Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
UPDATED:::CATA Group- New thread!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="klmno" data-source="post: 443334" data-attributes="member: 3699"><p>Haoz- those things were on the table. They had lesser charges they could consider, even 3rd degree, manslaughter, or child abuse as options. </p><p></p><p>I remember watching the OJ case. I was thinking the same thing people are saying about this case (ok, younger than I am now <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> ), and I swore the same thing- the state just didn't prove guilt. This many years later, now I think it's a travesty that we all know he did it, logic only tells us that, the prosecution did a horrible job because they threw in "stuff" themselves that created doubt that overcame evidence that did piont to OJ and OJ alone. Someday, people will look back on this and see it as a travesty, IMVHO.</p><p></p><p>When people have time to stop and think and reflect and question, if Casey didn't do it, then who did? And then question, did the prosecution have evidence to prove it? That is where the question of circumstancial evidence comes in. </p><p></p><p>I have no idea if DDD's, or anyone else's, opinion is based on having a personal connection with the system in Fl , as suggested in the previous thread. But if it does, I would ask that instead of focusing only on how that system served (or failed) your grandchild (or whomever), consider also if it was your gfgdau on trial and your grandchild had been dead at 2 1/2yo- would you have as much symtpathy if you were the person making the 911 call that Cindy did?</p><p></p><p>I am sincerely interested in coming to terms with this, in a civilized manner.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="klmno, post: 443334, member: 3699"] Haoz- those things were on the table. They had lesser charges they could consider, even 3rd degree, manslaughter, or child abuse as options. I remember watching the OJ case. I was thinking the same thing people are saying about this case (ok, younger than I am now :) ), and I swore the same thing- the state just didn't prove guilt. This many years later, now I think it's a travesty that we all know he did it, logic only tells us that, the prosecution did a horrible job because they threw in "stuff" themselves that created doubt that overcame evidence that did piont to OJ and OJ alone. Someday, people will look back on this and see it as a travesty, IMVHO. When people have time to stop and think and reflect and question, if Casey didn't do it, then who did? And then question, did the prosecution have evidence to prove it? That is where the question of circumstancial evidence comes in. I have no idea if DDD's, or anyone else's, opinion is based on having a personal connection with the system in Fl , as suggested in the previous thread. But if it does, I would ask that instead of focusing only on how that system served (or failed) your grandchild (or whomever), consider also if it was your gfgdau on trial and your grandchild had been dead at 2 1/2yo- would you have as much symtpathy if you were the person making the 911 call that Cindy did? I am sincerely interested in coming to terms with this, in a civilized manner. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
UPDATED:::CATA Group- New thread!
Top