The Justice System Has Failed

[gypsychild]

The more hours that go by, the more anger I feel. Ten hours and 40 minutes. REALLY? SERIOUSLY? The equivalent of one work day plus 2 hours to decipher 6 weeks of information about a child's death? I can't say here how I feel about that group of 12.

We need new standards. Something more definitive for "reasonable doubt". And juror selection standards should be refined. I cannot fathom how these jurors heard the same testimony I did and didn't look at one single piece of evidence or have 1 question about the charges, or ask for any piece of testimony to review. Stupid.

Here I agree. In todays society with the advance technology and science we have access to, the "jury of your peers" is outdated and comprised of people who cannot comprehend the complicated information that is being provided to them. There definitely needs to be some sort of educational standard set for a jury for a trial of this magnitude.

 

[KR2tonenow]

I completely agree. I am totally horrified.

I will say I think the jury system is VERY much so flawed. Small sample size of the population and not much "variation" in educational status of the jurors creates an inherent bias and outcomes/verdicts that may seem shocking or unexpected.

BBM -I think Anthony sympathizer's. Period....

 

[KR2tonenow]

Yes! He could have ruled over their verdict and found her guilty. Apparently he didn't listen much during the trial either.

Honestly I was more appalled by the judge.:loser: He was sitting back in his chair like he was on break, and just accepted whatever the jury said. :waitasec:

 

[beachbumming]

This is such a miscarriage of justice and a stain on our justice system. I don't blame Jeff Ashton from retiring.

 

[jandkmom]

Words just can't express the anger and disappointment of this verdict. Poor Caylee did not receive justice. My God bless all that tried to bring justice.

 

[Bullwinkle]

From Double jeopardy in the United Kingdom:

"Under the 2003 Act, retrials are now allowed if there is "new" and "compelling" evidence for certain serious crimes, including murder, manslaughter, kidnapping, rape, armed robbery, and serious drug crimes. All such retrials must be approved by the Director of Public Prosecutions, and the Court of Appeal must agree to quash the original acquittal."

"On 13 December 2010, Mark Weston became the first person to be convicted of murder after previously being found not guilty of the same offence, that of the murder of Vikki Thompson at Ascott-under-Wychwood on 12 August 1995. Weston's first trial was in 1996, when the jury found him not guilty. Following the discovery of compelling new evidence in 2009 – Thompson's blood on Weston's boots – Weston was arrested in 2009 and tried for a second time in December 2010, when he was found guilty of Thompson's murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment to serve a minimum of 13 years."

 

[kjpaw]

The justice system did not fail. The evidence wasn't convincing to the jury. If you want freedom this is a possible consequence.

Well, it's easy to fall back on Blackstone's formulation (10 guilty go free rather than one innocent be found guilty) to address this case. That is the way our justice system works for better or for worse, but may I offer that the night one of the guilty may have walked free is not a good time to offer that principal. That principal, in my opinion, is built for the innocent man who is not convicted and was not intended to be celebrated when a guilty person is not convicted because of the protection the system offers. If you believe ICA is unfairly accussed then and only then can I understand you bringing out this principal. I will do my best to respect the juries verdict, but it is actually a sad day when so much as one of the 10 go free...even if it is to protect the one innocent.

This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice. ~Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

 

[GreenEyedGirl]

Personally, I think that any death penalty case should have a jury of nothing but judges. Perhaps all 50 states should have one judge step forward and 12 of them chosen by the defense and prosecution. This way, every jury understands what is expected of them. I'm just thinking out loud, what do I know?

 

[Hallslm]

It was the jurors who brought injustice to Caylee!! They were dumb and never listened to a bit of the states case! This is a travesty!

 

[yolorado]

What justice system? As far as I'm concerned, I no longer believe we have a justice system. There's no justice or truth in this verdict. A system that spawned it is not any good at all.

 

[Cross Creek]

You know what's so crazy? Misty Croslin got 25 years for some prescription drugs and she is suspected in Hayleigh Cummings disappearance. And yet Casey's the last one seen with Caylee and the overwhelming evidence against her walks free.

 

[Janeylynn]

my thoughts aren't going to settle well with many but I'm going to give them ..... watching the trial tapes and talking with people that ONLY watched the trial I don't think the justice system has failed. What failed was the case against CA. They did not prove she was guilty of murder. In my heart I know she was, but as the jurors were directed, feelings are not part of the law.

I'm sure the jurors all agreed she is a liar and worked somewhat hard in covering her tracks, but they (the jurors) weren't asked to vote on her personality. They needed to take all the evidence given to them and make a decision based on the law. They probably felt, like most of us do, that she did committ murder.... but feelings can't be part of the verdict. All of them could write books and make a LOT of money but they chose to not talk to the media and release their names. That tells me they knew she was guilty but the evidence wasn't there.

It is a sad day, and CA will have to leave the state of Florida, change her name and never be able to contact her family again after all those lies.... but in my opinion the jurors did what they could with the evidence presented to them.

 

[TxLady2]

Though we all know she is guilty as heck, our criminal justice system is based on PROVING you're guilty as heck. This is a good thing for us - bad that occasionally one of these murdering psycho's gets off the hook. The system did not fail, the oneness of this case, the burden of proof, lay with the prosecution and they left too many holes for the defense to walk through and create reasonable doubt. The system did exactly what is was supposed to do -- release the defendant if the state can't prove its case.
I hate it too. I was hoping for a different verdict

You are exactly right. It's not what you KNOW, but what you can PROVE. They did not prove that Casey killed Caylee.
And truth be known, I bet there are families out there tonight that have someone in prison who was convicted of a crime they did not commit. And I bet they are cursing our justice system just as loudly.

 

[JimEverett]

Justice was served.
Justice is the process, not a result.
Each side had their say, and a jury both sides agreed to (under the rules) decided that the state did not meet their burden of proof.
Not perfect, but I will take it over any other system I am aware.

 

[bookworm474]

It was the jurors who brought injustice to Caylee!! They were dumb and never listened to a bit of the states case! This is a travesty!

They confused having a reason for doubt and reasonable doubt.

They WERE NOT REASONABLE.

Juries will have to get smarter in the future.

Casey's pathology needs to be exposed. Maybe she will do that her self and get more enablers who want to make money, or fame.

 

[theBritster]

I don't understand how KC can be found not guilty because the State didn't prove things like cause of death or motive (which is what that alternate juror stated), and yet Scott Peterson was found guilty with basically the same type of circumstantial evidence. Shouldn't the jurors all follow the same guidelines so that it's not so inconsistent? jmo

Also, I didn't follow the SP trial that thouroughly so I apologize in advance if I'm wrong.

 

[tlcya]

these people listened to 90 some witnesses, they saw hundreds of pieces of evidence, and you mean to tell me they were done deliberating on all that information, from both sides, in what was the equivalent of ONE FULL DAY????

I am ashamed for those jurors. This system failed. There is no other conclusion I can reach. I could have swallowed this verdict alot easier had they ACTUALLY deliberated as they were charged to do. You will never convince me they gave this case the attention and diligence that it required with ONE DAY's worth of deliberating.

 

[Etiana]

I would like to stick up for Judge Perry. I think he is an amazing, honourable, fair, knowledgable, no nonsense man. He's familiar with death penalty cases and doesn't hesitate to follow through with that sentence. I think he did everything he could to reign in Mr. Baez and more than once he gave him the smack down. I felt like he gave LDB and JA ample support, I know he shouldn't side one way or another but I felt like he was partial to the State. If there was any chance of ICA getting a guilty verdict, he was the man for the job. Sadly the jury came to a vastly different conclusion than the rest of us

 

[RR0004]

I grew up loving the law...but see now how flawed it is. I'm so disillusioned...it appears it's as good as the jury you get. Sorry...this jury did not take the time to examine the evidence in the room. IMHO they basically went in, designated a foreperson, and "chatted" about the case. Today they made sure the paper work was filled out correctly.That's serious deliberation?
There's very little in life that goes "unchanged" and simply because it's the only system that we have does not mean that it shouldn't be improved. JMHO

 

[Shelby1]

We have the greatest legal system in the world.



I do not agree with the verdict, but I agree that the jury made the right decision based on the information they had.

Plain and simple.

I'm going to put a few quotes from someone that I'm sure you respect that agree with my statement.

websleuths Tricia Griffith



Everyone please listen. This is the only verdict they could come up with. Step back and look. EVERYONE LIED. Who do they believe?

8 hours ago


websleuths Tricia Griffith



jury had to find her not guilty. they.could not figure out who was telling the truth

8 hours ago


websleuths Tricia Griffith



I don't agree. She is definately GUILTY. But based on the case the way it was presented they had to find her not guilty

8 hours ago