Casey Anthony Trial Thread #3

[LisaR]

Didn't the state experts testify that there was root growth holding the skull in place?

 

[Nancy]

I have seen that clerk smile quite often. Maybe she was just having an off day. Other wise she smiles alot.

She is the one that stands up right in front of the judge..today she had a huge necklace on. I don't watch all that much but whenever I do she has never had anything but that same look on her face. Maybe that is her serious, I'm doing my work face.

 

[Kurby]

I believe the defense won big points today discrediting the way in which Dr. G did the autopsy. From everything I have read and heard today, it is very common procedure to remove the top of the skull. I think that hurts the state.

I'm not really sure how I feel about the idea that the skull was found on the left side and therefore duct tape wasn't put on until after decomposition. It seems far fetched that someone traipsed through the woods to apply duct tape and thought in advance that they should tape the pieces back together. Maybe Casey went back into the woods with some duct tape to try and make it look more like a kidnapping/murder?

speculation. i dont' think `someone`went back and put the tape on her after she had decomposed - the tape was there (imho) prior to it. be it before death or after i don`t think we`ll ever know but it wasn`t after decomposition - that i`m pretty sure of

 

[LisaR]

From what I read, the top of the skull is removed to remove the brain for examination. There was no brain to be examined.

I don't know or even think that removing the top of the skull would have provided the state with anymore evidence. From the three defense attorneys I just listened to though, they said they have never had a case where the ME DIDN'T remove the top of the skull. Since it was common procedure, I think that discredits Dr. G. They need to get her back on the stand to explain why she didn't do that so the jury can see that it wouldn't have provided anymore evidence. If they don't do that, I believe it will leave the jurors questioning her expert testimony.

 

[LisaR]

speculation. i dont' think `someone`went back and put the tape on her after she had decomposed - the tape was there (imho) prior to it. be it before death or after i don`t think we`ll ever know but it wasn`t after decomposition - that i`m pretty sure of

I agree. I just threw that out there because if the defense can say that Kronk went back into the woods and applied duct tape, why couldn't Casey do the same thing?

 

[Nancy]

I don't know or even think that removing the top of the skull would have provided the state with anymore evidence. From the three defense attorneys I just listened to though, they said they have never had a case where the ME DIDN'T remove the top of the skull. Since it was common procedure, I think that discredits Dr. G. They need to get her back on the stand to explain why she didn't do that so the jury can see that it wouldn't have provided anymore evidence. If they don't do that, I believe it will leave the jurors questioning her expert testimony.

I think you are right. She needs to explain to them why it wasn't needed or why she felt it wasn't needed.

 

[usnuzuloose]

At first I thought it was odd that Ashton let the statement go about the ME staging the scene. But upon thinking about that the jury may hear that as an angry person trying to point to something else than really having to answer the question. I think the jury can see and hear what is real and what is not. Nor do I believe that the jury will buy into that someone came back and put duct tape on the skull after it completly decomposed. So it may be better to let the jury think about it rather than Making Mr. Ashton being confrontational with a person who cant remember alot of things.

I also think it may be a good day for the state in alot of ways. This news of Baez's of his sneakiness is going to be out in the news. The jury knows something is up as this witness did not return today. Baez is burying himself so deep. This will not look good on his record. Lets hope for his sake that he keeps things on the up and up weather it hurts them or helps them. I think Casey knows she has hired the wrong attorney by now. I just have a hard time with the fact that Mason let him do this. He of all people should know better and I think Perry should question him and the rest of the team if they knew he did this.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I think you are right. She needs to explain to them why it wasn't needed or why she felt it wasn't needed.

They may bring her back for rebuttal along with a few others. It is probably all of a matter who testifys that the area in question is who decides that needs to return.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

From the three defense attorneys I just listened to though, they said they have never had a case where the ME DIDN'T remove the top of the skull.

What defense attorneys? On TV? Just wondering, because I have HLN on and today it was just Jean Casarez, but I'm wondering if I'm missing some good commentary! I hate a day without Dr Casey Jordan!

Did they specify that that included skeletal remains?

 

[kidshop]

I don't know or even think that removing the top of the skull would have provided the state with anymore evidence. From the three defense attorneys I just listened to though, they said they have never had a case where the ME DIDN'T remove the top of the skull. Since it was common procedure, I think that discredits Dr. G. They need to get her back on the stand to explain why she didn't do that so the jury can see that it wouldn't have provided anymore evidence. If they don't do that, I believe it will leave the jurors questioning her expert testimony.

I missed a lot of today, but all the ones where they do remove the skull, are they bodies or skeletons?

As a side, I think it's pretty clear so far, that there was a dead body in the trunk and the tape was applied prior to decomposition. In the Florida heat the body would have skeletonized in just a few weeks. There is no reason to tape a dead child or a skeleton, and clear evidence shows the tape held the mandible in place. The root growth is consistent with the body not being moved.

Grasping at straws....

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

The jury knows something is up as this witness did not return today.

I think JP handled it very well and put the explanation to the jurors in such a way that they're not thinking too much is up. He said something about needing to fit in another witness from out of state, and that this witness will return Monday. He was very matter-of-fact about it. What the jurors think every time there's an objection (and sustained or overruled), sidebar, or are dismissed for an unscheduled break, who knows. Not supposed to infer anything, but they ARE human.

 

[plutotek]

I don't know or even think that removing the top of the skull would have provided the state with anymore evidence. From the three defense attorneys I just listened to though, they said they have never had a case where the ME DIDN'T remove the top of the skull. Since it was common procedure, I think that discredits Dr. G. They need to get her back on the stand to explain why she didn't do that so the jury can see that it wouldn't have provided anymore evidence. If they don't do that, I believe it will leave the jurors questioning her expert testimony.

I think you are right. She needs to explain to them why it wasn't needed or why she felt it wasn't needed.

Putting aside my personal aversion to Spitz's 'because I said so' approach to the protocol, I agree that the state needs to find a way get an explanation of Dr. G's reasoning into the record, if for no other reason than you can't see any of the crime shows w/an autopsy scene where they DON'T open the skull.

However, I agree w/the theory that since there is no brain, no reason to open up, but that's just an armchair theory that has yet to be demonstrated in this case.

 

[MaryAnnDVC]

Putting aside my personal aversion to Spitz's 'because I said so' approach to the protocol, I agree that the state needs to find a way get an explanation of Dr. G's reasoning into the record, if for no other reason than you can't see any of the crime shows w/an autopsy scene where they DON'T open the skull.

However, I agree w/the theory that since there is no brain, no reason to open up, but that's just an armchair theory that has yet to be demonstrated in this case.

I appear to be at a disadvantage...I don't watch crime shows!

And also, regarding no brain...with the hole in the bottom of the skull, and empty eye sockets, I would imagine one can see quite a bit in there. And Dr G DID have the residue in the skull analyzed. Dr Spitz didn't because he doesn't have access to a lab? That doesn't sound good.

ETA: IMHO

 

[Nik's Mom]

Well, there were some interesting points for the defense today. The differing opinions on opening the skull, for example. But the doctor didn't help when he accused the m.e. from altering the scene. So, I think it was a wash-out today.

 

[CurlyGirl]

I believe the defense won big points today discrediting the way in which Dr. G did the autopsy. From everything I have read and heard today, it is very common procedure to remove the top of the skull. I think that hurts the state.

I find it interesting that, although Dr. Spitz took the top of the skull off, he didn't test the residue and just looked at it. Shouldn't that be protocol -- testing what's inside the skull? One could argue that Dr. G. tested the inside and Spitz made an error in not testing it himself.

I'm not really sure how I feel about the idea that the skull was found on the left side and therefore duct tape wasn't put on until after decomposition. It seems far fetched that someone traipsed through the woods to apply duct tape and thought in advance that they should tape the pieces back together. Maybe Casey went back into the woods with some duct tape to try and make it look more like a kidnapping/murder?

That body, in a trunk in the FL heat, probably started decomposing faster than "most bodies" would. So, what needs to be answered is how far into decomposition was the tape placed? Two days? Two weeks? And what is the rate of decomposition for a body in the trunk of a car in FL heat compared to "normal" decomposition? A week of normal decomposition is equal to how many days of being in a trunk, in bags, in the FL heat?

 

[MyManGoofy!]

to get murder 1 and death it does.

or else it could have been spir of the moment anger, accident, or anything else. if you want a conviction of murder 1 and ask for death over live you have to prove she planned it and carried it out

Not necessarily. Here is a very good overview of the charge against Casey http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimes/homicide/first-degree-murder.html

I am really just a lurked but I keep seeing this pop up. Also, I missed everything this am so if this has already been talked about - I apologize-still trying to catch up!!

 

[plutotek]

I appear to be at a disadvantage...I don't watch crime shows!

And also, regarding no brain...with the hole in the bottom of the skull, and empty eye sockets, I would imagine one can see quite a bit in there. And Dr G DID have the residue in the skull analyzed. Dr Spitz didn't because he doesn't have access to a lab? That doesn't sound good.

ETA: IMHO

Oh, I agree with you there, but perception is reality, and while Spitz ended on a low note, he does have the credentials to lend credence to his statement that it should have been done.

 

[LisaR]

What defense attorneys? On TV? Just wondering, because I have HLN on and today it was just Jean Casarez, but I'm wondering if I'm missing some good commentary! I hate a day without Dr Casey Jordan!

Did they specify that that included skeletal remains?

I switch back and forth between my local Orlando channels. I don't have cable so I don't get any of these channels you guys talk about.

I missed a lot of today, but all the ones where they do remove the skull, are they bodies or skeletons?

As a side, I think it's pretty clear so far, that there was a dead body in the trunk and the tape was applied prior to decomposition. In the Florida heat the body would have skeletonized in just a few weeks. There is no reason to tape a dead child or a skeleton, and clear evidence shows the tape held the mandible in place. The root growth is consistent with the body not being moved.

Grasping at straws....

They did not specify. Just guessing but I am assuming they have seen all types of bodies/skeletons. All have gone up against Jeff Ashton in the courtroom so I am guessing they have been involved in many different cases.

I find it interesting that, although Dr. Spitz took the top of the skull off, he didn't test the residue and just looked at it. Shouldn't that be protocol -- testing what's inside the skull? One could argue that Dr. G. tested the inside and Spitz made an error in not testing it himself.



That body, in a trunk in the FL heat, probably started decomposing faster than "most bodies" would. So, what needs to be answered is how far into decomposition was the tape placed? Two days? Two weeks? And what is the rate of decomposition for a body in the trunk of a car in FL heat? IE: one week of normal decomposition is equal to how many days of decomposing in a trunk in FL heat?

Absolutely! And that was a sticking point for me. Dr. G did TEST the "dust" that she found and determined that it was dirt - at least that is what I remember. Dr. Spitz removed the skull and obtained "dust" and just OBSERVED that it was brain dust as opposed to dirt based on his experience. Dr. G needed to remove the top of the skull and Dr. Spitz needed to test what he found. I think there is cause to claim that BOTH did a shoddy autopsy.

 

[plutotek]

Not necessarily. Here is a very good overview of the charge against Casey http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimes/homicide/first-degree-murder.html

I am really just a lurked but I keep seeing this pop up. Also, I missed everything this am so if this has already been talked about - I apologize-still trying to catch up!!

Thanks for that as researching FL law was honestly on my list of things to do today (too hot outside to do anything else).

 

[Kurby]

interesting fact - non case related.

we`re starting to wash all the crib sheets and cloths from dd (just 2 months younger then caylee) and he brings me up a pile of sheets to fold.

all winnie the pooh. i take one look at them and make this face that makes dh say - whats wrong - he`s not watching the trial so he doesn`t know winnie was what caylee had