Intermezzo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 10,623
- Reaction score
- 1,679
Qualitative vs Quantitative analysis education
the jury doesn't need to hear the chemist say he smelled death. JA's question and JB's objection speak volumes.
If the car still smells after 3 years, how come these pieces that they are showing don't smell?
As much as we don't want to admit it, and as much as we quite possible hate the fact, JB is getting in some good points today especially. If the only evidence in this case (which it isn't) was the air tests and chromotography, then the DT could very well introduce reasonable doubt. There are all kinds of ways... chain of evidence problems; calibration problems; problems with organic compounds being in other "situations" in nature outside of a human decomposition event... etc... so I hope the jury is paying attention to all of the plethora of other evidence which, when they connect the dots, will lead to KC's conviction.
Don't hit me
But they swam in the pool at Tony's apartments and it likely did.
But they swam in the pool at Tony's apartments and it likely did.
But they swam in the pool at Tony's apartments and it likely did.
But they swam in the pool at Tony's apartments and it likely did.
Baez with his questions beginning with "Aaaaanndd" are so annoying.
Baez standing with his darn white board again and calling the witness down, to show the jury an example of what a chromatogram(?) might look like..
(this link doesn't work me anymore- anyone have another link that shows Casey and the witness? http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/interactive.html )
But they swam in the pool at Tony's apartments and it likely did.
Baez with his questions beginning with "Aaaaanndd" are so annoying.
Baez standing with his darn white board (easel) again and calling the witness down, to show the jury an example of what a chromatogram(?) might look like..
As much as we don't want to admit it, and as much as we quite possible hate the fact, JB is getting in some good points today especially. If the only evidence in this case (which it isn't) was the air tests and chromotography, then the DT could very well introduce reasonable doubt. There are all kinds of ways... chain of evidence problems; calibration problems; problems with organic compounds being in other "situations" in nature outside of a human decomposition event... etc... so I hope the jury is paying attention to all of the plethora of other evidence which, when they connect the dots, will lead to KC's conviction.
Don't hit me