If the jury was fooled into thinking DNA proof of murder is required in every case, our society will have killers running willy nilly in every city. I think Ms. Anthony killed her daughter, and I don't believe the skull buzz-saw forensics advocate had a leg to stand on after the soft-stated anthropologist pointed out that a dentist's mirror inserted into the child's foramen magnum was adequate to detect any injury to the skull, whereas sawing the skull in half would indeed inflict or obfuscate injury and was thus not acceptable in his or his peers' practice. Destroying evidence is what skull-sawing does, and modern forensics does not generally practice that antiquated shibboleth. I hope the jury is able to sort that out and set aside Dr. Sawbones' critiques of those who do not do his brand of evidence destruction. It's sad to see one alleged forensics expert take a piss on others who don't engage in his own deleterious practices.
But that isn't what's important here. The jury can't tell much from anything that was presented, including the loss of the little heart found stuck on the duct tape covering Caylee's little mouth. Perhaps a good lawyer would use it as an opportunity to grandstand against bad forensics practice, although conventional testing for DNA on the heart destroyed it.
The jury has only its gut to go on about the peculiar human behavior of the killer mom who spent not one moment of remorse over the loss of her daughter until she was behind bars where she was forced into enough quiet time that it could have come to her attention that what she did was horrendous. her mother lied in open court about researching "chlorophyll" and may have accidentally typed in chloroform at the time of the search on the home computer when records showed her to be at work, posting patient information.
Those people's neighbors were mad, too, at being betrayed by lie after lie after lie of someone they considered regular people. They made fools of themselves by mocking and berating the family, but they didn't like what happened and were horrified further when the child's taped-and-garbage-bagged-and-disposed remains were found.
How would you like it if this creepolini got off, decided to babysit under a different name someplace else where her name was not a household word, and did a number on somebody else's toddler when it cried too much or got in her miserable way?
And to make matters worse, her mother lied on the stand in order to keep lines of communication open with this harsh, cruel woman she raised. That deserves twenty years of hard time to send a message to other dilly-brained people who'd lie for getting off a cold-blooded killer.
Maybe those of you who think this should be done in a quiet, deliberate way to meet the standards of justice are superstars of prudence, and I'm not.
I'm just tired of this horrible case and the animosity it seems to bring out in some of us. Before I had to think about it, I felt calm and possessed of my faculties, too. But when I read the evidence and saw state's witnesses telling the tale of that child's woe and thought of the perverse way in which the body of that child was discarded into such an unlikely area, and a passel of lies a day, I formed an opinion of the liar that was not favorable to her case.
So, pardon my sardonic attitude, but I am given to pity children who are maltreated by their parents. A lot of that goes around in the world, and that grieves me more.
})
})
