CASEY ANTHONY - NOT GUILTY??

I'd still fuck that horsefaced baby killer right in her sweet little ass.

images


casey-anthony-making-out-woman-1.jpg


new_casey_anthony_11.jpg%3Fw%3D240%26h%3D320

Yeah I agree.
 


Manslaughter would have been so much easier to prove. But really, what kind of person puts their dead child in a bag and dumps them into a field and walks away. Even if there were some element of accident here, like killing her while trying to keep her quiet, who would dump their child's body in field and walk away.
 
I don't care about things that don't directly impact me.

Like this case for instance.
 
338803315-2d06bd8a507d0a46a1765fd7fb38340a.4e136638-full.jpg



I had a feeling this whole time she was going to be found not guilty. It happens and we all move on. I can see her being on a "Dr. Drew Celebrity Rehab" type of show in a few years. She will have a hard time finding a job or a steady job and will party and do drugs.
 
The prosecution's case was horrible. No DNA evidence at all. No eye witnesses. The only link to Casey was her car trunk...and they found no DNA, no blood, just 1 hair that supposedly came from a dead body based on unproven science. The guy that found the skeleton reported it, and then the police came like a month later.

I wasn't surprised by the verdict at all.

The police completely dropped the ball and it seems like the prosecution did the best they could with basically no evidence at all.
 
The police completely dropped the ball and it seems like the prosecution did the best they could with basically no evidence at all.

That's nothing. This happens all the time but in places in America we never hear about. Like small hometown murders and child abuse cases.
 
CASEY HORSEFACE ANTHONY WAS GUILTY FROM DAY 1

Are you sure beyond a reasonable doubt that the child couldn't have accidentally drowned and then Casey tried to cover it up? If it's possible that is what happened then she would be not guilty of the charges.

They should have charged her with reckless homicide or something like that. This wasn't like the OJ trials where it was obvious that the victims were killed by knife attack.


So how long before she does porn?
 
The prosecutors constructed a CAPITAL MURDER case around 3 flimsy loose pieces of shitty evidence:

- some duct tape and a star sticker
- a scent or smell observed by 1 person
- google searches

No DNA, no confessions, no huge mis-steps by the defense. At least in the OJ case there was tons of DNA involved.
 
I don't care about things that don't directly impact me.

Like this case for instance.

I think if someone could be sentenced to death over "phantom stains", it would effect all of us.

I have no doubts that she did it, but the prosecution fucked up. It's not the jury's job to decide based on their emotions, intuitions, or gut feelings. It's their jobs to decide based on indisputable evidence, which unfortunately, the prosecution failed to provide.
 
I can't help but feel like the actual difference between guilty and not guilty in this case is so incredibly close that she should get the electric chair either way.

It's proven that she's a party-girl moron so bad at parenting that she at least allowed her child to die through neglect. -This in itself is murder. -But we're not done yet!

It's proven that she for some reason duct taped her kid's mouth, which of course would only happen before death, and greatly increases the chance of death... This may be circumstancial but my god man it's just fucking wrong.

It's also proven that she dumped the body and didn't tell anyone for a month, making up lies to cover up for the missing child, even to her family. For fuck's sake that is called conspiracy, and she'd have to be the dumbest white woman alive to think it would help anything.

My point: I wish I lived in a country where these PROVEN things = A trip down the green mile, no matter if she "meant" to kill the kid or not... It's just too evil either way.

I want to see this "not guilty" bitch get the chair anyway.