On May 25, 2010 Casey Anthony 's lawyer states to the court and jury that Caylee was unintentionally drowned in the swimming pool of their home , and that Casey and her father had cover it up. The prosecution presented that Casey Anthony did research on chloroform at her home computer but her mother Cindy Anthony 's asserted that it was her that made the searches that implicated her daughter but the records showed that Cindy Anthony was at work when these searches were done.
On July 5, the jury found Casey not guilty of first degree murder but she was found guilty on four misdemeanors because she provided false material to a law enforcement officers.
In this case the only obstacle the prosecutors had was prove that Caylee Anthony was murdered by her own mother, they had to prove beyond reasonable doubt to the jury that she was behind her daughter’s death. Most of the evidence that was presented was in fact pointed to Casey Anthony as the person who was fully liable for her daughter
…show more content…
Simply because the juries base their verdict on evidence that proves the accused is linked to the evidence that is being presented in court. Conversely, it also involves unconventional indication that demonstrations of the indicted offense occurred. The Corpus Delecti involves evidence that proves the wrong or forfeiture was in fact produced by the accused mischievousness acts. In this case the jurisdiction required that independent evidence was in fact done by Casey Anthony.
Unfortunately, in this case the prosecution did a poor job on linking all evidence to Casey Anthony that proved she murdered her daughter. The prosecution ignored a single plain legitimate notion “Corpus Delicti” requirement and due to that failure of addressing it the jury was forced to give a “not guilty” verdict from the beginning of the