Evidence That is Incompatible With an Accident Theory

[debbie0604]

My opinion on why the ME feels that the tape was placed prior to decomposition is because, this is hard to type... usually when a skull is found after being in the woods for a long period of time decomposed (as poor Caylee's remains were), the mandible will become separated from decomposition and animal activity and usually all of the teeth will be missing. In Caylee's case, the mandible was held completely intact by the layers of duct tape, and all of her teeth were intact except for one (IIRC). That is why Dr. G felt that the tape was placed prior to decomposition because the tape was applied onto the skin and hair (in my opinion while Caylee was still alive and not decomposing). While most of the hair was gone, the TAPE still held some of the HAIR in place and there was a hair mat at the back of the skull from the elements and animal activity. My opinion is that this is indicative of duct tape placement prior to decomposition because the tape still held the hair in place along with the mandible to the skull. Even through the elements and animal activity, the mandible did not become separated from the skull as what would usually happen during decomposition, or would have happened had the tape been applied after decomposition. (If that makes sense). I hope this makes sense. It is therefore, her opinion that the tape was applied before decomposition. I hope this helps.

 

[joypath]

Joypath, in your opinion when the ME says the "tape was applied prior to decomp" are they saying :
a)prior to the moment of death where the process of decomp actually begins?
b)sometime prior to the taped areas actually starting to decompose?
c)Open to debate?

IOW, based only on what the report says, could the tape have been applied post mortem but prior to decomposition or does the statement "prior to decomposition" make that an unreasonable possibility?

Answering the question from your choices is difficult for the following reasons: a: "prior" to the moment of death would then mean that the ME would be positively stating it as a COD (asphyxia by manual means); the fault point in this statement is PRIOR to the MOMENT of death.
b. yes, BUT it would have had to have been placed prior to the development of rigor mortis OR after the 36 hr +/- time where the lactic acid dissolves. Against this point: the physical condition of the corpse and the ability of the adherence of the tape plus the abundance of "critters" on the corpse.
c. ABSOLUTELY, and watch Linda Kenny Baden create magic with this choice.


Nuts and bolts: prior to decomp essentially means, before the body "fell apart"....in the vernacular.

 

[southernbrunette]

The two truth options seem to be:

a) KC deliberately murdered Caylee;

OR

b) Caylee, who died accidentally, coincidentally had one of a tiny handful of mothers in the entire history of this world who could lose a child, immediately roughly tape her up with layers of duct tape, stuff her in a trash bag, have a pleasant evening, drive around for days with the odour of her decomposing in her car, party and look happy and blithe, and then toss her into thick undergrowth. Respect for the bodies of the dead is one of the most consistent values held by cultures and civilisations across human history. Almost no one, ever, who wasn't a murderer, could throw a loved one out like trash. So, what are the odds that a mother could a) accidentally lose her child (since very few children accidentally die) and then b) get over it within minutes?

:woohoo:AMEN

 

[JBean]

Answering the question from your choices is difficult for the following reasons: a: "prior" to the moment of death would then mean that the ME would be positively stating it as a COD (asphyxia by manual means); the fault point in this statement is PRIOR to the MOMENT of death.
b. yes, BUT it would have had to have been placed prior to the development of rigor mortis OR after the 36 hr +/- time where the lactic acid dissolves. Against this point: the physical condition of the corpse and the ability of the adherence of the tape plus the abundance of "critters" on the corpse.
c. ABSOLUTELY, and watch Linda Kenny Baden create magic with this choice.


Nuts and bolts: prior to decomp essentially means, before the body "fell apart"....in the vernacular.

Oh wow. So, in your opinion, would it be accurate to state that the autopsy is saying specifically that the tape was clearly applied before the body started to fall apart?( before rigor or after the lactic acid dissolves)

 

[joypath]

Oh wow. So, in your opinion, would it be accurate to state that the autopsy is saying specifically that the tape was clearly applied before the body started to fall apart?( before rigor or after the lactic acid dissolves)

Absolutely! This is part of the factual data that a pathologist would use to enter into an equation to determine manner of death, the external assist from the tape provided the mandible a support that replaced that which nature provided us: muscles & ligaments. To the mix, toss in the multiple layers of difficult to manipulate duct tape that is positioned over both breathing orifices and then extended into the hair. Wrapping the body in an available personal blanket and then multiple sacks/bags for disposal convenience. Add to the scenario that the child was not declared missing for 31 days and that the responsible party was not incapacitated during that time period and the definition of homicide fits nicely vs accident, heck even accidental homicide!. Dr. Jan will definitely speak her mind, oops state her opinion, regarding the FACTS that led to her decision!

And yeah, I'd take the stand on this one with vim and vigor, matching my accent against LKB anyday!

 

[debbie0604]

Absolutely! This is part of the factual data that a pathologist would use to enter into an equation to determine manner of death, the external assist from the tape provided the mandible a support that replaced that which nature provided us: muscles & ligaments. To the mix, toss in the multiple layers of difficult to manipulate duct tape that is positioned over both breathing orifices and then extended into the hair. Wrapping the body in an available personal blanket and then multiple sacks/bags for disposal convenience. Add to the scenario that the child was not declared missing for 31 days and that the responsible party was not incapacitated during that time period and the definition of homicide fits nicely vs accident, heck even accidental homicide!. Dr. Jan will definitely speak her mind, oops state her opinion, regarding the FACTS that led to her decision!

And yeah, I'd take the stand on this one with vim and vigor, matching my accent against LKB anyday!

How could it be "accidental homicide?" Just curious.

 

[ynotdivein]

Absolutely! This is part of the factual data that a pathologist would use to enter into an equation to determine manner of death, the external assist from the tape provided the mandible a support that replaced that which nature provided us: muscles & ligaments. To the mix, toss in the multiple layers of difficult to manipulate duct tape that is positioned over both breathing orifices and then extended into the hair. Wrapping the body in an available personal blanket and then multiple sacks/bags for disposal convenience. Add to the scenario that the child was not declared missing for 31 days and that the responsible party was not incapacitated during that time period and the definition of homicide fits nicely vs accident, heck even accidental homicide!. Dr. Jan will definitely speak her mind, oops state her opinion, regarding the FACTS that led to her decision!

And yeah, I'd take the stand on this one with vim and vigor, matching my accent against LKB anyday!

joypath, thank you so much. So glad to have you here (or "heahyah")! :blowkiss:

 

[JBean]

Absolutely! This is part of the factual data that a pathologist would use to enter into an equation to determine manner of death, the external assist from the tape provided the mandible a support that replaced that which nature provided us: muscles & ligaments. To the mix, toss in the multiple layers of difficult to manipulate duct tape that is positioned over both breathing orifices and then extended into the hair. Wrapping the body in an available personal blanket and then multiple sacks/bags for disposal convenience. Add to the scenario that the child was not declared missing for 31 days and that the responsible party was not incapacitated during that time period and the definition of homicide fits nicely vs accident, heck even accidental homicide!. Dr. Jan will definitely speak her mind, oops state her opinion, regarding the FACTS that led to her decision!

And yeah, I'd take the stand on this one with vim and vigor, matching my accent against LKB anyday!

Good info thanks. I am also anxious to hear Dr. G's professional opinion as to the cause of death. I concur wholeheartedly that homicide was the correct determination. It is only cause of death that has me asking all these questions and now you have only given me more questions.
Thanks. I suppose I should start a COD thread so this doesn't overshadow the accident discussion.

 

[AZlawyer]

How could it be "accidental homicide?" Just curious.

Like failing to pay attention to your toddler and letting her drown.

 

[ynotdivein]

Good info thanks. I am also anxious to hear Dr. G's professional opinion as to the cause of death. I concur wholeheartedly that homicide was the correct determination. It is only cause of death that has me asking all these questions and now you have only given me more questions.
Thanks. I suppose I should start a COD thread so this doesn't overshadow the accident discussion.

RBBM: JBean please do and maybe put in a poll? TIA--you are the coolest thing since parachute pants. :dance:

 

[debbie0604]

Like failing to pay attention to your toddler and letting her drown.

Right. I have thought about that, but why the need for duct tape and three layers? The duct tape IMO and this is my opinion only... I believe was placed with force and that's why it remained on the skull with the hair attached and kept the mandible in place throughout the elements and animal activity. JMO.

 

[joypath]

How could it be "accidental homicide?" Just curious.

Usually the MOD is chosen from the following:
natural, suicide, homicide, accidental, undetermined (also known as could not be determined) and the temporary classification which can release or hold a body, pending investigation.

when explaining the categories, the definition of homicide is important to keep in the forefront: homicide occurs when death results from a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm or death. Intent to cause death is NOT required.

So...the classic example used is the fool-hardy hunter who brandishes his/her weapon and shoots another hunter. Accident?, yes....homicide?, yes! Level of criminal charging: not the medical examiner's issue!

And yes, every jurisdiction has guidelines that a chief Medical Examiner expects his/her staff to follow and to defend his/her "choices" usually at staff meetings, most ME offices practice as collegial units/"think tanks" so that the public get the best from their civil servants. (commercial over!):blushing:

 

[notthatsmart]

Here is what he reported.
http://www.wftv.com/news/18253901/detail.html

Sounds like Kb is wrong again. He never reported the skull came rolling out in his interviews with police. thanks

 

[AZlawyer]

Right. I have thought about that, but why the need for duct tape and three layers? The duct tape IMO and this is my opinion only... I believe was placed with force and that's why it remained on the skull with the hair attached and kept the mandible in place throughout the elements and animal activity. JMO.

Oh, I agree. I was just giving an example of something that might be called an "accident" and also "homicide" (although "negligent homicide" would be a better term to use, to distinguish between that and "real" accidents).

 

[notthatsmart]

The skull was inside the bag(s) and you do not know what position the skull was in before it tumbled out. When RK prodded the bag the skull fell out. That is documented if you care to look it up.

Read JoyPath post #332- 'Factoring in the issues of temperature in June,the musculature,ligamentous decomposition would have been rapid and the mandible should have 'dropped' quickly NO MATTER what position the body was entombed. Thus, an external mechanical means provided a support for the internal structures'.
The DUCT tape held the mandible in place.

Regarding whether other experts can challenge Dr Garavaglia's post mortem report as to the presence of duct tape holding the mandible - what are they going to dispute- that the skull was not found as she documented? She stated meticulously what she saw. It is what is is, no expert can come along and say anything different- photos document the position of the mandible and the duct tape holding it in place.

Alright, lets try to get this straight. You are saying the skull dropped out or rolled out. I am saying the Le interviewed him 3 times to get the right answer according to them.

Under your scenario, if the skull rolled out or dropped out, then the mat that was attached to the hair that was attached to the duck tape that was attached to the skull, must have grown roots through it in 2.6 seconds. I do not see how it is possible that the skull was ever in a bag because of the roots growing through the hair mat. Can't have it both ways. Was the hair adhered to the ground or not? What she saw or reported on was something that was in a paper bag that had been transferred. She did not report the skull from the crime scene. IMO

Ps I am all for your scenario, the skull being in the bag, just makes it more look like it was put there later. The Skull being out of the bag and adhered to the ground, makes it look like it was put there sooner.

If it is true that the skull came rolling out, then someone is lying about it being adhered to the ground with roots. IMO

 

[debbie0604]

Usually the MOD is chosen from the following:
natural, suicide, homicide, accidental, undetermined (also known as could not be determined) and the temporary classification which can release or hold a body, pending investigation.

when explaining the categories, the definition of homicide is important to keep in the forefront: homicide occurs when death results from a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm or death. Intent to cause death is NOT required.

So...the classic example used is the fool-hardy hunter who brandishes his/her weapon and shoots another hunter. Accident?, yes....homicide?, yes! Level of criminal charging: not the medical examiner's issue!

And yes, every jurisdiction has guidelines that a chief Medical Examiner expects his/her staff to follow and to defend his/her "choices" usually at staff meetings, most ME offices practice as collegial units/"think tanks" so that the public get the best from their civil servants. (commercial over!):blushing:

BBM I totally understand. I work in pathology myself. That was why I was wondering how it could be an "accidental" homicide. I knew that Dr. G had said that Caylee's death was 'homicide by undetermined means.' I understand that because of the condition of the remains she could not specifically state the exact cause of death, since there were no vital organs present. I do understand that based on all other evidence and findings, along with the ME's testimony, LE must put together their case and go to trial.

Thank you so much for your reply!!

 

[debbie0604]

Oh, I agree. I was just giving an example of something that might be called an "accident" and also "homicide" (although "negligent homicide" would be a better term to use, to distinguish between that and "real" accidents).

I gotcha friend!! Thanks!!! :blowkiss:

 

[ZsaZsa]

Sounds like Kb is wrong again. He never reported the skull came rolling out in his interviews with police. thanks

Here is the interview by Y Melich at the scene. RK clearly states he poked the bag and a skull dropped out.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjRWRN3PfGU&feature=related[/ame]

 

[notthatsmart]

I agree with the part I bolded:

Here is a description of the hair mat and duct tape from the remains' site during initial processing:

http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740668/detail.html

page 2

page 74

I had noticed these contradictions as well. One reports the skull the the north west of the log, the other reports it to the east. Prolly a simple typo. Or someone moved it. No big deal i guess. IMO

 

[ZsaZsa]

Alright, lets try to get this straight. You are saying the skull dropped out or rolled out. I am saying the Le interviewed him 3 times to get the right answer according to them.

Under your scenario, if the skull rolled out or dropped out, then the mat that was attached to the hair that was attached to the duck tape that was attached to the skull, must have grown roots through it in 2.6 seconds. I do not see how it is possible that the skull was ever in a bag because of the roots growing through the hair mat. Can't have it both ways. Was the hair adhered to the ground or not? What she saw or reported on was something that was in a paper bag that had been transferred. She did not report the skull from the crime scene. IMO

Ps I am all for your scenario, the skull being in the bag, just makes it more look like it was put there later. The Skull not being out of the bag and adhered to the ground, makes it look like it was put there sooner.

If it is true that the skull came rolling out, then someone is lying about it being adhered to the ground with roots. IMO

It is not MY scenario. It is documented as fact.
AS I keep reiterating, you should read Dr Garavaglia's post mortem report, it clearly states all of her findings regarding the skull, the tape holding the mandible in place, the roots intermingled with the hair mat. Dispute her findings if you wish, but they are what she saw and she was at the scene, you were not, she has the expertise which you do not. I do not believe she is lying about anything.