Salon 1

Casey Anthony Trial: Exchanging Logic for Sensationalism

Lao Tzu — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 15:02:33 +0000

So the verdict came in yesterday on the trial of Casey Anthony for the alleged murder of her 2 year old daughter, Caylee Anthony. She was found not guilty on the counts of murder and abuse, but guilty on three counts of lying to investigators regarding facts related to the case. There is so much that went wrong with this case and verdict, I do not know where to begin. I did not follow the case, so I do not have all the information, but here are some facts to which I am aware:

FACTS

Casey did not report her daughter missing to police, even after several weeks.
Casey’s parents made first contact with police.
The child was found with duct tape over nose and mouth.
Casey lied to investigators on multiple occasions about the circumstances around this case.

Inductive Reasoning

Fact #1 suggests that Casey killed her, knows who did, or did not care. For a normal person, if their child were missing, they would call police immediately, at least the same day, and definitely not longer than a few days. If she lied to investigators about this situation (e.g., that a nanny that did not exist had her) then that should be even more suggestive.
Fact #2 indicates that it is unlikely the parents are to blame. It also means we have no way of knowing if Casey would have called the police at all. The fact that the grandfather attempted to commit suicide could be taken either way – as sympathetic or guilty. His explanation sounded genuinely sympathetic – but that is just his testimony. Although I am having a hard time understanding the motives of the witness Krystal Holloway if she were not telling the truth.
The defense explanation was that the child died in a drowning accident. There was no evidence at all to support this theory. No normal parent or grandparent would bury their child after an accident. Any teenage babysitter would have called 911. If this were true, the Anthony family would not even know whether the child could have been revived.
Fact #3 clearly, undisputably, indicates that the child was murdered and did not drown, discounting the above theory.
Fact #4 indicates she is hiding information, and most likely the fact that she killed her. Innocent people don’t lie about their involvement unless they are covering up something worse – but what could be worse – nothing.

There were also serious failures within the court that helped sacrifice logic for sensationalism. For example, one of the explanations for the shocking verdict was that there was information presented in the courtroom on TV when the jury was not present. That means, the public had more information than the jury, when it is really supposed to be the other way around. Casey Anthony’s attorney admitted that he did not think they would win. That makes him either a terrible attorney (to have such an attitude), or he knows she is guilty. It should be clear that someone in that family murdered that poor child.

Other Plausible Explanations

Casey knows who killed her and is covering it up.
Casey’s brother murderd her. He demonstrated abnormally strong emotions for being “left out” of the child’s life. There is also the theory that he is the father, which makes sense given the previous sentence.
Casey is being framed by another member in the family. This explains the weird internet searches. No normal person would Google “shovel”. This would also explain the mother calling police and saying, “it smells like a decomposing body.” Most people do not know what that smells like.

This case really demonstrates how broken the court system is. If “busy” professionals are relieved of jury duty, it means that the jury statistically is skewed to a more likely collection of less educated individuals. The general public should never have more information than the jury. Facts should be the foundation of arguments but are often over-shadowed by right brain thinking or smoke screening of irrelevant information. Many people cannot distinguish opinion from fact. Many people are still persuaded, even subconsciously, by personal appearance or the defendant, witnesses, and even victims. The focus should be on the crime and victim, and not the individual defendant. We need to apply logic (deductive and inductive reasoning) more in the courtroom.

I hate writing about this kind of stuff, and reading it, but we cannot turn our backs on it. We need to protect our children and not facilitate the system into continuously neglecting them and their rights.

The end result of all this is that there is no justice for 2 year old Caylee Anthony.

Why Preschool is a Bad Idea

Lao Tzu — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 17:14:42 +0000

So in my previous post, I mentioned a potential benefit to children staying at home at a later age prior to starting school. I now present the complimentary reason why going to school at too young of an age is detrimental to children, society, and could have long term impacts on childrens’ health.
At the preschool age, children have not yet learned many skills that we take for granted to get through our daily life – in particular, how to avoid getting sick. At preschool age, children are still putting things in their mouth, sneezing and coughing all over the place, not washing their hands when they need to, etc. This increases the chance of them getting sick astronomically.
Preschoolers that are sick might not always know they are sick, or know what to tell you about how they feel. This makes it difficult to even diagnose a sick toddler.
Once they are sick, there are very few medicines they can take. Often one has to resort to indirect medications, such as Benadryl for nasal congestion.
If there is a medicine they can take, you have the difficult task of trying to administer the medication in some manner that is often intimidating, resulting in hours of trying to squirt a syringe into the mouth of a kicking and screaming child, hoping you don’t loose too much of your ultra-conservatively measured prescription.
Few preschool age children can blow their nose at all, let alone effectively. Blowing your nose is one of the most effective means for managing what is often the most challenging symptom, nasal congestion. Not only does it interfere with their breathing, but as they sleep, the mucus drips down into their throat causing them to cough, and even into their stomach causing them to vomit. Often, they continuously sniff if they do not know how to blow their nose. All of this could lead to further complications, such as pneumonia and sinus infections. The alternative is a bulb syringe to the nose, which is also intimidating, and extremely painful if the child also has an ear infection, which is likely.
Toddlers with a fever are more likely to experience seizures.
Finally, a preschooler’s lack of training in cold management (sarcasm) results in increased spreading of the illness – snot on toys, not washing their hands, improper cough and sneezing coverages, etc.
Some interesting stats would be:
- The proportion of children in preschool that have to get tubes in their eardrums compared to those at home
- Sick day rates of adults with preschool children compared to those without.
I think you will find that preschool age children are the main hub of cold and flu season, at no fault of their own. Everyone benefits from children under 6 years old not attending school or day care, especially the children. A common argument I hear is that preschool builds their immune system. This is obviously not true. How many adults have immunities to the common cold or every strain of flu?

I am not a medical doctor, and this article in no way offers any medical advice. Always consult with a physician before treating anyone for any medical condition.

The Devolution of Parenting

Lao Tzu — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:51:01 +0000

There is a recent news article investigating the question, “Is it time to return to caveman parenting?”. It turns out that our neanderthal ancestors were better (i.e., really more advanced) at raising children into mentally heathy, well adjusted adults in comparison to today’s trends. I, for one, am not surprised, and there could be several reasons for this. The need for survival tempers us to focus on truly important matters. In addition, abnormal, unusual, strange (essentially bad) social behavior probably takes time to evolve within a society. Unfortunately, television and movies are speeding up that process for us today.

This article also reverberates a thought I have been having for a while. That children need to spend more time at home with the family before going off to school. This time is critical for learning the basic foundations of behavior and social interaction, and it can occur best in a non-threatening environment. I am not an advocate of putting children in to school as fast as possible for several reasons (see next post). I do not think teaching a 4 year old how to read is as important in teaching them how to interact socially and become self reliant and self confident. There is plenty of time to teach them to read.

The Scan Scam

Lao Tzu — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 01:18:44 +0000

Backscatter Xray Image from Airport Scanner, from MSN

When new scanners that could see through clothing were proposed for security screening at airports, the TSA stated that the devices could not save / store images. It was then quickly discovered that these devices could store images (not surprising), but the TSA claimed that it was only for training purposes and that they devices would not have that capability in operations. Today, marshalls reported that these devices are being used to store images, and one such device has stored thousands of images.

So what this means is that the Government has implemented a device that violates your privacy by taking images through your clothing, and the device has the capability for users to store and distribute the image, and we were lied to about that capability.

What is Technological Progress

Lao Tzu — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:12:48 +0000

So I have been meaning to write a post for a while on the meaning of technological progress. Then today I saw an article that was slightly related regarding the never-ending development of mens’ facial razors. My concern lately has been more on telephones and televisions. So let’s elaborate. What is the definition of technological progress? How do you know you have advanced?
The article on razor’s points out that there are new designs with a lot of hype and increased cost, but are they really better? I, for one data point, can attest that I have the latest model razor from Gillete, complete with a battery in the handle and a vibrating head, and I still get nicks. I shave my head at night to give time for my nicks to heal before showering again in the morning. So, after several high tech designs with corresponding increase in cost, there is no real advancement in the core required capability.
Cell phones are another easy example. I have the latest cell phone technology, a Motorola Droid. And, much like my previous BlackBerry device, it is a great, multi-function, all-in-one, personal digital assistant, However, it is a crappy phone. The speakers are always designed to be small, as if they do not know that the bigger the speaker – the louder. Reception has not really improved – only coverage. I still get a lot of dropped calls – a phenomenon where the Apple iPhone is an even better example. I do not expect a cell phone to sound as good as a land line, but land lines are getting worse. I remember talking on a telephone in the 1970s, and I never had a problem with hearing someone, or had static or other background noise. Now, my landline, decades later, with Comcast digital voice, sounds terrible – very quiet, static, and plenty of background noise. It is essentially useless. And they advertise digital voice as sounding better than an analog phone. Whenever I hear a marketeer wield the word digital, it reminds me of the word electrolytes in the movie Idiocrasy.
So, if we ignore the hype, the additional features, and focus on the core required functionality, I think we would see very little progress in several technologies, but not all.
But let’s expand this even further to not just technological progress, but social progress. For example, if new technology costs more, is it really progress at all?

The Twisted Story of Elian Gonzalez

Lao Tzu — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 10:08:55 +0000

It is 10 years after Elian Gonzalez escaped Cuba with his mother, and was found floating alone off the coast of Florida, taken in by relatives in Florida, and then arrested at gun point by US agents and sent back to Cuba to be with his father.

The Arrest of Elian Gonzalez

There is a story out today about how, “Elian Gonzalez is not angry at Miami relatives”. Huh? Why would he be angry?

This is a great example of how the press can either intentionally, but subtly, steer public opinion about a topic; or unintentionally take a stance on a topic based on what certain organizations want us to believe. The media can no longer be trusted as unbiased muckrakers, not because they are being directly manipulated by a totalitarian Government as in China and Korea, but because they are being corrupted by their own stupidity as well as an affinity towards social rends and group think.

Guess Who’s in List of Life’s 100

Lao Tzu — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:57:56 +0000

Life magazine recently published a special edition entitled, “Life, 100 People Who Changed the World”. The cover includes icons of such individuals as Jesus, Einstein, Ghandi, Mother Theresa, Beethoven, Hitler, Lincoln, and a few others that are also recognizable by a single name. What’s surprising is that in the top left spot (a spot that usually indicates ‘first’) is Oprah. So Oprah Winfrey is considered one of the 100 people that changed the world. Listed before Jesus and Einstein and Lincoln and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

What algorithm were they using? What has Oprah accomplished that has changed the world? Making yourself rich and famous is not changing the world. And let’s not forget that the only reason Oprah is rich and famous is because she is portrayed as famous. In the words of the movie Ed TV, “People used to be famous for being great, now they are just great for being famous”. I think I have said this before. But shouldn’t such an acclaimed magazine making such a notorious list be a little more logical in their selection. She is definitely an outlier in this list, there for some other reason that escapes me. The only change that Oprah has inflicted upon the world is projecting her own fear of men on her female audience, and giving a voice to right brain ‘thinkers’ to project their ‘theories’ into mainstream group think. She has been the platform for pop-psychology and psuedo-science for over 20 years, making her the pied piper of the uneducated.

I do credit her for giving a voice to the abused, however. This is an important accomplishment. But does it put her in the same company as Newton, Joan of Arc, Margaret Mead, Madam Curie, Galileo, and Homer? Perhaps if she were actually helping to reduce child abuse.

Congrats, Oprah.

The Ultimate Sympathy Gift

Lao Tzu — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 14:13:47 +0000

I was going to write about the “near-perfect” baseball game a couple of days ago, and I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade, but the story has recently gotten much weirder.
Apparently the pitcher, Armando Galarraga, was just given a Corvette (yes, car) as a gift for being “denied” a near perfect game last week. This latest story can be found here.
Here’s the interesting part. The news has been talking the last few days about the umpire making a call that stopped the game short of being a near perfect game. The news reported it almost as a “crime”, and the umpire gave a tearful apology to the pitcher, and entered the field at the next game in tears. The news did not initially talk about whether the call was accurate or even questionable. That important fact was not included in any news story I saw on TV or heard on the radio. It was seen as irrelevant. In healthy contrast, the baseball commission stated that the call would not be investigated and it stood as is, implying that they did not feel that it was a bad call. After looking at the video, I admit the call was close and he might have been safe, but the umpire’s call is the call.
So Chevrolet felt that he was “robbed” and gave him a new Corvette as a sympathy gift. So a company that is in financial burden felt that an expensive gift to someone who is already rich was warranted here. Meanwhile, I am constantly barraged with advertisements asking me, the middle class, to give and give to charities for those less fortunate, the poor, the starving, the ones without cars, the ones that have lost their homes in this foreclosure scandal, disease research, etc. Which I will do. Meanwhile, this country will continue to treat sports as our most important endeavor, and celebrities as our greatest charity.

The Silliest Lawsuit

Lao Tzu — Fri, 28 May 2010 02:32:29 +0000

Although the $1 M lawsuit for the missing pants at the dry cleaners in DC is a close second, there is a new winner. A lady, Ginger McGuire, on a flight from DC to PA fell asleep on the plane, and no one woke her up when the plan landed. She was awoken hours later by the cleaning crew. She, with the help of her attorney Geoffrey Fieger, is suing for false imprisonment, emotional distress, and negligence. But what is she being held accountable for? After all, isn’t one of the definitions of being an adult is that you can take care of yourself. Is the airline really responsible for babysitting adult passengers?
See the full story here.

Social Networking Security

Lao Tzu — Tue, 25 May 2010 10:11:24 +0000

There have been several articles about how unsecure social networking sites are, and today there is a news article discussing some of the issues with Facebook. What’s really interesting is that the article sites an IM thread where the CEO / inventor bragged about how stupid people were for uploading their personal information to his site.
Here are some rules of thumb to remember should you choose to use social networking sites:

Do not upload or write sensitive personal information on these sites, ever. Remember that pieces of information can be aggregated. Also remember that your information and files are stored on someone else’s server, and you have no idea what they or third parties are doing with it.
Avoid adding third party widgets into your social networking account. The main site has little control over how these tools access your data and what they do with it.