Not guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder or child abuse.
She was conviced of a few counts of lying to police though.
Printable View
Not guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder or child abuse.
She was conviced of a few counts of lying to police though.
Here's me commenting , and yet not caring.
That's how the cookie crumbles.
moving on.
just another example of our JS failing. Add her to the list of OJ and M. jackson. :rolleyes:
OJ was jury nullification and Jackson's accuser's family were professional plaintiffs with zero credibility. But I'm really surprised by this one. Just her partying for 31 days while her daughter was 'missing' was proof enough. I'm dying to see what the jurors say when they speak to the media and of course get their book deals.
All the evidence was circumstantial. I'm saw this coming.
who cares for a piece of trash.
she is yet another example of subhumans who exist in the world today.
nothing but a walking bag of trash.
Apparently it wasn't. This is the prosecution's fault for not putting together an adequate case. They decided to go through with circumstance. They had 3 years and yet still couldn't piece together proof of how she actually died. That ought to tell you something, like maybe everyone is wrong. That is called reasonable doubt. And that is all it takes. In this country you're innocent until proven guilty. Not the other way around. Like the verdict or not, the system worked as intended.
This is why we have the system we do. None of us were in the courtroom so we don't know. If you left it to the mob mentality in this country she'd have been stoned to death. I'll take our system as is.
I agree with you about our system SoCo. One of the Founders said something along the lines of, 'Its better for 100 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent man to be convicted'. So I agree that our "Innocent until proven guilty" system is the best in the world. I'm not questioning our system, I'm questioning the logic of those 12 people. I just can't fathom a parent not calling 911 for a whole month when their child is missing and 12 people saying that isn't proof of a crime. And I don't even have kids. It's just unfathomable to me.
Things that tripped up the jury:
-No cause of death
-Possibility that the death was accidental (That would explain a LOT, but this trial couldn't address that)
-No evidence of premeditation
And...
Spencer said she was not surprised by the verdict. She cited the lack of direct evidence, including any incriminating DNA found on tape attached to the little girl's skull. Forensics evidence, she said, "backfired" on prosecutors.
"I think that this verdict was the only logical verdict," prominent defense attorney Mark Geragos told CNN's Cooper. "The prosecution woefully fell flat in this case at all times. They're the ones who invested themselves in this guilt-by-character-assassination ... they didn't have actual evidence."
Something DOES smell rotten in the state of Denmark, but the evidence was crap, and they might have very well been chasing the wrong charges.
They actually had that one covered by presenting the Internet history, searches, etc. Those searches were done before the little girl disappeared.
I initially felt the mom was trying to put the kid to sleep with the chloroform so she could go out and party and she accidentally killed her. After the prosecution showed the Internet searches also had stuff like 'broken necks' and other similar terms, I then felt it was likely intentional.
I'm not following the case, don't care about the case. She was found not-guilty, means she is not guilty. Simple as that.
I wasn't big on following the case, so I wouldn't have been surprised if the verdict had gone either way.
I will say that the prosecution really screwed up when they put the death penalty on the table. It seemed pretty clear from the get-go that the chance of the DP for her was remote to begin with. I'm sure that was a big factor in finding her not guilty of murder.