Fiber Analysis

[LambChop]

Any fibers from the trunk on the laundry bag could have washed away by the time they found it. Obviously Caylee did not walk to the dump site so one would expect to find some fibers from a car trunk or carpeting. If none were found then it is possible they could have been destroyed or washed away while submerged in water.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Those links are for everyone that needs them Turnadot :blowkiss:

thank you very much for the links, the thread about the smell was very helpful to me, thanks again

 

[Jolynna]

Any fibers from the trunk on the laundry bag could have washed away by the time they found it. Obviously Caylee did not walk to the dump site so one would expect to find some fibers from a car trunk or carpeting. If none were found then it is possible they could have been destroyed or washed away while submerged in water.

Exactly.

The laundry bag was outside exposed to thunderstorms that would include blowing wind and blowing water for 6 months. At some point animals were digging into the bag (we know they did because the body was pulled apart). Then the bag was submerged under water. After that, dirt and mud were tracked over it. Mold was growing on the bag. The garbage bags inside the laundry bag were mud covered and in tatters.

Take a piece of cloth and rub it over your carpet. Take the cloth outside and hold it under a fan. Then put the cloth outside in your backyard during a thunderstorm. Afterwards let your dog run over the cloth and track over it with muddy feet for a week. Next stick the cloth in a pan of water. Leave pan outside for a couple of really rainy weeks so water can run in and out of the pan. Take the cloth out of the water and hold a fan over it. Leave the cloth in the backyard with your dog for another rainy week. Go out into your yard and try to find the cloth. When you finally do find the cloth, have fun finding the carpet fibers that USED to be there.

Fibers tangled in a knot of hair and under tape and triple-bagged would be fibers that would have a chance of remaining despite 6 months of water, insect and animal activity. I think what was found is consistent with what I believe were the circumstances.

MOO

 

[Brini]

From what I've seen on Court TV and other programs, it doesn't seem that fiber matching is very conclusive. Most of the time it seems the best science can do is to say the fiber is similar to fibers found say in a Pontiac Firebird carpet but couldn't say it definitely came from a particular Firebird carpet. So, even if they had found fibers that might have come from her car, I don't see where that would have been great evidence. As other posters have stated, any fibers found that came from house or car really only prove that Caylee was in the house and car. Even fibers from KC's clothes wouldn't really prove that much, at least to me. To me it is the combination of all the circumstantial evidence that is going to prove this case, missing child for 31 days, telling no one, acting as everything is normal, stealing gas cans, borrowing shovels, panic when Dad gets near the trunk, telling friends her car smells due to a dead squirrel, car smelling like death, myspace posts regarding killing, searches for neck breaking, hair with death band in trunk and there are probably 20 more I'm leaving out. I just don't see this as a hard case to win. Poor little Caylee, I get sick reading these posts that speculate on KC holding her down to tape her little mouth. I hope that there was some drugs involved to sedate her, I really hope she didn't know what was happening.

Agree. Fibers are likely not that conclusive. Just another pebble on the mountain of evidence.

Also agree that this case won't be hard to win.

 

[Wudge]

Exactly.

The laundry bag was outside exposed to thunderstorms that would include blowing wind and blowing water for 6 months. At some point animals were digging into the bag (we know they did because the body was pulled apart). Then the bag was submerged under water. After that, dirt and mud were tracked over it. Mold was growing on the bag. The garbage bags inside the laundry bag were mud covered and in tatters.

Take a piece of cloth and rub it over your carpet. Take the cloth outside and hold it under a fan. Then put the cloth outside in your backyard during a thunderstorm. Afterwards let your dog run over the cloth and track over it with muddy feet for a week. Next stick the cloth in a pan of water. Leave pan outside for a couple of really rainy weeks so water can run in and out of the pan. Take the cloth out of the water and hold a fan over it. Leave the cloth in the backyard with your dog for another rainy week. Go out into your yard and try to find the cloth. When you finally do find the cloth, have fun finding the carpet fibers that USED to be there.

Fibers tangled in a knot of hair and under tape and triple-bagged would be fibers that would have a chance of remaining despite 6 months of water, insect and animal activity. I think what was found is consistent with what I believe were the circumstances.

MOO

What was found in the way of inculpatory fiber evidence is nothing, and an absence of inculpatory evidence is not inculpatory evidence.

The lack of any meaningful fiber evidence plays extremely well for the defense while maintaining a total absence of highly reliable evidence that prosecutors could use to place Caylee in the trunk of Casey's car. Moreover, jurors cannot assume or speculate that fiber evidence was there but was somehow washed away or otherwise removed by the elements and/or the environment.

 

[Bakersmom]

What was found in the way of inculpatory fiber evidence is nothing, and an absence of inculpatory evidence is not inculpatory evidence.

The lack of any meaningful fiber evidence plays extremely well for the defense while maintaining a total absence of highly reliable evidence that prosecutors could use to place Caylee in the trunk of Casey's car. Moreover, jurors cannot assume or speculate that fiber evidence was there but was somehow washed away or otherwise removed by the elements and/or the environment.
__________________
Respectfully snipped***

The fact remains that there are leaps and bounds more inculpatory evidence in this case than on the Scott Peterson trial and the circumstantial evidence will indeed play a huge role, you cannot deny this fact. Of course the defense will deny and play down any evidence as "junk science", it's the nature of what they do and have to do to defend their client. I truthfully have not seen enough to exclude Casey from Caylee's murder and dumping her body. What have you seen that excludes her from this??

 

[3doglady]

It looks like there are white and light blue cotton pillow cases too. Plus an animal print throw was on her bed in one picture. It had black, white and beige furry stuff. If you were getting a child held down and taping over her mouth I expect there'd be a little struggle that would result in fibers being in Caylee's hair and on the tape.

Good catch on the animal throw. There's so much junk in the room I missed it. I'm assuming it is fake fur and the banded black and white hair was from a real animal, but anything is possible. If the throw was imported from another country there could be real animal hair in it.

 

[Jolynna]

What was found in the way of inculpatory fiber evidence is nothing, and an absence of inculpatory evidence is not inculpatory evidence.

The lack of any meaningful fiber evidence plays extremely well for the defense while maintaining a total absence of highly reliable evidence that prosecutors could use to place Caylee in the trunk of Casey's car. Moreover, jurors cannot assume or speculate that fiber evidence was there but was somehow washed away or otherwise removed by the elements and/or the environment.

BBM

You are right, jurors cannot assume that fiber evidence was there and was washed away.

But, by the same token, considering the circumstances (wind, rain, animals,flooding) the fibers not being there isn't exculpatory. I understand that the defense was relieved that they were absent...big whew for KC. But, I don't think a single juror is going to think KC didn't do it because there weren't fibers on something that had been out in the elements or underwater for half a year.

jmo

 

[AZlawyer]

What was found in the way of inculpatory fiber evidence is nothing, and an absence of inculpatory evidence is not inculpatory evidence.

The lack of any meaningful fiber evidence plays extremely well for the defense while maintaining a total absence of highly reliable evidence that prosecutors could use to place Caylee in the trunk of Casey's car. Moreover, jurors cannot assume or speculate that fiber evidence was there but was somehow washed away or otherwise removed by the elements and/or the environment.
__________________
Respectfully snipped***

The fact remains that there are leaps and bounds more inculpatory evidence in this case than on the Scott Peterson trial and the circumstantial evidence will indeed play a huge role, you cannot deny this fact. Of course the defense will deny and play down any evidence as "junk science", it's the nature of what they do and have to do to defend their client. I truthfully have not seen enough to exclude Casey from Caylee's murder and dumping her body. What have you seen that excludes her from this??

To be fair, I don't think Wudge ever said there was any evidence excluding the possibility that Casey killed Caylee, or more specifically (and to stay on topic) that the fiber evidence excludes her as the killer.

 

[carrie]

If Caylee was bagged and put into the trunk right away, in the shortage of air she'd putrefy quickly and in a most foul way.

Bacteria break down tissues and cells, releasing fluids into body cavities. They often respire in the absence of oxygen (anaerobically) and produce various gases including hydrogen sulphide, methane, cadaverine and putrescine as by-products. People might find these gases foul smelling, but they are very attractive to a variety of insects. http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/decomposition/putrefaction.htm

​

DNA would break down and degrade.

Next Caylee was tossed out in a marsh, endured a hurricane outside unprotected, and then Caylee went underwater. Caylee''s clothes were down to the a shirt collar and tattered shorts. Animals dug through and scattered her bones. The trash bags were in shreds. As were Caylee's pull-ups. The laundry bag is covered with mud, mold and algae. Plants grew through it. Hair and fiber and fabric often end up in mouse and bird nests. If they can tie the fabric in Caylee's hair and on the duct tape to jean shorts they took of KC's or KC's blanket, pillow or her carpet...that would be a big deal.


imo

(above BBM

Respectfully, I'm still confused as to the logic of this.

How could it matter if they indeed could make a positive/conclusive match between fibers on the duct tape and fibers from KC's clothing (or the other A's or their home)?

Ok - Say a stranger (I don't believe there was a stranger, mind you, just posing this hypothetically) abducted Caylee, or even someone other than George, Cindy, or KC, and put the duct tape on her mouth and nose. Because she was with KC or GA or CA all the time, and lived in their home, and rode in their vehicles, she likely had fibers from their clothing, home, and vehicles on her person. Some or those fibers could easily get on the duct tape, having already been on Caylee's hair, clothes, skin, etc. How would that be a big deal or significant?

If they found fibers from someone other than the A's clothes, home, vehicle,etc., that would be significant.

I guess them not finding fibers from anyone other than KC or the A's could add a little (very little IMO) strength to the argument that no one other than KC or the A's was involved in the crime. I really don't think that would help much though.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I truly want to know what I'm missing. Obviously, they checked for fibers and analyzed them. So there had to be a possibility they could find some form of evidence. But what?

IMHO, I think it was only to show that they did, in fact, try to find evidence of a perp other than KC or one of the A's. That way, the defense can't say LE didn't look for evidence of a perp besides KC (or A's). I get that they had to do that. I'm not getting what folks think could be proved, or even suggested, if fibers from KC, GA, or CA can be link to anything from the crime scene (i.e. duct tape, laundry bag, remains, etc.) LE already assumes KC was with her mother the last day she was alive. As well as in the A home. Of course she was, she lived there. Of course she'd have fibers from her mother's clothes on her, too.
:waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:

 

[Wudge]

To be fair, I don't think Wudge ever said there was any evidence excluding the possibility that Casey killed Caylee, or more specifically (and to stay on topic) that the fiber evidence excludes her as the killer.

titcr

(tipping my hat ... deep bow)

 

[Jolynna]

(above BBM

Respectfully, I'm still confused as to the logic of this.

How could it matter if they indeed could make a positive/conclusive match between fibers on the duct tape and fibers from KC's clothing (or the other A's or their home)?

Ok - Say a stranger (I don't believe there was a stranger, mind you, just posing this hypothetically) abducted Caylee, or even someone other than George, Cindy, or KC, and put the duct tape on her mouth and nose. Because she was with KC or GA or CA all the time, and lived in their home, and rode in their vehicles, she likely had fibers from their clothing, home, and vehicles on her person. Some or those fibers could easily get on the duct tape, having already been on Caylee's hair, clothes, skin, etc. How would that be a big deal or significant?

If they found fibers from someone other than the A's clothes, home, vehicle,etc., that would be significant.

I guess them not finding fibers from anyone other than KC or the A's could add a little (very little IMO) strength to the argument that no one other than KC or the A's was involved in the crime. I really don't think that would help much though.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I truly want to know what I'm missing. Obviously, they checked for fibers and analyzed them. So there had to be a possibility they could find some form of evidence. But what?

IMHO, I think it was only to show that they did, in fact, try to find evidence of a perp other than KC or one of the A's. That way, the defense can't say LE didn't look for evidence of a perp besides KC (or A's). I get that they had to do that. I'm not getting what folks think could be proved, or even suggested, if fibers from KC, GA, or CA can be link to anything from the crime scene (i.e. duct tape, laundry bag, remains, etc.) LE already assumes KC was with her mother the last day she was alive. As well as in the A home. Of course she was, she lived there. Of course she'd have fibers from her mother's clothes on her, too.
:waitasec::waitasec::waitasec:

I edited my post to say that fiber in Caylee's hair from her mother's bed would be another part of the puzzle.

I agree that since Caylee slept in her mother's bed, she'd have fiber from that bed on her person. But, if KC got Caylee out of bed, brushed Caylee's hair, washed Caylee's face and took Caylee where "some other dude" nabbed her (Caylee); then the "other dude" dressed her in the pink shirt Cindy and George say they never saw before and "the other dude" eventually killed her, then Caylee would most likely have more fibers in her hair from her struggles where the other dude took her than from her mother's bed.

A fiber from KC's bed (or Anthony carpet) in Caylee's hair does not prove that KC killed Caylee in that location. But, iff Caylee struggled in KC's bed or on a carpeted floor, fiber would be stirred and probably get into Caylee's hair and under the tape that went over Caylee's face. Maybe several fibers.

Hair and fiber float and are carried. A single hair or fiber could float onto Caylee from any area she stirred. But several (from the same location) ending up under tape put over Caylee's face during Caylee's last moments would have more meaning.
jmo

 

[Harmony 2]

Page 7 of the serology report indicates the Winnie the Pooh blanket was light blue. This might be the source of some of the blue fibers found on items at the crime scene and remains. Makes sense if Caylee was wrapped with it that it would act as a barrier to fibers from the trunk liner/carpet.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15088979/Serological-Exams

 

[Gailey]

So far we don't seem to be much further ahead, depite an interesting topic and some good minds. We already knew there were no trunk fibers found on the body, but that merely supports what we assumed anyway, that the body was 'bagged' before it was placed in the trunk..(at least it helps allay the horrible idea of little Caylee being placed in the trunk alive..thank God...but then I don't think many of us thought that anyway)

I can't think of anyway to 'trace' the fibers to their source, even forensics with all their tools will have a tough time doing that, although I am hoping some of those fibers match something like the cover on KC's bed, or the rug on her bedroom floor.

I have to come back to my original thought of 'Why so many fibers? and why so many different types of fibers? Especially in her hair?' Could it be her body was placed somewhere, for a time, in a place there were a lot of fibers? like beside the outside vent of the dryer? or perhaps on a shelf over the dryer? Seems unlikely, but some such a place..and at that point I am stuck

Is it not likely that after a bath and hairwash, Caylee's hair was rubbed vigorously with a towel and might that not account for the fibres in her hair? I would also imagine that towels that get dried in a tumble drier with other items of clothing would accumulate fibres from surrounding articles. Just a thought.

 

[Harmony 2]

I bumped the above thread because there is a lot discussed there that is the same as here -

Post 13 of 10/10/09 in The single piece of Henkel ....thread

"Q62, Q64 and Q104 are microscopically dissimilar in fiber composition to Q66 ..."

The fibers on the tape on the gas can does not match the fiber on the tape found on Caylee.

It's unclear what Zone 20 is (Valhall posted that everything taken from the A home was listed as Zone 20 on Dec. 11 or 12).

Non Henkel tape was found nearer to the fence.

Q66 (OCSO Q76)
Q104 (OCSO Q100)

Interestingly, in the thread you bumped up Valhall's post #40 mentions (Q248) Napkins from trash bag in Casey's trunk had blue cotton, red cotton and black cotton "as contaminating fibers". These napkins also had the early grave wax or adipocere like substance on them. She does not give a link or page number. I assume it is from the 1405 pg doc. I have been skimming over the pages to locate a page #. It appears the blue, red and black fibers are similar to the ones found on the duct tapes.

 

[beach]

Interestingly, in the thread you bumped up Valhall's post #40 mentions (Q248) Napkins from trash bag in Casey's trunk had blue cotton, red cotton and black cotton "as contaminating fibers". These napkins also had the early grave wax or adipocere like substance on them. She does not give a link or page number. I assume it is from the 1405 pg doc. I have been skimming over the pages to locate a page #. It appears the blue, red and black fibers are similar to the ones found on the duct tapes.

It is from that same doc. I saw what you are referencing in re. THE paper towels and it caught my attention, too. I didn't jot down the pg.#, because I actually saw the paper towel fibers referenced BEFORE I found ALL the duct tape fibers. When I ran across the duct tape fibers with the same colors referenced, I said, "whoa..." I'll run across it again, probably because I know within a 700 pg. radius where it is. About 1/2 the total area. I'll quote you and post the pg. # when I find it.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

The specific fibers that were found on the tape:

Q62–on skull-
white textured delustered polyester-type
black wool (l)
blue cotton (l)
off-white (d)

Q63–on skull, crossed over Q64-
white textured delustered polyester-type
black wool (l)
blue cotton (l)

Q64–on skull-
white textured delustered polyester-type
black wool (l)
blue cotton (l)

Q66–on gas can-
white textured delustered
blue delustered (l)
white round delustered
black cotton
blue cotton
off-white (d)
blue (d)

Q104–crime scene-
red cotton
blue cotton
off-white (d)
black (d) (mostly opaque)
grey-brown (d)
blue (d)

First, NICE WORK!!!!!!

IS it possible she tore the tape, put them on her pants then applied them?
Could the fibers match the clothes she was wearing and the pants cindy washed?

 

[BondJamesBond]

"...within a 700 page radius..."

Beach, I'm not sure which I'm more concerned about...

(A) that I know exactly what you mean

(B) that I just got a noseful of my beer

(3) that even with a noseful I'm still LMAO

Wish I'd thought of it myself.

 

[beach]

:snooty:

"...within a 700 page radius..."

Beach, I'm not sure which I'm more concerned about...

(A) that I know exactly what you mean

(B) that I just got a noseful of my beer

(3) that even with a noseful I'm still LMAO

Wish I'd thought of it myself.

Well....I think you owe me at least a 6-pack for not stopping me when I said I was gonna do this. You KNEW how deep this dark hole was and didn't say one word to stop me. :snooty:

 

[BondJamesBond]

Blue cotton = ubiquitous in clothing today

Black cotton. :waitasec: "DBC Entertainment" t-shirts

Wool...in Florida :waitasec: Rugs?