The Instigator
ALayne
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
moneymachine2004
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Casey Anothony should be able to live her life like any normal person after her trial concluded.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
moneymachine2004
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/26/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,011 times Debate No: 18991
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

ALayne

Pro

I believe that she should be able to live a normal life without pressure from the media and everyone. Anyone willing to debate?
moneymachine2004

Con

I believe that she should be able to live a normal life without pressure from the media and everyone. Anyone willing to debate?

I do believe in sixth amendment which basically disallows an individual from being tried more than once upon a finding of innocence. A long time ago, there were many people who were tried over and over for the same crime. This to me simply is not fair. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that bans the media and private citizens attempt to unearth the truth from a party that they deem guilty. That is, as long is they do so within the confines of State and Federal laws.

My opponent believes that Casey Anthony should be entitled to a normal life.

I disagree wholly. As a private citizen, I believe that Casey Anthony got away with murder. It is my hope that she is constantly reminded of it. Casey Anthony never took the stand and therefore never gave her account as to what happen. The public wants answers in exchange for normalcy.
Debate Round No. 1
ALayne

Pro

I would like to start off by thanking my opponent for agreeing to debate.

I agree that there is "nothing in the Constitution that bans the media and private citizens attempt to unearth the truth from a party the deem guilty". Regardles of weather or not it is legal to harass her doesn't make it right or should make it ok for the media and/or anyone else to do so. People who harass her accuse her of being guilty of the crime. They have no evidence of this, no confession from her, and in a court of law it was determined in a court of law that she was innocent. In some people's mind this may have been an incorrect ruling, yet that doesn't matter, that is their personal opinion and everyone is entitled to one. I'm not saying I support Anthony or what happened to her daughter, but her innocence was deteremined in a court of law, not in someones personal opinion.

An accused women should not have to be harassed soley based on the public's opinion
moneymachine2004

Con

As I mentioned early in my post, I do not condone harassment because that would violate a state and/or federal law. Harassment laws vary from state to state and they differ from federal laws. I would advise anyone seeking contact with Casey Anthony to obtain legal representation to make sure they are within the confines of the law. Nonetheless, I stick to my central argument. People have the right to seek answers from her. Casey has nothing to lose at this point if she is no guilty. She should be willing to speak publicly about the case at this point.

The Pro should answer this question: What does Casey Anthony have to lose if she answers questions at this point? There are not legal impediments at this point.

[1] Did she know her daughter was dead when she was partying?
[2] Why would you lie about a friend having your daughter?
[3] Why did her trunk smell like a dead body?

The jury used a "beyond any doubt" standard, just like in the O.J case
Debate Round No. 2
ALayne

Pro

"People have the right to seek answers from her"
Yes they do have the right to seek answers. She also has the right to refuse to talk to them let alone answer their questions. She has already stood trial and been through that process. If people want answers and have doubt that's up to them, it's their own personal opinon and views on the subject.

As for "What does Casey Anthony have to lose if she answers questions at this point?"
Who knows what she has to lose. Only she know what really happened and no one else. There will always be speculation over any trial decision no matter what evidence is provided. She might have a lot to lose, she may have nothing at all to lose. It doesn't matter "what she has to lose" at this point, she doesn't have to answer any questions. The decision has been made.
Although valid points of evidence, the points you made at the end are dissmisable to this debate. We are debating on her life AFTER the trial, not debating on weather or not she was guilty or not.

moneymachine2004

Con

I must assert that there is no such law that bars persons from asking questions. The free press has that right to approach anyone they want and ask questions. In many cases, the press wants to hear from parties after a case is over. If Casey does not want to face this constant scrutiny, then she either needs to answer the questions or move out the United States.

1. She has no constitutional right to be left alone when she enters the public domain.
2. Many people believe that she got away with murder and we hope these constant questions makes her life miserable.
3. She is not behaved like someone that is innocent.
4. If Casey wants people to leave her alone she must answer the questions. If she is found to be innocent she will be left alone if she admits guilt she will face additional questions--which is a small price to pay for getting away with murder. Don't you agree?
5. Should O.J be left alone too? Give me a break.
6. Lets leave all people that get away with murder alone.
Debate Round No. 3
ALayne

Pro



People can think what they want, and they have a right to ask her questions, but if she refuses to answer they can't continue and harass her with questions and "make her life miserable". How can you"behave like your innocent"? This women's daughter died, regardless of how, how do you expect her to act? She has gone through months of grueling trials, questions and people hating her. The least they can do is let her have peace now that the decision has been made.

People get second chances. For example, look at NFL player Donte Stallworth. In 2009, the morning after drinking he drove out to get some food. He was not aware he was still "legally drunk" and struck and killed a pedestrian who walked out in front of him. He was convicted of murder, and spent a year behind bars. After getting out he was reinstated by the NFL and allowed to play. This is a man who was actually convicted and he gets left alone. Anthony wasn't convicted, and yet people still feel the need to bring ehr past up.
moneymachine2004

Con

You have provided no evidence that Casey Anthony can prove in a court room that she has been a victim of harassment. The free press or any individual can ask her questions even if it makes her uncomfortable provided that there is no law broken. As I have stated, it is my hope that everyone she comes into contact with her continues to ask her the questions. I seriously doubt that Casey Anthony would be able to prove harassment against any of the thousands of people that I hope continues to ask her questions. People should ask these questions. Dontee Stallworth was driven drunk and killed someone. His sentence does not fit the crime in my opinion, however no mysteries remain to me. If you or other people have unanswered questions regarding that incident, then you have the right to ask him those questions in the public domain. He has no inherit right to be left alone and neither does Casey Anthony.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DanT 5 years ago
DanT
I agree. Someone in a different state was put in the hospital because someone assaulted her for looking like Casey.

There are plenty of cases far worse than her's, the only reason it was a big case was because the media decided to focus on it.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
ALaynemoneymachine2004Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: constitutionally it sounds justified but as the con said the media has the right to go after her if they feel the public is interested in her, so arguments went to him. Very god debate this didnt end up transforming into a debate over the murder like I thought it would
Vote Placed by GWindeknecht1 5 years ago
GWindeknecht1
ALaynemoneymachine2004Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used the words "should" quite a few times without backing the contentions up. Con generally made more convincing arguments and used outside ideas from the case during Rd. 2.