2009.06.19 FBI Decomposition Report

[butwhatif?]

Snipped.

I don't see any statement in the LIBS analysis that says the tests confirm human decomp. It's stated that the results are consistent with a HDE but not conclusive and that other explanations for the compounds found cannot be ruled out. I can't see anything new in this report from when the initial findings were released months ago, apart from the fact that they also utilised a dead squirrel and the results of tests previously done on another dead child in their examinations, plus the results of tests done on the paper towels.

ITA- And its interesting to note that even though chloroform is a known compound of human decomp it was not present in the control sample. (the child allowed to decompose in the trunk of a car with a blanket).
I think Vass' research will one day be an exact science, but right know it is waaaaaay too early to be used in the courtroom.(imo)
The 5 chemical markers he identified as being present in the florida trunk sample and indicative of human decomp, can be found in so many other things.Beer, water, food additives etc.

For the person who asked if the adipocere can be tested for DNA, studies in my country show that it can, or it is at least being attempted.
I came across an interview with dr Baden about it, and he also says it can be used to test for some drugs. So I'm curious as to why it doesnt seem that they tested it for signs of presicription drugs or anything else.
Keep in mind, that I'm no expert. I just spent a few hours researching it online yesterday, and this is what I came up with.

 

[Just Jayla]

*snipped to point*

Yeppers...that would be one way that the adipocere could get on the paper towel from KC cleaning it. I guess she could have gotten all the tissue off the carpet to where it didn't show up in the forensics, but that perplexes me if she did.

Thanks! This is a possibility, indeed.

This is horrifying....Maybe KC put the heart sticker on the duct tape after Caylee had developed adipocere. Thus, since cheeks are very adipose (especially on sweet babies), maybe KC got some on her fingers and used the towels to wipe.
If she saw Caylee in that state, maybe it also explains her later fascination with skeleton avatars/pics.

 

[AZlawyer]

OK, I looked back at the lists of items found in the trunk and in the white garbage bag, and I'm not seeing any paper towels...but in the white garbage bag there were "five napkins." Do you think this is what they tested? Or is there an evidence list somewhere with "paper towels" listed?

 

[chefmom]

We know the hair in the trunk had postmortem damage of some kind. The hair came from a corpse. The corpse was either Cindy, Casey, Caylee, or Cindy's mom...so who was it? It was Caylee-she is the only one missing and later proven to be dead. So why do we have so much trouble accepting that the stain that included every element of a human decomposition in an elevated amount was in fact decomposition?

Of course it was decomposition. The only question really is whose? Well, obviously Caylee's, since the hair that came from a corpse and also came from the trunk came from her head. So the apparent decomp was none other than that of Caylee Anthony.

To me it is so cut and dried on this particular issue. There is not even a reasonable space to doubt in there as far as I can tell. Add to that the witness testimony and all the people who knew and know what human decomp smells like have confirmed that, yes, by the smell, there was a dead body in there, nothing else smells like that. Not one person. Not two people. Many people, including trained professionals and CADAVER DOGS, attest to the fact that there was the scent of a human decomposing coming from that car.

The jury is not going to have as much trouble with this one as we have had between us here. It is cut and dried. There was a dead body. Their was a dead and missing child. One of the hairs from the dead child was in the trunk. The child was in the trunk and dead at the time. The child was Caylee.

And, the state rests! (Lol! Well stated!)

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[Devon]

I stated in my first sentence (IMO) which means "in my opinion" but I am sorry as I should have made that more clear. In my opinion, if I was on a jury, I think the LIBS results confirm the stain was from decomp. The statements in the report that convince me of this are as follows at this link:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...l-caylee-anthony-autopsy-2,0,3085300.htmlpage

handwritten page # 6559:
"It is interesting to note that every element known to be associated with a decompositional event (that could be detected using this technique) was elevated over control values."

handwritten page # 6560 - 6561
If you are a visual person, the graphs on these pages should help you see that the calcium, magnesium, sodium and iron levels (which are the elements found in human tissue that are found in higher concentrations from drainage as decompositions progresses) are all elevated in the Pontiac's trunk stain versus the control car.

handwritten page # 6566
"Conclusions:
1. LIBS - showing elevated elements typically associated with human decomposition"


Devon, you are right, the report does not state:
the LIBS analysis confirms the stain in the trunk is human decomp, but if you can read this report and think that stain is something other than human decomp, you are a defense attorney's dream juror! Although it is just my opinion and you are certainly entitled to yours too. But I don't think I have ever seen a scientific conclusion that states they are 100% positive (basic statistics rules says there is always an error rate). If you are looking for 100% positive conclusion from scientists, then again I say that you are a defense attorney's dream juror.

In the FBI report released months ago, it stated LIBS analysis was going to be performed but no results were available yet. This report has the actual results of the LIBS, so, yes, this is new. The report also has the results of the VFA analysis which has never been released before hence I would call it new. This test is interesting to me because it potentially moves the timeline from 2.6 days decomp in the trunk up to 0.7 days. There was a very long discussion about the 2.6 days so I am surprised this new analysis has not been noticed by anyone yet.

I apologise - I didn't notice your 'IMO'! It was late for me last night when I read your post (5 hours ahead of the US) and I clearly didn't read it properly.

The LIBS results were released on Oct 24 and are linked here as 'FBI forensic reports on KC's car' (Post 57): http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71772&page=3

Just for clarification, the evidence convinces me that Caylee's body was in KC's car for a period of time, but I was just pointing out that the forensic results themselves are not conclusive and that the report makes that clear.

I don't remember them ever stating anything about the stain from a forensic standpoint. Can you direct me to a report? I've been waiting for this news forever. I could have missed it. TIA

The original report can be found at the above link.The LIBs test results are at the end of the report. There is some new detail in the final report that's just been released, but the only new test results are those on the paper towels.

 

[Shear22]

We know the hair in the trunk had postmortem damage of some kind. The hair came from a corpse. The corpse was either Cindy, Casey, Caylee, or Cindy's mom...so who was it? It was Caylee-she is the only one missing and later proven to be dead. So why do we have so much trouble accepting that the stain that included every element of a human decomposition in an elevated amount was in fact decomposition?

Of course it was decomposition. The only question really is whose? Well, obviously Caylee's, since the hair that came from a corpse and also came from the trunk came from her head. So the apparent decomp was none other than that of Caylee Anthony.

To me it is so cut and dried on this particular issue. There is not even a reasonable space to doubt in there as far as I can tell. Add to that the witness testimony and all the people who knew and know what human decomp smells like have confirmed that, yes, by the smell, there was a dead body in there, nothing else smells like that. Not one person. Not two people. Many people, including trained professionals and CADAVER DOGS, attest to the fact that there was the scent of a human decomposing coming from that car.

The jury is not going to have as much trouble with this one as we have had between us here. It is cut and dried. There was a dead body. Their was a dead and missing child. One of the hairs from the dead child was in the trunk. The child was in the trunk and dead at the time. The child was Caylee.

I completely agree! :clap:

 

[Valhall]

The jury is not going to have as much trouble with this one as we have had between us here. It is cut and dried. There was a dead body. Their was a dead and missing child. One of the hairs from the dead child was in the trunk. The child was in the trunk and dead at the time. The child was Caylee.

*snipped to point*

The PROBLEM is...and it is a real problem...everything you just stated points to a dead body in the trunk. That does NOT prove murder. It proves some warped, morbid, possibly panicked reaction, hiding the death of a child, disposing of a dead body in an illegal manner, child neglect leading to the death of a child, but not murder.

And especially not in a DP case. That's why there simply must be more than just proving she had a "deceased Caylee" in her trunk and even more than her not reporting it and even more than her partying all the while. Even with all I have seen, and my own personal OPINION on what happened, I could not with a clear conscience convict her of premeditated, capital murder based simply on the fact she freaked out and ran around with her dead daughter in the trunk and partied like it was 1999. I'm sorry, but loathing her and her behavior does not a conviction make.

There has to be more. That's why the chloroform issue is important. That's why the zenaida myspace issue is important. That's why the forensics we have NOT seen on the computers is important. There has to be more....and I believe there is.

STAY TUNED!!!

 

[beach]

OK, I looked back at the lists of items found in the trunk and in the white garbage bag, and I'm not seeing any paper towels...but in the white garbage bag there were "five napkins." Do you think this is what they tested? Or is there an evidence list somewhere with "paper towels" listed?

link to JWG's post including a screenshot -
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3887960#post3887960"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3887960#post3887960[/ame]

 

[JWG]

OK, I looked back at the lists of items found in the trunk and in the white garbage bag, and I'm not seeing any paper towels...but in the white garbage bag there were "five napkins." Do you think this is what they tested? Or is there an evidence list somewhere with "paper towels" listed?

Hi AZ ... LE used "napkin" and "paper towel" to describe the same thing, just depended on who was describing the evidence. Similar to the interchangeable use of "air freshener sheet" and "dryer sheet".

 

[okiedokietoo]

*snipped to point*

The PROBLEM is...and it is a real problem...everything you just stated points to a dead body in the trunk. That does NOT prove murder. It proves some warped, morbid, possibly panicked reaction, hiding the death of a child, disposing of a dead body in an illegal manner, child neglect leading to the death of a child, but not murder.

And especially not in a DP case. That's why there simply must be more than just proving she had a "deceased Caylee" in her trunk and even more than her not reporting it and even more than her partying all the while. Even with all I have seen, and my own personal OPINION on what happened, I could not with a clear conscience convict her of premeditated, capital murder based simply on the fact she freaked out and ran around with her dead daughter in the trunk and partied like it was 1999. I'm sorry, but loathing her and her behavior does not a conviction make.

There has to be more. That's why the chloroform issue is important. That's why the zenaida myspace issue is important. That's why the forensics we have NOT seen on the computers is important. There has to be more....and I believe there is.

STAY TUNED!!!

how about the internet searches for "neck breaking" "household weapons"...

 

[Dear Prudence]

I apologise - I didn't notice your 'IMO'! It was late for me last night when I read your post (5 hours ahead of the US) and I clearly didn't read it properly.

The LIBS results were released on Oct 24 and are linked here as 'FBI forensic reports on KC's car' (Post 57): http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71772&page=3

Just for clarification, the evidence convinces me that Caylee's body was in KC's car for a period of time, but I was just pointing out that the forensic results themselves are not conclusive and that the report makes that clear.



The original report can be found at the above link.The LIBs test results are at the end of the report. There is some new detail in the final report that's just been released, but the only new test results are those on the paper towels.

I apologize too! You are correct about the LIBS results being in the October report. I was thinking of the volatile fatty acid (VFA) analysis which had not yet been completed as of the original report. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Valhall]

how about the internet searches for "neck breaking" "household weapons"...

There's been no evidence at all to tie those two searches to the death of Caylee, so what good are they? The medical examiner has explicitly stated there is no evidence of antemortem trauma. So how, as a prosecutor, would you support the argument those particular searches were for anything associated with the death of Caylee when the evidence juxtaposed with the searches simply do not align.

There has been evidence released to tie the searches for chloroform, how to make chloroform, and the constituents of chloroform to the death of Caylee. That's why I said I believe the chloroform evidence is important.

Don't misinterpret my words. I wasn't speaking to what I believe happened (which is she murdered Caylee and she did it on purpose and with planning), I'm talking about what I would have to do if I sat on a jury and was presented the evidence we have so far. That's two totally different things.

 

[lovelabs]

Did I miss something? Did KC set up the zenaida myspace account?

 

[Themis]

It also says that they found acetic acid in the tire well and that in an acidic environment (which they say the tire well was) acetic acid is a by-product of making chloroform by mixing acetone and chlorine.

Sounds like homemade chloroform spilled in the trunk. Arm and Hammer probably used for cleaning. So, if another product was used for cleaning, what was the chloroform used for again?

 

[Valhall]

Did I miss something? Did KC set up the zenaida myspace account?

Nothing has been released to date that shows that.

 

[Searchfortruth]

There's been no evidence at all to tie those two searches to the death of Caylee, so what good are they? The medical examiner has explicitly stated there is no evidence of antemortem trauma. So how, as a prosecutor, would you support the argument those particular searches were for anything associated with the death of Caylee when the evidence juxtaposed with the searches simply do not align.

There has been evidence released to tie the searches for chloroform, how to make chloroform, and the constituents of chloroform to the death of Caylee. That's why I said I believe the chloroform evidence is important.

Don't misinterpret my words. I wasn't speaking to what I believe happened (which is she murdered Caylee and she did it on purpose and with planning), I'm talking about what I would have to do if I sat on a jury and was presented the evidence we have so far. That's two totally different things.

I don't know how they are going to tie the computer searches in, but I think there is more evidence from computer forensics that we haven't seen. They may link the searches to household weapons and what not to Casey's mind set in March...she was thinking about it, but didn't follow through then. Wasn't March the time when they started planning the PR trip ? Maybe Cindy let her know right off the bat that there would be no baby sitting for that trip and this set the wheels to turning.

 

[Chess613]

*snipped to point*

The PROBLEM is...and it is a real problem...everything you just stated points to a dead body in the trunk. That does NOT prove murder. It proves some warped, morbid, possibly panicked reaction, hiding the death of a child, disposing of a dead body in an illegal manner, child neglect leading to the death of a child, but not murder.

And especially not in a DP case. That's why there simply must be more than just proving she had a "deceased Caylee" in her trunk and even more than her not reporting it and even more than her partying all the while. Even with all I have seen, and my own personal OPINION on what happened, I could not with a clear conscience convict her of premeditated, capital murder based simply on the fact she freaked out and ran around with her dead daughter in the trunk and partied like it was 1999. I'm sorry, but loathing her and her behavior does not a conviction make.

There has to be more. That's why the chloroform issue is important. That's why the zenaida myspace issue is important. That's why the forensics we have NOT seen on the computers is important. There has to be more....and I believe there is.

STAY TUNED!!!

Actually, I don't believe murder has to be proved here - what we have here is evidence a child was killed and that it was Caylee, and that the parent/guardian knew about it and did nothing. So I understand your point about proving that a murder happened, but all a jury has to know is that Casey had a responsibility to take care of Caylee (even ONE phone call to tell someone what happened) and she simply didn't do it. That's enough to convict for murder. Everything else is icing on the cake (i.e. the duct tape, pictures at Fusians, etc).

 

[Chess613]

This is an add-on to my earlier post today, regarding whether it's necessary to prove Casey deliberately killed Caylee. This is from miami.criminal.lawyer.net (the bold is my emphasis:

782.04 Murder.--

(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:

1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:

h. Aggravated child abuse,

is murder in the first degree and constitutes a capital felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082.

(b) In all cases under this section, the procedure set forth in s. 921.141 shall be followed in order to determine sentence of death or life imprisonment.

So the burden of the prosecution is only to prove either that Casey deliberately killed Caylee, or that Casey deliberately abused Caylee, which resulted in her death. The first one is harder, but the second one is easier, considering the tape evidence. And I'm one to believe the tape was on Caylee before she died - had the tape been used to contain death fluid, I don't think the tape would have stayed on (unless it was on before the fluid seep). Also the heart shape shows a depraved mind.

 

[okiedokietoo]

There's been no evidence at all to tie those two searches to the death of Caylee, so what good are they? The medical examiner has explicitly stated there is no evidence of antemortem trauma. So how, as a prosecutor, would you support the argument those particular searches were for anything associated with the death of Caylee when the evidence juxtaposed with the searches simply do not align.

There has been evidence released to tie the searches for chloroform, how to make chloroform, and the constituents of chloroform to the death of Caylee. That's why I said I believe the chloroform evidence is important.

Don't misinterpret my words. I wasn't speaking to what I believe happened (which is she murdered Caylee and she did it on purpose and with planning), I'm talking about what I would have to do if I sat on a jury and was presented the evidence we have so far. That's two totally different things.

I was adding to your list -- Unless the State is holding back a bombshell the case by the State will be all the pieces adding up

 

[Friday]

Good points, Devon. I'm just trying to reconcile the ladder/pool supply box/gate issues. But as Ripley stated....they may just be another CAGA lie.

Possibly, KC deliberately left the gate open and moved the pool supply box because she had some half-formed plan to use drowning as Caylee's cause of death? Drowning by invisi-nanny, maybe? I don't know; it's just a thought. I have to agree with Devon, though, that the event appears to be true since CA talked about it at work before she knew Caylee was "missing."