Yesterday's Light

Images in Space and Time

Always a Silver Lining

Perkins Cove Harbor, ME

First, this is an image that I took last week up in Maine  with a new Canon G12.  I bought the darn thing for 2 reasons:  first, I wanted something that I could use as a backup to the 5D MK II (when carrying a large camera is not a great idea), and second, I needed something to replace the now defunct Canon G7 (which died very unceremoniously last October out west).  My wife uses the old G10 now, so I also had an opportunity to compare those 2 cameras side by side.  The G10, of course, has more megapixels than the G12 (15 versus 10), but also tends to generate more noise.  Small sensors are, after all, small sensors.  Neither camera, in my opinion, comes even remotely close to the 5D MK II with respect to visible resolution.  There just isn’t any contest.  The question, though, for me, was whether or not the G12 is better than the G10.

At this point, I’d have to say “yes, it is”.  There’s still visible noise in the shadows (even at low ISO’s), but it’s not as bad as what I’ve seen in the G10.  If you look at this picture at 100% (in the shadow areas), you can see it.  But the noise is even more pronounced in a similar G10 image.  On a computer monitor, anyway.  If you print both versions, however, the noise becomes essentially invisible.

So all in all, not a bad little camera.  And I definitely like the movable LCD screen.

In my last post, I mentioned the Casey Anthony verdict (or more correctly, the verdicts).  I indicated that I was surprised by these verdicts, mostly because it was fairly clear to me that she was at least heavily involved in the death of her daughter, if not completely responsible.  As I said then, she sure looked guilty to me.

Which got me a few interesting comments.  My friend Earl for example stated that the prosecution failed to “prove” the case beyond a shadow of a doubt and so the jury system worked just fine.  The jury was not, as Earl says, “swayed by opinion”.

My son Chris agreed with Earl, saying that “you cannot convict a person on emotion and rumors”.  But then he adds, “but of course I think she did it”.

And that puts my son with about 2/3 of the rest of the country (including me).  We ALL think she “did it”.

But she got off.  Why?  Not, in my opinion, because the evidence was at fault (or nonexistent).  Once you see everything that happened across that space of time, it’s impossible to conclude much of anything else.  She knows what happened to her daughter.  If she wasn’t personally responsible herself, she knows who was responsible and she was complicit.  How else can one explain those 31 days of time?  And I mean “rationally” explain them.

In my opinion, the jury was simply inclined to acquit by the time they were asked to deliberate.  The initial vote was supposedly 10 to 2 to acquit.  I find that just a bit strange.  Somebody on the prosecution team pissed a few people off somewhere along the line.

I don’t think, though, that she should have been found guilty of premeditated murder.  That would  have been unwarranted.  Virtually all of the evidence was circumstantial.  But how about the “aggravated child abuse” charge?  How could anyone not find her at least guilty of that?  A guilty verdict on that one could have cost her 15 years in prison.  Instead of the week she’s getting now.

Having said all of that, I also have to say that I’ve always believed that it’s better to let the guilty go free than to send the innocent to jail (or worse, to the death chamber).  But 15 years for this person?  Who could possibly have argued with that?  In this case, the system failed.

Advertisements

6 Responses to “Always a Silver Lining”

  1. ken bello

    I don’t think the system failed. The system did what it is designed to do, which is to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. But guilt has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and the prosecutions case was full of doubt. If there was a failure, it was the prosecution, not the jury. Now she’ll get to do the talk shows, the book deal, the movie of the week and make a fortune. But if you believe in karma (as I do), she’ll pay her dues one way or another.

    I love this photo. The tones are really nice. And there are more diagonals than I can count.

    Reply
    • Paul Maxim

      I can only say, Ken, that it’s a damn good thing you and I weren’t on this jury. We’d still be there! And if you believe that our “system” is designed to “protect the innocent and punish the guilty”, then I have a bridge across Irondequoit Bay that I’d like to sell you…….Sometimes the system actually does do that, but that’s not how it’s set up. The high school textbooks say that, but that’s just the usual adolescent nonsense (kind of like Paul Revere’s ride).

      No, I don’t believe in “karma”. Most people who lie, cheat, steal, or murder actually get away with it. Forever. This bimbo may ultimately “pay” because she seems to me to be just a tad psychopathic. Sooner or later she’ll do something that gets her ass nailed.

      Ah yes, the diagonals. Lots and lots of diagonals. Just like life.

      Reply
  2. Ken Bello

    I already own that bridge. I let people use it as my gift to them. Still negotiating on the inlet bridge.

    Reply
    • Paul Maxim

      So you’re the guy responsible for the lane closures on that thing?

      The Inlet bridge? It’s only used a few months of the year. Why would anyone want that thing?

      Reply
  3. Don

    Being a retired NYS Senior Court officer, things like this don’t surprise me. I also thought about the charge of child abuse but there are to many unanswered questions like; when did she die, where did she die, how did she die, and who was with her when she died? The jury did not say she was innocent only not guilty to the other charges.

    Reply
    • Paul Maxim

      My understanding of the aggravated child abuse charge (in Florida) is that no death was required. The little girl didn’t have to have been murdered – just “abused”. Even that, I suppose, might have been difficult to prove conclusively, but again I think that if you look at what Casey Anthony was doing during the time the kid was missing it’s hard to conclude that she was actually looking for her. If my daughter was “missing” and I was out getting tattoos and partying, I think I’d feel that I’d done something wrong.

      And you’re right about the jury – they only said that they couldn’t pronounce her “guilty”. I just think that they could have been a little more creative.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: