you to shut you up - that's assault, not a restraint on speech. The restraint would be if there was a city ordinance that said you couldn't talk about X topic.

Generally, civil rights are the idea of equality before the law.

Now, more broadly - as far as the basic human rights that all people have, then yes, an argument could be made that Casey violated those rights. However, we don't have laws based upon that, as those concepts are the backbone of different laws that we make, such as murder statutes, robbery, etc. Also, a lot of the punishment of crime is left to the states because of the way our civil rights were set up. They believed that the people were more likely to have justice served by more local-based governments.

I understand that people are frustrated with the ruling, but a civil rights violation is not likely to go anywhere. Other things, like a civil trial, or finding other criminal violations, would probably have more luck.

I would tend to agree with the exception of natural rights, which trump all unless they are used to infringe upon another's natural rights.

Caylee had a natural, unalienable right to life.