If you read up at all about this story, I would find it hard to believe that anyone would feel she is innocent.
Please be careful. In the American justice system, a trial is not about guilt or innocence. It's about proving the guilt of the defendant. From what I've read and heard, I believe that Casey is
probably responsible for her daughter's death. But the evidence (and this is according to Juror #3, who has spoken to the media) was not sufficient to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that she was guilty.
The jury's verdict is one of "not guilty," not "innocent of the accusation." And this isn't quite OJ all over again. The OJ jury apparently (and no one but the jury members really know) engaged in "jury nullification," which is a legal term for "sure he's guilty but I just don't want to see him pay for his crime." Casey's jury seems to have come to the conclusion that yeah, she's probably guilty, but the prosecution can't prove it. So they basically had no choice but to acquit her.
We can't operate a justice system based on how we feel about a particular defendant. I don't know her, but I don't like her. She's a single mom who seems to have been more interested in her own party life than in being a mom, but that doesn't make her a murderer. She lied to the police on multiple occasions, but that doesn't make her a murderer. She apparently left her little girl's body in a field for months without telling anyone where she was, but that doesn't make her a murderer. It might make her a terrible human being, but still not a murderer.
This is not a defense of Casey Anthony. This is a defense of the American legal system. The outcome of this trial wasn't what many wanted, but as far as I can tell, the system worked as it was intended. The saying that "I'd rather let ten guilty go free than condemn one innocent" applies here.