EastCoastNiner

You mean like last year where he only fumbled one time?

Should I report you for harassment? Your dumb ass tried to report me before. . Also, I love how you have the 12-4, when in fact I did not ever say they WOULD go 12-4. It's the only team I gave a range of wins to, from 7-9 to 12-4, so that really makes no sense. Also, Fish, I'll be emailing you my paypal info that is long overdue for the $30 you lost last year for saying the Cowboys would have a better record than the Patriots. I'll make sure to bump this after the season when the Patriots or 49er's win it all. Until then, I'll just have to settle for the Red Sox winning the World Series to continue the Boston dominance.

When Brady wins his third NFL Regular Season MVP this year, and another Super Bowl MVP, he will learn. Anyways, it's really hard to rate the top five QB's in the NFl. I really think the top five QB's are very close to each other, but I'll take players that have proven themselves for more than just a few years than some QB's that haven't. As I stated earlier, give me Brady and Peyton as #1 and #2.

Good for them.

I thought he was referring to me not having Rodgers on the list, but then I remembered Leinert was #1 on your list. .

1. Tom Brady 2. Peyton Manning 3. Drew Brees 4. Phillip Rivers 5. Big Ben

I understand what you are saying, and my heart is completely in agreement with that, but my brain is partly in disagreement. At the end of the day, no motive and no cause of death was proven. You're not going to get a first-degree murder conviction with that lack of evidence in this case, especially with the death penalty on the line. The death penalty should have been taken off the table here. I know you are going to say that even if they took it off, the jury's decision should not change, and legally I agree with you, but I think we'd be being naive if we didn't think that factors into their decision, whether or not that is right or wrong. I really don't know if she would have been convicted if the death penalty was off the table, but who knows? Again, I know what your response will be, and I understand it. I'm sure it's going to be along the lines of saying that the jury needs to make their decision based upon the evidence, and not the potential of a death sentence, but I think the reality is that that does factor into their decision, whether it is right or wrong, and whether or not they really did think like that. At the end of the day, the alternate jurors came to the same decision as well, and I think that is telling. Also, some food for thought. Do you think she actually pre-meditated and murdered her daughter? I used to think so, but I'm a little skeptical for a few reasons. If she pre-meditated to kill her kid, don't you think she would have had a better plan, and had a better story for the police? The way she acted was not the way most people who pre-meditate murder would act, and, yes, I know she is not your "normal" person. Also, I forget the name of the law, but I believe it prohibits defendants from making money off of their story's for their cases, and I think that maybe jurors should not be able to make a profit either. Honestly, the jurors could easily think that if they give a not-guilty verdict in a case like this that they will get a lot of money to talk about their decisions. Does anyone know what law I'm talking about because I heard of it earlier, but am not sure if I am correct on it, and if it is actually a U.S. law? Already, one of the jurors has a family paid trip to Disney World by ABC in order to talk about the case. I'm always a little skeptical about these decisions.

Who....is.....she? .

Just like a ton of them are not surprised at all with the verdict. I guess I'm in the same boat as them. I think most people THINK she is guilty, but going by the letter of the law, the jury just couldn't convict her. At the same time, I keep thinking "When does enough circumstantial evidence become enough?" because it was overwhelming in this case. She did something to Caylee, and I believe it was killing her, but the jury couldn't convict her based upon what they heard and were shown. I mean, even the alternate jurors said the same thing. It's a frustrating case because she is a complete scum-bag, and has gotten off legally. Also, if anyone watched any of Dr. Drew on CNN Headline News with Jeff Ashton, what did you think? I feel bad for him, but he's handling himself very well. Also, apparently before the body was found, Casey was talking about being able to go on radio stations and t.v. shows, and she was joking about Howard Stern and asking about her bra size if she went on the show. She is a low life piece of shit, and I wouldn't have complained at all if she went to jail, but I guess I understand the verdict.

You were only 10 posts late.

No, not only can they not charge her with that, but they can't charge her with anything being related to this case. In regards to child neglect, they can't do that because they already disputed the drowning as well. There's nothing that can be done.

http://i56.tinypic.com/1zveq93.jpg

It's apparent that you aren't understanding the difference between "innocent" and "not-guilty". The jurors can't just make a decision based upon how they feel with disregard for the law. They must follow the law, and that is what they did. Where is the proof of child abuse again? The prosecution had a weak case for child abuse. I put most of this on the DA for being a moron and trying to go for capital murder without a clear motive and without a clear cause of death. They had a lot of evidence, but just didn't tie it together well enough. Again, I think she is guilty of something happening to her daughter, but death penalty decisions are taken a LOT more seriously, and the jurors all came to the same conclusion I believe, just like the alternate jurors that spoke, so I think that speaks volumes.

Are any of you being required to take it? I'm just wondering because I know the real DaBearsFan is taking it because he isn't such a smart one, and was wondering if anyone else had to take classes too? And, do you think summer classes suck?

Somebody's going to hell. <_< .

Also, there was no proof of child abuse. The prosecutions case for child abuse was that Casey drowned Caylee, but they didn't believe it. Not reporting a dead body is NOT child abuse, but rather failure to report a dead body, which the prosecution did not pursue for whatever reason.

I think she is guilty as well. However, the prosecution could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey killed her Caylee. The couldn't prove motive, and they couldn't prove the cause of death. They can have all the circumstantial evidence they want, but they didn't prove their case well enough.

@kimkardashian WHAT!!!!???!!!! CASEY ANTHONY FOUND NOT GUILTY!!!! I am speechless!!! Oh, how stupid she is. .

They will eventually do one, but not right after the trial.... Not to mention, I'd wait until someone offers me tons of money to talk about it as well.

The alternate jurors may be answering questions in a little while. However, none of the jurors that decided the case are going to answer questions today.

They had a lot of different evidence, but couldn't put it all together. Also, I question the validity of the chloroform searches, and whether or not there really were 84 searches, as the prosecution claims. However, I have no doubt she is guilty as hell, and I bet her dad knew what happened as well. However, I don't know the exact reasoning of the jury. Maybe they will do an interview and let us know the reasoning for their decision.

I've never passed out in my life, but I would have passed out if I was her.

This case should prove that you can never really know what the ruling will be until the actual verdict is read. Most of the media and people in general thought this was a slam dunk case.

Here's the thing. I bet you a lot of the jurors THINK she is guilty, but by the writing of the law, they may not have been able to hand down that decision. I think she's guilty as shit, and hopefully we find out the jury's reasoning. The closing arguments for the defense may have won them the case.

Has anyone else followed this case? I've been watching it every day, and the verdict just came back as, not guilty. The media is probably shocked right now, and Nancy Grace is probably flipping out.