Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Casey Anthony Mask
- Thread starter HeyyyyyJoe
- Start date
I'm afraid her and OJ lead the list in this country of people who got away with murder due to the US judicial sytem like it or not, right or wrong. That's just the way most people feel or at least the Joe and Jane Q Public that I and other's know.
Joe and Jane Q Public weren't in the courtroom, didn't hear the evidence presented and so have no basis on which to challenge the verdict.
The presumption of innocence that our, and many other, legal system is based on dates back at least a thousand years.
Like or not we make it hard to convict people because letting the guily go is better than imprisoning an innocent man - though that probably happens more often than anyone would care to admit.
A former acquaintence of mine was charged with a murder that made front page headlines here in New York about 35 years ago. The DA proceeded with the indictment despite the fact that the guy was drunk and asleep in his girlfriend's house at the time of the killing. The charges were eventually dropped but not after his parents spent $30,000 or so in legal fees and he spent more than a year in jail. The dropped charges never made the paper and when I knew him - 5 years after the fact - he was still living with the stigma.
I find it funny that people keep bringing this point up, practically every time a case like this is mentioned.
Here's the rub... we KNOW the public wasnt in the courtroom. We know that the public wasnt privvy to all the evidence. That has no bearing on the fact that MANY people believe (read: are of the opinion), rightfully so or not, that Casey Anthony and OJ are guilty.
Add to that...both cases have been decided based on the fact that not enough evidence was there to convict. In OJ's case, it was also because of some shady prosecuting. That's how the judicial system works. The court of public opinion, though, is an entity all to itself. And it is run by the whim of every flawed human being who has his or her own view. Like it or not...that's just the way it is sunshine
Well, that's the way it works. It's called "reasonable doubt", an underlying principle of criminal law, especially in the more serious crimes like murder. If there is the shred of a possibilty that the person is innocent, as the saying goes, "Better that a thousand guilty go free, than one innocent be convicted of a crime they did not commit." At least that's the concept. No matter how you personally may "believe" the person to be guilty, if the prosecution cannot absolutely prove their case, then the jury MUST find them "not guilty". One's personal opinion is irrelevant to the law.
I know this, which is why I said "according to the law she is not guilty".
My point is pretty much what macaroni tony posted.
Brother!
You should just keep that on your clipboard and use it as most of your posts from now on
I think it's silly, and I'd never buy one, much less spend nearly $1m on it, but to each his own.
That said, I'm sure there are WAY worse things people have dressed up as for Halloween before or whatever. People need to stop getting up in arms and offended by everything nowadays.
That said, I'm sure there are WAY worse things people have dressed up as for Halloween before or whatever. People need to stop getting up in arms and offended by everything nowadays.
Brother!
You should just keep that on your clipboard and use it as most of your posts from now on
I'm telling ya!
I feel like I'm stuck in a perpetual state of deja vous....
Unfortunately, its not easy to sway public opinion, unless youre a good politician, or in marketing.
But out of curiosity - why? When we see these media spectacles, it's very hard to not form an opinion. That, plus we have all heard of innocent folks being locked up and guilty folks walking.... it happens, so what makes it so wrong to question a verdict?
Sincere question, no sarcasm or snarkiness intended.
Casey Anthony was found guilty by public opinion before her trial even started. That's just flat out shameful behavior by the media.
I agree, and I also find that shameful. That's not really what I'm talking about though - I'm referring to the case itself, what facts have been presented, what questions have been answered, what's been left unanswered.. I would really like to know more to get a really good grasp on this but we probably never will. Based on what I do know and have read, I think she's guilty. It's my opinion, as I stated before, I have no evidence, no smoking gun, just an opinion and a gut feeling based on what I've learned following this. After hearing a juror say something that led me to believe that they were not all 100% in lockstep and convinced of her innocence, it just makes me question the verdict even more.
Lord knows, I could be wrong, I just don't think so at the moment.
I beg to differ.
When we see these media spectacles, it's very hard not to form the opinion said media spectacle is urging us to form.
"If I want your opinion...I'll give it to ya."
If we refuse to rise to the bait a media spectacle is exactly that, a lurid spectacle and not a factual presentation.
Such foolishness came with the morphing of traditional journalism into the news entertainment industry.
When the goal is advertising sales and not reporting facts, what more can we expect but tawdry sensationalism?
You're not really differing with me
I agree. I should have probably stated "it's hard to not notice and form an opinion EITHER way, because you're bombarded by it constantly."I'm always railing on TB on how I can't stand what the media has become.
