Casey Anthony

Casey Anthony judge: There was enough to convict


Casey Anthony July 7, 2011 photo / AP - Orlando Sentinel, POOLORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — The judge who presided over the trial of Casey Anthony said Monday he believed there was enough evidence to convict the Florida mother who was acquitted of murdering her 2-year-old daughter.

Judge Belvin Perry told NBC’s “Today” show that he thought there was sufficient evidence for a conviction on a first-degree murder charge, even though much of the evidence was circumstantial.

Anthony was acquitted almost two years ago of killing her daughter, Caylee, following a trial that attracted worldwide attention. She was convicted of making false statements to police and got credit for time served.

When he read the jury’s verdict, Belvin said he felt “surprise, shock, disbelief” and read it twice.

“I just wanted to be sure I was reading what I was reading,” Perry said.

Anthony’s attorney, Jose Baez, refused to say anything to The Associated Press about the interview when reached by phone. He said he would comment after a request had gone through his Los Angeles-based spokesman.

A spokeswoman for the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which oversees Florida judges, didn’t immediately return a phone call.

The judge said he saw two sides to Anthony. The one she showed to jurors was a wrongfully accused mother grieving for her child. The other was a woman wasn’t afraid to shout and swear at her attorneys, as she did when they talked to her about a possible plea deal for aggravated murder.

“There were always two sides to Casey,” Perry said. “The public persona that she wanted the jury to see and there was a side that she showed when the jury wasn’t there.”

Perry also said he thought prosecutors were better attorneys than Baez, who the judge described as “personable.” All the defense had to do was create reasonable doubt, which they did, he said.

“He came across as someone you would like,” Perry said of Baez. “Like someone trying to sell a used car. Who are you going to buy from? The most likable salesman.”

The judge also said he thought justice had been served with a jury verdict.

“Justice will finally be served one day by the Judge of Judges,” Perry said. “She is going to have to live with this and deal with this for the rest of her life.”

Source: AP

Copyright 2013 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Share this post!
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

Comments

tab  
crissy snow says:

that trial had me in tears for weeks upon weeks, I watched from day one to the end. I was just gob smacked when the jury came back with not guilty. I am like so many others who heard her admit she knew the child died, so you know she supposedly drowned and then you just go off on your merry way for several months in a daze from the all of a sudden deep horror over your childhood trauma that you never told another soul about, and partied like it was nothing. Somebody is responsible for her death, and I say if she knew then she is guilty at the very least of covering up a death. I don’t know how that jury sleeps at night. they can say all they want about not enough evidence, but caylee got no justice, and that is a crime that someone will be judged for one day.
crissy

   
Bumble bee says:

Me and my Best Friend knew she killed her daughter from the moment we heard it and we were pissed off because she got away with it I read the book they tried so hard to convict the b!tch. Hope she never steps foot in Washington state.. I hate it when mothers kill there kids and get away with it.. You better never get pregnant again Casey you don’t need anymore kids you baby killer

   
Stan Robinson says:

Well, this is then a perfect example of why the jury system is as important as it is. Judge Bullfrog Q. Ribbid was obviously biased right from the git-go. All you had to do is look at his many rulings to see that they were heavily biased in favor of the prosecution. The fact of the matter is that there was NO evidence that CA killed her daughter. You might *think* that she did (possible) or that someone else did (also possible) or that there was a terrible accident (also possible). They couldn’t even specify when or how the kid died. And that, folks, is reasonable doubt. The fact is that both the prosecution and defense were incompetent (it takes a really special kind of fool to lose a case to Jose Baez) and the jury was left with NOTHING on which to predicate a conviction. And its to their credit that they didn’t buy into the media hype.

   
jbeach62 says:

Guess Gayler just wondered into those woods and put herself in those garbage bags.

   
jbeach62 says:

Stupid auto correct

   
Dr G says:

I guess everyone puts tape on a dead person’s mouth, huh? That child was murdered and she did it. Why? Because she admitted that it was an “accident” meaning she was there when it happened. There was no accident.

   
tina says:

Has anyone watched a movie called “Let’s go to prison” ? A comedy movie from the 90′s I think. If not check it out. There is a part that talks about trial by jury. I had to select a jury for an incident I had. As I sat there I thought to myself, this is a legal matter. How many of these people know how the system works? Jury duty is made up of people who are I guess force to go. If not who know exactly what happens. I tell you, I know people who don’t bother going and to this day, I have not seen or heard anything happening to them for not going. Anyways, I gave my so called attorney or public defender, which I still had to pay for. All that if you can’t afford an attorney one will be provided for you. That’s a crock, I still had to pay for it, if not I would of got probation for not paying. Anyways, long story short, I was found not guilty. Now, this is what I learned from this incident. First off, prosecutor and public defenders tell the story of what happened but in legal terms. Now seriously how many people out there really have knowledge of the legal system? Then too boot, my public defender tells me in frustration to take the deal because she hated loosing cases. She obviously, judged me for the way I looked. I wish I could go back time, and tell this public defender what I really thought of her in front of everyone in that court room. I was glad to get it behind me. Later on that day, I was so pissed, just thinking what if I had listened to her and take a deal. All because she hated loosing cases.This happened many years ago and to this day I still get pissed. I avoid jury duty, now that I know how it works. You need to check out that movie. Its funny, but I tell you what. It isn’t funny when it happens to you having to pick out a jury. You definitely don’t want some juror saying “we find the defendant Quilty, and a judge correcting them saying ” oh, you mean Guilty”? Oh yeah it looked like a Q.

   
Timothy Keran says:

Here is what a juror stated was that the state did not say how she(Kaylee) was killed and that is why they could not find her guilty.

   
Dr G says:

Jury error. The law does not require that the state show how the person was killed, only that the killing was caused by someone else and it was murder. Had the jury listened to the law things might have been different.

   
Betty Treger says:

I think it is time to do away the jury system completely. Let the Judge be the decider of guilt or innocent. To many people are getting away with murder and the defense attorneys are a disgrace to our justice system. Defense attorneys need to be held to a higher standard just like the prosecutors. I find it amazing that they can throw out anything and everything with no proof to muddy the waters. Baez and his co-counsel should be ashamed of themselves and I wonder how they sleep at night. I guess they too are just as evil as their clients.

   
Mickey says:

I don’t think you’d like the consequences of a judge without a jury!

   
Jill says:

We are only so lucky to have a jury system of our peers deciding these matters. Holding 1 judge responsible opens up the possibility decisions being rendered based solely on political gain, which absolutely happens. Judges do not always hear a case without prejudice unfortunately. Defense attorney’s, as well as Prosecutor’s, are a necessary ‘evil’ only doing their jobs. If you ever need one, you will hopefully feel differently about their role in our system.

   
James says:

Okay. We’ll need to burn our Constitution and start all over, but that’s no biggie!

   
Tom says:

I would be willing to bet that if you were faced with criminal charges you would change your tune about doing away with the jury system. And although you might not be a criminal in the usual sense, all it would take is a horrible accident and an over-zealous prosecutor and you could find yourself at the defense table.

   
Cathy says:

Bravo! I am impressed that a judge would say that without worry about repercussions.i for one am glad. I like the honesty he shows. He did get to see Casey as she really was and what the world saw as a mother who killed her child and threw her in the mud with garbage. I feel that judge Stevens feels the same way with the incomplete outcome of the Jodi arias trial. They are a lot like Casey and Jodi. They both have to face judgement from the big judge…I suggest they dress light.

   
TG says:

A Judge can’t overturn a jury verdict and increase the punishment. That violates every right an american citizen has. Once the defendant decides to not throw themselves at the mercy of the court or not plea, and requests a jury of her peers, it’s out of the judges hands. The only thing he can do is reduce the sentencing penalty or sign onto the jury’s recommendations.

   
Maryann says:

The jurors brains were baked from the Flori-duh heat. Complete and utter morons.

   
Heidi Hayes-Pandey says:

I KNEW IT!!!!

   
Jeannie says:

Good lord, she’s fugly!

   
Marsha says:

Judge Perry was such a good judge. And well put on the difference in the prosecutors and attorneys of Casey’s trial and Jodi’s case. Crossing my fingers!

   
Julie says:

The judge could NOT overturn the juries verdict for a greater charge! Judges are only able to LOWER a juries verdict.

   
JL says:

Wrong – he had the discretion to set aside that Verdict.

   
JL says:

…mean to add to impose a punishment.

   
JL says:

As the judge, he had the discretion to overturn that Jury verdict and he didn’t. Justice would have been served for that lost little baby had he done that. He is every bit as responsible for that asinine verdict as those brain dead jurors. To not consider the overwhelming evidence, but let this child murderer go free because her attorney was a “better salesman” is unconscionable and means they did not do their jobs.

   
Oyuky Woo says:

This makes me sad once again! WTF where they thinking. Awww Judge perry was in disbelief of what he was reading. :( He even SAW GUILTY!!! DUH! STUPID STUPID JURY. I hope they live with that for the rest of their lives too.

   
Nicole says:

The jurors on that case should be ashamed. One of them was quoted as saying the reason they let her go is because no one could tell them how Cayley died. Of course, under the law that was not a legal reason to let her go. No where in their jury instructions did it say that the state had to show how the victim died.

Was it not enough that a 2 yr old girl died years before her time? I gotta say, that jury wasn’t very bright.

   
Simone says:

upsetting!! I simply cannot fathom what that jury was thinking! Infuriating!

   
Kathy Roe says:

Can wild put up a verdict clock below the court seal???

   
Nicole says:

Without knowing when the jury will have a verdict, the clock would be sort of inaccurate. It could take them hours or days to come up with a verdict. Should the countdown clock begin with an hour or 12 hours?

   
Cindy says:

Start the verdict clock at ZERO and count UP, Nicole.

   
Sue says:

OMG. Well we knew it, right?

   

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *