Not guilty.

Those two words hold a lot of weight in today’s society, as someone is more often guilty until proven innocent. Casey Anthony is the latest example.

The latest example of how the justice system actually worked.

Many of you reading this are probably too young to remember the O.J. Simpson trial in 1994, so the Anthony trial might not have the same perspective as it does to those of us who closely followed O.J.

The dichotomy of reactions toward the not guilty verdict are similar.

The same goes for the amount of people ready to hang a suspect before really knowing what was presented. In a superficial look at Anthony’s case, she was guilty, and the jury’s ruling basically reads to me that they didn’t believe her side.

Problem is, the prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence. The most obvious of flaws in their case against Anthony – no cause of death. The O.J. prosecutors at least had DNA evidence seemingly all over the place.

Putting guilty or not guilty opinions aside, the jury in the Anthony case was justified in its decision. They were not given sufficient evidence to put a woman away for life, just circumstances and poor parenting. Actually, beyond poor parenting. More like being a poor human being for not reporting a child missing until 31 days later.

People have been sentenced to life, or death row, on more evidence than presented against Anthony, only later to be found innocent.

The Anthony verdict is disappointing because it appears justice for Caylee Anthony will not be served. It is not disappointing that an unlikeable suspect was found innocent based on a lack of evidence.

That’s not what our justice system is built to do. Don’t blame the jury for doing its job; blame the prosecution for not doing its well enough and letting someone getting away with murder.

The glove might fit Casey Anthony, but the evidence was poor enough to acquit.

Sad story, but the system worked. And isn’t that what people have championed for all these years?