On the one hand, she's correct about Florida's jurisdiction. She would have a difficult time convincing a jury, though. Her status as a public figure means that she would need to be able to prove that the specific statement she was suing over was made with "actual malice" rather than just negligence towards the truth, meaning an awareness that the statement was false.
Although I am not a lawyer, I am not sure that would meet the standard in this case given the high profile trial, public evidence, and widespread public opinion of her guilt. It would in the case of, for instance, Eric Clapton, but Casey Anthony? I know what my decision would be if I were on that jury.
I doubt 75% of the US "get" British humour anyway, so I've lost before it starts 😁
I only need my passport for my security clearance. When I get my next 10-year SC clearance, I'll lose it in the incinerator or something 😜 That way they'll never get me! LOL
During her trial, the prosecution failed to introduce evidence showing that someone using her computer had searched for information on chloroform and killing someone via suffocation while visiting sites only she used (MySpace).
If prosecutors hadn't missed that evidence, they might also have been able to prove someone logged into her MySpace account specifically.
Her defense team was shocked it was never brought up, and in my opinion it would have changed the verdict.
If they get around my mysteriously missing passport and manage to extradite me, can I get dibs on Jose Baez then? 😜(as long as I don't have to screw him too, I have higher standards than her, and I'm happily married).
I'd like to see how long the arm of Florida's law is 😁
Shall I test it? LOL
Does she really believe anyone would go to bat for an batshit alleged child killer?
If push comes to shove, I'll blame my dad; he's been dead for 30 years. He wouldn't mind 😜
On the one hand, she's correct about Florida's jurisdiction. She would have a difficult time convincing a jury, though. Her status as a public figure means that she would need to be able to prove that the specific statement she was suing over was made with "actual malice" rather than just negligence towards the truth, meaning an awareness that the statement was false.
Although I am not a lawyer, I am not sure that would meet the standard in this case given the high profile trial, public evidence, and widespread public opinion of her guilt. It would in the case of, for instance, Eric Clapton, but Casey Anthony? I know what my decision would be if I were on that jury.
She did manage to convince a jury last time 😊
I doubt 75% of the US "get" British humour anyway, so I've lost before it starts 😁
I only need my passport for my security clearance. When I get my next 10-year SC clearance, I'll lose it in the incinerator or something 😜 That way they'll never get me! LOL
During her trial, the prosecution failed to introduce evidence showing that someone using her computer had searched for information on chloroform and killing someone via suffocation while visiting sites only she used (MySpace).
If prosecutors hadn't missed that evidence, they might also have been able to prove someone logged into her MySpace account specifically.
Her defense team was shocked it was never brought up, and in my opinion it would have changed the verdict.
If they get around my mysteriously missing passport and manage to extradite me, can I get dibs on Jose Baez then? 😜(as long as I don't have to screw him too, I have higher standards than her, and I'm happily married).