Why is it we always get these kinds of verdicts in places that don’t belong to Low-Sloping Foreheads?
But I’m getting ahead of myself.
We’ve seen this before, never considering, is this a trend?
In the past we had the Menendez brothers acquitted for brutally murdering their parents because, as one juror put it, “they were unfortunate orphans.” We didn’t really blame the water in California then. It wasÂ just an aberration. Juries happen.
Then probably the most indecent miscarriage of justice (in my lifetime, at least) came with the OJ case. But we were still more inclined to blame the verdict on the over-exposure of the media (do you have any idea how many idiotic media careers got started with that case…or the idea that somehow lawyers could actually make good television news journalists?). Or maybe race. Then there was also a poor prosecution, and equally poor court management by the trial judge.
Even though both of those trials occurred in California, no one ever thought to blame California, the Land of Full Frontal Lobes, for the shortcomings.
But we did begin to wonder.
Besides, after 10 years’ hindsight, OJ finally got his. He went into his murder trial a double-celebrity, then came out a notorious celebrity, but celebrity nonetheless. Finally, today he’s just a bum in jail, just as he deserved.
But Casey Anthony went into her trial a bum and has came out a notorious bum. Unlike OJ, she will never be able to find a band of groupies to stay with her ten years. The OJ Effect will not last even a year for Casey, who despite the couple of million she will reap for “her story,”Â will never be able to buy a friend, or have a decent relationship.Â She will probably die broke…and young…and from the looks of her, as conscienceless as if she’d stepped on a bug.
But you noticed that this most recent trial also occurred in a Land of Full Frontal Lobes, Florida, where, by all looks of it, the jury was comprised of real citizens with presumably all the reasoning skills we assumed were lacking in both the OJ and Menendez cases.
Aberration no more?
And to my mind, the judge managed the courtroom well. I didn’t watch it gavel-to-gavel, but there were no great moments of drama. The cameras seemed transfixed on the almost disinterested Casey, who seemed to be there only because she had to be there. They reminded me of the search along the coast of New England for any sign of John-John in 1999, placid and boorrrring.
If I have a beef with the prosecution, it was in not being able to really convey to the jury the things Casey likely did to her daughter, for there was abundant evidence that she did “something.”
But if the prosecution can’t piece together the evidence to suit itself it’s obvious a jury can’t either, which explains a unanimous decision in such short time.
It’s difficult, actually, almost impossible to get a guilty verdict when you can’t prove cause of death and make a strong case for motive. “Generally bad mom” isn’t enough. The same goes for aggravated manslaughter. But the third charge, “aggravated child abuse,” which carries a lot of years, was a shoo-in…only…and here’s the rub…
…the prosecution paid little attention to it for 1) the media probably had them convinced they could make a case for Murder One, and 2)Â it would haveÂ had to dwell on that charge instead of the Murder One charge…especially in closing arguments, the explaining phase of the trial.
And that requires creating a daisy chain of evidence that is linked together by logic and common sense.
In other words, they would have had to spend a great deal of time, with a chalk board, if necessary, to highlight the logical links that could tell anyone of common sense that Casey had to have done “something,” and known “something,” that caused her daughter to be found in a plastic bag as she was.
Instead the prosecution seemed to most want to prove a charge that was almost unprovable. Perhaps due to media hype, I can’t say.
Still. there was a range of provable 5-to-10 year offenses, depraved indifference, mistreatment of a body, etc., that were never charged.
They could have nickle-and-dimed Casey to 20 years.
But as I said, grand juries happen. too.
Casey Anthony in Kansas
But a larger question lies embedded in this tale, and that is, would (anymore) a jury of low sloping foreheads in common sense country… have found Casey Anthony guilty of anything either?
Why couldn’t that jury in Orlando figure this out on their own? Why couldn’t 12 men and women see Casey’s damnable fingerprints all over that body that was found in a plastic bag and KNOW Casey had some dreadful role in her daughter’s death. She did SOMETHING….besides lie.
And these days, would a jury in Kansas, or Kentucky, or Minnesota have been able to deduce these simple truths as well?
After all, common sense is a form of critical thinking, but has been talked down in public schools for almost two generations. And common sense has also been derided as radical thinking in popular political circles. So to find wrong-doing, unless specifically guided there by recognized authorityÂ is a form of judgmentalism to be decried and damned as a matter of public policy…also now taught in public schools.
So, it not hard for me to understand why the jury in Florida missed the elephant in Casey Anthony’s dock, but I have to ask if it isn’t also lurking in our town as well.
Without critical judgment, the absence of which was apparent in Orlando, we either put a gun to the head of that elephant in the dock, or to our own head.
More to follow.