Casey Anthony?

Parent Cafe
2141

<p>So…if you catch an employee “red handed” stealing money from you, but the person is found “not guilty” in a court of law, you should just respect that and continue to employ this person?</p>

<p>So…if you witness your brother kill an innocent person in cold blood and he’s found “not guilty” then you need to respect the decision and treat him as if you didn’t know what you know to be true? </p>

<p>Granted, these are different situations…but in neither of them would the person be expected to “respect the jury’s decision” and treat the person as an innocent.</p>

<p>As private citizens we can accept, reject, respect, not respect, make fun of, mock, joke about…whatever verdicts we want to.</p>

2142

<p>You have a habit of making awful comparisons to be perfectly frank. </p>

<p>All of those scenarios involve you being directly related to the crime in question. So obviously, your ability to remain objective and non-biased is marginal at best. What we’re discussing here, is a situation that none of us is directly tied to, so yes in this situation you have to respect the verdict.</p>

2143

<p>

Really? Because I’m absolutely ready to tell you that you shouldn’t hate someone because of their race, religion, or sexual orientation. I think hating people because of any of those reasons is “wrong.” I think hating people because of those reasons will result in bad things happening. I think getting together with other people who feel the same way and talking about how you agree about hating [blacks] [jews] [homosexuals] is likely to lead to really, really bad things happening.</p>

<p>Maybe that’s just the narrow-minded way I think…</p>

2144

<p>I must be one of the few who is barely familiar with Nancy Grace. I watched her once and had to turn the channel. The yelling, the constant interrupting, the theatrical presentation-big turn off. She could well have been right in theory about everything she said that night, but she so rubbed me the wrong way, her words really had no impact and I haven’t watched her since.</p>

2145

<p>nrdsb4… i watched her a few more times but feel exactly the same way…think she is a pot stirrer…and honestly dont think she cares about what impact her words might have…she chooses a side and wont listen to any thing contrary to her side…</p>

2146

<p>

</p>

<p>You had me until this…</p>

<p>This is the most misguided thought I’ve ever heard. MANY feelings are wrong. Excessive jealousy, hatred, uncontrollable anger.</p>

<p>My basis for this? These negative emotions harm you physically AND psychologically. Even socially…</p>

<p>Your assertion is plain wrong.</p>

2147

<p>Feelings are never wrong, in and of themselves. They are instinctive. But how we progress from those feelings—recognizing whether they are productive or destructive, and either cultivating, rejecting, or redirecting them accordingly—is the key to being civilized human beings.</p>

2148

<p>I find it bothersome the accusations by some posters that assert that CCers on this thread are “obsessed” with this case. Further, it seems that CCers who are participating in the discussion are being lumped in with Nancy Grace! </p>

<p>I can’t speak for others but I am not obsessed with this case (and don’t observe that from many others on this thread too). I did not follow the case or watch it on TV. I never watch Nancy Grace. I barely ever turn on a television. The day of the attorney’s closing statements, I watched 30 min. of the case and that is all I have seen. However, as we are all well aware, this case has been covered constantly in the media, including hte mainstream media. I read the news on the internet several times per day. It is hard to not notice that this case is on the front page news (during the trial in particularly). As someone who reads the news, I often read these headlines and near the very end of the case, read some articles. Then, as someone who regularly reads CC (too much so!), I came upon this thread and got interested in the discussion and sometimes when I participate in a thread, it makes me return and I get rather hooked into following the thread after that, whereas other long threads that I did not read originally or didn’t post on, I tend to not keep up with. I found a lot of the discussion here interesting only because it was a major news story and so hearing various perspectives was of interest. Had it not been in the headlines so much, I may never have opened this thread. </p>

<p>I don’t think participating on a discussion thread equates to “obsession” with the topic or case. If you claim that, I guess I will be considered obsessed with college admissions (look how many posts I have on that topic over 9 years on CC! I have a lot of posts on the musical theater forum and so I guess I am “obsessed,” by some people’s definition. Ironically, these same folks who are judging others for spending time discussing this case are ALSO participating in a discussion forum about…wait…guess…the Anthony case! :rolleyes: </p>

<p>To me the people who are truly obsessed with the case are picketing at the jail, pushing to get in line to get a seat in the courtroom, posting on hate sites about Casey Anthony, and so on and so forth. That is not the same as some intelligent discussion of points of view on a discussion forum about a major and current news story. </p>

<p>Now, CCers discussing this news story are being lumped in with Nancy Grace. I haven’t read oodles of support about Nancy Grace here or even people who regularly watch that show. And for those who criticize Nancy Grace (I’m not supporting her, btw), you must know enough about her to criticize her and must have watched her show! </p>

<p>I’d be surprised to find many citizens in the country who are not aware of the Anthony case or don’t have some sort of opinion about it. </p>

<p>Do I think this one crime should have gotten lots more attention than many other horrific crimes or crimes against children? No. But we can’t help that the media covered it (and I’m referring to mainstream media which more people follow than Nancy Grace TV shows). And as citizens who read the news, it is only natural to discuss it with others. That is what this thread is about in my opinion. It is not a hate thread. It is not an obsession. And if you think discussing a news story such as this one is an obsession, why would you even open the thread and post on it? I followed the Duke Lacrosse case thread on CC too. It was interesting. Maybe I read CC too much but I don’t get the criticism of those who are engaging in civil discourse about major news events.</p>

2149

<p>All of those scenarios involve you being directly related to the crime in question. So obviously, your ability to remain objective and non-biased is marginal at best. What we’re discussing here, is a situation that none of us is directly tied to, so yes in this situation you have to respect the verdict.</p>

<p>that was never the caveat. (and, BTW, I clearly STATED that my scenarios were “different situations”…I wasn’t claiming that they were similar. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Sometimes you have to illustrate absurdity with absurdity. And, it’s absurd to insist that Americans who aren’t part of the CJ system must respect a jury’s decision, when there are instances when doing so would be absurd. </p>

<p>The statement that has been discussed for several pages has simply been about “respecting a jury’s verdict”. There were never exemptions offered for eye-witnesses, surviving victims, etc. </p>

<p>That’s my point. People can’t just broad-brush say “you must respect the jury’s decision” as if that’s some kind of law of this country. It’s not. </p>

<p>People have the right to disagree with a verdict. They have a right to voice that disagreement. </p>

<p>They don’t have the right to inflict bodily harm on the acquitted defendent. </p>

<p>They also have the right not to purchase things that would financially benefit the acquitted defendant.</p>

2150

<p>The whole “Profiting from the Case” scenarios being posited is a non-issue for me because it really has nothing much to do with the actual case.</p>

2151

<p>Mom2collegekids said:" That’s my point. People can’t just broad-brush say “you must respect the jury’s decision” as if that’s some kind of law of this country. It’s not. </p>

<p>People have the right to disagree with a verdict. They have a right to voice that disagreement. </p>

<p>They don’t have the right to inflict bodily harm on the acquitted defendent. </p>

<p>They also have the right not to purchase things that would financially benefit the acquitted defendant. "</p>

<p>^^^^^^^^^^^
What she said! I guess I don’t agree with what these 12 jurors decided upon- and I won’t be purchasing anything that will come to benefit Casey aka “Dirtbag” Anthony!</p>

2152

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you deliberately being inflammatory? Because it is really hard to have a discussion when there are people who are provoking discord for the sake of discord. </p>

<p>

It is WRONG to keep telling people that they are WRONG! Lol. It is your OPINION that these feelings are wrong. Feelings are normal and human. It is only harmful if they result in injury to another person. What exactly would you suggest people do with their feelings? </p>

<p>It reminds me of a time when I saw Jim Carrey on a talk show and he was telling the story of being a child and he was trying to express a feeling to his mom. He said that his mother looked uncomfortable and told him to “take that thing outside”(meaning the feeling).</p>

<p>Do you think it is healthy to disallow people’s feelings because they make you uncomfortable or because you are concerned that they might adversely affect that person’s health? It is the inhibition of feelings that is unhealthy, slacker. It is the shaming of feelings that make them “bad”. Not the healthy expression of them through dialogue.
On that note, I hope you can learn something, someday about effective communication and healthy disagreement. </p>

<p>I am officially out at this point. i have plenty of walls in my house that I can talk to. Good luck all!</p>

2153

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m sorry… I believe I wrote that in a manner so as to avoid saying “You are wrong.”</p>

<p>However, when you make assertions that the sky is orange, cigarettes are good for you and/or that negative emotions are not bad then well you are wrong…</p>

<p>What else can I say?</p>

<p>That is not a moral gray area or a subjective view. Negative emotions ARE bad for you. While mantori.suzuki stated it better she essentially said what I said.</p>

<p>When the sky is orange I’ll agree that negative emotions are not bad for you… Until then, well that’s something you aren’t going to be able to pass off. Shrug…</p>

<p>Should I coddle you and say your opinion is right??? Even kluge showed you that yur statement is ludicrous.</p>

<p>So like I said before… You can “withdraw” because you don’t “like” me… whatever, but don’t claim I’m a “wall” when you are throwing silly assertions around.</p>

<p>For example, you can “think” purple people are inferior, you can “feel” that the orange people are all criminals. I’ll tell you that you are wrong every single time and I’ll be right…</p>

<p>Does that make me self-righteous or condescending or arrogant? Then so be it.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Why don’t you, on your own time, find say a psychiatrist or psychologist or even a priest and ask them what negative feelings do to those having them…</p>

<p>You think negative feelings aren’t harmful? Really? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL </p>

<p>As to being natural? Attacking some guy because he talks to my girlfriend is natural, watch the Discovery channel. So does that mean it’s right for me to attack him? Not so much methinks… </p>

<p>You sir, are wrong. ;)</p>

<p>This reminds me of the show Intervention. All the people telling the addict they are wrong and need help and the addict keeps saying “NOOOOOO, You can’t judge me, You aren’t the boss of me!!! I’m an adult! I’ll do/say/think/feel what I want! You don’t understand me!!!” </p>

<p>Silliness.</p>

2154

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree. This is what amazes me about the reaction to Casey and the sex, tatoos and partying. They manifest feelings and some have attempted to argue that these feelings should have been surpressed and therefore Casey was bad.</p>

2155

<p>

</p>

<p>This is bad? Since when? The ENTIRE country (ok NOT everyone but the media and a LARGE portion of America) is doing this to Casey Anthony.</p>

<p>What’s good for the goose is good for the gander…</p>

<p>And also… Why do we spend millions of dollars trying to inhibit hate if it’s unhealthy to do so? </p>

<p>We are all making sweeping generalizations so let’s boil it down.</p>

<p>Emotions in moderation are good. Negative emotions are harmful to the one having them. They cause more harm the longer they are present and the stronger they become. People DIE from sadness. Hate and anger eat people inside. Everyone knows a negative person. How healthy is their psyche? Their social life? Try watching someone whose wife of 60+ years has died. Watch them die from despair while not having one medical problem.</p>

<p>Why is this even a debate? You people know this and if you don’t you should.</p>

2156

<p>It seems to me that in this circumstantial case, the prosecution was betting on Casey’s conduct generating a hate feeling in the jurors that would translate into aguilty verdict.</p>

<p>***See, see – Casey is a tatooed slut boozer, she’s a bad girl, hate her, convict her. *** </p>

<p>Seems the prosecution lost the case at voir dire. They didn’t get tatooed slut boozer haters. If the foreman is accurately assessing the feelings of the entire jury panel (to me a BIG if), perhaps Baez got the haters he needed to get an acquittal.</p>

2157

<p>FYI, re: the chloroform searches… [Prosecutor</a> Misconduct In Casey Anthony Case Alleged - Yahoo! News](<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/prosecutor-misconduct-casey-anthony-case-alleged-172213907.html]Prosecutor”>http://news.yahoo.com/prosecutor-misconduct-casey-anthony-case-alleged-172213907.html)</p>

2158

<p>

</p>

<p>You are not alone: I’ve never seen her, although I’ve heard people talking about how horrible she is for years.</p>

<p>xSlacker, regarding feelings, I think you are confusing “bad for you” with “wrong.” Negative feelings, such as jealousy, are natural. It is not “wrong” for a person to feel jealousy, although it can indeed be “bad for them.” I think the point being made was that the best way to deal with negative feelings is not to label them “wrong” and repress or deny them, but to deal with them constructively, in hopes of minimizing negativity now and in the future.</p>

2159

<p>Anger is a feeling or emotion.
HATE is an attitude projected towards another.
Different, though can be related. And may or may not lead to action. Or suppression. Or expression. Or none of those.</p>

2160

<p>Gotta love the Tot Grandparents. Go–George and Cindy! No haters allowed.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>[CAYLEE</a> ANTHONY - Reviews & Brand Information - Lippman Law Offices, P.A. Orlando, FL - Serial Number: 85322494](<a href=“http://www.trademarkia.com/caylee-anthony-85322494.html]CAYLEE”>http://www.trademarkia.com/caylee-anthony-85322494.html)
[JUSTICE</a> FOR CAYLEE - Trademark by Lippman Law Offices, P.A. Orlando, FL - Serial Number: 85322498](<a href=“http://socialmedia.trademarkia.com/justice-for-caylee-85322498.html]JUSTICE”>http://socialmedia.trademarkia.com/justice-for-caylee-85322498.html)</p>

<p>I read that their attorney is sending out cease and desist letters to those who are using these trademarks on T-shirts and merchandise. The Tot Grandparents seem to want that money.</p>

<p>I was surprised to read that Lippman stated very recently that G & C do hope they can have some contact with Casey in the future. See–they can let go of hate.</p>