Canadian forensic anthropologist Scott Fairgrieve joins Casey Anthony's defense

[LancelotLink]

There's no tooth. No truth to the tooth. lol The dogs were not looking for a tooth. It was mentioned by JB because sometimes dogs hit on teeth. Maybe he was suggesting that KC at one time lost a tooth in the backyard. Not sure where he was going with that. jmo

Unfortunately, neither was JB. That episode of Matlock must have been a 2 parter and when he saw To Be Continued, he thought that was instructions on for his strategic questioning.

 

[LancelotLink]

A lame example but there are some that believe it. But that's like smelling popcorn in the hall, tracking it down to the kitchen, opening the door to the microwave getting a wave of fresh popcorn smell rolling over you and then declaring that the popcorn never existed because there was none in the microwave when you opened the door.

I personally thought Dr. Vass blew Fairgrienve's assessment out of the water with his skunk analogy. You smell it, you know what it is, you don't have to see it squashed in the road to know what happened.

 

[celticthyme]

Hopefully the cadaver dog hits in the yard and in the car will come in. There are 2 simple points I hope the State will make very clear to the jury:
1) That the relationship of the dog and handler is very important, and how the dog is trained to respond, depends solely on how it was trained, IE the sit/stay was the final communication from this particular dog to tell the handler he was finished with his alerts.

2) When the dogs alert to decomposition, that is not something the humans can see, ( perhaps they could smell?) but only the dog can identify this, so even if the dog was being observed by a lay person, we could not know what we sere seeing necessarily, because WE do NOT know how the dog was trained. Hope this makes some kind of sense.

 

[LambChop]

:floorlaugh:

Calling all cars, be on the lookout for a suspect calling herself the tooth fairy...:floorlaugh:
Could this be why Casey was needing a shovel? She wanted to plant the tooth with her shamrock lanyard in hopes it would sprout an Irish kid?

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
Is that how you get an Irish kid? Well no wonder....I've been doing it wrong. jmo

 

[ynotdivein]

:floorlaugh:

Calling all cars, be on the lookout for a suspect calling herself the tooth fairy...:floorlaugh:
Could this be why Casey was needing a shovel? She wanted to plant the tooth with her shamrock lanyard in hopes it would sprout an Irish kid?

:spit:

Squeegee and a fresh iced tea on aisle 4 please...

 

[Aedrys]

There's no tooth. No truth to the tooth. lol The dogs were not looking for a tooth. It was mentioned by JB because sometimes dogs hit on teeth. Maybe he was suggesting that KC at one time lost a tooth in the backyard. Not sure where he was going with that. jmo

And seriously, trying to say it might be Casey or Lee's teeth? Give me break. How many times was that backyard mowed and dug up from the time Casey and Lee were kids? And unless they were involved, after the last age they'd last lose teeth naturally, in horrendous, teeth knocked out, fights in the backyard, that also wouldn't make any sense. Or maybe Cindy knocked out some of Casey's teeth the night she also choked Casey? Or some of Caylee's teeth got knocked out that night? Hmm, no sign of them seeing a dentist or emergency room, though. None of that makes sense. It's reaching, desperation, that's all it is. And looking for one tooth in the backyard, as small as Caylee's tooth would have been, is literally a needle in a haystack. They never would have had any luck finding it if it was there, which I doubt it was. That tooth thing was just ri.di.cu.lous!

 

[Intermezzo]

Was it EVER mentioned that Caylee lost/shed a tooth?

Caylee's skeletal remains were scattered by animals around the area she was finally dumped in. I assumed that her teeth were also scattered along with her skeletal remains by animals.
Considering the scattering of the remains, I was impressed that CSI found as many bones and teeth as they did in that swampy area.

Did I miss something? Or is it because NOT all of her teeth were found at the remains site that Baez has found an avenue to create doubt elsewhere?

:twocents:

 

[BlOnDe_GuRrL]

:floorlaugh:

Calling all cars, be on the lookout for a suspect calling herself the tooth fairy...:floorlaugh:
Could this be why Casey was needing a shovel? She wanted to plant the tooth with her shamrock lanyard in hopes it would sprout an Irish kid?

:floorlaugh:

 

[strawberry]

Was it EVER mentioned that Caylee lost/shed a tooth?

Caylee's skeletal remains were scattered by animals around the area she was finally dumped in. I assumed that her teeth were also scattered along with her skeletal remains by animals.
Considering the scattering of the remains, I was impressed that CSI found as many bones and teeth as they did in that swampy area.

Did I miss something? Or is it because NOT all of her teeth were found at the remains site that Baez has found an avenue to create doubt elsewhere?

:twocents:

I'm sure that's what happened..those teeth are so tiny I don't know how they found any of them.

I remember CA mentioning teeth in her State Deposition. She seemed to think it was evidence Caylee was still alive:

A Mr. Baez can tell you that I'm still upset
the fact that they talk about 18 teeth that Caylee had.
Caylee had 20 teeth.

Q U h - h u h .

A And the report that I finally read a few
weeks ago says -- they talk about 18 and accounting for
17 teeth that she had. Caylee had 20 teeth and I know
that for a fact --

Q All right.

A -- because I brushed her teeth.

Bottom of page 523, http://www.thehinkymeter.com/Library/CMA/depos/cindyanthonydepo072909.pdf

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Something I didn't understand at the hearing. Baez kept trying to negate "residual odors" as "false positives" constantly. What the heck does that mean about dogs that track lost people? They rely on the faintest residual remains to find people all the time! From what I've learned about these dogs is that some are so good they can even follow the scent of a person who got in a car and was driven a distance!

We won't see Fairgrieve at trial, imho. I doubt that Baez would get the judge to admit him as an "expert witness" in the field of cadaver dogs.

 

[logicalgirl]

Honestly I found listening to Dr. Fairgrieve's testimony just plain embarrassing, for him as an individual and for me as a Canadian.

He was unorganized, he couldn't focus his points to speak in a logical manner, and he was claiming to be an expert in a subject he knows as much about as I do - cause I watched a cadaver dog search for remains on a Criminal Minds episode a couple of weeks ago.

What gets into these people???? Sheesh. Send him up North to spend some time in a sweat lodge and get all that pompousness out of his system.

 

[Baxter]

I'm sure that's what happened..those teeth are so tiny I don't know how they found any of them.

I remember CA mentioning teeth in her State Deposition. She seemed to think it was evidence Caylee was still alive:

A Mr. Baez can tell you that I'm still upset
the fact that they talk about 18 teeth that Caylee had.
Caylee had 20 teeth.

Q U h - h u h .

A And the report that I finally read a few
weeks ago says -- they talk about 18 and accounting for
17 teeth that she had. Caylee had 20 teeth and I know
that for a fact --

Q All right.

A -- because I brushed her teeth.

Bottom of page 523, http://www.thehinkymeter.com/Library/CMA/depos/cindyanthonydepo072909.pdf

Three year olds are supposed to have 20 teeth.

" By age 3, your child should have a full set of 20 baby teeth."

http://www.babycenter.com/0_developmental-milestones-teething_6574.bc?page=1

 

[MD MOMMY]

Three year olds are supposed to have 20 teeth.

" By age 3, your child should have a full set of 20 baby teeth."

http://www.babycenter.com/0_developmental-milestones-teething_6574.bc?page=1

But she wasn't 3 yet. Who knows how many teeth she had. I brush 2 sets of kiddos teeth and I couldn't tell you how many they had. A childs mouth is tiny and their teeth are even more tiny. They all blend together. :twocents:

 

[MD MOMMY]

Honestly I found listening to Dr. Fairgrieve's testimony just plain embarrassing, for him as an individual and for me as a Canadian.

He was unorganized, he couldn't focus his points to speak in a logical manner, and he was claiming to be an expert in a subject he knows as much about as I do - cause I watched a cadaver dog search for remains on a Criminal Minds episode a couple of weeks ago.

What gets into these people???? Sheesh. Send him up North to spend some time in a sweat lodge and get all that pompousness out of his system.

He obviously learned all of his information via the web, no wonder he had no clue what he was talking about. It's kinda like googling symptoms you have when you aren't feeling well. Brain tumor always comes up and your like OMG. His confusion probably comes from reading hundreds of articles that directly contradict themselves. He was way out of his league and testifying was a HUGE mistake for his own reputation IMO.

 

[Reality Orlando]

My sentiments exactly. I was very surprised that a professional of her caliber would choose to associate herself with a case like this one that has so many negative undertones. Not to mention the potentially career ending effect it could have if things continue along the same unsavory lines it began on months ago.

Does anyone know for sure whether she withdrew from the case?

Well, that can go two ways as well. She could have taken on the case originally to make sure an innocent woman wasn't wrongfully accused, which signals to me she found otherwise...but that's just my opinion.

 

[K9Snoop]

I personally thought Dr. Vass blew Fairgrienve's assessment out of the water with his skunk analogy. You smell it, you know what it is, you don't have to see it squashed in the road to know what happened.

You're right but I hadn't got back in the posts until after I did my own. I like the skunk thing to.

 

[LambChop]

I don't think Dr. Fairgrienve did a bad job, I just don't think he told us anything we did not already know about dogs. If they don't actually find a body but alert on a spot, there either was a body there or there wasn't a body there, but dogs are so much better at determining that there could have been a body there which humans cannot always do. No one would argue dogs are not always right but they have a better track record than humans when it comes to sniffers. jmo

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Honestly I found listening to Dr. Fairgrieve's testimony just plain embarrassing, for him as an individual and for me as a Canadian.

He was unorganized, he couldn't focus his points to speak in a logical manner, and he was claiming to be an expert in a subject he knows as much about as I do - cause I watched a cadaver dog search for remains on a Criminal Minds episode a couple of weeks ago.

What gets into these people???? Sheesh. Send him up North to spend some time in a sweat lodge and get all that pompousness out of his system.

It REALLY makes me wonder what type of person would feel comfortable knowingly trying to affect the verdict of a trial about a murdered CHILD when they are so lacking in expertise. It's one thing if he knows his stuff, but it is downright evil for him to knowingly try to sway opinion toward the defense when he knows he is uninformed. Absolutely despicable.

 

[Oakley]

It REALLY makes me wonder what type of person would feel comfortable knowingly trying to affect the verdict of a trial about a murdered CHILD when they are so lacking in expertise. It's one thing if he knows his stuff, but it is downright evil for him to knowingly try to sway opinion toward the defense when he knows he is uninformed. Absolutely despicable.

I'm sure there are more accurate words to describe this time of person but vainglorious is what comes to mind at the moment.

ETA: Certainly an unusual person. Hee hee.

 

[mitzi]

It REALLY makes me wonder what type of person would feel comfortable knowingly trying to affect the verdict of a trial about a murdered CHILD when they are so lacking in expertise. It's one thing if he knows his stuff, but it is downright evil for him to knowingly try to sway opinion toward the defense when he knows he is uninformed. Absolutely despicable.

Bold mine.

Apparently, in Dr. Fairgrieve's case, money talks. That can be the only reason he would actually subject himself to this case. Or else he is a narcissist himself, too. That type never seems to be able to see how ignorant they will come off to others. They "think" they are so smart. I liked the expression another poster used...LDB cleaned his clock!