kgeaux
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
- Messages
- 7,598
- Reaction score
- 31
So you are worried about a lack of blowflies, but you have no problem discounting the 10 people who smelled what they recognized as death in the car? Along with the cadaver dog? Along with the "coincidental" finding of Caylee';s hair in the trunk that shows death banding (that although isnt 100 percent provable, cannot be replicated in any other way?) And the self serving message she sent to Amy admitting her car smelt like death? I dont understand how you can let one little thing like lack of blowflies bother you, but all that stuff can be handwaved away.
If you'd read all my posts, you'd know that I am far away from letting "one little thing" about this case bother me!
There was testimony that rotting pork smells almost identical to human decomposition. I knew that from before this case, and brought it up at the time of the first document dump. There were test results that showed NO levels of certain decomp chemicals that would have been in the car if a body had been left in there for days....and the chemicals that were found would be present if an animal (think pork) decomposed in the trunk. There was an absence of blow-flies, and believe me, that is very important. It would be almost impossible to erase the presence of blow-flies, and the fact that they weren't there lends reasonable doubt that the body was never in the trunk. The very fact that you admit that the death band is not 100% provable is reason for a juror to hold that testimony in question. I am not "handwaving" anything away. I am looking at both arguments, and I do understand how the jurors felt there was reasonable doubt. ESPECIALLY when combined with the fact that there was DNA of some unknown person found on the tape, but none of Caylee's.
I do think cadaver dogs are useful, but I do not think the "hit" of a cadaver dog rises to the same level of DNA or fingerprint evidence.
Also, you expected the tape to be on the bone? Do you realize that is impossible? The tape was on the skin. The skin is gone, and by that time the stickiness of the tape is gone with it. How would it stick on the bone? It was stuck to what was ON the bone, which is skin. If it was stuck to the bone, that would prove it was put there afterward. The way it was found is consistent with it being stuck on skin, which is what the experts testified. I think people make too many assumptions on their own and dont listen to experts. Why even have them on then? Why even have experts exist? Lets just all pretend we know where blowflies should be found and tape should be after 6 months of the elements. In defense of the blowflies, I know there was an expert saying they should be found, but he had almost no experience compared to the expert that says otherwise. Why would anyone choose to believe him over the other?
Are you kidding? Who in their right mind would expect the tape to be adhered to the skeleton? Not me, for sure. My point is that there was nothing to show us where the tape had been placed......the skin had decomposed, the tape was presumably loose. The way it was found COULD be indicative of where the tape was originally adhered, but thanks to Mr. Kronk, we will never be sure. When he poked that skull, kicked and lifted that bag, the tape could have moved.
I have my own feelings about this case. I strongly FEEL that something very bad happened to Caylee, and that ultimately Casey is to blame, whether through action or inaction. I also acknowledge that the baby could have died accidentally and Casey's level of disfunction is so off the charts that I can believe she would react very differently from most of us.