Caylee Anthony and Lindbergh cases

[knapplc]

McDonald's got screwed on that coffee case.

 

[SmoovP]

"Walmart Nation" (whatever that means...I guess people not in agreement and therefore not as intellectually superior as you?) cares about people, they get emotionally invested in a story...not always the best way to analyze, to be sure, but I can understand why it happens, especially when it comes to kids, because many people are parents. They get [censored]ed when a likely murderer walks free, especially if it is a child murderer, and especially if it was the person who was supposed to protect that child from harm, not dump them in the trunk for a month and grind on anything with 2 legs. The fact that you seem unable to understand or even refrain from abjectly insulting people of this point of view sometimes staggers the imagination.

I totally get the emotional investment and emotional reaction to the verdict.

I have 4 sons - aged 22, 12, 10 and 7 - and I die a little every time they walk out the door.

However:

They get [censored]ed when a likely murderer walks free...

"Likely" does not rise to the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard that our judicial system is based on.

 

[Bucklion]

I totally get the emotional investment and emotional reaction to the verdict.

I have 4 sons - aged 22, 12, 10 and 7 - and I die a little every time they walk out the door.

However:



"Likely" does not rise to the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard that our judicial system is based on.

I understand that, agree with it, and in fact that's my point...everyone is not a lawyer, everyone is not schooled in the nuances of the law, and everyone was not in the courtroom...however (almost) everyone has the capacity to love, especially family, empathizes with a helpless child, and can see evidence in front of them plain as day...to the extent that people got to see everything they could, including some things the jury didn't (see trial, OJ) it becomes obvious to almost everyone she had something to do with it, and that no innocent person who lost a child they actually cared anything about (and perhaps didn't want to get rid of) would act that way. But, in the eyes of the 12 that matter, the evidence in the case wasn't adequate to establish what exactly her role was. Fine. Fair enough. But people are understandably outraged when a child murderer (in their eyes) walks. They you have the Alan Dershowitz types who insist on lecturing the "Walmart Crowd" about how wonderful the system is BECAUSE a murderer walked free, as if anyone who looks at this case from a humanist, and not a strictly legal, point of view is somehow a moron. And that if you aren't jumping for joy at how wonderful and perfect the system is today, 2 days after she walks free and flaunts that she wants more children while smiling and flipping off the media, well you are clearly intellectually inferior.

And then these same people wonder why Sarah Palin and the "anti-intellectual" movement gets to be so popular among the masses. Well here's a clue: If you are a person and you care infinitely more about technical jurisprudence than the fact that a 2 year old was murdered, fine. But STFU and let people be upset by the loss of a child. It doesn't mean they are stupid, it means they have a soul...maybe you could take some lessons.

 

[BB73]

Well, now we know that BL shops at Walmart and that Gator can't dance, since he has no soul.

 

[Bucklion]

Well, now we know that BL shops at Walmart and that Gator can't dance, since he has no soul.

He was nowhere in that post at all. But I bet he can't dance anyway. Unless Tebow is leading.

 

[SmoovP]

I understand that, agree with it, and in fact that's my point...everyone is not a lawyer, everyone is not schooled in the nuances of the law, and everyone was not in the courtroom...however (almost) everyone has the capacity to love, especially family, empathizes with a helpless child, and can see evidence in front of them plain as day...to the extent that people got to see everything they could, including some things the jury didn't (see trial, OJ) it becomes obvious to almost everyone she had something to do with it, and that no innocent person who lost a child they actually cared anything about (and perhaps didn't want to get rid of) would act that way. But, in the eyes of the 12 that matter, the evidence in the case wasn't adequate to establish what exactly her role was. Fine. Fair enough. But people are understandably outraged when a child murderer (in their eyes) walks. They you have the Alan Dershowitz types who insist on lecturing the "Walmart Crowd" about how wonderful the system is BECAUSE a murderer walked free, as if anyone who looks at this case from a humanist, and not a strictly legal, point of view is somehow a moron. And that if you aren't jumping for joy at how wonderful and perfect the system is today, 2 days after she walks free and flaunts that she wants more children while smiling and flipping off the media, well you are clearly intellectually inferior.

And then these same people wonder why Sarah Palin and the "anti-intellectual" movement gets to be so popular among the masses. Well here's a clue: If you are a person and you care infinitely more about technical jurisprudence than the fact that a 2 year old was murdered, fine. But STFU and let people be upset by the loss of a child. It doesn't mean they are stupid, it means they have a soul...maybe you could take some lessons.

I don't completely disagree with your overall point. It was an awful, awful thing that happened and people are understandably upset with what happened to the child and the verdict.

Regardless, I didn't come away from the Dershowitz article with the same impression as you did. What I came away from it with was that it was a calm and well-reasoned reaction to those who are screaming from the rooftops that "SHE'S GUILTY AND SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE DEATH PENALTY!!! THE JURY SHOULD BE PUT IN JAIL FOR SETTING HER FREE!!!".

 

[Gatorubet]

McDonald's got screwed on that coffee case.

They did not. If you propagate the lie that they did get screwed, you are doing as disservice to the system of justice that delivered that verdict. And I know that you saying what you just said was not borne out of malice or meanness or bad intent - but out of you not caring enough to find out the basic facts of the case (and why should you care that much?) - so that your opinion is an informed one, and you like many people fall into a willingness to comment about something because there an often repeated urban legend out there for you to buy, and it is far easier to continue to spread a sort of lazy lie that lots of people will support you on.

 

[jwinslow]

They did not. If you propagate the lie that they did get screwed, you are doing as disservice to the system of justice that delivered that verdict. And I know that you saying what you just said was not borne out of malice or meanness or bad intent - but out of you not caring enough to find out the basic facts of the case (and why should you care that much?) - so that your opinion is an informed one, and you like many people fall into a willingness to comment about something because there an often repeated urban legend out there for you to buy, and it is far easier to continue to spread a sort of lazy lie that lots of people will support you on.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoINTDFosCY"]YouTube - ‪Jackie Chiles Trumping up a Coffee Burn Case‬‏[/ame]

 

[Gatorubet]

"Walmart Nation" (whatever that means...I guess people not in agreement and therefore not as intellectually superior as you?) cares about people, they get emotionally invested in a story...not always the best way to analyze, to be sure, but I can understand why it happens, especially when it comes to kids, because many people are parents. They get [censored]ed when a likely murderer walks free, especially if it is a child murderer, and especially if it was the person who was supposed to protect that child from harm, not dump them in the trunk for a month and grind on anything with 2 legs. The fact that you seem unable to understand or even refrain from abjectly insulting people of this point of view sometimes staggers the imagination.

Perhaps you missed the talking head on Nancy Grace saying that the jury was comprised of "the only 12 people who still thinks the world is flat", and the numerous people who are so upset with the jury actually following the law that there are death threats and threats of violence against the jury to the extent that Dr. Drew and the Lead Prosecutor were on TV pleading with people to channel their anger in more productive ways than threats of vigilantism.

The fact that you seem unable to understand or even refrain from abjectly condemning such people - who attack the Judge when he bent over in favor of the prosecution - and the defense attorney, who is protecting the failure of a mom/dumb ass slut's Sixth Amendment Rights as required by our laws, and attacking jurors who gave up literally months of their lives in public service - to be sequestered and separated from their families and even the city in which they live, only to be subjected to threats of physical harm for doing jury duty...that you have a problem with my problem with them........well......it staggers the imagination.

And maybe BL, because YOU weren't given a bunch of [Mark May] yesterday by one of your neighbors talking about "How you lawyers (fill in the blank tirade about how the whole group of lawyers should be put in prison with [God Help me, I hate the term so f-ing much] "Tot Mom") are ruining the proud tradition of lynch mobbing in the South.

 

[Gatorubet]

YouTube - ‪Jackie Chiles Trumping up a Coffee Burn Case‬‏

http://hotcoffeethemovie.com/

I challenge anyone to watch this HBO documentary about the McDonald's case in particular, and more specifically about how the big business and political interests are playing the very people who are protected by the court system of justice into becoming allies with those interests who want to limit their rights to justice.

Anyone who freely throws out "law suit abuse" and "tort reform" without seeing this very accurate film will benefit by it. It is absolutely agenda driven, but absolutely true. It does not erase the fact that there are always reforms and tweaks to any system, but it will challenge and educate many of the very smart people here who think that their opinion on the coffee case.....and on tort reform issues......is based upon all the facts.

I urge anyone to see this as a "now you know the rest of the story" educational tool. And if anyone knows of a good film or documentary showing, exposing the practice of insurance fraud/false claims that arise in the system, I would love to have that included too - and we can break it into a separate thread and see what folks think after viewing both.

 

[jwinslow]

Objection: counsel is using words hard to read in a Jackie Chiles voice.

 

[Gatorubet]

Objection: counsel is using words hard to read in a Jackie Chiles voice.

(and a tip of the cap to muffler )

 

[Bucklion]

Perhaps you missed the talking head on Nancy Grace saying that the jury was comprised of "the only 12 people who still thinks the world is flat", and the numerous people who are so upset with the jury actually following the law that there are death threats and threats of violence against the jury to the extent that Dr. Drew and the Lead Prosecutor were on TV pleading with people to channel their anger in more productive ways than threats of vigilantism.

The fact that you seem unable to understand or even refrain from abjectly condemning such people - who attack the Judge when he bent over in favor of the prosecution - and the defense attorney, who is protecting the failure of a mom/dumb ass slut's Sixth Amendment Rights as required by our laws, and attacking jurors who gave up literally months of their lives in public service - to be sequestered and separated from their families and even the city in which they live, only to be subjected to threats of physical harm for doing jury duty...that you have a problem with my problem with them........well......it staggers the imagination.

And maybe BL, because YOU weren't given a bunch of [Mark May] yesterday by one of your neighbors talking about "How you lawyers (fill in the blank tirade about how the whole group of lawyers should be put in prison with [God Help me, I hate the term so f-ing much] "Tot Mom") are ruining the proud tradition of lynch mobbing in the South.

WTF does Nancy Grace have to do with anything? I didn't say anything supporting that batshit crazy broad, or her opinions. I spoke completely for myself. And since when have I NOT staggered your imagination?

And as for the whole being a lawyer thing, well, I went through as many years of schooling as you (and I dare say likely more, I was locked in that dungeon for a long time) and yet you probably make more in a year than I do in a decade...so you'll get no sympathy from this Walmart Crowd Member with an advanced degree

 

[Bucklion]

I don't completely disagree with your overall point. It was an awful, awful thing that happened and people are understandably upset with what happened to the child and the verdict.

Regardless, I didn't come away from the Dershowitz article with the same impression as you did. What I came away from it with was that it was a calm and well-reasoned reaction to those who are screaming from the rooftops that "SHE'S GUILTY AND SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE DEATH PENALTY!!! THE JURY SHOULD BE PUT IN JAIL FOR SETTING HER FREE!!!".

There's a difference between explaining how the system works as an expert and lecturing people over your spectacles at the mnost hotly contested time. I dare say Dershowitz has made as much money doing the latter as he has being a lawyer...and he's probably made more enemies. Why do these people not spring up when a killer actually goes to jail and justice for the victim is actually served (well, unless they can show up saying how barbaric anyone who supposrts the death penalty is, that is)? Because they can't lecture the emotional proletariat to make themselves feel intelectually superior then. It's only when people are riled up about a lost child that they feel the need to interject their cold and calculated rhetoric in such a way as to try and make someone feel guilty for being mad.

 

[Gatorubet]

Today, 10:04 PM

WTF does Nancy Grace have to do with anything? I didn't say anything supporting that bat[Mark May] crazy broad, or her opinions. I spoke completely for myself.

Today, 01:23 PM

I am sick of having to justify to ignorant people (not meaning you BL, I'm just using your post as a soap box)

All due respect my friend, the bold language in my original post might explain that.


My use of your post to address different people saying different things than you did in your post was poorly done. I apologize.