NOT GUILTY?!?!?!

Originally Posted by AbsoluteApril

what the... not guilty?!?!



yet another reason to lose faith in the justice system and people in general

There was enough circumstantial for me to believe she did it.

I don't usually swear/curse....am I allowed to do that here?
Anyway if I ever see her, I will be guilty! No doubt about it!

Actually the justice system worked the way it was designed to...There was no SOLID proof that she's a murderer.

Did she do it?..well if she didn't,she knows who did is my opinion.

Peope have been executed with less evidence presented.
She is GUILTY.......no doubt in my mind at all no matter what the defense threw out there to cause doubt.
A parent does not act like she did when their child is missing.

, Nothing more to be said. That's it.

A bad parent doesn't make her a murderer...The prosecution had no solid evedence that SHE killed the little girl...The media of course has her guilty before she even got to a court house.No evidence

That did it.

1st degree murder aside, her defense was that the child drowned under her supervision. That's manslaughter. She walks away with a charge for lying...Seriously?

I hope those jurors can sleep at night knowing they let a psychopathic murderer free. Hopefully their is some jailhouse retribution for this poor murdered tot.

Originally Posted by zzzdanz

No evidence

I do understand your point, 'innocent until proven guilty' right?

It's just hard to look at all the other pieces of the puzzle and see how she could not be guilty (even if she had someone else do it for her, she would still be guilty)

not telling anyone her child is missing for a month, making up lies that they were doing things together (visiting the made up nanny at the hospital)
then saying the (made up) nanny kidnapped the child (a person would keep this to themselves for a month?)
then lying about where she works, taking the cops there to try to continue the lie
then the smell of death in the car (you know death when you smell it, it's unlike anything) - the forensics dog scented the death as well
then the insane story about the child drowning, the parents wanted to hide it (how long did they think that could go on for?), then they said the dad tried to make it look like murder? (if that was true, why did the mom call 911 to report the car smelled?) and if the parents were in on it, why would she be telling them lies about where the child was?

not enough? then what would it take? I'm actally curious about that. What would it have taken to prove it?

and still the only one that truly suffers is the innocent child


dang it, I didn't mean to post so much, getting all swept up in it... ah the media, let's us all feel like we're part of it. I'm not specifically arguing with you Dan, mainly venting frustration at the verdict

I definitely saw the not guilty for murder but wasnt expecting not guilty for the abuse and manslaughter.

How do you figure it's manslaughter? She might not have even been there when that kid was killed.She lied her *** off..mistermeaner not murder.

Maybe the parents did it,or the brother..who knows...Everyone wants to see her strung up for a murder, that in the eyes of the court and a jury of her peers,say she didn't commit.

I think she had something to do with it,but she had help.