Metro Detroit ME (Dr. Werner Spitz) Will Testify At Casey Trial

[GeekyGirl]

Thats actually great news!!!! Caylee had no broken ribs or sternum or any other fractures noted on autopsy for that matter. CM made a big deal about there being no fractures.
CPR would have likely caused fractures. Maybe the good Dr can explain 2 adults standing around crying, crying, crying rather than attempting to save the childs life. IMO walking on the child abuse would require attempting CPR at the very least.

Besides. Caylee could have died of a bullet wound and bled out. Dr G even explained that. Pretty easy to speculate wildly when there's no soft tissue left to contradict you.

Not saying I think CPR was performed, but an absence of rib fractures isn't evidence that it wasn't. I'll try to find the link I posted in another thread, but basically the rib cages in children are much more pliable than in adults and it's actually more likely that they wouldn't be fractured.

ETA: here's the link.... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064496701373

 

[mitzi]

I'm not just talking about fingerprints with duct tape. The did not put in any evidence to show any residue anywhere from the duct tape.

Three or four years ago, I had a broken window on my truck that I covered with plastic and duct tape. I still have residue from that despite ice, snow, rain, WD-40, rubbing alcohol, steam, hot water, cold water, dish soap, peanut butter, etc. The tape did not always hold and had to be replaced. But the residue has survived all my attempts to remove it.

Has your truck been underwater for 6 months?

 

[Nore]

This is one witness I can't wait to see JA cross examine. I think he'll come out like a pit bull looking for a bone!

------------
I hope JA. reminds him it wasnt necessary to remove the top of Caylees skull as
the skull was not connected to the spine. All one had to do was turn the skull upside down and examine the inside which is what Dr. G. did. (autopsy report). Dr. G. also made note of the mud inside her skull. If I recall right the tape WAS
still stuck to the mandible and hair. IMO.:seeya:

 

[GeekyGirl]

BBM To the skeleton. Didn't you listen to the ME explain that Caylee could have been abused horribly but suffered no skeletal trauma. She could have been kicked in the stomach and hemorrhaged to death. She could have been shot and the bullet completely penetrated her body missing all bones. She could have been asphyxiated with a plastic bag. She could have been doused with the gas ICA stole from GA and set on fire although the hair mat suggests that's not the case. Her head wasn't set on fire but her torso could have been and resulted in the same osteological (sp?) findings on autopsy.
I'm not even going to bother addressing the duct tape except to say this. The DT are the ones making the claim that ICA has poor impulse control. Poor impulse control manifests itself in things like stealing. Just a thought but ICA stole money, credit cards, food, her mothers laptop before she left, her BFF's checks, her fathers gas. Reasonable people might agree it is likely she stole the family roll of duct tape. She stole Amy's duct tape too actually but it doesn't have a logo on it. Amy needed it to move in with ICA after her parents divorced and gave her their house lol! The texts regarding this have been released to the public.

Read the autopsy report again and listen to Dr G's testimony. There's a good reason the toxicology reports came back with no smoking guns.
You not understanding the evidence doesn't make it holier than swiss cheese...sorry.

:twocents:

With all due respect, if all of the things you mentioned could have happened, so could a host of others that would be classified as accidental or negligent death. That was what I felt like the OP's point was, that ultimately we just don't know for sure, and probably never will, what the COD was. I'm not saying that it was an accident, but just because someone believes it could have been doesn't mean "they don't understand the evidence". It may mean they've looked at the evidence and have not drawn the same conclusions you have, which, in a case like this, where so much of the evidence is circumstantial, doesn't necessarily make them wrong. It's an understandably emotional case, but there is such a thing as confirmation bias, so it's always good to viewpoints from other people.

 

[mitzi]

------------
I hope JA. reminds him it wasnt necessary to remove the top of Caylees skull as
the skull was not connected to the spine. All one had to do was turn the skull upside down and examine the inside which is what Dr. G. did. (autopsy report). Dr. G. also made note of the mud inside her skull. If I recall right the tape WAS
still stuck to the mandible and hair. IMO.:seeya:

The fact that Dr. Spitz has overlooked the fact that it wasn't necessary for the top of Caylee's skull to be removed has me now wondering if Spitz really did do an autopsy! And even if he didn't, couldn't he see by the pictures that the skull was not still attached to the spine?

 

[Kat]

With all due respect, if all of the things you mentioned could have happened, so could a host of others that would be classified as accidental or negligent death. That was what I felt like the OP's point was, that ultimately we just don't know for sure, and probably never will, what the COD was. I'm not saying that it was an accident, but just because someone believes it could have been doesn't mean "they don't understand the evidence". It may mean they've looked at the evidence and have not drawn the same conclusions you have, which, in a case like this, where so much of the evidence is circumstantial, doesn't necessarily make them wrong. It's an understandably emotional case, but there is such a thing as confirmation bias, so it's always good to viewpoints from other people.

Both yours and Karn's posts were great.

I wanted to say that when I read your post it reminded me of the fact that this jury does not know what we have seen here at WS.

I wanted to add that as a juror with no or little prior knowledge looking at this case as the state presented it to them for the first time I do think that the fact that there is no COD, Dr. Spitz while on the stand will IMHO argue against Dr. G's finding of MOD as homicide. To us it looks cut and dried but the jury has to evaluate all evidence. They don't get to decide to choose one Dr's testimony over another but consider both testimonies.

I want to hear Dr. S's testimony about the remains and the position of the duct tape (if he testifies about that) because even though I enjoy watching Dr. G's testimony and put a fair amount of weight into it she is just one of the the two ME's testifying in front of that particular jury.

I'm off to look up Dr. Spitz's previous cases he was involved with. I saw one posted backthread but one case does not make his entire career. I have to look for myself to draw a conclusion. All JMHO.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I can't vouch for the veracity of this comment that is posted below a recent WDIV (Detroit) story about Dr. Spitz, so take from it what you will:

Dr. Spitz is a notorious defense expert. He once testified on the record, under oath, that he would "dance on the table in the nude" for a thousand dollars. The statement came during a deposition in a civil case about 20 years ago. He was responding to questions about his fees, and later said he was only joking. Many civil attorneys over the years have used this off-hand remark to challange Spitz's credibility.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/28239316/detail.html

 

[Tuffy]

Has your truck been underwater for 6 months?

And was the truck made out of human flesh and hair?

 

[Tuffy]

I recall someone testified that chloroform dissipates quickly. Did you miss that?

Actually, it evaporates quickly. Lots of chloroform was found in its gas form in the trunk. It was found dried on the carpet sample. Two people testified for the state saying so. It did not dissipate, because it is four times heavier than air, and stayed in the trunk, somewhat.

Chloroform would have been found in Caylee's hair only if she had been chloroformed between 90 days to 2 weeks prior to her death. If she had been chloroformed just prior to death, it would not show up in the drug test.

We cannot conclude from the negative drug test that Caylee had not been chloroformed at the time of death.

 

[1Chump]

What exactly was the duct tape on? From what I remember and I want I think, the duct tape was on Caylee's face, her skin, and in her hair. When Caylee decomposed and became a skeleton, there was no more face or skin for the duct tape residue to be on. Of course there was duct tape residue in her hair as the duct tape was still attached to her hair.

The example of a vehicle with duct tape on it really does not apply here. As I said above, there was nothing left that the duct tape was originally attached to other than Caylee's hair for residue to be found on.

MOO

I was commenting on the statements that residue was left from a sticker but not duct tape. According to the SA, three pieces of duct tape were over her mouth nose. At least two of the pieces of duct tape should have had "residue" on both sides to show that the three pieces were stuck together.

As I typed that I realized that the fingerprint tech who saw the heart residue contradicted herself. She testified that the glue was gone from the duct tape becasue of the elements. However, she also testified that she had to send two pieces of the duct tape back because they were "stuck" together.

If the elements/water "destroyed" all the glue on the duct tape so they couldn't find any cells, dna or other evidence, how did those two pieces stay stuck together?

 

[ZsaZsa]

I was commenting on the statements that residue was left from a sticker but not duct tape. According to the SA, three pieces of duct tape were over her mouth nose. At least two of the pieces of duct tape should have had "residue" on both sides to show that the three pieces were stuck together.

As I typed that I realized that the fingerprint tech who saw the heart residue contradicted herself. She testified that the glue was gone from the duct tape becasue of the elements. However, she also testified that she had to send two pieces of the duct tape back because they were "stuck" together.

If the elements/water "destroyed" all the glue on the duct tape so they couldn't find any cells, dna or other evidence, how did those two pieces stay stuck together?

Because they were stuck- they were sealed. The exposed pieces were open to the elements and biological action. She is not contradicting herself. She stated two pieces were stacked one over the other, sealed together.

 

[scandi]

Hi, I know I'm a broken record but hope that now the State can point out the piece of tape that was wrapped around the back of her head.

It shows in that photo of the tape. I believe it shows premeditation, to keep the tape over the nose and mouth in place to make sure she would die.

xox

 

[whiteangora]

http://www.clickorlando.com/video/28248341/index.html

Has anyone watched this yet? Now Spitz is saying brain matter was in the skull.

 

[ZsaZsa]

http://www.clickorlando.com/video/28248341/index.html

Has anyone watched this yet? Now Spitz is saying brain matter was in the skull.

I tried, but this is ridiculous. Hopefully LDB and JA will set him straight.

 

[scandi]

http://www.clickorlando.com/video/28248341/index.html

Has anyone watched this yet? Now Spitz is saying brain matter was in the skull.

Thanks Whiteangora, I'm thinking there might be an assertion by the State that Dr WS's autopsy was not official and thus maybe can not be used to testify in court. Dr G gave a negative shake of her head as to his having done an autopsy.


Cripes, I really don't know as I'm not a leagalease. Just IMO

 

[whiteangora]

I tried, but this is ridiculous. Hopefully LDB and JA will set him straight.

He did say it was decomposed, deteriorated, whatever.
He seems to be getting a bit dotty, didn't want to discuss when or if he would be paid.
He also seems to think there should have been intact insects or insect parts found on the sticky side of the tape.
I would think they too would have decomposed. Dr G may have to be called back for rebuttal.

 

[whiteangora]

Thanks Whiteangora, I'm thinking there might be an assertion by the State that Dr WS's autopsy was not official and thus maybe can not be used to testify in court. Dr G gave a negative shake of her head as to his having done an autopsy.


Cripes, I really don't know as I'm not a leagalease. Just IMO

BTW, The interviewer stated that Spitz may testify as soon as tomorrow or Sat.

 

[ascerbic]

I haven't seen the uncersored pictures. Wasn't the skull detached from the spine? Why would you need to cut off the top? Couldn't you just look thru the eye holes or turn it upside down to look at the inside of the top (sorry for gross out).

And what difference does it make anyway. Of course it would have been on its side at one time. If she were dumped feet side down her body would just fall over on its side.

So much I don't understand.

 

[scandi]

BTW, The interviewer stated that Spitz may testify as soon as tomorrow or Sat.

Yea, He left for Orlando this afternoon. It will be interesting to see how the State handles him on rebuttal [sp].

 

[ZsaZsa]

I haven't seen the uncersored pictures. Wasn't the skull detached from the spine? Why would you need to cut off the top? Couldn't you just look thru the eye holes or turn it upside down to look at the inside of the top (sorry for gross out).

And what difference does it make anyway. Of course it would have been on its side at one time. If she were dumped feet side down her body would just fall over on its side.

So much I don't understand.

Yes, the skull was apart from the rest of the bones. All DR G had to do was turn it upside down and she could visualize the (empty) interior. I don't know why he thinks she should have removed the top of the skull in order to do that.
She had no intention of doing so, it wasn't an oversight as he is trying to imply.