Why do people keep saying Casey Anthony is guilty when she was proven innocent?

Answer 1

First answerShe was not "PROVEN" innocent

The prosecution was unable to prove her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

She was convicted on a minor charge

Since she was convicted of the minor charge by definition she is not

Another Answer:

First, there is an enormous difference between "not guilty" and "innocent". The jury determined that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was guilty of the charges. That should not be interpreted as a finding of innocence.

Most of the public, and even a few jurors who have spoken publicly since the verdict, believe that she is probablyguilty. However, in the United States, "probable guilt" is not sufficient. The standard is "beyond any reasonable doubt", not "probably". Given the lack of some critical pieces of evidence, particularly the lack of a cause of death, the jury could not return a guilty verdict.

Public opinion does not conform to such a high standard of proof. Many people are enraged that someone who is probably guilty will go free. They do not understand that our legal system is based on the moral standard summarized by Blackstone's Formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons go free than one innocent person be punished".