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

[ecs5298]

I think you interpretation is wrong. You're nearly behind the big tree by the road. This would put the little tree right in the middle of the pic and it's not. I don't understand what you'r trying to say with the other pics. I know where the bags are located.
Here's another view you may have missed. Look at the sign. The big tree is out of the picture to it's left and the little tree is to it's right. The skull is 1ft 7 inches to the right of the bag that's just barely in view and 1 ft, 2 in. behind it. Clearlly it's not behind the pine tree. The bags themselves are just at the edge of the path per the documents.

ETA; The angle you show the photo taken from wouldn't even capture the path...it's down a slope and not visible from where you're standing near the road. You have to go closer and point the camera down a little.

Nope, this shot is taken facing south to the west of the big tree. Look at the vegetation.

 

[fortytwo]

No, because the garbage bag is behind the canvas bag (it has a width of it's own too), and the skull is another 1 ft 3 inches behind the garbage bag and 1 ft 7 inches to the left of it (if you have your back to Suburban Dr.) My line is an approximation keeping these measurements in mind.

I didn't notice the "pixie" in the photo until you mentioned it. I thought you were making fun of me.

(bold above by me)

Moi?

I would never even contemplate such behavior.

:angel:

 

[Marina2]

OK, I guess I will have to study the diagrams re: placement of the skull at the scene, but for now I'm in the "log" camp, with a nod to the "skull" camp to acknowledge that the end of this particular log looks a heck of a lot like a skull.

Something else occurred to me: why is the "skull" dark gray if, indeed, it is a skull? I thought it would be white--and I thought RK said it was white.

At least you have an open mind.

Snipped from p3465
"I observed a rotting log located on the west side of the small path. To the east of this log I observed a small skull with duct tape over the lower area. "


I included this in answer to the pic ecs included with a "view from the west" of the remains area. Same page

"Also noted were a black plastic bag and a white canvas bag to the northwest of the skull Several visible skeletal remains were located on the ground and partially covered with vegetation in the area of the skull. These items were just inside and at the location of the veil of heavy vine obscuring the view of the items from the west."

I don't think the skull would be white unless it was very old and sunbleached.

 

[christee]

OK, I guess I will have to study the diagrams re: placement of the skull at the scene, but for now I'm in the "log" camp, with a nod to the "skull" camp to acknowledge that the end of this particular log looks a heck of a lot like a skull.

Something else occurred to me: why is the "skull" dark gray if, indeed, it is a skull? I thought it would be white--and I thought RK said it was white.

Ditto on the dark grey color. I think it takes a few hundred to thousands of yrs for a skull to turn that dark, at least that's what I've seen on National Geographic.

as usual, JMO

 

[snow_walker]

What a horrible place to choose as a final resting spot for a little child. I know nothing about Florida, but surely there are beautiful quiet places where one might hide a body, if one was forced to do so.
To get back on topic, is there a scale drawing somewhere of all the relevant items locations?

 

[Marina2]

Nope, this shot is taken facing south to the west of the big tree. Look at the vegetation.

No, I was referring to the angle and position you put yourself in on the diagram...you were nearly at the road and I don't think you could capture the path down the slope from up there.

The pic above is facing north to northeast. I don't disagree with what it depicts. The canvas bag, the big tree and Suburban Dr. The palm fronds are found throughout the area, I don't understand the point you're making with them.

 

[Lovejac]

Here's an unusual view of the area under dispute here:

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/photogalleries/021809remainsfoundOCSOpictures_set4/1/lg/196602.htm

OMG is that Caylee's skull next to the pink flag!!

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I promise there are no skulls in any of those released photos. (Unless...do party ants have skulls?)

 

[Lovejac]

At least you have an open mind.

Snipped from p3465
"I observed a rotting log located on the west side of the small path. To the east of this log I observed a small skull with duct tape over the lower area. "


I included this in answer to the pic ecs included with a "view from the west" of the remains area. Same page

"Also noted were a black plastic bag and a white canvas bag to the northwest of the skull Several visible skeletal remains were located on the ground and partially covered with vegetation in the area of the skull. These items were just inside and at the location of the veil of heavy vine obscuring the view of the items from the west."

I don't think the skull would be white unless it was very old and sunbleached.

OMG again! It IS Caylee's skull! How did that get released??

 

[Lovejac]

I promise there are no skulls in any of those released photos. (Unless...do party ants have skulls?)

There you are SS! Been missing you, can't keep up with you running back and forth-Haleigh-Caylee! How do you do it?

Back on topic, would the State get in trouble for that being released? I swear I think it's her skull, especially after reading that part of the snipped report.

 

[Marina2]

Soil samples taken at skull and west of skull for control sample. Dec 17th
p3444

Evidence marker J
Approximate area where the skull had originally been located. Lane 4

Evidence marker K
Area directly west of where the skull had originally been located. Lane 4

The skull would have been a little more towards the lane 4 string since it was 19 ft, 8 inches from the road. The southside of lane 4 marks the 20 ft mark from the road. Move the J marker up towards the string a little and that is the spot where it was found.

 

[Macushla]

Just another thought: the skull was located in immediate proximity of the laundry bag, right? If you can't see the laundry bag in the 'suspect' pictures, then that is not the skull. the skull was removed BEFORE the laundry bag.

ETA: And as my final argument against the skull being in the picture. Does anyone think the media would have let this slip by them? they scoured those photos, hence the 'book report' (no pun intended - well ok maybe just a small pun). there is no way the media would have passed this up.

 

[JBean]

Just another thought: the skull was located in immediate proximity of the laundry bag, right? If you can't see the laundry bag in the 'suspect' pictures, then that is not the skull. the skull was removed BEFORE the laundry bag.

ETA: And as my final argument against the skull being in the picture. Does anyone think the media would have let this slip by them? they scoured those photos, hence the 'book report' (no pun intended - well ok maybe just a small pun). there is no way the media would have passed this up.

I am with you in that there is no skull in any of those pictures. I think all mags and papers would have it posted by now.

 

[Theonly1]

OMG is that Caylee's skull next to the pink flag!!

Lovejac, don't you start too!!! :drink:

I think that the skull (had it been in the photo) would be designated by a marker....

But I'd have to compare the crime scene documentation to make sure...

NOTE: NEVERMIND. I think someone said it was at marker "J"

 

[Theonly1]

Just another thought: the skull was located in immediate proximity of the laundry bag, right? If you can't see the laundry bag in the 'suspect' pictures, then that is not the skull. the skull was removed BEFORE the laundry bag.

ETA: And as my final argument against the skull being in the picture. Does anyone think the media would have let this slip by them? they scoured those photos, hence the 'book report' (no pun intended - well ok maybe just a small pun). there is no way the media would have passed this up.

I see it your way too, Macushla.

But regarding the media "scouring" these photos--I heartily disagree. The photos are numerous and many outright BORING. You have to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. WSer's, on EVERY DOCUMENT DUMP SO FAR, have discovered and ferreted out more information than the media who in my mind simply take the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS facts (from the police reports and such) and restates them. Other than people like Tony Pipitone, I think the media is looking for the easy pull quote and easy "bombshell".

Other than people like Pipitone, you DON'T see them really comparing statements, and doing any real investigative work. So, in my honest opinion, I don't think the "media" is doing any real scouring or sleuthing. At most they are glancing and looking for the BIG STORY to jump into their laps.

And then I think some of the "media" log on Websleuths and take credit for other people's deductions!

 

[Macushla]

I see it your way too, Macushla.

But regarding the media "scouring" these photos--I heartily disagree. The photos are numerous and many outright BORING. You have to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. WSer's, on EVERY DOCUMENT DUMP SO FAR, have discovered and ferreted out more information than the media who in my mind simply take the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS facts (from the police reports and such) and restates them. Other than people like Tony Pipitone, I think the media is looking for the easy pull quote and easy "bombshell".

Other than people like Pipitone, you DON'T see them really comparing statements, and doing any real investigative work. So, in my honest opinion, I don't think the "media" is doing any real scouring or sleuthing. At most they are glancing and looking for the BIG STORY to jump into their laps.

And then I think some of the "media" log on Websleuths and take credit for other people's deductions!

I agree whole heartedly with your last line, and it adds to my thoughts. If they have seen this thread, or at least this particular skull discussion, I have no doubt that even if they weren't sure and couldn't decide which side of the fence to come down on, they would still throw it out there just for the 'shock' value.

 

[Hot Dogs]

And then I think some of the "media" log on Websleuths and take credit for other people's deductions!

Like when at least one media outlet reported that a book was found with the remains? They showed a picture of the book Caylee was filmed reading right alongside the Kindercare sign. That whole faulty deduction could have come straight from Websleuths.

 

[Theonly1]

Like when at least one media outlet reported that a book was found with the remains? They showed a picture of the book Caylee was filmed reading right alongside the Kindercare sign. That whole faulty deduction could have come straight from Websleuths.

:clap:

You took the words right off my keyboard!

 

[My kids mom!]

The picture of KC's bedroom has a big "missing" poster of Caylee at the bottom of the bed. Look closely at the date that she went missing on the bottom of the poster. Very telling...I think. Also I was surprised to see the foil balloons in Caylee's Bedroom and one found at the scene.

 

[My kids mom!]

It's no wonder KC didn't sleep in her own bedroom when she was out on bail! A big picture of Caylee at the end of her bed and little ones all around the room...