Reactions to the Anthony verdict

She did it!

But the "pussy pass" kicked in.

If she were middle aged, fat and ugly she would have been convicted on all charges.

When men are on the jury as in this case their dicks start to drag the ground in their chivalrous efforts to protect a cute and young female in distress. I feel the females on the jury wanted to convict but the alpha males rammed through a not guilty verdict implementing the "pussy pass."

Of course that there were many more women than men on that jury? Or is this one of those things were because men were involved at all it is their fault, and if they weren't it would be their fault? Or are women just so weak that they will bend to any "alpha" male who is nearby?

Studies show it is both attractive men and women that benefit in certain situations. So if an attractive female has any influence on jurors, the same could happen with an attractive male.

I have also heard it suggested that the attractiveness of attorneys can influence jurors (I saw this on Dateline or one of those shows years ago, long before the Anthony case). The study suggested that attractive people are thought to be more trustworthy and have stronger influence on others. Probably because people hold eye contact with them longer (and the influence is not limited to the opposite sex).

I did not see the prosecuting attorney(s) in this case, but I did see her defense attorney and I thought he was an attractive guy.

I don't know if attractiveness of anyone played a part or not in the Anthony case, but it could be suggested about any court case and about either gender.

For the Anthony case, I put the blame on the prosecution. I don't see any evidence of gender favoring or reason to blame women for this verdict.

I can't imagine realistically that a jury in the Anthony case would have come to the same verdict if the defendant had been male. (OJ's verdict in the criminal case centered on race, not gender.) I can't imagine Matthew Winkler in my own state of Tennessee being given a light sentence for murdering his abusive wife -- and then regaining custody of his children. Our criminal justice system treats men and women differently at every stage of the process. Women are treated more leniently and are more likely to get away with murder -- especially if they murder males. If the system treated men and women equally, there would be far more women in prison, more women on death row, and more women being executed.

In his '93 book, "The Myth of Male Power", Warren Farrell discusses what he terms the 12 "female-only" defenses:
the innocent woman defense -- the tendency to see women as more credible then men because of being thought more innocent -this one underlies all the others
the husband defense -- the learned helplessness defense that can be used to allow a woman to kill a man and go free
the battered woman syndrome -- another learned helplessness defense that advantages women and allows them to get away with the premeditated murder of men
the PMS defense, my body, no choice -- a woman's hormones can be used to successfully defend her against charges that would send a man to jail for years
the depressed mother defense, baby blues and terrible twos -- Andrea Yates and many other child-killing and child-battering women get treated leniently
the "children need their mother" defense
the "mothers don't kill" defense -- mothers enjoy special immunity from serious investigation
the "blame the father, understand the mother" defense -- Andrea Yates again
the "my child, my right to abuse it" defense
the plea bargain defense -- the tendency to offer the woman a plea bargain when a crime is committed jointly by a woman and a man
the Svengali defense -- the tendency of male judges (like males in general) to want to protect beautiful women
the contract killing defense - defend self by hiring someone else- the greater likelihood of women to use third parties when killing a male partner -it's recorded as a"multiple offender" killing, not as spousal homicide