Casey Anthony's trial is drawing comparisons today to another trial that took place a few decades ago, that is the trial of OJ Simpson. Some are saying the Casey Anthony verdict is more surprising than the one handed down for OJ. Others are referring to the short time of deliberation for each trial.
Nancy Grace was one of the first to come out to say that she is more surprised by the 'not guilty' verdict handed down today, than she was with the OJ verdict. The Kardashian sisters have also reacted to the trial being labeled as "OJ Simpson Number 2" since hearing the jury's decision.
The similarity made between OJ's glove and Casey's car, which were two key pieces of evidence, is that they had both become useless in court for prosecutors. Still, Nancy Grace believes that the Casey Anthony trial had much more blatant evidence, like the lie that Casey told for a month about the nanny having Caylee.
Then there is another one of Kim Kardashian's comparisons about the amount of time that each jury took to deliberate the verdict. It seems that the short deliberations are indicative of the 'not guilty' verdict. OJ's only took three hours and Casey's jury was out for under 11 hours, according to RumorFix.
One thing that is different between the two is that Casey is free to profit from her story and OJ could not. The family of the murder victims that OJ was accused of killing won a civil suit against him that meant any money he realized off his story would go to the claimants.
This is not the case with Casey. She can literally become a rich woman off her story, with no one in line waiting to take her money in a civil suit, not as of yet anyway.
Two very big murder trials that looked like simple cases to prove; both fell apart in court at the hands of the prosecutors, to the shock of almost everyone in the nation. The lawyers prosecuting each case did not do enough to support their claims that both Casey and OJ committed murder.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 5
She was found guilty of lying (covering up the crime), but she was found NOT guilty of what she covered up.
I wonder if her friends were on the jury.
George Vreeland Hill
Do you think that it could have been the needless lies that the police got caught telling on the witness stand? Or maybe the jury was disenchanted with the lead detective in the OJ case walking around inexplicably with the victim's blood and OJ's blood in his posession, and carrying Simpson's blood/DNA into the murder site?
Or maybe it could have been the phantom photos showing socks with blood at OJ's house after other police photos failed to show any socks on his bedroom floor? Or maybe the jury didn't buy the idea of Nicole Brown's family driving between Brentwood and Dana Point in approx. 45 minutes instead of a usual 90 minutes to make a 9:37 PM call back to LA? Maybe the jurors remembered the initial time of OJ's wife Nicole being called by her mother by phone at 11PM while Simpson was entering the backseat of a limo to LAX to catch an 11:45 PM flight to Chicago, you think??? Maybe the jury didn't care for the attys concealing those telephone records as Cochran slipped up and said http://youtu.be/Bk3Muy_MgJA or maybe they didn't like Ron Goldman being a possible snitch and his family's Illinois drug connection, better read http://www.amazon.com/Pursuit-Exhibit-Simpson-murder-trial/dp/1456313169/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297179994&sr=1-1or. And just maybe the whole world doesn't buy your premise about Simpson's guilt, you think???
The states attorneys failed to establish exactly HOW she died, When she died, and WHY.
We convict on evidence which was sorely lacking in this case.