CASEY WHO?!

It is amazing how much the public school system has "dumbed-down" the American citizenry.

Casey Anthony had her day in court and the prosecutors were not able to make the case that this woman killed her child. It is as simple as that. Don't blame Casey for being such a liar or bad parent; while all of that may be true, it still remains that she was found not guilty because the prosecutors were inept.

I remember the "OJ" trial, and how so many people were soooo pleased that HE was found innocent, dispite all the evidence to the contrary. The news media wasn't weeping over that verdict, like they are over this one. And Americans were content to let him walk free, while they seem a little less inclined in the Anthony case.

People!! It doesn't matter what you think; it doesn't matter what you feel; the facts are what the jurors had when they determined her innocence or guilt. None of the jurors were concerned about how you felt, and it is a good thing that at least these 12 people were able to come to a determination, without being affected by their emotions.

I salute all of them! But the rest of you are the ones I'm concerned about. Even Miss Kimberly Guilfoyle showed her prejudices on the television programs that followed the verdict. She could hardly contain herself and her prejudices when debating the guilt of Casey Anthony, whom Guilfoyle was absolutely certain, was the murderer of Caylee Anthony.....regardless of the lack of evidence.

It is true; there is a dead body of a 2 year old child, but there is no evidence to prove how her death occurred or who may have abetted her death. Has our country and its legal beagles gone that far off the constitution that they are more concerned with how they feel and what they think rather than what the constitution and the rule of law dictates as to how a person can be convicted in a case concerning the death of a person?

I'll tell you this, if I were one of the jurors, I too would have been hard pressed to find a verdict of guilt. We used to have to have 2 witnesses to prove someones guilt; today we use forensics to act as witnesses, but for me, that merely means additional proof needs to be presented since no one can corroborate the testimony of science. I want actual proof, not circumstantial evidence presented by blood tests or horse whisperers. I am  not so inclined to put someone to death or to find someone guilty and imprison them for life, unless there is irrefutable evidence.....not merely "new" or "old" science.

The emotional people who demanded Casey's verdict of guilt need to find a therapist. Obviously, they are ruled by their emotions and not facts. Obviously, they want an outcome based on how they feel, not the facts. I wonder how they would react if THEY are ever charged with anything as meaningless as a traffic ticket, which was made possible via a camera at an intersection? I mean, is a photograph of their automobile going through a red light evidence that they were the ones driving the car at the time? I'm just saying.