No wonder the SA was laughing...:floorlaugh:
2011.06.27 TRIAL Day Twenty-nine (Morning Session)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
- Status
No wonder the SA was laughing...:floorlaugh:
mombomb
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,437
- Reaction score
- -3
6/27/11
10:58
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. FURTON BY JB
He is a professor in chemistry and bio-chemistry at FIU. He's been employed there for 23 years.
BS in forensic science phd in analytical chemistry and post-grad in UK in nuclear science.
Expertise - chemistry dealing with separating, identifying and quantifying complex chemicals - specifically those in forensics evidence.
He's studied human decomp. Research group since 2003 volatile chemicals given off by live and deceased individuals in an effort to locate human remains by the chemicals being released.
He has published - masters and phd students who have published. His involvement is direct supervision of their research, but he joins them in the lab and research field trips.
Government grants - most research in recent years has been done with live human scent, but also decomp
He gives extensive lectures.
Instruments to identify volatile compounds? No instruments specifically designed to identify human remains.
Expert witness experience - this is his first trial on human decomp for forensic chemistry. He has testified over 2 dz times.
Patents - he has 1 patent which for the id of humans based on the volotile chemicals they give off.
American Chemical Society, fellow of American Academy of Forensic Sicences.
Prior testimony in a variety of situations - grand jury hearings, civil and criminal proceedings for both the defense and prosecution
Awards?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED
Move to have him entered as an expert.
VOIRE DIRE BY JA
Work in the study of decomp is based on what a dog would alert to? Yes.
His studies - the students (as well as himself) do the research
Until recently the studies dealt with training aides. One dealt with whole human remains.
Volatiles during decomp - as a forensic scientist and teaching, he is involved in the general knowledge as it realtes to hsi research.
HHJBP: Expert accepted in chemistry and human decomp in terms of odor analysis
DIRECT EXAM BY JB - continued
Just got back from California.
He received all the records related to the investigation, ME reports, photos, contents of trunk, reports from Oakridge, depos from experts.
He was asked to review the reports from Oakridge and Dr. Sigman's report from the National Center of Forensic Sciences.
Was Dr. Sigman's report the first in this case?
OBJECTION - hearsay - OVERRULED
He believes it was the first chemical analysis done of the trunk.
Then a month later, the report from Dr. Vass? Yes.
He has also reviewed numerous studies dealing with human decomp.
It is his opinion that there is currently no instrumental method that has been scientifically validated to identify the presence or absence of human remains.
He has a Power Point.
OBJECTION BY JA - wants copy to be marked
Power Point accepted as a demonstrative aide. Defense Exhibit FN(?)
He identified it as an animation showing how the instrumentation works - the
GCMS. Samples are injected and go thru the machine. Then a written report - a chromatogram is generated.
(Technical difficulties with the Power Point)
If compounds are close to one another, you have to run additional tests.
Known standard - you buy them from a chemical company which have a confirmed identity and you run them on your instrument to be certain of the identity of a chemical.
Chromatogram does not show how much of a chemical - only estimations or relative to each other. Ultimately you need to run a calibration curve using your known standards - only way to do a quantification.
The chromatogram will give you an indication of the approximate relative amounts - one chemical versus another within the same run.
Next slide - each peak is for a different chemical and he put it into a bar graph with the relative ratios using the 24 identified odor compounds. This involved all living people and the chemicals they give off.
This shows that each of the 10 people gave off a unique pattern of chemicals. Looking at the most abundant to the least abundant - they have determined the reliability to differentiate individuals.
Next slide - bar graph on left was 7 living individuals showing differing chemical components. The next showed 6 deceased that showed more similar chemical components.
Next slide showed the 20 most abundant chemicals in 21 deceased individuals.
Next slide - they also did this for other decomposing animals - K-9s, tuna, chicken, pork, beef. Trying to identify compounds coming from non-human decomp. There is quite a bit of overlap between decomposing organic matter (animal remains) and human remains.
He also had a larger slide, Defense Exhibit DW for demonstrative purposes only.
When complex chemicals are separated, if you go through a sensitive level, you go through thousands of chemicals, then thru refinement you can come up with a handful associated with human remains. Blue are acids. This is a comparison of 8 different studies done on human remains to give a snapshot of similarities and differences. There was an additional paper published last week from a graduate student's dissertation. Dr. Vass's study is included.
Is this a breakdown of what Dr. Vass?
OBJECTION - under (?) case - May we approach?
SIDEBAR #1 (11:31-
10:58
DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. FURTON BY JB
He is a professor in chemistry and bio-chemistry at FIU. He's been employed there for 23 years.
BS in forensic science phd in analytical chemistry and post-grad in UK in nuclear science.
Expertise - chemistry dealing with separating, identifying and quantifying complex chemicals - specifically those in forensics evidence.
He's studied human decomp. Research group since 2003 volatile chemicals given off by live and deceased individuals in an effort to locate human remains by the chemicals being released.
He has published - masters and phd students who have published. His involvement is direct supervision of their research, but he joins them in the lab and research field trips.
Government grants - most research in recent years has been done with live human scent, but also decomp
He gives extensive lectures.
Instruments to identify volatile compounds? No instruments specifically designed to identify human remains.
Expert witness experience - this is his first trial on human decomp for forensic chemistry. He has testified over 2 dz times.
Patents - he has 1 patent which for the id of humans based on the volotile chemicals they give off.
American Chemical Society, fellow of American Academy of Forensic Sicences.
Prior testimony in a variety of situations - grand jury hearings, civil and criminal proceedings for both the defense and prosecution
Awards?
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED
Move to have him entered as an expert.
VOIRE DIRE BY JA
Work in the study of decomp is based on what a dog would alert to? Yes.
His studies - the students (as well as himself) do the research
Until recently the studies dealt with training aides. One dealt with whole human remains.
Volatiles during decomp - as a forensic scientist and teaching, he is involved in the general knowledge as it realtes to hsi research.
HHJBP: Expert accepted in chemistry and human decomp in terms of odor analysis
DIRECT EXAM BY JB - continued
Just got back from California.
He received all the records related to the investigation, ME reports, photos, contents of trunk, reports from Oakridge, depos from experts.
He was asked to review the reports from Oakridge and Dr. Sigman's report from the National Center of Forensic Sciences.
Was Dr. Sigman's report the first in this case?
OBJECTION - hearsay - OVERRULED
He believes it was the first chemical analysis done of the trunk.
Then a month later, the report from Dr. Vass? Yes.
He has also reviewed numerous studies dealing with human decomp.
It is his opinion that there is currently no instrumental method that has been scientifically validated to identify the presence or absence of human remains.
He has a Power Point.
OBJECTION BY JA - wants copy to be marked
Power Point accepted as a demonstrative aide. Defense Exhibit FN(?)
He identified it as an animation showing how the instrumentation works - the
GCMS. Samples are injected and go thru the machine. Then a written report - a chromatogram is generated.
(Technical difficulties with the Power Point)
If compounds are close to one another, you have to run additional tests.
Known standard - you buy them from a chemical company which have a confirmed identity and you run them on your instrument to be certain of the identity of a chemical.
Chromatogram does not show how much of a chemical - only estimations or relative to each other. Ultimately you need to run a calibration curve using your known standards - only way to do a quantification.
The chromatogram will give you an indication of the approximate relative amounts - one chemical versus another within the same run.
Next slide - each peak is for a different chemical and he put it into a bar graph with the relative ratios using the 24 identified odor compounds. This involved all living people and the chemicals they give off.
This shows that each of the 10 people gave off a unique pattern of chemicals. Looking at the most abundant to the least abundant - they have determined the reliability to differentiate individuals.
Next slide - bar graph on left was 7 living individuals showing differing chemical components. The next showed 6 deceased that showed more similar chemical components.
Next slide showed the 20 most abundant chemicals in 21 deceased individuals.
Next slide - they also did this for other decomposing animals - K-9s, tuna, chicken, pork, beef. Trying to identify compounds coming from non-human decomp. There is quite a bit of overlap between decomposing organic matter (animal remains) and human remains.
He also had a larger slide, Defense Exhibit DW for demonstrative purposes only.
When complex chemicals are separated, if you go through a sensitive level, you go through thousands of chemicals, then thru refinement you can come up with a handful associated with human remains. Blue are acids. This is a comparison of 8 different studies done on human remains to give a snapshot of similarities and differences. There was an additional paper published last week from a graduate student's dissertation. Dr. Vass's study is included.
Is this a breakdown of what Dr. Vass?
OBJECTION - under (?) case - May we approach?
SIDEBAR #1 (11:31-
Linda7NJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 32,101
- Reaction score
- 8,217
At least, Dr. Vass made it fun...he was so engaging
sitting in the trunk, eating a raw hamburger with a paper bag over my head....
TraceyLeigh
Lover of WS Peeps!
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2008
- Messages
- 1,749
- Reaction score
- 0
Thank you!! These are my thoughts exactly!!:waitasec:
bobloblaw
Verified Male
- Joined
- May 16, 2011
- Messages
- 1,469
- Reaction score
- 5
technicalconfusion
Curses! Foiled Again!
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2008
- Messages
- 2,056
- Reaction score
- 1
Drama Queen
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 0
She loves reading the funny papers.
Can we throw out Dr. Vass testimony then about air samples?
lowens1975
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2011
- Messages
- 847
- Reaction score
- -10
Bill S. says what we're having is a sidebar with occasional testimony in between.
Linda7NJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 32,101
- Reaction score
- 8,217
rofl....too funny!
The DT wants us to believe they just figured out she's a liar?:floorlaugh:
tut med
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2009
- Messages
- 417
- Reaction score
- 6
In session
daisy.faithfull
RIP Joey, Summer, Gianni & Joey Jr.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2009
- Messages
- 3,113
- Reaction score
- 95
Tennessean
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2011
- Messages
- 64
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe CM called for the psych evaluation to rehabilitate -himself-?
I'm guessing that at various points in this investigation/trial, <modsnip> has been offered a plea deal by the prosecution. Life or LWOP. CM and JB know that she is as guilty as sin and as their defense 'case' evaporates before their eyes, they have repeatedly counseled her to take the deal(s). <modsnip>, of course, is a pouting liar and refuses to admit guilt. Otherwise, this case would be over, and we all would be sad...
Public perception of an attorney that takes a trial all the way to verdict and loses, is probably far different than when their client does the 'right thing' and admits guilt, IMO.
I think CM had enough, on Saturday, and hoped that he -personally- could get some relief via a psych eval for his <modsnip>.
Even if <modsnip> knows right from wrong ('competent'), the message is now out there that he, CM, thinks that his client is as crazy as a s***house rat. His loud speech, etc. in chambers on Saturday may be constructed by himself to demonstrate his anguish for being in this untenable position. By doing it in chambers, he wasn't tased and arrested by the deputies.
IMO, CM is trying to protect -his- good reputation. In the case of JB, a good reputation is non-existent. It's really the -only-, albeit tiny, thing that CM can do at this point to attempt to rehabilitate -himself-, even if he thought all along that the eval would show she is 'competent'.
IMOFWIWIANAL
I'm guessing that at various points in this investigation/trial, <modsnip> has been offered a plea deal by the prosecution. Life or LWOP. CM and JB know that she is as guilty as sin and as their defense 'case' evaporates before their eyes, they have repeatedly counseled her to take the deal(s). <modsnip>, of course, is a pouting liar and refuses to admit guilt. Otherwise, this case would be over, and we all would be sad...
Public perception of an attorney that takes a trial all the way to verdict and loses, is probably far different than when their client does the 'right thing' and admits guilt, IMO.
I think CM had enough, on Saturday, and hoped that he -personally- could get some relief via a psych eval for his <modsnip>.
Even if <modsnip> knows right from wrong ('competent'), the message is now out there that he, CM, thinks that his client is as crazy as a s***house rat. His loud speech, etc. in chambers on Saturday may be constructed by himself to demonstrate his anguish for being in this untenable position. By doing it in chambers, he wasn't tased and arrested by the deputies.
IMO, CM is trying to protect -his- good reputation. In the case of JB, a good reputation is non-existent. It's really the -only-, albeit tiny, thing that CM can do at this point to attempt to rehabilitate -himself-, even if he thought all along that the eval would show she is 'competent'.
IMOFWIWIANAL
- Status