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

[LambChop]

DOCUMENTS RELEASED: Sheriff's Office Crime Scene Reports
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740668/detail.html

Page 2

Thanks for posting this report. The report does not state that the skull had any roots growing through the skull from the ground. It only mentions that roots were growing through the bags when they tried to pick them up.

 

[Anais]

Where did you find this information on line one about the bones being essentially in the bag?

You can find almost any and or all documents here.

 

[seagull65]

Thanks for posting this report. The report does not state that the skull had any roots growing through the skull from the ground. It only mentions that roots were growing through the bags when they tried to pick them up.

at the bottom of p 3465 and into 3466 Spvr Mears describes the collection of the skull and a few other items in the direct vicinity, including additional bones, and then says:

"I placed flags at the locations of the skeletal remains I picked up with notations on the flags as to what was located in that specific area. All of the items collected were on top of/within the leaf layer and/or adhering to the ground with small root growth."

so "all of the items collected" , but "and/or adhering to the ground with small root growth". And she did not pick up the skull itself but she was describing its collection along with the items she herself picked up...... So did the skull also have tiny roots growing to the bottom of it like other items mentioned specifically elsewhere in the report or was it an exception that didn't have little roots growing to it? It will be interesting to see what more comes out. I don't think we can say for sure yet that it didn't have roots growing to it can we (unless we're someone who was there .) (And that's not me.) It seems reasonable to think if it was in that position as long as the other items that it also had the tiny roots. I'm curious if it did or not.

Was it YM's report that said "it was apparent that the skull had not rolled out of the bag but had been in this position for some time" (not an exact quote, that's my best recollection.) I can't remember if he elaborated, maybe because it was kind of lodged in the dirt? Or did we only guess back then that that might be why. I can't remember now.

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Perhaps it was the wipe found in the backpack....

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72554

The fact that many of these Exhibits are personal items of Caylee's which were shown to George during his State deposition, items that surely George himself dressed Caylee in as he touched her sweet skin, smelled her baby scent, and yet even that hasn't moved George to stand up for Caylee, is just heartless of him, despicable, and shameful.

Thankfully, Caylee has the voices of most of the Websleuthers, LE, FBI all the experts who will be her voice at trial as they testify for her justice, and Caylee's Prosecution team who has already clearly stated that 'their purpose, focus and voice is to protect Caylee, not the family.'

God Bless them for doing for Caylee what Caylee's own "grandparents" grossly failed and continue to fail to do, even for a murdered baby.


Exhibits shown to George Anthony during his State deposition:

Exhibit 1 - close-up photo of gas can duct tape
Exhibit 2 - close-up photo of Henkel brand duct tape on gas can
Exhibit 3 - photo of gas can with duct tape and metal brackets with duct tape on floor
Exhibit 4 - soiled brown/grey carpet
Exhibit 5 - Winnie the Pooh blanket from crime scene
Exhibit 6 - Caylee's striped shorts from crime scene
Exhibit 7 - Anthony garage
Exhibit 8 - white canvas laundry bag

 

[logicalgirl]

The fact that many of these Exhibits are personal items of Caylee's which were shown to George during his State deposition, items that surely George himself dressed Caylee in as he touched her sweet skin, smelled her baby scent, and yet even that hasn't moved George to stand up for Caylee, is just heartless of him, despicable, and shameful.

Thankfully, Caylee has the voices of most of the Websleuthers, LE, FBI all the experts who will be her voice at trial as they testify for her justice, and Caylee's Prosecution team who has already clearly stated that 'their purpose, focus and voice is to protect Caylee, not the family.'

God Bless them for doing for Caylee what Caylee's own "grandparents" grossly failed and continue to fail to do, even for a murdered baby.


Exhibits shown to George Anthony during his State deposition:

Exhibit 1 - close-up photo of gas can duct tape
Exhibit 2 - close-up photo of Henkel brand duct tape on gas can
Exhibit 3 - photo of gas can with duct tape and metal brackets with duct tape on floor
Exhibit 4 - soiled brown/grey carpet
Exhibit 5 - Winnie the Pooh blanket from crime scene
Exhibit 6 - Caylee's striped shorts from crime scene
Exhibit 7 - Anthony garage
Exhibit 8 - white canvas laundry bag

Dignity4Victims I want to say a special thanks for bringing this list forward. I've never seen it before and it is heartbreaking to understand George saw these items and continues in his behaviors of denial. All I can say is Wow.

 

[seagull65]

Regarding movement of the body parts due to water, etc: The small items like the Disney bag and bottles and cans and so on, I wonder why they wouldn't have washed away if there was directional flow of the water. Everything always sounded to me like it was probably pretty much where it was placed originally, for example, the body placed just within the vines screening it from view, etc, (except for the parts dragged by animals.) I never pictured anything being able to move very much with water just due to the vegetation/foliage and the rooty/bumpy ground, even if it had been a body with lungs full of air that could float or water deep enough to float much. But maybe water did contribute to the movement of some of the body parts since they were on that slight slope, if there didn't happen to be plants to stop them. Well, interesting and Bond's post is food for thought. Also, I was wondering, when RK claimed to have first seen the skull, he could see enough of it above water that he didn't think it was a ball or some other object, he described it as "I think I saw a skull in there" to his coworkers. I think that was Aug 11, IIRC. Was that during the timeframe described as the highest water period in the water study? Maybe not, maybe it was just before, I'm not positive. RK describes the skull as being in the same place each time he saw it, right? And always in that upright position IIRC.

 

[notthatsmart]

DOCUMENTS RELEASED: Sheriff's Office Crime Scene Reports
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740668/detail.html

Page 2

That information that I asked Bond for is not on page 2. still looking. thanks

 

[BondJamesBond]

Regarding movement of the body parts due to water, etc: The small items like the Disney bag and bottles and cans and so on, I wonder why they wouldn't have washed away if there was directional flow of the water. Everything always sounded to me like it was probably pretty much where it was placed originally, for example, the body placed just within the vines screening it from view, etc, (except for the parts dragged by animals.) I never pictured anything being able to move very much with water just due to the vegetation/foliage and the rooty/bumpy ground, even if it had been a body with lungs full of air that could float or water deep enough to float much. But maybe water did contribute to the movement of some of the body parts since they were on that slight slope, if there didn't happen to be plants to stop them. Well, interesting and Bond's post is food for thought. Also, I was wondering, when RK claimed to have first seen the skull, he could see enough of it above water that he didn't think it was a ball or some other object, he described it as "I think I saw a skull in there" to his coworkers. I think that was Aug 11, IIRC. Was that during the timeframe described as the highest water period in the water study? Maybe not, maybe it was just before, I'm not positive. RK describes the skull as being in the same place each time he saw it, right? And always in that upright position IIRC.

*bbm*

Thanks, Seagull.

As you alluded to re: interaction w/ vegetation, slope of the grade, water & scavengers, IMHO, there are so many variables involved that it is difficult to develop a simple explanation for how things were transported. I just gave one example of how things might have happened in general.

FWIW re: bolded above and as an example of the interaction of variables. IIRC, a decomposing body will bloat w/ the gases of decomposition in the early stages. So, for example, I would expect a bloated body to interact w/ rising/falling water differently than one that has passed this stage when exposed to rising/falling water IYKWIM.

Soooo many variables.

 

[notthatsmart]

Regarding movement of the body parts due to water, etc: The small items like the Disney bag and bottles and cans and so on, I wonder why they wouldn't have washed away if there was directional flow of the water. Everything always sounded to me like it was probably pretty much where it was placed originally, for example, the body placed just within the vines screening it from view, etc, (except for the parts dragged by animals.) I never pictured anything being able to move very much with water just due to the vegetation/foliage and the rooty/bumpy ground, even if it had been a body with lungs full of air that could float or water deep enough to float much. But maybe water did contribute to the movement of some of the body parts since they were on that slight slope, if there didn't happen to be plants to stop them. Well, interesting and Bond's post is food for thought. Also, I was wondering, when RK claimed to have first seen the skull, he could see enough of it above water that he didn't think it was a ball or some other object, he described it as "I think I saw a skull in there" to his coworkers. I think that was Aug 11, IIRC. Was that during the timeframe described as the highest water period in the water study? Maybe not, maybe it was just before, I'm not positive. RK describes the skull as being in the same place each time he saw it, right? And always in that upright position IIRC.

IIRC, Actually Rk said it was a fifty percent chance it was in the same area that he reported in the first 911 call. Investigators questioned him about this and told him how that sounds when he says that. At some point he says, I gave you longitude and lattitude. This is also something missing from discovery imo. In the 911 call he is going to his gps at some point and I wonder if this is where the longitude and lattitude numbers are coming from. I have not seen any gps numbers in discovery. Also, responding officer Kutcher said she checked her grid numbers before she was interviewed and it was in the same general area, however, have not seen any grid numbers in discovery.

I think the storm came through around Aug 17th.

My point is: I can not find proof in the discovery that the skull was ever underwater. I know there are many witnesses that say the area was underwater, but many are confused where the location of the skull was. The tes volunteers were making statements like it was 40 to 50 feet in, they seem to be confused. Tm says that spot was 14 inches under water. Yet, Dc and Jh just walked right down in there, and no water. I dont get it.

To keep it on topic, I noticed last night in a document written by CSI Welch that there was a Tv in the perimeter of the crime scene, inside the baseline. The Dc video shows a TV. I guess I never realized he was that close. I thought he was much further to the east. There may have been another tv in there. I do not know if the blanket that Dc found is the same as the second blanket that Ocso found.

 

[ZsaZsa]

IIRC, Actually Rk said it was a fifty percent chance it was in the same area that he reported in the first 911 call. Investigators questioned him about this and told him how that sounds when he says that. At some point he says, I gave you longitude and lattitude. This is also something missing from discovery imo. In the 911 call he is going to his gps at some point and I wonder if this is where the longitude and lattitude numbers are coming from. I have not seen any gps numbers in discovery. Also, responding officer Kutcher said she checked her grid numbers before she was interviewed and it was in the same general area, however, have not seen any grid numbers in discovery.

I think the storm came through around Aug 17th.

My point is: I can not find proof in the discovery that the skull was ever underwater. I know there are many witnesses that say the area was underwater, but many are confused where the location of the skull was. The tes volunteers were making statements like it was 40 to 50 feet in, they seem to be confused. Tm says that spot was 14 inches under water. Yet, Dc and Jh just walked right down in there, and no water. I dont get it.

To keep it on topic, I noticed last night in a document written by CSI Welch that there was a Tv in the perimeter of the crime scene, inside the baseline. The Dc video shows a TV. I guess I never realized he was that close. I thought he was much further to the east. There may have been another tv in there. I do not know if the blanket that Dc found is the same as the second blanket that Ocso found.

I don't think Tim Miller was confused about the location and he has clearly stated the area was completely underwater when they planned to search. I believe if an ATV was submerged at the beginning of the search,everything smaller than an ATV was too..

 

[LambChop]

It was not just one or two people who claimed the area was under water it was many. Including Ofc. Cain who did not want to get his feet wet obviously. jmo

 

[notthatsmart]

Also, if you look at the Fox news crime scene photos, you can clearly see the log right beside the path and the flags placed appropriatley. I do not know what Rk meant by 6 feet over. It looks like it is right there, like 1 foot over from the path. I can not figure out how officer cain or anyone else could miss it. His description in the first 911 call, looks nothing like the pictures. I see no white board or mowed area beyond or a log that looks like it has been cut on.

 

[CuriousTwo]

Very interesting observations!

I recall mention that this area (where Caylee's body was left) is basically a dumping ground - an area that's used by individuals for dumping trash, that teens use for drinking, smoking, etc. If so, it contains lots of debris unrelated to Caylee. I can't imagine how LE could sort thru all that to determine which items were related and which weren't. I mean, where do you start and stop? I can't quite wrap my mind around this process. Would love any input. Thanks!

 

[Intermezzo]

:bump:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76731"]Crime scene photos CASUAL VERSION - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame] THREAD 1

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76732"]Crime scene photos #2 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame] THREAD 2

 

[Intermezzo]

moving some posts over

LE removed and cleared the area of vegetation when looking for Caylee's remains so the site would not have been the same when she went there.

Here are some photos of the crime scene for reference. I have been looking for the log, mentioned in the report, that the skull was under.

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set4/indexGallery.htm

ETA: to add other sets
http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set3/indexGallery.htm

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set2/indexGallery.htm

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set1/indexGallery.htm

Look at Photo 63
Under the Blue tent..looks like a log
The remains were under the BLUE tent, iirc

Thanks
These photos (Set 4) were released on Feb 18, 2009
She had received Dr Halls report on Feb 17, 2009
Yet she did not receive, from the Defense, photos until Sept 2010

I wonder if there are other photos that have not been released to us..(we know the ME/autopsy photos have Not..right?..i think they have not)

I also wish add...WOW..Look at all that Vegetation..

View attachment 13983

If we look at the grid map... it appears that the laundry bag would be to the left of the skull and slightly closer to the roadway.

Looking at the video starting @ 6:25 and we see the pavers. We also pan straight @ 8:12 and 8:37 where there is what is for sure a LOG and it appears to be slightly elevated in some areas. It is slightly further into the woods than pavers. I think this large log is where Caylee's skull was. I did not, on the video, see DC go near the log. He sure as heck was digging and probing underneath those pavers. What a sick man!! :banghead:

 

[Intermezzo]

moving posts over

The "daycare" sign was right near the log, wasn't it. I'm sure there are a lot of logs from downed trees in this area. You have to wonder if DC was aware of the pavers and the black trash bags (which he showed interest in) wouldn't he be also looking for the canvas laundry bag? It sure looks like a canvas bag in the video but didn't the canvas bag contain the black bags also? I remember seeing some pictures of the canvas bag and the black bags at the scene early in 2009 when the pictures were first released. jmo


ETA: Looking at the grid above and the location of the pink blanket DC was very close.

If we can find those pictures, that would be great!!

I would think that DC would have been told about the laundry bag, but he sure seemed interested in black trash bags only. So maybe someone... cough... Cindy... cough... Casey... forgot about that little detail?

 

[cottoncandy]

Just a general comment about the crime scene photos… the defense can argue whatever they want about photos or anything else in this case but what will seal inmate’s date with that pesky needle are the photos of Caylee’s skull with THREE strips of duct tape stretched across her small face attached to her hair & holding the mandible in place. The duct tape obviously was not placed to keep Caylee temporarily silent it was a permanent solution. There is zero evidence that someone besides inmate had Caylee … and these photos prove homicide. Sayonara, Casey Anthony. moo

 

[Reagan]

cottoncandy,

Agreed. It was meant to be permanent. KC would have ripped out Caylee's hair and more than likely several layers of skin off her face with that fire resistant duct tape if she tried to remove it. Explain that one to CA. She knew she wouldn't have to.

It sure wasn't temporary, and it sure didn't float there by chance as Linda Kenny Baden claimed (And I think Brad C? But someone correct me on that one). Wasn't that theory used in the scott peterson trial? The jury didn't buy it then, and this jury won't buy it now.

 

[JBean]

bump for info

 

[Hot Dogs]

Canvas laundry bag and plastic trash bag as found at the crime scene. These were the body bags. Click to enlarge.