Heart Shaped Sticker And Duct Tape #3

[sumbunny]

I don't quite understand how they say "worn away".

Does that mean the elements wore away some tape, or that perhaps "god forbid" she was pawing at the tape around her mouth while alive?

*gasp* I really hate to think about it

 

[Ripley007]

I don't quite understand how they say "worn away".

Does that mean the elements wore away some tape, or that perhaps "god forbid" she was pawing at the tape around her mouth while alive?

*gasp* I really hate to think about it

I wonder about this too. Unless Caylee's hands were bound (or she was already dead), the duct tape should show eviedence of an alive Caylee trying to remove it. If her hands were bound, what were they bound with? Anything found at the crime scene? If bound with duct tape, one would think a loop was made multi times over. Was a multi-layered loop of duct tape recovered?

 

[Rumpole]

I'm confused . . . 2/18 docs pp 3415

"Duct tape was lying on front of the skull, over the mouth area. The exterior non-sticky side of the duct tape at the front of the skull appeared to have worn away."

So where was the heart shaped sticker again? couldn't be over the mouth area or the above statement would not be true. . . . (did I miss previous posts about this?)

There has been some previous discussion.

That description leads me to think the heart may NOT have been at the front over the mouth, as we all first imagined. (I guess perhaps on the "cheek") The fact is, it has not been specified precisely where along the length of the piece of tape the sticker was.

 

[KeysBreeze]

There has been some previous discussion.

That description leads me to think the heart may NOT have been at the front over the mouth, as we all first imagined. (I guess perhaps on the "cheek") The fact is, it has not been specified precisely where along the length of the piece of tape the sticker was.

7 months of lying in the woods in a garbage bag with 11 plus inches of rain just in the month of August would certainly change the crime scene.

 

[Rumpole]

7 months of lying in the woods in a garbage bag with 11 plus inches of rain just in the month of August would certainly change the crime scene.

I don't think the weather conditions moved the heart sticker along the tape.

There was a single spot where the heart was and the residue was found.

The precise location has not been specified in Discovery yet.

 

[ibyoungr]

We don't have all the crime scene reports. If you read through them, you will notice there are pages missing. I personally believe the duct tape was wrapped all the around her head. If it had just been on her mouth, they would not have needed to cut it away from the hair.

I do believe the hair will be important because it can give the details of ALL the drugs that baby had been subjected to for months. That I believe will be a real kicker in this case.

above is bolded and resized by me...

To answer this I found the following information in a police report
Page 20 of the PDF http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/KRONKINTVPICS3976-4026.pdf

The attachment is an incident report at 12/11/08 at 9:32 am by Eduard Turso
"Mr Kronk showed me where he foudn the plastic garbage bag and skull. The object appeared to be a small human skull with brownish hair aournd the sides of it(the top of the skull did not have any hair.) There appeared to be tape around the front of the skull."

Page 21
Incident Report at 12/11/9:32 am by Pamela Porter
"Upon arrival D/S Turso went into the woods and verified the information given. I also entered the wooded area to verify the information. I amde contact with teh garbage bag and the surrounding area. I immediately noticed an object that appeared to be a human skull. The skull was small and it and long brownish hair around the sides of it. The middle area did not have any hair. The front part of the skull appeared to have tape on the mouth area. I immediately exited the woods and notified my Supervisor, Sgt Deeb.

IMO, this should put to rest that the tape went around the whole head.[/B]

 

[christee]

above is bolded and resized by me...

To answer this I found the following information in a police report
Page 20 of the PDF http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/KRONKINTVPICS3976-4026.pdf

The attachment is an incident report at 12/11/08 at 9:32 am by Eduard Turso
"Mr Kronk showed me where he foudn the plastic garbage bag and skull. The object appeared to be a small human skull with brownish hair aournd the sides of it(the top of the skull did not have any hair.) There appeared to be tape around the front of the skull."

Page 21
Incident Report at 12/11/9:32 am by Pamela Porter
"Upon arrival D/S Turso went into the woods and verified the information given. I also entered the wooded area to verify the information. I amde contact with teh garbage bag and the surrounding area. I immediately noticed an object that appeared to be a human skull. The skull was small and it and long brownish hair around the sides of it. The middle area did not have any hair. The front part of the skull appeared to have tape on the mouth area. I immediately exited the woods and notified my Supervisor, Sgt Deeb.

IMO, this should put to rest that the tape went around the whole head.[/B]

I wish there was a report that stated more clearly the exact position of the tape. Going by what is stated still doesn't change my interpretation of the report-that "the front part of the skull" and "tape on the mouth area" does not include the back part of the skull and/or around or across any other part of the skull.

JMO

 

[Rumpole]

I wish there was a report that stated more clearly the exact position of the tape. Going by what is stated still doesn't change my interpretation of the report-that "the front part of the skull" and "tape on the mouth area" does not include the back part of the skull and/or around or across any other part of the skull.

JMO

I understand and respect those who think pictures should not be released, and I would have reservations about looking at the skull pics, but for "Scientific" purposes I would like to see pictures of the skull as found with the tape in place.

 

[ibyoungr]

I guess... I must be very black and white...
In front means not in back or around... tape on mouth area.. means it was on the mouth area.

I read it to say..tape on mouth area in the front of the skull.

Not

Tape around the skull with it being over the mouth.

 

[Marina2]

All of the descriptions of the skull and placement of the tape are given by those who have not touched or moved the skull in any way. They are describing a skull that was lying on the ground. I don't think we've read a description of the back of the skull yet.

I know that the documents did include a description of how the hair had to be cut to preserve the integrity of how the tape was found on the skull. They cut the hair so that they would not destroy the way it was positioned or placed on the skull.

What position or placement could the tape have been in that would necessitate cutting the hair to preserve the way it was found?

 

[Rumpole]

All of the descriptions of the skull and placement of the tape are given by those who have not touched or moved the skull in any way. They are describing a skull that was lying on the ground. I don't think we've read a description of the back of the skull yet.

I know that the documents did include a description of how the hair had to be cut to preserve the integrity of how the tape was found on the skull. They cut the hair so that they would not destroy the way it was positioned or placed on the skull.

What position or placement could the tape have been in that would necessitate cutting the hair to preserve the way it was found?

I think it is absolutely critical to the case to know exactly what the configuration of the tape on Caylee's skull was. It's critical to prosecution and the defence (possibly why it's not been described unambiguously yet). Also of course critical to serious WSers.

I appreciate the sensitive nature of remains photos, and I would find them upsetting personally, but I would like to see the pictures for information. If the decision is not to release picture, then I see less sensitivity issues in releasing an accurate sketch?

 

[FaerieB]

I appreciate the sensitive nature of remains photos, and I would find them upsetting personally, but I would like to see the pictures for information. If the decision is not to release picture, then I see less sensitivity issues in releasing an accurate sketch?

I agree Hercule. As much as the images would upset me horribly, I would want to see them to be able to accurately envision what happened in this case.

Having said that, part of the discovery released on February 18th, states that the tape was affixed in such a manner as to keep the mandible "adjacent to the skull." (Without actually seeing a picture, or at least a drawing, I'm assuming they mean the "attached" definition of adjacent, but could easily be convinced they mean "close to or lying near." Arrgh!) If this is the case, the duct tape would have to have covered a significant area of face. If the tape solely covered the mouth, we're looking at at least to the ear area to keep the mandible adjacent. If, as I've always felt, it covered the nose as well, it could be a smaller piece of tape to keep them adjacent.

Please accept my sincerest apologies if this post has upset anyone.

 

[Rumpole]

I agree Hercule. As much as the images would upset me horribly, I would want to see them to be able to accurately envision what happened in this case.

Having said that, part of the discovery released on February 18th, states that the tape was affixed in such a manner as to keep the mandible "adjacent to the skull." (Without actually seeing a picture, or at least a drawing, I'm assuming they mean the "attached" definition of adjacent, but could easily be convinced they mean "close to or lying near." Arrgh!) If this is the case, the duct tape would have to have covered a significant area of face. If the tape solely covered the mouth, we're looking at at least to the ear area to keep the mandible adjacent. If, as I've always felt, it covered the nose as well, it could be a smaller piece of tape to keep them adjacent.

Please accept my sincerest apologies if this post has upset anyone.

Your description does not upset me. I keep "Caylee" separate from the case and evidence etc, even the remains. The point is there are different interpretations of details and it could be very important details. For instance it seem clear to me from descriptions that the tape ended at each side, but I can not be sure it did not go right around the head?

 

[Skully]

I don't know if this helps or not, but if a person was laying down, the hair would fall towards the back of the skull. I think that if you were applying tape on a person's mouth, it would have to go pretty far around, maybe including the ears to get the hair to be caught in the tape. So I think that tape had to be a good seven to eight inches long to cover the area of a child's ears and beyond. The report did not say the length of the tape, but that is what I am guessing. I also remember that the tape held the lower jaw in place, so if it was just at the mouth area, the lower jaw would have been able to fall ... I hate typing this. But the jaw is attached back by the ear area, so I think the tape went pretty far back, but maybe not all the way around. At any rate, it was not intended to come off. God bless you Caylee.

 

[Rumpole]

I don't know if this helps or not, but if a person was laying down, the hair would fall towards the back of the skull. I think that if you were applying tape on a person's mouth, it would have to go pretty far around, maybe including the ears to get the hair to be caught in the tape. So I think that tape had to be a good seven to eight inches long to cover the area of a child's ears and beyond. The report did not say the length of the tape, but that is what I am guessing. I also remember that the tape held the lower jaw in place, so if it was just at the mouth area, the lower jaw would have been able to fall ... I hate typing this. But the jaw is attached back by the ear area, so I think the tape went pretty far back, but maybe not all the way around. At any rate, it was not intended to come off. God bless you Caylee.

You reinforce my point.
We have all read what descriptions there are, and used our own common sense and imagination, but we don't all agree. To even try and work out when the tape was applied and perhaps why, we do need the detail. It doesn't really matter so much that WS members know, but it is an important part of the puzzle.

 

[snow_walker]

This is a subject I too am reluctant to speak about.. but I have given it a lot of thought. I don't like my own thoughts and it is one of those things that hurts to think about or speak about. I apologize for doing so, but it is really important.

What I finally decided is likely the case is that she was laying on her back, and the tape was started as far back on that side as possible, then her head was pushed over to that side, and the taping went as far back as possible on the other side, with her still laying on her back.

I grabbed a roll of 2" tape and tried it on myself, first taking most of the sticky off by taping it over my clothes, like I was removing pet hair from my clothes with it.

It would grab almost all of my hair doing that, (I have long hair, and it takes in almost all my hair, by shoving my head from one side to the other, as I described) a few strands would not be caught by the tape, but about 90% would. It crosses the lower jaw hinge area, so I can see how the jaw would remain affixed to the rest of the skull.

It is not the same as a childs skull or face, and the results are not precisely transferable, but it was kind of surprising to me how long a piece it took to do this, how much of my hair got caught up, and I am sure with a childs face, it would also cover the nose, or at least be hard for it not to do so.

 

[Skully]

Speaking of hair, I still find it hard to believe that KC didn't get any of her own hairs caught on that tape. I know everything hasn't been released and I hope that is something they will have and release it close to the trial date. I have very fine long hair and I am constantly finding it on my cloths or where ever I am. I really thought there would be prints on the tape and hair attached from KC. At least fibers from her cloths. That tape is VERY STICKY AND STRONG.

I also don't understand if the tape was over the mouth and it held the lower jaw in place, how did the teeth get scattered? I know it was discussed but never at length. So many questions that will never be answered.

 

[Rumpole]

To me the duct tape and/or heart sticker are the most likely out of evidence we know about to lead to a definitive link to the Anthony home and KC.
Perhaps results from tests here have inspired the renewed interest in DP?

 

[FX Wiz]

To me the duct tape and/or heart sticker are the most likely out of evidence we know about to lead to a definitive link to the Anthony home and KC.
Perhaps results from tests here have inspired the renewed interest in DP?

I just heard NG say LE may have soil from KC's shoes matching soil from dump site! So let's keep our fingers crossed.

 

[Rumpole]

I just heard NG say LE may have soil from KC's shoes matching soil from dump site! So let's keep our fingers crossed.

Well lets hope NG is basing her "Bombshell" on evidence, and not just the rumour that has been around for a while. If NG got it right it would be a first.