2011.06.04 TRIAL Day Ten (Morning Session ONLY)

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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just goes to show me that it's a hard proficiency test and if you pass it you're pretty qualified. Also...if he raises doubt, wait until the air samples, the odor, the gravewax, and the stain all come together to point to the same thing. Each taken separately may be doubted, but the chances that all of them are wrong are astronomical.
 
I don't think the DT is doing much damage. Either there's a band or there isn't, and she testifies that there is a band. Bands are only on hairs from decomp. Pretty simple. Just hope the jury isn't getting confused.
 
Sidebar bc Baez tried to ask whether FBI conducted a new study after witness deposition in this case & Ashton objected #CaseyAnthony

by oscaseyanthony via twitter at 8:24 AM


Sidebar! 4 female jury members looking through notes. 5 men all looking around or at lawyers.

by cfnews13casey via twitter at 8:24 AM


(Again, times listed are PDT)
 
i'm glad she tossed in that the failed test was in 2000 but in a sea of details when I'm finally able to talk about this 5 weeks from now with other jurors, I'm not sure that I'd remember that date nugget.
 
Yea but that was 11 years ago. Apparently passed for the next 11 years.

I wish she would've said this point blank. Hopefully JA will bring that out!!
 
Jose tried bringing up that using a photograph to make a determination about what kind of hair you are seeing is not as good as looking under a microscope at a real hair. The witness agreed and then Jose moved in for the kill...

So, why did you bring pictures with you TODAY?

The witness calmly said so that she could illustrate what she was discussing.

:thumb:
 
CFNews13Casey Casey Anthony News13
Sidebar! 4 female jury members looking through notes. 5 men all looking around or at lawyers.
 
Wondering...when is the duct tape supposedly applied to poor caylee in the DT theory? And by whom?
 
I think the jury will be able to fully understand that even though there was only one hair showing the post mortem death banding... that one is one too many. It is a proven fact that the post mortem death banding is only seen in a deceased person. I'm not worried.
 
From a personal point of view I have doubt about this evidence and I do strongly believe ICA is guilty. I just have doubt about this evidence. Its ONE hair, and the witness has only studied this type of science for 6 months. It creates doubt in my mind.

I'm somewhat with you on this score. Would this evidence alone be enough for me to find ICA quilty? I'd have to say no. Taken along with the other evidence presented thus far... I would definitely consider the hair banding testimony in some measure.

For me, I'm looking for the state to present a logical story here. If the hair banding fits into that in my mind, I'd probably give it weight.

JMO
 
I failed art in 5th grade. I guess that disqualifies me from being an expert in recognizing an annoying person. Shrug. He did make some points, but the cumulative evidence overall is good and this is not the only evidence, but coincides with other evidence so just the testimony whether strong or not kind of ties in. This will NOT create reasonable doubt that George let Caylee drown and sexually abused Casey into party life.
 
Baez also brought up Lowe's proficiency exam from 2000, which she failed #CaseyAnthony

by oscaseyanthony via twitter at 8:25 AM
 
State should have left this hairbanding out. Its wrecking their case. I'm sick.


BBM.

It's not. That might be the case if they hadn't found the body. But you have to also remember that dogs hit on the trunk for having a dead body in it, multiple people testified to the smell of decomposition, and caylee's remains were found 15 houses down from ICA's residence.

The hair banding just blustered the states contention that Caylee's body was stored in ICA's trunk.
 
From a personal point of view I have doubt about this evidence and I do strongly believe ICA is guilty. I just have doubt about this evidence. Its ONE hair, and the witness has only studied this type of science for 6 months. It creates doubt in my mind.

I can understand your doubt if you do not take her education, her extended work in the field, the four scientific papers she has written on this subject approved by her peers.....if you look at her course and consider it was intense and compacted.

For example, my next door neighbour is a Doctor and a specialist in thoracic lung surgery. He is currently in the States on a six month highly intensive "course" learning how to do lung transplants.
On his return, he will lead the lung transplant team.
 
None of her testimony has been based on the study by Steven Shaw. JA says they have a later witness who will testify to it.

HHBP sustained objection as beyond the scope of the direct examination

5 minute break
 
I'm sorta half-listening to HLN coverage as I do some chores around the house. This science mumbo-jumbo is lost on me, I'm afraid; math and science were never my forte. JC on HLN said that JB's cross-exam is "very effective". Hope the SA can rehabilitate this witness.
 
Again, please refrain from disparaging remarks regarding Mr. Baez.......

Thank you!
:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
161
Guests online
1,707
Total visitors
1,868

Forum statistics

Threads
606,137
Messages
18,199,327
Members
233,748
Latest member
AnnaNikiSB
Back
Top