How long has this mess even been going on? We all know she killed her 2 year old daughter, and she didn't JUST kill her, she gagged her with duct tape, buried her and pretended she didn't know anything about it. I say fry the bitch now and quit wasting everybody's time and money with this trial her lawyers are trying to drag out as long as possible.

What do I think should be done with her? A trial by a jury of her peers and if convicted, a punishment as prescribed by the state of Florida. The prosecution is on record that it intends to pursue the death penalty which as far as I know is lethal injection or the electric chair. Or would you prefer they revive scourging and crucifixion? I predict her case isn't going to drag on any longer than any other capital murder case.

It certainly seems like it takes a ridiculous amount of time for some to get to trial. But I believe everyone deserves a fair one. I don't really like people being held indefinitely. But apparently this foot dragging is on the part of her defense team. The fastest one I remember in a while is the David Westerfield case. He requested a speedy trial & it didn't work out too well for him. Based on what I've seen & heard it does appear she's guilty. But I haven't seen the evidence the jury will see. It has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. As difficult as it is, emotion shouldn't come into play. It has to be based on the evidence. Sometimes guilty people get cut loose. But just as bad is an innocent person spending years in prison or god forbid executed. Time will run out eventually & she will have to face trial. The best we can hope for is justice even if it takes longer than we think it should.

It seems to me this woman's already getting it too easy. Wasn't the matter a while back that her attorney quit and they wanted the public to pay for her a new one? There's a thing called public defenders who take cases for nothing, use it.

And yes, we don't know what the jury will see, but here's the evidence the whole world has already seen. The remains of body decay were found in HER car, the searches for how to make chloroform were on HER computer, the burial was not far off from HER home, and SHE is the one who has given police 20 different stories about who had her child. She had the child, but she left the child to go partying at clubs, all of a sudden her child is gone and she's making this baby sitter up out of thin air, why? Now I also believe in innocent until guilty but does that sound like something an innocent person would do? Does she really mean to say SOMEBODY else used her computer to look up how to make chloroform, somebody else put the dead body in her car and somebody else told her to make up a dozen different stories to tell police?

I don't think public defenders are pro bono. Haven't researched it but if I remember right they're paid by the state. So it's still tax dollars at work.

From what I've heard about what they have, her attorney is probably going to argue the evidence is circumstantial. She can still be convicted for sure. You don't even need a body. Like I said I think she's guilty. So I wouldn't be chosen for the jury. But it has to play out according to the legal system. Time will run out for her. But even if she's found guilty, there will be an automatic appeal & here we go again.

I can't believe that the case has been going on for three years, and they only recently set a trial date for August. Don't waste tax payer money making this a lengthy one, speedily convict the money and sentence her.

Anyone still keeping up with this?

Truth be told, I had to be reminded of who she is. I thought this might have been about the American woman convicted of murdering her roommate in Italy. Sometimes the news just starts running together. I still remember who Susan Smith and Scott Peterson are.

Nah, not keeping up with it. I had to Wikipedia her name. Apparently she killed her kid, so lock her up already....

I'm following it best I can which isn't much since I can't catch much of the trial in the mornings. I'm waiting for them to convict her and I hope she does get the death penalty.

I can't deal with the details of this case so I haven't been following it very closely.

Now something I would love very much to know, WHAT kind of mother gets a tattoo saying 'Beautiful Life' at the time her 2 year old daughter is missing/dead? How can anybody say she's not guilty? Let's go with the second example, WHY would a mother have BEAUTIFUL LIFE tattooed on her after dumping her dead daughter's body, regardless of how she died? (ha ha)

Innocent until proven guilty is nice and all but she seems to be doing a good job of proving it herself, she doesn't need the prosecutor helping. I personally have NEVER heard of a case where a baby 'accidentally' dies and the first thought is '*snap* let's take it out and bury it and forget it ever existed, nobody will know!' And I have also NEVER heard of a woman whose child died accidentally and she went along with dumping the body in the woods and not saying a word for a month because she was molested when she was 8 years old. And a big question I would be asking is if she drowned in the pool, and her father the cop was there, WHY would anybody, least of all him, feel a need to make the body disappear? He's a cop, he's got authority, he's got connections, if anything went wrong, who would ever suspect him? Especially if it WAS an 'accident', you do not hide the dead body of a child in a case of accidental death.

Didn't her mother just commit perjury?

(Oh!) Rob Petrie wrote:

Didn't her mother just commit perjury?

Yah, seems she did. She said she did the search on chloroform on the home pc, but work records show she was at work.

The whole thing is so sad while I try not to sound too opinionated about publicized cases like this, I have to say that her changing stories indicated guilt. No part of me thinks anyone did it but Casey.

I agree with you. It's another OJ trial. It's SO obvious. She's just managed to slither through red tape and technicalities.

I haven't been following the trial closely. Is she set to take the witness stand?

Chris wrote:

I haven't been following the trial closely. Is she set to take the witness stand?

The jury's deliberating today, and to answer Chris, no, she never took the stand. Everybody agrees that would've just hanged her then and there because the prosecutor could've torn into her with all the lies she told and she would never be able to string them all together to sound convincing.

I think she's going to walk, because unfortunately I don't think the prosecution presented enough evidence. I think she's guilty. And her despicable lack of emotion is chilling.

Angel wrote:

I think she's going to walk, because unfortunately I don't think the prosecution presented enough evidence. I think she's guilty. And her despicable lack of emotion is chilling.

I don't know, her defense has done a good job of trying to make it sound like everybody else is responsible for Caylee's death, but there's that pesky thing called MOTIVE, who had a motive? Who gains from Caylee and all mommy responsibilities going bye bye? Who, after Caylee dies decides life is so beautiful she needs to get a tattoo of it? Who makes up that a dead child has been kidnapped by an imaginary nanny? Who searched 80 times for chloroform and neck breaking and duct tape? Who waited until the trial was almost over to suddenly say 'oh wait, I should be excused because I'm crazy'? Who has had their 2 year old child die and has not shown ONE iota of emotion EXCEPT in these last few days when the jury is watching, but has otherwise for 3 years remained completely stone faced? A jury sees that every day and they're going to remember that. And if they have a single mother on the jury...

Supernova wrote:

How long has this mess even been going on? We all know she killed her 2 year old daughter, and she didn't JUST kill her, she gagged her with duct tape, buried her and pretended she didn't know anything about it. I say fry the bitch now and quit wasting everybody's time and money with this trial her lawyers are trying to drag out as long as possible.

I think that IF she is convicted, she should be punished to the full extent of the law. IF she is not convicted, then she shouldn't be. It's really that simple. I think that due process should take it's course.

I don't know if Casey Anthony killed her daughter or not. I don't know if she was an indirect participant or not. At the end of the day, none of that matters because we have a justice system set up on the premise of a person being innocent until PROVEN GUILTY beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is a lack of credible "evidence" linking her to the murder and there is reasonable doubt, then she is not "proven" guilty. I definetely think she has SOMETHING to do with her daughter's dissappearance/death, but what roles she played I don't know. I don't know if she killed the girl and burried her herself, if she hired someone else to do it, or if she was just neglegent and tried to cover up the fact that her daughter was kidnapped and killed. But what I "think" doesn't really matter.

Except how could Caylee be kidnapped when her body was left in Casey's car?