Casey Anthony’s Demeanor
Boy, do I have opinions (as usual)!! But want to first address with a recent observation which is troubling me. Been watching from the beginning, and listening to the talking heads
Now, that said. . . about her reaction to photographic evidence. If people are disturbed by her “lack of emotion” they’re being entirely unfair. She did love her little girl, albeit in a rather superficial manner (as in how this beautiful little girl reflected her own glory). But still, she is rather “up against it” in the courtroom. She probably is mildly sedated. Everyone’s been admonished against outward signs of emotion. And, she’s well aware that her every reaction is suspect (we’ve all been critical, haven’t we??). Her reaction is reasonable, considering the limitations she’s subject to. . . .
That was my thought when the photos were first displayed in court, and after listening to the talking heads ramble on about her “flat affect.” How little she seems to show of her feelings over the death of her child, concluding that she is a woman without an ounce of empathy for others. Then, she came apart at the seams. . .
And, the discussion began anew, drawing new conclusions about her. First, the natural suspicion that she was faking (most were eager to adopt this conclusion). Then, there were those who believed the “breakdown” was real; but that it was for herself, a case of self-pity. But here’s the most interesting conclusion/criticism by the talking heads. . . .
That, for her to show strong emotion while the photos were being introduced was “not a very wise thing to do.” That it would “have been better for her to restrain herself and maintain a level of stoicism,” while this evidence was forthcoming. It’s never “a good idea to show too much emotion in front of a jury.” This conclusion was reached less than 24 hours after she was sharply criticized for an entire day for not showing enough emotion!!
Now, don’t get me wrong; I don’t like her. I have a family member who’s “frightenly” like her. It’s just that, in discussing her demeanor (or anything else about the case), I would caution us all not to be influenced by a news medium which will lead us hither, thither and yon, just for the sake of sensationalizing to the extreme a topic which is, all by itself, sensational enough.
I actually heard V— P— state that when he saw “the images of little Caylee’s skull for the first time,” was when he realized why this was a death penalty case. “Just at that moment, not before.” That was not a true statement; I’d never heard him say he didn’t think it was a DP case before that day. But. . . the choked voice, that little catch (almost with a tear), the intricate description of the photo. . . well, it was just so much more connecting to the viewer than a simple reporting of the facts of the case. He suddenly becomes more than a reporter, a “disinterested third party;” now he’s “one of us.”
Let’s not give too much credence to the talking heads. Watch the trial, the testimony. But let’s make sure the conclusion—on any aspect—you reach is yours alone; not influenced by the self-interested commentary of those who rely on ratings for their jobs.
So, what do you think about her demeanor in court, or before the trial for that matter? Any experience with her personality type?