In Retrospect-Kronk Believes He Saw Skull In August

[Wudge]

Their dedication is to find the missing. If you have followed this case from the beginning, you would know that LE was somewhat reluctant to have TES come out and search initially.

The alleged reason being what?

 

[Wudge]

... Unless they are retained by a defence attorney

Does TES take retainers?

 

[marspiter]

You were quoted in my post and here is your quote again. Now can you please cite the link or reference where the FBI has changed how it stands behind its evidence?

Can you also cite a link or a reference to the ugly history of scandals in the FBI?

Also for reference can you narrow down a time period in which this ugly history of scandal took place? Are we talking modern day or McCarthy era?

Your pretty much stating as fact that do to this history of scandal with in the FBI it has had to change how it supports its own findings and the policies of its labs. I am asking for citation of such. I think that's fairly reasonable given that this was stated as fact.

Also do to this ugly history of scandal do the courts take evidence from the FBI differently. Given that these scandalous actions are apparently so rampant in the FBI. I would figure court systems acrossed the country would put forth measures to ensure the information presented by the FBI is accurate.

Is there any evidence of the court systems applying such measure specifically against the FBI's findings? Perhaps a disclaimer given in the jury instructions to put less weight on evidence examined by the FBI?

Also as new means of collecting evidence, and new technologies arise labs do change their policies to reflect this new way of collecting or analyzing evidence. Also much of the standards for dealing with and testing new technology and evidence arises through much trial and error. I am sure the standards for dealing with DNA are not the same today as they were when the technology first arrived.

Many of the FBI's lab policy changes probably arose out of this scenario and not because of scandal or conspiracies. Just my opinion though.

Correct. It was from your previous post, and it was not drawn from what I said. My point is, do not extend what I say. Quote me and make sure your questions are appropriately drawn from what I say.

My above quote clarifies and asks questions more related to what you said. However you have completely bypassed this post and continue to rely on an older post.

Harmony2 and AutomaticAuttie however have provided much of the information I was asking for links too (thanks for the links btw). I would still say based on those articles that it only points to one type of 40 year evidence collection process that the FBI currently doesn't use and was overstated during its use. The evidence type in question though has absolutely no barring on this case.

 

[RR0004]

The alleged reason being what?

Not sure what you're asking, but let's be honest...the only ones NOT looking for Caylee were the Anthony family. So does the organization have goals in-line with LE? Absolutely! And I'm glad you said you had a "feeling" that they get their marching orders from LE. They do have to answer to someone when there is a criminal investigation going on. But, they're not some sort of rogue operation. They're law abiding citizens who only want to do what's best. They would not set out to hurt an investigation; hence they would abide by LE's wishes. JMHO

ETA: alleged reasons...safety of searchers...low on funds to provide useful assistance...already existing circus like atmosphere (MOO).

 

[Friday]

BBM

Excellent point. Anyone who has played golf knows that three people can walk right by a ball in the rough before the fourth sees it.

Does that mean that the ball was placed there after the first three missed it? (Well, perhaps that depends on who you play golf with!)

:floorlaugh: Thanks for the golf chuckle, Rlaub.

 

[Wudge]

Not sure what you're asking, but let's be honest...the only ones NOT looking for Caylee were the Anthony family. So does the organization have goals in-line with LE? Absolutely! And I'm glad you said you had a "feeling" that they get their marching orders from LE. They do have to answer to someone when there is a criminal investigation going on. But, they're not some sort of rogue operation. They're law abiding citizens who only want to do what's best. They would not set out to hurt an investigation; hence they would abide by LE's wishes. JMHO

ETA: alleged reasons...safety of searchers...low on funds to provide useful assistance...already existing circus like atmosphere (MOO).

I appreciate your input.