Casey Anthony trial...

[y2kitty]

state will appeal. that said, casey wins b/c that body decomposed for so long and the one guy who found it was a not-credible creep.

The State cannot appeal. Once someone is acquitted, it's over forever because of our constitutional right preventing a person from being placed in double jeopardy. This is why the prosecution has the ability to make an interlocutory appeal (an appeal in the middle of the proceedings to decide an issue of law). Once the not guilty has come down, that's it for the State's case.

I used to agree with this idea but after today, I really wish there was some way for the courts to appeal the issue.

It is just wrong that she is getting away with murder.

Really? You want to give the government carte blanche to prosecute you over and over till they get the result they want? I personally think Casey is guilty but the prosecution had a horrible case.

Hmmm, but if there are sufficient grounds for appeal can the case not be appealed?? I get double jeopardy, etc., but are there no grounds for appeal post-verdict in criminal cases? I'm not a crim pro expert...

The state never appeals. The accused can appeal if convicted and has valid reasons.

 

[mayerling]

This has finally reached the UK...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13986356

 

[sillyberry]

With double jeopardy, the state cannot appeal a not-guilty verdict.

Now if I'm remembering crim pro correctly, another case can be brought against a person involving the same nucleus of operative facts, if the new charge involves an element not previously ruled upon. So, a person found not-guilty of first degree murder could not be recharged for manslaughter, since the elements are all the same. However, they could be charged with conspiracy for that murder, since that includes an element separate from the original charges.

I haven't paid attention to this case, so I have no idea if it applies here, just always thought that was an interesting wrinkle to double jeopardy.

 

[rhbgirl24]

I'm sick.... urg!

 

[somethingshiny]

Just disgusted.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

Please help an idiot out here: If you are not guilty of murdering your child and not guilty of aggravated child abuse, what would you need to lie to the police about? Am I missing something?

 

[Laila619]

She'll be able to go home. Her parents were willing to lie for her until the very end. I'd imagine that if George didn't want her there then Cindy would go somewhere to live with her.

Yep. I no longer feel sorry for George and Cindy Anthony--they have enabled their POS daughter to the very end. There will never be consequences for her.

As for the VERDICT, I can maybe understand why the jury didn't vote her guilty of first degree murder. But not guilty of aggravated manslaughter?!?! That is BS! HELLO? She didn't report her daughter "missing" ( ) FOR 31 DAYS!! That alone should warrant being guilty of child endangerment or manslaughter.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am disgusted, too. Unbelievable. I agree with whoever said how did TWELVE people come to that conclusion????? I can understand a hung jury, but not holding her responsible for Caylee's death in SOME WAY????

I really thought when they said not guilty to 1st degree murder, the problem was that there were those on the jury who were opposed to the death penalty. So I kept waiting to hear she was guilty of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. I just couldn't believe it. I'm betting she goes free on Thursday for time served, although she might be safer being kept in jail awhile until the furor dies down.

I hope her family never speaks to her again. I think her mother didn't want her to get the death penalty, but it would be hard for her to forgive her for killing Caylee.

I am glad I do not know a juror because I think I could never speak to them again.

And what bothers me almost at this injustice is that there are scumbags who will offer Casey deals to make money. There are almost no morals in this country anymore. Whatever makes ME happy seems to be the name of the game.

 

[VapidLapid]

Just going out on a limb here, but I think they have to judge the case as it was presented rather than on the conclusions they infer. Meaning that they could all believe she is completely guilty, but that also the prosecution has not proved that, and therefore, they cannot find her guilty.

 

[Laila619]

The problem with this whole case was the prosecution was screwed from the start. There was no cause of death, and therefore they had a nearly impossible task. What I want to know is, why did it take 6 months to find the body?! It wasn't like poor Caylee was found far away. If she had been found sooner, they could have done an autopsy.

 

[mrs jam]

Wow. Just wow. She had better get herself a new identity and signed up for witness protection asap if she expects to make it in the united states very long...

Really?! Do we have the rule of law in this country or not? She was found not guilty. Like it or not, it's over--I hope you aren't insinuating that someone in this country should go outside of the law to administer some vigilante "justice" in this case.

I don't think that someone should KILL her, but I do think she will have a hard time living her life in the U.S. I wouldn't want to hire her, if I was an employer. I would not want to work for or with her. As a customer, I would not want to be waited on by her at a restaurant, retail store, anywhere! I think, for a while at least, she will have a rough life. Everyone knows who she is and what she has done (or not done, if you agree with the verdict!)

ETA: If I saw her on the street, I would have a hard time controlling my mouth to not scream - MURDERER! I think that she will cause a scene whenever she goes out in the public for years to come.

If I saw her on the street, I would have a hard time not screaming, "Alanis Morissette!"

Well, since it's not the 90s anymore, I would most likely not scream it but just think it to myself. Seriously, the resemblance is incredibly striking. I wonder if Alanis gets any crap from people over her unfortunate doppleganger.

 

[Maria D]

It would have been better if Caylee's body had been found sooner but I disagree that there wasn't enough evidence to conclude foul-play of some sort. No report of a missing person or an accident, disposed corpse, a skull with duct tape still on it. An accident or natural causes is not a reasonable conclusion, to me anyway. The jury must have felt that there wasn't enough concrete material evidence tying Casey to the foul-play. There was all kinds of circumstantial evidence but no fingerprints or DNA. Either that or they did believe that it was an accident but that the Anthony family is so bizarre they would choose to cover it up. Or, and I truly think this is the case, the term "beyond a reasonable doubt" is misinterpreted as "beyond any doubt," meaning absolute certainty.

 

[Lanie]

Just going out on a limb here, but I think they have to judge the case as it was presented rather than on the conclusions they infer. Meaning that they could all believe she is completely guilty, but that also the prosecution has not proved that, and therefore, they cannot find her guilty.

This is true. Some of the jurors from the OJ trial said they felt he was guilty, and believed it themselves, but couldn't legally proclaim him guilty. So weird.

In regards to lying to the police, Madam Bijoux, did you follow the case? If you didn't, I don't remember perfectly why there are 4 counts of it (it's somewhere on this loooooong thread) but she lied when she claimed that a nanny was taking care of her, who later turned out to be fictitious, and I believe she lied somewhere along the way about the timeline. Again, someone could chime in bc I probably have something wrong in there, but that's the jist of it. But even then, she could be set free on Thursday bc she has already banked time in the slammer. She'll get pregnant again along the way, and I hope a Joran Van der slut doesn't happen all over again (meaning he probably killed Natalee Holloway, and then went and killed another Brazilian girl a couple of years later...why? Because he got away with it the first time).

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Lanie, I am hoping she gets her tubes tied since it clearly was inconvenient for her to have a child.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry. I guess I know how my parents felt when OJ Simpson got off. It just opens the door for so many other questions. Once again, Casey doesn't have to face the consequences of her actions.

I never thought I'd say this...but I think it's time to bring perjury charges up against Cindy. She played dirty, she lied on the stand and I think, just for that, she needs to be held accountable . I probably wouldn't have felt so strongly about this, but the Anthony's quote really set me over the edge..."we may never know what happened to Caylee, but this chapter of our lives is closed,"...WTF! Victim's families NEVER close the chapter until their love one gets justice. It doesn't just go away. But since Casey is fine and dandy and on her way home, Caylee is what? Trash on the side of the road from 2008? If they really believe Casey is innocent, then why aren't saying the search for the real culprit will continue? Why are they just giving up now?

Jeff Ashton is retiring. I don't blame him. He has probably lost a lot of faith in the legal system--along with many of us. He fought the good fight, on the side of Caylee and he was her voice. He can retire knowing that most of America believes he did an outstanding job.

What happens to Casey now? A book deal? A movie? A million dollar interview? It DISGUSTS me, I could throw up--and I mean that. It's like an award for doing bad things. There is nothing I want to hear her say, watch her do, I don't want to read her thoughts on how justice prevailed. She's a liar...was then, is now. Even if she wrote a tell all book, a la OJ, it's nothing more than lies in print.

And where does she go? Home? Home to mother she hates and the father who molested her? I'll bet that's exactly what she does.

But, at the end of the day, there is still this...look at Casey Anthony as a whole...look at her lies, look at how easily she stole...she's not a good person, murder aside. Like with OJ, a leopard doesn't change it's spots. She'll have her comeuppance one day, it may take 10 years--maybe longer. But, like with OJ, she'll eventually do the wrong thing, at the wrong time and get caught red handed. She now believes she's above the law, but she's not. She'll mess up, and the public now HATES her more than ever...I'm guessing the next 12 won't let her slide. She's already in the whole 80k and change to the IRS...with no college education, and reputation that proceeds her...I'm guessing she'll do time in Federal Prison for tax invasion, to which I say, at least it's something.

 

[Lexie]

I'm borrowing this explanation from a friend of a friend who is a prosecutor. To me, it kind of puts things in perspective:

"In the U.S., it is not the defendant's responsibility to prove her [Casey Anthony's] innocence; it is [the] prosecutor's job to prove guilt. At the end of the day, neither the prosecutor, nor the jury, nor I, nor any of you . . . really know beyond a reasonable doubt what happened to that girl [Caylee Anthony], and in this country that's called 'Not Guilty.' If she did murder her daughter, then she will answer for that one day, but today in our legal system, justice was done."

 

[princesss]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

I'm borrowing this explanation from a friend of a friend who is a prosecutor. To me, it kind of puts things in perspective:

"In the U.S., it is not the defendant's responsibility to prove her [Casey Anthony's] innocence; it is [the] prosecutor's job to prove guilt. At the end of the day, neither the prosecutor, nor the jury, nor I, nor any of you . . . really know beyond a reasonable doubt what happened to that girl [Caylee Anthony], and in this country that's called 'Not Guilty.' If she did murder her daughter, then she will answer for that one day, but today in our legal system, justice was done."

Do I know for a fact what happened to Caylee Anthony? Absolutely not. But I have this thing, it's called common sense. My common sense tells me things didn't line up "just so" on happenstance. So, with that in my back pocket, I can say any doubt that Casey killed Caylee is anything BUT reasonable.

 

[confusedaisy]

She'll be able to go home. Her parents were willing to lie for her until the very end. I'd imagine that if George didn't want her there then Cindy would go somewhere to live with her.

Yep. I no longer feel sorry for George and Cindy Anthony--they have enabled their POS daughter to the very end. There will never be consequences for her.

As for the VERDICT, I can maybe understand why the jury didn't vote her guilty of first degree murder. But not guilty of aggravated manslaughter?!?! That is BS! HELLO? She didn't report her daughter "missing" ( ) FOR 31 DAYS!! That alone should warrant being guilty of child endangerment or manslaughter.

+1

 

[Loves Vintage]

She'll be able to go home. Her parents were willing to lie for her until the very end. I'd imagine that if George didn't want her there then Cindy would go somewhere to live with her.

Yep. I no longer feel sorry for George and Cindy Anthony--they have enabled their POS daughter to the very end. There will never be consequences for her.

As for the VERDICT, I can maybe understand why the jury didn't vote her guilty of first degree murder. But not guilty of aggravated manslaughter?!?! That is BS! HELLO? She didn't report her daughter "missing" ( ) FOR 31 DAYS!! That alone should warrant being guilty of child endangerment or manslaughter.

+1

+2

The thing that is so hopelessly sad here, beyond the fact that this POS is going to walk out of the court house as a free woman on Thursday, is the fact that she will suffer nothing for the loss of her daughter. I had the tv on briefly when I got home from work. A commentator remarked that she knows what she did, and she'll have to live with it every day. Yeah, but no problem for her! She doesn't care!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She didn't care for those 31 days. She didn't care when she was in jail. And, she is not going to care now! The benefit of being a sociopath, I suppose. I should say, if she is even one. I don't know. How can one make sense of the pictures and videos of her with her daughter. How does she then kill her, with no signs of remorse?

As far as where she'll go and how she'll be accepted back into society, guess what -- there are a lot of CRAZIES out there!!! She will find one of them, and her life will go on. She has celebrity status now. We live in the age of celebrity. Some psycho will be attracted to that.

I completely agree with Maria D. re: the jury needing/wanting to see DNA evidence in order to convict. This is the world we live in. I still really can't believe that 12 people would agree. I could see one or two people being outliers, but all 12. It is so insane.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

I can say that because I just finished listening one of the alternate jurors discussing his take on the case. He believed things that WEREN'T in evidence...like the drowning, which snowballed (his words, not mine)...and failed to take into consideration the evidence that WAS in evidence, like the duct tape. That is where I consider the whole trial gone awry. He said he considered the dysfunction of her family, and that excused away the 31 days. The chloroform? That could have been from cleaning products...but what cleaning product smells of decomposition?

Does he speak for all of them? No. Of course not. But listening to him speak, I saw some major lapses in judgement. That's my opinion.

 

[Miss Sparkly]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

+1. Besides, look at our sources. The media. Media is a business and selling the story of an innocent mother doesn't make money. Personally, I don't know if she is or is not guilty and that was not up to me to decide. If 12 people agree that there is not enough evidence to convict her then I will believe those 12 people.

I have never been able to understand why people become so heated and upset about something that doesn't directly effect them. If she gets a million dollar book deal, don't blame her, blame the media. They are the ones telling the story, keeping people interested and on the edge of their seat. Blame the entire country for becoming so wrapped up in something that doesn't pertain to them that they are willing to spend the money, or sit in front of the tv, and justify any kind of TV special or book deal.

My 2 cents...stand up and become emotional for something that is worth your energy and time. Something where a difference can be made. For me it's keeping music programs in schools and reducing drunk drivers on the roads.

 

[mrhand]

So who here is going to boycott ABC shows since they CONTRIBUTED to her defense? I hear she is getting 7 figures for a primetime interview.

You all should watch Big Brother on CBS instead. So much better than courtroom drama or the skanky housewives of orange county.

 

[stephbolt]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

This. Exactly. I wish there had been more clear-cut evidence to ensure Casey was found guilty. But I trust the jury made the best analysis of the facts they had and came to the verdict they thought was just. That's just the way our system works, and you don't hear people complaining about it when it protects someone who was wrongly accused of a crime.

 

[Maria D]

I just listened to an interview with an alternate juror who felt that the jury made the right decision, his would have been the same. The fact that the prosecution could not prove cause of death was a huge issue for him. Apparently then, if you can manage to hide the body long enough for physical cause of death to be impossible to determine beyond the shadow of a doubt you can get away with murder. The fact that no accident or missing person report was filed, the body was hidden and there was duct tape placed on the skull where the nose/mouth had been is not enough to determine homicide or at least aggravated assault? I could entertain the argument that further proof is needed (and I felt it was there) that Casey did the killing but I don't get how it's accepted that there was no "cause of death." If a person falls out of a tenth story window and dies I don't need to know which vital organ failed to understand that the cause of death was falling out the window. When a child's body is hidden in a swamp with duct tape wrapped around her face I don't need to know if she suffocated or had a heart attack to know that it was murder.

 

[Loves Vintage]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

+1. Besides, look at our sources. The media. Media is a business and selling the story of an innocent mother doesn't make money. Personally, I don't know if she is or is not guilty and that was not up to me to decide. If 12 people agree that there is not enough evidence to convict her then I will believe those 12 people.

I have never been able to understand why people become so heated and upset about something that doesn't directly effect them. If she gets a million dollar book deal, don't blame her, blame the media. They are the ones telling the story, keeping people interested and on the edge of their seat. Blame the entire country for becoming so wrapped up in something that doesn't pertain to them that they are willing to spend the money, or sit in front of the tv, and justify any kind of TV special or book deal.

My 2 cents...stand up and become emotional for something that is worth your energy and time. Something where a difference can be made. For me it's keeping music programs in schools and reducing drunk drivers on the roads.

A lot of people watched the trial, so they saw the same thing the jury saw . . . so I'm not getting your point. As to blaming the media for giving criminals opportunities to cash out, I agree with you.

Re: why people get so heated and upset -- we like to think we live in a world where things go the way we expect. In our world, mothers look after their children and will DO ANYTHING to protect them. In our world, a mother doesn't kill her baby, leave her to rot in a car, dump her in a swamp and then lie every which way they can without any regard for the life that was and that should continue to be. So, yeah, it's upsetting to a lot of people when a society in which such conduct MAKES NO SENSE must accept that such a woman will go free.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

[quote="Sparkly

+1. Besides, look at our sources. The media. Media is a business and selling the story of an innocent mother doesn't make money. Personally, I don't know if she is or is not guilty and that was not up to me to decide. If 12 people agree that there is not enough evidence to convict her then I will believe those 12 people.

I have never been able to understand why people become so heated and upset about something that doesn't directly effect them. If she gets a million dollar book deal, don't blame her, blame the media. They are the ones telling the story, keeping people interested and on the edge of their seat. Blame the entire country for becoming so wrapped up in something that doesn't pertain to them that they are willing to spend the money, or sit in front of the tv, and justify any kind of TV special or book deal.

My 2 cents...stand up and become emotional for something that is worth your energy and time. Something where a difference can be made. For me it's keeping music programs in schools and reducing drunk drivers on the roads.[/quote]

You can believe whatever you'd like, I'll never try to convince you otherwise. And I think it's wonderful that your on a mission to keep music in schools and drunk drivers off the road. We all have causes we champion, and that's very important. However, this thread is about Casey Anthony trial, and it has captivated a lot of people because a little girl lost her life--that's a sad, horrible thing. A lot of us have followed the evidence and disagree with the finding, it upsets me, personally, because I saw things differently. Same, maybe, for you when people give all sorts of reasons why money could be better spent elsewhere instead of on music. But, at the end of the day, those are your opinions and you're entitled to them.

 

[Maria D]

So, I've thought about this now for a few hours...the shock and disappointment have worn off, and now it's just another really sad story of the justice system gone awry.

Wait, how did it go awry? 12 people got in a room, looked at the evidence, and decided they couldn't convict her. As easy as it is for us to sit here and say she's guilty (and I think she is), we don't have the burden of looking at the evidence and saying, "Yes, this PROVES that she did it." There was no cause of death. As VL said, they may have thought she was guilty, but the evidence all put together didn't prove it. If there had been a cause of death, I think this would have been a different case.

I just don't see how this is a case of the justice system going awry. Not going the way we want it to? Definitely. But I think it worked the way it was supposed to. The law is designed so that people are innocent until PROVEN guilty. It seems like the jury followed the law, and just couldn't find *proof* in the evidence presented to them and so they acquitted her, which actually means it's the legal system working the way it's meant to.

+1. Besides, look at our sources. The media. Media is a business and selling the story of an innocent mother doesn't make money. Personally, I don't know if she is or is not guilty and that was not up to me to decide. If 12 people agree that there is not enough evidence to convict her then I will believe those 12 people.

I have never been able to understand why people become so heated and upset about something that doesn't directly effect them. If she gets a million dollar book deal, don't blame her, blame the media. They are the ones telling the story, keeping people interested and on the edge of their seat. Blame the entire country for becoming so wrapped up in something that doesn't pertain to them that they are willing to spend the money, or sit in front of the tv, and justify any kind of TV special or book deal.

My 2 cents...stand up and become emotional for something that is worth your energy and time. Something where a difference can be made. For me it's keeping music programs in schools and reducing drunk drivers on the roads.

Sparkly Blonde, I agree with most of what you've written. I have had to stop and ask myself why this bothers me so much. It's not that she got away with murder, that happens somewhere every day. Also, a child is dying somewhere as we speak so I can't in all honesty say it's justice-for-Caylee that makes this get under my skin. It's the one part of your post that I don't agree with -- that if 12 people agree then they should be believed. I think what's bothering me the most is this is yet another example (for me) in this country where people are lazy-minded and refuse to really think. If it's not all spelled out exactly they don't have the mental tenacity to figure it out. (That's my opinion of what happened here.) It's not allowed on PS to talk about the other times I've felt like this so I won't go on. But, I will take your advice and go back to getting passionate about things that are worth my energy and time -- so thanks for this post!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I can almost buy why some of them couldn't go with 1st degree murder since the cause of death was undetermined. BUT, there is no denying that Casey was responsible for the child's death whether it was an accident or not. The fact that she tried to hide the body and lie about it is certainly enough for me to convict her of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter. I just can't understand why they did not hold her responsible at all. I still can't believe it.

 

[Laila619]

I have never been able to understand why people become so heated and upset about something that doesn't directly effect them. If she gets a million dollar book deal, don't blame her, blame the media. They are the ones telling the story, keeping people interested and on the edge of their seat. Blame the entire country for becoming so wrapped up in something that doesn't pertain to them that they are willing to spend the money, or sit in front of the tv, and justify any kind of TV special or book deal.

It absolutely does pertain to us. An innocent child's murder should pertain to every citizen in this country. As should justice.