2011.06.18 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-Two)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's a picture while JB gets reprimanded by the judge.

There are a couple of standard JB looks. That one is his look when it is starting to sink in that he is being thwarted.
There is a grin he gets when he is smacked down that says to me" I am not even listening to you. You don't matter.I have this case in the bag."
 
just popping in to say :gthanks: to all the great posters here!

i took the sideBAR a bit too seriously last night and overslept today. had HLN recorded but would have missed SO much without everyones great comments
 
Baez says, "Follow the duct tape" - so now we are to believe that that GEORGE, sometime after decomposition, goes to Suburban drive (quite likely wearing his "find Caylee t-shirt" and flipflops), picks up, re-assembles the skull, and applies the tape to his dead granddaughter's decomposed face. And for the grand finale, GEORGE styles the hair on little Caylee's skull. And he does this to FRAME his own daughter. What is that saying about "I have some swamp land in Florida to sell to you????"
 
I apologize if this has already been addressed. Hopefully someone can help me out with something I'm struggling with. When the jury returned and the first witness had been dismissed did the judge tell them there was another witness because they were accommodating him because he was from out of town? Is it ethical to lie to the jurors? I really like Judge Perry and am amazed how he has been able to maintain some sanity in this trial. He was put in a bad situation and really pushed to give some explanation. However, unless I misunderstood his comment to the jury I am disappointed he would handle it in this way.

Mason asked the Judge to tell the jury "something" to explain why there is a new witness in front of them, and what happened to the previous witness before they went to break.
The Judge said - so, what do you want me to tell them? the truth?
Mason said he would tell them.
Then the Judge said if you do that, then I will let Ashton say something also.
The the Judge said I will tell them something ... and he came up with the accomodating the out-of-town witness, on the spur of the moment before the jury came back in.
Only thing is, the first witness Dr. Rodriguez is also an "out of town witness" and had already told the jury he was working in Washington, DC - he lives in Maryland.
 
Baez says, "Follow the duct tape" - so now we are to believe that that GEORGE, sometime after decomposition, goes to Suburban drive (quite likely wearing his "find Caylee t-shirt" and flipflops), picks up, re-assembles the skull, and applies the tape to his dead granddaughter's decomposed face. And for the grand finale, GEORGE styles the hair on little Caylee's skull. And he does this to FRAME his own daughter. What is that saying about "I have some swamp land in Florida to sell to you????"

or some Ocean front property in Arizona... :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
 
Dr. Garavaglia had done an autopsy first and then Dr. Spitz? Were there only 2 autopsies?
 
What's interesting about him bringing Judy Buenoano up is that he's tried approx 8 death penalty cases but this is the one he keeps talking about. I wonder if this case brings backs memories for him? If I was ICA I wouldn't take it as a good sign although I'm sure it means nothing, but it is interesting.

I find it interesting too that he brings up this case. I read the good judge's biography and I know that this is one case that he followed through to the end, witnessing her execution. It would appear that the Judy Buenoano case has made a lasting impression on him. But to be presiding over this case and remembering that case is not a good sign for KC.

It's as if HHBP sees similarities between the two women - Judy Buenoano and Casey Anthony. Does he think the same conclusion is warranted?
 
A friend just told me Judge Jeanne P will have a 2 hr special on FOX tonight, 8pm CST for those interested..... I really want to see it. She's a very fair and sensible person. Not just another th babbling on and on...

Warning ... Will Robinson ....... Lennie boy is part of this show. Jeanne has lost my respect now.
 
IMO I believe the whole point about opening the skull or not, was basically that the entire body had decomposed. Dr. G said there was no need to open the skull because she was able to examine inside it (possibly with the use of more current technology that Dr. Spitz maybe doesn't use?) Most likely, Dr. G used some sort of pencil thin light/camera to inspect the skull for any signs of damage that can be related to cause/manner of death. She also did the saline wash to get out the debris inside (another aspect that Dr S scoffed at). In the end, it seemed that this whole ado about opening the skull was for nothing since Dr. S ended up cracking the skull HIMSELF in the process and never tested the dust inside to determine if it was dirt or brain dust, anyway. They were not dealing with a partially decomposed body with soft tissue remaining where there would be a need to open the skull.

Also I believe Dr. G testified she couldn't allow him to perform the autopsy with her because it was against procedure for where she works. Others have said that she also said the body was not determined to be Caylee's yet at that point, so why allow the DT expert in on her autopsy? Makes no sense. I read that after Dr. G performed the autopsy, Caylee's remains sat for 2 weeks before Dr S performed his autopsy. So he REALLY wanted to do the autopsy with her but then waited 2 weeks after? I think the DT wanted Dr. S in the autopsy with Dr. G for their own personal reasons and NOT in order to be efficient. If he had done the autopsy with her, I'm sure they would have found some other way to try to discredit her.

I know we are not to insult Dr. S for his age, and I am certainly not trying to do that mods. However, I think it is important to note because it DOES play a factor in how people perform tasks or how well of a memory they have to serve as a witness. He can't remember who he interviewed with last week, but he can remember details about the autopsy? But then he can't remember that he cracked the skull, etc. Also, an example, my uncle is a dentist. A GREAT dentist. But he is not so young, and if you go to his office it's run in a pretty ancient manner (IMO) Most files are done by hand, the programs they use are outdated, etc. Technology has advanced soo much since he's opened his practice, but while he's great at Dentistry and keeps up to date with it, there are better methods he can use to make his office more efficient when it comes to customer files, etc. This is how I feel about Dr. S. He's not aware of the advances in technology that perhaps do NOT require you to open a skull of a fully decomposed body when you can look inside and get the dust out with other methods.

As always, JMO.

I need to go back and check her testimony, but I am pretty sure that Dr. G testified that it is office protocol to not allow observers and outsiders in the autopsy room. She was following protocol :)
 
Bless Dr. Spitz for having the fortitude to come and testify. It coudn't have been easy being there...the traveling alone would not be easy for a man at his age...especially difficult for someone who has spent the better part of the new year recuperating. I truly mean that. But what I have been thinking about for the better part of the day, and what I find issue with, is his inflammatory and highly derogatory testimony about Dr. G. He is a professional and I didn't see him acting very professional today. Ashton didn't provoke him to reply that Dr. G's work was "shoddy"...that's on him. I would imagine that in his professional world it's just not cool to besmirch another colleague's reputation like that. I find it difficult to believe that such a learned man couldn't find a better way to say he did not concur with a trusted ME's findings.
 
I find it interesting too that he brings up this case. I read the good judge's biography and I know that this is one case that he followed through to the end, witnessing her execution. It would appear that the Judy Buenoano case has made a lasting impression on him. But to be presiding over this case and remembering that case is not a good sign for KC.

It's as if HHBP sees similarities between the two women - Judy Buenoano and Casey Anthony. Does he think the same conclusion is warranted?

This Buenoano chick sounds much worse than KC!
 
I wish someone would show how excited JB looked this am waiting to get started - all grins like here comes the kicker everyone. Then he got ripped by the judge and lost his witness. Then, oh, ok I have this great very smart witness who will blow away your great Dr. G - ut oh And in the end he has a stupid grin on his face like - It doesn't hurt to try... Grasshopper needs to learn when to fold 'em.

here's a couple that might do the trick!
 

Attachments

  • dr werner testifying - smiles from defense4.jpg
    dr werner testifying - smiles from defense4.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 64
  • jose getting reprimanded 4.jpg
    jose getting reprimanded 4.jpg
    43.5 KB · Views: 63
ThinkTank, Can you possibly capture the discussions between Jeff and WS where Jeff was asking "who" cut the duct tape and how it was applied. I'm looking for the part where WS said "SHE may or SHE might have cut the tape ..." Jeff didn't stop him for an explanation unfortunately or maybe it was calculated to use during rebuttal. If you can I would appreciate it. Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
77
Guests online
2,490
Total visitors
2,567

Forum statistics

Threads
603,681
Messages
18,160,736
Members
231,820
Latest member
Hernak
Back
Top