The dust has begun to settle on the Casey Anthony saga. She has been released from prison, having been acquitted on the capital murder charge. The public will continue to believe that the jury is dumb -- the man on the street "knows better" -- and that she is guilty as sin, period: that she literally got away with murder (the insignificant guilt verdict on the false statement charges is seen as meaningless).
In time, as the tabloids seem to opine, Casey may hook up with some trailer trash slug. Maybe he'll marry her expecting, as is likely, that she can be his meal ticket -- write her book, pose for Playboy, and star in a reality show. And most likely the public is correct: Either Casey did kill her little girl, or she took elaborate, brazenly inhumane measures to cover up the child's death in such a sordid way that many may see it as tantamount to having actually killed her.
Because of this world view, the world, we assume, will likely pay no attention to a story buried in the New York Times on July 19. In the story, software designer John Bradley, a former Canadian police sergeant who specializes in forensic computer analysis and was a key prosecution witness at the Anthony trial, reported that his trial testimony, in which he essentially asserted that the Anthony computer was used 84 times searching for the word "chloroform" (claimed by the prosecution throughout the trial as the cause of death), was seriously mistaken. Bradley, having reconstructed his expert work and analysis of the issue after he testified, admitted that the analysis offered was wrong -- there had been only one search for "chloroform" on the Anthony computer. Moreover, according to Bradley's post-trial interview with the prosecution, he made this acknowledgement of his error to the police and the prosecutor's office while the trial was still in progress. And yet, astonishingly, according to the Times story, neither the defense, the judge, nor the jury was ever alerted to Bradley's recantation.
But as we see it, the public simply won't care about this dramatic revelation even if completely accurate. Why? Even though this disclosure might be quite relevant in determining Casey Anthony's guilt, the public has already convicted her. To the court of public opinion, this is simply a situation of "no harm, no foul." Even without the extra 83 chloroform website views, and the implications of what the absence of that evidence means, Casey Anthony is guilty, guilty, guilty!
There is nothing to prevent the public from taking that position, however unenlightened or influenced by a mob-like mentality. The folks on the street do make determinations outside the courtroom based on God-given common sense considerations that have nothing to do with courtroom protocols and rules. For these folks, rules against hearsay evidence and lie detectors are silly. Defendants accused of crimes who refuse to testify and proclaim their innocence are guilty. It's as simple as that.
But what about the prosecutors? How can it be that, if Bradley is telling the truth on his recantation that he supposedly reported to the Anthony prosecutors while the case was still ongoing, that the defense wasn't told about it? How can it be that such clearly exculpatory evidence was hidden from the defense. Prosecutors, unlike the man on the street, do have an ethical and legal duty to come clean when something of this importance comes to their exclusive doorstep, especially when the stakes are so high and the potential of a death penalty is implicated.
In our experience, there's a simple answer. Most likely, the prosecutors concluded early on, and probably rightly so, that Anthony was a killer or at least brazenly covered up her baby's death. Guilty, period. Everything else that would be raised by the defense side would be a smokescreen -- a brazen effort to obscure reality. Why arm a bunch of irresponsible defense lawyers with the ability to create a smoke and mirrors sideshow that would have nothing to do with the truth of Casey's guilt? She needs to fry! Indeed, that is the typical mindset when prosecutors disobey the dictates of Brady v. Maryland (the famous 1963 Supreme Court decision that requires prosecutors to disclose exculpatory evidence) even when defendants are charged with horrendous crimes -- and especially when the trials are so high profile.
Still, prosecutors have to follow the rules. The prosecutors were required to disclose Bradley's information. That they failed to do so could theoretically subject them to professional discipline. But does anyone seriously believe that this will happen? Prosecutors are hardly ever subject to discipline for their misconduct, and the failure to disclose the Bradley information is surely misconduct. But if prosecutors are not disciplined for not disclosing exculpatory evidence that would exonerate an innocent man (see our 4/1/11 post "Cops are Stupid, But Prosecutors Are Smart" re: the Supreme Court's decision in Connick v. Thompson), why should prosecutors get disciplined for not disclosing exculpatory evidence when they and everyone else believes the defendant is guilty?
Is Casey Anthony in danger after her release Sunday? - USATODAY.com
Casey Anthony – Nancy Grace - CNN.com Blogs
Casey Anthony Video May Be Unsealed by Court - ABC News
Threats to Casey Anthony: How safe will she be after leaving ...
How Casey Anthony Could Have Been Convicted
Casey Anthony Trial Update: Defense calls Casey's parents back to ...
Sorry, but the onous is on Mr. Bradley and his lack of ethics. Maybe he went along with erroneous findings to ensure payment of his expert fee, and then he could retract or clarify after the trial. His expertise is now questionable.
Casey was found not guilty, but the girl isn't innocent. I thought the prosecution did an excellent job and because it was turned on it's head when the jury reached their verdict, doesn't lesson the prosecutor's case.
Who amongst has made a mistake somewhere in our lives and tried to cover it up? I know I have but I was lucky I could always, always, always blame it on my boss because he was too busy popping pills and going in and out of blackouts.
While my mistakes weren't about decisions on whether someone was guilty or innocent in a court of law, we as humans do make mistakes, sometimes little one's and sometimes big one's. In this case the forsenic computer experts made a mistake due to the software they used to extract the information, it was software error more than it was human error.
But what does scare me is that this software might have been used in other cases and someone could be sitting in prison because of it. I would demand an investigation into previous cases if a person was convicted of a serious crime based on data extraction.
Good point.
I won't move there especially with DP on the table
post. WE can fix that. I have a Petition on change.org demanding
that the Florida State Attorney puts a stop to this kind of conduct
by Prosecutors. Go to this site and VOTE. Get everyone you
know to go there and VOTE. Enough votes on this and it WILL
be stopped. Here is the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/state-of-florida-hold-state-attorneys-office-accountable-
for-misconduct?share_id=BHwyokHJpS&pe=d2e If clicking on it don't
work, past it to your browser. Thanks for being a true American!!!
http://wwwÂ.wftv.com/Ânews/28608Â822/detailÂ.htm
The general populace seems to agree. They want someone to blame and do not seem to care if it is the right person. There is no understanding that if an Innocent man is convicted the guilty go free.
The DA could have developed how different the defendants looked today from how the looked at the time of the crime, The crime scene show-up, plus the mug shots, plus the other victim's I.D. would lock it up, and the jury would hold their deliberate change of appearance, which is only brought out by your scrupulousness, against them.
The girl had a trial in the USA and in the USA we have this thing about proving someone guilty or they are innocent. What would you change about that???
They had to beat the OJ jury by a few hours.
duty as an American citizen to stand against this misconduct.
So, help us out. We have a PETITION on change.org to
demand this be addressed by the State of FLorida. Go to
change.org and SIGN the PETITION, Please. Here is the link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/state-of-florida-hold-state-attorneys-office-
accountable-for-misconduct?Share_id=BHwyokHJpS&pe=d2e
If you click on it and it does not work, just paste it to your
browser. Thanks for being an American who cares,