Why can't people accept the verdict in the Anthony trial?

Clearly some people need to learn how a verdict gets decided. All the evidence her was circumstantial, meaning, not definitive, meaning,

not solid.If you were in that jury and you voted guilty, then you would be making an

assumption, which is NOT what the judicial system is about, or else we would

still be in the time of burning women as witches. This case was highly publicized without a fair say on both sides, the media tried to use emoitonal logic to get your heart involved with case because they are grasping at actual proof. There is none. The jury is doing its job.

Legally speaking, it was what I expected. The prosecution didn't have any solid evidence against her. It was all circumstantial and based on speculative theories. The thing that has most of the general population outraged is her character. People have a lot of disdain for bad parents. And especially her. So whether she did it or not, there was not enough evidence to convict her beyond a reasonable doubt, so I agree with the verdict (in that respect). If they convicted her solely based on inferences and dislike of her as a person, I would think that would set a bad precedent, especially when the defendant is facing the death penalty. People just want someone to go down for this, and think that Caylee was denied justice. Well, as society, we also have to be concerned about justice for all of us, including those accused of crimes. As one of the most famous and influential justice Blackstone once said, "It is better to let ten guilty go free, then let one innocent suffer."

We can't forsake our laws and our rules of evidence because our emotions get the best of us.

People should be more outraged at the fact that the prosecution decided to go and prosecute a case that they didn't have totally solid yet. There is no statute of limitations on murder, and they could have worked harder on finding some good evidence. There are many others that I also think they ignored that could be viable suspects. I think they got too focused on Casey, when there is a whole other set of people to look into. I find it odd that the mother said she looked up chloraphyll and 80 times it came up as chloroform instead. She also is the one who reported it, and immediately stated the car smelled like a decomposition and then pointed the finger at her own daughter. She also never knew who the father of her grandchild was. She said he died in a car wreck and read the obituary but doesn't remember his name. And what is with this father and his weird behavior? And the brother? There are too many unanswered questions here. And Casey acts like a nut ball, not necessarily a sociopath. She seems almost detatched from reality and believes her own lies. Something that I know from my psychology days, is often a learned behavior and self defense mechanism. She probably had a rough upbringing, and I bet there is some truth to her allegations against her father, but who knows. It's something they should continue to investigate, and even if they learn some day that it was Casey, and can't re-prosecute due to double jeopardy (which is why they should have waited to get more evidence), at least they should try to find more answers.

I accept the verdict, though I'm not particularly comfortable with it.

The jury made a tragic, yet correct, decision. The prosecution failed to present evidence that proved, beyond doubt, that Anthony was guilty. The jurors made the right choice by not convicting based on circumstantial evidence. I wish the prosecution had presented a more effective case.

People are going on their emotions and the media's presentation of Casey Anthony.

She's not a likeable person, and these events are terrible, so they just want justice, even if it's misguided.

I can't imagine the jury listened to that entire thing and found her a likeable person, but they did do their job.

<-- This is what happens when you don't watch Nancy Grace.

They're mad because their lord and savior, Nancy "I have tweeeeeee-innns" Grace, was wrong. Fortunately our justice system does not convict base on the court of public opinion. It will be a sad day in this country when a person will go to jail for being an unlikable *****, rather than on the basis of irrefutable evidence.

People have their own personal opinions and beliefs, thats why most can't believe it because most thought she was guilty... She had to of atleast had something to do with it... No living mother moves in with her boyfriend the day her child goes missing and shows no sign if it. Our goes out partying telling lies to family and friends about her daughters wereabouts our waits 31 days to file a missing report.. Our even send police on a wild goose chase for nothing... Shes obviously hiding something and just because 12 people decided her fait doesn't mean the world has to agree.

I don't watch Television or Listen to the radio, nor do I read the news. From what LITTLE I've gathered, she was negligent and stupid. Unfortunately these are not crimes in the United States, but rather the Standard.

Because the public thinks they know more then the lawyers and the jury..

Almost none of them even wanted to hear any evidence, they just wanted/want to take casey out back and shoot her in the head. they blame her and don't care about evidence or lack of.

The People were give a ruling in Law - not Justice.

Law is all you get from the court system.

Justice was not met.

i don't have a problem with it..

The law requires the prosecution to prove its case.

The prosecution failed.

I don't understand why they didn't charge her AND her father with abuse of a corpse and failing to report a death.

They would have won those charges,