A lot of people have been ranting and raving about Casey Anthony being found not guilty this morning on the charges of murder and child abuse. I'm no law student, but I wanted to give my thoughts on the subject.
Is Casey Anthony a psycho? Yes. Is she a compulsive liar? Yes. Did she kill her daughter? Maybe.
"Maybe" is the best we can do at this point. Is that enough to end a suspect's life with the death penalty? Not. At. All.
I admire the jury assigned to this case and how they have represented the American justice system. Despite the freakshow, despite the circus of oblivious observers literally racing and pushing to get tickets to the courtroom each day, despite the defendant's overt selfishness and obvious instability, they stuck to the rules of our justice system:
You are innocent until proven guilty.
Guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
There was no injustice today. Circumstantial evidence, no matter how much of it there is, is not substantial. You can make inferences and draw logical inclusions with it, but it is NEVER enough to justify taking a human being's life, even if that person is psycho trash. The prosecution never produced solid evidence (witnesses, fingerprints, DNA) and the defense was able to exhibit reasonable doubt.
Like it or not, this is justice. As controversial as this may seem, it is better to let a criminal go free than it is to end the life an innocent person. Free criminals at least will have a chance at redemption. Death is final. Yes, the criminal may commit more crimes, but if no substantial evidence is brought forth, the jury was correct, even obligated, to let the person go.
The main concern I have with the verdict is that, unless they discover evidence was tampered, Casey will now be protected by double jeopardy. For those of you not familiar with the term, "double jeopardy" basically states that a person cannot be tried for a crime of which they've already been acquitted. If they eventually discover that Casey was, indeed, the killer, too bad. No one will be able to touch her after this, unless she pulls an OJ.
And you can't really say, "At least she'll have to live with the guilt." Casey is most likely a sociopath. Sociopaths think they are better than everyone else (resulting in extreme selfishness), lack appropriate emotional connections, and rarely ever exhibit true remorse. If Casey did murder her daughter, she likely saw her as an obstacle to her own lifestyle and, thus, will not feel bad for what she did. At most, she'll resent the further inconveniences of the trial and the time she'll be spending in jail for lying to the police.
Of course, this is all conjecture. I am neither a lawyer nor a psychologist. In the end, though, no matter who murdered the young girl, the jury deserves no blame. Instead, they deserve respect for upholding the law and not bending to public opinion.
Chatboard (0)