Letters to the editor 07-15-2011

-A A +A

Casey Anthony is Not Guilty


What do people not understand about the caption, Casey Anthony not Guilty? To find anyone guilty of a crime you must have five things present: Who, what, where, when, why and with what. In the Anthony case we know the who, Caylee Anthony. Beyond that, we do not know the what, where, when, why or with what as a murder weapon. For people to criticize a jury for not proving anyone guilty with that little information is what I've suspected all along and that is, the average American is not too bright.

 Bill Ford


Common sense

Like others in the minority agreeing with this verdict you failed to mention common sense.
True, the evidence was circumstantial with the delay in finding the body but the evidence was still strong enough for a conviction, particularly on the second and third counts.
That said, that out-of-town jury came down with a slap on the wrist verdict that threw little Caylee back into that swamp.
While you gave Jose Baez a gold star, the prosecution team of Ashton and Burdick did a great job despite your opinion.
Casey "31 days" is being released on a Sunday.
Yes! Another Sunday that will live in infamy.
Bob Cronin

Oak Run


Jury had no choice

I am writing to the 12 jurors that decided Casey Anthony’s fate.  I want to apologize for the people who have made threats and have such hatred.  I am sure after they have time to calm down and cool off they will see that you had no other choice.  You have proved that we can have a fair jury in this country.  You were not given any other option and the state did not give you the evidence you needed to render a guilty verdict.

We all know what a liar she is but that didn’t count we know that she knew what happened but wouldn’t say, can’t convict her for that, Karma will get her eventually same as OJ got his.  I really hope the people will see this was the only decision you could make with the evidence you did not have.  It is good to know there are honest people who can be our jurors and not people who really don’t care one way or the other.  I will pray and hope that you do not get any more aggravation for your decision.  We do live in the USA and we are not a third world country yet.  Thank you.


Pam Lee



Casey Anthony

To the editor: Your analysis of the trial is quite faulty. Your point about the meter reader shows poor police investigation (hampered by Casey Anthony's lies that had the police looking for a missing child not a dead body) not a botched prosecution.

The forensic testimony was necessary to provide a connection of a decayed body to the Anthony car. None of the prosecution's forensic testimony was clearly refuted. In fact, after cross-examination of defense experts, there was agreement on the state's conclusions.

I'm sure that many murder cases are successfully prosecuted without a murder weapon, location and time of death. Short of a time recorded video, think of how difficult it is to establish those things since most murders are committed with an attempt to conceal incriminating evidence. What better concealment than delaying discovery until a child's body has become a skeleton, ravaged by animals. The absence of reasonable doubt does not require "concrete evidence." The jury cannot be overwhelmed by the fact that there were seven counts. If anything, it should make them more deliberate. And subsequent reporting tells that the initial vote was not 12-0 for guilty but at one point 6-6 on at least one of the serious charges.

I hope that the jury took their responsibilities more seriously than to vote on whether one attorney appeared nervous and the other at ease. This had to do with the murder of a child not who was more engaging. Your comments about that show a very shallow perspective.

Dan Drake



Financial film

The Academy Award winning documentary “Inside Job” gives us an excellent examination of the people, the organizations and the laws that permitted the worldwide financial meltdown of 2007/2008. It also covers the 2009 attempts to bail out and protect most of the richest players in this disaster. The meltdown has an estimated cost of $20 trillion in damages worldwide.

The film shows the terrible impact of the high unemployment and business failures this get rich quick scheme had on average people around the world. But the real horror lay in the width and breadth of the number of financially oriented professionals that were involved. The film interviews many people in business, banking, insurance, education and the government. It also names many more people in these activities who declined to be interviewed. Graphics and a narrator’s voice make this complex subject easy to understand and the upbeat background music will keep your attention.

The film is divided into time sequenced segments and each segment shows how the scheme continued to flourish, under different leaders and schemers, until it could no longer sustain itself. The scheme started in this country with the invention of an investment product that was derived from a very large number subprime mortgages guaranteed by the government. The last segment is the most telling. It examines where we are today and who the leaders are in the financial organizations that still control our economy.

The film was directed by Charles Ferguson and required many interviews and an extensive amount of research. You can borrow it in DVD format from the Marion County Public Library. Your first viewing should make you mad. Your second should convince you to vote in 2012.

Bill Farthing,



Does anyone care?

What matters? Where are our priorities?

The world is on the verge of financial collapse, and a political upheaval, and a possible holocaust. But, does anyone take note of these facts? Very few. Very, very few. You could ignite an atomic bomb under people, and they would just yawn.

However, televise a murder trial, and people become transfixed. Some are greatly inconvenienced when it becomes necessary to visit even the doctor.

While waiting in a doctor’s office, for a friend, this is what transpired:

Patient enters spouting “Why isn’t that TV on? I am missing the trial. I will have to be briefed by someone on what I am missing.” Next patient: “Hope they can get me in quickly, I am missing the trial.” Patient taken in quickly, and states: ”Good now I won’t miss much of the trial.”

This dialogue is heard repeatedly, in various locations. Anywhere, any place, any time. The obsession was palpable.

The coverage was so over saturated, it was sickening. It seems each time one of these incidents occurs the media notches up the hype, and the public follows right along. Where will it all end?

What is this fascination with mayhem, all about?

Our country is in dire straits. Does anybody care?

D.I. Larson



In defense of ‘the rich’


     At a recent press conference, President Obama said that the United States could significantly reduce its crippling debt by raising taxes on the rich, defined by the president as individuals earning more than $200,000 a year and households with annual incomes above $250,000. While complaining that these people “fly in corporate jets,” he failed to mention that they make up only 2 or 3 percent of the population and already pay about 40 percent in federal taxes. These are also the very people who have the talent and courage to take the risks and create the small businesses that provide more than 75 percent of the jobs in this country.

     There are those among us whose minds are so small that they equate “rich” with the Ponzi-scheme criminal Bernie Madoff and others of his ilk. They fail to recognize that the vast majority of wealthy people in our society became that way through their own honest and brave efforts, whose successes produced millions of decent jobs which made this country the strongest and best in the world.

     Time is running short for our Constitutional republic. This cynical attack on the so-called “rich” has fearsome implications in its obvious attempt to separate and weaken the American people through “wealth envy” and class warfare, an age-old Communist strategy to divide the people and turn them against each other, making them easier to subjugate. Tragically, too many of us fall into this trap of sinister manipulation.

     Some of us are living difficult lives; most of us live in comfort and ease; a few will become wealthy. But all Americans have the choices and the opportunities. Abraham Lincoln once said, “That some should be rich shows that others may become rich and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprise. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently to build one for himself.”

Joseph Paterek



Chipping (smashing) away at America's good foundation

 It's astounding how blatant liberal lies have become: A few weeks ago, there was a challenge to anyone with some semblance of honesty and common sense to "do a little research" about America's founding supposedly and laughably not a Christian nation, as our "great leader" now polluting the White House would say, while making the absurd claim that he's "Christian" (while the next minute telling the Muslims and other anti-Christ fools that he's Muslim or something else that isn't Christian.)

 OK, I've done "a little research": George Washington: "It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible." John Adams: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people (sorry ACLU immoral fools); it is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

Patrick Henry: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians." Noah Webster (writer of Webster's dictionary that worthless liars want to get rid of): "Almost all the civil liberty now enjoyed in the world owes its origin to the principles of Christian religion (current day fools hate Christianity, and thus hate liberty. These liberal "brains" would rather have no liberty, and thus, be slaves! That's what they pretend; in reality, they want you to be their slave). The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles. This is the genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions of government."

Benjamin Rush: "Let the children be carefully instructed in the principles and obligations of the Christian religion. This is the most essential part of education. The great enemy of the salvation of man, in my opinion, never invented a more effectual means of removing Christianity from the world than by persuading mankind it was improper to read the Bible in our schools." (Does the ACLU and other anti-Christ trash ring a bell?) Thomas Jefferson (supposedly the supporter of the "separation of church and state" crowd of anti-Christ liars): "My views are the result of a lifetime of inquiry (something superficial liberal fools would never endeavor: a lifetime seeking of truth) and reflection and very different from the anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruption of Christianity, I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus Himself. I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others."

Quite a mouthful: I doubt that any liberal liar could make it through reading that far, or thinking that far. Yet, they, with all adamancy, proclaim how much they "understand" Jefferson.

Sorry libs, I can’t help but laugh at what you "think" you understand! On the other hand, I'm hoping that your insanity doesn't infect the entirety of America, so that it continues to crumble under Obama and Hillary Clinton. If that's what you want, you'll get what you deserve, in spades!

Paul Zeigler