Ralph Lauren is not responsible for who buys his products. (I happen to have two Ralph Lauren shirts.)Should the photographers have told Casey Anthony to put on a generic brand shirt for her prison release photo?

Miranda Rose Smith on July 18, 2011 at 11:45 am

Deb, if you want the ultimate example of a “Girly Man” it would be any male who understands what the hell you’re talking about in this article. I buy shirts either at “Target,” K-Mart” or “Ross Dress For Less” (whichever one I happen to be driving near that day). I purchase two or three new ones about once every five years. I look at the label inside the collar to make sure it has an “L” with a bold font (for “Large”), but usually don’t have my reading glasses with me, so can’t make out any of the writing under it, which I assume probably reads “Made In Taiwan.”

I’m not sure what you mean by “aspirations of upper-class and western swashbuckling living” or “wealthy socialites and rugged, handsome American men wearing leather chaps, cowboy hats, and Marlboro man shearling jackets in Western settings, such as a Montana ranch.” All I know is like all heterosexual males, I hate shopping for clothes, and just want to get in and out of the store as quickly as possible.

P.S. “swashbuckling?” Isn’t that the act of engaging in a swordfight on board a pirate ship? Somehow that adjective seems out of place in this article. I don’t know of anyone who aspires to be Johnny Depp talking like Keith Richards.

Irving on July 18, 2011 at 12:29 pm

I agree with Miranda, RL can’t control what trash is going to wear his clothes.

Oscar on July 18, 2011 at 12:30 pm

Not sure who Debbie hates more: Jews who hide their Jewness, or people who can afford Polo.

My guess is her attys bought that shirt for her.

So what brand IS acceptable to her Highness? Do I need a Star of David on my shirt to be acceptable? Menorah?

Mark on July 18, 2011 at 1:20 pm

Ralph Lauren also has one of the most extinsive car collections in the world with most being displayed at this very minute in Frances’ Villa de Esta, go have a look.

Koeteus on July 18, 2011 at 1:25 pm

Miranda–

DS surely realizes that Lauren has no control over who wears his stuff. Her point is that a white trash killer sporting the duds is probably something he would not have chosen.

Much like the preferred image for the Marlboro Man would not have been a patient dying of lung cancer.

Red Ryder on July 18, 2011 at 2:29 pm

Ralph Lauren makes good clothes. I have a suede jacket made in India. Good quality.

The company has no control over who wears its clothing. I’m not going to allow a murderer to dictate my fashion taste for me!

NormanF on July 18, 2011 at 2:34 pm

But it does cheapen a fashion line if a tramp like CA is able to wear your stuff. I’m sure she wouldn’t be leaving prison wearing Jimmy Choo shoes. The Jimmy Choo Shoes line has an exclusiveness to it that Lauren doesn’t have, in that Lauren, unlike Jimmy Choo is accessible to lowlifes. (although granted when she becomes a multimillionaire she will be able to afford Jimmy Choo shoes, but then she will have graduated, or regressed to a different level of celebrity.)

So she wouldn’t leave prison wearing a $10,000 custom-made suit,but Lauren is accessible to her.

And his religious background is relevant, because he obviously believed he needed to mask his identity in order to make his brand ‘exclusive’, unlike others who are proud of their Jewish background.

And, thus, the point is that masking his background didn’t help him; tramps can still demean his brand.

Little Al on July 18, 2011 at 3:39 pm

And needless to say I am not demeaning or attacking any other contributors to this site; I am simply saying that the Lauren brand does not meet RL’s desires for exclusiveness, unlike other brands that do meet such standards.

Little Al on July 18, 2011 at 3:58 pm

OMG! I am so ashamed I have a couple of RL polo shirts and maybe a pair of khaki pants (not sure though)!..What you guys would suggest as a decent way of getting rid of these disgraceful items?
1. Burn
2. Use as rags to clean the floor after my cat
3. Send to Gaza strip or to Gaddafi’s supporters in Libya
4. Donate to local thrift shop
5. Any other ideas?

Begletz on July 18, 2011 at 5:03 pm

Donate them to Casey!

Little Al on July 18, 2011 at 5:53 pm

Polo is good quality clothing. “Tough guy” doesn’t always = POWM (people of Wal-mart) appearance with cheap, ill-fitting clothes. I have Polo shirts by RL that are 18 years old and still look good. Their khakis and pants can last for me up to 10 years. Nothing unmanly about presenting a neat, professional appearance as well as being frugal by buying quality that lasts instead of clothes that go threadbare after a couple dozen washings.

The Casey Anthony verdict was a travesty.

DS_ROCKS! on July 18, 2011 at 6:13 pm

I appreciate this post because DS is pointing out something very odd, unexpected and funny (in a non ha-ha way) about unintentional advertisement, the underbelly of the RL brand and his unease with being and American Jew and the American media.

But most of all, I appreciate how she saw something in a way no one else did. With all her law acumen, she is one of the very FEW NOT being coerced into following the dumbed-down American crowd/mob parroting the very bad and dangerous “The prosecution did not prove their case” and “She was found NOT guilty in a court of American law” as well as “We must respect the jury’s verdict”.

She is smart enough to still stand in the crowd and say NO WAY when she knows she is being zoomed. She KNOWS this sociopath is a killer and KNOWS that the evidence proves this beast is as guilty as sin.

Thank goodness. I need to hear that because it’s getting bizarro-world more and more each day and I need to know I am not the only one looking for the truth. And she is NEVER afraid to say it. Bravo.

Skunky on July 18, 2011 at 6:36 pm

There is no proof that that spot on the T is Polo’s logo, because I can’t conclude that my eyeballs are fixing correctly on the object.

Acquit me.

John P on July 18, 2011 at 10:12 pm

I am stunned that this jury discarded all the lesser charged options and basically have set this psychopath free. I am disgusted that Baez had the arrogance to publicly state that this was justice for Caylee. Did the jury have no understanding of the definition of reasonable doubt? Did they think any doubt was equivalent?
As everyone knows, trials are won or lost in jury selection. While I do think that Judge Perry is a stellar jurist, I believe that he rushed the jury selection process in a significant way. Because he is also the chief administrative judge his role and responsibilities encompass the financial constraints and considerations involved in the costs incurred with 2 weeks in Pinellas County. He also had to contend with the small window of time that he was allotted for use of their court room. Just as a comparable reference the Scott Peterson case took 11 weeks to seat the jury.
I do wonder why 4 members of Casey’s jury have criminal records. Why would they have been selected by the Prosecution? I do remember that they were running out of jury pool candidates and also the time deadline was fast looming. I do not place any blame on the Prosecution because I think that they’re hands were tied. I do think that it was very unwise for Judge Perry to have such an arbitrary deadline fixed for this most all important process. I also think that regardless of budgetary constraints the Prosecution needed to use a jury consultant just as the defense did, to their overwhelming benefit.
Juror #3 said: “You can’t punish someone for something if you don’t know what they did.”
Juror #3, it was NOT YOUR JOB to PUNISH Casey Anthony. It WAS your JOB to LISTEN TO THE EVIDENCE and USE COMMON SENSE. You were not handing down PUNISHMENT in this phase. Did you skim over the words “Caylee is Dead” on the Juror Instruction sheet?
Juror #3, Ms. Ford spoke on Nightline a few nights ago. Ms. Ford felt that one could not convict if you didn’t know how someone died or the motive.
I totally disagree. You don’t need to know a motive. You don’t need to know how someone died. It’s my opinion that often times people don’t realize that behavior is evidence, powerful evidence.
She stated that the prosecution did not provide the jury with those facts. She also stated that she did not believe the defense case. On the Nightline show, she completely sidestepped the evidence of the duct tape on Caylee’s skull. She never addressed it.
I can’t believe what some of these jurors believed! Juror #2 stated that “it didn’t matter at what point in time she came home and found out her daughter missing”. I can’t believe it. They also said they weren’t sure who the caretaker was. How in the world did this happen? Were they sleeping when the PT told in detail the calls from Cindy to Casey over the 31 days asking where they were? She kept making excuses as to where Caylee was. We all know this, CLEARLY Casey was the “caregiver” (term used loosely).
This is unreal…..they thought Casey came home and found out Caylee was missing??????????? This tells me they could not have been paying attention at all.
Done is done but Judge Perry made a huge mistake not telling the jurors they had to disregard the opening statement from Baez as he proved none of it. This jury believed it with not one iota of proof but disregarded the evidence the PT had.
How did 12 people agree Casey “came home and found out Caylee was missing”? It’s like one of them made it up and they all went along with it….they gave no thought whatsoever to the 31 days. What a huge huge mistake these people made by not taking the time to ask questions and look at evidence, and most of all, use common sense.
I think this jury was totally taken in by the CSI effect. They were unable to make any type of conclusion about Casey’s post-incident behavior and wanted all the evidence tied up for them in a neat package. They wanted to know when she died, where she died and how she died before they were willing to convict on any charge. It shows us a jury that is unable to analyze evidentiary behavior critically, and come to a conclusion about it. This jury also rejected the prosecution’s motive that was presented to them. I believe they rejected it because they didn’t understand it.
Even though Casey Anthony lied to every person in her immediate orbit, law enforcement officers, the general public and beyond about having a job, what she was doing and when, having a “Zanny the nanny” and a kidnapping, that behavior by Casey was rejected by the jury as having any weight as evidence that a crime had been committed. They basically said, Casey Anthony’s post incident behavior means nothing without a motive or cause of death.
Even though the prosecution presented strong evidence that there was a dead body and high traces of chloroform in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car, they still could not come to the conclusion that a dead body had been placed inside it. Even though the prosecution presented powerful evidence that three pieces of duct tape were attached to the child’s skull, mandible and hair, the jury did not see that as evidence that a crime had taken place. Many of us are wondering what person in their right mind could think that how and where little Caylee ended up, in plastic bags, in a swamp, with duct tape wrapped around her head was the result of an “accident?” To me, this tells me that this juror, and most likely the rest of the jurors were unable to connect the dots and put the pieces of evidence together.
When you have jurors that are unable to make reasonable conclusions about post-incident behavior and powerful scientific evidence this is the type of verdict you get.
I am disappointed by a jury foreman, juror #6 negotiating media deals for 5 figures. I am disgusted that juror #3 has been awarded a trip to Disney World, courtesy of ABC/Disney for an interview. I find it disgusting that these people would decline a press conference, but are negotiating with the highest bidders for media time.
The jurors, IMO are accountable to society for their actions. As they step forward to give their reasons for their utterly incredible verdict and reap financial benefits for speaking, they become fair game for investigation. They let a murderer, a psychopath free onto society!
I also do not believe that this jury understood the validity of circumstantial evidence and pooh-poohed it. What the defense would have us believe is if there is no eyewitness to a murder and there isn’t any DNA because the body isn’t found until its skeletonized, then nobody should ever be charged with the crime regardless of what the circumstantial evidence shows.
Apparently, the jurors did not understand the meaning and/or the significance of circumstantial evidence. Most criminal cases are based on circumstantial evidence. Because most criminals do not commit their crimes in front of witnesses. A witness provides direct evidence. All other evidence is circumstantial. When properly investigated, the circumstantial evidence put together by law enforcement and prosecutors can be just as persuasive (sometimes more so since witnesses can lie or be mistaken) as direct evidence. If circumstantial evidence was not considered strong evidence (when obtained through proper and thorough investigation) then no criminal would ever be successfully prosecuted. I assumed that the case would be decided on the preponderance of the evidence against which the defense of reasonable doubt is offered. From the jurors that have spoken so far, I am convinced that this did not happen.
To me it seems that the jurors were summarily picking and choosing what they wanted to believe, and disregarded the tons of hard evidence presented to them. They capriciously exercised their personal prejudices, and by ignoring the jury instructions they have violated/subverted the justice system, IMO. We will never know how Caylee died, but defendants have been convicted time and time again with far less evidence.
This jury had to sort through a mass of lies rather than weighing the truth. Baez only performed well if you believe that the rights of one citizen (Casey Anthony) take precedence over the rights of many others (her dad, Dr G, Roy Kronk, Zenaida Gonzalez, Vasco Thompson, multiple police and FBI personnel–all smeared and lied about– and, of course, Caylee). That was never the intent of the justice system and raising reasonable doubt is not justification for it. That we have allowed this to become acceptable is our bad. To characterize this vile type of practice as ‘doing a good job’ is simply not accurate, IMO. The perversion of our justice system is more complete with this verdict, because it is so high profile.
I am a firm believer in the right to representation and that a strong challenge to the State is the only way we keep from becoming a police state. And I think Casey has an absolute right to a strong defense. I don’t, however, think her rights as a citizen are any more sacred than anyone else’s and to ruin reputations, smear character and generally trash other citizen’s rights–even some who had nothing, nothing to do with this trial–in service of her ‘rights’ is just plain wrong. The fact that her counsel could do this with impunity because they can’t be held accountable for what is said in court is a big gaping hole in the system. I’ve heard several talking heads suggest that people are just projecting their dislike for Casey onto Jose Baez. This is BS. Jose Baez needs to own his behavior. Casey didn’t make him perform like a cocky little rookie, lie to the court, suborn perjury, publicly vilify George, Dr G, Zenaida Gonzalez, Roy Kronk, the OCSO (Orange County Sheriff’s Office) or Vasco Thompson. He did that on his own. Baez is devoid of any ethical compass and that’s why I don’t like him.
I do want to address some clear disinformation that was presented in Baez’s and Mason’s arguments. If we define misinformation as an unintentional conveyance of an error in fact, and disinformation as an intentional misrepresentation of fact, we have to outright call these blatant errors disinformation. We either have to do that or claim that in the almost 3 years of this case, and over 2-1/2 years since Caylee’s remains were found, the number of defense lawyers who either currently are or formerly have represented Casey never bothered to look at the evidence disclosed over the past 3 years, or to even reread the transcripts of testimony that have been produced in this trial.
George never outright denied the Henkel brand duct tape was his. In fact, he has never denied it was his in almost 3 years of interviews, depositions and trial testimony. He has stated, and been consistent in this response, that he didn’t pay attention to what type of duct tape he had, so he couldn’t say. Jose Baez outright stated that George DENIED the tape was his. FALSE
When removing the people who state they DID smell decomposition in the car, Baez’s clear intention was to remove everyone who either wouldn’t have lied because of possible involvement in Caylee’s death or cover-up of same and reduce it to one person, George. When he got to Cindy’s picture he stated that she had made the statement in the 911 call (that the car smelled like a dead body had been it) because she had made 2 prior calls and hadn’t got law enforcement at her house yet. Of all the witnesses who have been impeached to some extent or another, Cindy is the ONLY witness to have been proven, before the jury, to have committed perjury. For Baez to remove her as not possibly having knowledge or being complicit in the alleged cover-up of an accidental death by using her own words to excuse her statement in the 911 call is an obvious “stacking of the deck” and cherry-picking in order to get to his goal of leaving George standing alone as the sole “suspect”. As Baez stated about the State, you can’t not only impeach Cindy, but prove she committed perjury and then use SOME of her statements as truthful. The statement made by Cindy in that 911 call will forever remain an excited utterance immediately after she had been told Casey’s story that Caylee had been kidnapped.
After 2-1/2 years of the evidence found at the remains site being available to the defense, I find it impossible to believe the defense does not know that there were 3pieces of duct tape on Caylee’s skull with a 4th piece a few feet away. It was not 2 pieces of duct tape on Caylee’s skull with a 3rd piece a few feet away. This is the third time that Cheney Mason has stated this blatant misrepresentation of evidence in the case, and this time to the jury. He did it again on Greta’s FOX show.
Dr. Werner Spitz did not say that suffocation will, by golly without a doubt, cause the tell-tale staining behind the ears on the inside of the cranial cavity. He stated it can. So the lack of staining does not mean that suffocation could not have taken place, as stated by Baez in his closing arguments.
And there are several more, but those are the more egregious lies presented to the jury during the defense’s closing argument.

Skunky -well said.

NancyB on July 19, 2011 at 2:01 am

Prosecution in this case screwed the pooch. They had a very good case for neg. homicide but when going to the death penalty their case was weak as bad tea. During the trial they had a bad time with making something out of nothing. The Defense on the other hand tried to make Prosecutions case for them. According to Law the jury was correct by letting her go end of discussion. They did not make the charges or present the evidence. As to RL I have several of his shirts I bought at goodwill excellent shape and will last as only good quality goods will (I guess like kosher hot dogs he answers to higher auth.)

Jonathan Gartner on July 19, 2011 at 11:25 am

I don’t feel sorry for George or Cindy Anthony as I firmly believed that both enabled their psychopath daughter. Cindy lying on the stand for her no good murderess daughter shows that even after she firmly could acknowledge her daughter killed her granddaughter in cold blood, she still wanted to protect her. That is evil and I don’t abide it.

What Baez and his murderess client did to George Anthony was unforgivable and the lowest of low. I wonder why GA did not put a stop to that via a motion because I believe he knew it was gonna be used as mitigating circumstances for his murdering daughter’s defense. I think up ’til the opening statements, GA was helping Baez. That reputation ruining lie could have been stopped BEFORE the trial. Those silly parents still stand behind their disgusting daughter. That’s vile and evil.

Nancy, in Nov 2008 the DEFENSE handed in a 30 page document BEFORE Caylee was found saying that if she were found dead, it could have possibly be due to chloroform. The body was found in December 2008. Funny, the DEFENSE seemed to have dropped that completely. And it is well known by now that the DEFENSE was testing public opinion and that is how they found out many people didn’t trust GA. And they crafted their disgusting and stupid defense on that. Can’t believed it worked.

Meanwhile, if one were to read the deposition of Lee Anthony (brother), it clearly shows what was happening those 31 days Caylee was missing, with the murderess NOT going home for those 31 days and her Mum getting more and more frantic trying to see the baby. She even asked her son (Lee) for help. Casey the murderess even avoided going to a club she posted on her Facebook as her destination for that evening. Because she knew her brother was going to be there looking for her. She lied and told him she was in Jacksonville. She was really still in Orlando.

In fact, her avoiding of people came to an end on July 15th, 2008 when her MUM got one of the murderess’ pals to show her where CAs boyfriend lived…and the Mum dragged her home. The car BELONGING TO CASEY had been found and driven home by her DAD by then and was stinking up the garage.

The car was CA’s, left abandoned because it stunk so bad and everyone who smelled it said the smell was putrid. The baby was found dead along with a laundry bag and 2 plastic bags that were from the Anthony home and the duct tape was also from the Anthony home. The hair and chloroform remains in the trunk of said, stinky car were from a DEAD person. All those things were at the murderess’ disposal. And she DID dispose. And what about that shovel she tried to borrow on June 17th, 2008 from a neighbour?

But we have NO IDEA what happened to Caylee Anthony? PUH-LEEZE! Only if you can’t make 2 and 2 make 4.

What the dumb-ass jury wanted but can never get is that the exact cause of death (and you really don’t need one) will never be known because the body was left to decompose for 6 MONTHS. Yeah, and let’s not forget her dear, loving mother Casey admitted to dumping the body in the Florida woods. She was the only one who knew she was dead and the woods and NEVER said a thing to the people searching for her daughter whom the murderess murdered on June 16th, 2008. And because all this evidence was so compelling and slam-dunk, the prosecution didn’t even meantion the knock-down-drag-out fight Casey and Cindy Anthony had on June 15th, 2008 where Cindy tried to strangle Casey because her sociopathic, mooching daughter infuriated her so because she had stole thousands of $$$ from her Grandad…who lived in a nursing home. I don’t even fault them for that.

I didn’t even touch on the dozen of make believe people this lying, sack of sh** made up along the way like a fake boyfriend in Jacksonville, a fake nanny named Zanny, along with a fake job.

Oh, but the prosecution didn’t do their job. More like the moronic jury.

Skunky on July 19, 2011 at 3:22 pm

They used to have these gangs in NY of puerto ricans called the lo-lifes. Basically they’d boost tons of polo out of stores and only wear polo. lol.

Joey P on July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm