Premeditated Murder #972

[Wudge]

Neither LE nor prosecutors have said or even claim that Caylee's hands were bound. That important, because it means Caylee's hands would have been free to remove short strips of duct tape if they had cut off her ability to breathe.

Regarding the importance of the absence of long strips of duct tape, if a murderer planned to use duct tape as the instrument of death on a person whose hands were free, they would certainly want to make those strips of duct tape hard to remove -- such as wrapping them entirely around the victim's head.

(CLIPPED FOR BREVITY)

But what if the victim was not conscious at the time? What if the victim had been rendered helpless, say...from the temporary effects of cholorform?

Obviously, the key thing is evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that's what happened. "If" is not evidence.

 

[JBean]

As always, the topic is not each other.

 

[lin]

But could the murder ITSELF be premeditated, but the placement of the body "on the surface of the ground" merely points to the absence of a PLAN "B", when the PLAN "A" that was part of the premeditation fell apart (hence suggested 2.6 days in trunk?)?

I've never seen anywhere, statute, case, whatever, that a disposal plan was required to show premeditation. In point of fact, the lack of an adequate disposal plan is what causes most murderers to be apprehended, imo.

 

[Wudge]

But could the murder ITSELF be premeditated, but the placement of the body "on the surface of the ground" merely points to the absence of a PLAN "B", when the PLAN "A" that was part of the premeditation fell apart (hence suggested 2.6 days in trunk?)?

"Could" falls inside the universal set of possiblities, but courts deal in probabilities.

Frankly, I don't see the front-end of Casey's alleged murder plan being masterful or well thought out, and I certainly don't see the back-end (body disposal) being so either. I don't see planning anywhere in her alleged murder of Caylee via duct tape, and plannng is the centerpiece of premeditation.

 

[Macushla]

I responded to this in my above post. You're correct in that there has been neither a leak nor a release (under the Sunshine law) of such evidence. And fifty plus years of assessing high-profiles cases tried in the press or today's crimetainment media have taught me that in such cases, D.A.s do not hold smoking guns back. They use everything at their disposal (including outright lies) to villify the defendant or defendants and poison the jury pool.

Wudge: Would I be correct in saying that it is your opinion based on your years of experience assessing high profile cases that IF there was evidence of Caylee being bound, we would have heard about it by now. If my previous statement is correct, then your statement as to the 'fact' that Caylee's hands were not bound is only your opinion based on what you have interperted from the documents relased so far. Isn't that what most of the people who believe this was premeditated are doing, basing their opinions on what how they have interperted the evidence they have seen so far?

I am more than a little surprised that you would take as fact something which has neither been proven or disproven. You have been eloquent in your posts about how important it is to look at the FACTS of a case and not let our emotions, personal feelings get in the way.

 

[Macushla]

I do pay attention to what I say or write, accordingly, that truth demonstrates my level of certainty as regards neither LE nor the prosecutors saying or claiming or that Caylee's hands were tied.

I am not sure whether you answered my question or not So I will try again, are you saying it is, indeed, a FACT that Caylee's hands were not tied?

 

[lin]

But what if the victim was not conscious at the time? What if the victim had been rendered helpless, say...from the temporary effects of cholorform?

A two year old victim may be mentally and/or physically unable to remove industrial strength duct tape. Two year olds are just starting to develop fine motor skills and don't possess a lot of physical strength, even if the particular baby's intellect is advanced enough to understand their airways were covered with duct tape. There are also other ways to restrain a two year old, as has been suggested by several others.

My point in all of this is that the jury is not only allowed to draw inferences from the available evidence, they are actually required to do so. Otherwise, they couldn't reach a verdict without a confession, witnesses and videotape of the event(s). A juror may very well infer that the child was bound, due to the extra matching duct tape found at the scene. A juror is also free to infer that there was no binding but due to the chloroform level, the baby was unconscious. (KC better pray they do!) A juror may infer as I've suggested, a baby would simply be unable to remove industrial strength duct tape.

It is up to the jury to determine what the facts are, based on the evidence presented. They may determine it to be fact that the child was bound; they may also determine that she was not.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge: Would I be correct in saying that it is your opinion based on your years of experience assessing high profile cases that IF there was evidence of Caylee being bound, we would have heard about it by now. If my previous statement is correct, then your statement as to the 'fact' that Caylee's hands were not bound is only your opinion based on what you have interperted from the documents relased so far. Isn't that what most of the people who believe this was premeditated are doing, basing their opinions on what how they have interperted the evidence they have seen so far?

I am more than a little surprised that you would take as fact something which has neither been proven or disproven. You have been eloquent in your posts about how important it is to look at the FACTS of a case and not let our emotions, personal feelings get in the way.

No, I'm using my long experience in high-profile cases where there the leaks --- or releases of evidence if you prefer -- amount to a nuclear chain reaction.

It's a bit like the sun rising each morning, someday it won't. And maybe someday before the sun doesn't rise, chain-reaction leaks (or releases ... chuckle) might stop before a trial starts in a poisoned high-profile case.

 

[snow_walker]

People keep mentioning traces of decomp in the oil pan.. how on earth would that get there, if it were actually found there? the oil pan would be at the front of the car, under the engine, not near the trunk, where the body apparently was placed.

 

[Wudge]

I am not sure whether you answered my question or not So I will try again, are you saying it is, indeed, a FACT that Caylee's hands were not tied?

Based on what we know, yes.

 

[countzero]

People keep mentioning traces of decomp in the oil pan.. how on earth would that get there, if it were actually found there? the oil pan would be at the front of the car, under the engine, not near the trunk, where the body apparently was placed.

I haven't read where traces of decomp WERE found in the oil pan.

I was the one who asked about the FBI being asked by OCSO to look for decomp in the swabs they sent them. Two swabs were taken from the bottom of each of the two gas cans in KCs car as well as two swabs from the interior of the oil pan.

I cannot find the results of the forensic analysis for these six swabs. If you did read the forensics report of these swabs can you please link it for me, thanks.

 

[Wudge]

I haven't read where traces of decomp WERE found in the oil pan.

I was the one who asked about the FBI being asked by OCSO to look for decomp in the swabs they sent them. Two swabs were taken from the bottom of each of the two gas cans in KCs car as well as two swabs from the interior of the oil pan.

I cannot find the results of the forensic analysis for these six swabs. If you did read the forensics report of these swabs can you please link it for me, thanks.

History amply demonstrates that a lot of things are found in testing that were not there.

(Say it ain't so Joe ... and all of you in the FBI lab.)

 

[Atlanta PI]

A two year old victim may be mentally and/or physically unable to remove industrial strength duct tape. Two year olds are just starting to develop fine motor skills and don't possess a lot of physical strength, even if the particular baby's intellect is advanced enough to understand their airways were covered with duct tape. There are also other ways to restrain a two year old, as has been suggested by several others.

My point in all of this is that the jury is not only allowed to draw inferences from the available evidence, they are actually required to do so. Otherwise, they couldn't reach a verdict without a confession, witnesses and videotape of the event(s). A juror may very well infer that the child was bound, due to the extra matching duct tape found at the scene. A juror is also free to infer that there was no binding but due to the chloroform level, the baby was unconscious. (KC better pray they do!) A juror may infer as I've suggested, a baby would simply be unable to remove industrial strength duct tape.

It is up to the jury to determine what the facts are, based on the evidence presented. They may determine it to be fact that the child was bound; they may also determine that she was not.

Agreed, and also let's consider that Caylee was bound papoose style in the Winnie the Pooh blanket so that she could not use her arms to try to pull the tape off, even if she had the motor skills to do so. Apologize if someone already mentioned this but didn't see it so I am throwing it out there.

 

[sleutherontheside]

We don't know what the "disposal plan" may have been.* IIRC her phone pinged in areas near the airport and that directed TES to focus there with a lot of effort.* I believe KC did not anticipate the speed of decomp and figured there was time to dispose of her.* It was probably when the smell became noticeable that she rushed to do it.* Disposal near her home enabled her to check the area and see if anything had been discovered.* At this time, we do not know if KC bound Caylee's hands.* BUT, just because the tape was placed in short strips does not mean it was meant to be temporary.* The tape was completely stuck to the hair and had to be cut away.* I can't imagine a toddler would be able to push through the pain of pulling their own hair out in order to breathe.* IMO they would likely panic and pass out before achieving their goal. If they were drugged, then they would be less likely to resist.

 

[reeseeva]

Lots of great sleuthing and facts about the "Duct Tape" here,

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4270328#post4270328"]The single piece of Henkel Duct Tape found NOT on remains - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


Many references to deteriorated "gray matter". Also, I believe, all pieces of duct tape were Henkel logo, including the long piece, 13.5" x 2 inches

Sorry for the O/T on this discussion, but reading All the newly released evidence, shows premeditation to me! JMO

 

[Brini]

Based on what we know, yes.

Well, what the ME knows about possible binding is.. nothing!

 

[Brini]

History amply demonstrates that a lot of things are found in testing that were not there.

(Say it ain't so Joe ... and all of you in the FBI lab.)

Like what, specifically?

 

[BeanE]

A two year old victim may be mentally and/or physically unable to remove industrial strength duct tape. Two year olds are just starting to develop fine motor skills and don't possess a lot of physical strength, even if the particular baby's intellect is advanced enough to understand their airways were covered with duct tape. There are also other ways to restrain a two year old, as has been suggested by several others.

My point in all of this is that the jury is not only allowed to draw inferences from the available evidence, they are actually required to do so. Otherwise, they couldn't reach a verdict without a confession, witnesses and videotape of the event(s). A juror may very well infer that the child was bound, due to the extra matching duct tape found at the scene. A juror is also free to infer that there was no binding but due to the chloroform level, the baby was unconscious. (KC better pray they do!) A juror may infer as I've suggested, a baby would simply be unable to remove industrial strength duct tape.

It is up to the jury to determine what the facts are, based on the evidence presented. They may determine it to be fact that the child was bound; they may also determine that she was not.

Neither LE nor prosecutors have said or even claim that Caylee's hands were bound. That important, because it means Caylee's hands would have been free to remove short strips of duct tape if they had cut off her ability to breathe.

Regarding the importance of the absence of long strips of duct tape, if a murderer planned to use duct tape as the instrument of death on a person whose hands were free, they would certainly want to make those strips of duct tape hard to remove -- such as wrapping them entirely around the victim's head.

As for Casey allegedly leaving Caylee's body on the surface of the ground near a road that is near the home, that certainly does not demonstrate planning, which is part of premeditation. Rather, that more properly points to the absence of a plan.

You're correct. Premeditation can form in a short period of time, but simply thinking that's what took place is not what's truly important. If prosecutors were to allege that at trial, what would be most important would be proving it happened that way. However, without an eyewitness or a confession, I doubt that is possible.

HTH

BBM

I'd like to also point out again that the duct tape was of sufficient strength, and/or applied in such a way, that through months of exposure to the elements, including heavy rains and flooding, as well as through the animal activity, Caylee's mandible was still held in place by the subject tape. Given that, I question whether, even if not restrained, Caylee could have removed that tape.

 

[Kentjbkent]

We don't know what the "disposal plan" may have been.* IIRC her phone pinged in areas near the airport and that directed TES to focus there with a lot of effort.* I believe KC did not anticipate the speed of decomp and figured there was time to dispose of her.* It was probably when the smell became noticeable that she rushed to do it.* Disposal near her home enabled her to check the area and see if anything had been discovered.* At this time, we do not know if KC bound Caylee's hands.* BUT, just because the tape was placed in short strips does not mean it was meant to be temporary.* The tape was completely stuck to the hair and had to be cut away.* I can't imagine a toddler would be able to push through the pain of pulling their own hair out in order to breathe.* IMO they would likely panic and pass out before achieving their goal. If they were drugged, then they would be less likely to resist.

Also brings up the point of what scale denotes the strips as being considered "short".

Is "short" considered just short enough to cover from lip to lip and "long" considered long enough to cover from ear to ear, or completely wrap the head. especially in relation to the circumference of a 2 yr old's head?

My opinion is that it makes none whether the tape was cheek to cheek or wrapped completely around the head. Both airway accesses were completely blocked of a 2 yr old child.

 

[Kentjbkent]

BBM

I'd like to also point out again that the duct tape was of sufficient strength, and/or applied in such a way, that through months of exposure to the elements, including heavy rains and flooding, as well as through the animal activity, Caylee's mandible was still held in place by the subject tape. Given that, I question whether, even if not restrained, Caylee could have removed that tape.

I thought I recalled reading this in documentation as well, which is why I wondered why LBK stated today that the prosecution's claim that the tape covered Caylee's mouth is NOT true?

The state has led you to believe that there's duct tape around the mouth," attorney Linda Kenney Baden tells CBS' Maggie Rodriguez. "All we can say is that's going to be a disputed issue."
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...omebody-else-is-the-killer-of-this-child.html