This is not the jury's fault. (And it's not mine either.) The prosecution did a piss poor job. They rivaled the incompetence of the OJ jury. There is no logical doubt that Casey did the crime, but the prosecution left acres of reasonable doubt. Given what the jury had to work with, they returned the only verdict they could.
Remember, she wasn't declared innocent, she was found not legally guilty due to the fact that the prosecution did not prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
[ ... ]
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
As much as this verdict galls me, I have to agree w/COG here - the jury worked with the tools they had.
I've seen the complete opposite happen when a jury made their decisions based on emotions rather than the facts they had to work with; ppl who were obviously
NOT guilty, with much
LESS circumstantial evidence have spent
MANY years in prison because the jury decided with their heart instead of within the boundaries of the legal system, see
Clarence Elkins.
Our legal system is flawed, but in this case the jury did their job the way it was meant to be done.
Edited to say: If she was my kid, I'd let her come home long enough to beat the living snot outta her and turn myself in.