Re Dr Spitz not finding any signs of trauma and not being able to determine a cause of death. Neither did Dr G so what's his point??
I'm glad he chose to go sweeping with his analysis rather than in the detailed fashion she did. No signs of trauma suggests he examined a living person or a person whose age or health status would suggest their sudden death could be of natural causes. A child with a heart defect on a transplant list or a child with diabetes may possible just suddenly die but that certainly doesn't apply to Caylee. Even if the defense tried to interject some malady that might explain Caylee dying of natural causes, at no point in the search for a living Caylee has any member appealed to anyone to bring her back let alone to bring her back because she needed her insulin or puffers or heart medication to live.
So he couldn't determine an actual cause of death but he won't be able to call it death from natural causes on the stand. I also don't believe they jury will accept the concept of no trauma when they'll be groslly traumatized by the autopsy photos. Dr G stated she found no signs of skeletal trauma. Caylee could have died from blunt force trauma to an organ that caused her to hemmorage internally to death. She could have died black and blue with bruising over every square inch of her body, and still have no skeletal trauma. Her abuser didn't break bones. So what??
I wonder what the going rate is for an expert to claim that a dead baby wrapped in gargabe bags in the woods with duct tape wrapped around her skull, didn't suffer trauma. Or maybe Caylee committed suicide. Seriously are we to believe that??
An ME without an official documented autopsy report shouldn't even be allowed on the stand IMO, but if he is, fear not. He can't explain anything more than the fact that Caylee never sustained a broken bone. The word Trauma in medicine is used in association with a specific event or body system. Traumatic brain injury, skeletal trauma, emotional trauma, traumatic amputation...... That's why Dr G stated there were no signs of skeletal trauma period because that's all she could determine with what she had to work with.
He says there's no signs of trauma. I say every juror in the court will see it differently and think he's insane.
Seems to me the defense experts are going to create reasonable doubt in their own defense strategy only. The SAO has a case that is built like blocks, solid. The defense wants us to believe it may not be murder on one hand, but may have been and if it was, somebody else did it, but may not have because Caylee is still alive living with someone named Sixto. Or did he move out lol???
Imagine Caylee Gonzalez living openly in NYC and not a single NG, JVM, National Inquirer or useless blogger noticing the likeness and reporting it? It's mindboggling, but not as mindboggling as the email parroting ICA's last story dated 12/10/2010.
Who are these people?
Sorry about the rant but:banghead::banghead: :banghead:
Does anyone know which expert was dropped or if the defense got their homework done by 12pm yesterday?
Neither did Dr. G. Spitz will testify that it cannot be proven that Caylee died as a result of a homicide. I'm anxious to hear his theory when the SA asks him to explain the duct tape. That should be an interesting exchange.
