2011.03.11 Dr. Spitz Report Due Today

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Did I read up thread that Dr. Spitz wanted to see "insects" from her orifices? Exactly what orifices Dr. Spitz? The poor child was nothing but skeletal remains. :banghead:
 
ZsaZsa said:
He says that the mandible would have disarticulated during decomposition- true, but it was held in its correct anatomical location by duct tape.
He seems to have missed the point completely. Paging Joypath.......
There is no telling what position her skull might have been in during the 6 months she was there,dirt could accumulated at any time when swampy water was present. Fact is the skull was found upright with duct tape as described by Dr G. How does he account for the presence of duct tape? No suggestions?
Why would Dr G need to 'open the skull' - I realize it is normal protocol to open a skull to inspect it and the contents when you have a body attached to the skull, but in Caylee's case the skull was separated, all you had to do to look inside was to turn it upside down. I think he is grasping for a non-existent straw here, to point out that Dr G did not follow a procedural policy, when that policy was not necessary.
Click to expand...
bbm
He also states that the tape was not adhered to the mandible so that it would not be found in it's anatomical position regardless of whether the tape was attached to the hair. The exact placement of that tape will be important. I believe photos and the cgi of the tape and the skull will show a cradling of the mandible, i.e. a portion of the tape strips up under the chin and back up towards her ears. I think it was placed in such a way as to keep her mouth closed as well as cover her airway. I remember in the autopsy report (?) it was stated that the tape was cut away from the hair so as to preserve the shape of the tape as it was found. We know the tape was stuck firmly to the hair on either side. This and a hair mat that formed at the base of the skull kept the tape in the same place the murderer put it and, in turn, the mandible remained in it's anatomical position even though the tape wasn't adhered to it.
 
Marina2 said:
bbm
He also states that the tape was not adhered to the mandible so that it would not be found in it's anatomical position regardless of whether the tape was attached to the hair. The exact placement of that tape will be important. I believe photos and the cgi of the tape and the skull will show a cradling of the mandible, i.e. a portion of the tape strips up under the chin and back up towards her ears. I think it was placed in such a way as to keep her mouth closed as well as cover her airway. I remember in the autopsy report (?) it was stated that the tape was cut away from the hair so as to preserve the shape of the tape as it was found. We know the tape was stuck firmly to the hair on either side. This and a hair mat that formed at the base of the skull kept the tape in the same place the murderer put it and, in turn, the mandible remained in it's anatomical position even though the tape wasn't adhered to it.
Click to expand...

Marina2, :hug:
Hugs to you and thank you so much for remembering what was in autopsy report and how S's would impact-You have clarified a lot of the info that Dr. S had numerated in report. I was worried but thanks to your considerable astute and timely comments, I feel that SA has a chance to block some of Dr.S's observations! Thank you for you wonderful insights!
Now I feel I can find a peaceful night's sleep!:offtobed:
Savannahanna
 
strawberry said:
I saw that one! I am hoping they have new ones now that they have moved the show to DFH!!! Do you know if they will? (Sorry for the OT)
Click to expand...

Dunno, I was surpised and very happy to have caught that episode-Since you saw it, you know how she came to 2 or 3 places where she just could have stopped what she was doing and declared a cause, but she didn't-It was very instinctual to her to keep digging-very good episode, huh?
 
"The manner of death is also undetermined because there is no scientific information available that the death was at the hands of another."
Verner Spitz


No scientific information ??

Hands of another? :waitasec:

I think the good doctor is R......E.....A.....C.....H.....I.....N....G. :giggle:
 
truckengirl said:
Anyone notice how Dr. Spitz added at the end of his report that he reserved the right to change his report if new evidence became available, my guess is this is how JB will try to seek something in at the last minute. The Judge was very clear that if it was not in the report that it could not be testified to in Court. My guess is JB try to say they have discovered something new right before trial.
Click to expand...

That wasn't a report, it was a letter to Baez dated 15 months after he did his examination. It's a load of a word that would get me banned.
Maybe his bowel problem went to is head :innocent:
 
Is it just me or does this contradict everything the defense has been trying to shove down the throats of the public? This report is trying to give the impression that this could be an accident? "Not at the hands of another" :banghead:. Well, there goes blaming Kronk or the nanny and there goes someone placing Caylee there after ICA was in jail. They are ruling out anyone else otherwise they would contend it was a murder but with another perpetrator. IMO, it basically hands ICA on a silver platter to the death chamber.
 
Can anyone find a video of Dr. Spitz on the stand in the Spector trial? I would like to see it but can't find it anywhere.
 
"The manner of death is also undetermined because there is no scientific information available that the death was at the hands of another."
Verner Spitz
Click to expand...

Of course Caylee's death was at the hands of another, she didn't do this to herself now, did she....Too bad WSpitz didn't name the other hand??? :maddening:

KDB said:
Is it just me or does this contradict everything the defense has been trying to shove down the throats of the public? This report is trying to give the impression that this could be an accident? "Not at the hands of another" :banghead:. Well, there goes blaming Kronk or the nanny and there goes someone placing Caylee there after ICA was in jail. They are ruling out anyone else otherwise they would contend it was a murder but with another perpetrator. IMO, it basically hands ICA on a silver platter to the death chamber.
Click to expand...

Which is what the jurors will see. Contradict the State's experts and it becomes the battle of the experts trial...who is more believeable...Me thinks Dr. G....ICA needs to think long and hard about changing her plea and asking the State to give her LWOP, or she takes the chance of playing russian roulette with a death sentence...Precious Caylee, reduced to bones...jurors will do right for the victim, who BTW, they want the right person convicted not SOD.....I bet my last dollar on a guilty verdict...JMHO


Justice for Caylee
 
You know, I can almost get past the no scientific evidence of her death thing because there isn't much to suggest exactly how she died. But saying she didn't die at the hands of another just bends all logic until it snaps in half. It doesn't work. It's using science as a shield at that point to hide behind and deflect all logic. It's not going to work with 12 jurors who are looking more at the logic of the situation than the actual science, or at least some kind of combination of the two. No juror is going to throw logic out and go purely with science in this case.

I also think it's funny how he kind of has a disclaimer at the end of his report about his opinions are formed by his education and training, and how he may change his report if other "pertinent information" becomes available. Nice save there, doc. Not. I have the feeling he's really not going to fight hard to what he reported on the stand. Instead, it will be maybe's and stuff like that, just enough to try to put some reasonable doubt out there. I notice he's questioning Dr. G's findings and not outright saying they're flat out wrong.

Yep, this is going to be a massacre by the prosecution and it's experts at trial. I can't believe Baez doesn't see this coming and isn't scared for Casey's life at this point. But he still seems to think he's doing a-okay and so does his client!
 
The manner of death is also undetermined because there is no scientific information available that the death was at the hands of another."
Verner Spitz
Click to expand...

Could also mean, he's resigned to the fact that no other person but ICA is responsible...it can be spun that way, no??? JMHO

Justice for Caylee
 
But on cross while on the stand Dr. Spitz cannot say, given the conditions she was found in, that Caylee wandered to that spot on her own and died by some mysterious reason. I think the duct tape will be a challenge for him to explain and that is why he was very brief. He's not going to make it hard on himself in his state of health and right now it looks like just his opinion which differs when compared with Dr. G. He would have no purpose to testify if he totally agreed so he finds something to put out there that may or may not fly.

I think what really will be hard to get past is his comment about removing the top of the skull when the reason for doing and why it is required is to examine the brain. Could it be Dr. G. saw no purpose in damaging her bones any more than necessary for something that would yield no investigative information? Whereas Dr. Spitz admits he has no problem doing this because he is curious and more detached about bodies.

While defense may be happy about the report I think it is much ado about nothing. jmo
 
LambChop said:
But on cross while on the stand Dr. Spitz cannot say, given the conditions she was found in, that Caylee wandered to that spot on her own and died by some mysterious reason. I think the duct tape will be a challenge for him to explain and that is why he was very brief. He's not going to make it hard on himself in his state of health and right now it looks like just his opinion which differs when compared with Dr. G. He would have no purpose to testify if he totally agreed so he finds something to put out there that may or may not fly.

I think what really will be hard to get past is his comment about removing the top of the skull when the reason for doing and why it is required is to examine the brain. Could it be Dr. G. saw no purpose in damaging her bones any more than necessary for something that would yield no investigative information? Whereas Dr. Spitz admits he has no problem doing this because he is curious and more detached about bodies. While defense may be happy about the report I think it is much ado about nothing. jmo
Click to expand...



RBBM....exactly, no brain matter so why desecrate Caylee's remains further...as explained by Joypath...that would be a reason to open the skull to get to the brain matter, since there was none, what's the point...I doubt this will go over well with jurors...they will see that Dr. G was more compassionate as well as through in her findings...Why is it that Dr. Spitz didn't notice the slight deformity of Caylee's skull? JMHO

Justice for Caylee
 
LiveLaughLuv said:
RBBM....exactly, no brain matter so why desecrate Caylee's remains further...as explained by Joypath...that would be a reason to open the skull to get to the brain matter, since there was none, what's the point...I doubt this will go over well with jurors...they will see that Dr. G was more compassionate as well as through in her findings...Why is it that Dr. Spitz didn't notice the slight deformity of Caylee's skull? JMHOJustice for Caylee
Click to expand...

He may have, two years ago.
 
Holly Oakes said:
Phil Spector Trial ~ Dr Werner Spitz Flips out on the Stand ~ Question of Money Slows Phil Spector Trial
http://losangelestrials.blogspot.com/2009/02/phil-spector-trial-dr-werner-spitz.html
Click to expand...

I hope everyone knows that the picture attached to this article is not Dr. Spitz. It is a picture of Jack Webb, who played Joe Friday on Dragnet, an old tv show that I used to watch.

There is a picture of Dr. Spitz in this interesting article.
http://apps.detnews.com/apps/history/index.php?id=166

As well as this informative article -
http://www.med.wayne.edu/wayne medicine/wm98/living.htm
 
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/celebrity/phil_spector/17.html

Found this interesting...don't know what the JAC rate is for "expert" testimony...but obviously NOT this !!
There's other articles by independant bloggers as to his "flip out" on the stand...LOL

He seems argumentative...like he takes a condescending attitude towards other experts with conclusions differing from his....almost like he WANTS to be contrary to whatever another expert reports.

ALOT of the things in his report are just plain old babble...and some are NOT even close to what the findings were...like he just whipped out a book and stated how things were supposed to happen or be found...and AGAIN, seems he just wants to shoot down ANY other experts findings....just IMO.



Aaaaaack !!!! Sorry.....foiled again !!! Didn't look up before posting....all the other super sleuthers beat me to it....I'm gettin slow in my old age !!!

ETA : Amusing to note he DID in fact go from "other expert reports" in the Spector trial...AND drew conclusions on what he "felt" happened - like Lana was "depressed". He also used only certain pics and info to draw his incorrect conclusions, which came out when testifying at the trial.

I wonder if these experts even THINK people are gonna read about their behavior in other trials....their reports...their past....and incompetent reports....deserved mentioning again....LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 103 more.
Total: 1,644 (members: 104, guests: 1,540)

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
1,540
Total visitors
1,644
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,183
Messages
18,200,106
Members
233,765
Latest member
Jasonax3
Back
Top