Henry Lee as a Defense Expert *Merged*

[logicalgirl]

I haven't heard anything about a hearing today. Perhaps you're confusing when HHJP discussed he would be available today for Kronk's motion.

No not confused (more than usual) I remember it as Lee's expenses being handed and Kronk's motion. And available to me meant a hearing, since I'm assuming our Mr. Ashton would want to be there also.

So do we know if Baez is taking advantage of HHJP's "availability"? I'd guess looking at the time - that's a no.

 

[nums24]

So does that mean JB had until 5 today??

Technically the defense has until 12/31/10 to have the Kronk motion heard, unless they worked out something that we don't know about, I think the motion will be denied by HHJP upon returning from vacation.

Regarding the travel expenses, HHJP gave JB until 12/21/2010 to submit an itemized statement to the court and JAC, we don't know if that's happened either :banghead:

Here is the order for travel expenses: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/6772692...s-of-Investigtion-and-Prior-Travel-of-Experts

 

[logicalgirl]

Technically the defense has until 12/31/10 to have the Kronk motion heard, unless they worked out something that we don't know about, I think the motion will be denied by HHJP upon returning from vacation.

Regarding the travel expenses, HHJP gave JB until 12/21/2010 to submit an itemized statement to the court and JAC, we don't know if that's happened either :banghead:

Here is the order for travel expenses: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/6772692...s-of-Investigtion-and-Prior-Travel-of-Experts

Thanks for that Nums23, I have read the order. I recall Baez denying HHJP's comment about Dr. Lee withdrawing and knew he had until the 31st to comply with both items, Kronk, and Lee, with Baez telling him he must hear Kronk before the 31st, only had the 23rd, and would handle Dr. Lee's receipts at the same time so all could get on with things. That must be where I got switched up.

Okay, I now call for a chorus of Aedyrs "Hokey Pokey" please! And kindly insert the Defense team at the same time. Expert/team what the heck - same diff.

 

[JWG]

I guess we did get our answer as to whether Dr. Lee will be testifying or not at trial. From Cheney Mason's motion to reconsider the sanctions slapped on Jose Baez, we see the following (page 5, item c):

Dr. Henry Lee. The response with respect to Dr. Henry Lee was also in substantial compliance, however, the Defendant supplements same by adding the following: During Dr. Lee's examination of the Pontiac Sunfire automobile, with CSI investigators of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, he found approximately seventeen additional hairs that had been previously undiscovered in the trunk of said automobile. Dr. Lee pointed out the discovery of said seventeen hairs to Orange County Sheriff's Office CSI investigators, who collected them and sent them to the FBI crime laboratories for examination. (It should be noted that none of the seventeen hairs tested positive for any decomposition.) At the deposition of CSI Bloise, he acknowledged this discovery by Dr. Lee and the subsequent handling of said evidence.

As a result of CSI Bloise acknowledging, under oath in his deposition testimony, that Dr. Lee did locate and point out said hairs, it is highly unlikely that Dr. Lee would be called upon or deemed necessary to testify in this case. It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics.

​

Now, Mr. Mason over-states Dr. Lee's contribution of the trunk examination. I think we have already determined that Dr. Lee found one hair in the trunk, and then he and CSI Bloise together found three hairs in the trash bag, and then after Dr. Lee left CSI Bloise found 13 additional hairs in the bag, attached to items such as a soda can. Hairs had previously been found in the bag, but attached to items of interest, namely the paper towels / napkins believed to have been used to clean the stain.

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

 

[Aedrys]

I guess we did get our answer as to whether Dr. Lee will be testifying or not at trial. From Cheney Mason's motion to reconsider the sanctions slapped on Jose Baez, we see the following (page 5, item c):

Dr. Henry Lee. The response with respect to Dr. Henry Lee was also in substantial compliance, however, the Defendant supplements same by adding the following: During Dr. Lee's examination of the Pontiac Sunfire automobile, with CSI investigators of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, he found approximately seventeen additional hairs that had been previously undiscovered in the trunk of said automobile. Dr. Lee pointed out the discovery of said seventeen hairs to Orange County Sheriff's Office CSI investigators, who collected them and sent them to the FBI crime laboratories for examination. (It should be noted that none of the seventeen hairs tested positive for any decomposition.) At the deposition of CSI Bloise, he acknowledged this discovery by Dr. Lee and the subsequent handling of said evidence.

As a result of CSI Bloise acknowledging, under oath in his deposition testimony, that Dr. Lee did locate and point out said hairs, it is highly unlikely that Dr. Lee would be called upon or deemed necessary to testify in this case. It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics.

​

Now, Mr. Mason over-states Dr. Lee's contribution of the trunk examination. I think we have already determined that Dr. Lee found one hair in the trunk, and then he and CSI Bloise together found three hairs in the trash bag, and then after Dr. Lee left CSI Bloise found 13 additional hairs in the bag, attached to items such as a soda can. Hairs had previously been found in the bag, but attached to items of interest, namely the paper towels / napkins believed to have been used to clean the stain.

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

And I'm sure Dr. Lee is thanking God that he doesn't have make his career take another hit one more time. And apparently, according to Baez's motion, they've got twelve experts, but only three are testifying. Wow. That says a lot about who is not willing to put their reputation on the line in this trial. Sadly, I think it's more because of the shenanigans of the defense team than their bad client.

 

[beach]

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

<snip>

Agreed. Interesting how all the "big names" are dropping like flies now that the $$$$ well has run dry. (experts and attorneys) Looks like we will at least be spared the defense's anticipated dramatic O.J. moment in "spin city". :dramaqueen:

 

[logicalgirl]

<snip>

Agreed. Interesting how all the "big names" are dropping like flies now that the $$$$ well has run dry. (experts and attorneys) Looks like we will at least be spared the defense's anticipated dramatic O.J. moment in "spin city". :dramaqueen:

Yup, pretty sad to see and hear these "famous" experts getting their 15 minutes of fame during the initial buildup of this case, but when it's time to put the facts up front in a court room and there is no big fees to make it worthwhile, they've disappeared like a morning mist as the sun rises.

 

[snowshuze]

I swear, it's the expert hokey pokey in this case.

You have your experts in
You have your experts out
You have your experts in, and you shake them all about
You do the hokey pokey and you turn your experts around,
Then all of sudden they're out!

Repeat, repeat, rinse, repeat. LOL.

See? The hokey pokey really IS what it's all about.
Buh Bye Dr. Ketchup.

:seeya:

 

[sumbunny]

I'm almost positive many other defense witnesses will be jumping ship shortly

(I'd guess as soon as their required to provide some kind of report to the court.)

 

[cottoncandy]

Henry won&#8217;t testify for two reasons, one he has nothing and two he will not subject himself to questions about stealing evidence from the Spector crime scene&#8230; he freaked out when Kathi Belich asked him about it in a sidewalk interview so no way would he let prosecutors go after him in court where he can&#8217;t run away, lol. moo.

 

[cyberborg]

I'm almost positive many other defense witnesses will be jumping ship shortly

(I'd guess as soon as their required to provide some kind of report to the court.)

The Defense ship is on the rocks taking on water fast and is sinking, some have intelligently moved on already, others are planning to abandon ship as we speak, some will go at the last minute ... some will ride the ship to the sea floor.

The only survivor will be AF who will continue to rise above the fray and be seen as a mitigation hero (by some) for having saved ICA from the DP.

This case was never about Guilt ... it is all about Sentencing. The rest is just a bizarre circus sideshow for some notorious media seeking egos.

 

[Tulessa]

I guess we did get our answer as to whether Dr. Lee will be testifying or not at trial. From Cheney Mason's motion to reconsider the sanctions slapped on Jose Baez, we see the following (page 5, item c):

Dr. Henry Lee. The response with respect to Dr. Henry Lee was also in substantial compliance, however, the Defendant supplements same by adding the following: During Dr. Lee's examination of the Pontiac Sunfire automobile, with CSI investigators of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, he found approximately seventeen additional hairs that had been previously undiscovered in the trunk of said automobile. Dr. Lee pointed out the discovery of said seventeen hairs to Orange County Sheriff's Office CSI investigators, who collected them and sent them to the FBI crime laboratories for examination. (It should be noted that none of the seventeen hairs tested positive for any decomposition.) At the deposition of CSI Bloise, he acknowledged this discovery by Dr. Lee and the subsequent handling of said evidence.

As a result of CSI Bloise acknowledging, under oath in his deposition testimony, that Dr. Lee did locate and point out said hairs, it is highly unlikely that Dr. Lee would be called upon or deemed necessary to testify in this case. It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics.

​

Now, Mr. Mason over-states Dr. Lee's contribution of the trunk examination. I think we have already determined that Dr. Lee found one hair in the trunk, and then he and CSI Bloise together found three hairs in the trash bag, and then after Dr. Lee left CSI Bloise found 13 additional hairs in the bag, attached to items such as a soda can. Hairs had previously been found in the bag, but attached to items of interest, namely the paper towels / napkins believed to have been used to clean the stain.

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

I just got to say that I love reading your post! You state it where we all can get it & let it sink in to realism.

 

[Kentjbkent]

I guess we did get our answer as to whether Dr. Lee will be testifying or not at trial. From Cheney Mason's motion to reconsider the sanctions slapped on Jose Baez, we see the following (page 5, item c):

Dr. Henry Lee. The response with respect to Dr. Henry Lee was also in substantial compliance, however, the Defendant supplements same by adding the following: During Dr. Lee's examination of the Pontiac Sunfire automobile, with CSI investigators of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, he found approximately seventeen additional hairs that had been previously undiscovered in the trunk of said automobile. Dr. Lee pointed out the discovery of said seventeen hairs to Orange County Sheriff's Office CSI investigators, who collected them and sent them to the FBI crime laboratories for examination. (It should be noted that none of the seventeen hairs tested positive for any decomposition.) At the deposition of CSI Bloise, he acknowledged this discovery by Dr. Lee and the subsequent handling of said evidence.

As a result of CSI Bloise acknowledging, under oath in his deposition testimony, that Dr. Lee did locate and point out said hairs, it is highly unlikely that Dr. Lee would be called upon or deemed necessary to testify in this case. It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics.

​

Now, Mr. Mason over-states Dr. Lee's contribution of the trunk examination. I think we have already determined that Dr. Lee found one hair in the trunk, and then he and CSI Bloise together found three hairs in the trash bag, and then after Dr. Lee left CSI Bloise found 13 additional hairs in the bag, attached to items such as a soda can. Hairs had previously been found in the bag, but attached to items of interest, namely the paper towels / napkins believed to have been used to clean the stain.

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

And didn't we all make this prediction after we learned during a hearing that Henry Lee didn't even bother to return to finish examining the car??

No surprise here....

 

[The World According]

I guess we did get our answer as to whether Dr. Lee will be testifying or not at trial. From Cheney Mason's motion to reconsider the sanctions slapped on Jose Baez, we see the following (page 5, item c):

Dr. Henry Lee. The response with respect to Dr. Henry Lee was also in substantial compliance, however, the Defendant supplements same by adding the following: During Dr. Lee's examination of the Pontiac Sunfire automobile, with CSI investigators of the Orange County Sheriff's Department, he found approximately seventeen additional hairs that had been previously undiscovered in the trunk of said automobile. Dr. Lee pointed out the discovery of said seventeen hairs to Orange County Sheriff's Office CSI investigators, who collected them and sent them to the FBI crime laboratories for examination. (It should be noted that none of the seventeen hairs tested positive for any decomposition.) At the deposition of CSI Bloise, he acknowledged this discovery by Dr. Lee and the subsequent handling of said evidence.

As a result of CSI Bloise acknowledging, under oath in his deposition testimony, that Dr. Lee did locate and point out said hairs, it is highly unlikely that Dr. Lee would be called upon or deemed necessary to testify in this case. It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics.

​

Now, Mr. Mason over-states Dr. Lee's contribution of the trunk examination. I think we have already determined that Dr. Lee found one hair in the trunk, and then he and CSI Bloise together found three hairs in the trash bag, and then after Dr. Lee left CSI Bloise found 13 additional hairs in the bag, attached to items such as a soda can. Hairs had previously been found in the bag, but attached to items of interest, namely the paper towels / napkins believed to have been used to clean the stain.

I would love to read specifically what CSI Bloise said in his deposition. But clearly, Dr. Lee has nothing of value to contribute to the defense, and therefore won't be at trial. :thumb:

That is huge!:great::great::great::great:

 

[AlwaysShocked]

"It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics."

Isn't 12/12/08 the very day the remains were found? Didn't it take several days, if not a week to positively identify the remains as those of Caylee through DNA testing? Why would Lee even THINK he would be allowed "on scene"?

Oh, and for Mr. Cheney Mason's secretary:
sight = one of our five senses
site = a location (this is the one you wanted)
cite = to name or to quote



OT- "OT you know I worked for the DoDDS in Europe and knew Peterson's sister...boy was she a strange one!

Was this the sister, Ann Bird, who wrote the book about how she eventually came to believe he was guilty?

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

"It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics."

Isn't 12/12/08 the very day the remains were found? Didn't it take several days, if not a week to positively identify the remains as those of Caylee through DNA testing? Why would Lee even THINK he would be allowed "on scene"?

Oh, and for Mr. Cheney Mason's secretary:
sight = one of our five senses
site = a location (this is the one you wanted)
cite = to name or to quote



OT- "OT you know I worked for the DoDDS in Europe and knew Peterson's sister...boy was she a strange one!

Was this the sister, Ann Bird, who wrote the book about how she eventually came to believe he was guilty?

Caylee's remains were found 12/11/2008..ID'd by 12/19/08..I've never seen where a defense attorney or their forensic person be in attendance at an area where the CSI team are gathering evidence. It just doesn't happen!

Same with ICA's reaction to those remains being found...all goes to consciousness of guilt. Baez wanting to be there proves to me, he knows more about Caylee's demise than he's letting on. Or ICA fed him a bunch of BS and he's leaking out the consciousness of guilt part. Didn't they "cry" together at the jailhouse? What attorney gets that emotionally involved with a client? What attorney who finds out what a seasoned liar this one is and doesn't question everything? JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[Gaia713]

I think it is great. I was not looking forward to any of his teaching techniques while he was on the stand. The last one spitting ketchup out during the Michael Peterson trial almost did me in. There would not be much to demonstrate with hairs and decomp. Unless of course he wanted to bring her car in and open up the trunk for the jurors. Now that one I could handle. Let them all have a little sniff of that "pizza" in the trunk.

Since Dr. Lee's expertise is in blood spatter, I fail to see his usefulness to the defense. Unless they are just using him for "name recognition and have no intention of calling him as a witness. He looked totally ridiculous in Michael Peterson case and he didn't even testify in Scott Peterson case.

 

[faefrost]

"It may further be noted that Dr. Lee had sought access to the recovery sight on December 12, 2008, he was thwarted in the ability to potentially learn and subsequently testify to any other criminalistics."

Isn't 12/12/08 the very day the remains were found? Didn't it take several days, if not a week to positively identify the remains as those of Caylee through DNA testing? Why would Lee even THINK he would be allowed "on scene"?

Oh, and for Mr. Cheney Mason's secretary:
sight = one of our five senses
site = a location (this is the one you wanted)
cite = to name or to quote



OT- "OT you know I worked for the DoDDS in Europe and knew Peterson's sister...boy was she a strange one!

Was this the sister, Ann Bird, who wrote the book about how she eventually came to believe he was guilty?

Is criminalistics even a word?

 

[TrialAddict]

Is criminalistics even a word?

Yep http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/occguide/crimnlst.htm

 

[Cayleefan]

LiveLaughLove,

I always enjoy reading your posts.

Caylee's remains were found 12/11/2008..ID'd by 12/19/08..I've never seen where a defense attorney or their forensic person be in attendance at an area where the CSI team are gathering evidence. It just doesn't happen!

Same with ICA's reaction to those remains being found...all goes to consciousness of guilt. Baez wanting to be there proves to me, he knows more about Caylee's demise than he's letting on. Or ICA fed him a bunch of BS and he's leaking out the consciousness of guilt part. Didn't they "cry" together at the jailhouse? What attorney gets that emotionally involved with a client? What attorney who finds out what a seasoned liar this one is and doesn't question everything? JMHO

Justice for Caylee

You wrote the, "seasonal liar" part. I love it! And, it's so true.:clap: