Casey Anthony Trial Thread #3

[Aisling]

Spitz just put his foot in his mouth! "High profile case"!!!!!!!

 

[Kurby]

so - spitz says dr g didn't follow protocol but he doesn't know of any protocol docutment she didn't follow.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Sounds like he has marbles in his mouth....

Oh good. This man just kept saying it is protocol. Now it is not protocol. Which is it? There is nothing in writing. He is not up to date with the examinations as I understand it. If casey is indigent how is he still being paid 5.000 ? They are limiting Baez's money for things since it is coming from the state. Would the state have to approve that amount?

 

[LisaR]

I thought the FBI DNA expert covered that - that the degradation and absence of DNA was not unusual considering the circumstances.

I still would have preferred that the situation be replicated instead of a comment that it "isn't unusual." That comment tells me that it might be possible for plenty of DNA to survive but if it doesn't, it may not be unusual.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

A "little hole"?

I think Dr. G dropped the ball on that one. There may not be a written protocol for it (I have no idea) but it seems common sense in an autopsy as part of the investigation of the head area.

Yes, from the bottom. No need to cut off the top, when the bottom was open.

I jumped in the shower when Spitz was talking about his findings. What did he garner from cutting open the top of the skull? I know he disagrees with Dr. G when it comes to the top of the skull but what did his removing of the skull prove?

That there were black speckles or something from decomposition settled on one part of the inside of the skull which he says proves that the head was lying on its side. But, it was found upright, so the defense is claiming that the body had been moved. Which...of course it has! Floodings, animals...all the bones "moved".

Spitz is having a hard time remembering what he gave in an INTERVIEW...he meant to watch the interview, but he fell asleep. Doesn't recall being on the Today Show or 48 Hours.

 

[Kurby]

he doesn't recall any interview he's done????

he's losing credibility fast.

 

[denisem]

Or an animal!



I can't believe both sides didn't pay an expert to test this theory out. They had three years to prepare for this (2.5 since the body was found). Why not have an expert put their DNA all over duct tape pieces and expose them to harsh environments for 6 months (heat, hurricane strength wind, flooding, tugging and pulling by animals) and see if there was any DNA left. I would have loved to see those results and those results would certainly sway my opinion one way or the other.

Thank you! I've been saying that all morning!

ok - i do have to agree that dr G not opening the skull is strange.

IIRC, Dr. G found sediment in the skull. She flushed it out with water & then examined the residue. Maybe that's an accepted practice nowadays as opposed to cutting the skull? (DH says it's because Dr. Spitz was practicing before water was invented. ) Hey, we can say it because we're old, too.

 

[LisaR]

Yes, from the bottom. No need to cut off the top, when the bottom was open. That there were black speckles or something from decomposition settled on one part of the inside of the skull which he says proves that the head was lying on its side. But, it was found upright, so the defense is claiming that the body had been moved. Which...of course it has! Floodings, animals...all the bones "moved".

Spitz is having a hard time remembering what he gave in an INTERVIEW...he meant to watch the interview, but he fell asleep. Doesn't recall being on the Today Show or 48 Hours.

Thanks! That is what I thought this all revolved around. I don't get why it isn't plausible that "something" moved the body. Proving it was Kronk vs. an animal or the weather will be interesting.

 

[Kurby]

he broke the skull?

interesting but does it matter? i would guess that if it had been out in the elements for 6 months and it would be delicate

then how long after did he cut it open?

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

(DH says it's because Dr. Spitz was practicing before water was invented. ) Hey, we can say it because we're old, too.

"The skull of Casey Anthony..." OK...easy mistake.

 

[Wadecool]

The problem with this doctor is that he is unwilling to concede anything to Ashton during cross examination. That makes him come off looking argumentative just for the sake of arguing.

 

[Kurby]

Thank you! I've been saying that all morning!



IIRC, Dr. G found sediment in the skull. She flushed it out with water & then examined the residue. Maybe that's an accepted practice nowadays as opposed to cutting the skull? (DH says it's because Dr. Spitz was practicing before water was invented. ) Hey, we can say it because we're old, too.

ya - protocol is changing and since he doesn't know what protocol he's talking about because there is no document he can think of then maybe there is none.


i guess all these ncis csi type shows always show them opening the skull but it's on recent deaths not months and years old.

and ya i know tv isn't the same

 

[ugadog99]

Oh my goodness. I was really trying to give this witness a chance, but Ashton's cross is making that very difficult to do. Ashton needs to tread carefully, though. This is a very old man with a lot of knowledge. Ashton can't badger him. (Although, I do love a good old fashion take down, Jeff Ashton style.)

 

[LisaR]

Good grief! As much as I despise this man from past experience, I am starting to feel sorry for him. His memory is horrible and he is losing credibility. Sad since he is a highly qualified individual.

 

[crz4mm2]

Ok, that explains it for me.






A "little hole"?
In the base of the skull there is a hole you could look into the skull.




I think Dr. G dropped the ball on that one. There may not be a written protocol for it (I have no idea) but it seems common sense in an autopsy as part of the investigation of the head area.

Not sure she did drop the ball if she had some examination of the skull in her report.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Um...the "decomposition spots" in the brain were not ANALYZED by Spitz, so he does not know if it's just dirt. So he opened the brain, and...?

 

[Nik's Mom]

This doctor is old and needs to retire. No offense to the elderly, but if he can't remember if he's been on the Today show, then his memory is shot.

So let me get this straight. Dr G examined the contents of the skull from the bottom, but this guy says it should be examined from the top? Well, if he can't site it in writing, then it isn't really protocol to examine from the top.

 

[crz4mm2]

Um...the "decomposition spots" in the brain were not ANALYZED by Spitz, so he does not know if it's just dirt. So he opened the brain, and...?

And he just knows that it is brain and Dr. G did not open the skull so it is her fault and not a good job!!
Kerfuffle....

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

This doctor is old and needs to retire. No offense to the elderly, but if he can't remember if he's been on the Today show, then his memory is shot.

I agree. This is uncomfortable.

 

[plutotek]

Good grief! As much as I despise this man from past experience, I am starting to feel sorry for him. His memory is horrible and he is losing credibility. Sad since he is a highly qualified individual.

I don't feel sorry for him at all. I had never heard of him prior to today, but he is not really earning his pay. His insistence that not opening the skull is a violation of protocol seems akin to a parent saying "because I said so."

He may be an expert, even a respected expert, but he is just not coming off as credible here.