Casey's Pants & the Knife and The Cleaning of the Pontiac

[Dignity4Victims]

Let me clarify. I believe that the fibers are from the duct tape, But the FBI does not say conclusively that they are. But obviously someone thinks the knife is a good piece of evidence since it is posted on February 10, 2010.

This is the knife that Cindy found in the car. She washed this knife. Yet after the knife was looked at, fibers "which appear to be from duct tape" are still attached to the knife. I believe KC used this knife to cut the tape. The knife was taken from a drawer of cutlery that was NEVER used. Cindy said they had two sets and this set was on the bottom and never used and that is where the knife came from. As I said, I BELIEVE this knife was used and that the fibers are from the Hinkley Duct Tape, but, and the but is important, the FBI cannot conclusively say the fibers are.

Hope that works for you.

The knife was tested at the lab, and iirc, there were no fibers found. Correct, or am I remembering this wrong?

I'm not at home on my usual computer where I have all of this information.

 

[AZlawyer]

The knife was tested at the lab, and iirc, there were no fibers found. Correct, or am I remembering this wrong?

I'm not at home on my usual computer where I have all of this information.

There was definitely something on the knife. In the pictures, it looks like hair or fiber of some kind. There was also something resembling a clear adhesive found on the knife. No hairs showing evidence of decomposition were found on the knife, and the adhesive was not a match for the duct tape adhesive. I can't remember if the fiber was tested. It could be that the adhesive and "fiber"-looking thing was from some plastic-sealed food container (or something similar) and is totally unconnected with the duct tape or the murder.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

There was definitely something on the knife. In the pictures, it looks like hair or fiber of some kind. There was also something resembling a clear adhesive found on the knife. No hairs showing evidence of decomposition were found on the knife, and the adhesive was not a match for the duct tape adhesive. I can't remember if the fiber was tested. It could be that the adhesive and "fiber"-looking thing was from some plastic-sealed food container (or something similar) and is totally unconnected with the duct tape or the murder.

Thanks, AZ, I should have phrased my post more accurately to say that I remember seeing the fibers on the knife, but that the lab testing came back negative specifically for fibers. I'm fairly certain of this, but if I'm wrong then I probably just retained the results that it tested negative for duct tape adhesive and then lumped that together with the fiber from the duct tape and figured the whole thing was awash. Who knows, the ridiculous length of this case has taken a toll on my memory bank! :banghead:

BBM - very logical guess, and likely correct.

 

[jon_burrows]

This has probably been asked and answered but how do we know Cindy gave them the knife that was in Casey's car? I think we can trust Cindy about as much as we can trust Casey.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

This has probably been asked and answered but how do we know Cindy gave them the knife that was in Casey's car? I think we can trust Cindy about as much as we can trust Casey.

Good point and true about Cindy's lies, and no we don't except that the knife did have 'something' stuck within the serrations, so it sums up to a 'probably' to me.

 

[Solace]

This has probably been asked and answered but how do we know Cindy gave them the knife that was in Casey's car? I think we can trust Cindy about as much as we can trust Casey.

They probably took the entire collection of silverware.

Also, according to Orlando "site": "The photos are not accompanied by documents to show whether the threads found on the knife’s edge match the threads from the rare duct tape found over Caylee's face and in the Anthonys' home."

Here are the slides:

http://www.wftv.com/slideshow/news/22578950/detail.html

 

[countzero]

There was definitely something on the knife. In the pictures, it looks like hair or fiber of some kind. There was also something resembling a clear adhesive found on the knife. No hairs showing evidence of decomposition were found on the knife, and the adhesive was not a match for the duct tape adhesive. I can't remember if the fiber was tested. It could be that the adhesive and "fiber"-looking thing was from some plastic-sealed food container (or something similar) and is totally unconnected with the duct tape or the murder.

Once again I am going on memory here. IIRC ICA had some empty cheese wrappers or food containers in the vehicle/trash bags. The knife could have been used to open them. Based on your thoughts, I agree with ya.

I don't remember where the photos are of the trash bag contents to verify this.

 

[Solace]

Once again I am going on memory here. IIRC ICA had some empty cheese wrappers or food containers in the vehicle/trash bags. The knife could have been used to open them. Based on your thoughts, I agree with ya.

I don't remember where the photos are of the trash bag contents to verify this.

This could be true. HOWEVER, since we are looking at a murder and the fact that duct tape was used and a knife from a set that WAS NEVER used by the family since it was purchased (according to Cindy) was found in the car (having fibers that could be from the duct tape on it) that had a strong odor of decomposition , one could reasonably infer that this knife may have been used to cut the tape. Also, why would Casey take a knife from a set that was NEVER used and was "under" the usual set of cutlery that the family used. All of this is circumstantial evidence and there is no definitive proof that the fibers on the tape are from the duct tape, but this set was never used (per Cindy) and Casey had the knife in her car and was found after the child was missing and subsequently found dead with duct tape around the mandible and the upper part of her jaw.

Of course, the jury is going to look for definitive proof, but I believe the prosecutor will present it and let the jury look at it. Just mo. Thanks.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

There was definitely something on the knife. In the pictures, it looks like hair or fiber of some kind. There was also something resembling a clear adhesive found on the knife. No hairs showing evidence of decomposition were found on the knife, and the adhesive was not a match for the duct tape adhesive. I can't remember if the fiber was tested. It could be that the adhesive and "fiber"-looking thing was from some plastic-sealed food container (or something similar) and is totally unconnected with the duct tape or the murder.

found this article AZ...

Also in the documents are results from FBI testing on evidence found in Casey's house and in her car. The tests show that the kitchen knife found in Casey Anthony's car did not have any duct tape adhesive on it, but did have a clear sticky substance of some kind.
http://www.wftv.com/news/19334859/detail.html

 

[Solace]

found this article AZ...

That answers that question.

 

[BondJamesBond]

This could be true. HOWEVER, since we are looking at a murder and the fact that duct tape was used and a knife from a set that WAS NEVER used by the family since it was purchased (according to Cindy) was found in the car (having fibers that could be from the duct tape on it) that had a strong odor of decomposition , one could reasonably infer that this knife may have been used to cut the tape. Also, why would Casey take a knife from a set that was NEVER used and was "under" the usual set of cutlery that the family used. All of this is circumstantial evidence and there is no definitive proof that the fibers on the tape are from the duct tape, but this set was never used (per Cindy) and Casey had the knife in her car and was found after the child was missing and subsequently found dead with duct tape around the mandible and the upper part of her jaw.

Of course, the jury is going to look for definitive proof, but I believe the prosecutor will present it and let the jury look at it. Just mo. Thanks.

I follow you, Solace. IMHO, though, unless/until there is any further forensic information yet to be released that definitively connects the knife to anything related to the crime (e.g. duct tape, etc.) if the SA offers it up for the jury to consider...it benefits the defense.

IOW...IF I understand it correctly - and I'm not pretending I do - jury's responsibility is to weigh the evidence presented vs. reasonable doubt. Soooo...if you imagine the points made by the SA on either side of a balancing scale w/ one side representing points that increase reasonable doubt, and the other representing points that decrease reasonable doubt...IMHO the SA wants to put as little as they can in the side that increases reasonable doubt. Anything in that scale provides the defense the opportunity to start poking holes @ it and say, "The SA is trying to frame my client!"...and begin to show the jury all of the flaws in an individual point (e.g. how the knife MIGHT be connected or MIGHT NOT be connected).

Suffer another analogy. In a sport like football you can measure how much time the winning teams' offense spends on the field vs. their defense. In almost every game, the team that controls the ball (i.e. 'offense' on the field) will be the team that wins. Controlling the ball is the key to scoring and scoring is the key to winning. While the defense can/may score occasionally, it is the exception rather than the rule. So, following this analogy, the SA, IMHO, wants to control the ball, control the opportunity to score w/ the jury by offering up ONLY the most solid points that will (a) score directly w/ the jury re: eliminating reasonable doubt, and (b) provide the defense w/ any opportunity to score points of creating reasonable doubt.

I believe it was AZLawyer that consoled me some time ago that I should prepare to be disappointed that the trial may not reveal much about so many details of the case that we've poured over...only those that are required to be clear to convict. The other details maybe interesting...just not of enough value in eliminating reasonable doubt for a conviction. IOW, per earlier song analogy, "Blue on Black"...when presented w/ 31 days, etc., the knife, "won't mean much".

 

[beach]

Somebody (Bond? AZ? JWG?) conducted an experiment with duct tape to determine the appearance of cut v. tear pattern. I recall it being very compelling and after comparing to the edges of Q62, Q63, Q64 & Q104, it appeared to match a "tear" vs. a clean cut.

I thought it was in the Duct Tape thread, but I have been looking for a long time and can't find it. If anyone recalls this, link me please.

 

[AZlawyer]

Somebody (Bond? AZ? JWG?) conducted an experiment with duct tape to determine the appearance of cut v. tear pattern. I recall it being very compelling and after comparing to the edges of Q62, Q63, Q64 & Q104, it appeared to match a "tear" vs. a clean cut.

I thought it was in the Duct Tape thread, but I have been looking for a long time and can't find it. If anyone recalls this, link me please.

I believe it was JWG. Maybe if you limit your search to posts by him?

 

[BondJamesBond]

Somebody (Bond? AZ? JWG?) conducted an experiment with duct tape to determine the appearance of cut v. tear pattern. I recall it being very compelling and after comparing to the edges of Q62, Q63, Q64 & Q104, it appeared to match a "tear" vs. a clean cut.

I thought it was in the Duct Tape thread, but I have been looking for a long time and can't find it. If anyone recalls this, link me please.

I believe it was JWG. Maybe if you limit your search to posts by him?

Here ya go, 'Beach. JWG's [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5140504&postcount=347"]handiwork[/ame]...a proclivity for duct tape experiments he has. The, "Duct Tape Scission Experiment"

Still waiting for more on AZ's dress experiment.

 

[Solace]

I follow you, Solace. IMHO, though, unless/until there is any further forensic information yet to be released that definitively connects the knife to anything related to the crime (e.g. duct tape, etc.) if the SA offers it up for the jury to consider...it benefits the defense.

IOW...IF I understand it correctly - and I'm not pretending I do - jury's responsibility is to weigh the evidence presented vs. reasonable doubt. Soooo...if you imagine the points made by the SA on either side of a balancing scale w/ one side representing points that increase reasonable doubt, and the other representing points that decrease reasonable doubt...IMHO the SA wants to put as little as they can in the side that increases reasonable doubt. Anything in that scale provides the defense the opportunity to start poking holes @ it and say, "The SA is trying to frame my client!"...and begin to show the jury all of the flaws in an individual point (e.g. how the knife MIGHT be connected or MIGHT NOT be connected).

Suffer another analogy. In a sport like football you can measure how much time the winning teams' offense spends on the field vs. their defense. In almost every game, the team that controls the ball (i.e. 'offense' on the field) will be the team that wins. Controlling the ball is the key to scoring and scoring is the key to winning. While the defense can/may score occasionally, it is the exception rather than the rule. So, following this analogy, the SA, IMHO, wants to control the ball, control the opportunity to score w/ the jury by offering up ONLY the most solid points that will (a) score directly w/ the jury re: eliminating reasonable doubt, and (b) provide the defense w/ any opportunity to score points of creating reasonable doubt.

I believe it was AZLawyer that consoled me some time ago that I should prepare to be disappointed that the trial may not reveal much about so many details of the case that we've poured over...only those that are required to be clear to convict. The other details maybe interesting...just not of enough value in eliminating reasonable doubt for a conviction. IOW, per earlier song analogy, "Blue on Black"...when presented w/ 31 days, etc., the knife, "won't mean much".

I agree Bond. I did not realize that it was proved that it was not from duct tape. You have convinced me. Thanks

Bond

P.S. You are so right; it will just confuse.

 

[sumbunny]

You said it best BondJamesBond The prosecution doesn't need smoke and mirrors and glimmers of evidence. They have solid evidence regarding Casey's suspicious behaviour.

I do believe if the SA keeps the trial very simple, and just lays out the clear, unwavering facts, they will get a conviction.

The defense is simply trying to muddy the waters with reasonable doubt. I do believe that JA and LDB are too smart to go down that road

 

[Bathbuddys]

I think it is a reasonable to assume that Cindy went into the car and grabbed clothing like type stuff and threw it in the wash. She look to be the do it now rather than do it later. The whole RN training kicking in. Make it clean. The knife went in the sink or dishwasher. It appears that she didn't clean everything. There were shoes still in the back of the car when LE came on 7.16 to tow it. I have to wonder if she didn't think about what the smell was or would not allow herself to until she opened the trunk and it hit her smack in the face. By then she may have already started the wash. If she was planning on hiding the fact that maybe something bad had happen in the car then why tell 911 about it. She could have kept her mouth shut and how would LE known. They may have figured out something later but that would have given GA & CA more time to clean really really well.

I am thinking she was obviously in SHOCK, DISGUST and DENIAL!!! all at once.
i have also wondered why or when the whole car was cleaned out? and the trunk was obviously cleaned out, why leave anything at all? or was it left or put back after it was cleaned?

 

[ynotdivein]

Bumping.

(Be careful when searching, sleuthers. The search function is a giant rabbit hole--let us know when you go down so we can bring you back up if necessary!)

 

[Harmony 2]

Bumping since there was discussion about the knife on last night during Websleuth's talk show. The results on the knife are on page 7 post # 329

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4493643&postcount=329"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Casey's Pants & the Knife: The Cleaning of the Pontiac[/ame]

 

[cecybeans]

I realize this is primarily about the knife, but it also has to do with the cleaning of the Pontiac, so forgive me if it's the wrong place (and let me know a better one).

I am bothered by several things that suggest the trunk was cleaned. For one, when GA picked up the car and Simon B threw the garbage bag out, it was described as wet and had maggots on the underside. It was described as positioned over the wheel well. Since it was wet, that would suggest there was some kind of fluid there. Since this corresponds to what was later described as a "stain", it would make sense that this fluid was decomp (also because of the paper towels inside the garbage bag with adipocere). When the car was impounded, the stain was noticed, but nobody said it was a pool of fluid which leads me to think it was removed. GA driving home a crime scene of a car is enough for me to think he was concerned about possible biologicals in that fluid. Which is why I thought he may have removed the wheel well cover and propped it up against the playhouse to hose it off which would allow the cadaver dogs to scent there - I cannot imagine ICA carrying the body of Caylee across the yard (versus dragging her) which she would have to have done for there not to be a trail of decomp, and I always thought that it might be difficult to have a cadaver dog alert that strongly on something that had not only been in the elements a month but also possibly subjected to lawn care chemicals). Also, wouldn't Caylee's body have had to been dead a bit longer than immediately after an accident for enough of a decomp smell to have a dog alert?

After the car is impounded we only hear about that area of the trunk as a "stain" shaped like a child in a fetal position, which implies whatever fluid there had either been cleaned or removed in some way, or there wasn't enough residue to prove exactly what was there. That doesn't make any sense if the bag was wet - there should have been enough fluid or dried material to identify adipocere or some other substance one would think.

Also, the fact there was only one hair of Caylee's in the trunk and one blow fly leg would suggest to me that the trunk had been vacuumed. It just doesn't seem logical to have only one banded hair if she was in the trunk as long as she was. And if she was placed there while still alive, one would expect non-banded hairs to be present as well. We've all talked about how the lack of evidence in the trunk was a bit suspicious.

I need to listen to the discussion about the knife on Tricia's show because I'm still confused about why it was excluded from evidence.