Casey Anthony Verdict an Outrage or Justice?

I am jumping on the bandwagon on this one, but not with the outrage that most seem to have over the not guilty verdict handed down in the Casey Anthony murder trial. 

Do not get me wrong, I am not choosing sides. A young child was murdered, and there can be no winners in this case. 

I find Ms. Anthony's actions strange and bizarre from a mother's point of view, and obviously have the same suspicions as every one else. How can you possibly go a month without reporting your child missing? And how could you go out partying and have a great time (or at least look like it), if you don't know where your child is?  There are many things that point towards her guilt, but the question is, was it proven beyond any reasonable doubt?

Our justice system may not be perfect, but it is working, and I think it is in everyone's best interest to keep the high standards we do have today.  With the changes we have seen over the past few decades in the authorities' ability to prove their case with DNA evidence, electronic evidence etc., there is no reason we should ever lower the standards a guilty verdict must meet. 

According to Innocence Project, 245 wrongly convicted people have been freed after DNA evidence became available. One of these, James Baines, from Florida, served 35 years behind bars for a rape he did not commit, before being freed in 2009. I would hope the State of Florida would not make such a mistake again. It is for these cases we should be glad to see the courts adhere to the high standards of proof.

Strangly I am finding that I all of a sudden share opinions with people seemingly far from my liberal self.  Jeffrey Scott Shapiro with Fox News calls the verdict a "Victory for the Constitution". Looking at little Caylee's picture, it doesn't feel like a victory, but after reading his opinion, I do actually agree with him.  

According to Mr. Shapiro, "Florida criminal case jury instructions say that, “a reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative imaginary or forced doubt . . . on the other hand, if after carefully considering, comparing and weighing all the evidence there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or, if having a conviction, it is one which is not stable but which waivers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable. It is to the evidence introduced in this trial, and to it alone, that you are to look to that proof.”

In layman's terms, jurors must render their verdict only on the evidence presented to them in court and they cannot to let their imagination or speculation guide their decisions. In this case the jurors honored those instructions. They complied with the law." You can find the full article here.  Bottom line is, the evidence presented did not meet the high standards of the law, and the jury did what they were asked to do.

Whether we think the verdict is right or not, I do hope that we can respect the justice system. I cringe when I see comments like "they better have an escape plan for her when she is released".  Why should they?  She was tried, and found not guilty.  We need to accept that.  

Or to quote Pastor Chris Braun who speaks of forgiveness and seeking God in instances like this; "Scripture repeatedly warns us against taking revenge, again see Romans 12:19.  You may let yourself off the hook by saying, “There is no possibility of me taking revenge on Casey Anthony,” to which I would respond, “Don’t you think that some of the people writing about Casey Anthony are taking revenge? It would seem that some are trying to pay Casey Anthony back if no other way than through Tweets. Or is it just my imagination?” Forgiveness may not be on everyone's mind with regards to Casey Anthony, but Pastor Braun's blog post is worth reading. You can find it here.

My thoughts and prayers go out to little Caylee.  May she rest in peace.