Defense Witness List

[kaRN]

respectfully snipped
TY kaRN for sharing TWA post with me. I didn't remember Dr. Lee had stated that. I do hope that Ashton can get all the notes from this defense. Even is the defense doesn't want to show the SAO the reports that the experts did do. If the experts are professionals that the reports exist brings another question to mind. Will the experts show at their depositions with the SAO with their reports or not? If they do I can imagine that Ashton will bring this up at a hearing coming soon. mh + mo

I believe that they will come with all the relevant files because they are required to testify under oath. It's not ethical to testify you can't recall something pertaining to the science if the answer is contained in paperwork you shredded or left in Holland . You either did something and this was the result or you didn't. Because scientific work, medical care etc. is done by teams, the assumption is if something isn't documented it hasn't been done.
No expert called is expected to be able to recall all the minutae of details involved in the application of the science or the results on a case by case basis but you are expected to be able to get all the required information from the notes, reports etc. you generated at the time. If it turns out you missed a step or whatever and can't address important details you should be able to. that any other reasonable forensic expert would be expected to, you're professionally liable for that. Or so we're taught. :angel:
This is the ICA case so who knows who'll pop out of the woodwork. The Eickenblooms seem a little too zealous to me personally.I agree with Faefrost that this is not a case a moral and ethical professional would want to play loosey goosey with the science for. MHO

 

[Intermezzo]

Dr Michael Freeman (Forensic Epidemiologist) is on the Defenses Witness List

Here is an article he wrote

http://www.internationalbrain.org/pdf_public/lisbon/Freeman Lisbon, Forensic Epidemiology.pdf

 

[LancelotLink]

Getting a headache trying to read the redacted. so far all I have is "We're not trying to hide anything." And "Jeff, you are a real funny guy."

 

[Dear Prudence]

Dr Michael Freeman (Forensic Epidemiologist) is on the Defenses Witness List

Here is an article he wrote

http://www.internationalbrain.org/pdf_public/lisbon/Freeman Lisbon, Forensic Epidemiology.pdf

Whoa, that is so over my head. Can anyone dumb it down for me and explain what forensic epidemiology is and what this expert could be testifying about in regards to KC's trial?

 

[nums24]

Whoa, that is so over my head. Can anyone dumb it down for me and explain what forensic epidemiology is and what this expert could be testifying about in regards to KC's trial?

I read this yesterday, it helped me understand what it is somewhat:

http://cphp.sph.unc.edu/focus/vol2/issue5/2-5ForensicEpi_issue.pdf

 

[Intermezzo]

http://www.globegazette.com/news/local/article_34b33ed6-6f3f-11df-b3ea-001cc4c002e0.html

Forensic expert: No evidence of strangulation

For The Globe Gazette

snipped

WEBSTER CITY — A forensic epidemiologist from Oregon disputed a medical examiner’s conclusion of how a Charles City toddler died."

"Freeman also acknowledged a defendant’s story may change or evolve over the course of an interrogation, leading to inconsistencies"

 

[nums24]

Dr. Michael Freeman Links:

Here is his CV, updated January 2010: http://performtec.net/Docs/MDF_CV.pdf

http://www.trialguides.com/authors/michael-freeman/

http://west.thomson.com/about/news/experts/freeman.aspx

http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/education/sc...health/people/michael-d-freeman-phd-mph-d.cfm

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I tried to read both articles on forensic epidemiology and still cannot understand how it could be applicable in this case. I did notice, however, that Dr Freeman has authored or co-authored several articles on cerebellar tonsillar ectopia (herniation of the cerebellum portion of the brain) of which one type is sometimes caused by a malformation in the skull. . . I'm wondering if this is connected to that finding (I can't remember the name of it) in Caylee's autopsy report ~ that there was a slight skull defect. Just trying to brainstorm here; so if I'm way off base pay no attention whatsoever as I certainly have no expertise in these matters at all!

 

[logicalgirl]

http://www.globegazette.com/news/local/article_34b33ed6-6f3f-11df-b3ea-001cc4c002e0.html

Forensic expert: No evidence of strangulation

For The Globe Gazette

snipped

WEBSTER CITY — A forensic epidemiologist from Oregon disputed a medical examiner’s conclusion of how a Charles City toddler died."

"Freeman also acknowledged a defendant’s story may change or evolve over the course of an interrogation, leading to inconsistencies"

So if I'm correctly following along with what this forensic expert will testify to - that is a medical examiners conclusions - would be that Caylee didn't die from having duct tape covering both her nose and her mouth, cutting off the ability to breathe and sustain life?

I don't recall Dr. G. giving a conclusion beyond "homicide". So not a homicide - is that what he will try to say? Ummm........:waitasec:

This would have to be after the MOTY got up on the stand and testified to exactly how the "accident" happened.

Why is it I open this thread expecting to see something concrete or even a plan the defense has in place and come up with dead air? Forgot to add so please imagine three head banging emoticons!

 

[Sun]

Dr Michael Freeman (Forensic Epidemiologist) is on the Defenses Witness List

Here is an article he wrote

http://www.internationalbrain.org/pdf_public/lisbon/Freeman Lisbon, Forensic Epidemiology.pdf

Is Dr. Freeman in any way connected to the no-TV defense attorney?

 

[Solace]

Richard Hornsby, Bill Sheaffer and Judge Strickland must have spit their drinks all over the keyboards in uproarious laughter reading this childish drivel from Baez. I have never seen a profession write anything like this. Ever!!!

It is another example of why he was not given his license to practice; he is totally unprofessional trying to get away with this bs in such a high profile case. He is also lazy and that is part of this.

 

[Dear Prudence]

It sounds to me like epidemiology is about how statistics apply to scientific data, like the prevelance of a certain disease in a certain population, and how reliable the conclusions drawn from the statistics are. So I wonder if Dr. Freeman's testimony might be about the air samples taken from the trunk being compared to the database and the conclusions drawn from that.

 

[logicalgirl]

Okay - I plowed my way through his pdf. and all I can say is this guy is a specializes in statistics and my advice to Baez would be "Beware the Algorithm". Remember that show "Numbers" (except I don't know how to type a backwards 3) with the cop and his brainy brother who was constantly coming up with formulas.:waitasec:

Hint: Baez- the show was canceled. :banghead:

 

[Solace]

So if I'm correctly following along with what this forensic expert will testify to - that is a medical examiners conclusions - would be that Caylee didn't die from having duct tape covering both her nose and her mouth, cutting off the ability to breathe and sustain life?

I don't recall Dr. G. giving a conclusion beyond "homicide". So not a homicide - is that what he will try to say? Ummm........:waitasec:

The forensic report does state that there was duct tape covering the mandible and nose. Jamie Weintraub (one of the lawyers who they pay on the shows to take the opposite view says this is not true).

Dr. G. specifically states it.

 

[logicalgirl]

The forensic report does state that there was duct tape covering the mandible and nose. Jamie Weintraub (one of the lawyers who they pay on the shows to take the opposite view says this is not true).

Dr. G. specifically states it.

I know!!!! I was trying to come up with something the good doc would think of to say...I mean - how ridiculous would it be to say that...

 

[Solace]

I know!!!! I was trying to come up with something the good doc would think of to say...I mean - how ridiculous would it be to say that...

Actually it was placed over the mandible and part of the maxilla. Here are pictures of both: So according to these pictures the entire mouth was covered.

http://iv.nucleusinc.com/imagescooked/3535W.jpg

Maybe Jamie Weintraub is saying it was not placed over the nose, just the mandible and that in her mind means it was not meant to kill. She'll say anything for money.

I cannot wait, cannot wait to watch Baez make an idiot out of himself as he did when he questioned Yuri Melich - he was as antagonistic as could be and for what reason - Melich is the lead detective and Baez was implying that he took forever to get to the house because the case was not important to him. He looked like an ambulance chaser and a fifth rate lawyer. His e-mails show he has not improved. I don't see him improving much in the next five months which will fly by and then we can all sit back and watch what he does.

He has a huge mouth and very little comes out of it - when he was asked about Kronk this past week, he replied that he never said "such a thing" meaning Kronk was not in the defenses eyes as a suspect when we all know he was big time.

 

[Jomo]

12/02/2010 Response Justice Administrative Commission's; to Defendant's Motion to Appoint Expert in Taphonomy and Request to Participate Telephonically

Latest entry for the murder case, from the Clerk of Courts records

I'm happy to see that JAC is on top of this one again!

 

[RR0004]

What I wouldn't give to read the redacted lines! I wonder if the media can request that? And JBs unprofessionalism is astounding. Shouting in all caps, saying "YOU ALREADY KNEW THIS" AND "PLEASE TELL ME YOU KNEW THIS".

What a....oh there's no namecalling...fill in the blanks yourselves.:angel:

Can you imagine how frustrating this must be for the State to have to deal with an "attorney" like Baez? He can't even write.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Baez' demeanor is astoundingly offensive. It looks like a youtube argument. How on Earth is he allowed to practice law? I hope someone shows that email, along with the other metric ton of garbage he's done, to the Florida Bar. I really think Baez does not understand what the judge meant by subject matter. Great job, by the way, to the Florida Bar for allowing him to practice. I'm sure the citizens are appreciative of having people like Baez loosed on them. Disgusting.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Actually it was placed over the mandible and part of the maxilla. Here are pictures of both: So according to these pictures the entire mouth was covered.

http://iv.nucleusinc.com/imagescooked/3535W.jpg

Maybe Jamie Weintraub is saying it was not placed over the nose, just the mandible and that in her mind means it was not meant to kill. She'll say anything for money.

I cannot wait, cannot wait to watch Baez make an idiot out of himself as he did when he questioned Yuri Melich - he was as antagonistic as could be and for what reason - Melich is the lead detective and Baez was implying that he took forever to get to the house because the case was not important to him. He looked like an ambulance chaser and a fifth rate lawyer. His e-mails show he has not improved. I don't see him improving much in the next five months which will fly by and then we can all sit back and watch what he does.

He has a huge mouth and very little comes out of it - when he was asked about Kronk this past week, he replied that he never said "such a thing" meaning Kronk was not in the defenses eyes as a suspect when we all know he was big time.

Baez seems to take everything so personally. He has a chip on his shoulder. He seems like the type who thinks everyone is racist against him, out to get him, etc. Utterly bizarre. Something's off in that noggin of his.