2009.03.14 Geraldo - Dr. Baden, Slip or Not on Chloroform In Caylee's hair test?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Before KC's case, had anyone EVER heard of "Chloroform" used as a babysitting agent?

Maybe, I'm old and there have just been much more advancements in the science & technology in the field of babysitting than I can imagine...scary if really true.

#1-I don't believe that is a true statement from MB
#2-Chloroform wears off so quickly that it would not serve to keep someone asleep for any length of time-unless it was continuously administered. So how would that work as a "babysitter" for KCs evening out?
 
I posted this earlier on the Rumor thread. I was asked to re-post it out here.. I had no clue there were 10 pages devoted to this.
All thoughts are based upon the premise that Michael Baden knows something about Caylee's hair testing that we don't know. Otherwise, there is no reason for a discussion of this at all. :)

First, since probably none of us are Forensic Chemists, and since we definitely do NOT have the chemical composition of any of Caylee's hair remains, we have to consider what COULD be possibly meant by his statement. Also, there's the fact that while intact Chloroform as a chemical compound may not have been found within the hair shaft as it grew, indicating long term exposure, the metabolites of Chloroform, if found in larger amounts not usually found in the same concentrations in a small child's hair WOULD be significant.
With that disclaimer out of the way, these are my thoughts as posted on the Casey Rumor thread:

Obviously there are different things he could have meant. These are what I could come up with.. While we are dscussing Chloroform in her hair, I think it's relative to the discussion to mention the possible presence of Xanax ( a prescription sedative believed to have been given to Caylee on a continuing basis by Casey) also. As to which scenario is more likely, I lean towards the first scenario, because I believe it is the most likely one:

1) Caylee's hair found in the trunk had Chloroform liquid coating part of it, ( much like hair spray coats hair) meaning that her body was placed in an area of the trunk where Chloroform was spilled, or that she vomited Chloroform and it got on her hair. She could also have already been deceased and been placed on an area of carpeting or other material soaked with Chloroform.

2) Caylee's loose hair ( like the one with the death band) in the trunk was tested and was found to be positive for the systemic presence of chloroform metabolites in the hair shaft.This would prove long-term dosing.
Addressing the issue of additional Xanax dosing for a moment- We might also find that other sedating drugs were present upon chemical analysis of the hair, such as a benzodiazapine like Xanax. ( I think Caylee's "Zannys" in Casey-speak was Xanax) . I hope DEA records from pharmacies and all family info pertaining to Xanax quantities in the home for the last year of Caylee's life have been obtained and reviewed. I hope records are released at trial if any discrepency or duplication of prescrbing at multiple Pharmacies was found. I want to know whose Xanax Casey was stealing (if it wasn't Casey's prescription), and if someone in the family knew they had doses missing from their prescription bottle or bottles and silently complied with Casey. Depending upon the dosage prescribed for an adult, as little as 1/8th of a single pill probably would have caused altered consciousness in a baby.

3) Caylee's decomposed remains with hair attached were tested and the long-term presence of Chloroform in her system was detected in her hair. Casey's Internet searches on making Chloroform point directly to intent to harm by illegal drugging. Any searches in the home which turned up chemicals used to make the Chloroform and which are not usually found in a home would also be significant. As we know, hair does often retain certain metabolites of drugs and other chemicals which our bodies processed. Again, it's possible that Chloroform + a Rx sedative would be found.

One interesting thing that I just realized when thinking about the possibility of determining length of ingestion of drugs is that there is video and photographic evidence of the total length of Caylee'e hair days before most people beleive she was killed. The videos and photos of her with her great-grandfather at the nursing home. IF Dr. G was correct in being as excited about the hair as she seemed to be at the time of Caylee's remains discovery, it's possible that some hair was fully intact in length despite the months of exposure to the elements. That would be a best- case scenario and Caylee's own body would speak as a witness to what was done to her over a period of time.

The first liklihood of what Michael Baden may have meant is not that alarming or earth-shattering, because we know Chloroform was found in the trunk in greater concentration than those of the metabolites which are found in a decomposing corpse without a history of exposure or ingestion of Chloroform drugging. It would confirm that Caylee contacted Chloroform which backs up the forensic analysis of the trunk gasses. It's still sad, very sad.

The second liklihood of concentrations of any drug in Caylee's hair shaft structure, whether found in the car trunk, on the remains months later, or both would be huge. Neither one could be explained in any measure by the defense, and it would totally blow any " accidental overdose" theory out of the water. This may be one reason Baez is already questioning evidence collection in the car.

In any case, if true, I believe the evidence , if present, will benefit the prosecution at trial, IMO.

Maria


Interestingly, during the execution of the search warrant on Dec. 11h of the Anthony home, LE confiscated prescription drugs from the home. This ties in with forensic analysis of Caylee's hair, as there was no tissue left to test.
 
If they conducted a test of the hair, the defense is required to disclose this to the prosecution, aren't they? Where in the rules of discovery does it state that they only have to disclose favorable results to the prosecution? Is it something to do with freedom from self incrimination?

Under Florida's Rule of Criminal Procedure, defense obligation in discovery.
(snipped)
3.220 (d)(1)(B)(ii)
(ii) reports or statements of experts made in connection with the particular case, including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons; and
(iii) any tangible papers or objects that the defendant intends to use in the hearing or trial.
It's my understanding that if samples were given to the defense to be tested, it will come out at trial. If tests were conducted by the defense but results of that test aren't submitted, it will come out as well. It would look bad to the defense to conduct a test but not submit the results.

You snipped out the part to which (ii) referred: the defense-called expert (not the State's expert, or someone not called as an expert). See 3.220(d)(i)(B)(i): "the statement of any person listed in subdivision (d)(1)(A),other than that of the defendant" which once one reads it again seems to narrow the list from "all experts" to "experts the defense may call at trial or hearing".

If the expert is called to trial (or hearing)this is a "yes" the expert would give all his/her reports to the State. But if they don't call the expert you very well could never hear about the test. KWIM?

Defenses conduct all kinds of tests, find out they are not favorable to client, and you never hear the first peep about them. I remember other cases where the defense used up samples doing their own testing (which was not favorable to their client, the defendant) and you never heard about the defense's testing at trial because it was worse for the defendant than the State's testing.
 
JB had custody but IIRC they were held in the funeral home and viewed at the funeral home, because the Defense didn't have access to a 'free' lab.

Not 100% sure since they were secretly cremated at some point and things were kept VERY quiet around that time -- so who knows?

I just membered that the Director of the funeral home said the defense should not do an autopsy at his business that they would have to take it some place else. Then I understood that JB and Lee went to the funeral him and Lee looked at the bones. What else could he do? There was no tissues. I really doubt that Lee would have much work to do.
 
According to the FBI this was pure chloroform.

I had a can of dry cleaning solution for my couch, it contained chloroform. It also contained several other chemicals so if I spilled it (or used it) an analyses would show chloroform and some form of alcohol and some stabilizers. The only reason I even knew it had chloroform was because of the big warning on the label only to use where well ventilated, not to mix it with other things. And some cancer warning! So I read the whole label. I doubt if I would have payed any attention when I was her age.

She can try to save her butt anyway she wants, I hope the jury isn't buying. I'm curious how many kids her age even know there is chloroform in cleaning solutions. Wouldn't most people her age just say 'what are you talking about?' I don't have chloroform in my car!!
Sounds to me that her and her attorney were talking.
 
FWIW, IMHO, this 'slip of the tongue' by Baden would not be spontaneous...rather, it would be the beginning of the defense sowing the "it was an accident" defense when the ZFG thing completely unravels @ trial.

Baden first advanced his accidental o.d back in Sep '08....before his wife was enlisted in the defense.


Havent read the whole thread so i may be repeating here but this just struck a nerve with me. Accidental?? How is chloroforming a baby ever accidental? That is the biggest load of (you no what) i have ever heard! No offenense to you BJB of course. When i was pregnant i prayed for a daughter both times but i was blessed with two boys and i can no longer have children. I would have gladly taken this beautiful child into my home as probably many of you here would have also. Im sorry i had to get that off my chest sorry for going OT I think i need a break from this case.:curses:
 
Every time there's one of these little imprompto hearings....is it my imagination or is the SA table not holding back laughter at JB"S performance?

How many times does JB start to "speak" before the prosecutors are interupting and reminding the judge what a bozo this dude is....

LMAO------The last one there were several peeps LOL. I heard them.
 
http://www.editgrid.com/user/evi/FBI_Evidence_Tests

On the report from the FBI there was :

Residues of chloroform were identified or

Residues consistent with chloroform- no additional chemicals (eg,, acetone or alcohols)

found on:

Piece of spare tire cover (OCSO Item #22, Q-I8)
Spare tire cover (OCSO Item #26, Q21)
Left side of trunk liner (OCSO Item #25, Q-20)
Right side of trunk liner (OCSO Item #24, Q-19)

Piece of spare tire cover (OCSO Item # 2, Q-16)
Q44-I/Q45-l(swabbings from Q44 and Q45 were combined
Piece of spare tire cover (OCSO Item II 31, Q-24)

this is not an air sample these are 6 places found in the trunk that contained pure chloroform. In other words not chloroform made at home that would likely still show bi-product of whatever was used to make it or chloroform found in cleaning products that would contain other chemical residue. This is just chloroform in it's most pure state.

I agree completely. Just an added note, there apparently is no such thing as 'pure chloroform', however, there is "Purified Chloroform". I'm not a techie in these things, so could be totally wrong, but IMO the idea is basically the same.
It is also my opinion if a person deliberately combines the ingredients to make chloroform, and some of those ingredients show up as left over, then the odds would be much, much higher for leftover components from two different substances used to clean accidentally mixing together to form chloroform, but again, not a techie, so could be way off base.
Lanie
 
IIRC when chloroform was first detected in the trunk, some news articles said the chemical can be produced if bleach mixes with decomposition. Now, when I look it up, all I can find is the fact that a decomposing body produces Methane, and if you mix Chlorine with that then Chlorophorm is emitted.
Didn't CA used bleach to try to get rid of the smell?
Could the hair test in question be one from the trunk and not the remains?
 
Let's not forget that toxicology will also include testing for other substances, such as Xanax.
Again, I firmly believe that the defense did their own testing on the hair found with the skeletal remains and Dr. Baden is privy to those results, either as an unofficial consultant or as the husband of LKB. He definitely slipped up. LKB likely had him sleep on the couch after raking him over the coals.
 
It's ironic that I'm a poster who's been chatting about chloroform "in the movies" and yet I doubt KC's use of chloroform so strongly. In "REAL" life, I believe I've read that chloroform leaves burns on the skin. It kills more often than not...It's not the "easy" knock out drug as portrayed in the movies...
I do not buy it. Never have. KC put duct tape across Caylee's mouth and then shoved a pillow into her face till she was dead. Case closed.

I too believed she smothered her daughter. It amazed me that the defense makes such a huge deal out of the CAUSE of death being unknown. Since KC said there was no accident, and we know she IS dead and we know about the duct tape and trash bags, etc. knowing how the perp chose to kill her doesn't make her any less dead. Maybe I just don't get it.
I believe it was suffocation, not smothering. I think Casey Chloroformed her with a rag, then duct taped her mouth, and maybe nostrils closed, and poor little Caylee was never able to breath again.
 
I believe it was suffocation, not smothering. I think Casey Chloroformed her with a rag, then duct taped her mouth, and maybe nostrils closed, and poor little Caylee was never able to breath again.


That's what I think too except that it could have been more complicated with some apparatus rigged in the trunk to put out even more fumes knowing that the sealed trunk would help displace all the oxygen and finally bring about death. I even believe the heart sticker on the mouth area served a practical purpose to somehow do this. Just a theory of what might have happened.
 
I believe it was suffocation, not smothering. I think Casey Chloroformed her with a rag, then duct taped her mouth, and maybe nostrils closed, and poor little Caylee was never able to breath again.

I too have entertained the idea of suffocation: trussing up little Caylee with duct tape, chlorforming her, then smothering her with a pillow.

I also thought perhaps leaving a bound up Caylee in the trunk, with open chloro and letting her lay in there dying of heat stroke.

However, it makes more sense that she was killed in the house.
JMO, of course.
 
I believe it was suffocation, not smothering. I think Casey Chloroformed her with a rag, then duct taped her mouth, and maybe nostrils closed, and poor little Caylee was never able to breath again.

Something that I have wondered about is how Caylee's teeth were sort of spread about....how did they come loose from the jaw.????
 
I believe it was suffocation, not smothering. I think Casey Chloroformed her with a rag, then duct taped her mouth, and maybe nostrils closed, and poor little Caylee was never able to breath again.
I really hate myself when I nitpick like this so I apologize in advance, but there is no difference between 'to smother' and 'to suffocate', at least when 'suffocate' is used as a transitive verb, which is its primary definition in most dictionaries. It's a distinction without a difference, and not particularly significant, especially in this context, when the main point is that a conscious act was performed.
That's what I think too except that it could have been more complicated with some apparatus rigged in the trunk to put out even more fumes knowing that the sealed trunk would help displace all the oxygen and finally bring about death. I even believe the heart sticker on the mouth area served a practical purpose to somehow do this. Just a theory of what might have happened.

I too have entertained the idea of suffocation: trussing up little Caylee with duct tape, chlorforming her, then smothering her with a pillow.

I also thought perhaps leaving a bound up Caylee in the trunk, with open chloro and letting her lay in there dying of heat stroke.

However, it makes more sense that she was killed in the house.
JMO, of course.

I don't quite understand the need for elaborate constructs and devices here. Please excuse me for being too graphically gruesome, but all KC would have had to do is put a pillow over Caylee's head and lean down hard for a couple of minutes. It's not like the poor, tiny child would be able to offer much resistance. If there is any foundation to the idea of pharmaceutical babysitting then she would have offered none at all.
 
I really hate myself when I nitpick like this so I apologize in advance, but there is no difference between 'to smother' and 'to suffocate', at least when 'suffocate' is used as a transitive verb, which is its primary definition in most dictionaries. It's a distinction without a difference, and not particularly significant, especially in this context, when the main point is that a conscious act was performed.




I don't quite understand the need for elaborate constructs and devices here. Please excuse me for being too graphically gruesome, but all KC would have had to do is put a pillow over Caylee's head and lean down hard for a couple of minutes. It's not like the poor, tiny child would be able to offer much resistance. If there is any foundation to the idea of pharmaceutical babysitting then she would have offered none at all.
Occam's Razor: One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.
 
According to the FBI this was pure chloroform.

I had a can of dry cleaning solution for my couch, it contained chloroform. It also contained several other chemicals so if I spilled it (or used it) an analyses would show chloroform and some form of alcohol and some stabilizers.

I'm not sure this explanation will hold up in court. If you spilled your cleaner in your trunk and the test was done on your trunk it would still show chloroform. It would also show other chemicals (just as KC's trunk did), but chloroform is chloroform. I guess what I'm trying to say is, the presence of chloroform in the trunk is significant...but it's also an extremely fragile piece of evidence by itself.

Now, it's my understanding that chemicals found in the hair shaft would be metabolized chemicals, so if the chloroform is present in Caylee's hair shafts...that's a whole new ballgame (as far as my limited understanding goes).
 
Was this Baden Blooper discussed on NG or JVM last night? I didn't see a thread and was unable to watch the shows myself.

.......................................

Patty added update: No, this was not discussed on NG/JVM etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
315
Total visitors
459

Forum statistics

Threads
609,471
Messages
18,254,565
Members
234,660
Latest member
Dexter 7783
Back
Top