Casey Anthony rightfully was found not guilty

Reasonable Doubt: If the jury has a reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, the jury should pronounce the defendant not guilty. Conversely, if the jurors have no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the defendant should be pronounced guilty. (1) Law in juror reasoning: An important note is that the law has very few limitations on what a juror may base its decision on. Jurors are specifically intended to be “layman’s” who are not professionals in law or in the fields of evidence presented. This is to ensure that their verdict will be based only on the evidence presented in court, and will do so according to the judge’s instructions as to what evidence may be considered. In those instructions the judge also states that jurors are to use their own judgment in evaluating the truthfulness of a given testimony or the strength of evidence presented(2). Rebuttal Pros case can be summed up by stating that there was no “when”, “where”, or “how” established in determining the death of Caylee Anthony. I agree that these are extremely important questions that should have answers to render the defendant guilty. However Pro has only demonstrated that the verdict can not be concluded inductively. The law does not stipulate that jurors must come to their verdict using such reasoning. By contrast when using deductive reasoning, there are no reasonable doubts that would be left in the mind of any reasonable person of the defendants guilt as my case will demonstrate. Prosecution(Due to character limits I will use 1 source for all evidence unless specified otherwise(3)) 1. Google searches performed by Casey indicate possible intent to murder Authorities seized Casey’s computer which revealed google searches for “neck breaking”, “death”, “household weapons” and amazingly, “chloroform” was searched 84 times. The defense’s answer to this is that Casey’s mother Cindy performed the searches for chloroform, however Cindy’s employment records conclusively show that she was at work while these searches were made(4). 2. Casey demonstrated characteristics of the guilty party A) She lied about Caylee’s disappearance: No one knew that Caylee had gone missing for 31 days. After her parents began suspecting that something had happened to their granddaughter Casey told them that she was with “Zanny the Nanny”. She continued this story to investigators including telling them that she worked at Universal Studios which had not been the case for 2 years. She would later admit that she intentionally mislead investigators because she believed it would help them find Caylee, which is a complete contradiction to her eventual defense. B) She demonstrated that she was happy with Caylee’s death: In the weeks after Caylee’s death, Casey was seen partying with friends and getting a tattoo which translates to “beautiful life”. Her friends and family testified that she showed no signs of anything being wrong and investigators also found a diary entry simply marked “June 21st” which read the following: “I have no regrets, just a bit worried. I just want for everything to work out OK. I completely trust my own judgment and know that I made the right decision. I just hope that the end justifies the means. I just want to know what the future will hold for me. I guess I will soon see – This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time. I hope that my happiness will continue to grow– I've made new friends that I really like. I've surrounded myself with good people – I am finally happy. Let's just hope that it doesn't change. ” 3. Casey’s trunk had the odor of a dead body On July 15th George Anthony went to the tow yard to pickup his daughter Casey’s car after she had abandoned it. When he arrived, both he and the attendant would notice a distinct odor coming from the trunk that George would later testify to be that of a decomposing dead body. George, who had experience in this field as a retired police officer was not the only professional who believed the smell to be that of a dead body. There was also additional forensic evidence that would suggest that the odor was in fact that of the decomposition of Caylee’s body. The defense would later offer strong scrutiny of the forensics but failed to disprove it or offer any contentions to the contrary. 4. Caylee’s crime scene clearly demonstrates the characteristics of a murder by her mother A) Caylee’s body was found in the woods: She was in a garbage bag with duct tape around her mouth. B) Items found at the crime scene match that of Casey’s: The same type of laundry bags, garbage bags, duct tape that was used in concealing Caylee’s body were all found in Casey’s residence. The duct tape in particular was said by investigators to be of “a rare brand”. Cindy Anthony had also previously reported a Winnie the Pooh blanket missing from Caylee’s bedroom. This same type of blanket was found at the crime scene. Defense The story of the defense is that Caylee drowned in the swimming pool in the backyard, and Casey and her father covered it up. The defense showed that the drowning was a possibility by showing pictures of Caylee climbing the ladder by herself and showing that Casey did not safeguard the door allowing Caylee a way out to the pool. The defense also argued that Casey’s odd behavior was the result of a girl who was scared and suffered from poor judgment partially as a result of a rough childhood in which she was sexually assaulted by her family. However the defense offered no evidence or testimony to affirm any of this and Casey’s family testified to the contrary. The prosecution also showed many video’s of conversations between Casey and her parents while in jail that also give no indication of any of this. One of those videos in particular from August 14th, show Cindy telling her daughter of a rumor that Caylee drowned in the swimming pool and Casey sarcastically replying “surprise surprise” in apparent disgust of the rumors going around(5). Summary While there is much more evidence these are the main points that have been established as fact. When looking at this issue the first thing to consider is how the story of the defense could possibly be true. Just some of what would have to be true is: a loving mother, loses her daughter in an accident, involves her father (who was a retired police officer) in the cover up of this accident to instead make it appear as a murder, and then leave the body in the woods with no plan as to how to keep this a secret or what to do when the body is found. Afterward, the mother (who is a victim here), goes out partying and getting a tattoo saying “beautiful life”. This plan also included utilizing the same items found in the house, and abandoning the car only for the same person who helped in all this being the one who would create attention to it when finding the car. Meanwhile the prosecutions case fits together perfectly. I would go into detail on it but I am out of space, so I will leave it for this round as it is fairly obvious. Conclusion The jury has a responsibility to return a verdict of guilty if there are no reasonable doubts as to the defendant’s guilt. There are clearly no reasonable doubts in this case. My main objective in this round was to demonstrate the facts. In upcoming rounds I will further demonstrate my main overall contention. I look forward to pros rebuttals. (1) . http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... (2) . http://www.floridasupremecourt.org... # (3.9)(3) . http://en.wikipedia.org... (4) . http://www.chicagotribune.com...(5) . http://www.wftv.com... (2:00min in)