Casey Anthony Murder Trial
On July 15th, 2008, Cindy Anthony had to reanalyze her life. Her tears echoed over the line to the local police station, confused as to why she hadn’t seen her precious granddaughter, Caylee, in over 31 days. Her daughter, Casey, offered every explanation possible as to why Caylee hadn’t come in contact with Cindy in this span of time. Cindy Anthony had been placing pieces together all along and the whole situation seemed suspicious to her. Casey’s car had smelled similar to a decomposing corpse and Caylee was nowhere to be found. Cindy Anthony made a bold move by phoning the authorities. No one could have known that this event would unfurl into the “case of the century.” The jury would decide if Casey’s motherly …show more content…
However, in actuality, courtrooms sometimes feed into the drama that is displayed on mediocre primetime television. In a sense, winning a case is more or less a competition of seeing who can manipulate the jury with flashy graphics, visuals, and heartbreaking testimonies. According to Hsieh’s article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence”, words aren’t enough to defend a case because jurors are expecting to be entertained. This misconception stems directly from the over-glorification of electronic media such as games, courtroom television shows, and smart phones (Hsieh, 2012, p. 627). This insatiable demand for visual media forced law firms to align with different multimedia organizations to bring their cases to fruition. However, going visual isn’t always the most viable option. Hsieh quotes Diamant, a partner at Taft Stettinus and Hollister in Cleveland, “One of the downsides to going visual at trial is cost. Expenses can range anywhere from $5,000 to $50,000, which some cases cannot justify” (Hsieh, 2012, p. 629). Technology can also manipulate evidence, which has the possibility of not making it into court. The artists ideas may result in something captivating and creative, but it can be used to beguile the jury, and must be heavily reviewed to see if it is …show more content…
The case uncovered many secrets of the family, some of which Casey revealed herself. Visual information was scattered throughout testimonies to bolster their arguments. One example in particular was the infamous duct tape that was claimed to be placed over Caylee’s nose and mouth. The article states, “Further evidence will include a superimposition of Caylee’s skull over her face, to show the placement of the duct tape as it would have been before decomposition. While potentially disturbing, and therefore prejudicial to a jury, Judge Perry is allowing this evidence because of its importance in the case” (Crime Museum, 2011, para. 34). This evidence was immensely controversial, and it immediately gained the attention of not just the jurors, but the entire courtroom. The impact of this visual evidence, along with a testimony from a chief medical examiner, shocked the jury and led to an increased bias towards the prosecution. This evidence attempted to incriminate Casey for placing duct tape over Caylee’s face. Additional evidence that surfaced included a picture of a tattoo that Casey had received around the time of Caylee’s disappearance. The article states, “The day finished with testimony from Casey Anthony’s tattoo artist describing a tattoo Anthony got saying “bella vita“–Italian for “beautiful life” (Crime Museum, 2011, para 37). Through testimony, it was discovered that Casey had
On July 15th, 2008, Cindy Anthony had to reanalyze her life. Her tears echoed over the line to the local police station, confused as to why she hadn’t seen her precious granddaughter, Caylee, in over 31 days. Her daughter, Casey, offered every explanation possible as to why Caylee hadn’t come in contact with Cindy in this span of time. Cindy Anthony had been placing pieces together all along and the whole situation seemed suspicious to her. Casey’s car had smelled similar to a decomposing corpse and Caylee was nowhere to be found. Cindy Anthony made a bold move by phoning the authorities. No one could have known that this event would unfurl into the “case of the century.” The jury would decide if Casey’s motherly …show more content…
However, in actuality, courtrooms sometimes feed into the drama that is displayed on mediocre primetime television. In a sense, winning a case is more or less a competition of seeing who can manipulate the jury with flashy graphics, visuals, and heartbreaking testimonies. According to Hsieh’s article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence”, words aren’t enough to defend a case because jurors are expecting to be entertained. This misconception stems directly from the over-glorification of electronic media such as games, courtroom television shows, and smart phones (Hsieh, 2012, p. 627). This insatiable demand for visual media forced law firms to align with different multimedia organizations to bring their cases to fruition. However, going visual isn’t always the most viable option. Hsieh quotes Diamant, a partner at Taft Stettinus and Hollister in Cleveland, “One of the downsides to going visual at trial is cost. Expenses can range anywhere from $5,000 to $50,000, which some cases cannot justify” (Hsieh, 2012, p. 629). Technology can also manipulate evidence, which has the possibility of not making it into court. The artists ideas may result in something captivating and creative, but it can be used to beguile the jury, and must be heavily reviewed to see if it is …show more content…
The case uncovered many secrets of the family, some of which Casey revealed herself. Visual information was scattered throughout testimonies to bolster their arguments. One example in particular was the infamous duct tape that was claimed to be placed over Caylee’s nose and mouth. The article states, “Further evidence will include a superimposition of Caylee’s skull over her face, to show the placement of the duct tape as it would have been before decomposition. While potentially disturbing, and therefore prejudicial to a jury, Judge Perry is allowing this evidence because of its importance in the case” (Crime Museum, 2011, para. 34). This evidence was immensely controversial, and it immediately gained the attention of not just the jurors, but the entire courtroom. The impact of this visual evidence, along with a testimony from a chief medical examiner, shocked the jury and led to an increased bias towards the prosecution. This evidence attempted to incriminate Casey for placing duct tape over Caylee’s face. Additional evidence that surfaced included a picture of a tattoo that Casey had received around the time of Caylee’s disappearance. The article states, “The day finished with testimony from Casey Anthony’s tattoo artist describing a tattoo Anthony got saying “bella vita“–Italian for “beautiful life” (Crime Museum, 2011, para 37). Through testimony, it was discovered that Casey had