While many were surprised by the verdict in the Casey Anthony case yesterday, some things remained both predictable and consistent like Nancy Grace’s reaction to any defendant prevailing in a criminal case. Grace’s choleric persona was in full rage that the jury would deign to find the evidence insufficient to convict the woman who Grace had already convicted many times on her show. “Now, I know it is our duty as American citizens to respect the jury system and I do, believe me I do. I’ve struck over one-hundred juries. But I know one thing: As the defense sits by and has their champagne toast after that not guilty verdict. Somewhere out there, the devil is dancing tonight.”
I have been a long critic (here and here) of Grace’s snarling, sensational approach to law and journalism — an embarrassment to both professions. Whether it is attacking the weather or pushing grieving mothers to suicide, Grace has been denounced as an unhinged bully who brought the same abusive tendencies from court to the camera. She is CNN’s Glenn Beck.
It was particularly interesting to hear her again cite her career as a prosecutor because she left that occupation while facing serious ethical charges for prosecutorial misconduct.
Grace last night however was almost speechless. Unfortunately, it did not last:
“The defense team is inside a bar having a champagne toast, right now. . . Now, you know what? I’m not a preacher and I’m not a rabbi, but there is something wrong with that ’cause Caylee is dead. And her body decomposed just fifteen houses away from where the Anthonys put their head on the pillow overnight. Everyday searching, searching for this little girl . . . “Now, I know it is our duty as American citizens to respect the jury system and I do, believe me I do. I’ve struck over one-hundred juries. But I know one thing: As the defense sits by and has their champagne toast after that not guilty verdict. Somewhere out there, the devil is dancing tonight.”
She insists that “Tot mom’s lies seems to have worked.” That is what CNN now offers for legal analysis.
What is strange is the reaction of the media. Over at CBS, Jodie Chen actually broke down in reading the verdict. The fact is that many of us said that the evidence was pretty weak and circumstantial in the case, though most expected a conviction. That a jury was able to overcome the high emotive aspects of the case (fanned by the prosecution and people like Grace) is a testament to their independence.
Jonathan Turley
i am so thankful that juries, and not the media, are responsible for the verdicts in court. there are so few people out there who have actually listened to every word of testimony, so most people’s opinion is usually adopted from their favorite news site. the prosecution did not prove their case, and they did not present sufficient evidence to convict. was justice served? yes. the defendant may have murdered that little girl, but proof, and not speculation, wins the day. blame the D.A., and not the defendant or her lawyers for the verdict…the jury unanimously agreed that the proof was not there, so live with it, and get on with your lives.
Alan Dershowittz and Mark Garagos made some intriguing comments after
the verdict was given, that our legal system is not so much based on
attaining justice as it is about whether or not the prosecution is able to
prove its’ case byond a resonable doubt. Emphasis on the prosecution
here because the burden of proof is theirs. We may disagree on what
reasonable doubt really means and in this case many have speculated that
the jury didn’t have a full understanding regarding reasonable doubt. In
any case, the final decision rests with the jury and what we consider to be
justice may or may not be served. Many have said that because justice
was not served, it was a failure of the legal system. Based on what Dershowitz and Garagos said, I must disagree. For whatever reason in this
case, the jury felt the prosecution did not meet their standard of reasonable
doubt and did what the law required them to do, they voted for aquittal. I
would add on a personal note that if I as a juror believe that someone is
innocent until proven guilty and also want justice for the victim, am I not
prejudicing myself against the defendant and therby in effect denying him
or her due process? In this case the sytem worked, albeit a very difficult
decision for the jury to make and I applaud them for it. They made their
decision based on the evidence putting all personal feelings aside and
not bowing to the media or public pressure.
Thanks, Zari. Good stuff. Those Anthonys are fine folks.
@ Mike S.: “The mysterious missing father would have standing and the damages would be the loss of the child. I have no idea if the father even knew about the child but I would think some loss of the chance of a relationship and certainly punitive damages would be appropriate. Apparently the mother didn’t know who the father was.”
Donna MacLean, 47, of Rutland, Massachusetts, says she is “100 percent certain” she is the dead 2-year-old’s paternal grandmother, and is willing to submit to lie-detector and DNA tests to prove it. Unfortunately, her son, Michael Patrick Duggan, 24, died in a one-car accident in Falmouth, Massachusetts, in October 2007. Casey Anthony did know he was the father, but named nearly 6 others at one time or another before she & the Anthonys “settled” on Jesse Grund. The two were engaged briefly, but Casey broke it off because she said Jesse “loved Caylee more than he loved her.” Jesse had a paternity test that proved he was not Caylee’s father.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/06/28/caylee-anthony-s-daddy-solving-the-riddle.html
@ Carol Herman: “…The jurors said the prosecutor provided no evidence on how the little girl died. HELLO. You can’t convict without evidence that a murder took place!”
The baby had three pieces of duct tape wrapped around her mouth & head; she was wrapped in her Winnie-the-Pooh blanket, put into 2 trash bags & a laundry bag, & thrown into the swamp for 6 months, including a few months under water. Because the remains were so well-hidden, by the time they were found they were completely skeletonized. It was the hair matt that was still attached to the duct tape that allowed the coroner to identify the remains.
So, no, there was no evidence that a murder took place. It is possible that the 2 year-old either committed suicide or suffered an accident after she wandered into the woods by herself one day.
The Anthony case is so sad on so many levels, but the only thing that makes me laugh about it is Nancy Grace’s reaction. I seriously thought she would have a full stroke when the verdict was read (or at the very least have her head explode as on the movie “Scanners”). Casey Anthony was not found “Not Guilty”. The verdict was actually “Not Proven Guilty”. The prosecution blew the case and left too much room for reasonable doubt. If the state wants me to send someone to the death chamber, it has to PROVE the guilt to me. The state didn’t meet that burden in this case and so, as a juror, I am not going to find her guilty. Sorry if that burns your butt, Nancy, but that’s the system of law we have. I have no doubt that Casey Anthony is NOT innocent of murder, but it wasn’t proven that she was GUILTY, so she walks. She will eventually answer severely for her crimes and justice will ultimately be served. But for now, Nancy Grace needs an industrial strength sedative and a strong laxative. Calm down and breathe.
Has anyone heard any discussions about “Costs of Prosecution” (COP)? It would be interesting to see just what the DA would be asking for. In their typical fashion, they will try to integrate the costs of the 3 felonies into the 4 misdo convictions.
In Western Colorado, we’re learning to ask for “Costs of Defense” when the client is completely exonerated, or contest COP item-by-item with split verdicts.
Well, she got 1 year on each of 4 charges of lying to police; 4 years to run consecutively with a 1K fine on each charge.
This is as bogus as piling on charges of ‘failure to follow a lawful order’ or the ubiquitous ‘resisting arrest’ because one doesn’t move fast enough. These kinds of charges as well as the overcharging of more serous charges are just ways to harass and punish someone if the prosecutor can’t make the case on the fundamental charge. They are designed to harass and, as junctionshamus observes, used to leverage a plea.
These kinds of charges smell, whether its a traffic stop, someone filming a cop or a murder trial. These charges don’t vindicate the prosecution, they just reveal how petty the process has become.
Overcharging has been around since Pharisees v. Jesus of Nazareth. Always overcharge and seek plea to original charge.
What I fear is for a while….that ALL PROSECUTORS are going to OVER CHARGE on all cases…it appears that..the Prosecutor has realized that they missed the obstruction of justice charge…..which would have meant that she could be sent to prison….
Florida Statutes, Chapter 843. Some of these particular offenses are listed below:
843.06 Neglect or refusal to aid peace officers.–Whoever, being required in the name of the state by any officer of the Florida Highway Patrol, police officer, beverage enforcement agent, or watchman, neglects or refuses to assist him or her in the execution of his or her office in a criminal case, or in the preservation of the peace, or the apprehending or securing of any person for a breach of the peace, or in case of the rescue or escape of a person arrested upon civil process, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
843.14 Compounding felony.–Whoever, having knowledge of the commission of an offense punishable with death or by imprisonment in the state prison, takes money or a gratuity or reward, or an engagement therefor, upon an agreement or understanding, expressed or implied, to compound or conceal such offense, or not to prosecute therefor, or not to give evidence thereof, shall when such offense of which he or she has knowledge is punishable with death or imprisonment in the state prison for life, be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084; and where the offense of which he or she so had knowledge was punishable in any other manner, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
I think Cindy Anthony could be the/a subject of this charge….
“Casey said “that it was just a random one night thing.” Shocking!”
Mespo,
Thanks for the clarification. As to the above, time after time as I here of these instances of pregnancy and fatherless children, I wonder what the knowledge of birth control was of the participating parties. In the many sexual encounters I had before marriage, protection overrode lust every time. Even in the bloom of the male urgency of youth the exercise of control is not that difficult. As for the female this should be educated into her at puberty. Unfortunately, our society does a poor job of providing sexual education for both sexes and a multitude of difficult futures face those lacking the knowledge and foresight. This doesn’t even touch on the religious insanity debarring healthy sexuality and the tragedy of its’ consequences.
pardon me?:
Go, Equusearch . Go!
Search and rescue group may sue Casey Anthony:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/national_world&id=8235234
MIke S:
The mysterious missing father would have standing and the damages would be the loss of the child. I have no idea if the father even knew about the child but I would think some loss of the chance of a relationship and certainly punitive damages would be appropriate. Apparently the mother didn’t know who the father was. Casey said “that it was just a random one night thing.” Shocking!
Gutter journalism. Nancy Grace is a disgrace!
Watching the curtain come down on this story, though, is like watching how the “hockey stick” shut down the global warming scam.
Take your time. The jurors said the prosecutor provided no evidence on how the little girl died. HELLO. You can’t convict without evidence that a murder took place!
Glad for the way things have turned out. You couldn’t get me to watch TV. Not Oprah. Not The View. Not Spitzer. And, certainly not this disgrace “Nancy Grace” claimed to own.
“It is more important that innocence be protected than it is that guilt be punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that they cannot all be punished. But if innocence itself is brought to the bar and condemned, perhaps to die, then the citizen will say, “whether I do good or whether I do evil is immaterial, for innocence itself is no protection,” and if such an idea as that were to take hold in the mind of the citizen that would be the end of security whatsoever.” – John Adams
We could make a case that there is a grand design behind the massive attack against the jury system.
As I said elsewhere, the failure to convict rests upon the prosecution in this case. It certainly wasn’t because of the brilliance of Baez for the defense. The jury said the weren’t convinced of motive and motive is a material element of capital murder. And in this case, the motive should have been an easy element to prove: inconvenience to the mother’s desired lifestyle. The prosecution dropped the ball. It happens. Just ask the L.A. D.A.’s office. They are the Houston Astros of successful prosecution of big cases.
The judge did his job.
The jury did their job.
Neither the prosecution nor the defense did their jobs well when they did it at all.
‘Any bets on the outcome of a civil wrongful death suit against that trio of Mom, Grandpa, and Grandma?”
Mespo,
Who would have standing to file it and what would be the damages requested? Naturally, if the above conditions are met, it would win. Personally, I don’t like the trend which became popular after OJ. While I know it has been deemed legitimate, it seems too much like a double jeopardy type of thing and of course as your imply there is a much lesser standard of proof required.
Any bets on the outcome of a civil wrongful death suit against that trio of Mom, Grandpa, and Grandma?