Casey Anthony Trial Judge Thought Jury Had Enough Evidence For Murder Conviction
CASEY ANTHONY TRIAL JUDGE JURY HAD ENOUGH to CONVICT, But ... Defense Planted Enough Doubt
The judge who presided over Casey Anthony’s murder trial thinks prosecutors made a strong enough case to win a conviction ... but he's giving her lawyers props for their strategy.
Judge Belvin Perry Jr. joined us Thursday on "TMZ Live," and we asked if he was surprised the jury acquitted Casey of murder, manslaughter and child abuse following 2-year-old daughter Caylee's death. Casey was only found guilty of lying to cops.
Perry Jr. says he thought prosecutors presented enough evidence for the jury to convict Casey ... but still, he wasn't shocked when the jury acquitted her, because he's learned there are no locks when it comes to criminal trials.
Judge Perry Jr. is now retired from the bench, and told us a lot of what Casey's saying in a new Peacock documentary is the same "crap" she floated during the trial. Of course, she was acquitted, but Perry says that doesn't mean the jury bought what Casey was saying back then.
Instead, he gives credit to her defense attorneys, Jose Baez and Cheney Mason, who "littered that case with as much reasonable doubt as they possibly could."
Casey didn't take the stand during the trial and is now giving her version of events in an upcoming Peacock documentary -- but the former judge told us there are all sorts of problems with her claims, the new ones and the old ones.
Despite his personal opinions on the trial, Perry Jr. still thinks this is how justice works in our system.
