I watched the Casey Anthony trail over the weekend.  I never really watch these reality trials, ever, but for some reason  it caught my attention.

The first one to plead his case was the prosecutor.  The prosecutor went on about so many items, so many reasons, why and how Casey killed her daughter.  She did it I thought, she clearly did it.  No way, she did not do it.  The prosecutor really stated a good case for her guilt.  OK, now the defense’s turn.  The defense rebuts  everything the prosecutor said, not defending Casey’s action as she partied after her daughter’s disappearance, he ( defense attorney) actually used the word slut in referencing Casey.  Wow, I thought he is being blunt and honest.  Then he began to disect the proseutor’s evidence, and the prosecutor’s theory of  Caylee’s murder.  I thought, if I was on the jury I would have a problem now, because now I rethought the whole idea of her guilt. I thought maybe there is more and something is missing.

I realized at that moment that it must be  hard  to be  a juror.    Especially when it entails the death penalty.  How awfully sure you would have to be of the person’s guilt, you would need some reason, anything, something you can reasonably sink your teeth in.

Guess what, jurors are  human, without any ability to really know what is true and, as I heard, they followed the letter of the law, although sometimes the laws letters  just don’t make sense.

mb