unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that on tuesday casey anthony was acquitted of murdering her daughter caylee. opinion on the verdict seems to be in two distinct camps: those who think the jury was wrong (“HULLO, SHE DID IT”) and those who think the prosecution didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt (“HULLO, THE CONSTITUTION”). from my group of friends, opinions seem to be based on whether one went to law school. my law student and lawyer friends are nearly all of the second camp while the first camp is almost completely made of people with strong opinions who didn’t go to law school. (certainly not 100% and this post is definitely NOT a bash on non-legal types, just an observation.)
typical example (i’ve added some insightful commentary) (click to make it bigger):
intelligent minds can disagree about the casey anthony verdict, but to say that the jury is stupid (or FREAKING DUMB) is plain ignorant. the jurors were sequestered; they didn’t have access to some of the things the media has been showing and they certainly haven’t been watching nancy grace for the past six weeks. the trial was conducted in accordance with evidentiary rules and criminal procedure so that the verdict would be as fair as possible.
i gave up the thought long ago that i “knew” many things. certainly i have many opinions and there are some things i know, but whether or not casey killed caylee is something that NONE of us KNOW with certainty. what i do know is that the prosecution failed to meet their burden. beyond a reasonable doubt is an extraordinarily high standard and the prosecution did not provide enough evidence to displace with all doubt. that’s the standard in this country. without it, lynch mobs would be asserting “justice” by determining whether someone is guilty or not regardless of the evidence. constitutional protections, my friends, embrace it.
tuesday was a shitstorm on facebook. i heard all kinds of things on twitter about a facebook flame war over on ninja‘s wall. after a flurry of FB/twitter worlds colliding, all of the sudden MY wall was giving rise to an enormous firestorm. rather than describe it, i’ll let you read it:
it was going okay until kendra (a lady who owns the stables i used to ride at) inserted the dumbest statement of all time: you don’t understand because you don’t have kids. well excuuuuuuse me. i thought as a 24 year old i was allowed to form an opinion. apparently not. but ninja stepped in to save me. and then erin. and then zilla.
and then kendra defriended me.
i sent her message to the effect of “hey, my friends are a bit opinionated, hope your feelings weren’t hurt.” and i got this masterpiece in return:
i mean, i don’t even know where to start. should i start with the fact that the first amendment doesn’t apply? that we all have experiences and opinions? that telling someone she cannot understand something because she doesn’t have kids is super presumptuous and offensive? or that disagreeing with me on an issue doesn’t mean we cannot be friends?
good riddance, i suppose. i don’t get why she didn’t just delete the comment. but no, we’re no longer friends. hokay.
facebook be craycray.