by Mustangt125 Thu Jul 07, 2011 9:05 am
I think she was guilty. I think she killed her kid and then tried to cover it up, and then lied about it.
Even if she did get off of that, and the only reason being because she discarded the body and didn't tell anybody for long enough that the boyd could not have a proper autopsy, sh eneeded to get put away for child endangerment in some form.
Alerting the authorities of a missing toddler is the responsibility of the parental guardian. This "mom" went out and partied, and got "Bella Vita" (Beautiful life) tattooed on her back. There are pictures of her partying at clubs, for crying out loud.
Unfortunately, despite overwhelming circumstantial evidence, they couldn't prove she did it I guess. It was just circumstantial. It is the burden of the state to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that she was guilty, and it only takes one of the jurors to have a doubt about it.
I think she was guilty, she should go for the rest of her life or be knocked out. People are never going to agree about the death penalty though.
One of the things that stuck out to me were the testimonials from her family. Her car wreaked of death which led to her parents investigating it, where upon a forensic search a hair from the kid was found. Her brother and her parents both testified that they thought she was guilty. She tried to cover it up by saying the nanny named "Zanny" drowned the kid in the pool. I can go from there to her killing her kid with Zannex and likely drowning it and then saying Zanny (Zannex) was the nanny who did it. Her entire family testified against her, which seemed damning to me. Watching her parents shake their heads and walk out when they announced the verdict was telling.
Remember, the burden is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The verdict is "Not Guilty", it is not "Innocent" and that's an important distinction to remember.
