Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Casey Anthony, Not Guilty. We have to Accept this Fact.

I know what I am going to say is not going to be popular, but we have to face reality. Our system of jurisprudence may not be perfect, but it has served us for over two hundred years. If Ms. Anthony had been found guilty, the same people that are now beating up our legal system would be praising the way it works. Decisions by juries are not always popular and have been shown to be incorrect, however a trial by one's peers is essential to all of us. If you were accused of a crime, that you did not commit, would you want to be tried in the court of public opinion, or in the court of facts. This jury may have felt that Casey Anthony had some part in little Caylee's death, but the facts as presented by the prosecution, did not meet their level of,  beyond a shadow of doubt. We need to understand that to allow one criminal to slip through the system, though it is hard to swallow, is far better then to convict someone, that is innocent, with less then the full facts. I have my feeling and opinion on the case, but it is just that an opinion. The law states the process and we proceed through a case. Ms. Anthony has many undesirable qualities, but she has also been found innocent in this case. I am sure that over the next days and weeks, she will be subjected to intense scrutiny and probably threats on her well being. This is just as wrong as what happened to Caylee. As a parent and grandparent it is very hard to see this happen to a small child. We wish we could protect all children from experiencing what has happened to Caylee. Unfortunately we can't. The trial is over. Ms Anthony has been found innocent, and as much as we don't want to, we must accept the decision. God, does know the truth and if she did hurt that little girl, she will face that verdict at a later time. That will be his decision.

1 comment:

  1. Hi John,

    For the most part, I agree with you - all except for the "innocent" part.

    A jury verdict of "not guilty" does not mean the jury found the accused to be innocent, but rather the state failed to prove it's case beyond a reasonable doubt. In capital cases "shadow of a doubt" is often used.

    Also, the term "innocent until proven guilty" is misleading. If a person committed the crime then they are guilty. The burden is then on the prosecutor to prove it.

    Our justice system just gives the defendant the benefit of the doubt until the jury renders a verdict.

    Bottom line - whether she is guilty or not, we may never know.

    ReplyDelete