Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:10:48 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Really, what was the OJ trial about then? The jurors basically decided they hated the actions of the LAPD more than OJ.
I imagine the jurors in this latest trial will be more forthcoming when People magazine calls
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Juror 14 was on TV. The rest, so far, have refused to talk.

And the OJ trial was much more than that.


_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:13:45 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Really, what was the OJ trial about then? The jurors basically decided they hated the actions of the LAPD more than OJ.
I imagine the jurors in this latest trial will be more forthcoming when People magazine calls
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Juror 14 was on TV. The rest, so far, have refused to talk.

And the OJ trial was much more than that.



I think what Tazzy may have meant was that the verdict (you both have said the "Trial", though I dont think thats what you meant), was more than just an FU to the LAPD, it was an FU to "the man" in general, and had elements of racism as well.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:14:46 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
I doubt if a court would find that the grandparents have a justiciable interest in their grand daughter's life. So what would they sue for?

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:15:55 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Good point, willbeur.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:26:37 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

I doubt if a court would find that the grandparents have a justiciable interest in their grand daughter's life. So what would they sue for?


Slander?

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:50:49 AM   
nephandi


Posts: 4470
Joined: 9/23/2005
From: Cold and magickal Norway in a town near Bergen!
Status: offline
Greetings

Personally I am pretty sure Anthony did it, her actions would lead me to speculate she killed her child to be free of the responsibility of that child and the whole thing sickens me and like everyone else I would have loved to see the guilty party pay for their crime. I do not believe in the death penalty, however I think that if Anthony had been proven guilty then she should be locked away forever, her walking feel like justice have not been served and I get that, I feel it to. However the judicial system of USA work on the assumption of innocent until proven guilty, tif the jury did not feel that it had been proven to them beyond a reasonable doubt that Anthony was guilty then they did the right thing. It is better to let ten guilty pepole walk then convict one innocent.

I wish you all well


_____________________________

Whatever you think you can do or believe you can do, begin it. Action has magic, grace and power in it.--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Futon torpedoes, make love not war!--Aswad


(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:56:50 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Im sure she will. There is also the possibility of civil suit from her parents. If that happens, its no different than the OJ book deal where the money had to go to the family. The grandparents could sue for that and she wouldnt see a dime.


Why would the parents sue? You dont think all of that was discussed as a defense strategy?


As soon as the verdict was read, the parents walked out. That wasn't part of the defense strategy.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 7:58:12 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Really, what was the OJ trial about then? The jurors basically decided they hated the actions of the LAPD more than OJ.
I imagine the jurors in this latest trial will be more forthcoming when People magazine calls
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Juror 14 was on TV. The rest, so far, have refused to talk.

And the OJ trial was much more than that.



The OJ trial was about money, race, politics and fame.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 8:02:14 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

I doubt if a court would find that the grandparents have a justiciable interest in their grand daughter's life. So what would they sue for?


Grandparents can sue for visitation and custody. Why wouldn't they have a justiciable interest in their granddaughters death? (Bita's reasoning well understood)

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 8:17:12 AM   
nancygirl34652


Posts: 291
Joined: 3/10/2010
Status: offline
There is a woman in tennessee who says she thinks her deceased son may be the father.  Apparently her son traveled to orlando for work and had met Casey Anthony there and started a romance and she got pregnant.  He was killed in a car accident....something which Casey Anthony had said about the father of Caylee.  She is supposed to come for dna testing.  If it proves that she is the biological grandmother then maybe she can do what Nicole Brown's family did in the OJ case....sue civilly and then she can be entitled to any money the baby killer makes off this.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 8:25:43 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
As much as the thought of her making money off her daughter's death is disasteful, I dont think that grandmother would have much standing since she had no relationship with the child at all.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to nancygirl34652)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 9:30:02 AM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

I doubt if a court would find that the grandparents have a justiciable interest in their grand daughter's life. So what would they sue for?


Slander?


You have a point there wilbur with the allegations of sexual abuse by Casey's father.

That's about as slanderous as it gets.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 10:06:36 AM   
BitaTruble


Posts: 9779
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


Slander?


Really hard to prove in a he said/she said case especially given the suicide note written by George.


This excerpt is very telling about how much worth George Anthony thinks he has..

"I have never been the man any of you could count on. I have always let each of you down in more ways then I could remember. I do not feel sorry for myself, I am just sorry I burden all of you the way I have.

My loss of life is meaningless."

What sort of damage can be suffered by someone who already thinks the loss of their life would be meaningless?

How do you get around a note like that? In any event, the burden wouldn't be on Casey to defend alleged slander but on the parent to prove that slander took place and that there was damage to reputation or the esteem held by others towards the victim of the slander.

Over the course of childhood which encompasses several years, who is to say that such things *never* took place or were perceived by an alleged victim as taking place. Only Casey and George know and, yes, one of them is lying about it. That might be Casey, might not be.. but it has to be proven with a preponderance of evidence.

Suppose Casey lied (again) and there was no sexual abuse or misconduct. The court (or jury) would then have to determine how much actual damage the lie caused. If the court/jury found actual damages, then they could assign punitive damages as well and, this is just an opinion, but I wouldn't put George up for a Father of the Year award any time soon. It's easy enough to prove that Casey is a liar (she's already been convicted) but not so easy to prove that she lied about that particular issue (if she did.)

_____________________________

"Oh, so it's just like
Rock, paper, scissors."

He laughed. "You are the wisest woman I know."


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 11:59:25 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
I think there is a privilege that applies to statements made in court. Can't sue for slander based just on testimony. And the Supremes, in Troxel v Granville found that grandparent visitation statutes were unconstitutional, tazzy. Doesn't mean they won't try, particularly if Casey starts making money off this. I just think their case will get tossed out way before trial.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to BitaTruble)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 12:10:35 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

I think there is a privilege that applies to statements made in court. Can't sue for slander based just on testimony.

This is true.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 12:11:33 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
No it didnt.

The U.S. Supreme Court Decision

In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court tackled this critical problem of grandparent visitation rights. In the case of Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), the Court reviewed a state court case from Washington State that struck down a permissive grandparent visitation statute. The Supreme Court agreed that parents have a fundamental right to make decisions about raising their children, but it did not agree that the permissive visitation statute was unconstitutional nor that allowing a nonparent to petition for visitation rights would amount to an assault on the integrity of the family unit.

However, the Supreme Court did say that the lower court applied the statute incorrectly, because it presumed that the grandparents' request for additional visitation was in the children's best interests, rather than presuming that the parent was acting in the best interests of her children in refusing the grandparents more than brief visits. This led the lower court judge to conclude that visitation should be granted unless the mother could prove that the additional visits would have an adverse impact on the children. The Supreme Court thought that this approach did not adequately protect a parent's fundamental right to make decisions for her children.

How the Troxel Decision Affects Other States

Many states have permissive visitation laws similar to Washington's. These states don't see grandparent or caretaker visitation as a severe restriction on the right of parents to control the upbringing of their children. Instead, they classify visitation as only a slight burden on that right. Therefore, the states need only justify the burden with a "rational" reason. Preserving the right of children to maintain strong bonds with their grandparents generally qualifies as such a reason and, since Troxel, most challenges to state laws regarding grandparent visitation have failed, with the statutes being found constitutional.

In addition, the Court in Troxel appeared to be swayed by the fact that the mother was not seeking to cut off the grandparents' visitation entirely. Instead, she chose to limit the visitation to one, non-overnight visit per month, plus some special holidays. If the mother had tried to bar the grandparents from visiting their grandchildren completely, it is possible that the Court would have reached a different conclusion.

The Supreme Court's decision in Troxel is not the final word on grandparents' visitation rights. Since Troxel, parents have continued to challenge how permissive visitation statutes are applied in specific fact situations and will continue to do so. Many states have amended their grandparent visitation laws to be consistent with Troxel's ruling that the starting presumption should be in the parents' favor, and judges in these states will certainly be more careful to take parents' wishes into account when resolving disputes.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/grandparent-caretaker-visitation-rights-29548.html;jsessionid=4170D82CD8492215EFA8D33D088A5D8A

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 1:18:36 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

She is one scary bitch.


What is really scary is that she used to be a prosecuter. Considering her contempt for due process I can't help but wonder how many innocent people are sitting in prison right now because of her.



I know this is bad, but I think that she is more representative of prosecutors than most of us would like to admit. And she does have contempt for due process, the constitution, etc etc etc....

This sort of attitude may have been what got Anthony off, because the prosecutor's lack of decorum in the courtroom had to have impacted the jury... it would have made a negative impact on me to see a prosecutor laughing and smirking while asking me to vote to kill someone. I would think that he didn't take the death penalty as a very serious decision.

< Message edited by juliaoceania -- 7/6/2011 1:20:14 PM >


_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 1:20:44 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Read the actual case.  I tried to copy the holding here, but I couldn't for some reason.  Based on the holding, I fail to see how the grandparents could have any right to sue. 

Washington Rev. Code § 26.10.160(3) permits "[a]ny person" to petition for visitation rights "at any time" and authorizes state superior courts to grant such rights whenever visitation may serve a child's best interest. Petitioners Troxel petitioned for the right to visit their deceased son's daughters. Respondent Granville, the girls' mother, did not oppose all visitation, but objected to the amount sought by the Troxels. The Superior Court ordered more visitation than Granville desired, and she appealed. The State Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed the Troxels' petition. In affirming, the State Supreme Court held, inter alia, that § 26.10.160(3) unconstitutionally infringes on parents' fundamental right to rear their children. Reasoning that the Federal Constitution permits a State to interfere with this right only to prevent harm or potential harm to the child, it found that § 26.10.160(3) does not require a threshold showing of harm and sweeps too broadly by permitting any person to petition at any time with the only requirement being that the visitation serve the best interest of the child.



_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 1:23:16 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Looks like the holding did copy.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs - 7/6/2011 2:19:46 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Read the actual case.  I tried to copy the holding here, but I couldn't for some reason.  Based on the holding, I fail to see how the grandparents could have any right to sue. 

Washington Rev. Code § 26.10.160(3) permits "[a]ny person" to petition for visitation rights "at any time" and authorizes state superior courts to grant such rights whenever visitation may serve a child's best interest. Petitioners Troxel petitioned for the right to visit their deceased son's daughters. Respondent Granville, the girls' mother, did not oppose all visitation, but objected to the amount sought by the Troxels. The Superior Court ordered more visitation than Granville desired, and she appealed. The State Court of Appeals reversed and dismissed the Troxels' petition. In affirming, the State Supreme Court held, inter alia, that § 26.10.160(3) unconstitutionally infringes on parents' fundamental right to rear their children. Reasoning that the Federal Constitution permits a State to interfere with this right only to prevent harm or potential harm to the child, it found that § 26.10.160(3) does not require a threshold showing of harm and sweeps too broadly by permitting any person to petition at any time with the only requirement being that the visitation serve the best interest of the child.




I did read the actual case. I have also seen subsequesnt cases. The Trexol case was not upheld because the mother did not deny the granpdparents access, all she was willing to give was limited access... which according to the SCOTUS was enough. It was the feeling of the Court that they cannot legislate how much access is enough and how much is not enough, and that was the mother's decision to make.

Now, subsequent decisions as in Ohio...

Court Sides With Grandparents on Visits

October 11, 2005|From Times Wire Reports
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled in Columbus that grandparents can be awarded visitation rights with grandchildren over a parent's wishes in some circumstances.

The court's unanimous decision sided with maternal grandparents who wanted to visit a granddaughter after the death of her mother but were challenged by the girl's father


http://articles.latimes.com/2005/oct/11/nation/na-briefs11.3

October 2005

Ohio Court Upholds Visitation Rights for Grandparents
Reported by UPI.

October 11, 2005 The Ohio Supreme Court sided with maternal grandparents who wanted to visit a granddaughter following the death of her mother but were challenged by the girl's father. The girl's parents were never married.The grandparents had raised the girl until she was 5 years old after the mother died of cancer.Monday's ruling said Ohio law properly balances the wishes of parents and the best interests of a child.


http://www.grandparenting.org/Grandparent_Visitation.htm

In 2000, in the case of "Troxel v Granville", the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of third party rights to seek court-enforced time with children. Within this context, a "third party" is somebody other than the child's parents. The Washington State statute examined in Troxel was not technically a "grandparenting time" statute, as it allowed “[a]ny person” to petition for visitation rights “at any time”. The Supreme Court had little difficulty in determining that the Washington statute was overbroad. While the Troxel opinion is a "plurality" decision, meaning that there is no single opinion of the court which was signed by a majority of the Justices, the decision made clear that there were certain prerequisites that grandparenting time statutes must meet in order to be constitutional. Six Justices joined opinions holding the Washington statute to be unconstitutional.

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/child_custody/grandparents_rights.html

What it means is if there is an established relationship, and a parent cuts the grandparents completely out of the child's life, then the grandparents do have the right to sue for visitation. The problem with Troxel is that the statute was too broad. They didnt strike down grandparents rights, they struck down that statute.

In regard to the Ohio case above...

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider making it harder for grandparents to win visitation rights, rejecting an appeal from a dad who went to jail to fight a court-ordered visitation.

Brian Collier had asked the justices to strike down Ohio visitation laws, on grounds that they interfere with parents’ rights to raise their families free from government interference.

Collier’s daughter is 7 and for most of her life has been the center of an emotional legal dispute in the small Ohio town of Wooster, about 30 miles southwest of Akron.

The girl’s mother, Renee Harrold, was diagnosed with cancer while pregnant and decided not to have treatment until after the child was born, according to court records. The woman died in 1999, when Brittany Renee was 2.

Collier, who never married the mother, later won custody of his daughter but refused to let the girl see her maternal grandparents.

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the girl should be allowed to maintain contact with the grandparents who had raised her until she was 5 years old.

Collier served a brief jail sentence in 2003 for contempt of court, for blocking the visitation. He maintains that the grandparents, Gary and Carol Harrold, are trying to turn his daughter against him.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11697913/ns/us_news-life/t/high-court-wont-hear-grandparents-rights-case/

If it was unconstitutional, I would think the Supreme Court would have been all over this.

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 7/6/2011 2:21:20 PM >


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Casey Anthony Alert....Turn on those TVs Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109