In July of 2008, a woman named Cindy Anthony reported that her granddaughter, Caylee Anthony, had not been seen in over a month. The toddler lived with Cindy and her husband, George, as well as the toddler’s mother, Casey. More shockingly, Cindy reported that a pungent odor was coming from her daughter Casey’s car, a smell that was strangely similar to that of a decomposing body (Neubauer 24). Six months after this report was made, Caylee’s remains were found just blocks from the family’s home in Orlando, Florida. The main suspect was her mother: Casey Anthony. After weeks of trial, and over four hundred pieces of evidence presented, Casey Anthony was acquitted. She was found guilty of four misdemeanor crimes, including giving false information and neglect (Neubauer 10). This verdict left the nation in shock. With that much evidence, how was Anthony not accused of murdering her two-year-old daughter? Many of the key pieces of evidence presented at the month long trial included: duct tape found with the body, the odor coming from Casey Anthony’s car, a hair found in the back of Anthony’s car, as well as Anthony’s lies and …show more content…
Body sniffing dogs were brought to the car, and allegedly indicated that there indeed was a body in the trunk of the car. However, at first, Anthony’s lawyers argued that this technique was merely “junk science” (Jean). Then, they refuted the idea that the air from the trunk of the car was able to be bottled up and tested. Allegedly, a forensic anthropologist was able to use his method of “human decomposition odor analysis” to confirm that 79.2% of the gasses that were found in the car matched with that of a decomposing human body (Shelton 420). His information also was not backed by a method that Florida, as a state, agreed was scientifically valid. This misinformation was part of the reason that Anthony was