Dallas Crim. Def. Law blog: Can Casey Anthony Get A Fair Trial and Why Should we care

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

The only reason I would want her to get a "fair" trial is so that there is no way it could be called a "mistrial". Other than that I wouldn't care if they sent her straight to the electric chair. :furious:

P.S. I'm just a little cranky today so excuse the boldness. :blushing:
 
I pray to God she gets a fair trial. I want nothing to interfere with her sitting in prison for the rest of her life.
 
Kelsy_C said:
Thanks for posting that article. It's so easy to get caught up in the hype, its important to remember what the justice system is really there for!
Click to expand...

Well, it has also been said that the public is only seeing the evidence that the jury would see.

I think the problem with "fair," in this case is that the evidence points SO strongly that unbiased is hardly possible-- unless one has lived in a cave.

There's everything but the smoking gun, here.
 
Brini said:
Well, it has also been said that the public is only seeing the evidence that the jury would see.

I think the problem with "fair," in this case is that the evidence points SO strongly that unbiased is hardly possible-- unless one has lived in a cave.

There's everything but the smoking gun, here.
Click to expand...


Oh I agree with this..
 
that is why this case does my head in. to me there is no possible way she can get a fair trial and that upsets me because the processes are there for a reason, to protect us all. same type of thing as the freedom of speech quote (who was it that said this, think it was voltaire? too tired to google and my kids, which are both present and accounted for ;) wont let me) "I hate what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

basically you have to support it 100% or not at all.


as a previous poster said, we want a fair trial so she gets her time :)
 
If OJ could get a fair trial, she can too... you don't know how many ppl I mention this case to who have no idea about it at all
 
OJ got away with murder, need we say more? And plus NO ONE I know knows anything about this case. I am sure there are others who dont. And do I care if she gets a fair trial? NO!
 
Yes I do believe she can get a fair trial. In my personal experience very few people I know, from friends to family have heard of this case much less followed it like I have. That said I do not live in central FL. Even if the defense petitions for a change of venue I do believe 12 of Casey's peers will be found who can serve and offer their ruling without predjudice. I think that the high profile nature of this case bodes particularly well for a case in which LE and the DA will be following the law to T so as to avoid any future discourse, legal or otherwise as to the handling of this case.
 
I didn't read the article yet, but I think a fair trial is possible. Anyone who has reached a decision has based it on the information at hand. In court, it's a whole 'nother world and you're privy to more...which could go either way. Who wants to find an innocent person guilty?

Personally, I find her 'guilty' of neglect and obstruction...based on facts of the case and her own admissions...doesn't know where her toddler is and lying/misleading police. Still, I would 'clean the slate' and do my job in court. I believe she murdered Caylee, but it would have to be proven to me.

In the end, I want her to have a fair trial and competent counsel. Anything less, and it's not really justice.
 
The US Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings stating that if potential jurors who have read news reports about the case are asked during jury selection proceedings if they can put aside what they have read and make a decision based only on what they hear in court, that defendant did receive a fair trial.

Here's just one in which the appeal attorneys tried to argue that the verdict should be overturned because the jurors weren't asked about specific news reports. The SC rejected the appeal.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/500/415/case.html
 
Yes, she can get a fair trial but she is obviously so guilty that she will go down. I don't think anyone will believe any side of the story she has to say since she is such a blatant liar. Nothing that comes from her lips is the truth. Ever. That will be her undoing. Usually, not always, but 99% of the time, the criminals go down at trial and thats as it should be.
 
Speaking of fair trials....what possible defense could she have??? Who would testify for her that there was a ZG that took the child, where ZG lived etc. I am sure she can't use that big fat lie of a story so what sort of defense and story could her attorneys come up with and who would testify for her? All I can see is trying to get experts to downgrade the scientific evidence and that isn't going to work in this case. Not in my opinion. They tried that in the Westerfield case and it sure didn't work for him.
 
Kelsy_C said:
Thanks for posting that article. It's so easy to get caught up in the hype, its important to remember what the justice system is really there for!
Click to expand...

This isn't the justice system-this is the internet...that guy is probably one of Jose's buddies, just trying to stir things up...
 
Its tough to say. I think the biggest problem will be finding a jury that hasn't been tainted by the media. But, that might not be as hard as it seems. I think there are still tons of people who either don't follow the news, or are all wrapped up in political or economic news that they haven't paid too much attention to this case.
 
Hope for the Best said:
Its tough to say. I think the biggest problem will be finding a jury that hasn't been tainted by the media. But, that might not be as hard as it seems. I think there are still tons of people who either don't follow the news, or are all wrapped up in political or economic news that they haven't paid too much attention to this case.
Click to expand...

To repeat again (see my post above) the court doesn't have to find jurors who haven't read or heard anything about the case. They only have to find jurors who say they won't let anything they have heard or read influence their decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 154 more.
Total: 431 (members: 155, guests: 276)

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
276
Total visitors
431
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,553
Messages
18,255,584
Members
234,689
Latest member
Emily Trefusis
Back
Top