What will happen to Casey Anthony if more evidence is found against her?

Nothing. She could essentially come on national TV and confess and share the details without legal consequences.
From what I have heard the maximum sentence for the charges that she was found guilty on is 4 years. Since she has already served 3, most likely she will only have to do another year.

In the US, you can’t be tried for the same offense twice. Double jeopardy, it’s called.

Nothing. See above.

See above. ;)

She couldn’t be retried in criminal court , but she could still be tried for civil offenses, if someone with standing cared to pursue that avenue.

She could be tried for a different accusation on the same topic but not for the one that she was cleared off .

I wondered why they charged her with child abuse and not Child neglect as well. Any cutodial parent who doesn’t know where their child is for a month SHOULD be able to be charged with neglect you would think.

They wanted to protect themselves here so they won’t end up charged with something .

If the statute of limitations had not passed on filing for neglect, child endangerment, etc they could go after that but I don’t know how well they can prove that either. The lawyers I am sure will make out like bandits and in the future too because they will seem like Houdini Lawyers ala Perry Mason, will get you off no matter how guilty you look like. They will get flooded with request for representation from accused people.

The threshold is lower in a civil case and she would have to take the stand, I believe, if the family has the cash to go after that I am not sure, or even if it would do anything other than giving them satisfaction one jury found her partly responsible.

The number of people who believe she is a murderer would increase tenfold.

For those of you suggesting civil court, who would file a civil case? She is the mom, and her parents want to protect their daughter.

Nothing could happen. Even if she later admitted on national television that she did in fact kill Caylee, she can never be tried for it again. It’s called Double Jeopardy. Once the prosecution fucked up and she got off, she got off. Permanently. Forever and ever amen. Heartless bitch.

Of course, if any “proof” ever comes to light, you can bet someone will kill her ass. I’m keeping my fingers crossed for that. I’m actually hoping that some disgruntled mom in her prison will find a discreet way to eliminate her…

Thank you all for clearing that up, though it makes me sad to think that justice may never be served for that poor little girl.

If she ends up in state or federal, you can be pretty sure that someone will shank her. Even among criminals there’s a rule of you don’t hurt the children.

@JLeslie I’m thinking the biological dad will come out of the woodwork at some point here.

@King_Pariah One can only hope. =0)

Just a note; I am surprised that some people mention “Double jeopardy” yet I saw no mention that that is rooted in the Fifth Amendment of our Constitution. In other words, it’s not a law, it’s THE law.

As for a civil suit, who has the legal standing to do so? As near as I can tell, only her family does, and I don’t see that happening.

What is the reason for double jeopardy anyway? Just wondering, because I really don’t know.

@Blackberry :: Imagine if something new popped up every year and then this shit would go on forever. Keep trying until you find jury willing to convict.

I wouldn’t say “nothing”, because American prosecutors have been very clever about holding some charges in abeyance until and unless they are needed later.

If a defendant is acquitted of a murder charge in which the person’s guilt appears to be manifest, then Federal prosecutors have the option (and have used the option) to bring federal “violation of civil rights” prosecutions against the defenders in federal court. (The murder acquittal would have been in a trial held in a state – or territorial – court.)

This is technically not a double-jeopardy violation, since the charges are brought in a new venue (the federal court), as opposed to the state court, and the “crime” is defined more broadly as “depriving a victim of his civil right” (to life, in other words). But since it’s not a “murder trial”, it’s not technically double jeopardy – but it’s the same event, in any case.

So she won’t say a word about whether she did the crime or not.

@johnpowell Ahhh, ok, gotcha.

@Blackberry: The first answer^^ by @ANef_is_Enuf gives the link for the legal definition of Double jeopardy

Double jeopardy, illegal search and seizure, right to face your accuser is all there to keep the government from acting like the Crown did. Charging people with phantom accusers with trump up charges, seizing property without cause, figuring if a jury found you innocent of the charges, getting a more sympathetic jury and trying it again, or again, or again, until one jury gives the government what it wants.

If that happened, perhaps the prosecution could charge Anthony with criminally negligent homicide, although CNH might be considered similar enough to murder for double jeopardy to attach.

You mean beyond getting an even bigger book deal?

Lawsuits are already underway.