Evidence That is Incompatible With an Accident Theory

[ZsaZsa]

...I believe it was an "excited utterance". Police did question him about this.

Yes and we all know how truthful excited utterances are. Think Cindy's 911 call re the smell of a dead body. Said when the event first happens and no time to consider what SHOULD be said..

 

[ZsaZsa]

I was just using logic. If roots are growing through the mat, I would assume it was adhered to the ground. I can not make any sense out of a skull rolling out and ending up being attached to a hair mat with roots growing through it. Do you know if Steve Hanson (the person that removed the skull and body) ever made a report from the field? thanks

Why don't you actually take the time to read the report.
If you really want to 'make sense' of it rather than suggesting it was not possible read what she documented as she made her examination.
Instead of asking the same question repetitively and stating how puzzling it is to you, doubting whether it could really have happened, read Page 9 second paragraph and it is there in black and white. It is wasting your time and everyone elses to keep trying to point out to you what was documented by the Medical Examiner if you won't take the trouble to read the report.
Oh, and before you suggest it one more time, I doubt the Medical Examiner was 'under pressure' to come up with a report as you stated, hinting that her work would be less than complete or accurate~
AS far as other related reports, please look them up.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/06/19/6440.6475.pdf

 

[ZsaZsa]

Of course they kept questioning him about it because they knew it couldn't be true. I will look for the final interview where I believe he stated that he only lifted the bag and nothing fell out or rolled out.

"They knew it couldn't be true?" What gives you that impression? I don't hear YM challenging him as to the truth of the facts he gave regarding the skull. He stated it just as it happened, at the time it happened. Wishful thinking on your part maybe...

 

[charok]

hi, im charok=im brand new here, registering wise, but ive been lurking in and out since the laci/scott peterson case..
i AT first thought, ok something happened( kc left caylee in a hot car, drowned in the pool while kc was too busy texting/computering,drugged her up/xanax perhaps?zanny? so she could go bump and grind at the fusiion,only to come back and find caylee died,ect) and she panics, hides the body,made up the lie about the "imagin-nanny" and here we are...
but as time went on...
the computer searches for chloroform making, RESEARCHING missing kids sites,not to mention the LAYERS of duct tape on her face( not one, but if i remeber right 3 layers? i could be recalling wrong) and oh, yeah lets not forget the tapes from her and tony going to blockbuster,and the multitude of party pics in WEEKS after the "kidnapping" and the icing on the cake? the bella vita tatoo..im sorry but NO mother who REALLY loves their kid and is "distraught" over the betrayal of the trusted friend/nanny taking off w/ thei child is going to get "the beautiful life" tattooed on them! thats just my 2 cents, of course...

i have especially gotten involved in watching this case unfold. my own daughter was born on 4-6-2005/ just a few months older than caylee..i now see her doing things( potty training, going off to preschool, getting ready to go to kindergarten next year, going to her little friends birthday parties,ect)that caylee too should be enjoying and doing, but it was all robbed from her, and for what?!?! nothing!

 

[darnudes]

I don't want to give you a bad shock but I'm not sure what autopsy report you read as there were no organs, or even skin (sorry) left on the skeletal remains when the body was found scattered over a large area of the property off Suburban. WS has huge files that can be read regarding evidence in immaculate detail.

I don't think you'll find anyone here who has surveyed the evidence who will say accidental death and even if those were the jury findings the penalty for felony manslaughter is the same as murder 1 so really it is a moot point.

In all fairness, and without trying to speak for anyone else, but there are a few of us on here who are open to the possibility it may have been accident. I don't think anyone would be able to say I haven't reviewed the evidence and I still don't know one way or another.

I hear what you're saying re the charges but that does not discount the fact there may be a plea deal done down the track.

I don't think I am going to be convinced until I hear the States opening and all evidence laid out, then the defense - if they even put a defense up which I am sure they'll have to.

 

[minazoe]

Casey murdered her daughter. I think the sticker was used to coax the tape on to her face before she injected her or whatever it was she did to stifel screaming. I am sure the prosecution and the Agencies have been testing ducktape and looking at all the various conditions to come up with what went down. Casey was busted by her father with the stinky car trunk...and I dont beleive that George really needed anything out of Casey's trunk...he used it as a ruse to go see in there...I think it smelled and he wanted to see...Casey flipped out and literally ran to the trunk to stop him from foraging in there.

thats a defining moment in this case...I think George unwittingly covicted Casey with that

 

[ZsaZsa]

Bolded by me: How can something fall if it is already sitting on the ground? If the defense said they are not going to refute it, then I would understand that it is just accepted. But they said they will challenge it and they have seen the actual photos. There was never any heart shaped sticker. Don't know where your getting that other than pure speculation of a so called image (not even residue) that an Fbi agent thought she saw and then was informed by her supervisor that the Fbi does not speculate. This is definately still an issue and will be challenged by the defense simply because it makes no sense at all.

The duct tape IMO was not wrapped around the lower face. I don't know where you are getting that. It certainly was not wrapped around the entire skull. It is too short. I feel bad for the jury because they will prolly have to view these photos to settle this matter. I don't know where your getting this wrapped tightly stuff. I have not seen anything in the documents that says that. The mandible may have stayed with the skull simply because the skull was sitting on top of the mandible on the ground. IMO

Some may think that Kc applied the duct tape to cover up an accident, that may be what happened, but you wouldn't know it from the defense.

Why would the defense dispute something that appears to be so obvious? They wouldn't. They have seen the pictures and it is not as obvious as many think. With the soddi theory, you would think they would be all for the duct tape being on there tightly. But theyr'e not. go figure. Moo

Please read DR Schultz' report- page 3, paragraph 3.
A hair mat was noted on the base of the skull and grayish colored tape was noted covering the mouth and nasal aperture areas.
The tape remained in place because it was adhered to the hair of the skull.

Caylee's face was not covered with skull hair, so the tape had to be around her face, and attached to the hair of her skull.
I will not copy the entire opinion that he writes, you can read it yourself, if sufficiently interested, but the final sentence says this:
Based on the position of the tape and the mandible, it can be inferred that the mandible remained in this position because the tape held it in place prior to the hair forming into a matt on the base of the skull.

 

[Nana46]

Please read DR Schultz' report- page 3, paragraph 3.
A hair mat was noted on the base of the skull and grayish colored tape was noted covering the mouth and nasal aperture areas.
The tape remained in place because it was adhered to the hair of the skull.

Caylee's face was not covered with skull hair, so the tape had to be around her face, and attached to the hair of her skull.
I will not copy the entire opinion that he writes, you can read it yourself, if sufficiently interested, but the final sentence says this:
Based on the position of the tape and the mandible, it can be inferred that the mandible remained in this position because the tape held it in place prior to the hair forming into a matt on the base of the skull.

Thank you for all your hard work finding this.....it is so hard to read but is necessary.....again thank you.

 

[JBean]

osteological autopsy report



Autopsy Report

 

[LambChop]

Of course they kept questioning him about it because they knew it couldn't be true. I will look for the final interview where I believe he stated that he only lifted the bag and nothing fell out or rolled out.

Just a thought here. Didn't JJ state they had searched that area and found nothing. If the skull were out of the bag I would think, you know, so close to the road someone would have seen it. But a bag that is somewhat submerged in water would not be noticed. From pictures we have seen there were a lot of trash bags thrown in that area. JMO

 

[JBean]

I think there are plenty of people that are still considering the possibility of an accident so let's please be careful when making generalizations about what everyone thinks or should think. It is not fair to say if you have read the evidence then you cannot draw that conclusion.

On another note, it may be a moot point to some of you what she may ultimately be convicted of , but to me it is very important.

It doesn't really have anything to do with sentencing for me ; but there is a difference between murder 1, felony murder, murder 2, manslaughter and/or other lesser charges and to me it is VERY important what the state can prove and what she will ultimately be convicted of.
I see people asking what's the difference and why should we even care, but if there wasn't a difference then different elemements for fdifferent crimes would not exist. So while it may not be of interest to you, it is of interest to others.

 

[notthatsmart]

Why don't you actually take the time to read the report.If you really want to 'make sense' of it rather than suggesting it was not possible read what she documented as she made her examination.
Instead of asking the same question repetitively and stating how puzzling it is to you, doubting whether it could really have happened, read Page 9 second paragraph and it is there in black and white. It is wasting your time and everyone elses to keep trying to point out to you what was documented by the Medical Examiner if you won't take the trouble to read the report.Oh, and before you suggest it one more time, I doubt the Medical Examiner was 'under pressure' to come up with a report as you stated, hinting that her work would be less than complete or accurate~
AS far as other related reports, please look them up.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/06/19/6440.6475.pdf

Bold 1: I have read the report several times. Please stop accusing me of not reading the documents. It does no good what so ever. I am well informed in this case and do not need somebody to repeatedly tell me to read the docs. So, please stop it. It just appears as though you are attacking the poster. Furthermore, you are welcome to scroll right by my post anytime you please, or just select ignore.

Bold 2: again I have read this doc several times. It was the suggestion that the skull rolled out of the bag that did not make sense. The Medical examiners report makes perfect sense.

Bold 3: Again, I have read page nine several times. I reserve the right to ask questions as anyone else. You are welcome to ignore me or just scroll by. I am not puzzled. Quote the quote.

Bold 4: Again I have read the docs several times. I do not know why you keep pointing this out. It seems like a waste of time to continue to attack me for not reading the docs. Why not just attack the post?


Please stop attacking the poster. Lets just agree to disagree. If you believe the skull came rolling out, then I will accept it that you believe it.

After reading the docs in this case, It is my opinion that the skull did not come rolling out of any bag.

 

[logicalgirl]

In all fairness, and without trying to speak for anyone else, but there are a few of us on here who are open to the possibility it may have been accident. I don't think anyone would be able to say I haven't reviewed the evidence and I still don't know one way or another.

I hear what you're saying re the charges but that does not discount the fact there may be a plea deal done down the track.

I don't think I am going to be convinced until I hear the States opening and all evidence laid out, then the defense - if they even put a defense up which I am sure they'll have to.

My apologies for making that blanket statement - it was obviously inappropriate of me. What I'm saying is - with everything I have read and heard and seen, I see nothing that points to an accident. Now instead of all this useless "the truth will come out at trial" and "SODDI" - if the defense was able to produce just one solid indisputable fact - I would pause and consider it.
However, if all we see at trial is some attempt at fancy dancing around the evidence by LBK - that's just not going to do it for me - I'll still think Casey killed Caylee - deliberately.

 

[darnudes]

My apologies for making that blanket statement - it was obviously inappropriate of me. What I'm saying is - with everything I have read and heard and seen, I see nothing that points to an accident. Now instead of all this useless "the truth will come out at trial" and "SODDI" - if the defense was able to produce just one solid indisputable fact - I would pause and consider it.
However, if all we see at trial is some attempt at fancy dancing around the evidence by LBK - that's just not going to do it for me - I'll still think Casey killed Caylee - deliberately.

No harm done, I know we all get passionate about this case.

I do see lots of potential evidence for premeditation so please don't get me wrong. However, I can see a scenario for an accidental death as well.

Maybe the stumbling block for me will always be, that I don't think she could have been evil enough to wrap that tape around Caylee's nose and mouth with the express purpose of extinguishing her life. I can't wrap my head around that.

 

[JBean]

we have a local case here where the DA was not going to be able to prove cause of death. there was enough circumstantial evidence to show that the accused was indeed involved in the killing of this young woman someway somehow. But even after skipping town,hiding evidence,scrubbing out his car, and transporting and disposing of the body, the murderer was able to say it was an accident and a plea agreement was struck accordingly.
So even though every piece of circumstantial evidence pointed to a murder, no cause of death meant they had to take his word that she killed herself with drugs he supplied.
That case did not have a body,and obviously there is a big difference as compared to this case. However I still think that the cause of death could be a critical piece in the final analysis.

 

[charok]

darnudes quote= Maybe the stumbling block for me will always be, that I don't think she could have been evil enough to wrap that tape around Caylee's nose and mouth with the express purpose of extinguishing her life. I can't wrap my head around that.

i unfortunately can....remeber this is the same woman who complains about not being able to go out and party, because of the "snot head" ..not to mention snarling to lee "maybe im a spitefull *****" = straight from the horse, er i mean casey(*i dont want to insult horses!) mouth..

 

[joypath]

I think there are plenty of people that are still considering the possibility of an accident so let's please be careful when making generalizations about what everyone thinks or should think. It is not fair to say if you have read the evidence then you cannot draw that conclusion.

On another note, it may be a moot point to some of you what she may ultimately be convicted of , but to me it is very important.

It doesn't really have anything to do with sentencing for me ; but there is a difference between murder 1, felony murder, murder 2, manslaughter and/or other lesser charges and to me it is VERY important what the state can prove and what she will ultimately be convicted of.
I see people asking what's the difference and why should we even care, but if there wasn't a difference then different elements for fdifferent crimes would not exist. So while it may not be of interest to you, it is of interest to others.

I'm tossing my :twocents: in here to remind folks that the term homicide means the taking of another's life, that's the sum total of the responsibility of the ME's office in this case!:truce:

Now as JB has aptly stated, it's the issue of WHAT level of the homicide that the perp will be convicted of, if at all! Here's where the delicate balance occurs (at least in the feeble mind of this poster!) because by going for the DP, they've declared that it's murder 1 and doesn't that leave out the jury choosing "lesser and inclusive charges?":banghead:
Of course, they can ALWAYS tag on child abuse and desecration of a corpse right before the case hit the courtroom but what the heck are the punishments for those charges?...WEEKS? (sarcasm inserted).:waitasec:

IF the jury does NOT "BUY" the murder 1 charge, and that's all she's charged with......game over, walk out with CM,JB,AL&LKB and she can begin RVing to her heart's content! (within the state of Fla as she's on parole!)
Okay: probability of occurrence given the FL majority rules you guilty......slim!:woohoo:

 

[LambChop]

we have a local case here where the DA was not going to be able to prove cause of death. there was enough circumstantial evidence to show that the accused was indeed involved in the killing of this young woman someway somehow. But even after skipping town,hiding evidence,scrubbing out his car, and transporting and disposing of the body, the murderer was able to say it was an accident and a plea agreement was struck accordingly.
So even though every piece of circumstantial evidence pointed to a murder, no cause of death meant they had to take his word that she killed herself with drugs he supplied.
That case did not have a body,and obviously there is a big difference as compared to this case. However I still think that the cause of death could be a critical piece in the final analysis.

You're right JBean. Difference here is that it is highly unlikely that Caylee killed herself.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Does it change anything if the skull rolled out or not? Does it change the fact that Caylee was disposed of like trash? Does it change the fact that a precious two year old was murdered and the probability that Inmate Anthony is the only one responsible??

I don't understand why it matters if the skull rolled out or not. There should not have been a skull in garbage bags at all, IMO! Caylee should not have been dead due to a homicide. Homicide by undetermined means but the duct tape over Caylee's mouth/nose/skull would leave someone to believe she suffocated her. That is until those letters prove she used some form of drugs to knock Caylee out! I only pray Caylee did not suffer. I only pray that Inmate Anthony continues to suffer for her part in her own child's death.

I also wonder how those who feel it may have been an accident, can it still be viewed as accidental with the lengths Inmate Anthony went through to cover her tracks. Lead authorities on a wild goose chase? Place innocent people in the mix for a SODDI theory? Knowing the little details of how Caylee was found even before it was made public? All that CA has done, giving the wrong hairbrush, washing the evidence in the trunk, not helping to look for an allegedly missing Caylee? Impeding this investigation the moment Inmate Anthony was arrested for neglect.

I'm not being snarky, I just can't see the accident theory after all that has been learned surrounding Caylee's demise!

Seems to me some have made a lucrative business out of Caylee's demise. Seems that money is driving the way this trial should go (until the indigent status). I remember when CA told Inmate Anthony how everyone is looking for Caylee and her reward was $250,000...wow, that's half my bond! Is this the way a mother who had nothing to do with her child's demise answers? Seems everyone involved has put money over Caylee's justice. I'd hate to see a murderess go free...even Susan Smith finally confessed, I wish someone on the defense would take the highroad instead of repeatedly disrespecting Caylee, this baby must receive her justice....:furious:

 

[JBean]

You're right JBean. Difference here is that it is highly unlikely that Caylee killed herself.

Point--missed. Sorry LC no matter how i try to explain it, I seem to do a poor job of it. I was not implying that Caylee killed herself or even remotely suggesting it so please.
The point was that because there was no cause of death, the murderer was able to come up with his own story to account for the death and no one was able to refute it with evidence. Maybe there is a parallel here and maybe not. We have a body that tells a story that may be all the evidence we need. but i think that is what we are discussing.