Casey Anthony verdict tests honesty of conservatives

An item on the national scene that caught my attention in recent weeks was media reaction to the Casey Anthony murder trial.

The Anthony story was not really national in nature. It was a Florida matter that was forced to national attention by the media's need for a blood-and-guts story and ratings.

The Anthony story became interesting to me because of the way the media toyed with it. It seemed as if there was a game being played.

The question each night was, "Who won today, the prosecution or the defense?"

In the end, a lot of people were angered when Casey was found not guilty of killing her daughter Caylee. It was in some ways an appalling reaction.

Outside the courthouse during Casey's sentencing for lying, there were signs that included, "Arrest the Jury" and "Jurors 1-12 guilty of murder."

Tasteless as that is, it's tough to blame the folks at the street level. They were set up by the talk show hosts, the pundits and the experts to believe Casey was guilty.

Like lynch mobs in old western movies, the media had Casey guilty and executed from the beginning. From the bits and pieces of testimony and evidence they had, they were betting she would be found guilty.

As smart as talk show hosts like Bill O'Reilly like to believe they are, they missed or ignored the first thing that put this case on a path to not guilty. Very early in the trial, it was revealed the prosecution had no cause of death.

Thankfully that jury in Florida had common sense. If you don't know how a person died, then you can't call it murder.

Still, when it was over, O'Reilly and other conservatives who espouse belief and trust in the Constitution, had to say such things as the "Constitution can work against you." Reminded me of the many times conservatives claim liberals like to pick and choose the parts of the Constitution that suit them.

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity were among the few conservatives who stood up for the jury and the Constitution. But that was somewhat ironic because Limbaugh and Hannity had joined O'Reilly back in the O.J. Simpson days in lambasting that jury.

Rush kept making a claim about "jury nullification" back then. Hannity kept harping about the "mountain of evidence." In their desire to see Simpson hanged, they missed a few key things in that so-called mountain of evidence.

Mark Fuhrman, an expert for talk shows today, admitted in court that he tampered with evidence. There was no trail of blood leading to Simpson. And the gloves didn't fit. There were enough holes in the case that I would have acquitted.

What irks me most about the reaction in either case, especially from conservatives, is how easily they abandoned their love of the Constitution. The Constitution worked as it was supposed to work. A jury was selected, and it rendered a verdict.

Casey may have killed Caylee. We'll never know. She was given a fair trial in front of a jury of her peers. They found her not guilty and she will forever be not guilty.

Things might have turned out differently if the prosecutor had waited until he at least had a cause of death.

Juries are instructed that guilt is proven when there is no reasonable doubt. Juries who heard every bit of testimony and saw every piece of evidence, said there was reasonable doubt in the Casey Anthony case, just as there was in the Simpson case.