Casey Anthony Debate - Las Cruces, NM

Discuss the national Casey Anthony debate in Las Cruces, NM.

Do you believe Casey Anthony is guilty?

Las Cruces supports
Guilty
 
12
Not Guilty
 
2

Vote now in Las Cruces:

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
watchdog1

Rio Rancho, NM

#21 Jul 13, 2011
Bottom line is that the Legal System Worked! The burden of proof is with the government(as it should be)AND THEY COULD NOT PROVE WITHOUT A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Case Closed.
If you would like the alternative system,go to a Dictator State and have to prove your innocents.
You can't have it both ways.
watchdog1

Rio Rancho, NM

#22 Jul 13, 2011
Sorry about the repeats. something screwed up with topix
INNOCENT until YOU PROVE

Las Cruces, NM

#23 Jul 13, 2011
It is the concept of innocent UNTIL proven guilty, do I feel she did it, maybe. Do I feel that she knows more than she has let on, yes. What gets me is that she waited 30 days (give or take) to call the police. But the law states that you have to "PROVE" beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the PROSECUTION that has the burden of proof. The prosecution did not say how she died, where she died, and left the window open as to 100% certainty that the mother did it. People, please remember that in the case of CRIMINAL matters, the prosecution has to "PROVE" she did it, not just implicate or suggest. Let us not be mad at the JURY, they did their job within the boundary of the law. I know that you think that it's not fair and that by her actions alone she should be convicted, but there is a set guideline that must be met to make a case for guilt, and the prosecution did not make that bar. As the saying goes, "it is better to let ten (10) guilty people go free than to have one (1) innocent person in jail". The United States was founded on the principle of INNOCENT until proven otherwise. Everyone that is making comments about her guilt, were NOT in that courtroom, nor were they privy to evidence. and even at that those that were "LUCKY" enough to covet a spot in the courtroom have not come forward with their opinion of guilt. All this anger is based on individual assumption, and not evidence, of her guilt. I don't think that she is innocent, obviously, she was guilty of lying, but there is more to the story, and I had only wished the prosecution had done their job to the fullest and provided a tighter noose.

“Phooey on Politicians”

Since: Jan 11

Politicians are full of BS!!

#24 Jul 13, 2011
INNOCENT until YOU PROVE wrote:
It is the concept of innocent UNTIL proven guilty, do I feel she did it, maybe. Do I feel that she knows more than she has let on, yes. What gets me is that she waited 30 days (give or take) to call the police. But the law states that you have to "PROVE" beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the PROSECUTION that has the burden of proof. The prosecution did not say how she died, where she died, and left the window open as to 100% certainty that the mother did it. People, please remember that in the case of CRIMINAL matters, the prosecution has to "PROVE" she did it, not just implicate or suggest. Let us not be mad at the JURY, they did their job within the boundary of the law. I know that you think that it's not fair and that by her actions alone she should be convicted, but there is a set guideline that must be met to make a case for guilt, and the prosecution did not make that bar. As the saying goes, "it is better to let ten (10) guilty people go free than to have one (1) innocent person in jail". The United States was founded on the principle of INNOCENT until proven otherwise. Everyone that is making comments about her guilt, were NOT in that courtroom, nor were they privy to evidence. and even at that those that were "LUCKY" enough to covet a spot in the courtroom have not come forward with their opinion of guilt. All this anger is based on individual assumption, and not evidence, of her guilt. I don't think that she is innocent, obviously, she was guilty of lying, but there is more to the story, and I had only wished the prosecution had done their job to the fullest and provided a tighter noose.
I agree that the prosecution should have done a better job as they left numerous holes in the case, that the defense filled in with theories (no real facts) and that swayed the jury. The jury did their job as they saw fit the facts and non-facts of the case.

I don't blame the jury for anything, I would not have wanted to be on that case. Years ago I was on a jury for a"murder trial" in my home town. The defendent was a rather prominent citizen and it took almost 6 weeks of testimony and 3 days of deliberations before we decided basically the same thing. The defendent was not innocent of the crime, but the prosecution never really proved he did it.
watchdog1

Rio Rancho, NM

#25 Jul 14, 2011
There was a case on television a while back 20/20 or the like. It was about a man in a small town whose wife had been murdered. Being a small town everyone knew each other and the man was not suspected of any wrong doing.
UNTIL, a few weeks after the death he started to go out on the town as such and did not act as the towns people thought he should in grieving. To keep this short they finally tried him and found him guilty,and he was executed.
A while later the guilty person was caught.
My point is what the people before me have said. Stick To The Facts Only! People act in different ways in coping with tragedy.
My own thoughts are that the child accidentaly drowned and the idea of covering it up the way they did was badly thought out,and wrong.The above example may have led to the approach they used.

“Irony, metaphor, film @ eleven”

Since: Feb 08

Old Mesilla/New Las Cruces

#26 Jul 14, 2011
INNOCENT until YOU PROVE wrote:
It is the concept of innocent UNTIL proven guilty, do I feel she did it, maybe. Do I feel that she knows more than she has let on, yes. What gets me is that she waited 30 days (give or take) to call the police. But the law states that you have to "PROVE" beyond a reasonable doubt. It is the PROSECUTION that has the burden of proof. The prosecution did not say how she died, where she died, and left the window open as to 100% certainty that the mother did it. People, please remember that in the case of CRIMINAL matters, the prosecution has to "PROVE" she did it, not just implicate or suggest. Let us not be mad at the JURY, they did their job within the boundary of the law. I know that you think that it's not fair and that by her actions alone she should be convicted, but there is a set guideline that must be met to make a case for guilt, and the prosecution did not make that bar. As the saying goes, "it is better to let ten (10) guilty people go free than to have one (1) innocent person in jail". The United States was founded on the principle of INNOCENT until proven otherwise. Everyone that is making comments about her guilt, were NOT in that courtroom, nor were they privy to evidence. and even at that those that were "LUCKY" enough to covet a spot in the courtroom have not come forward with their opinion of guilt. All this anger is based on individual assumption, and not evidence, of her guilt. I don't think that she is innocent, obviously, she was guilty of lying, but there is more to the story, and I had only wished the prosecution had done their job to the fullest and provided a tighter noose.
Yup.....Mom did it, or certainly had a hand in the death, accidental or otherwise, but then let a month go by. She is guilty as sun-up on the east coast. Her prosecuting team simply didn't
convince the jury of the charges that would have best convicted her on a higher level, not the highest level.

Too bad.....this psycho, lying mom will get rich off this after Zenida woman sues what's left of her butt off.
CH

Mesa, AZ

#27 Jul 22, 2011
all evidence points to casey anthony. she is caylee's killer.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Las Cruces Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) 21 hr Sylvia 6,372
Debate: Marijuana - Las Cruces, NM (Aug '10) May 1 Beth Blevins rela... 195
ISIS Camp a Few Miles from Texas, Mexican Autho... Apr 29 EatPrayDie 3
News Sen. Mary Kay Papen: No legal barrier to making... Apr 28 sheryl 2
Gang problems in Las Cruces (Sep '07) Apr 27 eastside 193
Lost Chihuahua/terrier "Darlin' (neighbors) Apr 27 yankeedudell 2
News Public Payrolls 2015: Sheriff's department says... Apr 26 Bloodonhishands 1

Related Topics

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]