What is Justice?

[uklaw]

OK guys,

A kind of philisophical question for you guys. (And mods I am new so if this question doesn't belong here then I am sorry please move it).

I need to preface this question. A lot of Criminal Defense attorneys have stated that they don't think that ICA will get convicted of First Degree Murder. Now a lot of people may disagree here but this is coming from a lot of seasoned criminal defense attorneys (even Jose Baez, okay that was a joke). See for example Patrick Barbary, Brad Conway and indeed Richard Hornsby.

I tend to agree subject to one caveat I have stated previously: Casey Anthony does not have the most experienced and skilled attorneys (and I have restrained myself here to try and comply with TOS). I believe that the evidence probably is not enough to convict of FDM because regardless of what happened it does not prove ICA committed FDM beyond and to the exclusion of reasonable doubt. However, she may well be convicted because of poor representation.

So regardless of the legal issues, if Casey Anthony (or anyone for that matter) is convicted for a crime that they did commit but the state would not have got a conviction had it not been for the fact that the Defendant had representation, has justice been done?

 

[yolorado]

Justice is NOT what's going on in the Caylee Anthony case....

If the defense knows that KC is guilty, or even believes it, and I personally think at least some do, and they are trashing innocent people, accusing other of crimes, to get her off, then that is not justice. Getting someone off is not, or should not be, the only goal of the defense. If our system lets lawyers stand up and accuse people of crimes without any proof...how is that right.

Dragging on trials for three years, wasting taxpayer money and scarce resources, letting his client sitting jail if he knew of an accident, IF this was an accident should be cause alone for disbarment. I don't see morality in the defense. I see win at all costs, no matter who has to be destroyed to set someone free who they themselves very possibly think is guilty.

Today was a sad day to watch as exciting as it was to some of the commentators, a sad statement on our justice system and a travesty as far as I'm concerned.

 

[uklaw]

Justice is NOT what's going on in the Caylee Anthony case....

I can't agree more. Three comments on this:
1.) The lack of justice has very little to do with ICA. It's to do with the media circus which most of those involved in this case have fed on and fuelled.

2.) The only people to have acted with propriety throughout this is the State Attorneys and JP (and yes I exclude from this the DT - with a possible few exceptions, the stream of "experts" that have been in and out of the Defense, Vaas and his "smell machine", the reporters, the juror who decided he wanted to post on Facebook that he was going to write a book on the case, the list is endless). Ironically, ICA isn't guilty of improper conduct during the trial per se because she has hardly spoken or done anything (obviously what she did before the trial was much more than improper).

3.) I got thinking about this when watching Local 6's commentary with NeJame. Do you think that the media frenzy and the public's insatiable appetite for sensational trial bombshells is appropriate? I kinda felt bad when the commentators spoke about this case providing the "bombshells" that the public wanted and how "all the characters" combined to make such an exciting story. This just seems to me to make a mockery of the justice system. The courts are not about entertainment especially in a first degree murder trial.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Justice is NOT what's going on in the Caylee Anthony case....

If the defense knows that KC is guilty, or even believes it, and I personally think at least some do, and they are trashing innocent people, accusing other of crimes, to get her off, then that is not justice. Getting someone off is not, or should not be, the only goal of the defense. If our system lets lawyers stand up and accuse people of crimes without any proof...how is that right.

Dragging on trials for three years, wasting taxpayer money and scarce resources, letting his client sitting jail if he knew of an accident, IF this was an accident should be cause alone for disbarment. I don't see morality in the defense. I see win at all costs, no matter who has to be destroyed to set someone free who they themselves very possibly think is guilty.

Today was a sad day to watch as exciting as it was to some of the commentators, a sad statement on our justice system and a travesty as far as I'm concerned.

I agree. Sure, she gets a defense...that's fine. But this is not a defense, it's just made up lies in hopes of getting lucky with a jury. There should be more restrictions on these things.

 

[gibby207]

I think justice is in the eye of the beholder. I think those who were closest to Caylee (or any crime victim) would be able to identify if they felt justice was served, and it differs from person to person, instance to instance, crime to crime, you know?

Personally? Regarding my feelings on justice for Caylee (as if it matters), I would hope ICA gets life in prison at the very least without the possibility to have another child again. That's my hope.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

OK guys,

A kind of philisophical question for you guys. (And mods I am new so if this question doesn't belong here then I am sorry please move it).

I need to preface this question. A lot of Criminal Defense attorneys have stated that they don't think that ICA will get convicted of First Degree Murder. Now a lot of people may disagree here but this is coming from a lot of seasoned criminal defense attorneys (even Jose Baez, okay that was a joke). See for example Patrick Barbary, Brad Conway and indeed Richard Hornsby.

I tend to agree subject to one caveat I have stated previously: Casey Anthony does not have the most experienced and skilled attorneys (and I have restrained myself here to try and comply with TOS). I believe that the evidence probably is not enough to convict of FDM because regardless of what happened it does not prove ICA committed FDM beyond and to the exclusion of reasonable doubt. However, she may well be convicted because of poor representation.

So regardless of the legal issues, if Casey Anthony (or anyone for that matter) is convicted for a crime that they did commit but the state would not have got a conviction had it not been for the fact that the Defendant had representation, has justice been done?

Yes. It does not matter how she is convicted imo, just that she is convicted. The legal system is one thing, but reality is another and if she killed Caylee on purpose, which she did imo, anything goes.

 

[SommerSunshine]

I couldn't help but chuckle to myself when I read this question, I just graduated in december with a criminal justice degree and took and entire class centered around this same question. Everyone has a different answer that's for sure!

 

[Ricki]

I have no background in law at all. What I type are my opinions based on my morals. Justice is getting the truth and nothing less based on factual evidence and testimonies. It is not getting reasonable doubt by taking well meaning, law abiding citizens and hurting them by false accusations. If accusations are made there very well be something solid to back it up(not we may never know statements).

 

[Kat]

In the USA justice is IMHO when 12 jurors examine the evidence presented from both sides (state and defense) and come to a conclusion about guilt or non-guilt in an alleged crime(s).

It really makes no difference what I, the non-juror, conclude. If there is a question about whether or not the defendent had proper representation then we do have an appeals process in place for that if the defendent is found guilty. JMHO

That's my definition of justice. JMHO.