Huckaby defense seeks second Sandra Cantu autopsy

[ohiogirl]

Good morning everyone, I just finished watching the news bit on the Today show in regards to the Huckaby defense team wanting to exhume Sandra's body for a second autopsy. I took the time to read the past few pages here to try to get an idea as to what all you brilliant people thought about this subject and I am a little leery now to post what my feelings are on this. I am not opposed to the exhumation. I feel that Sandra is in heaven and albeit VERY at peace.

I am very concerned about the people of Tracy reporting(in the news report this morning) that they do not feel Melissa acted alone and there may be a chance there is another perpetrator out there somewhere in Tracy. If there is even the slightest chance this is true then it is owed to Sandra and the other innocent children of that community to be brought to justice. After reading about the Tracy 60 and other reports of child *advertiser censored* rings I feel that if the prosecutors really want to leave no reasonable doubt in a future jurors mind then they shouldn't object to the 2nd autopsy. I understand that LE felt 100% that Huckaby was the perp in this case, but what if she is covering for a partner in her crime....or more than one partner in her crime. What if she was filming what she was doing for well.....sickening but obvious reasons? Wouldn't that trigger one to think she was filming it for a reason....or another person perhaps? I just don't want the defense to be able to put an ounce of doubt in the minds of a juror, and if the people of Tracy are doubting that this woman is capable of doing these things....key word there is doubt...shouldn't we put all doubt to rest by allowing the defense to perform their own autopsy? These people in Tracy(who already admit to doubt) will be the ones to sit on the jury and an ounce of reasonable doubt will be a travesty of Justice for Sandra!

I agree with you, everything must be done to put this woman away. Sandra is at peace now, now justice must be found for her.

 

[QNA]

Really? More convenient than a sex offender being charged with a rape and murder of a child. A sunday school teacher and Mother of a small daughter was more convienent that a sex offender? Do you really believe that?

Melissa had more ties to the victim than any of the random Tracy 60. Also there was the suitcase being possibly hers, the finding of the infamous "note" -which I haven't confirmed LE ever found., and the fact that she had been giving conflicting reports to different sources, something none of the Tracy 60 had done. This is what made her more convenient.

 

[QNA]

http://www.tracypress.com/pages/ful...widget=push&instance=home_news_bullets&open=&

The investigators themselves, when first confronted with the evidence that pointed to Huckaby, were inclined to look for another suspect.

True but when they realized they were getting nowhere with their other leads amidst the growing public pressure for an arrest they may have decided to go with this unlikely suspect to assuage the urgency. Do you have any idea how much pressure is put on LE in a nationally saturated media-frenzy case such as this? Especially when LE is so inexperienced in something of this magnitude... Again, not to say that they are not right on their mark but the atmosphere is very prevalent for haste, urgency and thus possible mistakes.

Somewhat OT but I have a very strong suspicion that Fred Williams is very much involved in the crime. More on this later.

 

[QNA]

What QNA would like us to believe is Sandra went with Melissa willingly, Melissa "accidently" caused Sandra's death prior to her feeling threatened or held against her will, Melissa decided to cover up the "accident" by then raping and molesting her dead body to point to a male perp, stuffing her in the suitcase, and dumping her in the irrigation pond. She then decided to make up the stories she told LE and the media to further cover the "accident".

What is left out here is the evidence the rape happened while Sandra was still alive which changes the entire scenario. The rape before death would conclude Sandra was held against her will and a kidnapping did occur.

This evidence has not come to light yet or for that matter been proven. The fact that Huckaby has been charged with rape doesn't mean she did it or that it occurred before death. The second autopsy my either confirm or deny this. I still believe that there may be another party or parties involved. I am in the process of investigating Fred Williams whom I have a strong suspicion is involved in all of this. More on this to come.

 

[QNA]

Really it is All speculative. We don't know what happened in Sandra's last moments so we are left to speculate. We do know she was raped with a foreign object, killed and stuffed into a suitcase.

Or accidentally killed, her body molested with a foreign object to make it look like rape, and then stuffed into a suitcase. BIG difference.

 

[Nora Charles]

This evidence has not come to light yet or for that matter been proven. The fact that Huckaby has been charged with rape doesn't mean she did it or that it occurred before death. The second autopsy my either confirm or deny this. I still believe that there may be another party or parties involved. I am in the process of investigating Fred Williams whom I have a strong suspicion is involved in all of this. More on this to come.

Obviously nothing will be proven until a verdict has been handed down in this case. However, the fact that Huckaby has been charged with rape does mean it occurred before death. Just like the charge of kidnapping requires the victim to be alive, the charge of rape requires the victim to be alive. If the victim were already dead the charges would have been different. This has been pointed out several times previously.

If the second autopsy is granted and performed, depending on the results it could potentially be useful to the defense during trial. However, it would not change the charges which were filed by the prosecution...and those charges include "rape" of a living human being.

 

[QNA]

Obviously nothing will be proven until a verdict has been handed down in this case. However, the fact that Huckaby has been charged with rape does mean it occurred before death. Just like the charge of kidnapping requires the victim to be alive, the charge of rape requires the victim to be alive. If the victim were already dead the charges would have been different. This has been pointed out several times previously.

If the second autopsy is granted and performed, depending on the results it could potentially be useful to the defense during trial. However, it would not change the charges which were filed by the prosecution...and those charges include "rape" of a living human being.

The findings and thus conclusions of the first autopsy may be erroneous, Something the second autopsy will either confirm or deny. Just becuase a person is charged with a crime doesn't mean the evidence used to support the charge is infallible. There are numerous cases of evidence not holding up under scrutiny in a court of law. Thus just because Huckaby was charged with rape doesn't mean the evidence used to support that charge will turn out to be infallible..

As I've stated before, this may a case of a "trumped up charge" to bolster the prosecutions case. Can you imagine the embarrassment of the prosecution if a second autopsy reveals contradictory findings... i.e. that the "rape" or molestation could have occurred after death? Or even at all for that matter. Perhaps a very good reason to so adamantly protest granting it to the defense...

 

[Nora Charles]

Can you imagine the embarrassment of the prosecution if a second autopsy reveals contradictory findings... i.e. that the "rape" or molestation could have occurred after death?

LOL! On the contrary, the defense wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't try to prove contradictory findings in the second autopsy.

As I said, nothing will be proven until a verdict has been handed down in this case.

 

[snapdragon]

Or accidentally killed, her body molested with a foreign object to make it look like rape, and then stuffed into a suitcase. BIG difference.

Hmm. An innocent person who accidently killed someone would call the police. Also, let's discuss the term "accident". I will preface this by saying NONE of us knows the cause of death yet. We are simply theorizing on what could have happened, as you did in the above statement. So I will now as well. Hitting someone with a vehicle while sober could be an accident. Drugging a child after kidnapping them and accidently overdosing them is NOT an accident. If that was what indeed was done, she is responsible, just like a drunk driver that kills someone, even tho they didn't INTEND it to happen.

If the scenario you provide comes to be proven as fact, at least it will go to fact that she knew right from wrong. Covering a crime shows you know it was wrong, and she will not be deemed insane. She will have to stand trial as a "mentally competent" person.

Oh, and BTW, IMO anyone who sexually brutalizes a child's body, dead or alive, for whatever reason, needs to be permanently removed from society.

 

[MCDRAW]

Melissa had more ties to the victim than any of the random Tracy 60. Also there was the suitcase being possibly hers, the finding of the infamous "note" -which I haven't confirmed LE ever found., and the fact that she had been giving conflicting reports to different sources, something none of the Tracy 60 had done. This is what made her more convenient.

Oh I get it. She was more convienent because the evidence was pointing toward her. If that's is what you are saying that all the evidence points to her so that made her convient then I agree with you.

 

[Salem]

The findings and thus conclusions of the first autopsy may be erroneous, Something the second autopsy will either confirm or deny. Just becuase a person is charged with a crime doesn't mean the evidence used to support the charge is infallible. There are numerous cases of evidence not holding up under scrutiny in a court of law. Thus just because Huckaby was charged with rape doesn't mean the evidence used to support that charge will turn out to be infallible..

As I've stated before, this may a case of a "trumped up charge" to bolster the prosecutions case. Can you imagine the embarrassment of the prosecution if a second autopsy reveals contradictory findings... i.e. that the "rape" or molestation could have occurred after death? Or even at all for that matter. Perhaps a very good reason to so adamantly protest granting it to the defense...

You do have a point. But can you imagine the horror and embrassment and pain of Huckaby's family if in fact the mutilation of Sandra's body was done after death? (I use the word mutilation based on the defense attorney's request for a 2nd autopsy).

After watching Sgt. Sheneman give the press conference regarding MH's arrest, I tend to believe that this will be a pretty tight case with good evidence that LE found horrifiying.

Just my opinion,

Salem

 

[Salem]

Or accidentally killed, her body molested with a foreign object to make it look like rape, and then stuffed into a suitcase. BIG difference.

How do you mean "accidentally"? I can follow your line of thought and while I disagree, you do make valid points. However, I am stuck on your use of the word accidently. How could Sandra's death be an accident given what we know?

Thanks,

Salem

 

[MCDRAW]

Or accidentally killed, her body molested with a foreign object to make it look like rape, and then stuffed into a suitcase. BIG difference.

Again, if it was an accident, why not call 911? Based on your theory it seems like a lot of work to cover up an accident. She would have to move her to the church, rape her to blame on someone else, redress ( if she was found clothed), get her suitcase, place her inside, load in the car, and drive to pond to dump Sandra. All to cover up an accident. If it was truly an accident wouldn't it have been simpler to call 911? Or even place the body where Sandra could have been found sooner? Once again, I will say that whether Sandra was raped before or after death it was still rape. She is still sick either way and needs to serve the rest of her life in prison. Once a rapist always a rapist in my book. Someone can not kidnap, and rape and murder especially a young child and then claim it was all an accident because the victim ended up dead.

 

[MCDRAW]

The findings and thus conclusions of the first autopsy may be erroneous, Something the second autopsy will either confirm or deny. Just becuase a person is charged with a crime doesn't mean the evidence used to support the charge is infallible. There are numerous cases of evidence not holding up under scrutiny in a court of law. Thus just because Huckaby was charged with rape doesn't mean the evidence used to support that charge will turn out to be infallible..

As I've stated before, this may a case of a "trumped up charge" to bolster the prosecutions case. Can you imagine the embarrassment of the prosecution if a second autopsy reveals contradictory findings... i.e. that the "rape" or molestation could have occurred after death? Or even at all for that matter. Perhaps a very good reason to so adamantly protest granting it to the defense...

When I asked you about the "trumped up charges" you said you were talking about the charges that police just tack on. I agree that police do tack on charges but normally there is proof they can't just make up charges. Personally, I believe that the police department knows how bad Sandra's family has been hurt and wouldn't add "trumped up charges" such as rape with a foreign object. That charge could only add pain to Sandra's family. I just don't believe that the police would "trump" up that charge without the evidence to back up the charge. IMO

 

[fran]

LOL! On the contrary, the defense wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't try to prove contradictory findings in the second autopsy.

As I said, nothing will be proven until a verdict has been handed down in this case.

I believe the term is called, 'dueling experts.' The def will most likely get their second autopsy and then the games begin.

IF one side doesn't like their hired gun's answer, :waitasec:....they shop until they get an expert to agree with what they *want to hear.*

JMHO
fran

 

[MCDRAW]

How do you mean "accidentally"? I can follow your line of thought and while I disagree, you do make valid points. However, I am stuck on your use of the word accidently. How could Sandra's death be an accident given what we know?

Thanks,

Salem

I agree. I think that is what is throwing me the words like accidental, trumped up, and content. Otherwise I agree there are some valid points.

 

[nursebeeme]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/21/BAFI176FFO.DTL

The defense will withdraw its request, which Huckaby's attorney made to a judge Thursday just a day after Sandra was laid to rest, Public Defender Peter Fox said.
He said the deputy public defender handling the case, Sam Behar, learned this morning from the county's chief medical examiner, Bennett Omalu, that "the relevant samples were preserved" and had not been interred.
"It will not be necessary to disturb the child's remains," Fox said in an interview. "From a human point of view, certainly it's nice not to have to do that."

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Great! I don't care if the real reason is the heat he was getting from other places or if he is being in earnest that the samples are sufficient...but I am so glad he is not going to pursue the exhumation request. It must be a huge relief to Sandra's family.

 

[nursebeeme]

I think this is the best news I have heard all week!

 

[arielilane]