He believed in his client and none of us really knows 100% exactly what happened.

Personal cost to Mr. Baez- Fame and fortune.

Had she lost, he'd be fine. Because she won, he wins.

Come on, he's a defense attorney- It's his job to get his clients off. I don't think he lost much skin.

fayse ... "He believed in his client" are you kidding me!!!!

A psychopathic liar!!!! Who he said lived in "Casey in Wonderland".

Baez took advantage of the system and 12 idiots from a culture who follows Professional Wrestling ... which some think is not acting!!

So ... you can take your 100% and ..............

Mr Baez did not earn his spot. The media gave him unprecedented coverage, which in turn gave him celebrity status.

If the media had have stayed away, he would have just been another defense attorney who won his case. Who may or may not have gotten other clients.

Blame the media and the voyeurism of the American people for what he may glean out of his Victory from now on.

Plus, every one wants to dismiss the juries verdict was based on the evidence as was their Constitutional obligation, to have reasonable doubt, because the Prosecution DID NOT PROVE their side.

He`s not a star or even a competent lawyer but he was smart in one respect, he took this case. Even if he had lost this case it was still a win-win situation for him. he was a 2nd rate lawyer so even if he lost he still would have gotten his name out there in public and would have a chance at taking on more high paying cases.

He got lucky and hit the lottery by winning this case. He won`t have to show his face in a courtroom ever again, he can milk money out of this case for years,then he can become a high paid legal consultant.

Please have respect for the Juror's decision.

#13 Juror was in a detailed interview, and for what 34 days, they were rational, understanding, mulled over every aspect of this case---it was an amazing interview--they understood this case very, very well. Being Sequestered, never waivering, the Jurors took this case very seriously---things most people would not have rationalized re: Casey Anthony's case/Trial.

It was not the Jurors fault--some day posters here will be put in the same position, being called for Jury Duty. It will an education.

It was a 10-2 Verdict at first, then everyone agreed; no single piece of evidence of proof that Casey did it---the cops messed up, the Prosecution messed up---and Baez did a brilliant job of conveying there were no actual facts to prove it. A good Defense Attorney like this is Rare. Most do have a questionable past, but they understand Criminal Law extremely well.

The Jurors deserve our respect; they followed the guidelines for this Trial perfectly---yes, she probably murdered her own daughter, along with the cover-up by the Anthony parents.

Free---that is the Justice System here---This is not an endorsement by me for the outcome of an Acquittal---but the facts, the facts, the facts. None.

I agree, it's easy to critizies when you weren't in the jury room

Hawaii2 ... your disclaimers at the end are pathetic!

"Baez did a brilliant job of conveying there were no actual facts to prove it" Baez actually used lies and innuendos to make his case!!!! The jurors had the responsibility to not eat this BS!!!

"A good Defense Attorney like this is Rare". MY GOD ... this is sickening!

And then you end by saying "yes, she probably murdered her own daughter, along with the cover-up by the Anthony parents."

And you are telling me that the jury should not have seen that ... oh wait ... but the facts, the facts, the facts. None.

They had over 300 pieces of evidence to check out ... oh but boy would that have cut into the time ... they decided to go home and leave us holding the bag!

Sidenote:

The Jury person interviewed was the Foreman of the Jury. Very astute.

The jurors did what they had to do. We were not in the courtroom, we did not see the orders handed down. We should not be passing judgement on them.

Are you guys kidding me? Really?! Ok... I will give the vapid jury a pass on the murder charge. Like the vast majority of Casey lovers, they were looking for that smoking gun... or an actual "how" it happened. Scott Peterson was convicted of killing his wife with a hair. Compared to his case... there was a mountain of evidence against her. Let's get past the murder and to one of the other charges... one that has NO EXCUSE for NOT getting a guilty charge. Aggravated child negligence. I'm sorry... your child has gone missing and then YOUR MOTHER FORCES YOU TO REPORT IT 31 days later... or your child drowns in a pool and you don't call for help. I don't care what her father allegedly said or did... it is HER RESPONSIBILITY to care for that child.

GUILTY! Count 3 should be guilty, and any person with an ounce of common sense knows this. No... there is NO reasonable doubt! Dead child... no call to authorities for 31 days... NEGLIGENT. Anyone like to argue this... step up...

I'm not saying the jury was incompetent.....but am just wondering if they even took into account the fact that the medical examiner had determined the death to be a homicide. Even if there is no cause of death it was still determined to be criminal to some extent.

I am constantly amazed at how many 'armchair quarterbacks' there are when it comes to this trial.

The defense team did not save their client...the inept prosecution all but handed him this 'victory' - sort of like winning the Super Bowl due to the fumbles of the other team.

The jury did a very difficult job, and did it well. Their decision was the only one they could have come to, according to the instructions of the court.

The entire defense team should be fired for incompetence.

Zorraco:

You are talking from emotion. Please get a grip. Obviously there is no understanding of the US Justice System.

Penny:

Great comments for those who fly off the handle, putting their emotions first, the facts last. The Jurors had plenty of information, which as you say, could not be presented to the public.

I seriously thought Baez played the bumbling lawyer to allow the case to be overturned when Casey was found guilty. There were times when he seemed to be trying to get her a guilty verdict by proving the prosecuter's case. I would imagine even Baez never knew how lucky he would be acting the incompetent and having a jury actually bite.

That is one lucky lawyer. LOL

Half of you posters here today are sickening. Do any of you idiots honestly have a clue as to how our justice system works??? Our country was founded upon the Rule of Law, and if you do not understand what that means, then feel free to educate yourselves!!! We have the fairest justice system in the world! It doesn't always work the way we THINK it should, and can be very inefficient sometimes, but it is the best that society has designed in all of history!

I cannot believe MSNBC would post an article like this!! Just because Casey beat her murder charge, now it's okay to post a smear piece about the lawyer who represented her?? The entire article is full of negative condescending remarks about Atty. Baez's past history and credentials. I, too, believe that Casey murdered her daughter, and I'm mad that she'll be free soon, but that does not excuse people from trashing her attorney or the justice system itself. Atty Baez did his job, and he did it rather well. The prosecution could not produce a solid enough case, and he was able to refute their premises.

Sometimes guilty people go free........that's just how it goes sometimes. But I would take that any day over a system fraught with emotional knee-jerk trials that condemn innocent people!

"If the glove don't fit -- You must acquit." Anybody remember this guy? A year from now nobody will even remember Baez's name. Take that to the bank.

Hawaii2 ... you say "get a grip".

Well ... My response to you is "get a clue"!

And to be honest ... I am in fact pissed ... and I have every right to be!!! For you to think that Baez is a great lawyer is a tell all and makes me sad that we have people who he can be sucker by the likes of him!!!

And to let these jurors have a pass ... I don't think so!

Indy...

I would accept your outrage without question if you could prove the information is a lie. So.. is his taking 8 years to pass the bar a lie, or just a statement? Why are you getting defensive for this guy? What is your personal gain? Did he not own two bikini businesses? And if they are just statements, and true ones, who's saying they're putting anyone down?

But I also had to chuckle at the absurdity of this- Sometimes guilty people go free... that's how it goes sometimes. Oh, ok. That's cool. @!$%# just happens sometimes and we reward guilty people with financial gain and it's nothing to fret over. Heck, let's do away with the whole system and make it easier!

Anyway, what are you so pissed off about? Everyone has a right to an opinion and well.. right now the concensus seems to be that he's not a particularly skilled lawyer, just one that got lucky.

And calm down dude, geez.

Jose Baez is laughable. He was denied practicing law in Florida for 5 years because he was an unethical louse, and was a TOTAL deadbeat Dad, owing $24,000 in past due child support. As my wife works for a national lawfirm, he was a running joke for the last 8 weeks. He was TERRIBLE in court, sounding like a inept loser, presenting stories that were just that. Not one shred of evidence concerning his opening in the trial was even brought up, the judge forbidded him from bringing up "sexual abuse" in his closing because after he brought it up, he never did again. Not a question in my mind he thought Casey WAS GOING TO BE CONVICTED. The only person more surprised about being found not guilty was not Casey it was Jose Baez. This guy is a joke of a lawyer, he just got lucky, just like Casey. 12 buffoons let them both win the lotto, end of story!

If ANY of you think Jose Baez is a strong lawyer then you know NOTHING about lawyers, he is a rank amatuer. He's now got his 15 minutes, because his peak has been reached, and only because of the ignorant jurors who are beyond pathetic. A jury that deliberates 10 hours after a 6 week trial is just one word, LAZY.

While the judge, who by the way was excellent, while he has not spoken about the trial. But based on body language he was extremly pissed off by the verdict, more like disgusted. And he certainly was totally disappointed these pathetic jurors did not even ask for any of the evidence, nor asking for any video or tapes, which means they had made up their mind, something the judge asked them not to do. A pathetic display of laziness and a disregard for a little girls life.

KIC- No where did I say that the information the article printed was false. What I said was that it was a smear piece, which it was. Why wasn't this information dug up before the jury's decision? And honestly, would we have even been given this article if the jury had convicted Casey?? Probably not.\

And yeah, I'm pissed. You're right, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. What angers me is that we have so many people who genuinely do not understand the more poignant aspects of our justice system. A lot of posters here believe the jury was wrong, or duped into acquitting Casey. Or that Baez is/was a lousy lawyer for "getting her off". No, KIC, my point is that our justice system worked the way it is supposed to. We convict people on FACTS, not OPINIONS.

And lastly, I did not give any impression that I feel letting guilty people go free is "nothing to fret over". Don't put words into my mouth. If you think it's absurd that guilty people sometimes "beat the rap", then fine. So how do you feel when innocent are put in prison or executed? Is that absurd too?? How absurd? More or less than the few guilty people who manage to get lucky?? Hmmm?

Jet

I am constantly amazed at how many 'armchair quarterbacks' there are when it comes to this trial.

I am also amazed by all the legal "experts" posting here.

Nicky

the medical examiner had determined the death to be a homicide.

But they could not prove, without doubt, how or by who. Thats one of the biggest reasons the defense won.

Indy Patriot-1934313 ... you remind me of a cat in the sand box covering up his stuff!

But as much as you try ... a couple of pieces are protruding!

snarky:

You've got it correct. Others are talking off the tops of their heads, without knowing what going for the Prosecution's Death Penalty means. A Fatal Mistake.

Above all that was presented, there was NO tangible evidence that Casey committed the murder.

Here's the issue -- we all know that somehow Casey was involved and knows more than she will ever admit to. And to make matters worse, when the case was looking bleak for her, Baez tries to play the insanity card. If he thought she was not competent, how could he have believed anything she said to begin with. The bottom line is there is a high degree of confidence that both Casey and Baez shaped their facts to best defend against the State's case, not to uncover the truth -- that's just wrong. But as someone put it ...guilty people go free sometimes -- and innocent people serve sentences. She beat the system, but I think the truth will come out at some point.

@John Skaggs

If the glove don't fit -- you must acquit

I surely remember Mr. Johnnie Cochran. He was actually a great attorney and thoroughly dismantled the State's case, along with F. Lee Bailey and the other members of his team. There was no "playing the fool" within that team. This case is just as controversial as that was.

As a father, I can't imagine not reporting my child missing for over 30 days... Anyone notice how she has never emphatically professed her innocence or did I miss that?? Had it have been me, I'd be screaming it from the top of my lungs that I didn't kill my child. Her parents seemed just as shocked as everyone else that she got off...

I think she did it...

Snarky, you obviously know NOTHING about the law. "how she died" is IRRELEVENT, motive is also IRRELEVENT. The ONLY question to do with this case was, as told to the jurors by the judge "was she killed by a person / or did neglect lead to her death / both of which is felony murder. That WAS THE ONLY QUESTION.

Hawaii, your just completely wrong. your quote " there was NO tangible evidence that Casey committed the murder"

Complete HOGWASH. There was a hair from Caylee's DEAD BODY on the carpet of Casey's trunk. Repeat DEAD BODY, confirmed by DNA. That was totally proven as was the match to Caylee. Also they have recordings of Casey talking about Caylee in the "past tense" before her body was found. How did she know she was dead, dude?

Hawaii2 & snarky68 ... please read!

Circumstantial Evidence is also known as indirect evidence. It is distinguished from direct evidence, which, if believed, proves the existence of a particular fact without any inference or presumption required. Circumstantial evidence relates to a series of facts other than the particular fact sought to be proved. The party offering circumstantial evidence argues that this series of facts, by reason and experience, is so closely associated with the fact to be proved that the fact to be proved may be inferred simply from the existence of the circumstantial evidence.

Please stop saying there was nothing for the jurors to go by. They left a ton of evidence on the table and went home!

Regarding murder, the prosecutors didn't provide any proof, so it isn't much of a suprise she got off that charge. They shouldn't have even brought her to trial until they had gotten all the evidence necessary to prove she did it. They were incompetent. It didn't matter if the defense was good or bad... without being able to prove her guilt, there didn't need to be much in the way of quality defense.

Regarding child abuse/neglect, the jurors were idiots. No parent who actually has even the slightest love for their child doesn't say anything for a month. The single item should have been enough to prove her guilty of that charge no matter what else either side said. The jurors failed right there.

All sides of this case failed. Prosectutors didn't prove the case. Jurors let her off of the child abuse/neglect for no valid reason. And the defense... well, the defense wasn't worth anything. If the prosecutors were any good, she'd have life or be on death row depending what the law is in that state.

And for all of you complaining that he (and she) are going to get rich because of the publicity... if you don't like it, avoid every single thing that comes out (movies, books, etc) regarding the case. Don't buy or pay for anything related to it and push to get everyone you know to avoid them as well. The only way they get money is if people give them money. Everyone these days is so excited about watching and reading about death or abuse or murder or whatever and are willing to pay the criminals just to be able to get their "fix". We can't blame the lawyer or her for getting money from these book/movie deals... blame the people offering the deals and more than that, blame the people who spend money on these things.

Btw, if anyone paid attention to her after the trial, she looked very smug. An innocent person doesn't look smug after winning a case like this. An innocent person will look like someone who was just given their life back after being on the brink of death. She either did it or knows who did and approved (or even requested it to be done). The problem is that the prosecutors didn't do a good job showing proof that she was the one who committed the crime. Pretty sad prosecutors.

"Zorro"- you said, "Indy Patriot-1934313 ... you remind me of a cat in the sand box covering up his stuff!

But as much as you try ... a couple of pieces are protruding!"

That's it???? That's all you've got???? LOL....you couldn't be bothered to write a more thoughtful post than that???? And YOU find fault with ME????

Awww, heck, since I'm a nice guy and all I'll give ya another chance, buddy! How about you post something a tad more tangible in response to my previous posts! Go ahead, give a try, I'll be back later to check!!

I do not understand the reference to "stardom."

Paradigm Talent agency signed Baez for a whole 5 1/2 hours before they unsigned him.

Paradigm IS NOT the biggest talent agency but I'll bet one of their biggest stars said "get that baby killer's lawyer out of here or I'm leaving."

Easy come. Easy go.

Baez did the job that everyone in that situation would want. He's a defense attorney and did that job well in this case. Famous or infamous now who cares.

Zorroaca:

You cannot guess guilt in a Jury Trial.

Indy Patriot:

EXACTLY----well-explained.

Indy Patriot-1934313 ... for you ... you deserve no more ... your trite sayings are clear as day! And we are talking about the Casey trial ... not your feelings about the system!

I'm stunned... no... amazed. We have all these posters defending the jurors and saying that the did the system right, but they didn't. I don't care about the Murder rap at this point. The people that don't think it was proved have already stuck their fingers in their ears about all the obvious evidence and how the pieces fit together... since there was no smoking gun. What about those other 6 counts, huh? What do you guys have to say about the jury's ineptitude on those?

The last 4 were a gimme because Baez called his own client a liar, and all he could do was try to come up with excuses as to why she would mislead the police from FINDING CAYLEE. Oops... sorry... don't want to give you a piece to the murder puzzle. It'll make you plug your ears again. What about the negligence? Does anyone think that she wasn't negligent? Does ANYONE agree with this double digit IQ jury about her not caring for her child?

The prosecution blew it. The jurors were given the choice of first degree murder. The prosecution could not prove it's case to base that charge. They should have gone for a lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter, or negligent homicide. As it was, they gave the jury nothing they could hang their hat on. End of discussion!

Indy- your words, not mine-

"Sometimes guilty people go free........that's just how it goes sometimes."

Yes, you did give that impression and it's not up to you to decide the impression you gave, but your audience.

You're fired up about what then? lol

It's not a smear campaign if it's the truth. The smears came from Mr Baez not wiping thoroughly. And yes, it would have come out. It ALWAYS comes out. If they were lies, I'd be inclined to feel he's a victim, but if they be facts.. well, it's from his own actions and inactions.

John Skaggs:

Johnny Cochran, F. B. Bailey, Robert Shapiro, Kardashian/The Dream Team----Attorneys for the OJ Case--

Jose Baez/Mason---forever will be remembered as the Attorneys for Casey Anthony----This along with the OJ Trial, was one of the Trials of the Century----

Both got their probably guilty clients off from the Death Penalty, or any other murder charges.

No one will forget.

Zorroaca- OK, you had your chance. You declined to write anything pertinent in response to my previous posts. Suffice to say, you don't have an argument. Next?

KIC- If you wish to have ANY particular impression of my posts, then fine, that's your prerogative. My point was objective and based on the reality of our current justice system. The problem is that you are still trying to qualify my post based upon what you think I believe. All I said was that sometimes guilty men go free, because that's the misfortunate discrepancy in our justice system. No where did I say I condone letting guilty men go free. But that's the reality. And it's certainly better than convicting innocent men by the same measure. Can you honestly comprehend my point? I'm beginning to wonder.....

And also, KIC, once again I stated that this piece was a smear article. Words matter here, buddy. The word "smear" does not imply that the information was false, but rather subject to the author's own biases against Atty Baez. I figured that was apparent to everyone. It's called reading critically. How old are you....12? 13??

And while you're mulling that over, why don't you answer the last paragraph in my post at #1.21??? Try debating substance, not emotions....it works better.

Cooky, I agree with you. Like most of the rest of this country I AM PISSED that this piece of trash got away with murder. But it wasn't the defense who got her off. It wasn't even the jury, as they had no choice. It was the prosecution. There was no "Smoking gun". There was no clear cut evidence, DNA, whatever, to prove the crime.

She should have at least been convicted of manslaughter, and child abuse/endangerment. The Prosecution didn't give the jury those options.

My only solace is that that beautiful child is no longer in the hands of such an uncaring mother. She is receiving the love and care in Heaven that she was denied here on earth.

A year from now everybody will remember Casey Anthony, 70% will have forgotten Baez.

Um, Indy... you should practice what you preach. I believe the guy foaming at the mouth over his keyboard would be the emotional one. And you're saying that I'm 12? Well, you're losing your cool with a 12 year old, so who has the problem?

Anyhoodle. You want me to answer your- how would I feel if an innocent person was jailed or executed? I thought that was rhetorical.. but here- I wouldn't like that either. That doesn't mean I can't be unhappy with seeing injustice on the other side. We keep talking about innocent, but we're not even talking about an innocent person.

But this isn't about the case anymore. It's about a performance review of a guy. So the article isn't a glowing piece of flattery and documents this person's career. So???

You point is easy enough to comprehend in the manner it was written (you did improve in your rebuttal, I was taking you at face value). Sorry you didn't do a better job the first time around.

Janine... were you on the jury by chance? What is this dire need for the smoking gun? What you are telling me is if someone kills someone with a gun, takes the gun apart and destroys it (no smoking gun), never touches the guy that he shot (no DNA), and is only on trial because motive and his actions singled him out as the only person that would do this. You would let the guy go because there just wasn't enuff evidence, right? This is what you're telling us?

Unfortunately I agree with you a little bit. As much as I hate to say it, he obviously did a good job at representing the baby killer as she will be walking outta that jail in a few days. But yes, at what cost to us??? She will ultimately be living in someones community soon enough(a lot of Florida residents I think have made it pretty clear that they don't want her walking around free on their streets) and I think we as a society deserve better. And god forbid she should have another child. Just thinking about that makes me nauseous.

I do believe in our justice system and part of that is that b!t@H's right to representation, but at the end it was the jury that found her not guilty.

It's just an all around mess if you ask me.

Now you know why us Blue Collar workers make fun of and ridicule the White Collar world - Professionals are taught to be slime.

The Defense and the Prosecution in the end have to band together - it is their only way to validate their miserable existence. Big business (too many aspects to list) and their Lobbyists, the Banking industry, Wall Street, the legal system and politicians - they all have to band together because the schemes and practices they engage in requires all of them to work in concert to pull off the acts they do.

If the slime balls don't stick together - the entire house of cards falls.

Lawyers; if they had any credibility, they would have restrictions (I see all the conservatives cringing) that prevents them from exploiting the legal system for their own gain. The Bar tries to place standards the lawyers should meet - but the lure of easy money corrupts even those we place in high esteem.

Baez didn't even pay child support - and now people want to praise him? I don't think so.

Next time you brag about your grandchild being all that in the White Collar world - just know that us Blue Collar guys know the truth.

This is why so many women, who go looking for Mr. Professional to marry - live a life of misery. If the slime balls treat each other like they do - imagine what it is like behind their front door at home. There are only so many social gatherings, where the posers can gather and parade their successes - reality isn't escapable in the end.

Wow brain damaged is right...

But hilarious.

So who among you still thinks Kronk is a bad guys - want some mustard for your crow?

LOL keep it; I think we have the makings of a new Reality show.

I guess I was mis-understood. We wouldn't get along drain- I'm a white collar and you are a shirt racist.

jurys dont deserve any repect and the hawaiian needs to visit all the corpes that never got a day in court to defend themselfs

america is a failed system, and its causing loop holes for murderers, rapers and crooks. we cant even defend our selfs from robbers ,and if they kill you they go free

so i guess the best places to kill folks is in that city, VERY SICK CITY I MIGHT ADD....

JCB

Snarky, you obviously know NOTHING about the law.

And i guess you being overlooked as a defense attorney for Casey was a mix up, right? /s

LMAO at keep it; most of my friends are White Collar - but I keep them in check. It's the ones in the big firms that get to hide their actions.

Shirt racist - I love it. Since I wear tie-dye often, I know all about shirt racism. I'm currently wearing a tie-dyed shirt with a South Park character smoking a bong - I get attacked every time I go out in public with it on. Poor me - I'm such a victim...lolololol.

keep it; in addition to being a White Collar - you are also a thief. Looking at your time stamps - you are posting from work. You must be a very low level White shirter (which would make you more Blue shirt) - my White shirt friends are way to busy to even go to Forum sites.

No, no, I'm actually a stuffed shirt. Pretty high up the chain. I have no idea how I got here! Well, other than I can multi task like a mutha.

And... I've been trying to get fired for over a year. I found the recipe for success at this company is to do the bare minimum. Oh and to take lunch. I used to be a blue scrub. You know what that is? It's in the medical field. But I decided that I wanted to take lunch and play on the internet instead.

Hello IT? Can you hear me? Your firewall has been down for awhile! Soon I'll be cruising CL for transexual sex!

Yeah. I'm a thief alright.

I must have heard a different closing.. My recollection showed a guy rambling and repeating himself, begging people to not use logic or reason, just faith that there was some reasonable doubt. lol It is what it is, but let's not make this guy out to be better than he is...

While the other side pushed for premeditated, don't forget the jury turned up their noses at manslaughter and even child abuse. They weren't going to convict her on anything. Her lies also made it so she couldn't be prosecuted for things that would make sense- like failing to report the death and abuse of a corpse.

I digress.. the guy is a flash in the pan. He might make money, but there wasn't alot of skill involved there.

No matter he did what he was required to do as a defense attorney.

kaara:

Totally agree with your comment. Mine is very similar.

Where can one put the blame for Casey's outcome?---we'll never find out how this tragic death of a beautiful, innocent child was murdered.

This is America. Criminals walk free, even if they may be guilty. On another note, look at all the Pedophiles that are walking free, and 'murdering" children, and young women---nothing is done about them in the beginning; living in our neighborhoods, until they commit another one of their famous slip ups; then they may be let out again.

To the Posters, "Is that right"?

Hawaii,

That's right... you are in America. Land of eternal tolerance for the predators that plague us. Criminals are treated better than most of our homeless, and yet they do nothing to better themselves. The system itself is very biased as well. Men are judged much harsher than women when it comes to crimes. Since you use pedophiles, let's stay there. If you take a male teacher that has had sex with one of his teenage students and compare it to the carbon copy. The female teacher will get a lesser sentence compared to the male teacher every time. Hell, there are a few cases where the women only get probation. Men get charged with rape... always. Sometimes the women only get hit with molestation or corruption of a minor. Do you think that poor lil' Casey had that advantage in her corner?

I have always said that Baez is a dolt, and I stand by it. The only reason that he won is because the jury are idiots and couldn't decide each count individually. He rambled on in his closing statement for over 6 hours and said a lot of nothing. Half of his exhibits he had to "adjust" because he used misleading pictures or information that was never introduced. Much like his opening statement where he accused everyone of molesting Casey and never proving a stitch of that focus. He is a hack lawyer that won the lottery with this case. Maybe he'll pay his child support now, huh? Great man... indeed.

Kinkomaster said it best, this is just another case of the guilty walking among the innocent. it happens every day, its not a matter of guilty or innocent anymore, its who has the better lawyer, and how well you hide the truth

I agree with keep it cool. I had a hard time following Baez AT ANY TIME of this trial, particularly the closing.

The most pathetic time was when Baez was questioning George Anthony.

Did you sexually molest Casey Anthony? It dropped like a lead balloon.

Kaara, do you pay full price for a car too?

I agree with keep it cool. I had a hard time following Baez AT ANY TIME of this trial, particularly the closing.

Maybe that was part of the strategy?

The prosecution, although presenting a good solid case with the circumstantial evidence, was arrogant and cold, and even mocked the defense in his closing argument by smirking on the sidelines. I don't think the jury appreciated this, particularly the ones who had experienced run ins with the law in the past. You have to know your jury and cater to them as such.

I don't disagree that this is true. But that doesn't make it even remotely right. Any jury who makes their decision based on what they think of the attorneys should be sent to prison themselves for being idiots. Sure, let's let someone off the hook because we don't like how arrogant the prosecutors are and we think the bumbling buffoon of a defense attorney is funny to watch. Yep, that makes sense. What a great justice system we have that has people making such idiotic decisions.

Kinko, You are not very bright. Baez didn't have much of a case and still won! Yes, I know, that is the sign of a terrible lawyer. He took the little he could come up with and made it in to reasonable doubt. He proved George to be a liar and had his mistress testify it was an accident that snow balled out of control. That was all it took! If you are so smart, what would have your defense angle would have been? Come on mr. smartypants, lets hear it. Get a clue!

Joe, how do you get around without your helmet on? The best defenses have a tinge of truth in them. If they wanted to go with the whole accident thing, they should have stuck with it. Caylee drowned... Casey panicked... not knowing what to do she hid Caylee. Caylee started to get ripe, so she put her in a couple garbage bags with her favorite blankey. She had to put tape on her face to stop stuff from coming out. After a while in the trunk, the smell got too bad and she put her where she had buried all of her pets since she was a little girl. She tried to dig a grave, but the ground was too hard. She pinned her under some tree roots and covered her with some branches. She hated leaving her, but she couldn't get into trouble. Then she started lying to cover things up. She tried her best to make it look like everything was normal to her friends by going out and partying... and being "the same ol' Casey".

There ya go, Joe... that is just off the top of my head. Notice... I don't have all the guys in her family raping her or beating her. I simply have a scared 1st time mom doing all the wrong things.

The only reason that Baez won is because of the idiot jury... period... end of case. The murder count is the ONLY thing that had reasonable doubt... that's it. She is responsible on everything else. Even my story doesn't clear her of neglect/ abuse. Ignorance isn't a defense.

The simple fact that you've swallowed every load that Jose has shot out there doesn't make you look very bright, Joe. If you believe that some woman that Jose paid $7000 to testify and then look completely unbelievable on the stand is worth even a seconds consideration, you need a few more clues than I do!

kaara:

Yeah, I kinda agree with you. Although I want to make it clear, I do believe she killed her own child. I think the prosecution should have NEVER laughed while he was giving his closing speech. Although I can understand why they may have wanted to laugh at him, they still should have held it back because things like that can really affect a jury sometimes and put the defense in a better light. And the most important thing was justice for Caylee. If I were that prosecuting attorney I would have sat over there and kept my smirks or any other obvious signs of what I thought about the defense to myself, in order to make EVERY effort I could to NOT let a baby killer go free.

I think they really shot themselves in the foot on that one when they laughed.

kinkomaster: I didn't say I bought his defense, or even liked him, I just gave him credit for making a silk purse out of a sow's ear, to put it bluntly.

His closing argument was well presented, and the jury was listening. They weren't the brightest stars in the sky, and he played to their ignorance. If you think about it, the entire trial, he played the dumb underdog attorney. Dumb like a fox!

Casey Anthony was guilty of aggravated child abuse...she caused the death of her child, but the jury let her off with not guilty on all counts but the four that were no brainers. There was enough circumstantial evidence to convict her of everything but premeditated murder, yet, she still walked free.

Like it or not, her defense counsel deserves some credit for that.

YEAH VERY SKILLFUL .. what happens when you get tarts as jurys ..maybe she was showing off her camel toe and see tho shirts from all the sweating she did

Kinko, You really are a complete idiot. You just basically said exactly what Baez did you dumba$$! I never said I agree with the verdict, just that Baez did a pretty good job with his defense, given what he had to work with. You are like a little baby who didn't get their way and I don't think you know anything about being a good lawyer. GROW UP!

Joe... you are such a pinhead. Baez blamed daddy for everything. Caylee died on his shift and then he forced Casey to hide the fact. In his picture... she never panicked... she was bullied by a molesting father, you pinhead. If you think that acting like a monkey compared to the professional prosecution and probably getting the jury to feel a little sorry for him being so out gunned. Let's face it, he looked like a 5 year old trying to tackle dad. He was just grabbing desperately at things and it showed. Why else would he want to do a psych exam on Casey 3/4's of the way thru the trial? He was desperate to get out of it. Little did he know that he had jurors that were as smart as you and couldn't tell the difference between 2 stories.

You know, pinhead, I'm NOT a lawyer, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to spot a bad one. You know... every one of you idiots that knock the prosecution, praise Baez, or defend the jury always say the same thing... "I think she did it." Ya, whatever. I think you say that to stop everyone from coming down on you because you are too stupid to defend your position in the first place. Just kick back, pinhead, and wait for her to squeeze out another kid... because she's said she wants to... and wait for that one to go missing. Then we'll revisit this boards and have a little talk with all of you that defended this retarded jury.

Believe me kinkgirl I KNOW you are not a lawyer. It could not be more OBVIOUS!

Tell ya what, pinhead. Just go down to the jail on Sunday with your "Marry me, Casey (or Jose... however you swing)" and celebrate that they got a stupid jury that let her walk out of there. Murder 1 might have had doubt. There is NO DOUBT when it comes to aggravated child neglect. The fact that the jury screwed up and didn't even consider this count shows their own neglect or stupidity. The fact that you defend them and give credit to Baez makes you look twice the idiot. You go, pinhead!

Kinkomaster--theres no proof casey was ever molested by her own father..her first story was zanny kidnapped her daughter,,,,lied to police and led them all on a wild goose chase,,,,,when they had her in jail,,they told her they found a childs body in the swamp by her families home,,she panicked,,,hyperventilating,,,( DAMN IM CAUGHT ),,,later they said the childs body was to decomposed not even lungs was left...BAM--another lie for Casey to make up,,,ok then my child drowned in my families pool.....later to make herself look more inocent,,she said her father and her brother molested her when she was young,,,,as far as I'm concerned,,her mental illness came from one of her favorite pets that died...so baez pointed fingers at her father an called him a child molestor..anything or lies to get a criminal off from being called a killer they will use...heartless it is...

And the florida police never responded to the meter readers call when he reported something in the woods,,,blame the police for letting the childs body rotting the rest of the way,,for they have failed...if police had responded the first time,,not the third time,,,,then they could have had DNA and or FINGERPRINTS....but in a swamp,,31 days,,is enough time for DNA to wash away.and 31 days is enough time for flesh to decompose,,making an oder for wild animals to come and eat on the corpse..

Kinkomaster--and for the father and mother of casey anthony to allow her to move back into their home,,well i dont think that caseys father ever did molest her at all or ever..family love,,more like a disturbed trio

the nanny story, the job at universal story, the rich boyfriend, etc.etc.etc. now three years later she just suddenly stopped lying and told the truth. oh wait, she didn't say anything! her atty. said it. she couldn't take the stand because that would require details. anyone who believes anything she says is a fool. even the judge told the defense he couldn't believe another thing out of their mouths. he also said the jury was not to take the drowning,abuse story into consideration as a defense- as there was absolutely no testimony,no evidence or proof of that whatsoever!

We all know that the story Baez spun was total BS, and the simple fact that he wanted to use it in his closing statement without introducing a shred of evidence to back up his initial claims should border on disbarment. It would just take him another 8 years to pass the Bar again.

Ya, Drake, I know poor George had nothing to do with any of that and my gut feeling tells me that he is the only "normal" person in that household. Cindy lies at a drop of a hat, and well... mother like daughter... It also shows why Cindy was happy when Casey was found not guilty and George looked like his pet got run over... again.

Sorry it wasn't the jurors. It was the incompetent prosecution. It's easy to blame jurors, but the judge gave them direction and they followed it. Oh yes it was prosecutor incompetence.

Nothing was proven, even to a reasonable doubt and the prosecution is to blame and no one else.

Jeff, I have to agree with you 100%.

the biggest downfall of the prosecution was that they went right for the death penalty and thought since a little girl was killed, they would tug on the jurys heart-strings, and get an automatic conviction. Needless to say, everyone got it wrong.

Jeff, I agree with you also. The prosecution could not prove without a doubt how Caylee died. It is the prosecutions job to prove without a doubt. It is the defense job to try to give doubt about the evidence. I didn't like the answer the jury came back with but it was correct. C.A. should have been guilty of not just lying to the cops but for child neglect for not reporting her missing. My personal opinion, I think she's guilty as hell of murder but because it could not be proven, we'll never know. This Baez evidently is smarter than people gave him credit for.

Ummm, "bogus theories"?......like, NOT prosecuting a person who has not been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?? Like that one???

Or, CaseyCreature, would you rather juries in the future ignore relevant information, or lack therof, and just convict somebody on emotional responses?

Hmmmm?

Incompetent Jurors also acquitted Lizzy Borden, and OJ Simpson.

The prosecution showed she lied, neglected to tell authorities about missing toddler...for a month. In the lie about the non-existent nanny kidnapping, Casey was intentionally misleading. Her lies about the pool drowning and conspiring father were again designed to mislead. Her lies were clearly designed. Behavior and motive to lie are clear evidence ignored buy a deluded jury. WHAT? No funeral or tears for your dead toddler?

Then there's the physical evidence. Proximity of the found body, etc...

This excuse for "Death Penalty Fear" doesn't bode well either. They offered the lessor charge of manslaughter, and the jury rejected that too.

An incompetent jury has put a killer back on the street. Shameful and ignorant jury worthy of scorn.

How can we uphold our justice system as an example to the world when we have decisions like this.

Juries need to have experts and leaders also. I've noticed that lawyers tend to eliminate intelligent people in the selection process. They don't want educated skeptics who can see through transparent tactics.

Jeff... not reporting a missing child for 31 days is beyond aggravated negligence. If all you have on the brain is murder, figure out what the other counts are. There is plenty of evidence for a guilty verdict on them. The fact that the jury focused on the first count only and wrote off the others without really considering them shows that they just wanted to get out of there... after all... juror 7 had a cruise to get on July 7...

Baez used semantic conditioning in his discussions. His words had various meanings and interpretations. The disseratation was brilliant.. and it worked!!!

I agree Charles with all of that. I mean we have juries like this, and then we have juries that convict a robbery victim of PREMEDITATED 1ST DEGREE MURDER.

People like to act like this is all black and white, and each jury will behave the same and within a carefully contained box when it's obvious that it's always open to interpretation and their own personal feelings.

She didn't do it. People don't commit murder one and hang around to answer questions. Casey Anthony's explanation of events is the only one that fully explains everything that happened subsequently.

The complete lack of any evidence in the cause of death is what acquitted her and the prosecuting attorney admitted that by saying that it was a "dry bones" case and "very hard to prove".

We have all lived to see literally dozens of people exonerated by DNA evidence for murders they did not commit after spending many years in prison and on "death row. There have even been cases where it was proved after the fact that the wrong person was executed for the crime.

Thankfully enough the blood lust and foolish desire to believe just whatever the media puts in front of you that most of you are apparently suffering from is not what decides cases most of the time.

One thing is certain, weather she is innocent or not, she will suffer because of this for the rest of her life.

Sorry, you are wrong. Jury's DO NOT need to have experts and leaders. In America, you afforded a fair trial by a jury of your peers... not a jury of judges, police, law experts, and forensic scientists. I wasn't in the courtroom/jury room, but my gut tells me she was guilty (like almost everyone else). Even so, the outcome of this case is everything that is still right about America. The government (federal or state) cannot be given the liberty to just arrest people and lock them up or execute them without proving them guilty to a jury of their peers beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution failed horribly in this case and the jury did their job accordingly.

It's unfortunate because a child killer is walking free...

The Prosecutor attempted to find Casey Anthony guilty via the Press. At no time was any evidence presented that gave the cause or manner of death, no DNA on the tape used to cover the childs mouth, the "smell" evidence, the heart decal, etc.. The Prosecutors failed to show any of these were evidence that Casey murdered the child. I have my own personal opinion, just like everybody else, but you can't find a person guilty of murder because what is written in a news paper or your hear from a news broadcast. My belief that the whole Anthony Clan had a part in the death of this child, and the Grandfather had the leading if not the final role in the death of this precious baby.

Oh yes it was prosecutor incompetence.

They weren't incompetent. They had no case. They had to go to trial with what they had and it wasn't enough. They counted on the general public outrage for support and it didn't work.

bobbyg-"She didn't do it. People don't commit murder one and hang around to answer questions."

Are you serious? She is a sociopath and a pathological liar! She got people to believe her lies most of her life so why wouldn't she hang around to answer questions? She didn't do it, right? She probably came up with lies in her messed up head to convince herself of that. She had already moved on and deleted photos of her and her daughter so Caylee basically didn't exist anymore and she could have the life she really wanted. She's a liar who believes her own lies and a sociopath who believed she could get away with it so she didn't need to go into hiding. It's ridiculous and sickening to imagine someone like that walking free.

The majority of the posters here make me physically ill. How dare you group together 17 people who you DO NOT KNOW and call them irresponsible idiots who failed to perform the job given to them?

Why? Because the verdict was not the one you wanted or believed in your depraved minds was the correct one? Why? Because you joined in the office betting pool and lost? Why? Because you consider yourselves of a higher more intellectual brain power and superior in your judging skills than the jury plus alternates? Why? Because you are a spoiled bigot used to getting your own way and throw tantrums when you don't?

I could go on, but why bother? You have convinced yourselves you are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong.

Since your blood lust was not fulfilled by a guilty on all counts verdict you have turned it toward the jury and the defense team. And feel justified in doing so for Caylee's sake...Justice for Caylee. Here's a tip...2 year olds are loving, forgiving, tantrum throwing babies who have no idea what justice is. You don't want justice. You want the verdict to be on your terms and will use any front, including Caylee herself as your justification.

One thing you knuckle draggers have proven to me is that the ability to evolve passed you by a long time ago. This lynch mob mentality is a throwback to the 18th and 19th century when humans decided it was their God given right to enslave another race of humans because of their skin color. You disgust me and I am ashamed for all of you.

Sour grapes make a very bad wine. God knows the people here in the USA hate to lose at anything...especially when it means they don't get to crucify someone or get to watch the suffering they believe they have coming to them. So just answer this last question. How in the hell has this trial and it's outcome affected you in your day-to-day lives? It hasn't and it won't so grow up, let it go, and get a real life, please.

PS Bash away all you want. They are just words and cannot hurt me. I don't know you and don't really want to so it's invenerial to me.

Bash away, huh? You know, Realist. I have always been taught that the first person to the other side of the argument a name... lost. For the simple reason that they have no points to argue or facts to stand on... and your temper tantrum, and that is what it is... shows it.

The very SIMPLE FACT of the matter is that the jury missed the neglect/ abuse charge. There is no possible way that a rational person could justify that as "not guilty". There is NO excuse. Her child is dead or missing and she was FORCED to report it after 31 days. Most experts will tell you that when a child goes missing that the first 72 hours is the most important. 31 days!! Would you have voted not guilty? During those 31 days, she partied and got a tattoo celebrating her freedom. She misled the police so they couldn't find Caylee or couldn't focus on what they needed to do to find her. Does this sound like a responsible mother?

Judging by your 2 year old's temper tantrum, I'm guessing that you are or would be the same type of parent... to come to Casey's defense in such a feral way. The simple fact that you are defending the jury from such an obviously careless and neglectful use of their given responsibility, you must have an IQ that rivals their own backwoods 5th grade educations.

You ask how this trial has affected people. How often do you get to watch the murderer of a little girl walk smugly out of a courtroom... with a smile on her face. Hear that she'd like to have another child or adopt one, and just feel that sense of foreboding. To some of us, Realist... it is like the Jaws theme is playing. She will have another child, and when that child comes to the age when they can give away her lies... they will disappear as well. The sad thing is that even then... morons like you will still defend her and the idiot jury that couldn't put a simple puzzle together.

Oh, just a little FYI, Realist, slavery was around WAY before the 18th and 19th centuries. Opposed to popular belief, blacks were NOT the only people to be used as slaves thru out the ages. Maybe you'll learn about that when or if you make the 6th grade.

Realist, you are cute. Can I call you sometime? Anyone that uses a pseudo word in a sentence.....amazing. I believe the Jury did what they thought was right. I believe that the defense attorney did a great job (ergo a win). I believe the prosecution did the best they could. I also believe that Casey Anthony killed her daughter at worst and neglected her at best. The other thing I believe is that every person that is posting their opinion has a right to do so. I disagree that they have a blood lust it is simply frustration that we know in our heart of hearts that she is getting away with being a part of a child no longer being on this earth and dying in a horrible fashion.

My only real concern about the trial is this: If the jury dismisses the notion that Casey Anthony killed her child, it would be necessary in turn to believe that Casey Anthony and her father took a child that had died accidentally in a pool, covered her mouth with duct tape, wrapped her in garbage bags and placed her in a swamp. The defense stated that Casey didn't kill her, it was a tragic accident and they panicked. I could not and would not believe that this would be the end result. Perhaps the jurors could believe that.

My second thought is this, I believe that you, Realist, just took all of the people on this post, THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW, and made broad and generalized statements about their characters. Those in glass houses should not throw stones.

I also want you to know that I have Valium if you need it.

Realist: After all that.... "invenerial"? Unbeceivable!

Kinkomaster...manager of a Kinko copy franchise? An assumption on my part, but a reasonable one.

I am not lost, that is your opinion of me.

I also do not consider composing a somewhat longer post than most for the dissent a temper tantrum. I personally have dealt with truly abusive mothers whose children are still dealing with the emotional scars of abuse far into their adult lives. Not reporting your child missing is neglect, but legally cannot be construed as abusive behavior. Being an irresponsible parent does not necessarily equate to committing a murder.

I do not currently have a two year old in my home, but I have successfully raised four children. One of my children unfortunately seems determined to ratchet up as many crimes as possible in one's lifetime as a form of rebellion. However, the only support I offer is paying attorney fees. To insult the intelligence of the jury and myself as having a less than standard education or even uneducated is simply the lowest form of bullying and Neanderthal. I do, in fact have more than a primary school education and happen to be a seasoned jurist, although now retired.

As for viewing, in your opinion, the murderer of a child walk freely from a courtroom. She did not walk away free, but was finger printed and remanded to custody. She has also served time for the crimes she was found guilty of. I would like to add without the aid of video from the courtroom, which many jurisdictions do not allow precisely due to scenarios that could arise similar to ones in this case, you would never have seen her enter or leave the courtroom. The only effect on you I can glean from this is you were forced to acknowledge how powerless you are over the outcome, which can be quite daunting to some.

As to slavery I was not referring to the act of slavery itself, as it is still in existence as we post in the form of sex slavery and slavery to cartels. I was specifically referring to the white man enslaving the black man and considering him less than human because of the color of his skin.

I believe I have responded to all of your points. If there is nothing further I will rest. Enjoy your evening and your freedom.

Yeah, I think the jury really did screw this one up. Especially the child abuse charge?? What the hell was that, not guilty??? I don't know how in the hell the jurors thought that she wasn't at least guilty of that one. She never reported her kid missing for apprx. 30 days and within THOSE particular days there is documented evidence of her partying(pictures etc.) and the jury didn't think that was a little odd?? That evidence right there proves she was not worried about her child being missing and had NO intention of reporting it either. Those are FACTS. And last time I checked child neglect is a form of child abuse.

And when the child was finally reported as missing, it still wasn't the mother who called, it was the grandparents because they couldn't get any real answers out of their own daughter as to what is going on!!!

Realist:

"Depraved mind..." I believe the only one with a depraved mind would that of Casey Anthony.

You throw your little "judgements" about people around then end your comment with saying "...I don't know you..." That's about the ONLY think you got right in that post. You don't know me or anyone else on here, but seem to thing you have us pegged???

Really there is no credibility to your post, just a bunch of words wasting internet space!!!

TLW-2153722

I do apologize to you and the other posters for my generalizations. I simply take the job and defense of a jury's decision as most valuable and a worthy use of my time. I must also confess I was quite angry in my first post and was typing so furiously I thought I was going to break the keyboard.

Our justice system is the finest and the most fair in all of the world. Are mistakes made? Yes. Are we perfect? No. However, none can compare.

Thank you for your post, your comments, and the offer of Valium. :)

CaseyCreature: Helloooo....that's exactly what he did...confuse them with BS and other lies, and it worked! If you interject enough reasonable doubt into the equation, it will confuse the jury and they will have no other alternative but to acquit. This jury wasn't particularly bright, and probably easily influenced by others within the jury that wanted to be done with the case. Remember, it was originally split 6/6. The weaker ones rolled over.

both sides getting payed by the same company

Realist... ranting and name calling at a WHOLE board is pretty much a tantrum. Take it for what it was. You said it yourself... you were mad and pounding away at the keyboard. I'm not slamming you about it... I've been that mad before, but don't try to say it is something else. It belittles you when you are obviously a well-spoken person.

As for not reporting a child being neglect but not abuse... does it really matter? If one of your kids when they were little walked out of the house and got lost somewhere and couldn't get help, and you didn't call for help to find them... you wouldn't consider leaving them to the mercy of the wild a little abusive? Abuse is not always physical. Plus, it doesn't really matter in Casey's case if there was abuse or not. Neglect was proven beyond a doubt and that is all that was needed.

As for bullying you, you are whining about me challenging your IQ when you start off calling EVERYONE "knuckle draggers" and having "depraved minds". Really... you wanna cry about name calling. It is like someone throwing a sucker punch and then whining about their target defending themselves. sheesh

As of this Sunday, Casey will walk out of jail... free. Yes, she served 3 years of a 4 year sentence... nice to know that she gets time off for being in solitaire. Have you ever heard of Court TV? Been around for quite some time. I believe they show actual court cases, huh...

Do you actually think that the black man was the only group to be treated like that? Ever heard of the Irish? King Edward the Blackheart once said to not waste arrows and send in the Irish. How about the Romans? Do you realize that they enslaved everyone they conquered because they were less than human? I really hate to pop your little bubble, but the blacks were not the first to be considered less than human. If all you want to do is bring up the fact that whites have had blacks as slaves, point taken and race card noted. Just realize that it also happened in Africa... and probably still continues today.

Alright... I think I knocked back all your points. Now I need to get a little work done.

Realist-502574 I'm still waiting to hear the definition of "invenerial." Lmao! It's just imblepherical to me when people use non-words to yell at people!

@cali-i read an article about invenerial just the other day. they say penicillin won't cure it. btw, i love imblepherical. don't know wtf it means but i love it anyway..haha

Caseycreature--- when a police officer doesnt respond to a call when a bodys found once..twice,,,but comes on the third time,,is enough time for a body to completely decompose..,,swamp,,heat,,washing away DNA,,or finderprints...skin and flesh is gone since the police didnt do their job...and as for baez,,hes a liar too..cause defence lawyers also lie to get the accused free...no evidence no death penelty,,,sort of hard for the jury to fail when there was no evidence,,cause no thanks to the florida police not responding to a call of a body in the woods,,and i mean not responding,,they could of responded the first time,,while there was enough DNA and finger prints on the body to show,,,but nooooooooooooo,,,they didnt respond when it was too late...

Luck has nothing to do with it. What has a lot to do with it, is a Prosecution that was not prepared with the evidence required for a conviction after having 3 years to build a case. What smelled in this case was the prosecution, not the Jury. But people being people, someone has to pay but not the people that actually took the life of this innocent.

I agree with you completely - the fact that the prosecutor so badly bungled the case makes Baez a lucky Baffoon.

Exactly because he sure wasn't anything spectacular in the courtroom anyway. I don't care if he was able to get this baby killer off of all these charges, I wouldn't trust Baez's abilities to represent me in a speeding ticket trial!!!

Dan ... that's your take ....

My take is ... they were unable to do "a difficult job"!

I just ignored the lies and innuendos layed out by the defense. Doing that, it was clear (to me) where the guilt was.

Just my take ... but what pisses most off ... is that it's a certainty that she was guilty of far more than what she's paying the price for ... thus ... an injustice!

A couch juror can do that, but these 12 men and women were instructed by a the courts on what they could and couldn't do. They did a wonderful job.

Zorroacca44...you've got it all wrong - you're 'take' on the matter is that CA was guilty from day one. This is NOT how the judicial system works; one is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Seems to me that the prosecution team's biggest fault was ASSUMING someone's guilt without adequate proof, then ASSUMING a jury would feel the same. Thank goodness the jury did their job better than the prosecution did.

You may not like the verdict, I may not like the verdict, but neither one of us was there, neither one of us sat in that jury box, so understand that your opinion is just that - your opinion.

My opinion is that the jury did a wonderful job (unlike both the prosecution team and defense team) and nobody has the right to second guess or criticize them or their performance.

I am just as upset as everyone else about justice wasn't served. But to blame the jurors??? That is just not right. I watch this case closely. Let me tell you at the end of the day, I just couldn't come up with enough evidence to convict her. We still don't know how she died. I think there was a few people involved with this. Maybe we will never know, but for gods sake, it's not the jurors falt. Itls called politics among the lawyers. This whole case was based on LIES. Get over it move on. Just pray for the baby. If she is really guilty, she will pay in the end.

Why is it so hard to blame the jurors? They barely took notes and the ones that did, left their notebooks behind when they went off to deliberate. They never asked to see any of the evidence, hear any of the testimony, or asked any questions on anything... yet most of you want to give them a pass when it comes to their obvious lack of civic responsibility. "They did a difficult job"... "The did a wonderful job"... are you guys as daft as they were? Do you actually think justice was done? If you think it wasn't done, then they did a HORRIBLE job... PERIOD! Don't blame the prosecution. They presented everything and the jury ignored it all. Didn't even look at it. Didn't touch it. Didn't want to go over any testimony. Nothing! Yet... they did our system proud. You guys have a real low expectation for our system of justice.

Jose Baez got married at age 17 because of the child. He is 42 now so that would make his daughter around 24. I don't think that he and his second wife have kids. Not sure about that so I will check his bio.

Bezoar- totally agree!!!!

I thought he had a 7 year old daughter, fayse. There is also an infant, I think.

AMEN

I do not believe the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt as to first degree murder but this was a circumstantial case and they did prove Casey killed her child. I heard a comparison yesterday about circumstantial and it went like this - you wake up in the morning and it is wet all around and there are puddles in the road so you know that it rained. You didn't see the rain but you know it did. That is circumstantial. Casey was the last one with her child and her child ended up in a bag thrown away. Now you have to use common sense. The jury lacked the common sense to follow the law.

In saying this however I am disgusted at the way the jurors have been attacked. I disagree with their verdict but as an American I have to abide by their decision.

One thing that really bothers me is the way Casey's mother seems to want to have a life with her daughter again. She knows she killed her grandchild. I believe the problem with that family lies with the mother and has all along. Especially after hearing the interview with Casey's finance who testified how Cindy always put Casey down. She didn't stand a chance but that does not give her the excuse for what she did.

It's hard to determine time and manner of death for a skeleton found six months later. Circumstantial evidence requires analysis of the facts in the case, combined with some common sense. According to your reasoning, most mobsters would never get convicted of crimes at all. One fact in this case would have been insufficient, but collectively, the facts all pointed to Casey. I'm surprised the jury found her guilty of lying, despite the fact they viewed it on film. I'm also surprised they didn't question the fact that Caylee was dead. Seriously, these folks were totally out to lunch. If you didn't feel it was premeditated, fine, convict her of felony murder or manslaughter. But Not Guilty? Are you kidding me???

If the proved that Casey killed her child how, where and when did she do it... I don't remember that ever coming out. The prosecution proved nothing other than the child was dead and her skeletal remains were found in a swamp.

She did it in the car with duct tape, result dead kid, happy mom. Pretty sick really.

its not the where and when that matter, Brad, its the fact that she did it and common sense would tell anyone that, fake nanny, motive being with her then boyfriend no child in the way, choloform searches, the smell of death in her car the doll of the childs still in the car she wouldn't go anywhere with out it, buried in trash bags and blankets from the home, she was the last one seen with her child, the child is hers and she is responsible no matter what, the defense says the baby was dead already june 15th she drowned and it was a cover up and casey was there why get a tatooe that says the beautiful life when you know your child is dead, ill tell you why because, she wanted her dead to party and live the single life. I have seen convictions with no body, i have seen less evidence in animal cruelty cases and a conviction was made. You dont dump your car and not report a missing child unless your guilty

Luce,.....you hit the nail on the head!!

How could ANYONE doubt the guilt of this girl?

No one on that jury could have caused me to change my opinion about the guilt of this girl....talk about justice..this is one of the most outrageous case of INJUSTICE I've ever heard of.

I don't remember seeing much evidence

Totally agree with you about Jeff Ashton's arrogance. That may have made a difference. I did hear one juror say that they did not like the attitude of George Anthony when Baez was cross examining him. They just didn't like each other but the jury didn't know that.

I can appreciate the jury not being wild about George Anthony, but how could they possibly find greater credibility in Casey? They viewed her on film, the night of her daughter's death, renting movies with her boyfriend !!!!

thats not all the jailhouse tapes shows casey telling her father you are the best dad and grandfather anyone could ask for, so if he was such a molestor or murderer how the heck does that even fit. she took anyway out she could just like she always has invent more lies some idiot out there will believe her

@Gunner-3737828

I noticed the same thing, Casey was right in his face a few times, thought they were going to plant a big one on each other! I think there is something going on with those two scumbags.

oh please. You probably this stars of the big dipper are next to each other. It's a matter of perspective. Seing this CRAP as inconclusive is what the jurors saw through.

oh please. You probably this stars of the big dipper are next to each other.

WTF?

Lynn...Gunner....go check Wonderwall and see what THEY say about the whole Baez/Anthony romance. If they don't have anything, the National Enquirer might...right next to the story about aliens and bigfoot having kids.

sheesh.

I agree fayse. If prosecutors had to answer for their "wrongful convictions", maybe they wouldn't be as zealous.

High profile cases are a stepping stone in a prosecutor's career. If they can win, it's a definite move forward for them.

I am not sure he is guilty, the prosecution didn't convince me.

if the evidence doesn't convince you then thats just sad, you are probably one of the guys who finds her attractive and therefore cant believe she is capable of such things, the evidence should convince you not the prosecution or defense,

Rick...I agree with you totally! If the jurors had reasonable doubt about the premeditated murder but did feel she was NOT innocent meaning she had some level of responsibility in Caylee's death, then definitely go for the hung jury and a new trial. There IS evidence pointing smack at Casey Anthony and unless she decided to tell the world the whole truth and nothing but the truth, it still points to HER as the murderer. So a new trial might just shake the truth out of her hopefully. But just acquitting her because they didn't know what else to do is baloney. Hold her responsible until she can prove to us she is not if that is the case.

Despite their doubts, they obviously wanted the trial to end quickly and just go home. Common sense dictates there was little discussion of the evidence in this case. At the bare minimum, you'd think she'd have been found guilty of child abuse for not calling 911 for 30+ days.

Sorry, Baez didn't have to prove anything. The state is the only one with the burden of proof.

Well said!!!!

FloridaDemocratFrank--perfectly said

Again, VERY well put!!

don't go slamming Florida. We have nothing but northern that live down here.

You took the words right out of my mouth

Perhaps now with his payoff from Casey Anthony he'll finally man up and pay his child support.

That's doubtful. Probably a chin tuck and some liposuction. Gotta look good, you know.

No more 'disgusting' than the thought of someone being convicted on circumstantial evidence ONLY. The prosecution dropped the ball BIG TIME, maybe they thought the jurors were as stupid and gullible as they were. They thought if they used the 'emo ticket' they'd forget they had no evidence to present, only innuendo.

'Common sense' is never used to convict anyone....proof beyond a reasonable doubt is. Thank God for that.

Jet, did you watch the trial? There was MUCH more than common sense that could have convicted her.

Common sense isn't enough. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is.

The prosecution could have helped the jury believe what they were saying by putting forth a reasonable theory how she died, or why. They didn't. They goofed up big time and lost.

or maybe the jury was paid off or knew the pay off for finding her not guilty the evidence speaks for it self. no one needs to convince anyone of that

Agree -- the defense did not win the case, the state lost it.

Linda, It's great having a great mind like yours post your opinion. Too bad you are a comlete moron !!!!!

Linda: Wow...you are seriously paranoid...

the jurors did the right thing. Get over it and move on. Sounds to me like the state of Florida is the uneducated lazy ones and were too stupid to prove anything. How sad. The south wonders why they are known as being slow, this proves it.

The south may wonder, but we in the north know the truth...State proved case...Jury was in a hurry to go on PAID VACATIONS BY NETWORKS...i.e. Disney World by one juror...AND HIGH PAID INTERVIEWS. Open your eyes!!!

If you think the jurors are uneducated then you need to educate yourself about the burden of proof in a criminal case. They came to a perfectly reasonable verdict.

Wow Annie you talk about the south being slow, you should really think about yourself. Thats really pathetic you think that.

Ever place an order in a southern restaurant? That speaks for itself

Good one.

Sorry Ozzymusprime, you must have been speaking some foreign language....you wouldn't happen to be from Lawnguylan, Noo Yawk would you?

Get over yourself. Stupidity exists everywhere; just because folks in the South don't act like they're lifetime methamphetamine users, doesn't mean they're 'slow'. Why don't you try treating the people you meet in your travels better, and stop judging them by silly cartoon characterizations.

I couldn't actually call you a racist for your comment, so lets just leave it at 'bigot'.