Sunday, July 10, 2011

Innocent Until Proven Guilty

Innocent Until Proven Guilty
Al Ritter

I am sure that I will get hate mail on this article, but it is based on our judicial system and how it works. Please understand that I am saddened by this horrible death, and just as much upset about the fact that justice hasn't been served. We may however disagree on the amount of evidence needed for a conviction. I personally believe that there should be more than circumstantial evidence to convict someone of first degree murder........with that being article.

The Casey Anthony trial has been a media frenzy to say the least, but the backlash from Monday morning armchair quarterbacks has been laughable to say the least. People from all walks of life and backgrounds seem to have an opinion, whether or not they are based on the premise of our judicial system. Everyone seems to have such a firm grasp of the law, even though they never went to law school. Everyone feels qualified to decide Casey's fate because they "watched the trial on TV." The fact is that viewers saw everything, even things that the jury wasn't allowed to see due to law. Televising a trial can be one of the worst things to do as far as swaying public opinion, because the public can draw uninformed conclusions they may not otherwise, had they been picked as an actual juror.

From the very beginning of Casey’s arrest the prosecution tried to taint the jury pool with wild and unsubstantiated claims, forcing the trial to a neighboring district. Claims have been made about what an incompetent attorney Jose Baez is and some of that may be true, but the fact remains that it is up to the prosecutor to PROVE that Casey Anthony was guilty in some way shape or form for the death of her daughter.

The state brought charges of first degree murder, and then covered all their bases with varying degrees of manslaughter in hopes of a conviction, which they didn’t get. No matter what you think of Casey, or her family, the facts remain that the state brought NO material evidence into court to convict her. Not blood evidence, not DNA evidence, not fingerprint, not one single witness, and what does the American public expect from a purely circumstantial case?

A case based purely on circumstantial evidence is nothing more than a theory….one person’s opinion on how the death happened, plain and simple. Is the American public that blood thirsty that they want to see Casey put to death for something that hasn’t been proven? Would you want that to happen to one of your family members?

Is Casey responsible for something that happened that fateful day?................probably…….do her parents know more than they are saying?.....probably……..did the state prove anything by circumstantial evidence?…….., no. Is Casey Anthony a good person?.........I don’t think so, but we need more for a conviction than being a bad person.

It saddens me that a child’s life has been snuffed; it saddens me even more that the State of Florida would come into court with a first degree murder charge with such little evidence. Has Caylee’s death been prosecuted to the best of the state’s ability…….I am afraid not.

So in closing I have to say, if you want to be mad at someone over the prosecution of Casey Anthony, be mad at the State Prosecutors office in Florida, they came to the fight with NO material evidence…….because everyone in our country is innocent until proven guilty…….it wasn’t the defense’s job to prove she was innocent.

Maybe someday in the future her judgment day will occur either by civil trial or by god himself.......but the prosecutor had his day in court and failed and nobody answers for the death of a beautiful little girl.


bigolds said...

I can't agree more...the fact that the case was brought with absolutely no evidence and she was found not guilty on (most)all counts, means that she can never be prosecuted for this again. The real test of the prosecutions failure was the first vote in the jury room that was 10-2 for not guilty!!!!

barb p said...

As much as I hated this trial, the jury had to find her "not guilty" for the reasons you said Al. This is very sad!

pamela m said...

I know you are right about the State failing to prove their case but I feel in my heart that she knew that child drowned in the pool and covered it up.
I hope you are right and that someday she will get her just desserts.

grant burmer said...

Excellent. I had been thinking the same thoughts. Grant.

steve c said...

Just another member of the Get Away With Murder Club!!!

jack h said...

Dear Al Ritter: Sorry, if you were looking for a hate mail here, I will disappoint you. I think she is guilty as hell, BUT, I agree, the state did a lousy lousy job, and did not even begin to prove their case. Glad you pointed that out - I have said the same on FB and yes, people do not like to hear the truth on this. They just believe in their guts she is guilty, and like you and I, we agree with her, but she has a right to innocence until proven guilty. Our government sure is becoming worthless in the courts to - the lead prosecutor needs to be shown the door and disbarred for even bringing this media frenzy into the court - and the added to it be trying to help their case in the media - that is the most despicable of all. Hope you don't get TOO much hate mail :-) Jack