Justice Isn't Justice Without a Guilty Verdict?

Today I watched some television coverage on the Casey Anthony murder trial in Florida that resulted in a conclusion of the criminal justice process with a verdict of not guilty. Prosecutors don't like to hear that. Neither, it appears, do the media pundits who had convicted the young woman of murdering her daughter. According to the people speaking on television, justice doesn't exist without a guilty verdict.

I did not follow the trial, so I don't have any idea what the jurors heard. Nevertheless, the entire criminal justice process was carried out. The defendant stood trial. Prosecutors had their say. In the end, jurors said not guilty. Now pundits express shock, accusing the jury of getting it wrong, expressing outrage at the defense attorneys for celebrating their victory.

People who observed the case did not want justice. On the one hand, they hold rules of criminal procedure to be sacrosanct. They wanted a conviction. When the jurors did not return a verdict of guilty, they claimed justice was not served. They wanted their pound of flesh, regardless of how those on the jury evaluated the evidence.

After the verdict was read, I heard one commentator with the misleading name Nancy Grace suggesting that the jurors were biased. She ridiculed the jurors for troubles they had had in the past with the criminal justice system. Nancy Grace should celebrate the diversity!

Our nation now confines 2.3 million people. I've read reports indicating that 13 million people have criminal records. More and more people who have struggled with the criminal justice system live in American communities. As jurors apparently were in the Florida murder trial, more people may become cynical about our nation's criminal justice system. It is growing into a multi-headed, Leviathan-like beast. Frankly, I'm sick of it.

 

 

 

Follow Michael Santos on Twitter: www.twitter.com/prisonreform

Comments

[Sheldon archer]

03:46 AM on 07/19/2011

There are many innocent people in American prisons and the reasons are not hard to find. First of all the prosecutors are more interested in the number of convictions that they can obtain than whether the accused is innocent or guilty. Next the prison system is big business and that's what America runs on. Private prisons have to keep their shareholders happy with profits. Greedy lawyers have to get their share. Prison guards and other employees need the work. DEA agents and the police have to show that they are doing something. Suppliers of prison food and other supplies need the income. Judges and the other court employees have to stay employed. etc etc. This is the reason why the drug war, which has been proven to be a total failure, will keep failing for many years to come.

[Bflobaz]

02:36 PM on 07/16/2011

A civil or criminal trial isn't like adding 1+1 and obtaining a sum certain each time. Due process, fundamental fairness and yes, justice is the anticpated result; but then "what's fair is in the eye of the beholder" that is, each party involved in the litigation. Stated another way: "What's fair for one person isn't (necessarily) fair for the other." That's one of the reasons the civil courts began moving towards arbitration, mediation or conciliation to hasten cases through overcrowed dockets and "problem solving courts" such as the Drug Treatment Courts (spawing DWI/DUI, Veterans, Family, etc Courts) find justice and fairness through a different sort of paradigm than influenced the development of the English Common Law.

So many factors may create a civil/criminal verdict; including the competency of one or more of the attorneys and/or the presiding judge; the credibility or lack thereof of one or more key witnesses; the ability or lack of a witness to communicate in the courtroom arena and of course, the jurors putting aside their own biases, understanding and following or failing to apply basic, but unfamiliar legal concepts and more.

It is a human system; but by and large probably works better than it fails; although for reasons stated above, seeks compromise. Does that leave both parties happy? Sometimes yes, sometimes not; but let's not return to our barbaric roots and let us gain a better understanding of our legal system.

[St Ansgar]

09:37 AM on 07/12/2011

In America it is the jury's job to determine guilt, not the media nor the masses. Furthermore, I doubt that the individuals who are complaining about the Anthony verdict would have much to say if they were in her place.

[FdeBear]

08:28 AM on 07/10/2011

Thanks for this commentary. I couldn't agree more. And based on the comments on this particular thread there are cooler heads that exist. I anticipated the verdict after hearing the closing arguments that summarized the evidence. I cared less about the "media trial" because we should know what that is all about. We should also know the difference between speculation and evidence. I wanted to shout at that mob outside the courtroom, "Shut up and go home!" Nothing can be done for Caylee but to help some other child.

[celeritas]

02:30 AM on 07/08/2011

Even with pictures, maps, telescopes, tons of indirect evidence and people who have gone the entire distance and came to tell about it... you'll never convince a flatlander the world is round.

[kwyang]

07:40 PM on 07/07/2011

It's not justice when the guilty get off because the jurors can't be trusted to find their way home, much less to the truth.

[Neal Patel]

07:17 PM on 07/07/2011

The best thing about the Casey Anthony verdict is an uneducated women from a low/middle income background -who gets knocked up at a young age. is able to get off on a major felony charge in Florida which is a Conservative State and Orlando is a pretty right leaning area.

[chemistrydoc]

05:54 PM on 07/08/2011

My vote for the best thing is this: that police and prosecutors and the Nancy Graceless types, in their rush to get a pound of flesh, started the endzone dance a few years too soon. And, they just didn't do their jobs. Not at all. And, the jury told them so, in the most direct terms possible.

[JeffJeckyll]

04:33 PM on 07/14/2011

YES YES

[disappointedliberal]

06:16 PM on 07/18/2011

Your use of the phrase endzone dance points out a problem I have with the system. Prosecutors today seem emotionally involved beyond just wanting to do a good job and being happy they won the case. They want punishment. I am a former prosecutor. As a prosecutor, I wanted to win but never got too upset over the punishment. That was the Judge's job and while I sometimes respectully disagreed with the punishment, I never really got upset over it. The feeling I get from prosecutors today, however, is that they take joy in the punishment of the criminal.

[Keri Miyadi]

05:14 PM on 07/07/2011

The only thing I can say is that I wish there was more evidence (either way). Whether she is guilty or not (no, really), we will probably never know. If she were guilty, I wish there was enough to convict; if not, I wish there was enough evidence to track down the real killer.

[JBS]

01:50 PM on 07/07/2011

"Nancy Grace should celebrate the diversity!"

Nancy Grace should burn in hell for her hypocrisy.

[minunperhonen]

03:37 PM on 07/08/2011

I am against opinion-based reporting and media-assassinations. If you agree, this site will give links to advertisers on HLN.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Help-Stop-HLN-and-Nancy-Graces-Opinion-Based-Reporting/240371955991183

[litigationtech]

01:16 PM on 07/07/2011

I have worked on a number of high profile criminal and civil trials in my career, including the Robert Blake murder defense, so I know what it looks like on the inside. While Nancy Grace and the HLN team seemed to imply this was a done deal, as I watched the verdict being published, I can’t say that I was shocked. During deliberations, the jury has only their notes and admitted evidence to work with. Although we were given an opportunity to see most of the evidence presented to the jury, they were not viewing it along with a picture of little Caylee in one corner, and “Tot-Mom” in another. Visual presentation can be very persuasive. http://trial-technology.blogspot.com/2011/07/casey-anthony-verdict-was-it-wrong.html

[FdeBear]

07:44 AM on 07/10/2011

Fanned. A credible voice among all this babble.

[goairforce]

11:25 AM on 07/20/2011

I, too, have worked in the criminal justice field, 30 years and counting. A few garnered media attention. You, as I do, must know it doesn't matter what the public is seeing or perceiving, once a verdict is rendered.

The problem a lot folks are having -- and those of us being "insiders" -- is at least three-pronged: (1) there was no instruction for circumstantial evidence; (2) the jury did not take notes or ask questions; and (3) they're after-court commentary clearly demonstrates they did not devote the time and attention to review ALL the charges, to understand the instructions, and to discharge their duties with due diligence.

[pitciarn]

11:46 AM on 07/07/2011

Casey did not report her 2 yr old missing for 31 DAYS !!!

Mutiple lies and mis-truths to police during the investigation, wasting resourse's and manpower in a futile useless search.

Casey did not act like a distraught mother , she partied and drank and went clubbing during the 31 days.

The childs body was dumped in a swamp !!! just the place for nature and critters to eat/destroy evidence.

Casey got away with murder, because a jury of 17 people wanted CSI evidence where none existed.

[VcKrc]

12:14 PM on 07/07/2011

"17 people wanted CSI evidence where none existed" Exactly, physical evidence, something they can see, hear or feel, and that did not exist. You cannot convict someone of murder without evidence that concludes that, without a doubt, they killed someone. Something that gives a motive, proves pre-meditation, puts them at the scene. The defense could not even rule out that she died as a result of an accident.They did not prove she died as a result of a homicide. I believe she did it, but all they proved was what you said, she's a liar and she's was a horrible mom that did not care about her daughter (there are people like that). Her emotion, or lack of, to me says she could very well have died accidentally and Casey was too focused on her party life to want to have to explain what happened and risk going to jail. The lies and the partying do not "prove" she killed her, they tell us she was menatally capable of doing it and not feeling remorse, but that is not enough to put someone to death. Physical evidence that ties her to the crime, does.

[Keri Miyadi]

05:08 PM on 07/07/2011

Fantastic reply.

[FdeBear]

07:45 AM on 07/10/2011

fanned.

[JBS]

01:54 PM on 07/07/2011

Casey Anthony is no one's candidate for mother of the year, but the prosecution DID NOT PROVE its case. The jury acquitted.

That's how our system is supposed to work. It's the only protection you or I have from the power of the state.

[ronnyrulz]

10:37 AM on 07/07/2011

I don't understand what everyone is so upset about. Trials are not about guilt, they are about proving guilt.

The reason she was found not guilty, irrelevant if she did it or not, is the same reason corrupt police (as well as officers, lawyers, judges, media outlets, or mobs of strangers) cannot simply say "You are guilty." and have you, an innocent person, thrown in jail because of a "hunch". Oh wait, they actually CAN put you in jail while you await a "speedy trial" which take years to actualize.

If someone accuses me of a crime I did not commit and puts me in jail for 3 years to await a trial, and I never did it-- they just stole 3 years of my life which I cannot get back. It also probably ruined my life as well. I would not only like to see Casey go completely free for there not being evidence, but I want her to successfully sue the Government, Lawyers, Judges, Police Officers, and everyone who makes a profit off of Jails & Prisons, for stealing 3 years of her life.

Unfortunately this won't happen, because they believe she is guilty and want to give her time anyway, which will be 3+ years. Imagine though if she was entirely innocent of ALL charges, or were YOU and a different crime. You really think stealing 1/2-3+ years of your life is considered a speedy trial? Not in my book.

[Lori Lewis]

11:57 AM on 07/08/2011

i totally agree, HLN could not sensationalize this any more if they tried. they are so concerned about how and where Casey will go. noting the concern for her safety. WELL, WHY DON'T YOU JUST FOLLOW HER?? (NOT ACTUALLY SUGGESTING THIS) KEEP THOSE RATINGS UP N.G.
i cannot and will not pass judgement, joining the majority of these trial watchers. who IMO should be ashamed of THEIR own behavior. THERE IS NO CONCRETE EVIDENCE. NO WITNESSES. NOTHING. you would think someone would have come forward to comment, had Casey been wining ,stressed or planning to get rid of Caylee. Not one of Casey's friends, people in her inner circle, have NOT tipped off ANYONE. Just a growing hysterical lynch mob, that continues to ask.if it wasn't Casy, then who. now HLN is talking about her seeing a therapist. omg.. SHE WAS NOT FOUND GUILTY. LIKE IT OR NOT... WHY DON'T YOU ALL GO OUT AND PREFORM A RANDOM ACT OF KINDNESS. TURN YOUR ENERGY AROUND!!! YOUR HATRED FUELS THIS FIRE. IT WILL NOT TURN BACK THE CLOCK, IN ANYWAY.
To all of you who stand in judgement of Casey, the jury, the legal system etc. THIS VERY SAME SYSTEM YOU HATE, COULD VERY WELL SPARE YOUR LIFE OR THE LIFE OF SOMEONE YOU KNOW.

YOU DO NOT KNOW CASEY DID THIS. IF YOU DID.. YOU WOULD HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT FACT.

[rosebud678]

01:47 PM on 07/10/2011

Casey is not innocent! Therefore it is not stealing anything from her. She was bailed out and put back in jail because of this. She will not sue anyone because she knows exactly what she did. You must not have seen much of the actual trial.

[jakel95020]

08:06 PM on 07/14/2011

Saw the whole thing twice. Look who was the first person on the talk show circuit getting paid all kinds of money, the Mr. Ashton the prosecutor.

[sadmaawk]

10:26 AM on 07/07/2011

This case was tried in the press, and they got their conviction. (at least with the court of public opinion) I have some friends, who are locked up now, doing 25 years for ag. child abuse. That's 25 years of birthdays missed for their 4 boys. Thats 25 Christmas, July 4ths, Thanksgivings, Labor Days, and all the other celebrations throughout the year that they are going to miss because in their case, the jury said "guilty". They committed no crime, but I can't prove that, and neither could they. Their life is ruined because of what someone said. That someone wasn't even in the house that much, but because of what they said my friends will remain if prison, their boys will get older, eventually they will die, and life will go on. I for one am glad this jury found her not guilty. At least I know that not all jurys a swayed by public opinion. They saw the evidence, and determined that the States Attorney did not have the right stuff to convict. I now know that at least sometimes, our system works. For those of you who are not happy about it, remember James Bain, and Tim Masters. How do they get justice?

[conscioushope]

09:26 AM on 07/07/2011

Great article! My thoughts exactly.

[Meerkatx]

12:40 AM on 07/07/2011

Casey is not guilty, it's a bad decision. Of course this is what the media and all the people paid for the last 3 years to convict Casey before her trial would have you believe. I suspect our system would be better off without the likes of Nancy Grace and her ilk and instead of truly professional reporters without bias report facts without spin. Justice was served, even if it's not your justice that you wanted or expected.

[JBS]

01:56 PM on 07/07/2011

Perhaps Nancy Grace should be on trial for the murder of Kaylee Anthony. I'm sure the prosecution could present at least as much evidence for HER guilt as they presented at Casey's trial.