My thoughts on the Anthony case. First off, I was stunned over the verdict. I knew the case was largely circumstantial, and that every question could not be answered . . . due to the decomposition of the body and you know, lack of video of the actual crime actually taking place. However, I think that in my mind (and the minds of many, many folks across the nation) there were enough dots for us to connect them to one conclusion . . . the mother did it.
I've never served on a jury, and thus don't really have an intimate idea of the mental olympics jurors must go through for a verdict. However, I must say that I think they screwed this one up.
I understand that they didn't have absolute proof off the specific cause of death . . . because they didn't have the child's lungs to determine if drowning were the case. However, it seems wholly illogical that someone with a law enforcement background would ever NOT call 911 in the case of an accidental drowning of a child. As one commenter put it, no one takes and accident and makes it look like murder.
Also, If the child were already dead, as the defense theorizes, why duct tape the child up?
Lastly, if the mother didn't do it . . . did the jurors ask themselves who did? The child didn't end up dead, duct-taped, and in the woods all by herself.
I think I banked too heavily on the idea that the jurors would be ruled by the idea that someone was gonna have to pay for a little, white, girl ending up dead. I think the jurors banked too heavily on a culture that has neat and tidy endings with absolute proof in 42 minutes without commercial breaks.