So Casey Anthony was found not guilty of murder, meaning we can go back to our everyday, regular lives. On July 5, the jury found Casey Anthony not guilty of first-degree murder, aggravated manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse (but found her guilty of four lesser, misdemeanor offenses related to her interrogations). What? You mean you “want answers” as to why she wasn’t found guilty?
We all want answers in our lives. We yearn for answers. People spend years in therapy looking for answers. But life isn’t always so neat, nor does it always provide easy-to-understand answers to such a tragic series of events that led to the death of Casey Anthony’s toddler, Caylee.
So the short answer is — there are no answers. You’re looking for justice in a world that lives by a set of rules in order to separate us from animals. And sometimes instead of justice, we get due process by those rules, and a result that is — to some — less than satisfying.
Nobody, of course, can tell you the psychology behind Casey Anthony herself (except her therapist), so any commentator who makes observations about her or her behavior is being less than ethical or professional.
But that doesn’t stop hundreds of thousands of armchair pundits suddenly going on Twitter or Facebook to proclaim their belief — whether based on facts or simply their own personal “truth” — that Casey Anthony is so obviously guilty. And indeed she was found guilty of lying to the police about some of the things in her story during her interrogation.
Most importantly, however, she was found not guilty of the murder of her own child. Without knowing how she died (sorry, but we still don’t know) and with the prosecution providing no clear motive, the verdict should’ve been of little surprise. When all you need is “reasonable doubt,” it’s not hard to come by when you can’t prove a murder has even taken place, nor why anyone would commit such a premeditated murder.
It makes me wonder — why the fascination with this unfortunate tragedy? Because it was a mom and it was her own child and no mom in their right mind would consider killing their own child (except the reality that some moms who have experienced postpartum depression have exactly that irrational thought; most do not act on it however)?
So it was with some relief to find an article by fellow psychologist Dr. Frank Farley over at CNN. He explains some of the reasons behind the fascination with the Casey Anthony trial, including:
1. Uncertainty: Much of our national interest falls under this factor. We are interested in uncertain outcomes — never give away the ending of the movie! Uncertain behavior — where the truth is unclear, the events are clouded, and the picture is always changing — is a source of fascination, or even fear, depending on the person and the situation. It’s the heart of mystery novels and crime stories. We often want to fill in the gaps, complete the picture, or find what’s on the other side of the mountain or the curtain. It can lead some to take hard stands in order to get personal control over the uncertainty and the ambiguity.
2. Lying: This could fall under uncertainty, but for this trial warrants special mention. This trial challenges all of us to figure out who is lying. It’s the central psychology of this whole courtroom experience.
3. Children: The body of an adorable child, the essence of human innocence, was tossed into the bushes. Nothing will engage the attention, motivate and anger Americans more than this.
4. Family: A family’s influence is forever. The great Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy said “All happy families resemble one another; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” The Anthony family’s issues include lies and allegations of abuse and adultery. We watch wondering if a meltdown is imminent. This is the train-wreck motive, involving our most important institution.
5. The “Perry Mason” effect: This crime and courtroom TV drama attracted a nation in the 1950s and ’60s. Since then, we have seen dozens that whetted our appetite for the culture of the courtroom.
6. “CSI” and police TV dramas: We have watched so many, with so much interest in the detailed solving of crimes, that when it becomes real, and seemingly insoluble, we can’t turn away. We find it unbelievable that it took investigators months to find Caylee’s by-then decomposed body within walking minutes of her home.
7. The dark side: Humans have, for millennia, been interested in evil, violence, hate, and horror. We understand normal life. But why an individual will kill or deliberately inflict horrific pain on another remains largely a mystery. We have theories, some good ones, but certitude eludes us. So our curiosity compels our attention to life-and-death adjudications.
I agree with these reasons, with an emphasis on the fact that it was a mother and her child — not two random strangers, even if the two were of similar ages. Most mothers just can’t imagine acting in many of the ways described as how Casey Anthony acted, including not reporting that her child was missing for 30 days.
The pieces still don’t fit, so our minds want to make sense of all the pieces. One obvious way to make them make sense is to fit them into a storyline, whether true or not. Our minds will seek to fill in gaps with conjecture, and to make irrational human behavior rational.
When pressed for a motive, some claim the mother was into having fun and partying, pointing to photos of her doing just that. So much so (and reportedly, with increasing resentment toward her child) that she would carry out a premeditated murder. Although this motive storyline makes little logical sense (what mother doesn’t enjoy getting a break from child-rearing and having a good time with their friends?), it fits within our mind’s need to create one to fill in the gaps.
Like OJ before her, Casey Anthony held our attention for weeks while the evidence — lacking as it was for a Murder One case — was presented. And now, with the verdict rendered by a jury of her peers, we can put the case to rest. For another week or so, there will be more Monday morning quarterbacking about what could have been done differently. The truth may never be known, but we do know that our fascination for cases and trials like this will never end.
Read the full CNN article: Why we’re obsessed with the Anthony trial
13 comments
I think it’s also as judgmental and unfair of you to label genuinely interested people as “arm chair pundits” I think it is heartening to witness such a heartfelt response instead of clinical cold due process…not to react with upset and alarm to me seems more inhuman and detached…Thank God for freedom of speech
I think you mean ‘Thank you President’ for freedom of speech.
This is the best article I have read to date on this trial. Well done.
To Ella: the truth hurts sometimes. The author has all you “armchair pundits” pegged dead on.
This article is not judgmental. Quite the contrary: it is intelligent and insightful.
Maybe too simplistic a conclusion, but, deeds not words are what define us, and for this woman to have remained silent if not lying for 30 days since the child disappeared from view to those around her is a damning indictment. What is it called, Ochman’s Razor I think, that the simple conclusion is most likely applicable to the problem being presented?
And it is nothing less than horrific to conclude a mother killed her child. But, we live in an age where this likelihood is more and more a reality to painfully learn.
I just also like what Bram Stoker wrote in Dracula: a fate worse than death. This woman will have to face her demons, and what form they will take is going to be between her and whatever the fates will offer.
Besides, the conclusion of the jury is as inconsistent anyone could possible arrive to, they agree she lied but had no role in the child’s death? I for one will not spend one dime on anyone involved in this case trying to cash in. I hope all invested readers in a responsible culture will do the same!
I am completely baffled by the fact Casey has no diagnosable mental health condition. I understand the Dr has only worked with her since 11/10. We have watched hours of fantastic and detailed lies (which we know began 2yrs prior to this incident with her pretending to work). All of he checks and money she stole from people close to her (not even strangers), has not shown emotion, acts as a chameleon (per the reports from people close to her), and everything thing else she did that was well documented through letters,
Video recording and audio. Is it possible she manipulated the testing? I am not a mental health professional, just using common sense and wondering.
Read up on Antisocial personality Disorder, and there is a book I think titled “The Sociopath Next Door”, and you might see correlations between these diagnoses and behaviors and what Ms Anthony may be about.
There are people out there who’s level of selfishness and entitlement is not just pathological, but a true danger to the society they prey, er, live in. I know, I have met these people in the office, out in the street, and unfortunately in areas of supervising in some form the community.
Scary? Understated to say the least!
I studied about sociopathy personality disorder and learned they lie from childhood & invent their own world.they can pass polygraphs and brainwave tests because nothing triggers that chemistry…& they also have no empathy & no sympathy abilities.they do not feel remose and are very intelligent…smart.most are men & are what is known to society as white collar criminals until they kill. Others live traumatized childhoods g witness bizarre things as children until one day they kill. Sociopathic is the hardest to diagnose and treat in psychiatry be cause they show no danger to society or selves until they kill.one high trait is excellent lying and extreme self preservation.REMEBER THE COMMENT OF THE FEMALE JAIL GUARD ABOUT Casey’s behavior while in solitary confinement for 3 yrs…she was neither up nor down,high or low.NOOOO EMOTION . BUT THIS IS NOT A DEFENCE FOR HER.I THINK IT WAS KNOWN BY ALL 3 IN THAT BIZZARE FAMILY.My thoughts lean heavily on the x-cop father & strange mother & brother.
As far as I am concerned, Casey Anthony got what she deserved. I am not going to retype here what I typed on my blog, you can read it there.
In my opinion the so-called “CSI-effect” has definitely raised the threshold of what juries now consider to be evidence of a crime.
Circumstances are important, but they now seem, at least in this case, to be insufficient indicators of guilt.
I look at the number of convicted persons that have been freed thanks to the Innocence Projects around the country. I think that raising this threshold can only be a good thing.
One could argue that the CSI-effect is simply producing “better” murderers, however as analysis of evidence has progressed, I would contend that this has always been the case. Better police, better criminals.
It seems obvious now that the prosecution in this case fell into the trap of going too big, too soon. There is no time limitation on a murder conviction, and one wonders what new technology might surface in the future that could prove cause of death in this case.
Now, it is likely that we will never know.
Hi,
For me, I was drawn in only after the verdict was read. I have a job and work a shift where that story was being played all the time. It was a forgone conclusion that she was going to jail for at least manslaughter.
What we have experienced for the past decade or so is the collisions of three realities. Juries are made up of 12 people unable to get out of jury duty. A jury can make a lot of money on a high profile case IF they decide in opposition of the obvious. Last is the CSI/ Law and order affect. 15 years ago, she would have had an needled sticking out of her arm by months end. But today, the culture is grown up on crimes neat with all questions answered and tied up in an hour.
Even Doc John mentions the distraction of “how she died” and evidence. Our law says “without a doubt. But that is of the offender. What has happened here via this CSI effect is that the investigators and prosecutors are now “on trial”. Many mobsters, employers of hit men, and anybody who learned on the internet to properly dispose of or mutilate a body can get out a murder conviction. Even through her own admissions she was at least responsible for aggravated child abuse and negligent homicide. But these people were looking for the L&O prosecutors to give them that “gotcha†moment. Americans in their market fed fantasy land and unable to think for themselves. So far, 2 jurrors and an alternate said they believed she was guilty … BUT.
This is all so abundantly obvious?
Mothers, OJ, CSI…….tell me something I don’t know.
Now, years later, when we have seen dozens of cold case forensics experts tear apart the laptop’s hard drive, and we realize that 98.7 percent of her activity was on Firefox, and that the investigators only researched Internet Explorer history, and we realize that the time stamp issues were not accurate, and we see that the defense attorney lied about her father’s having a chat account, and we are faced with the fact that “suffication” was searched on Firefox … we realize that, yes, she probably did kill her daughter, and that she was exonerated because of a botched investigation. We also must remember that a neighbor called the police three times the week Caylee died to report what looked like a child in the next field over, and the police refused to even look at it (it turned out to be Caylee, as they finally ventured to the site in December).
We must also consider her behavior while incarcerated, which was reminiscent of histrionic’s need to preoccupy oneself when under stress or of a narcissist’s need to be the center of attention, or a narcissist’s callousness.
Of all the cases to use to argue against public opinion, in hindsight this was probably one of the worst ones.
Comments are closed.