Prosecution giving choice of Murder or Manslaughter!

[2goldfish]

Even if she had only been charged with murder the jury could reduced the charge down to manslaughter.

exactly. I dont get the double charge personally unless that was the reasoning but it was not necessary so...

 

[Misfit76]

Miracleshappen, thank you for explaining that. I do hope she gets LwoP or the DP, but Id rather her be found guilty on some type of serious charge and serve prisontime then get off or be acquited.

 

[MiraclesHappen]

Miracleshappen, thank you for explaining that. I do hope she gets LwoP or the DP, but Id rather her be found guilty on some type of serious charge and serve prisontime then get off or be acquited.

You are welcome:blowkiss: And I agree with you 100%!!! Something sure beats nuthin, here!

 

[yolorado]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/16/caylee.mom.indicted.ap/index.html
"Rose said the state has done "a very smart thing" in charging Anthony with murder and manslaughter, because it gives the jury a choice.

"You give the jury a place to run," Rose said."


Okay, I did not know this. Prosecution is going to give the choice of convicting her on murder or manslaughter? So does this mean no DP option? :furious:
I think this is terrible personally.

It also quiet probably signals the defense that they might be willing to go to manslaughter if KC leads them to a body, which they actually retrieve, which at this point might be possible.

 

[Marina2]

This man faced same charges as Casey. Convicted in Florida of agg. manslaughter, agg. child abuse. Will be sentenced Oct. 27th. He faces 60 years for both counts. His original charges were murder 1, agg. manslaughter, agg. child abuse. His girlfriend (mother of child) is going to trial facing agg. manslaughter for not protecting child from her boyfriend.

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/sep/08/kashon-scott-guilty-manslaughter-aggravated-child-/


ETA: The child was only three.

 

[CaliKid]

Very, very smart move.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Very, very smart move.

I agree. I think the prosecution does have some hurdles to jump in this case. The fact that they don't have a body is a biggie. I think there is probably some concern that a jury will have a difficult time condemning a young attractive woman to death regardless of the evidence against her and therefore won't vote for Murder 1. I also think the Casey we see at trial will be a different Casey than we're used to seeing. She'll be demure, modestly dressed, tearful, repentant....the all American girl. I posted yesterday that I foresee her getting less than 20 years on manslaughter charges.

 

[Marina2]

Continued from my post #25

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/sep/08/kashon-scott-guilty-manslaughter-aggravated-child-/

It is interesting to note that the jury in the above case could not reach a unanimous decision. A mistrial appeared likely but they opted for the lesser charge. It is speculated some felt the mother may have been the one who killed the child.

I think it is a smart move on the SA's part to allow the jury an out so that a mistrial would not result.

 

[Marina2]

bold is mine

I agree. I think the prosecution does have some hurdles to jump in this case. The fact that they don't have a body is a biggie. I think there is probably some concern that a jury will have a difficult time condemning a young attractive woman to death regardless of the evidence against her and therefore won't vote for Murder 1. I also think the Casey we see at trial will be a different Casey than we're used to seeing. She'll be demure, modestly dressed, tearful, repentant....the all American girl. I posted yesterday that I foresee her getting less than 20 years on manslaughter charges.

I disagree. These are aggravated charges. If convicted of the agg. manslaughter she will also be convicted on the agg. child abuse.
She will be sentenced for both and I hope she gets consecutive sentences. The man I referenced in the article above is facing 60 years for the same charges.

 

[icherish]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/16/caylee.mom.indicted.ap/index.html
"Rose said the state has done "a very smart thing" in charging Anthony with murder and manslaughter, because it gives the jury a choice.

"You give the jury a place to run," Rose said."


Okay, I did not know this. Prosecution is going to give the choice of convicting her on murder or manslaughter? So does this mean no DP option? :furious:
I think this is terrible personally.

It's a common tactic in circumstancial murder 1 or 2 cases to add in the manslaughter charge as a lesser included offense.

A case that comes to mind is the "Nanny" trial in Mass. They felt sure she killed the baby she was caring for during an act of anger, but there was a question of intent. IIRC, she ended up being convicted of second degree murder, but the judge disagreed, overrode the jury's verdict and reduced it to manslaughter. Which was unbelievable imo, but I digress...

 

[Short_Stuff]

It was a smart move.
IMO unless they have more evidence then we know, and more importantly Caylees body, I dont see them getting murder one or the death penalty.
Time will tell.

 

[EtherealGirl]

Very, very smart move.

I agree 100%. Otherwise it would be all or nothing and that is way too risky in this case.