Fingerprints and gloves

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Exactly ... one would expect to find evidence of casey and caylee on the roller brushes/bag ... UNLESS ... casey tracked leaves and debris into her car (later vacuuming it up) from the disposal site and the forensics could prove that this particular debris came from ONLY the wooded area ... my guess is that the house is too close to the proximity of the area where remains were found to differentiate between the two ... JMO!

Not only would the debris need to be specific to only that wooded area, but it would have to be proven when it was tracked in and by whom. We know DC was in the area in November, maybe he brought it in.
 
The attached report from the FBI does not look like a report in which the 3 were excluded from any other found fingerprints. There would be a mention that latent prints were found, and that the 3 were excluded as being the source because of xyz technical reasons. Instead, it reads exactly as it would if no prints were found whatsoever. There is no need to explain why the 3 family member copies don't match other found prints - because no prints were found at all.
.

I don't know, HD. From my understanding, if they ELIMINATED certain prints (GA, CA, LA) then they had to have some type of prints to compare them to, right? Why use the word "eliminated" if there were no prints at all? I also found it strange also that if there were no prints at all why wasn't KC's prints "eliminated" as well? I'm just curious.
 
I don't think she used gloves - too much effort. I thought it was a waste of time when they were searching deep into the woods by the airport for Caylee. This girl is lazy. She was probably wearing her hot body dress and party boots when she dropped her daughter just off the side of the road. She wouldn't want to get herself dirty or go to too much trouble. Same thing with the duct tape. Gloves would get in her way and just frustrate her. Just my opinion, but she seems too impulsive to care if she gets angry . . . .
 
I don't know, HD. From my understanding, if they ELIMINATED certain prints (GA, CA, LA) then they had to have some type of prints to compare them to, right? Why use the word "eliminated" if there were no prints at all? I also found it strange also that if there were no prints at all why wasn't KC's prints "eliminated" as well? I'm just curious.

Hello Websleuth-ers,

I’m internet savy. But this IS my 3rd post on Websleuths so be patient with me while I get settled in……….

There are 3 types of fingerprints:
Visible – Can been seem with the naked eye. (ex. Prints in blood)
Latent – left by oils in the skin. Can Not be seen without processing
Pressure - left by ridge imprints into a soft surface. (ex. Adhesive on duct tape)

I have read probably EVERY discovery document in this case. Some more than once. If my memory serves me correctly (and MAYBE I am wrong. Someone please correct me if so) BUT I think there is one document that states:

1. Investigators did not find fingerprints belonging to George Anthony, Cindy Anthony or Lee Anthony on the duct tape found on Caylee Marie's skull (They make no mention of Casey in this statement)

And Then there is another document that states:

2. “There were no LATENT prints found on the duct tape” (But what about PRESSURE or VISIBLE prints??)

So does this = No fingerprints of any kind of CA, GA, or LA & No LATENT fingerprints of ANYONE, but maybe a visible or pressure print ??????

I’m just sayin’ it’s a thought
 
Fingerprint types

Latent prints

Although the word latent means hidden or invisible, in modern usage for forensic science the term latent prints means any chance of accidental impression left by friction ridge skin on a surface, regardless of whether it is visible or invisible at the time of deposition. Electronic, chemical and physical processing techniques permit visualization of invisible latent print residue whether they are from natural secretions of the eccrine glands present on friction ridge skin (which produce palmar sweat, consisting primarily of water with various salts and organic compounds in solution), or whether the impression is in a contaminant such as motor oil, blood, paint, ink, etc.

Latent prints may exhibit only a small portion of the surface of the finger and may be smudged, distorted, overlapping, or any combination, depending on how they were deposited. For these reasons, latent prints are an “inevitable source of error in making comparisons,” as they generally “contain less clarity, less content, and less undistorted information than a fingerprint taken under controlled conditions, and much, much less detail compared to the actual patterns of ridges and grooves of a finger.


Patent prints

These are friction ridge impressions of unknown origins which are obvious to the human eye and are caused by a transfer of foreign material on the finger, onto a surface. Because they are already visible they need no enhancement, and are generally photographed instead of being lifted in the same manner as latent prints.[citation needed] Finger deposits can include materials such as ink, dirt, or blood onto a surface.


Plastic prints

A plastic print is a friction ridge impression from a finger or palm (or toe/foot) deposited in a material that retains the shape of the ridge detail. Commonly encountered examples are melted candle wax, putty removed from the perimeter of window panes and thick grease deposits on car parts. Such prints are already visible and need no enhancement, but investigators must not overlook the potential that invisible latent prints deposited by accomplices may also be on such surfaces. After photographically recording such prints, attempts should be made to develop other non-plastic impressions deposited at natural finger/palm secretions (eccrine gland secretions) or contaminates.
 
I've noticed alot of posts in various threads that it appears that the A's shed, gas cans, KC's car, etc. were wiped clean of fingerprints??? Has that been confirmed/provided within document dumps that I may have missed? Can someone point me in the right direction?
 
I have not read that the shed or gas gans were wiped clean, I did read that it is confirmed that there were no finger prints found on the duct tape ( meaning finger prints of Cindy, Lee and George) They have not disclosed if KC's finger prints were on the duct tape. But to answer you better, post your question on "asks websleuths" thread.
 
Hello Websleuth-ers,

I’m internet savy. But this IS my 3rd post on Websleuths so be patient with me while I get settled in……….

There are 3 types of fingerprints:
Visible – Can been seem with the naked eye. (ex. Prints in blood)
Latent – left by oils in the skin. Can Not be seen without processing
Pressure - left by ridge imprints into a soft surface. (ex. Adhesive on duct tape)

I have read probably EVERY discovery document in this case. Some more than once. If my memory serves me correctly (and MAYBE I am wrong. Someone please correct me if so) BUT I think there is one document that states:

1. Investigators did not find fingerprints belonging to George Anthony, Cindy Anthony or Lee Anthony on the duct tape found on Caylee Marie's skull (They make no mention of Casey in this statement)

And Then there is another document that states:

2. “There were no LATENT prints found on the duct tape” (But what about PRESSURE or VISIBLE prints??)

So does this = No fingerprints of any kind of CA, GA, or LA & No LATENT fingerprints of ANYONE, but maybe a visible or pressure print ??????

I’m just sayin’ it’s a thought

Would love to know the answer to your question! Wonder if this is one of those situations where it's not so much what the report SAID, as opposed to what it DIDN'T say?
 
http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFil...ommunications with Law Enforcement, et al.PDF

I actually just read this renewed motion front to back. WoW! Seems to indicate where LKB is going with things.

Two items that reach out and slap me:
1) I was astounded at the 18 finger prints mention on page 60! This really excites me as after the reports of there being no prints from the other A's etc etc, I was giving up on the notion. This seems to confirm that there WERE prints found...18 of them....and they weren't GA, CA, or LA's!

2) They plan on tearing up Dr. Vass! Requesting the last 12 years of info is just ridiculous!
 
I don't understand why the SA office does not turn over all of this evidence over to the defense. Everyone keeps saying that this is going to cost $4 million or more. It's soooo obvious that she is guilty as sin! I just don't get why the state would want to prolong all of this. I'm baffled by it. I know that everyone dislikes the defense team but they are doing their jobs just like the SA. The gentlemen for the SA that is always wiggling in his chair, talking out loud and tossing his arms around (tall skinny guy) really really really gets on my nerves. If he does this in front of jurors I wonder what kind of effect it will have? He acts like he is 7 yrs old on the playground bullying the defense (JB). And the judge just sits there and lets it happen!!! I'm flabbergasted every time I see him in court. It would be horrific if she gets off b/c the SA wont do it's job fairly! I DO NOT THINK SHE IS INNOCENT! I have watched and read all the files from the get go. She deserves what she gets whether it be life or death in jail. I just worry about the SA having a backwards effect on the outcome b/c they are holding back evidence. It sure does seem like a slam dunk case to me. I just don't understand. Especially if her prints are on the gloves and misc. items from the crime scene. :waitasec: I watched the OJ trial from start to finish and I cried so hard when the verdict came in. I can only pray that justice is done here and she doesn't get off or by some freak chance b/c the SA isn't treating her "fairly" in the eyes of the law, not turning over evidence etc. Does anyone agree with me or am I all alone in my views? :headache:
 
I don't understand why the SA office does not turn over all of this evidence over to the defense. Everyone keeps saying that this is going to cost $4 million or more. It's soooo obvious that she is guilty as sin! I just don't get why the state would want to prolong all of this. I'm baffled by it. I know that everyone dislikes the defense team but they are doing their jobs just like the SA. The gentlemen for the SA that is always wiggling in his chair, talking out loud and tossing his arms around (tall skinny guy) really really really gets on my nerves. If he does this in front of jurors I wonder what kind of effect it will have? He acts like he is 7 yrs old on the playground bullying the defense (JB). And the judge just sits there and lets it happen!!! I'm flabbergasted every time I see him in court. It would be horrific if she gets off b/c the SA wont do it's job fairly! I DO NOT THINK SHE IS INNOCENT! I have watched and read all the files from the get go. She deserves what she gets whether it be life or death in jail. I just worry about the SA having a backwards effect on the outcome b/c they are holding back evidence. It sure does seem like a slam dunk case to me. I just don't understand. Especially if her prints are on the gloves and misc. items from the crime scene. :waitasec: I watched the OJ trial from start to finish and I cried so hard when the verdict came in. I can only pray that justice is done here and she doesn't get off or by some freak chance b/c the SA isn't treating her "fairly" in the eyes of the law, not turning over evidence etc. Does anyone agree with me or am I all alone in my views? :headache:

Please refer the the Andrea Lyon thread for further reading, but here is a quick answer from one of our finest!

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4083922&postcount=438"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Andrea Lyon New DP Atty[/ame]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
106
Guests online
1,064
Total visitors
1,170

Forum statistics

Threads
599,288
Messages
18,093,952
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top