Software designer says Casey Anthony prosecution data was wrong

[JSR]

I agree and applaud your statement. This whole thing about "reasonable doubt" sucks. What is unreasonable doubt?

Many suggest our system is the best in the world. After watching this trial, I'm starting to doubt it. JMO.

Please don't doubt our system. It's not our system that failed. The judicial system is only as strong as the jurors who promise to uphold it.

I think the key is not reasonable doubt. But more what is reasonable to a REASONABLE PERSON (Juror). IMO we didn't get reasonable jurors on this case.

They chose to believe that getting to point A to point B (per Jennifer Ford) via the Defense's theory was easier than the states. Mainly because they couldn't understand the science and it would have taken a lot of time and critical thinking to get to Point A to point B via the states evidence. So the jury chose to believe unsubstantiated lies and innuendo instead of cold hard science. They chose to believe the craziest and most absurd theories I've ever heard in a Court of law. They wanted whatever got them out of that jury duty service as quickly as possible. That's how we got this verdict.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

He has updated his timeline. He is now saying it was June 23rd, not June 16th. That changes things significantly.

In this case isn't changing dates SOP? This isn't the first time in this case that the date was a week off. LOL

 

[defense101]

JB: It relates to the issue of dealing with the computer searches. You may recall that there was an issue with the number of times that chloroform site was visited. The sci-spot….Mr bradley testified based on a report that was introduced by the state of florida that was actually compiled by the Sergeant Stenger. This was the 2nd report that was compiled a year later using a new software program in which they were having problems with and the net analysis that was conducted on August 2008 showed the identical website visited only once and that 2 columns below was 84 times for myspace which did not show up on the cache back report. It is our understanding that the cacheback report contains false information and we have placed the state on notice that the testimony elicited was false and we would ask that the state, on rebuttal clarify that false testimony and advise the jury of this falsehood.

BBM

Just wanted to highlight this part of what JB said. To me, this gives me the impression that however they came across the information that there was false information, it didn't come from the state telling them. He was asking the judge to have the state basically acknowledge that there was false information at which point the judge told him to file a motion.

The question is did the state a) really know there was false information in the report and if so b) did they disclose this to the defense.

If they did not disclose this to the defense, how did the defense find out about it?

The state has said that is was discussed with Jose Baez... as to when that was they didn't say, but IMO as JB brought it up between JA and LDB closing rebuttal it was after the defenses closing argument.

 

[cityslick]

Please don't doubt our system. It's not our system that failed. The judicial system is only as strong as the jurors who promise to uphold it.

I think the key is not reasonable doubt. But more what is reasonable to a REASONABLE PERSON (Juror). IMO we didn't get reasonable jurors on this case.

They chose to believe that getting to point A to point B (per Jennifer Ford) via the Defense's theory was easier than the states. Mainly because they couldn't understand the science and it would have taken a lot of time and critical thinking to get to Point A to point B via the states evidence. So the jury chose to believe unsubstantiated lies and innuendo instead of cold hard science. They chose to believe the craziest and most absurd theories I've ever heard in a Court of law.

Not to get into this discussion again in this thread, but I'll respectfully disagree that I don't think they jury believed any theory. Many believe the jury must of believed one story if not the other and I don't think that's the case. They didn't believe any story, despite whatever evidence to the contrary.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Baez screwed up.

:waitasec::waitasec: Well that is NOT news ... nothing new there ...

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[JSR]

Not to get into this discussion again in this thread, but I'll respectfully disagree that I don't think they jury believed any theory. Many believe the jury must of believed one story if not the other and I don't think that's the case. They didn't believe any story, despite whatever evidence to the contrary.

And you might be right. Either way they must have not paid attention to the testimony.

 

[Solace]

All things come to a man who has patience or so they say. The defense and KC are feeling just fine these days but the chances of KC screwing up in the future are high and we can all just wait and watch.

 

[Aedrys]

In this case isn't changing dates SOP? This isn't the first time in this case that the date was a week off. LOL

I'm not sure what you mean here, but in this particular instance, June 23rd was when Cindy was cross examined by LDB. So if he didn't report the mistake until the 23rd, that means LDB didn't find out about it until AFTER this testimony. A lot of people insinuated that LDB knew about this WHEN she was cross examining Cindy and that's why it was prosecutorial misconduct. Well, the software guy changed his dates, rendering that sentiment false.

 

[dunlurken]

Please don't doubt our system. It's not our system that failed. The judicial system is only as strong as the jurors who promise to uphold it.

I think the key is not reasonable doubt. But more what is reasonable to a REASONABLE PERSON (Juror). IMO we didn't get reasonable jurors on this case.

They chose to believe that getting to point A to point B (per Jennifer Ford) via the Defense's theory was easier than the states. Mainly because they couldn't understand the science and it would have taken a lot of time and critical thinking to get to Point A to point B via the states evidence. So the jury chose to believe unsubstantiated lies and innuendo instead of cold hard science. They chose to believe the craziest and most absurd theories I've ever heard in a Court of law. They wanted whatever got them out of that jury duty service as quickly as possible. That's how we got this verdict.

Thank you. I will never understand why all that "stuff" aka scientific evidence was brought in. I don't have a PhD and I was quite impressed with both sides, prosecution and defense that they could even cross exam each witness. All of it left me befuddled, which is what I think happened to prosecution's case. Thus, the NG.

It's what I would call overkill, no offense to little Caylee. JMO. There's an old saying........ choose your battles wisely, lest you lose the war.

 

[erinleigh]

defense was told. i assume they did not raise a giant stink about it so that way they had it in their back pocket for appeals.

 

[KathrynL]

Not to get into this discussion again in this thread, but I'll respectfully disagree that I don't think they jury believed any theory. Many believe the jury must of believed one story if not the other and I don't think that's the case. They didn't believe any story, despite whatever evidence to the contrary.

Based upon what the foreman said, I'd say they did believe the sexual abuse, and were instantly and always suspicious of him. They interpreted his attitude with JB as something very different than a man who could hardly stand to talk to the lawyer who made graphic (unsubstaniated) statements about GAs relationship with his daughter. Also the "dysfunctional family" meme was echoed. Thus, I do believe the leader of the jury bought into the defense theory. The prosecutors lost mostly in jury selection and completely after the DT opening statement. IMO

 

[LambChop]

This is really strange.....So Baez dropped the ball. And why wait for after closing arguments to bring it up???:maddening:

It appears from this person's blog that he notified LDB prior to her rebuttal which would have been after JB's closing arguments. It sounds like LDB notified JB as soon as she was made aware of the fact. Judge Perry told JB to file a Motion. It's been two weeks. If CM had a problem with it he would have filed it right away. They got the appeal in without a problem. jmo

 

[KathrynL]

I'm not sure what you mean here, but in this particular instance, June 23rd was when Cindy was cross examined by LDB. So if he didn't report the mistake until the 23rd, that means LDB didn't find out about it until AFTER this testimony. A lot of people insinuated that LDB knew about this WHEN she was cross examining Cindy and that's why it was prosecutorial misconduct. Well, the software guy changed his dates, rendering that sentiment false.

I believe thedeviledadvocate was referring to the initial date given by X and CA as the last date Caylee was seen. It was about a week before the date she was actually last seen. mo

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

From the WFTV link provided above...(thank you to the member who posted it). Anyway, I am now suffering from PTSD from watching 10 minutes of the trial again, but did so in order to transcribe what was being said.

As has been posted throughout this thread...the defense team, ASA's and Judge Perry were aware of this error. I should have done this sooner as it resolves the majority of the questions occurring from page 1.


@10:45 the chloroform searches, Stenger’s testimony and Bradley’s testimony is brought up by Baez.


JB: Yes sir, I just have a brief issue that I need to get on the record.

JP: Yes sir

JB: It relates to the issue of dealing with the computer searches. You may recall that there was an issue with the number of times that chloroform site was visited. The sci-spot….Mr bradley testified based on a report that was introduced by the state of florida that was actually compiled by the Sergeant Stenger. This was the 2nd report that was compiled a year later using a new software program in which they were having problems with and the net analysis that was conducted on August 2008 showed the identical website visited only once and that 2 columns below was 84 times for myspace which did not show up on the cache back report. It is our understanding that the cacheback report contains false information and we have placed the state on notice that the testimony elicited was false and we would ask that the state, on rebuttal clarify that false testimony and advise the jury of this falsehood.

JP: Any response from the state?

LDB: Mr. Baez has already made his closing arguments your honor.

JP: uh…folks I don’t know what you’re saying, whether it’s true or false. The only thing I can say is if there’s evidence of false testimony, then you need to file the appropriate motions at the appropriate time and I will take a look at it and see whether or not it is proven to be false. But at this stage I can’t chase after arguments, so file the appropriate motion and we’ll cross that bridge when we get there. Anything else?

LDB: No sir

JB: No

JP: ok, let’s return the jury.


http://www.wftv.com/video/28440654/index.html

This happened on the day of closing arguments so it might not clear the prosecution. It all depends on who knew what when.

 

[BiancaS]

From the WFTV link provided above...(thank you to the member who posted it). Anyway, I am now suffering from PTSD from watching 10 minutes of the trial again, but did so in order to transcribe what was being said.

As has been posted throughout this thread...the defense team, ASA's and Judge Perry were aware of this error. I should have done this sooner as it resolves the majority of the questions occurring from page 1.


@10:45 the chloroform searches, Stenger’s testimony and Bradley’s testimony is brought up by Baez.


JB: Yes sir, I just have a brief issue that I need to get on the record.

JP: Yes sir

JB: It relates to the issue of dealing with the computer searches. You may recall that there was an issue with the number of times that chloroform site was visited. The sci-spot….Mr bradley testified based on a report that was introduced by the state of florida that was actually compiled by the Sergeant Stenger. This was the 2nd report that was compiled a year later using a new software program in which they were having problems with and the net analysis that was conducted on August 2008 showed the identical website visited only once and that 2 columns below was 84 times for myspace which did not show up on the cache back report. It is our understanding that the cacheback report contains false information and we have placed the state on notice that the testimony elicited was false and we would ask that the state, on rebuttal clarify that false testimony and advise the jury of this falsehood.

JP: Any response from the state?

LDB: Mr. Baez has already made his closing arguments your honor.

JP: uh…folks I don’t know what you’re saying, whether it’s true or false. The only thing I can say is if there’s evidence of false testimony, then you need to file the appropriate motions at the appropriate time and I will take a look at it and see whether or not it is proven to be false. But at this stage I can’t chase after arguments, so file the appropriate motion and we’ll cross that bridge when we get there. Anything else?

LDB: No sir

JB: No

JP: ok, let’s return the jury.


http://www.wftv.com/video/28440654/index.html


It would seem to me, the real question is did the DT file a motion, if so what was the outcome? Instead of accusing others of misconduct.

Wonder why Mason did not to know about this issue...since it was in open court? :waitasec:

Cheney Mason, one of Ms. Anthony’s defense lawyers, said it was “outrageous” that prosecutors withheld critical information on the “chloroform” searches.

“The prosecution is absolutely obligated to bring forth to the court any and all evidence that could be exculpatory,” Mr. Mason said. “If in fact this is true, and the prosecution concealed this new information, it is more than shame on them. It is outrageous.”

“This was a major part of their case,” Mr. Mason added.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!! (Also further proof that Cheney Mason was sleeping through most of the trial, as many of us suspected. I just love it when he makes himself look stupid!!).

 

[dunlurken]

JP said many times during the trial that misconduct could be filed against both sides. Time will tell where all this goes.

 

[Jo in Calif]

JB: It relates to the issue of dealing with the computer searches. You may recall that there was an issue with the number of times that chloroform site was visited. The sci-spot….Mr bradley testified based on a report that was introduced by the state of florida that was actually compiled by the Sergeant Stenger. This was the 2nd report that was compiled a year later using a new software program in which they were having problems with and the net analysis that was conducted on August 2008 showed the identical website visited only once and that 2 columns below was 84 times for myspace which did not show up on the cache back report. It is our understanding that the cacheback report contains false information and we have placed the state on notice that the testimony elicited was false and we would ask that the state, on rebuttal clarify that false testimony and advise the jury of this falsehood.

BBM

Just wanted to highlight this part of what JB said. To me, this gives me the impression that however they came across the information that there was false information, it didn't come from the state telling them. He was asking the judge to have the state basically acknowledge that there was false information at which point the judge told him to file a motion.

The question is did the state a) really know there was false information in the report and if so b) did they disclose this to the defense.

If they did not disclose this to the defense, how did the defense find out about it?

BBM
So JB did not think that the 84 visits to my space, that Cindy, did not have a my space page at that time, would have shown, that his witness, Cindy was lying about being the one making the searches?

 

[raeann]

No, I'm saying if one thing is flawed, what else is flawed?

HMMM....how about the "heart shaped sticker" maliciously placed over the mouth....that never existed/mysteriously disappeared/couldn't be photographed etc. The SA KNEW from the minute they started circulating the photo of the sticker that it was not found anywhere NEAR the scene that they had serious problems with the documentation of any such "residue", but they put that out into the public for YEARS and harped on it to help inflame the public attitude.


jmo

 

[pinup]

No, I'm saying if one thing is flawed, what else is flawed?

That might be a good point if this computer forensics guy used his software to analyze all of the other evidence in this case, but he didn't. Thus, that argument doesn't hold water for all of the other expert evaluations.

 

[LambChop]

From the WFTV link provided above...(thank you to the member who posted it). Anyway, I am now suffering from PTSD from watching 10 minutes of the trial again, but did so in order to transcribe what was being said.

As has been posted throughout this thread...the defense team, ASA's and Judge Perry were aware of this error. I should have done this sooner as it resolves the majority of the questions occurring from page 1.


@10:45 the chloroform searches, Stenger’s testimony and Bradley’s testimony is brought up by Baez.


JB: Yes sir, I just have a brief issue that I need to get on the record.

JP: Yes sir

JB: It relates to the issue of dealing with the computer searches. You may recall that there was an issue with the number of times that chloroform site was visited. The sci-spot….Mr bradley testified based on a report that was introduced by the state of florida that was actually compiled by the Sergeant Stenger. This was the 2nd report that was compiled a year later using a new software program in which they were having problems with and the net analysis that was conducted on August 2008 showed the identical website visited only once and that 2 columns below was 84 times for myspace which did not show up on the cache back report. It is our understanding that the cacheback report contains false information and we have placed the state on notice that the testimony elicited was false and we would ask that the state, on rebuttal clarify that false testimony and advise the jury of this falsehood.

JP: Any response from the state?

LDB: Mr. Baez has already made his closing arguments your honor.

JP: uh…folks I don’t know what you’re saying, whether it’s true or false. The only thing I can say is if there’s evidence of false testimony, then you need to file the appropriate motions at the appropriate time and I will take a look at it and see whether or not it is proven to be false. But at this stage I can’t chase after arguments, so file the appropriate motion and we’ll cross that bridge when we get there. Anything else?

LDB: No sir

JB: No

JP: ok, let’s return the jury.


http://www.wftv.com/video/28440654/index.html


It would seem to me, the real question is did the DT file a motion, if so what was the outcome? Instead of accusing others of misconduct.

Wonder why Mason did not to know about this issue...since it was in open court? :waitasec:

Cheney Mason, one of Ms. Anthony’s defense lawyers, said it was “outrageous” that prosecutors withheld critical information on the “chloroform” searches.

“The prosecution is absolutely obligated to bring forth to the court any and all evidence that could be exculpatory,” Mr. Mason said. “If in fact this is true, and the prosecution concealed this new information, it is more than shame on them. It is outrageous.”

“This was a major part of their case,” Mr. Mason added.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/us/19casey.html

Bradley's blog said he notified LDB before rebuttal, so the above sounds about right. jmo