Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just because your emotions make you feel bad about these trials, doesn't mean that they didn't mull over the evidence. That they took so little time, especially in the case of the latter, shows that the forensic evidence was very, very weak.
The people who founded the country didn't want trials by judges. They wanted trials by people. Likely to avoid the consequences of politics mingling directly with the freedom of those on trial.
I am guessing you know nothing about the testimony and evidence presented at either OJ's or Casey's trial.
One of the lesser charges against Casey was Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child. This can be the death of a child from something as simple as neglect-such as neglecting to provide for safety or neglecting to properly supervise a child.
Casey was the last person with Caylee who was not even three years old. Caylee turns up dead and Casey does not give a truthful account of what happened. Even if an accident did happen, it would be negligent to not seek help immediately. If the child was dead too long for medical help than it is neglect by leaving a child unsupervised for an unreasonable period of time.
The circumstances speak for themselves. Casey's wrong doing can be inferred from the mere fact that the occurrence happened:" Res ipsa loquitor". Casey Anthony verdict in - NOT guilty
Ok in order for Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child to be proven you need the following I think.
A person who causes the death.
Of a Person under the age of 18.
By culpable negligence.
If the prosecution cannot prove beyond a resonable doubt to the jury that Casey caused the death then her negligence and the child age are irrevelant.
Ok in order for Aggrivated Manslaughter of a Child to be proven you need the following I think.
A person who causes the death.
Of a Person under the age of 18.
By cupapble negligence.
If the prosecution cannot prove beyond a resonable doubt to the jury that Casey caused the death then her negligence and the child age are irrevelant.
The point is "reasonable doubt" not doubt because we don't have a video documenting exactly what happened. If Caylee drowned and she did not call 911, that is manslaughter by negligence.
Quote:
A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence.
There has been quite a bit of discussion of how to differentiate manslaughter from first and second degree murder, but what it comes down to is this: if something you do causes someone else to die, if something you get someone else to do causes someone to die, or if you do something stupid (or fail to do something smart) that common sense would tell you would create dangerous situation and could cause someone to die and someone does die, you have committed manslaughter.
The point is "reasonable doubt" not doubt because we don't have a video documenting exactly what happened. If Caylee drowned and she did not call 911, that is manslaughter by negligence.
A person who causes the death.
Of a Person under the age of 18.
By culpable negligence.
To which you quoted me the FL statute saying.
"A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence."
Additionally, reasonable doubt is whatever the jury thinks reasonable doubt is and they obviously found it. Just because you and the Nancy Graces of the world disagree doesn't mean the jury was negligent or didn't understand the law.
To prove the crime of Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. Caylee Marie Anthony is dead.
2. Casey Marie Anthony’s act(s) caused the death of Caylee Marie Anthony. Or The death of Caylee Marie Anthony was caused by the culpable negligence of Casey Marie
Ok you need caustion. As I said just proving negligence is not enough.
BTW, the defense claimed the "causation" was drowning. So either Caylee was not supervised for a very long period of time or Casey did not seek appropriate medical attention for her child. Both of which led to Caylee's demise of which the defense admits. Remember Biaz's opening statement?
They literally admitted culpable negligence in their opening statement. End of story.
BTW, the defense claimed the "causation" was drowning. So either Caylee was not supervised for a very long period of time or Casey did not seek appropriate medical attention for her child. Both of which led to Caylee's demise of which the defense admits. Remember Biaz's opening statement?
They literally admitted culpable negligence in their opening statement. End of story.
I don't want to rehash the entire trial and or 1L crim law. All I am saying is that I think reasonable minds could disagree as to whether in this case the Defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of the child's death and thus an acquittal is reasonable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
