.
July 5th, 2011
05:15 PM ET

Anthony lawyers decry media coverage

Orlando (CNN) - Defense lawyers for Casey Anthony lambasted the judgmental role adopted by some members of the news media and their guests in the months leading up to Tuesday's verdict.

"I hope that this is a lesson to those of you who (have) indulged in media assassination for three years," defense attorney J. Cheney Mason said after the verdict in the Casey Anthony case, which has attracted intense media scrutiny.

"Bias and prejudice and incompetent 'talking heads' saying what would be and how to be - I'm disgusted by some of the lawyers that have done this. I can tell you that my colleagues from coast to coast and border to border have condemned this whole process of lawyers getting on television and talking about cases they don't know a damn thing about," Mason said.

Former prosecutor Nancy Grace, whose show on CNN sister network HLN has featured the case extensively, defended the media coverage. "I find it interesting that his first reaction was to attack the media like we had something to do with it," she said. "We didn't have anything to do with it; this was all tot mom."

She added, "There is no way that this is a verdict that speaks the truth."

"Casey did not murder Caylee; it's that simple," co-defense attorney Jose Baez said. "I think we should all take this as an opportunity to learn and to realize that you cannot convict someone until they've had their day in court."

He said he hoped Anthony would be able "to grieve and grow and somehow get her life back together."

And he called the case "a perfect example" of why the death penalty does not work.

FULL STORY
Post by:
Filed under: 360° Radar • 360º Follow
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. Grenda

    I disagree with Mark Geragos. Justice was not served and the media didn't influence anyone who can think critically. Was this a jury of one's peers? Do we need to redefine what is meant by one's peers? One lawyer said that the case was lost, because of the level of technicality introduced by the prosecution. I understood it. If I was on trial I would hope that the jury would be capable of understanding the technical aspects of the case. How could anyone make a decision on the merits of the case, if they could not understand what they were evaluating. A long time ago I took a law course. On the first day of the course, the lawyer/professor said that the "law is a game and whoever plays best..wins."

    July 6, 2011 at 12:27 am |
  2. Maureen

    Congratulations defense team. I'm sure you've gained numerous scum of the earth fans. Jumping for joy while getting drunk after the verdict only proves that you have about as much conscience as your "client".

    July 5, 2011 at 11:24 pm |
  3. sue

    Justice was not served. this jury must have been clueless to come back with not quilty on all major counts. it is even evident child neglect should have been charged since caylee was in her care when disapeared. did they not understand the instructions? they did not have to give murder 1 but nothing at all is absolutely ridiculous. all the evidence was there. where is the murderer? is law enforcement going to continue to look for caylee's murderer if it's not casey? also, caylee's fathers mother needs to file civil action suit against casey since she never got to know caylee.

    July 5, 2011 at 8:05 pm |
  4. judy Best

    Yeah right.....Mr.Mason shoots off his mouth in the courtroom about the media attention, then crosses the street to the restaurant, pops open a few bottles of bubbly, and invites a member of the HLN media inside and starts talking away!!!!...He'll be making the talk show and news show rounds soon enough....how pompous and self-righteous can you get!!!

    July 5, 2011 at 7:38 pm |