My source is that document in the motion. The fbi agent clearly states the evidence was lost in writing.
Which document in the motion? Provide a link, please. We need to ensure what we state is completely accurate and factual.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
My source is that document in the motion. The fbi agent clearly states the evidence was lost in writing.
Lost because there wasn't enough to save for further testing is very different then destroyed...don't you think?My source is that document in the motion. The fbi agent clearly states the evidence was lost in writing.
Which document in the motion? Provide a link, please. We need to ensure what we state is completely accurate and factual.
Lost because there wasn't enough to save for further testing is very different then destroyed...don't you think?
It is in this thread. It is the subject of this thread.
Here is the link to the fbi lab activity and communication log.
http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2009/0924/21103527.pdf
Still no proof it's not with the medical examiner's office. Again...it would be relevant if the prosecution intends on using it...do we know that they are? Personally, I never put whole lot of thought into the residue... just couldn't get past the tape.All they had to do was take a picture of it before they tested it.
Well that is a good question. Did they destroy it or did they make the whole thing up. Either way it looks awful.
They did not record it whether it existed or not.
The Fbi said they destroyed it.
I cant wait to see this lady get on the stand.
It is in this thread. It is the subject of this thread.
Here is the link to the fbi lab activity and communication log.
http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2009/0924/21103527.pdf
RR0004
I totally agree with you. The residue on the tape was really, not such a big deal. The actual tape and whatever they got from it, be it finger prints or DNA!
It's like the sundae with out the cherry on top, but in the long run it's still a sundae.
:banghead:
as always MOO
Well that is a good question. Did they destroy it or did they make the whole thing up. Either way it looks awful.
They did not record it whether it existed or not.
The Fbi said they destroyed it.
I cant wait to see this lady get on the stand.
I see your finding your way around. That is great!
Hmm, It doesn't seem like the report matches your personal report of the event.
The impression I was getting, was the tape was no more. Totally gone. Destroyed by the lab. Yet, that isn't want the report says at all. That is why we look at actual documents. To see if they say what we think or been told they say. The media may spin, but we verify. Or at least, I do.
The FBI did NOT say they 'destroyed' the residue.... they said, and I quote, "a heart shape/outline was noticed on tape, but unable to see it after powder process." Destroyed was a word used by the media and picked up on by people who don't do their own research.
That log is both a record of the observation of the residue, and a record that it was unable to be seen after PROCESSING.
And I agree with bailee, who said with or without a cherry on top, a sundae is still a sundae. You go, girl!
you guys drop it. It's just semantics. The heart shaped residue is not there anymore. Disappeared, destroyed , eaten up during the fingerprint process whatever.
What are the ramifications, if any to this development?
Thank you for getting us back track (once again) JBean.
I think it would be risky for both the defense and prosecution to try to bring this into evidence now. It could backfire on both of them.
1. If prosecution brought it in to try to use it to strengthen the connection to Casey (i.e. her signature love of everything hearts) then defense could use the opening to claim shoddy technical forensic handling (which is what I think they will try to build their entire case on).
2. If defense brought it in to use as an example of shoddy handling/testing of evidence then prosecution could bring on the FBI person (and maybe others in lab) as eyewitnesses. That could heighten the jury's impressions of the heinousness of the crime and its origin to Casey.
It will be a good thing to track during the trial and see how it plays out, huh? moo.
Perhaps this one trained eye out of several trained eyes just simply made a mistake. I cant wait to see her on the stand.
Along with the fact that the sticker residue wasn't the only thing that made LE want another search warrant after they found Caylee's remains. They also needed to get samples of the duct tape to compare as well as trash bags and the laundry bag. Just because there may or may not be a way to prove with photography or the actual residue itself that it did in fact exist does not mean that she will not be found guilty. There are too many extenuating circumstances. As well as the fact that the duct tape was there and there's no way to deny that!
All said with due respect, and of course my O-pin-eee-on![]()
At this point, IF there is no picture of the heart shaped residue, then it becomes a double-edged sword. If SA uses it, they give JB room to make the "junk science" and "incompetence" claims that we know he will undoubtedly use. But, if JB tries to claim incompetence due to the fact that the FBI lab damaged evidence of the residue, then, as Snaz stated earlier, he has to first admit that the residue was there to begin with, and I don't think this is something he will do. I would imagine that they are sighing with relief that they may have dodged this particular bullet, as it makes the defendant look particularly mean. I am just hoping that somewhere during the time after it was noticed that someone was able to get an image, one way or another, of this alledged heart shaped mark. If there is none, then it is anyone's guess as to whether they will still use it at trial. I would think not. MOO.