Did Casey Anthony really murder her 2-year-old daughter?

Millions of people around the world were glued to their television screens on July 5, 2011 waiting for the jury of seven women and five men to render their verdict with respect to the charges facing Casey Anthony. The occupations of the jurors were quite diverse: a student nurse, another student, a church lady, a retired nurse’s aid, a salesman, a secretary, a policeman’s daughter, a handyman, an employee of a mobile phone company, a gym teacher, a part-time cook and an employee of IT (whatever that is).

At 2:15 in the afternoon the jury returned their verdict of not guilty of the following charges: first-degree murder (which can be punishable in Florida by natural life in prison or death), not guilty of aggravated manslaughter of a child and not guilty of aggravated child abuse. However, they found her guilty of four counts of providing false information to law enforcement officers.

The verdict caused an uproar across the country and no doubt around the world. Many people believed that she really did murder her daughter.

The child is reported missing

Two-year-old Caylee Anthony and her mother, Casey Anthony were originally living with Casey’s parents, George and Cindy Anthony. According to Casey Anthony's father, Casey left the family's home on June 16, 2008, taking Caylee (who was almost 3) with her and did not return for 31 days.

During the month Casey and her daughter Caylee were away, Casey's mother, Cindy asked repeatedly during the month to visit her so they could see Caylee, but Casey claimed that she was too busy with a work assignment in Tampa, Florida. At other times, she said Caylee was with a nanny, later identified by Casey as Zenaida, ‘Zanny’ Fernandez-Gonzalez, or at theme parks or at the beach. It was eventually determined that although Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez did in fact exist, she had never met Casey nor Caylee Anthony, or any member of the Anthony family, or any of Casey's friends.

A judge has allowed this Kissimmee woman who is suing Casey Anthony for defamation of character to seek punitive damages. Casey Anthony's attorney, Jonathan Kasen, wanted a judge to dismiss the civil case filed by the Morgan & Morgan law firm, which is representing Zenaida Gonzalez, a 38-year-old mother of six. That didn't happen. Instead, Orange Circuit Court Judge Jose R. Rodriguez granted Gonzalez's request to amend the complaint with new details and to seek punitive damages, which are meant to punish wrongdoers. Sometimes punitive damages can exceed general damages.

Now this should certainly raise an interesting question, it being; why did the mother of two-year-old keep refusing to let her parents visit her and Caylee when they were in Tampa? I will get to that shortly.

Casey Anthony returned to Orlando without her daughter or her car. She was living somewhere else in the area other than at her parent’s home. Obviously the fact that Casey didn’t have her car or her daughter with her was of great concern to the little girl’s grandparents. Casey Anthony's mother, Cindy Anthony, tracked her daughter down and demanded answers regarding Caylee's whereabouts.

On July 13, 2008, while doing yard work, Cindy and George Anthony found affixed on their front door, a notice from the post office about a certified letter addressed to Casie.

George Anthony picked up the certified letter from the post office on July 15, 2008, and found that his daughter's car was in a tow yard. When George picked up the car, both he and the tow yard attendant noted a strong smell coming from the trunk. Both later testified that they believed the odor to be that of a decomposing body. When the trunk was opened it contained a bag of trash, but no human remains.

On the same day, Caylee’s grandmother contacted the Orange County Sheriff's Office and told them that her two-year-old daughter, Caylee was missing. A distraught Cindy also told the 911 operator "There is something wrong. I found my daughter's car today and it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car."

During the same call, Casey Anthony acknowledged to the 911 operator that Caylee had been missing for 31 days. If her child was missing for 31 days, why didn’t she report this to the police herself on the first day her child was missing?

She later explained that she didn’t contact the police because she was making efforts on her own to find Caylee. That is utter nonsense. I hardly think partying around during that 31-day period is actively looking for her supposed lost child. Besides, she told her parents during their various calls to her that her child was with her nanny, at a theme park or on the beach.

When Detective Yuri Melich, with the Orange County Sheriff's Department, began investigating the disappearance of Caylee Anthony, he found discrepancies in Casey's signed statement. When questioned, Casey said Caylee had been kidnapped by her nanny, Zanny. In fact no nanny had been looking after Caylee at any time during that 31-day absence from her grandparent’s home.

Casey Anthony continues to lie

Casey also told police that she (Casey) worked at Universal Studios, a lie she had been telling her parents for some time. Investigators brought Casey to Universal Studios on July 16, 2008, the day after Caylee was reported missing, and asked her to show them her office. Casey led police around for a while before admitting that she had been fired years before. Universal Studios told the investigators that she never worked for them.

Casey Anthony was first arrested that same day, and was charged the following day with giving false statements, child neglect, and obstruction of a criminal investigation. The judge denied bail, saying Casey had shown "woeful disregard for the welfare of her child."

I am inclined to think that her refusing to report her daughter missing is definite evidence that she had complete disregard for the welfare of her child.

On August 21, 2008, after one month of incarceration, Casey Anthony was released from the Orange County jail after her $500,200 bond was posted by the nephew of California bail bondsman, Leonard Padilla in hopes that Casey would cooperate and Caylee would be found. That in my opinion was a very stupid thing for him to do.
Casey was arrested again on August 29, 2008, on charges of forgery, fraudulent use of personal information, petty theft for forging $700 worth of checks and using her friend's credit cards without permission. On September 5, 2008, Casey Anthony was released again on bail after being fitted with an electronic tracking device.

Leonard Padilla, whose nephew posted Casey Anthony's bail, stated that if he had known before the bail was posted what he learned later, including the fact that Casey would not cooperate with him, he probably would not have helped get her out of jail. It was at this time he finally got his brains in gear.

Caylee’s body is found

On August 11, 12, and 13, 2008, tips of a suspicious object found in a forested area near the Anthony residence were called in to police by a meter reader, Roy Kronk. However, a search was not conducted at that time. After another report from the same man on December 11, 2008, skeletal human remains were found in a laundry bag. Duct tape was found on the face of the skull. On December 12, the remains were tentatively identified as Caylee's.

On December 19, 2008, medical examiner, Jan Garavaglia confirmed that the remains found were those of Caylee Anthony. She ruled the death as a homicide but listed the cause of death as undetermined.

In my opinion, the fact that the child’s face had Duct tape around the area of where the child’s mouth and nose were and that the child’s body had been placed in a plastic bag is clear evidence that the child had been murdered by suffocation.

Casies’ lawyer, Jose Baez said on the ABC News that Caylee drowned in the family pool and that there was no Duct tape placed on her face when her body was placed in the nearby swamp. I don’t believe that at all. If in fact the child drowned in the pool and its body was placed in the swamp without Duct tape being placed over its mouth and nose, then how did the Duct tape end up on her face?

As to the conclusion of the medical examiner that the manner of the child’s death could not be conclusively determined, I don’t take issue with that. Admittedly, the tape covering the child’s mouth and nose would imply that she was suffocated by someone but there is always the possibility (even if it is highly unlikely) that the tapes were placed over her mouth and nose after she had died. If that is what really happened, I cannot really understand in my wildest imagination why that would be done.

Cause of death of Caylee

I am convinced that she was murdered by being suffocated to death by an adult. If the child’s body had been found shortly after the little girl was murdered, the medical examiner would only have to look at the child’s eyes etc., for the telltale signs of suffocation. Evidence of suffocation may include small red or purple splotches in the eyes and on the face and neck as well as the lungs (petechial hemorrhages). Unfortunately, this kind of evidence was not available to the medical examiner because of the decomposition of Caylee’s body. It is too bad that the police didn’t act on the first tip given to them on August 11th that there was something suspicious in the swamp. If they had, there might have been evidence available to them with respect to the manner of the child’s death.

The child’s body was found near the intersection of South Chickasaw Trail and Suburban Drive, on the edge of the Anthonys' neighborhood about 10 miles southeast of downtown Orlando. Sheriff's Office spokesman Jim Solomons said that a utility worker found the body at 9:32 a.m. on December 11th in a wooded area less than a half-mile from the house Caylee lived in with her grandparents and mother.
Who really killed Caylee Anthony?

Now ask yourself these rhetorical questions. Who was the last person to see Caylee alive? Here is another question for you. Why did Caylee’s mother refuse to let her grandparents visit Caylee during the 31 days the girl’s mother supposedly was caring for her in Tampa?

And here is a real interesting question for you. Why did Caylee’s mother not report that her daughter was missing for 31 days? days?

In my opinion, I am honestly convinced that Casey murdered her child after she left their home to go to Tampa and she murdered her daughter shortly after she left her home. Exactly where in Florida she murdered her, I have no idea but if in fact there was the smell of human remains in her car and that was because human remains were at some time in the car, then the girl had to have been murdered somewhere other than where the girl’s remains were eventually found.

Casey Anthony was offered a limited immunity deal by prosecutors until September 2, 2008 but did not take it. As it turned out later, that was a smart decision on her part.

Prior to the discovery of Caylee’s remains in December of that year, Casey Anthony was indicted by a grand jury on October 14, 2008 on charges of felony murder, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child and four counts of providing false information to police. She was then arrested for the fourth time. She entered a plea of not-guilty to all charges. On October 21, 2008, the charges of child neglect were dropped against Casey. In a statement that morning, the State Attorney's Office explained: "The neglect charges were premised on the theory that Caylee was still alive. As the investigation progressed and it became clear that the evidence proved that the child was deceased, the State sought an indictment on the legally appropriate charges." Casey continued to maintain throughout all the time she was in prison for almost three years waiting for the trial and also during her trial that she didn’t murder her child.

Jury selection began on May 9, 2011, at the Pinellas County Criminal Justice Center in Clearwater, Florida, because the case had been so widely reported in the Orlando area and as such, their opinions might be tainted. For this reason, the jurors were brought from Pinellas County to Orlando for the trial. Jury selection took longer than expected and ended on May 20, 2011, with twelve jurors and five alternates being sworn in. The panel contained nine women and eight men. It was estimated that the trial would last about two months, during which the jury would be sequestered to avoid influence from information available to them from outside the courtroom.

The trial of Casey Anthony

The trial began on May 24, 2011, at the Orange County Courthouse, with Judge Belvin Perry presiding. The proceedings stretched to more than six weeks and featured allegations of sexual abuse, questions regarding Casey Anthony's competence and various theories on what happened to Caylee. The jury listened to more than 33 days of testimony and looked at 400 pieces of evidence and all the time being sequestered in a hotel for all 33 days of the trial including days when they were excuded from the courtroom during motions etc.

In the opening statements, prosecutor Linda Drane Burdick described the story of the disappearance of Caylee Anthony day-by-day. The defense, led by Jose Baez, presented its claim that Caylee drowned accidentally in the family's pool on June 16, 2008, and was found by George Anthony, who then covered up Caylee's death. Baez also alleged that George Anthony had sexually abused Casey since she was eight years old, and also claimed that Casey's brother Lee had made sexual advances toward Casey; he was even given a paternity test to see if he was Caylee's father. However, the defense offered no proof of any sexual abuse of Casey by either George or Lee Anthony; consequently the defense was not allowed to mention claims of sexual abuse in their closing arguments.

Prosecutors pointed to Casey Anthony's behavior during the 31 days before Caylee was reported missing as evidence of her guilt.

According to testimony, Casey Anthony was not looking frantically for her missing child as she later told police. Instead, she moved out of her parents' home and stayed with her then-boyfriend, Tony Lazzaro. She also got a tattoo saying "Bella Vita" (Italian for ‘beautiful life’) and went shopping, witnesses said. She also partied at Orlando nightclubs and participated in a ‘hot body’ contest at one point, according to testimony given at her trial.

Her lawyer said to ABC News the following day after the trial that people grieve in certain ways and partying was Casey’s way of grieving for the death of her child.

Losing someone you love is very painful. After a significant loss, you may experience all kinds of difficult and surprising emotions, such as shock, anger, and guilt. Grieving is a personal and highly individual experience. How you grieve depends on many factors, including your personality and coping style, your life experience, your faith, and the nature of the loss. The grieving process takes time. Some people start to feel better in weeks or months. For others, the grieving process is measured in years. Not in my wildest imagination can I fathom any mother who has suffered from the death of her child feeling better within a week after the child dies. What follows in the next two paragraphs is clear evidence that her so-called grief was short lived.

On February 18, 2009, An entry from Casey Anthony's diary was released. The following diary entry by Casey Anthony is dated "June 21" (five days after she took Caylee for the supposed trip to Tampa) and if she is to believed, after her daughter died in the pool. It reads:

“I have no regrets, just a bit worried. I just want for everything to work out OK. I completely trust my own judgment and know that I made the right decision. I just hope that the end justifies the means. I just want to know what the future will hold for me. I guess I will soon see. This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time. I hope that my happiness will continue to grow– I've made new friends that I really like. I've surrounded myself with good people. I am finally happy. Let's just hope that it doesn't change.” unquote

Lazzaro and other friends and acquaintances of Casey Anthony's testified that at no time during that month did she tell anyone her daughter was missing or ask for help, and she did not seem anxious or sad. When asked where Caylee was, she told them the child was with her nanny, a woman named Zenaida Gonzalez. Eventually confronted by her family, Casey Anthony then stated that Gonzalez had kidnapped Caylee. She told her parents other stories, including that she and Caylee had been in Jacksonville staying with a wealthy suitor, Jeffrey Hopkins.

Authorities never found a nanny who Casie claimed looked after her child. They did however find a woman named Zenaida Gonzalez, who denied ever meeting the Anthonys and as said earlier in this article, she later sued Casie for defamation of character.

A man named Jeffrey Hopkins took the stand and said he was an acquaintance of Anthony but that the two had never dated. The wealthy suitor and the nanny were among a host of people Casey Anthony chose to claim as her friends, her defense attorneys acknowledged. Her attorney referred to them as her ‘imaginary friends’.

As far as I am concerned, they were untruthful alibis she conjured up to throw the suspicion aimed at her to others whom she perhaps hoped that Caylee’s death would be aimed in their direction instead of hers. Naming these innocent people in my opinion was not done by a woman possessed of a diseased mind who imagined things. It was done by a woman who deliberately tried to throw the death of her child in their direction as a ploy to raise the issue of reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors with respect to her own role in her daughter’s death.

Years ago, there was a case where a man in Toronto was charged with the hit and run death of a woman. During the trial, the lawyer for the defence suggested that the woman’s husband was the person who killed the woman despite the fact that the woman died from an impact from the defendant’s car. It is unfortunately a common ploy brought about by the lawyers of guilty defendants to confuse the juries into giving their clients the benefit of reasonable doubt.

Casey Anthony's car and the odor emanating from its trunk was another prong of the state's case against her, which admittedly was largely circumstantial evidence. On June 27 2008, she abandoned her car at an Orlando business, saying it had run out of gas, according to testimony. It later was towed to a wrecker yard, where it remained until July 15, when her parents, George and Cindy Anthony, noticed a letter from the tow yard and went to pick it up. It is interesting to note that their daughter didn’t tell them that her car had been abandoned by her. One is forced to ask why she chose to abandon her car. If she ran out of gas, that would be no reason to abandon her car permanently. But if she wanted the car to be taken to a car junk yard and perhaps be crushed, then any evidence of her daughter’s body being in the trunk of her car would be forever gone.

Numerous witnesses, including a tow yard employee and George Anthony, said there was a vile smell coming from the car's trunk. The prosecution alleges and a number of witnesses testified that the smell was that of human decomposition.

A cadaver dog brought to the car was alerted to the possible presence of human decomposition in the trunk. Arpad Vass, a research scientist at Tennessee's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, testified that forensic testing of air samples, carpet, scrapings from the wheel well and a spare tire cover found a handful of compounds associated with human decomposition.

Vass also said that his testing showed chloroform to be present at a "shockingly high" level on a carpet sample from the trunk. Defense experts who testified, however, disagreed with Vass' findings and found low amounts of the substance, which is present in a number of household cleaning products. However, prosecutor Jeff Ashton pointed out to jurors, none of the defence experts disagreed that chloroform was present.

If the little girl was chloroformed in order to make her unconscious before her mouth and nose were taped, and the carpet in the trunk of the car had high levels of chloroform on the carpet, does it not follow that the little girl was chloroformed in the trunk of the car and then murdered by having Duct tape placed across her mouth and nose until she suffocated to death. And ask yourself this question. Whose car was it and why was the car later abandoned?

Can you see it now? The defence was attempting to muddy the waters again by telling the jurors that there had been household cleaning products in the trunk in hopes that the chloroform information would be later ignored by them during their deliberations.

Searches conducted on the computer in the Anthony home where Casie was living was another focus of the state's case. Computer experts testified that in March 2008, three months before Caylee disappeared, someone searched for keywords including "chloroform," "how to make chloroform" and "alcohol."

Cindy Anthony took the stand during the defense's case and testified that she was the person who had searched for chloroform, saying that it evolved from a search for "chlorophyll" (a green pigment found in almost all plants) as she was trying to determine if her dog's habit of eating bamboo plants in the back yard was making it tired. She was perjuring herself in order to protect her daughter. Prosecutors introduced work records showing Cindy Anthony was at work at the time the searches were conducted. She countered by saying that she could have left early that day, as she often took company time off from working overtime.

An attorney for Cindy Anthony's former employer took the stand as a rebuttal witness. He brought work records that he said showed that someone using Cindy Anthony's credentials was logged in and using a desktop computer at her office on the days when those searches were done on her family's home computer. Obviously the searches were done by Casey and no one else. Her mother had perjured herself when she was trestifying.

On the defense's contention that Caylee drowned in the Anthony pool, Cindy Anthony testified that Caylee was able to climb into the pool on her own. But she admitted that the toddler could not have put on the pool's removable ladder or opened gates leading to the area. Baez (Casey’s lawyer) told jurors in his closing argument that Cindy Anthony may have left the ladder up the night before, when she and Caylee went swimming, although she previously testified that she did not.

Anthony’s attorneys had been suggesting that the girl drowned in the family’s pool. They said that Casey Anthony panicked and that her father, a former police officer, decided to make the death look like a homicide by placing duct tape over the child’s mouth and dumping the body in some nearby woods. George Anthony obviously denied that.

Why would anyone in his right mind, especially a former police officer, cover up an accident by making it look like a homicide? This just goes to show you how far some defence lawyers will go to throw mud into clear water so that those looking at the water are confused as to what they really see in it.

Jurors heard hours of forensic testimony, receiving crash courses in DNA, hair analysis and chemistry, etc.

Experts testified that a hair found in Casey Anthony's trunk had a band that suggested it was from a decomposing body. The hair was similar to Caylee's, according to forensic experts, but could not absolutely be proved to be hers.
Jurors heard testimony about items found with Caylee's remains. A Winnie the Pooh blanket matched the one found in the little girl's room at the Anthony home. The laundry bag that prosecutor Ashton told jurors served as Caylee's coffin was one of a matching set. The other was found at the home. And all that remained of the little girl's T-shirt, saying "Big Trouble Comes in Small Packages," were some letters and the stitching around the collar.

On January 22, 2009, the Florida State Attorney's Office released 311 pages of new documents in the Caylee Anthony case. According to the documents, Caylee's skeletal remains had been placed in a cloth laundry hamper bag, prior to being placed inside a black plastic garbage bag. The documents further reveal that a backpack with the word 'adorable' on it, a Winnie the Pooh blanket, a size 3T shirt, a kid's pair of striped white shorts and small, cloth-type, iron on letters were found inside the bag. Perhaps most unsettling are paragraphs within a search-warrant affidavit, which detail the discovery of the remains and also the discovery of a "heart shaped" sticker that had been placed on duct tape that was found wrapped around the child's skull which had also covered her mouth.

Included in the documents released by the State Attorney's Office in Florida was the statement 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 in the home. 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, 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.

Who would have access to such a blanket in the Anthony home other than Casies’ parents and brother? Prosecutors later pointed out in closing arguments of the trial that Casey Anthony had access to all those items found at the place where her daughter’s body was found. Of course, others in the family also had access to those items but does anyone with a sound mind really believe that her parents and brother committed the murder?

During their case, prosecutors argued that Anthony killed Caylee in June 2008 because the toddler interrupted her self-centred, carefree partying and love life.
The defense called a woman to the stand who had previously volunteered in the search for Caylee. Krystal Holloway testified that she and George Anthony (Casey’s brother) had an affair. Holloway said that he once told her what happened to Caylee was "an accident that snowballed out of control." George Anthony denied the affair and prosecutors used Holloway's statement to police to say she was taking George Anthony's comment out of context. According to the statement, Holloway told authorities that George Anthony said he believed Caylee's death stemmed from an accident and that Casey Anthony may have covered it up somehow.

Throughout the trial, the pain experienced by Casey Anthony's family was evident. Both her father and mother sobbed on the stand at times recalling their lives with their granddaughter. George Anthony also cried as he testified about his January 2009 suicide attempt, which came shortly after Caylee's remains were identified.
One of the most egregious unfounded accusations made during the trial was when the defence lawyer questioning Casey’s father, asked if he ever sexually abused his daughter. The lawyer in his opening statement said that Casey’s father would enter her daughter’s room after Casey had gone to bed beginning when she was eight and inappropriately touch her. George Anthony denied ever sexually or otherwise abusing his daughter.

Where would a lawyer get that kind of idea to ask that kind of question? Obviously from Casey Anthony who the lawyers admitted at their opening statement is a pathological liar.

As for why Casey lied, her attorneys said that she behaved that way because she had been trained to lie through years of sexual abuse by her father. Judge Belvin Perry ruled, however, that there was no evidence that Casey was abused and ordered that it not be mentioned in closing arguments.

That kind of false accusation against one’s parents is so abhorrent, it defies human decency. I watched the last stages of this woman’s trial and immediately after the jury found her not guilty of the three major charges, her parents stood up and left the court room. If they really believed that their daughter hadn’t murdered their granddaughter, they would have gone to her and embraced her. By turning their backs on her and walking out of the court room before the proceedings were over is a sign of their contempt they have for her.

What she did to them was; (1.) accuse her father of sexually abusing her) (2.) accuse her brother of having sex with her, (3) acusing her father of attempting to cover up the crime and (4) murder their beloved granddaughter.
No parent would have want such a daughter in their midst and I hope for the sake of their sanity, they cut this woman out of their lives forever.

On June 30, the defense team for Casey Anthony rested, without Anthony testifying in her own defense. (which is her right)

On July 3, closing arguments were given. Jose Baez acting for Casey Anthony contended that there were holes in the prosecution's forensic evidence, saying it was based on a "fantasy." Fellow defense attorney Cheney Mason then followed with an additional hour-long closing argument.

After the prosecution detailed all the evidence, it explained Casey Anthony’s motive for killing her daughter. The prosecutors argued that Anthony killed Caylee in June 2008 because the toddler interrupted her carefree partying and love life.
The jury began deliberations on July 4, 2011.

The verdict

Chief Judge Belvin Perry announced the verdict at 2:15 on the afternoon of July 5th. after getting word the jury had decided on their verdict. As his clerk read the verdict, Casey Anthony first looked down, heeding the Judge’s warning against emotional outbursts. She began to cry after the most serious charges produced not-guilty verdicts, including a not-guilty verdict on a count of aggravated child abuse. When they had all been read, Anthony began to sob and hugged lead defense attorney Jose Baez as the prosecutor Jeff Ashton shook his head in disbelief.

After a round of hugs with her defense team, a now-smiling Anthony was led away by bailiffs, and her attorneys faced reporters. They took no questions, but they blasted the media legal pundits for the way Anthony’s case was handled.

“I hope that this is a lesson to those of you who have indulged in a media assassination for three years, biased, prejudice, and incompetent talking heads saying what would be and what ought to be,” said attorney Cheney Mason.

“I am disgusted by some of the lawyers who did this and I can tell you that my colleagues from coast to coast, border to border, have condemned this whole process of lawyers getting on television and talking about cases they don’t know a damn thing about.”

“I want to start off by saying while we’re happy for Casey, there are no winners in this case,” said who had been criticized for his relative inexperience, his approach to the case and his unsupported claims in trial that Caylee was the victim of an accidental drowning and cover up.

“Caylee has passed on far, far, too soon. What my driving force has been for the last three years has been always to make sure that there has been justice for Caylee and Casey because Casey did not murder Caylee, it is that simple.” He also said.
“Today our system of justice has not dishonored her memory by a false conviction.”

The trial has to be considered in terms of notoriety, no different than the infamous O.J. Simpson trial in which footballer was accused of murdering his ex-wife and her boyfriend. He too was acquitted despite the fact that there was real damming evidence produced to the jury that showed that he was at the scene of the murder at the time when they were both knifed to death. If fact, his wife’s boyfriend’s blood was on O.J. Simpson’s shoes. What more damming evidence can you get than that kind of evidence?

In my opinion, there has been no justice for Caylee or her grandparents. Just because the murdered girl’s mother beat the rap doesn’t necessarily mean that justice has been served.

O.J. Simpson beat his rap despite the fact that one of the victim’s blood was on his shoes. Justice certainly wasn’t served in that case for his victims or their families. I witnessed a trial in which witnesses testified they saw a man strangle a woman to death and yet he was acquitted because the jury excepted the defendant’s lawyer’s argument that perhaps she wasn’t really dead at that moment and someone else went into her room and strangled her later. Incidentally, several years later, the defendant attempted to strangle another woman and got twelve years in prison. Meanwhile, there was no justice for the dead woman he really strangled to death and her family and friends. If you think that those jury verdicts were weird, consider the verdict recently given in Quebec, Canada when a jury was deciding the fate of a doctor who murdered his two young children (ages 3 and 5) by knifing them to death and then mutilating their bodies because he wanted to take revenge on his wife who was leaving him. The jury accepted the defence lawyer’s argument that the doctor was not capable of the criminal intent to murder and mutilate his two young children because at that time, he was suffering from anxiety, depression and had been contemplating suicide also.

“While the family may never know what has happened to Caylee Marie Anthony, they now have closure for this chapter of their life. They will now begin the long process of rebuilding their lives,” said attorney Mark Lippman, speaking for Anthony’s estranged family, who were blamed during trial for sexually abusing Casey, sexual affairs, lies and covering up Caylee’s true demise. He added that despite the baseless defense chosen by Casey Anthony, the family believes that the jury made a fair decision based on the evidence presented, the testimony presented, the scientific information presented and the rules that were given to them by the Honorable Judge Perry to guide them.”

The verdict means that officially, Caylee Anthony’s killer is still at large. The verdict cannot be appealed so Casie Anthony is free to go after the things she really wanted, partying and her freedom without having the burden of having to care for her young child.

Prosecutors made no statement about what, if anything, will be done to pursue any other leads in that case. Lamar (one of the prosecutors) did say that the police and prosecutors will go back to work on the thousands of other cases they have, including other cases involving dead children.

Then Lamer remarked, “This is justice in America.” My response to that statement is; “Was it really justice?”

I did not say she was innocent," Jennifer Ford, a 32-year-old nursing student who was the first juror to speak publicly about Anthony's acquittal told ABC News on the day after the trial, "I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be." She also said that the jury didn’t really know how Caylee died.

That doesn’t make any sense at all. There have even been convictions for murder in the absence of bodies although historically, cases of this type have been hard to prove since the prosecution must rely on other evidence, usually circumstantial. Recent developments in forensic science make it less likely that such a murder will go unpunished. Surely the tape covering the mouth and nose of Caylee is sufficient evidence that she was murdered by suffocation.

Ms. Ford did say however that the jurors were "sick to their stomachs" over the decision to deliver a "Not Guilty" verdict

With respect to her statement that there wasn’t enough physical evicence to prove that the baby was murdered, consider the following cases. Nat Fraser, who was convicted of murdering his estranged wife after she vanished from her home in Moray in 1998, lost an appeal on may 6, 2008 against his life sentence. Fraser, 49, was ordered to spend at least 25 years in jail in 2003 after a jury found him guilty of killing his wife, Arlene, a mother of two, whose remains have never been found. The previous November, his lawyers claimed that vital evidence casting doubt on his guilt had been withheld from his defence team at the time of his trial, making Fraser a victim of a miscarriage of justice.Three senior judges at the Court of Appeal in Edinburgh refused to overturn his conviction, and described the circumstantial evidence against Fraser as “compelling”.

Ms. Ford also said that Casey’s brother George when giving his testimony was evasive when answering questions by both the prosecution and the defence. She also said that in her opinion, George and Casey were both present whenCaylee died but she added that she didn’t know if Casey actually killed her child. She admitted that she had a gut feeling that Casie killed her child but she didn’t hear any proof (from the prosecution) confirming that she killed her child. She also said that a ‘not guilty verdict’doesn’t necessarily mean that she is innocent. That is true of course.

Ms. Ford has subsequently been awarded a trip to Disney World, courtesy of ABC/Disney because of her interview with ABC News in which she is claiming that she never said Casey is innocent and was sickened by the verdict

What is meant by reasonable doubt?

The burden of proof lies with the prosecutor. It is the prosecutor who must convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant is guilty. The doubt must be reasonable in a sense that any reasonable person hearing and seeing all the evidence presented in court would finally conclude that there is reasonable doubt in his or her mind as to the guilt of the defendant.

The ‘air of reality’ is a standard of proof used to determine whether a criminal defense may be used. The test asks whether a defense can be successful if it is assumed that all the claimed facts are to be true. In most cases, the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution, negating the need for a defense of any kind. In other words, the defence can remain mute through the entirety of the trial and rely on the jury taking the position that the prosecution hasn’t proved its case against the defendant. There was such a case in Toronto where the defendant who represented himself didn’t say one word at his trial. He was convicted nevertheless so as one can see, this approach has risks that are inherent.

Since it is impossible to read what was in the Casie Anthony juror’s minds, it is difficult to really fathom as to how they reached their verdict. However in all fairness to the members of the Casie Anthony jury, I really can’t fault them for arriving at the verdict they arrived at. I have heard judges in the past arriving at similar verdicts after stating that although they believe that the defendants were guilty, they were forced to give them the benefit of reasonable doubt because they weren’t satisfied that the evidence they heard against the defendants was enough to convict them.

Despite what I have just said, I have to admit that in my opinion, during the Casie Anthony trial, there was sufficient circumstantial evidence submitted by the prosecutor to warrant a guilty verdict but we must not forget that these jurors were not trained criminal lawyers or highly experienced prosecutors who understand just how much circumstantial evidence is required to arrive at a guilty verdict. They probably worked on that age-old premise that it is better to let nine guilty defendants go free than to convict the tenth defendant who is innocent.

They may have been aware that many innocent people have in the past, been imprisoned for life and in many cases, condemned to death based on evidence that was solely speculative. Admittedly, there was a lot of evidence that tied this woman to the death of her child and she gave false information to her family and the police but was it enough to actually prove that she was the person who killed her child?
If I was on the jury, I would have been convinced that she was the person who killed her child and even if I was the only one of twelve jurors who arrived at that conclusion, I wouldn’t have wavered.

I really do appreciate however the concerns that many people have, including this woman’s jurors, the concerns being that no one wants to see innocent people imprisoned or put to death. But simply having that concern doesn’t mean that guilty persons should be found not guilty.

In my respectful opinion, there was enough evidence submitted to the jury by her prosecutors that any reasonable juror would had to accept as being valid and which would have left them with no other viable alternative but to find this woman guilty. I think the fact that she never once told anyone in 31 days that her child was missing while it was in her care and lied about where her child was when the child was actually dead should have been enough evidence to satisfy any juror that this woman really killed her child.

The four remaining charges she was facing

Casey Anthony while being questioned by the police lied four times to them. In the State of Florida, lying to police during an investigation while being interviewed by the police is a misdemeanor and is punishable by one year in jail for each lie and a fine of $1,000 for each lie. In Canada, lying to the police while being interviewed as a suspect is not a crime.

On Juy 7th, Casie Anthony was brought back to court and found guilty of lying to detectives trying to find her daughter in July 2008. (1) She lied to them about working at the Universal Studios theme park, and (2) about leaving her daughter with a non-existent nanny named Zanny and/or about leaving the girl with friends, and (3) about working for Universal Studios and (4) about receiving a phone call from her daughter who was already dead.

He sentenced her to one year on each of the four counts and said that the sentences were to be served consecutively. However, he has reserved his decision as to how much of those sentences that equal a four-year eriod of time in prison until he has had an opportunity to consider the 997 days she has already been in custody and the additional time she will remain in custody until the next hearing. At that time, I will give my readers an update which will be placed at the end of this article.

My comments with respect to Casie Anthony

Every community, no matter what its size, has filth that is no different than that which goes down a toilet and yet its external appearance is that of humans and this woman is that kind of filth. Those kinds of filth who murder their children or their parents to further their own interests are the kind of filth that every decent person should avoid. Unfortunately, that isn’t always possible. Their seemingly ‘on the surface’ lack of anxiety and guilt may successfully enable them to avoid suspicion of their real character.

The term ‘psychopath’ often brings to mind the images of sadistically violent individuals such as serial killer, Ted Bundy or the fictional character of Dr. Hannibal ‘The Cannibal’ Lecter in the book and movie The Silence of the Lambs.

But I believe the defining characteristic traits of psychopaths actually cover a much broader spectrum of individuals than most of us would ever imagine. The psychopath is a truly self-absorbed individual with no conscience or feeling for others and for whom social rules have no meaning. Such persons appear to have no understanding or appreciation or willingness to accept ethical values. They glibly claim to adhere to high moral standards that in reality have no apparent connection with their behavior. Their development in having a conscious is severely retarded or alternatively nonexistent. They are selfish, callous, exploitive which associates them with chronic anti-social behavior.

Further, they generally have a callous disregard for the rights, needs and wellbeing of others. They have developed a tendency to learn how to take rather than earn what they want. Many are prone to deviate and unconventional behavior and often break the law impulsively without any thought of the consequences that they may receive as a result of their behavior.

Psychopaths are often charming and likeable with a disarming manner that easily wins them friends. Although they are consummate liars, they usually seem sincerely sorry for what they have done in hopes that forgiveness will follow. They readily find excuses and rationalizations for their anti-social conduct, typically projecting the blame on others, just as Casie Anthony tried to do when she tried to explain away her missing and later dead child. They try to convince other people that they are not at fault even when their fault is so obvious. She is a pathological liar and yet despite the fact that her lies were so stupid and unsustainable, she told them anyway while believing that those whom she told them to were too stupid to discover the falseness of her lies.

When this woman falsely accused her father of sexually molesting her when she was eight and falsely accused her brother of having sexual relations with her and made these two false accusations so that the jury would be sympathetic to her, it is clearly the actions of a psychopath.

When asked where Caylee was, she told the police that her child was with her nanny, a woman named Zenaida Gonzalez. Eventually confronted by her own family, Casey Anthony then stated that Gonzalez had kidnapped Caylee. It was later established that the two women never met at any time. This is more evidence that Casie Anthony is a psychopath.

The fact that she claimed to the police that the reason why she was partying right after her baby was missing was a form of grief, is also the sign of a psychopath.

Psychopaths have no empathy (feelings) towards other human beings. They are indifferent to the needs of others and they are the kind of people who think entirely of themselves at the expense of others. The fact that she was more interested in being free from the responsibilities of raising a small baby so that she could party and be with her boyfriend without the encumbrances of caring for her baby and for these reasons, murdered her baby, is unquestionably the actions of a psychopath.

Psychopaths cannot be understood in terms of antisocial rearing or development. They are simply morally depraved individuals who represent the ‘monsters’ in our society. They are unstoppable and untreatable predators whose behavior is planned, purposeful and emotionless.

I believe that most all of us know or have come in contact with the kind of psychopathic individuals I have described at some times in our lives without even fully realizing just how bad they really are.

People tend to believe that female killers are ugly like Florida serial killer, Aileen Wuornos was. Not all female killers are ugly. Casie Anthony is quite pretty but then so was serial killer Bundy quite handsome. Obviously looks can be quite deceiving. Both were psychopaths. Incidentally, both Wuornos and Bundy were executed in Florida for their crimes.

Casie Anthony isn’t the only pretty woman who has killed her child. Diane Downs who was also pretty chose a romantic relationship over her own children. When her lover, Lew, made it clear that a life with children was not in his master plan, she began to create a twisted scheme in which she would destroy her offspring, who had become only obstacles to her own happiness. Her plot to kill her children was a desperate, last-ditch attempt to hold on to a man who wanted out. Stopping the car along a deserted stretch of road, she killed Cheryl, her second child, aged 7, in cold blood. Christie and Danny were also shot. Her oldest daughter, Christie, who was eight, survived the attack, and so did 3-year old Danny Downs. However, her little son was paralyzed from the waist down after being shot at near point-blank range. Christie was also left with serious injuries, such as paralysis on one side of her body, and speech difficulties. Note the similarities between her and Casie Anthony, She too stopped by the side of the road and murdered her two-year-old daughter.

Susan Smith was also a pretty woman but her psyche was a witches’ brew of personality disorders, which culminated in the deaths of her two very young sons, Michael and Alex. Much like Diane Downs, this woman believed that ridding herself of her offspring would heal a relationship with her boyfriend that had ended badly. However, her beliefs were rooted in delusion, because her lover, Tom, had made it clear that he was done with the relationship, once and for all. This woman drove to the edge of a South Carolina lake, got out, and then put the car in drive. After releasing the brake, she stood silently and watched the vehicle, where her babies slept peacefully in the backseat, sink into the depths. Then, she phoned the police, in “hysterics”, blaming the crime on a “black man”. She like Casie Anthony tried to put the blame on someone else.

My fear is that some male idiot will fall in love with this woman and have a child with her. My rhetorical question to the men who have read this article is; “Would you risk marrying a beautiful woman you know or suspect may have murdered her own child? Do you really believe that the father of her murdered child would want to marry this woman?

I strongly urge anyone who is contemplating marrying someone to do a Google search on them. You might be surprised as to what may show up on the screen. It might just be the face of Cassie Anthony. Then of course, your fiance’s face may not show up at all. That wouldn’t necessarily mean of course that you would be marrying someone who isn’t a psychopath. You would have to take your chances like the rest of us. I married a beautiful woman 35 years ago and fortunately for me, she is a kind woman who has empathy for everyone including me. There are millions of men and woman who are great spouses and will be great spouses and are as lucky as I am.

However, sometime in the future, an unfortunate man may fall in love with a pretty woman and later discover to his horror that he married Cassie Anthony or someone like her. The same applies to woman also. Many wonderful women have married men who later murdered them or their children but initially had no idea that their spouses were psychopaths until it was too late.