Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
We are a financial program but we -- go to digress briefly to the Casey Anthony ability to all rise as you know the judge is here judge and -- volatile.
Project you've got something to say about the way the government handled the case.
I think that -- -- and of course hindsight is twenty -- I thought she would be convicted I thought she would be convicted not because the evidence was there but because the judge permitted and atmosphere to develop in the courtroom in which it was probable that she was guilty.
He permitted that by permitting the jury to hear junk science no one's ever been convicted of a crime on the basis about murder.
On the basis of smell and he permitted that juries.
Impartiality to be tainted.
But playing tapes of Casey Anthony at her worst being lying and manipulative to the police.
Having said that it is now clear that this jury did not believe that the government proved its case.
That doesn't mean they don't think she was guilty.
It means that the government didn't prove its case the purpose of the jury system is not a who done it like in Perry Mason.
The purpose of the jury system is to test the government's evidence and to test -- under the rigors of the constitution.
And if the government can't prove its case the defendant goes free even if the general perception is that an event and it's.
I think we have raised the bar -- standards of evidence it seems to me that now if you do not have.
DNA evidence linking the accused of the crime.
You find that person not guilty there's a -- a -- that's a very interesting observation and -- reveal a portion of our conversation during the break you think that that are may have been raised.
By the media.
By the television programs that demonstrate the use of DNA -- by the manner in which we talk about DNA.
And by the numbers if you -- to say the chances are.
Out of a million most people would say okay that's.
Practically -- certainty those numbers of overwhelming.
Those are the numbers that we use that we talk about the so when you look at it we've -- the office found -- the evidence is not not legally but perhaps psychologically.
In the mindset of jurors who are -- -- Charles I.
You know what I find fascinating about outside and watch Charlie any of the trial you know but my mother mice in my system law Monday both told me that there was reasonable doubt -- every -- I did turn it on.
Every pundit said this he was guilty in other words -- scene that's pissing me that the pundits.
Couldn't separate their emotional this thing for this woman with that I you know with the way the proceedings were just like I get the jury -- may need to have been able to -- I.
Referred to the judge -- a prosecutor and a black robe which is a harsh in my view criticism of a judge because he really not must not only being neutral.
He must appear to be neutral but the opening line of the defense lawyers closing argument was how -- Caylee Anthony -- The government didn't tell you and you can't speculate and if the government can't tell you how she died.
How can you possibly find that my client caused her death.
That's the case in a nutshell so we have a dead child and no one punished for correct.
Are judged we're gonna bring you back a little later in the tsunami accurate -- -- we still looking back at this event in the that it is a very difficult subjects everybody's got strong opinions yes it is the toll of America as we speak we thank you become to --
Filter by section