1st, let's get one thing very clear- you are a complete piece of shit. period,

2. when the fuck did i say that, shitstain? never. when the fuck was this murdering mom killed by a vigilante mob? she wasn't, dickhead.

c. you can support this shithead murdering mom all you want and act like her acquittal and the majority not agreeing with that means there is some sort of breakdown in the system but the fact of the matter is our justice system is still intact.

and if you think that people voicing thier outrage about it has some sort of bearing on our 200+ year old justice system then it is very clear that in addition to your being a complete piece of shit dickhead, you are also the idiot in this.

go fuck yourself.

amazing how people are brainwashed by their media. this shit makes a good case that media in the US right now is undermining civil society and should be dealt with as such. incredible.

ridiculous country where nancy grace and tabloids trump the courts and rule of law.

like america has become a whole country of grocery store line up grannies.

how's anything changed? it hasn't. the system works, it has not been effected whatsoever. you people really think people voicing their outrage about the outcome is going to change a 200+ year old justice sytem that survived the civil war, civil right movement, abortion, roe v wade, snopesmonkey trial, free speech, etc. etc,, et al, on & on.

come on.

no point discussing this really. people are so brainwashed might as well argue with fred phelps about gays.

the american media is really an amazing thing. russia and china have nothing on it. amazing in an evil genius way.

http://www.google.com/search?q=colin...af e=off&tbs=

This bloke, by all accounts, was a bit of a horrible cunt. Media destroyed him, even after the acquittal, and mob mentality was all for 'street justice'.

Years later, they found the real murderer. Turns out that even though Stagg was a nasty bloke, he wasn't a murderer. Still, the media got some great circulation out of him :)

There were probably a bunch of people saying hold on, he was acquitted, you know, those who went out to "support this shithead murdering" bloke, but wtf did they know, right?

What's even funnier is that those stalking think they are in the right as well.

The girl was found not-guilty. Let her get on with her life.

Tabloid justice at a mini mart near you.

The trial was publicly televised completely from day one. The public was able to see EXACTLY how it went down.

They DID NOT have to rely on Nancy Grace to get their " facts ".

The public got to see ALL of the evidence while the jury got to see only what they were allowed.

The public got to see ALL court proceeding except the sidebars while the jury only saw what they were allowed.

Now I ask you, who is in a better position to form a judgement, someone that gets to see and hear EVERYTHING
or someone that only has access to a smaller portion of it.

Granted, that's the way the system works but it doesn't mean the verdict is always correct in relation to the ABSOLUTE truth.
The system allows for a lot of legal wrangling and the opportunity for the " smoking gun " evidence to be omitted when it would have proved beyond a doubt.

The people on the jury are in a better position of course, because they are shown evidence determined to be appropriate by law. The tv can show whatever they want and blur things and make inferences and innuendos.

Anyone remember the Scott Peterson trial? There was a day leading up to it where pictures from Petersons house were released to the media, and Nancy Grace had them. She showed a picture of an open phonebook on the kitchen counter and insisted that it was opened to Lawyers and claimed that it was evidence that Peterson knew he would be needing a lawyer. She went on for hours about it.

Next day it was revealed that it was open to Pizza as they had friends over for pizza that day.


People on the jury are absolutely in a better (meaning appropriate) position.

Maybe they should have trial by TV, get the phone votes in, etc. That sounds a much better way.

american convict.


:1orglaugh
prolly be more voting than in a presidential election eh

if you can't get any inkling on how the media framed this and lead you to their desired outcome and reality they want to project well then ... don't really have much to say here.

i doubt *the media* had a meeting or conference call way back when where *the media* decided they would orchestrate an acquittal.

The courtroom coverage was straight forward. No fancy editing or embellishment. It was as accurate as actually sitting in the court room except for the fact they were not allowed to show the jury.

I made this point in another thread and I'll make it again for you.

Lets say that the neighbor's security camera caught Casey drowning her child in the pool, putting the body in the garbage bags, using the duct tape then placing the body in the trunk of her car ( there is no such tape, just making an example )

The video tape is presented as evidence in court. The jury leaves while the judge, lawyers AND the public via live television takes a look at the tape. Without a doubt it is determined that Casey actually did murder the child.

The Judge sees it. The lawyers see it along with everyone else in the courtroom AND the public sees it. The jury doesn't.

Now through some legal wrangling the defense lawyer is successful in getting the video tape which would have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey murdered her child omitted from evidence and the jury never gets to see it.

How in the hell can you say the jury is in a better position to make a judgement than those that actually got to see the evidence.

That's because the jury weren't influenced by the media. I can't tell if that was the dumbest post of the day, or sarcasm tbh.

Let's say this didn't happen.

big thumbs up

you're time would be better spent asking yourself why you are devoting a large part of your life to something that means nothing in your day to day existence and what kind of psychological function it is performing for you. :2 cents:

I'm not saying it's because people want to kill her or anything, like in a poetic sort of "justice for Caylee" kind of way, but I do hear that duct tape sales are up 10% all over N America this week.

btw, the wiki on this trial is well done imo with tons of linked references. i was particularly impressed with the csi sort of evidence being introduced for the 1st time ever. scientists actually tested the air in the trunk of her car and some other test that showed the sticker on the duct tape after it had detoriated but a fingerprint dusting wiped out that evidence.

I'll bet she od's on cock sometime this week.

.

The Anthony case introduced new forensic science that has yet to be peer-reviewed. The University of Tennessee's "body farm" discovered "hair banding", a theory still in its early stages of scientific investigation, in which hair roots form a dark band after death. A hair found in the trunk of the Anthony car exhibited this pattern.[45] Air samples were sent to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.[45]

On Friday, October 24, 2008, a forensic report by Dr. Arpad Vass of the ORNL stated that results from an air sampling procedure (called LIBS) performed in the trunk of Casey Anthony's car showed chemical compounds "consistent with a decompositional event" based on the presence of five key chemical compounds out of over 400 possible chemical compounds that Dr. Vass' research group considers typical of decomposition (human decomposition was not specified). Whether or not the decomposition was human is still unknown, but was indicated as a possibility. The process has not been affirmed by a Daubert Test in the courts.[46] Dr. Vass' group also stated there was chloroform in the car trunk. In evidence hearings, Dr. Ken Furton, a professor of chemistry at Florida International University, stated that there is no consensus in the field on what chemicals are typical of human decomposition.[47] DNA samples could not confirm whether the source was alive or dead. The only DNA testing by the FBI was limited to 752 base pairs out of 16,569 base pairs (less than 5% of the mitochondrial genome sequence).
Evidence was found that someone had searched the Internet on the Anthony family computer for the use of chloroform and how to make it.[48][49][50][51] On November 26, 2008, officials released 700 pages of documents related to the Anthony investigation, which included evidence of Google searches of the terms "neck breaking", "how to make chloroform", and "death" on Anthonys' home computer.[48]

Investigators also entered into the body of evidence a photo from the computer of Ricardo Morales, an ex-boyfriend of Casey Anthony, which depicts a "joke" in which a man is using a chloroform-soaked rag to drug a woman.[52]

On February 18, 2009, documents released by the State Attorney's Office in Florida indicated that the same type of laundry bag, duct tape, and plastic bags discovered at the crime scene were found in the house where Casey and Caylee resided. Heart-shaped stickers were also recovered by investigators.[53] According to an FBI laboratory email, a heart-shaped outline was originally seen on the duct tape that was recovered from the mouth area of Caylee's skull,[53] but the laboratory was not able to capture the heart shape photographically and could no longer see it after the duct tape was dusted for fingerprint processing.

The documents also indicate that Cindy Anthony stated to them that a Winnie the Pooh blanket was missing from Caylee's bed. This type of blanket was found at the crime scene.[54] A "June 21" entry from Casey Anthony's diary was also released in which she expressed having "no regrets" and wrote "This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time."[55] A member of Casey Anthony's defense team, spokeswoman Marti MacKenzie, contended that this entry was written in 2003 prior to Caylee's birth, citing various evidence. The prosecution acknowledged that it did not know when the entry was made.[56] An FBI report released in 2011 stated that the diary in question was not on the market until 2004. Lead attorney Jose Baez called the evidence ?completely speculative" [57] and filed a motion to excluded it from evidence, whicih the judge denied.[58]

A "June 21" entry from Casey Anthony's diary was also released in which she expressed having "no regrets" and wrote "This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time."[59] A member of Casey Anthony's defense team, spokeswoman Marti MacKenzie, contended that this entry was written in 2003 prior to Caylee's birth, citing various evidence. The prosecution acknowledged that it did not know when the entry was made.[60] An FBI report released in 2011 stated that the diary in question was not on the market until 2004. Jose Baez called the evidence ?completely speculative" [61] and filed a motion to excluded it from evidence, which the judge denied.[62]

In other words you can't dispute my point.

Good one :thumbsup