Originally Posted by Soulmagent
Right, in Baez's awful defence the jury has the ability to see that she needs a new lawyer .IMO We all might be shocked.
Personaly I have high expectation of the burden of proof and for me the state didnt meet them.
We are a CSI society and LE reinforces that all the time. So while it is easier to locate evidence with the advanced tools they use now it also raises the expectation of actual evidence. IMO.
While I respect your opinion(s), I have to say that, by the standard you speak of, there would/will be few successful future prosecutions as people, and potential killers, have access to readily available information (via the internet, television programs like CSI, Forensic Detectives, etc.,), therefore they are, and will continue to get "smarter" about how to avoid leaving forensic trails (telephone communications, online website visits, etc.,) and/or incriminating forensic evidence at the scene of their crime(s). I personally believe that with enough circumstantial one can sensibly and reasonably connect the dots and meet the standard for a conviction. JMO~
To me, if we have a high expectation in CSI-type evidence, then the higher it rises, the smarter the criminal becomes. Once women were just raped. Then when men started to go to jail they got "smart" and silenced their witness. Now that DNA can be the silent witness, the women are being raped, killed, then mutilated or otherwise disposed of so that there is no evidence. Shall we let these killers go just because they found a better way not to get caught?
Once children were just raped, then kidnapped and raped, then kidnapped, raped, and killed, and now kidnapped, raped, killed, and again mutilated so that the remains are not found and the criminal never brought to justice. This murdered gets to walk the same streets as my grandchildren because he/she has figured out the best way to not get caught?
Should Casey be freed just because it was her "good fortune" that Caylee's body was not found for six months and by then had skeletonized, making cause of death impossible to pinpoint? Should she be returned to society because she had the again "good fortune" to dump her sweet baby's body in a place known to flood - which washes away evidence? Time, temperature, and torrential rains is KC's golden ticket. The jury will hopefully see through the charade and leave that ticket uncashed.