Casey Anthony Murder Trial Underway

[Chris_]

Before this thread degenerates into an enormous, unreasonable, blathering mess, SHE WAS ACQUITTED of murder.

You're free to argue against it, bitch and moan, but she is innocent of murder as far as the state of Florida is concerned.  She has the same rights today as she did two years ago.

You're free to disagree and discuss, but keep it civil.  Knock off the hyperbole and dramatics.

[unbiased]

I am thinking a mole rather than a troll.

Please explain how anything I have written makes me a mole or troll. All I have said is that she was found not guilty and she should be able to live her life like anyone else who was not guilty of killing their daughter. I even said I think she had something to do with it. But, to say she shouldn't be able to live her life as the free woman a jury found her to be is ridiculous.

So, someone show me a quote that implies I am anything by an American who is following the Constitution.

[Evil_Conservative]

YOU ARE F**KING NUTS!!! How about the NO Colored signs that we used to have? Do you want them back? What is your all's problem? I would never think that conservatives would be so much against the American justice system. Good God!!!!! Not only is a sign like that illegal but to the dumbass who said they would put up a sign for the jurors too, you all don't belong here. It is that simple. READ THE CONSTITUTION!!!!

Would you shut the **** up and go back to reading comprehension 101.

I said there are businesses putting up those signs.  I did not say the businesses SHOULD do it. 

[olde north church]

I was pretty much finished on this thread because there was no changing of minds to be done here.  The Media Whore Nancy Grace poisoned the Casey Anthony's world with her wall-to-wall histrionics and the prosecutor's office in FLA finished the job based upon the fact it had to move venues.  What people here or on other forums refuse to admit is they know only the facts of the case supplied by the media.  There was no flow of mitigating evidence and to believe there was none is outrageous.  The power of the state is basically limitless.  Yet the supposed Conservatives are being spoon-fed the state's line and people are gobbling it like peaches and cream.
That said, if this was such a travesty of justice, the Judge had it within his power to overturn the verdict.  He saw the evidence that was beyond view of the jury and he still let the verdict stand.  I've read that it's been done before.
My wife has been on two juries.  One civil, one criminal.  On the criminal case, the prosecutor's office fulfilled the obligation of actually PROVING THE CASE and the defendant was found guilty but not until after each member of the jury spoke his or her piece.
Yeah, it's hard to look at the pictures of the adorable little child who won't be around to play anymore.  And it's a fact to know if she looked like Little Lurch nobody would give a flying ****.  But our legal system isn't based upon somebody's got a pay for that crime.  It's based on rules of evidence.
Does it suck that in Casey Anthony most likely had been involved in some sort of bad act regarding Caylee's death and there will be no punishment?  Yeah, it does.  But we also have to think that same God who brought down a lightning bolt near the point where the body was found also had a part in moving the minds to a verdict of not guilty.

[Evil_Conservative]

What people here or on other forums refuse to admit is they know only the facts of the case supplied by the media.  There was no flow of mitigating evidence and to believe there was none is outrageous.

Don't lump everyone into one huge category.

The state of Florida has the sunshine law (believe that's the right law, someone correct me if I am wrong), where all findings/evidence are to be released to the public.  I used to open up those 500 page PDF files and read through the findings, pictures, etc.  I did not read every single page, but went through a majority of the police reports, statements by the witnesses, friends, the Anthony's, etc.

You act like we only got our "facts" from Nancy Grace. 

[olde north church]

Don't lump everyone into one huge category.

The state of Florida has the sunshine law (believe that's the right law, someone correct me if I am wrong), where all findings/evidence are to be released to the public.  I used to open up those 500 page PDF files and read through the findings, pictures, etc.  I did not read every single page, but went through a majority of the police reports, statements by the witnesses, friends, the Anthony's, etc.

You act like we only got our "facts" from Nancy Grace. 

She's the personification of all that is wrong with court reporting.  She is the Tina Fey of judicial reportage.  I mock her whenever possible.

[Chris_]

She's the personification of all that is wrong with court reporting.  She is the Tina Fey of judicial reportage.  I mock her whenever possible.

I call her 'Ole Melon Head'.

[Evil_Conservative]

She's the personification of all that is wrong with court reporting.  She is the Tina Fey of judicial reportage.  I mock her whenever possible.

Okay.  But don't lump everyone into this media brainwashing thing.  Some of us actually did our OWN research.

[olde north church]

Don't lump everyone into one huge category.

The state of Florida has the sunshine law (believe that's the right law, someone correct me if I am wrong), where all findings/evidence are to be released to the public.  I used to open up those 500 page PDF files and read through the findings, pictures, etc.  I did not read every single page, but went through a majority of the police reports, statements by the witnesses, friends, the Anthony's, etc.

You act like we only got our "facts" from Nancy Grace. 

I know what you mean about the Sunshine Law.  Just because it's available doesn't mean it gets disseminated.  Not everyone is as conscientious as you (not a sarcastic remark).
From what I've heard O'Reilley is pitching a hissy fit about the verdict as well.  Another Kennedy School of politics graduate!

[Revolution]

This is what I am talking about. I didn't say anyone was racist. You said that signs not allowing Casey Anthony in a restaurant are okay. How is that different than someone not wanting anyone else in their establishment any different? If that is okay, then I should be able to say that "Jimmy who beat my son out for quarterback can't come to my restaurant" or "cg684 is not allowed in my restaurant because he was aquitted of something he may or may not did". Can you not see the irony in your own statements?

 That is why I don't post here much. I am conservative and I like the news I get here. But I don't need someone elses approval to think for myself. If you all want her to never work again, then you just hired her. Let her get on with her life and pay for herself. And while she's doing that, go ahead and get your own lives. This mob mentality is union-like and you all know it. Get over yourselves.
 

No. I basically said I don't necessarily disagree with them. So what?

Secondly, yes you certainly DID imply that I am a racist, and that is something I just will not deal with.

But we also have to think that same God who brought down a lightning bolt near the point where the body was found also had a part in moving the minds to a verdict of not guilty

I heard about that earlier, and it shocked the hell out of me. If that wasn't a sign, I don't know what is...

I said there are businesses putting up those signs.  I did not say the businesses SHOULD do it.

Yeah that. They maybe shouldn't do it, but hey, there are very strong feelings about this whole thing in Florida. VERY strong, and everyone has their own opinion, which, unless I am somehow mistaken, they are entitled to.

[unbiased]

No. I basically said I don't necessarily disagree with them. So what?

The great thing about this quote is that you said you don't necessarily disagree with them. Would you be so bold to to not necessarily disagree with any other sign that limits a person's constitutional rights? Pick any right you want. What about your right to shop in a store because they don't like you? What if you couldn't get a job because the nation decided you were a POS, although a jury of your peers found you not guilty? I really hope you never have to go through that. But wishing it upon someone else makes you as bad or worse than them.

[unbiased]

Secondly, yes you certainly DID imply that I am a racist, and that is something I just will not deal with.

How? By implying that a sign that says Casey Anthony can't enter is the same as saying a colored can't enter? If that is what you think makes me calling you a racist then you are not able to see irony. What's the difference in a sign that says Casey Anthony or "colored"? They are both against the constitution. But I guess you don't care about that little piece of paper, huh?

[unbiased]

Well so far I have gotten 13 bitch slaps but not one explanation why. I guess it's okay for some to just go off emotion instead of facts. I always thought that was reserved for liberals, but, hey, do what you do. Slap me around. Until someone can tell me why she doesn't deserve the same life anyone else in this nation deserves, I will stick to the Constitution. Some of you apparently only like rules to apply to you. I hope it works out for you, but you are hypocritical. Casey Anthony was found guilty of lying to police. She is will be done with her time in a few days. If you don't like it, start your own country with your own laws. But right now, she should be able to move on. And those that can't move on, get a freakin life!

[seahorse513]

I was thinking, she dug her own hole......if she didn't do it, then who did??? Is she going to find out who did or is she going to make millions off books and movies?

I realize that she was acquitted, BUT what if someone gets hardcore evidence that she did  it, does the state of Fl get to bring her to trial again?? Or does this poor baby gets killed and nobody pays the price?? That is not fair!!!

All I can think of the fear this little girl went thru, it makes me heartsick.....

A mother who goes and parties, gets tats, and doesn't report her missing for thirty-one days is a major red flag!!! That's abandonment and neglect at the least!!! This case is bizarre . I realize that this child won't come back to life, whether the killer is found or not, but how can someone live without that closure?.....

[Gina]

If us exercising our freedom of speech pisses you off, you can move to Russia.

No shit.  Don't let the door hit ya in the ass on the way out either.   Just like OJ is guilty so is Casey. 

[olde north church]

I was thinking, she dug her own hole......if she didn't do it, then who did??? Is she going to find out who did or is she going to make millions off books and movies?

I realize that she was acquitted, BUT what if someone gets hardcore evidence that she did  it, does the state of Fl get to bring her to trial again?? Or does this poor baby gets killed and nobody pays the price?? That is not fair!!!

All I can think of the fear this little girl went thru, it makes me heartsick.....

A mother who goes and parties, gets tats, and doesn't report her missing for thirty-one days is a major red flag!!! That's abandonment and neglect at the least!!! This case is bizarre . I realize that this child won't come back to life, whether the killer is found or not, but how can someone live without that closure?.....

I'm just curious if she was wearing her "**** me" pumps when she was dancing through the swamps or if she broke a nail.  It's more believable to me the Caylee died accidentally and Casey freaked out and was seeking help for 31 days than any other scenario.  People don't exercise the best judgement when things like that occur.  The family is a freak circus from beginning to end.
This 31 days thing is getting a bit worn also considering the Sheriff's Department took 4 months of their sweet-assed time to investigate the scene where the utility worker reported a suspicious bag floating around the swamp.  There's also the fact if it were homicide and not accidental Florida is like Pedophile Central.
BTW, what's the difference between Nancy Grace and a vulture?  A vulture stops picking at a corpse when it hits bone.

[jtyangel]

I was thinking, she dug her own hole......if she didn't do it, then who did??? Is she going to find out who did or is she going to make millions off books and movies?

I realize that she was acquitted, BUT what if someone gets hardcore evidence that she did  it, does the state of Fl get to bring her to trial again?? Or does this poor baby gets killed and nobody pays the price?? That is not fair!!!

All I can think of the fear this little girl went thru, it makes me heartsick.....

A mother who goes and parties, gets tats, and doesn't report her missing for thirty-one days is a major red flag!!! That's abandonment and neglect at the least!!! This case is bizarre . I realize that this child won't come back to life, whether the killer is found or not, but how can someone live without that closure?.....

So much for staying out of it...although I do not agree with everything unbiased is saying(or the emotional investment in it--with either side), I agree with some main premises. What if? I know you guys hate to hear this, but where we live currently does not allow for a 'what if'. The prosecutor FAILED at his job and he should have been much more careful knowing that if she was acquitted, there was no going back. I really think the issue is that the vitriol being spewed here belong with the lawyers who did NOT DO THEIR JOB PROPERLY if you feel that she got off. But since she did go off, well unbiased is right that there really is nothing that you can do about that. What about the father of the child, how about some vitriol for a sperm donor who has no part of his child's life? If more men(and women) cared about the repercussions of thier actions on other people(ie children) this child may not have been in a position to have harm done to her to begin with. Where was her other parent in all this, doing what a man does and protecting his own flesh and blood? Either way, there are lots of culprits in this situation to go around and lots of what ifs.  What's done is done...to that baby, to prosecuting her mother for the crime, etc. What does it serve to even wish her ill will at this point? Even if she did do it, how would it make you feel if this woman somehow learned a lesson in this without the punishment and makes an exemplary life for herself from this point on? Would that make you(general you) angry that she actual did well and maybe lived a life that ended up honoring her daughter in some--that served as a great apology to her child? I get the feeling it would not be enough. And for those Christian among us, who believe in certain ways, you know full well all a sinner like her would have to do is cry for Christ and repent of her sins(Christ never said she had to publicly repent and ask for absolution and serve time). Whether anyone here likes it or not, she could walk into the gates of Heaven arm and arm with you and greet her child again--murderess or not. In my mind, this is why we could never redeem ourselves and needed Christ, but that's a whole other religious discussion.

Where I part ways with unbiased is that I believe a business is perfectly within their right to deny service of any kind to her as long as it is not a constitutionally protected area like race, religion, etc. Business can deny people service for being barefoot or not wearing a shirt or a certain type of dress and can expel people for being too rowdy. I don't believe her status as a (legally) absolved person is a protected status. The businesses can do what they want and in the course she is, of course, free to move anywhere else and probably will. I think unbiased has a good point though about shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to work. Attitudes that seek to continue to persecute will ensure that she is either a taxpayer burden for life or that she does make money off of the noteriety(not being able to find any other line of work). Most people when push comes to shove will find a way to survive. It's done, at this point the emotional investment really is ridiculous. AT this point, she is her family's problem and she will have to live with the weight of what happened, whatever her contribution to it was. I know it doesn't satisfy the natural vengeance that people feel, but what's done is done. For unbiased, at this point it's venting...let people vent their spleen..not much else any of us can do really except vent frustration.

[jtyangel]

I'm just curious if she was wearing her "**** me" pumps when she was dancing through the swamps or if she broke a nail.  It's more believable to me the Caylee died accidentally and Casey freaked out and was seeking help for 31 days than any other scenario.  People don't exercise the best judgement when things like that occur.  The family is a freak circus from beginning to end.
This 31 days thing is getting a bit worn also considering the Sheriff's Department took 4 months of their sweet-assed time to investigate the scene where the utility worker reported a suspicious bag floating around the swamp.  There's also the fact if it were homicide and not accidental Florida is like Pedophile Central.
BTW, what's the difference between Nancy Grace and a vulture?  A vulture stops picking at a corpse when it hits bone.

I tend to agree with you on the assessment. I love Florida and lived there for years, but I agree with you and there's a reason I'm not raising my kids there and you stated it. I don't know why it is, but it's been that way for a long time. I could tell you stories that would make your jaw drop about things I even saw as a kid when I moved down there from the northeast. It's really downright ridiculous. But I don't believe a pedophile did anything in this case.

[unbiased]

So much for staying out of it...although I do not agree with everything unbiased is saying(or the emotional investment in it--with either side), I agree with some main premises. What if? I know you guys hate to hear this, but where we live currently does not allow for a 'what if'. The prosecutor FAILED at his job and he should have been much more careful knowing that if she was acquitted, there was no going back. I really think the issue is that the vitriol being spewed here belong with the lawyers who did NOT DO THEIR JOB PROPERLY if you feel that she got off. But since she did go off, well unbiased is right that there really is nothing that you can do about that. What about the father of the child, how about some vitriol for a sperm donor who has no part of his child's life? If more men(and women) cared about the repercussions of thier actions on other people(ie children) this child may not have been in a position to have harm done to her to begin with. Where was her other parent in all this, doing what a man does and protecting his own flesh and blood? Either way, there are lots of culprits in this situation to go around and lots of what ifs.  What's done is done...to that baby, to prosecuting her mother for the crime, etc. What does it serve to even wish her ill will at this point? Even if she did do it, how would it make you feel if this woman somehow learned a lesson in this without the punishment and makes an exemplary life for herself from this point on? Would that make you(general you) angry that she actual did well and maybe lived a life that ended up honoring her daughter in some--that served as a great apology to her child? I get the feeling it would not be enough. And for those Christian among us, who believe in certain ways, you know full well all a sinner like her would have to do is cry for Christ and repent of her sins(Christ never said she had to publicly repent and ask for absolution and serve time). Whether anyone here likes it or not, she could walk into the gates of Heaven arm and arm with you and greet her child again--murderess or not. In my mind, this is why we could never redeem ourselves and needed Christ, but that's a whole other religious discussion.

Where I part ways with unbiased is that I believe a business is perfectly within their right to deny service of any kind to her as long as it is not a constitutionally protected area like race, religion, etc. Business can deny people service for being barefoot or not wearing a shirt or a certain type of dress and can expel people for being too rowdy. I don't believe her status as a (legally) absolved person is a protected status. The businesses can do what they want and in the course she is, of course, free to move anywhere else and probably will. I think unbiased has a good point though about shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to work. Attitudes that seek to continue to persecute will ensure that she is either a taxpayer burden for life or that she does make money off of the noteriety(not being able to find any other line of work). Most people when push comes to shove will find a way to survive. It's done, at this point the emotional investment really is ridiculous. AT this point, she is her family's problem and she will have to live with the weight of what happened, whatever her contribution to it was. I know it doesn't satisfy the natural vengeance that people feel, but what's done is done. For unbiased, at this point it's venting...let people vent their spleen..not much else any of us can do really except vent frustration.

That is the most sensible post I've read. Although I still think she would be allowed to go into a business. But she could sue for that right, if she does have the right. And just to set the record straight, I never said she was innocent. I just said we had the best justice system in the world and we have to accept the outcomes.

[olde north church]

I tend to agree with you on the assessment. I love Florida and lived there for years, but I agree with you and there's a reason I'm not raising my kids there and you stated it. I don't know why it is, but it's been that way for a long time. I could tell you stories that would make your jaw drop about things I even saw as a kid when I moved down there from the northeast. It's really downright ridiculous. But I don't believe a pedophile did anything in this case.

The pedophile angle was the first thing that occurred to me when the case began as bits and pieces passed through my head as I tried to ignore the "Today Show" while my wife got ready for work.  It wasn't too long after the Jessica Lunsford case, a year I guess.  Acquaintance of the grandparents, if I recall correctly?

[rich_t]

So much for staying out of it...although I do not agree with everything unbiased is saying(or the emotional investment in it--with either side), I agree with some main premises. What if? I know you guys hate to hear this, but where we live currently does not allow for a 'what if'. The prosecutor FAILED at his job and he should have been much more careful knowing that if she was acquitted, there was no going back. I really think the issue is that the vitriol being spewed here belong with the lawyers who did NOT DO THEIR JOB PROPERLY if you feel that she got off. But since she did go off, well unbiased is right that there really is nothing that you can do about that. What about the father of the child, how about some vitriol for a sperm donor who has no part of his child's life? If more men(and women) cared about the repercussions of thier actions on other people(ie children) this child may not have been in a position to have harm done to her to begin with. Where was her other parent in all this, doing what a man does and protecting his own flesh and blood? Either way, there are lots of culprits in this situation to go around and lots of what ifs.  What's done is done...to that baby, to prosecuting her mother for the crime, etc. What does it serve to even wish her ill will at this point? Even if she did do it, how would it make you feel if this woman somehow learned a lesson in this without the punishment and makes an exemplary life for herself from this point on? Would that make you(general you) angry that she actual did well and maybe lived a life that ended up honoring her daughter in some--that served as a great apology to her child? I get the feeling it would not be enough. And for those Christian among us, who believe in certain ways, you know full well all a sinner like her would have to do is cry for Christ and repent of her sins(Christ never said she had to publicly repent and ask for absolution and serve time). Whether anyone here likes it or not, she could walk into the gates of Heaven arm and arm with you and greet her child again--murderess or not. In my mind, this is why we could never redeem ourselves and needed Christ, but that's a whole other religious discussion.

Where I part ways with unbiased is that I believe a business is perfectly within their right to deny service of any kind to her as long as it is not a constitutionally protected area like race, religion, etc. Business can deny people service for being barefoot or not wearing a shirt or a certain type of dress and can expel people for being too rowdy. I don't believe her status as a (legally) absolved person is a protected status. The businesses can do what they want and in the course she is, of course, free to move anywhere else and probably will. I think unbiased has a good point though about shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to work. Attitudes that seek to continue to persecute will ensure that she is either a taxpayer burden for life or that she does make money off of the noteriety(not being able to find any other line of work). Most people when push comes to shove will find a way to survive. It's done, at this point the emotional investment really is ridiculous. AT this point, she is her family's problem and she will have to live with the weight of what happened, whatever her contribution to it was. I know it doesn't satisfy the natural vengeance that people feel, but what's done is done. For unbiased, at this point it's venting...let people vent their spleen..not much else any of us can do really except vent frustration.

Extremely well said.   H5.

[Revolution]

The great thing about this quote is that you said you don't necessarily disagree with them. Would you be so bold to to not necessarily disagree with any other sign that limits a person's constitutional rights? Pick any right you want. What about your right to shop in a store because they don't like you? What if you couldn't get a job because the nation decided you were a POS, although a jury of your peers found you not guilty? I really hope you never have to go through that. But wishing it upon someone else makes you as bad or worse than them.

Lookie here, Noobie: I'm not going to play this little game with you. I don't care if you're a plant or not, but you seem to be something other than what you're saying. Oh, you're this righteous Constitutionalist with core conservative values, right? I'm not buying it with your actions, and your words.

This jury deliberated for a measly 11 HOURS in a time of 2 whole days. Wowie. Must've been some hard god damn deliberation, huh? Imagine debating getting a tattoo for 11 hours, and finally coming to a conclusion to get it done on the spot. Couple years go down the line, and you decide "Shit, I hate this thing. Why'd I do that?" Well tough luck, dumb ****. You're either stuck with it, or spending a ton of dough to get it lasered off. The pure fact is...we're stuck with this verdict under very suspect conditions. The evidence only points to ONE PERSON! Are you telling me that along with all testimony, a jury is not free to think for themselves? Is not free to use their own logic, and reasoning. Hell, Bill Maher is ahead of you, son. He also believes as I, EC, and many others on this board do. In that effect, he is more intelligent than you, "unbiased."

[Revolution]

Even if she did do it, how would it make you feel if this woman somehow learned a lesson in this without the punishment and makes an exemplary life for herself from this point on? Would that make you(general you) angry that she actual did well and maybe lived a life that ended up honoring her daughter in some--that served as a great apology to her child?

IF she did do it, I've not seen a single example of that kind of massive rehabilitation occuring. Only family member's victims have done that sort of thing in my recollection. If you could provide a case where that happened, my jaw will indeed drop.

[rich_t]

Lookie here, Noobie: I'm not going to play this little game with you. I don't care if you're a plant or not, but you seem to be something other than what you're saying. Oh, you're this righteous Constitutionalist with core conservative values, right? I'm not buying it with your actions, and your words.

This jury deliberated for a measly 11 HOURS in a time of 2 whole days. Wowie. Must've been some hard god damn deliberation, huh? Imagine debating getting a tattoo for 11 hours, and finally coming to a conclusion to get it done on the spot. Couple years go down the line, and you decide "Shit, I hate this thing. Why'd I do that?" Well tough luck, dumb ****. You're either stuck with it, or spending a ton of dough to get it lasered off. The pure fact is...we're stuck with this verdict under very suspect conditions. The evidence only points to ONE PERSON! Are you telling me that along with all testimony, a jury is not free to think for themselves? Is not free to use their own logic, and reasoning. Hell, Bill Maher is ahead of you, son. He also believes as I, EC, and many others on this board do. In that effect, he is more intelligent than you, "unbiased."

Jury members consider the evidence and formulate their individual opinions as the trial progresses.  Can their opinions be swayed or changed as the trial progresses?  You bet!   A lengthy deliberation is not always needed for a jury to convict or acquit.  The last jury I sat on, my mind was made up before the defense even stepped up to the plate.  The defendant was charged with 11 felony charges related to theft.  He was facing decades behind bars.

The prosecution abysmally failed to make their case.  

We the jury, deliberated for less than 3 hours before we acquitted the defendant on all 11 counts.

We found out later that this was the prosecutions 3rd bite at the apple and their case still sucked (two previous trials ended up in a hung jury).

In this particular case I read that the initial jury vote was 10-2 to acquit.  That tells me that the majority of the jury obviously felt at the beginning of the deliberations, that the prosecution failed to make their case.  I am not saying that the jury made the right decision in this case.  I wasn't there and I didn't see/hear all of the evidence.  I do know that I am not going to second guess the jury.  

[unbiased]

Lookie here, Noobie: I'm not going to play this little game with you. I don't care if you're a plant or not, but you seem to be something other than what you're saying. Oh, you're this righteous Constitutionalist with core conservative values, right? I'm not buying it with your actions, and your words.

This jury deliberated for a measly 11 HOURS in a time of 2 whole days. Wowie. Must've been some hard god damn deliberation, huh? Imagine debating getting a tattoo for 11 hours, and finally coming to a conclusion to get it done on the spot. Couple years go down the line, and you decide "Shit, I hate this thing. Why'd I do that?" Well tough luck, dumb ****. You're either stuck with it, or spending a ton of dough to get it lasered off. The pure fact is...we're stuck with this verdict under very suspect conditions. The evidence only points to ONE PERSON! Are you telling me that along with all testimony, a jury is not free to think for themselves? Is not free to use their own logic, and reasoning. Hell, Bill Maher is ahead of you, son. He also believes as I, EC, and many others on this board do. In that effect, he is more intelligent than you, "unbiased."

So are you saying that you should be the one who decides guilt or innocence? That sounds a lot like what Hitler, Stalin or Hussein thought too. I am glad you are so darn smart. Why not take your talents to the Supreme Court and get the Constitution changed?


Your tattoo example actually proves my point, too. What if they gave her a lethal injection and then later found out that she didn't do it? And how long do you think it SHOULD take to come to a verdict? Would it have taken you longer than 11 hours to convict her? Doesn't sound like it to me. I said in my first post on this thread that people like you would react this way. Thanks for proving my point. And could you please tell me how anything I've said makes me anything but a conservative? You are not thinking things through. Calm down and ask yourself if you would like to have a fair trial or just have some random person who is reacting on pure emotion decide your fate.