- This topic has 19 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I will be shocked if she’s convicted of murder one. I am guessing the manslaughter charge might be the one. If this ends up in a hung jury or if she gets off I’ll scream.
this beautiful little child died (be it accident or murder 1) to comment on it – so all I can say is what Jesus said in KJV Matthew 18:6
"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
In my book if it were up to me, you harm a child, you are toast, no if’s and’s or buts…no lawyers on retainer, nothing, no hung jury, no second trial, – TOAST. Good thing I’m not in charge, eh?
murder in the first degree, that it was pre-meditated, and that she will be sentenced to death, and I truly believe in my heart that it will be the correct verdict and a justified sentence.
is the money she’s going to make from this. That is absolutely criminal and should be against the law.
and apparently varies from state to state:
A Son of Sam Law is any law designed to keep criminals from profiting from their crimes, often by selling their stories to publishers. Such laws often authorize the state to seize money earned from such a deal and use it to compensate the criminal’s victims. The term "Son of Sam" refers to the nickname of serial killer David Berkowitz, the subject of a notorious murder case in 1978
Remember how OJ wrote that book "If I Did It" – and there was such a big stink about it because he was "aquitted"? Good law as far as I’m concerned but the crux of it here is this damable woman wasn’t convicted of a crime (other than lies to a officer of the law) so now she can become a millionare three times or more over. – the _itch!
years back where that happened. It was the savings and loan crisis and the person(s) owning a particular savings and loan here in Maryland shut down the business, boarded up the building, and swindled people out of their money. After the trial they were found guilty and went to jail and he decided he was going to do interviews and write a book and even planned on a film; however, when told they would not see a dime of the money if they did, they decided to nix the idea.
No one should be allowed to profit from crime. Whether this mother was guilty or not, her actions throughout this tragedy speak for her; therefore, I hope she doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell to rake in any profit from the bloodsuckers out there willing to make a quick buck themselves by using the death of that innocent baby to their advantage.
if they are convicted. Since she was acquicted, she can exploit it all she wants. THAT’S the part where I said there ought to be a law against.
"common sense" law as I call them – that if you child is missing for a certain period of time (not sure what that time period is – you may have heard more details living there Bonbon about it than I do), that it will be a crime if you do not report them to the police, FBI and others – …like I said, I’m childless but if I did have a child that went missing for more than 30 seconds, 30 minutes I’d be on the phone to the police, FBI, private investigators, the neighbors, tv, radio and selling my soul to the devil to get my child back…I think most parents would do the normal things, but then we wouldn’t need another law out there.
I have often thought, to be a parent you should first have to take some classes, and get a license to be a parent. Why not? You have to have a license to drive, get married, and even catch a fish for goodness sakes, why not making a baby that you are completely responsible for in an 18 year time period. I know that’s going to PO most of all of you out there but because you are all great parents, yohave seen other people who shouldn’t be parents. You get people out there like Andrea Yates, and so many twits out there are just like this Casey clown that just ruin another generation (or kill it) just because they can produce an egg….
Maryland now has it on the agenda, and so have many other states across the country, as well it should be. Otherwise, what defends the rights of an innocent child depending solely on a parent to provide for their welfare? AAARRRRGGGGGHHHH …. I’m still so damn mad over this verdict, this jury, AND this judge for the way this all turned out.
From what I’ve heard so far, they took their job very seriously and stuck to the letter of the law. They said the prosecution did not prove their case "beyond a doubt." That being said, it was the only verdict they could legally return. Juror #3 said she was sick to her stomach by having to do so.
So, I guess if there’s anybody to blame or be mad at, it would be the prosecutors who failed to do their job. Such a shame, such a terrible, horrible shame.
if the prosecution had charged her with something lesser than murder one (and the other things under that), if she would have been found guilty. I think knowing that they were deciding a life or death case, along with the evidence or lack thereof to connect her to her child’s premeditated murder, they were more cautious in really sticking to every letter of the law. Maybe involuntary manslaughter or something that would potentially cause a longer sentence but not the death penalty? I’m not in a death penalty state but I’m sure it must have been difficult for those jurors to hear all that they did and look for the beyond a reasonable doubt proof and not be able to find it but feel that she was guilty of something. jmho
stick to their guns and instead of being "sheeple" would have voted guilty for a hung jury and to hell with the appropriate behavior. They could have tried the biotch again with a hung jury. The jury wanted a CSI ending with the evidence, after the little girl was left rotting in the woods for six months no wonder there wasn’t any. One can be convicted on circumstantial evidence. Did you also hear how the blank refused to see her own mother when her mother requested to see her?
second choice of manslaughter available to the jury. I thought they would choose that one. I knew she wouldn’t get a murder conviction.
I don’t know exactly what they heard or thought and I know I wouldn’t want to be judged the way there are being. She certainly didn’t present in the court room as a woman who would kill her own child but seeing other things on TV, I think it is very possible/likely. I would like to see Florida charge her for the costs of investigating the death which should take any profit she makes from her story away. To retry her would have cost the state of Florida taxpayers way too much (hung jury issue).
as part of the penalty for lying to the police and the costs involved in police investigations, etc., but that’s little consolation for me. She should have been charged with a much more severe crime, and time served should not have been given to her, iMO, since she admitted lying to the authorities and was found guilty on all 4 counts. You just wait and see the worms that will crawl out of the woodwork now that this trial is over. And several of these upstanding, law abiding jury members, who no one seems to want to fault, are now coming out indicating that they felt she was guilty all along, and some are now charging upwards of $50,000.00 for an interview. Nice.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.