Dr. Michael Baden: Misinformed or deliberate misinformation?

[ohiogirl]

FYI, it was Werner Spitz that was involved with the JFK case, not Dr. Baden.

 

[Sara Barracuda]

I haven't read all the responses here but wanted to say maybe he's not privy to what his wife, Linda, is being that she's one of KC's lawyers? But then again, you don't have to be privy, we all saw what went down during the search for days and days on TV.

Thank goodness he's not one of their experts since he is throwing out mistruths already. That would most likely be a conflict of interest anyhow.

 

[warbuckle]

Wait! Has it been confirmed that the "other" bones scattered were indeed Caylee? I know I heard that the body found was ID as her, but do we know for a fact that "all" the bones found at that site were hers?

 

[radio]

Ever since I saw a forensic specialist on tv -- they seemed to me like bungling, codgey professors. Not their fault, but if they are going to be on tv they need to at least know the facts and speak the facts.

 

[Recovering-Lurker]

Wait! Has it been confirmed that the "other" bones scattered were indeed Caylee? I know I heard that the body found was ID as her, but do we know for a fact that "all" the bones found at that site were hers?

I thought Dr. G had said that they did find very tiny bones that were scattered that did indeed belong to Caylee.

 

[dtown]

I don't understand how an expert can get away with flat out lying??!! It seems that there would be something in the law to safeguard against that? I guess I am too innocent.

The media does it all the time. They print/broadcast supposed leaks from anonymous sources that they feel will bring in great ratings. The supposed fact they are reporting can't be or is never verified. It's nothing but trashy journalism, sensationalism. It's pretty well accepted by the public. It has become a report first and check to see if it's true later situation. The defense is just playing the game. I mean after the "Casey is 100% guilty by overwhelmimng evidence" story can you blame them? It's all really sickening. Almost no one surrounding this case has conducted themself in a dignified manner that respects Caylee's memory. Sorry, but it is all ultimately fueled by the publics insaitible appetite for every detail before the case gets to trial.
The media has this case on a path to be more of a ridiculous spectacle by the time it reaches trial than even the OJ fiasco.

 

[radio]

The media does it all the time. They print/broadcast supposed leaks from anonymous sources that they feel will bring in great ratings. The supposed fact they are reporting can't be or is never verified. It's nothing but trashy journalism, sensationalism. It's pretty well accepted by the public. It has become a report first and check to see if it's true later situation. The defense is just playing the game. I mean after the "Casey is 100% guilty by overwhelmimng evidence" story can you blame them? It's all really sickening. Almost no one surrounding this case has conducted themself in a dignified manner that respects Caylee's memory. Sorry, but it is all ultimately fueled by the publics insaitible appetite for every detail before the case gets to trial.
The media has this case on a path to be more of a ridiculous spectacle by the time it reaches trial than even the OJ fiasco.

:applause: :takeabow: :applause: :applause: :takeabow: :takeabow:
YIPPEE!!!!!

 

[whiteangora]

FOX News is playing in Baez's ball park.
They want the exclusive interview with tot-mom. jmo

 

[kpalma715]

What bothers me, is if he was or wasn't misinformed, Greta should know this information since she has been at times covering the case. If she doesn't have that much knowledge of the case, she shouldn't even speak about it on her show, IMO... She should of questioned him on his statement. I am sure NG would of!

 

[drip~drop]

I've posted this before ... I totally lost respect for both Baden and Henry Lee back during the O.J. case. Baden isn't gullible and he hasn't been misinformed. He knows exactly what's up. He knows good and well that there were actually plants growing up through the skeleton which indicates it had been there for quite sometime. He's going to say whatever the defense pays him to say. Same as Henry Lee. They're paid to put a "defensive" spin on things.

one would think these medical examiners, government employees voted in to their positions as chief me's (unless they are retired) would be bound ethically to tell the truth if not at least morally.

this is a BABY, killed by her "mother" and these people are working against, imo, Caylee and FOR the , imo, killer.:waitasec:
:cow: moo

 

[nobull]

The media does it all the time. They print/broadcast supposed leaks from anonymous sources that they feel will bring in great ratings. The supposed fact they are reporting can't be or is never verified. It's nothing but trashy journalism, sensationalism. It's pretty well accepted by the public. It has become a report first and check to see if it's true later situation. The defense is just playing the game. I mean after the "Casey is 100% guilty by overwhelmimng evidence" story can you blame them? It's all really sickening. Almost no one surrounding this case has conducted themself in a dignified manner that respects Caylee's memory. Sorry, but it is all ultimately fueled by the publics insaitible appetite for every detail before the case gets to trial.
The media has this case on a path to be more of a ridiculous spectacle by the time it reaches trial than even the OJ fiasco.

I have to take exception to the "supposed fact they are reporting" part. The truth is, their facts have to be corroborated by their respective media outlets for veracity. Otherwise it's called LIBEL (printed) and SLANDER (broadcast media), something that doesn't fly here in the good ol' US of A.

Now, I will agree that a reporter's SOURCE could be particularly shady. For example, let's pretend for a moment that there is someone flat out confabulating facts, but is connected to, say, the sheriff's department or attorney general, i.e. the "anonymous source". If they can get another person to verify the anonymous source's fact (maybe it's that person's buddy in the office), that reporter has just done their due diligence. However, if a reporter can verify a source, but still has cause to know that the information is patently false but print/broadcast anyway, they and their publication can be sued.

I can say that anonymous sources are taken very seriously in the media, editors have long sit downs with reporters over these situations. If the editor isn't convinced, it doesn't get printed/broadcast. Media outlets have no time for lawsuits, and people that report using shoddy "anonymous sources" don't tend to have a job for very long. That is why the anonymous source is generally someone that the reporter has a long-standing professional relationship with. They are not taken lightly.

Believe it or not, publications like the National Enquirer (which many people believe is the figurehead of yellow journalism) has some of the most intensive fact-checkers in the business.

Seriously, how often do you honestly see lawsuits for libel or slander? It's fairly uncommon.

 

[MaryAnn]

Deliberate.....Yes
His wife is one of Casey's Laywers

I can kind of understand why GA, CA and LA want to protect Casey, but why why are these successful lawyers trying to protect her? They all seem to be jumping on the band wagon for the defense. Especially since it's a Baby that was killed!! The Anthony's don't have a lot of money so what is their incentive to side with the defense? I just don't get it!!!!!! I would think they would be siding with the prosecution.

 

[nobull]

They have become the equivalent of high-profile ambulance chasers, Mary Ann. Like I said earlier, whether they are getting paid from the exclusive video rights fees the A's got paid for Caylee footage or just doing it to further their stature, they are getting rewarded.

I suspect that this case may backfire on them, however. Hopefully they will be shunned as the pariahs they are.

And that is my opinion.

 

[SWGAL]

Greta's blog might be interested in the statements regarding what Dr. Baden stated on her show on Monday. I, too, was shocked by his comments.

 

[Bobby62]

FYI, it was Werner Spitz that was involved with the JFK case, not Dr. Baden.

Depending on his exact age, Baden would have been around early to mid twenties when JFK was shot. That would have been very early for him to have learned to stretch the truth for dollars. :crazy:

ETA. Born in 1934