Okay, so I know that this is getting far too much attention, and it's quite sickening the way the media has glamourized it, but I cannot stop thinking about this Casey Anthony case. It honestly has to be one of the most messed up, insane true stories I have ever heard, which is why it is so captivating...like a bad accident. Nobody wants to look, but people can't bring themselves to look away. At least I can't, and I feel guilty for it.
I wasn't following the case, but my husband was. Every day, he would tell me what he read on CNN, and the more details he gave me, the more I found myself Googling articles and videos from the courtroom. After yesterday's verdict, I felt like I could throw up. I understand that the cold, hard evidence needed to convict Casey Anthony of murder just was not there- I get that. However, what happens now? That woman has so much explaining to do, and yet now she doesn't have to explain anything to anyone. She's been tried, and she's been found not guilty, so that's it? And why was she found not guilty as far as neglecting her child goes? Don't you think not knowing where your daughter is for thirty- one days and doing nothing about it constitutes neglect? Wouldn't the opposite of neglect mean caring for your child, and most importantly, making sure they have the basic needs of life and are safe? And by safe, I mean knowing where they are. Seriously, if I had a young child and they were missing for thirty-one minutes, I would be losing my mind.
Now, I've been thinking about the law...which I don't really think about too often. I'm more into thinking about food and clothes and crafts and stuff. You know, the big things. But submersing myself in this case the last couple days has got my wheels turning. These lawyers have been working their asses off on this case, however the final verdict comes down to the jurors. These are every day citizens with no legal background, but yet they get to decide the fate of people. Why is that? Who came up with that system? I get the whole "neutral third party" deal. But I just can't wrap my head around why these decisions are left in the hands of every day folks like you and I, when there are people that study law and go to school for years to be part of the system. I'm baffled. I'm also baffled as to why people who are being tried for any crime don't have to testify. For real! I can't understand why it is optional. If a person cannot take the stand without jeopardizing their "not guilty" stance, then doesn't that indicate that they have something to hide? If I was being tried for something, and I knew I didn't do it, I would have no problem testifying to save myself. It's just shady, shady business, and I really feel like these "rules" need to be re-evaluated. I am miffed. Like I said, I get the whole "we need hard evidence" thing, but the legal system is weighing on me right now, and I can't help but think that some changes need to be made. There are just some things that make me scratch my head. And since I like to think simple thoughts, this is really bugging me!
I just had to write about this and get it out of my system- I apologize if you got here thinking you were going to read about the bee hive Molly and I found on our walk, or a new way to make a grilled cheese. Next time, kind readers...next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment