I was surprised by the verdict but sort of relieved in a way. Had the state charged her with a lesser crime like involuntary manslaughter then I truly feel she would have been found guilty but they went all out for the death penalty and that's where they messed up. Wishing death upon someone is wrong and malicious and in the end is vengeful not justice. Casey is clearly a troubled young woman that must have had a disturbing child upbringing for her to behave the way she did after her daughter's death. I read all the negative comments out there on the web regarding the case and it just disturbs me by the amount of hate so many have against someone they don't even know personally.

I had been waiting to see "Hot Coffee" for quite a while,so watched it and recorded it the first night it came on. Oliver Diaz, the former Supreme Court Justice from Mississippi that is featured in it is one of my very good friends from childhood and he was very excited about the film. It's definitely time for some changes in our system, I'm just not sure we'll ever get those in charge to agree on the proper changes.

I am of the same opinion as Terriks, that this time the cholorform was too much and she returned from partying that night to find Caylee dead. She then disposed of the body in a manner consistent with what they'd done with pets that had died (wrapped in plastic & duct tape). I have heard that the duct tape was not necessarily on the babies mouth. As to the verdict, I knew all along they'd never convict on 1st degree murder, but I thought they might convict on manslaughter. The primary difference being that 1st degree is premeditated, thus eligible for a capital offense, while manslaughter is accidental (with a degree of malice) and not a capital offense. I was once a juror on a rape/murder trial. It was horrific and it made me sick serving on that trial. The defendant was as guilty as could be...you just KNEW he did the crime, but when it came time to deliberate, we initially found him not guilty. Why? Because the prosecution did not prove beyond REASONABLE doubt he did the murder. We were all just sick about it, we wanted so badly to find him guilty, but there was a small amount of reasonable doubt. The case was all circumstantial (this was before DNA), and relied heavily on blood spots found in the car. But the blood type was that of the victim, and the defendants brother, also. Reasonable doubt. A witness for the prosecution was an inmate who was promised a shortened sentence for testifying. Again, reasonable doubt was raised. It wasn't until I remembered something in the testimony that didn't make sense to me, so we reviewed the transcripts and when that was compiled with the rest of the circumstantial evidence, we found him guilty of 1st degree murder. He had choked the victim, then slit her throat...had he just choked her it would have been 2nd degree, but by cutting her throat, it made it pre-meditated in our minds. In this case they did not seek the death penalty, but did sentence him to life in prison. So, I guess I can see why the jury found the way they did. They're probably all heartsick about it, but it is THE most tremendous pressure to serve as a juror in a murder trial. Nothing you can do will be the right thing, so you must go with what the law instructs. My family and I suspect that she'll go into porn of some kind...what else can she do? Seems to go along with her party girl/sociopathic personality.

We don't really know yet what happened, but I think she was abused, and also was responsible for her daughter's death in some way. She is a liar, but that doesn't mean she wasn't abused as a child herself. Have you ever worked with women who have been abused? Many (NOT ALL!) of them are very damaged and have so many negative coping skills. Partying, drugs, alcohol, lying and reckless self indulgent, self destructive (including criminal) behaviour is very common, for those who haven't gotten help. BUT... if she killed her daughter, she needs to be punished to the full extent of the law.