US Senator Mitch McConnell (KY-R) Raises Concern Over Civilian Terror Trials in Light of Casey Anthony Acquittal

Imagine if the Casey Anthony jury was put in charge of judging a terror suspect?

Who would ever have thought that we would be using the words Casey Anthony and terrorism in the same sentences? However, after the debacle that occurred in Orlando, FL following the head scratching verdict of the jury of “not guilty” on all major charges in the murder trial of Casey Anthony, that is exactly what has transpired. US Senator Mitch McConnell (KY-R) said on Fox News Sunday that the acquittal in the Casey Anthony murder trial is exactly the reason why terror suspects cannot be tried in civilian court.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell pointed to the acquittal of Casey Anthony as an example of why the U.S. civilian court system should not be trusted to try terror suspects.

Anthony, the Florida mother charged with killing her 2-year-old daughter Caylee in 2008, was found not guilty Tuesday on all charges except lying to investigators. Becoming perhaps the first lawmaker to do so, McConnell drew a lesson Sunday from that case in connection with the debate in Washington over whether to try suspected terrorists in federal courts.

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder had previously stopped the military tribunals of KSM and other terror suspects to instead try these cases in NYC. Of course we know how that ended as a hue and cry went up through the United States and New York City that no such trial should ever take place in the shadows of Ground Zero and a civilian court. Eventually, Obama/Holder pulled the plug on it.

However, McConnell and other Republicans were outraged this past week after the Obama administration moved to charge a Somali terror suspect in civilian court in New York. We just learned by the verdict in the Casey Anthony case that juries are as much of a crap shoot as the reliability of a terrorist underwear bomb.  What would happen if a terrorist’s attorney played the same games as Casey Anthony’s defense team and the jurors ignored prosecutors evidence and decided to more accept defense theories of a crime instead?

The question is no longer just whether terrorist should be provided the benefits of the US Constitution by being tried in civilian court, what also must be looked at is whether a jury could actually be capable of judging such a case. What will happen when defense council in opening statements says that the terrorist committed the act and killed American because he was molested by George Anthony and that the individual killed by a road side bomb or detonated bomb vest actually died from drowning in a pool? Will the jury find the terrorist not guilty of murder and only find them guilty of lesser charges of littering or destruction of property? After all, it was not the terrorist who did the computer searches of how to make a bomb … it was really done by Cindy Anthony.

Does America really want to take their chances with terror suspects and guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? A note to Eric Holder, you might want to scratch Pinellas County off the list of jurisdictions to hold any civilian trial.