Crime Scene Photos #3 ***WARNING - GRAPHIC DISCUSSION***

[Theonly1]

Area where the majority of Caylee's body was discovered (IMO):

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/201724.htm

We know from the written report that the blue tent did NOT cover the area of the skull (likely because it could not easily fit in that area).

 

[Marina2]

Area where the majority of Caylee's body was discovered (IMO):

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/201724.htm

We know from the written report that the blue tent did NOT cover the area of the skull (likely because it could not easily fit in that area).

No, they couldn't put it there until vegetation was cleared. It's stated in one of the reports. You can see the tent moved over in pics taken after the vegetation is cleared.
Everything necessary to pinpoint exactly where the skull was found is included in these docs. From photos, narratives, diagrams the skull is shown to be exactly where it was first seen by some WS members in the earlier crime scene threads. Believe it or not, it's there.

 

[Theonly1]

I wonder if there was something interesting about this ziplock baggie. It was photographed twice on 12/12 (early in evidence gathering).

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/202156.htm

 

[Theonly1]

Possible piece of duct tape:

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/202225.htm

 

[Theonly1]

I think you can see how the roots have grown THROUGH the bag here.

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/202249.htm

 

[ecs5298]

No, they couldn't put it there until vegetation was cleared. It's stated in one of the reports. You can see the tent moved over in pics taken after the vegetation is cleared.
Everything necessary to pinpoint exactly where the skull was found is included in these docs. From photos, narratives, diagrams the skull is shown to be exactly where it was first seen by some WS members in the earlier crime scene threads. Believe it or not, it's there.

Although it is intriguing to think that the skull is visible in any of these pics. I have seen that OCSO has been very careful in what pics they have released to the public. The pic directly below is the one where everyone says they saw the skull.

Here's the same angle after the scene has been processes and the remains removed. You will see that the skull would have been behind the tree in this pic.

Just more pixies, orbs and microscopic baby strollers.

 

[Rumpole]

Although it is intriguing to think that the skull is visible in any of these pics. I have seen that OCSO has been very careful in what pics they have released to the public. The pic directly below is the one where everyone says they saw the skull.

Here's the same angle after the scene has been processes and the remains removed. You will see that the skull would have been behind the tree in this pic.

Just more pixies, orbs and microscopic baby strollers.

I agree.

It was fun looking and finding toys etc. The skull was "seen" in and around the center of the top photo, but we now know it was out of shot to the right.
PS I STIll think it looks like a book in the top shot

 

[Hot Dogs]

What's the green striped thing in this annoyingly sideways photo?

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/1/lg/201646.htm

A palm leaf?

 

[Rumpole]

A palm leaf?

It's got no flag. That's a clue.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Although it is intriguing to think that the skull is visible in any of these pics. I have seen that OCSO has been very careful in what pics they have released to the public. The pic directly below is the one where everyone says they saw the skull.

Here's the same angle after the scene has been processes and the remains removed. You will see that the skull would have been behind the tree in this pic.

Just more pixies, orbs and microscopic baby strollers.

Yes, and I still see it. It is about 1/3 the way up from the bottom and just right of center. The skull is almost centered within the three "globes" (a little closer to the two on the left).

It may be PAREIDOLIA but until I hear/see the evidence, I'm a believer!

 

[Woe.be.gone]

It's got no flag. That's a clue.

I think the pink flag in the bottom pic is where the skull may have been.

 

[Rumpole]

Yes, and I still see it. It is about 1/3 the way up from the bottom and just right of center. The skull is almost centered within the three "globes" (a little closer to the two on the left).

It may be PAREIDOLIA but until I hear/see the evidence, I'm a believer!

I don't think evidence will do it for you if it hasn't yet.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I don't think evidence will do it for you if it hasn't yet.

I'll live with my delusions!

 

[Rumpole]

I'll live with my delusions!

We all do that!

It's OK as long as we realise there is one REALITY and not ALL subjective views are accurate.

 

[Marina2]

Although it is intriguing to think that the skull is visible in any of these pics. I have seen that OCSO has been very careful in what pics they have released to the public. The pic directly below is the one where everyone says they saw the skull.

Here's the same angle after the scene has been processes and the remains removed. You will see that the skull would have been behind the tree in this pic.

Just more pixies, orbs and microscopic baby strollers.

Those pics show the scene before the tent was moved over. The pic below is after it's been moved over the remains. You can see it's a big difference in where the tent originally was.
The T2 tree is "west of the skull" and the skull was found on the South side of Lane 4. Tree T10 isn't even visable in your pic. That's a pretty good slope from tree T14 down into the path so is further than it looks in this pic to Lane 4. If the skull is east of T2 and in Lane 4 it's in view in the photo. The diagrams really show this better as well as particular evidence markers.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Marina2, Are you saying it's possible the skull was there? Is T2 in Lane 4? It looks like skull could of been on the southeast side of T2.

 

[Marina2]

Marina2, Are you saying it's possible the skull was there? Is T2 in Lane 4? It looks like skull could of been on the southeast side of T2.

I'm saying that the narratives and the diagrams, as well as particular evidence markers show that where we see a skull is the same place that it is documented as being found. Tree T2 is a Swamp Bay and is west of the skull. It's in lane 5 or 6...south of lane 4. The skull is northeast of T2.
The perspective in some photos is misleading so many don't think it's possible that this is the skull. Also, they don't believe LE would release it. I think that was a mistake because it's not readily apparent. But, imo and in viewing the diagrams it's more likely than not that this is the skull in the photo. I see what's there. It's not pixels or pixies, it's a skull. It's even facing the same way LE said it was...back of skull to the southeast and face of skull to the northwest. I'll see if I can snip out a portion of a diagram to show it. That's about as objective as I can get.

 

[BuffaloPI]

Yes, and I still see it. It is about 1/3 the way up from the bottom and just right of center. The skull is almost centered within the three "globes" (a little closer to the two on the left).

It may be PAREIDOLIA but until I hear/see the evidence, I'm a believer!

No, its there. The features of the skull aren't plainly visible, but the duct tape and hair is.:frown:

 

[AZlawyer]

My eyes must be broken. Can one of you guys cut out the part of the photo that shows the skull (or duct tape and hair)??

 

[Rumpole]

My eyes must be broken. Can one of you guys cut out the part of the photo that shows the skull (or duct tape and hair)??

No.....