@sujatarao
my resume
pandora
home
digster.fm
universal music group
interscope
island def jam
gamefly
intel
aspca
national wildlife federation
when cats are alone
Create Your Badge
what i'm listening to ...
I will shamelessly admit …
I watch HLN’s Nancy Grace on a daily basis. It’s like watching a cross between a car-wreck and a bad MAD TV sketch. Today, as her viewers watched what was the “verdict countdown” turn into what is now the “sentencing countdown”, she highlighted a statement allegedly made by one of the jurors. The juror stated the following according to ABC News …
The jury in the Casey Anthony case wouldn’t speak to the media yesterday after they handed down the ‘not guilty’ verdict, but Juror #3 is speaking today. The Casey Anthony verdict made the jurors, “sick to their stomachs,” says the young woman, but they were left with no choice.
Jennifer Ford said that she joined the other jurors in crying, and felt ill after voting to acquit the teen mother of murder charges. Ford was quick to say, “I did not say she was innocent. I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be.”
source: http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979575791
Grace kept bringing up what the statement by this juror means. The meaning is completely clear - they didn’t have enough definitive proof to convict Casey Anthony. This is exactly how our jury system works so I didn’t understand why Grace kept trying to get different interpretations out of her interviewees (maybe she wasn’t and I was just misinterpreting the whole thing).
Regardless, I hope to God I never have to serve on a capital trial and I think Grace should comment on the effectiveness of the expert witnesses and the overall prosecution strategy (since we all agree the defense’s strategy was ‘let’s throw stuff at this wall and see what sticks’). Unless there was some serious juror misconduct - the post-verdict statements of these jurors don’t need to be repeatedly gone over (well I should correct myself, this is HLN so I suppose this trial is their bread and butter).
What I personally want to know is the level of difficulty in re-opening a case if, hypothetically, some slam dunk evidence came to light.
