Quote Originally Posted by momcat View Post

The prosecution didn't present any solid evidence that Casey did kill Caylee but at the same time the defense didn't present any solid evidence that she didn't. Listening to closing arguments, I think the defense was able to raise reasonable doubt. Baez did well countering the prosection's main arguments.

Hung Jury?
I agree Eileen. The prosecution has to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Casey killed Caylee. Way, way too much doubt, and credible doubt too, brought up by the defense. Gut feelings and suspicions and emotions just don't count. If I was on the jury, I couldn't say she positively did it, even tho in my gut, I feel that she did.
On the other hand, the defense has to prove nothing! The burden of proving anything rests with the prosecution, and they just didn't do it.
No way will she get 1st degree premeditated murder and the death penalty - 2nd degree probably with years of jail time. IMO of course.