2011.06.06 TRIAL Day Eleven (Morning Session)

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.
I'm perplexed this morning, almost in a fog. I don't get the reaction of ICA - nothing, nada, zip. Especially when Dr. Vass said he jumped back from the odor. This coming from a man who has had over 20 years experience in the field, and is so passionate about his field. I believe every word coming out of his mouth, but don't understand the reaction from the DT or ICA.

Is it just me???

Best,

Mel

I don't think she has a soul. There is no way she has a soul and sits there and nothing. There's a special place for her in the afterlife, all I'm sayin'.
 
Is the computer expert likely to testify today? (That's more my area where as this chemistry is all over my head) My kingdom if he/she would explain the difference between a blog and a message board, (I know, not happening ). I'm looking forward to seeing how much Google confuses the DT.
 
It depends on the person IMO. I am 58 and my friends older and younger, as well as younger family members, use Facebook every day, all day - as well as e-mail, texts, etc.
 
Did Casey really think that what she did in the dark of her being would go undetected in the light of truth? I think she did. She thinks she's that brilliant.
 
I don't understand why the defense is fighting this testimony of the experts regarding the trunk if the baby's death was an accident?
Why did the defense just go with with , Casey just didn't have the heart to put the baby in the ground, that she wanted to KEEP HER CLOSE? So she left her in the trunk!

Why invent this fantasy defense, elaborate lies that paint Casey even worse?That put the defense in Casey's imaginary world ? None of it makes sense :banghead:

Charleyann

Exactly !
 
JB wants to inspect the box. Seriously.
 
JB wants to inspect the box. He may have another point to make! :rolleyes:
 
I don't understand why the defense is fighting this testimony of the experts regarding the trunk if the baby's death was an accident?
Why did the defense just go with with , Casey just didn't have the heart to put the baby in the ground, that she wanted to KEEP HER CLOSE? So she left her in the trunk!

Why invent this fantasy defense, elaborate lies that paint Casey even worse?That put the defense in Casey's imaginary world ? None of it makes sense :banghead:

Charleyann

All that chloroform didn't come from a corpse. How could GA have had the baby in the trunk and she had complete possesion of the car. Duct tape is a coming!
 
Is this the first time we have heard of scrapings from the tire well? I am not recalling that at all?

No not the first time.. it was in the docs... I posted a screen shot of the information in Friday's side bar...I will repost it at side bar during lnch recess
 
That's your baby girl decomposing in your trunk that they're talking about and no reaction. OMG. *sits on hands HARD*

I KNOW!!!! Wether she's guilty or innocent, how can she not react to this !!!
 
Dr. Voss testified that "butyric (sp?) acid is the first compound of decomposition", and it was found in ICA's trunk.

I take that to mean Caylee's body was in the trunk at the very beginning of the decomposition process. As opposed to laying out in the backyard, etc.
 
I don't think anyone, other than Dr. Vass, could present this testimony in such a delightful way. Much respect to this man.
 
Continued direct exam of Dr. Vass by JA.

He received the paper towels in a white bag. It was sealed.

JA attempted to get paper towels admitted into evidence. JB wanted to inspect the box and then renewed objections.

Paper towels conditionally received into evidence as Exhibit 126.

Jury recessed for lunch until 1:30
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
2,621
Total visitors
2,694

Forum statistics

Threads
604,661
Messages
18,175,036
Members
232,783
Latest member
Abk018
Back
Top