But the only way those seven women and five men could all agree that Casey Anthony deliberately murdered her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee, would be to completely disregard the principle of reasonable doubt.
This wasn't just a botched prosecution. The real question is whether there was ever enough evidence to justify bringing a murder charge. In the absence of any substantial link between Casey Anthony and her daughter's death, the jury was left to do what many of us did - fill in the blanks.
That's what this prosecution asked of the 12 citizens who spent seven weeks hearing 90 witnesses and examining 400 pieces of "evidence." It wanted them to take a leap of faith across all of the gaping holes in its case and reach a logical conclusion.
It wanted them to judge Casey Anthony instead of judging the evidence presented against her.
It wasn't a bad strategy. Caylee Anthony would have been better off if she had been raised by a pack of wolves. Casey Anthony seemed incapable of caring for or even caring about her only child.
What kind of mother goes on a partying binge within hours of her daughter's death? Or gets tattooed with the Italian phrase for "life is beautiful" after the sudden death of her only child?
Even if you believed the defense theory that Casey Anthony and her father, George, panicked and buried Caylee's body after she accidentally drowned in her grandparents' pool, Casey Anthony would still be beneath contempt. Even a stranger would have called for help if there was any chance the child could be revived.
Seen in the most sympathetic light, Casey Anthony is a sociopath, a slut and a pathological liar.
But is she a murderer? Can a jury that must have been as disgusted by the testimony as many of us were convict her of murder even though Osceola County coroner Jan Garavaglia concluded that the child died of "undetermined means"?
