Spoliation Motion Sept 22, 2009 Includes Response

[RR0004]

From the article (my bold) "But Local 6 has obtained a report from the FBI laboratory that reveals all traces of such a shape on the duct tape were destroyed by the FBI lab during a fingerprint-testing process and no photograph of the outline of a heart was taken by the FBI before all traces of it were obliterated."

I don't believe it implies at all that the FBI destroyed anything but rather that the heart shaped adhesive outline was obliterated (inadvertently) during the fingerprinting process (if I am interpreting it correctly.)

ETA: Wondering if this is a case of a poor choice of words ("destroyed") i.e., not entirely accurate in describing what transpired.

Again...if it comes from the same document that MM posted earlier...I'd like to know where in there it states that. MM...do you think they're referring to a different doc?
In the past 24 hours I have heard so much misreporting that I'm ready to pull my hair out. Not just about this case...but others as well. These guys have a real hard time getting their facts straight and I'm finding that they are truly slanting the "news" to ultimately sell papers.

 

[mysteriew]

I think this is JB's strategy. And it has worked in some other cases. If he can convince the jury that the lab was enough in error, then he may be able to convince them that the lab is incompetent. If he does that then they could find any testing done by that lab as suspect.

However, JB may be jumping the gun. We don't know what the state is going to do. They may not bring up the testing. They may have other sources or testing done that shows the heart or it's remains. Or they might be hoping that they can convince the jury that the time the remains spent out in the weather made the evidence so fragile that in essence the weather destroyed it. And since this is so apparently true, I think JB will find it hard to convince the jury that this makes the lab incompetent.

 

[Oakley]

Again...if it comes from the same document that MM posted earlier...I'd like to know where in there it states that. MM...do you think they're referring to a different doc?
In the past 24 hours I have heard so much misreporting that I'm ready to pull my hair out. Not just about this case...but others as well. These guys have a real hard time getting their facts straight and I'm finding that they are truly slanting the "news" to ultimately sell papers.

Seems to me the word "destroyed" was not used in the handwritten FBI lab notes (far as I can tell.) Appears that was injected by the news agency. Hope that answers your question.

 

[Oakley]

I think I remember Dr. G's notes or statement about the adhesive of a heart shape of a sticker. If this is the case, I am sure she photographed that evidence. I am not stating this as fact, I will go look for a link, but my memory has something stored regarding that adhesive and Dr. G. Along with the CSI team that found the baby with duct tape on the front part of the skull holding the mandible in place, you would think they would photograph that from every angle and close up. After typing that the residue from a sticker is the least of the defenses problems again here starts the smoke and mirrors. This will be the beginning of the long list of slanderous conclusions by the defense and they are starting with the FBI, these folks have balls of Steele. This will be interesting in how far will they go and who will believe them in the deconstruction of the evidence. I am waiting to see how they will get around the 31 days.:crazy: All I can hope for is Justice for Caylee.

This is encouraging and makes sense now that I think about it. It is highly likely that Dr. G. and her team were first to examine the remains. I am fully confident that they were careful to thoroughly document the duct tape and the heart with photographs and verbiage.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Here's the second page of Muzikman's latest contribution: Appendix I from the Motion to Dismiss, titled FBI Laboratory Activity and Communication Log. First draft - Please let me know what to correct or fill in blanks. I made _____s where I had no idea what was handwritten and put (?) after words I was pretty sure about but not positive. This is only a loose transcription so don't use this to base any facts or theories on unless you go back to check the original document for yourselves: http://www.filedropper.com/fbilabcommlog
Hope it will be helpful.

12/16/08
Telcall from SA C. - Will have an agent picking up tibia/hair mass today - When will hair be available. Per TEU (?) (Shaw) - need until 12PM. Notified SA C. Email from SA C. - SA John "Brad" G, cell # _________ will be picking up _____. Flights into/out of Dulles today.

12/16/08
Per TEU (C___) Q60 read for pickup. Q65/Q66 - almost ready - checking on packaging of all tape since removed. Notified him - no ____ on Q65/Q66 - put Q66 in ____ for CU.

12/16/08
Email from SA C. - meeting at OCSO at 5PM to discuss what to send in. Asked for a list of items to be faxed to ____ for units to review - will advise on the 18th when back in the office.

12/16/08
Telcall with DMAI (S___) - DMAI would like to try to proc./soak the tape from skull after other units are done. Will check with CU - Sometimes they soak tape in chemicals to remove adhesive. Telcall with CU B. - was not soaked (Q62 - Q64) did use methanol on swab in a few places - can let DMAI know which areas swabbed. Will be done on Thursday - didn't need to soak. Telcall with DMAI - Will ____ up after CU - CU will let DMAI know areas swabbed by CU when tape from scene is submitted - will send it to ____/____/____.

12/17/08
Received fax copy of evidence listing. Copies provided to S, G, T, B, R, S. F will pick up copy in the morning. Per SA C, medical examiner was inquiring about tox exams on hair. Per S. (TEU) plenty of hair left in the hair mass received. Per M. M., she will be point of contact for inquiries for tox exams. Emailed C.M.'s cell #______ for either C. or medical examiner to contact M. concerning request.

12/17/08
Hair mass has been returned to TP (picked up yesterday). M will discuss with the medical examiner what samples, if any, should be submitted for tox. Notified M that S has photos of Q59 if she wants to see it.

12/17/08
Fax from C of rough sketch of lanes evidence was collected in. To be used in conjunction with evidence property forms faxed earlier if needed.

__________________

page 3 next. Need to break a bit.

 

[Muzikman]

Again...if it comes from the same document that MM posted earlier...I'd like to know where in there it states that. MM...do you think they're referring to a different doc?
In the past 24 hours I have heard so much misreporting that I'm ready to pull my hair out. Not just about this case...but others as well. These guys have a real hard time getting their facts straight and I'm finding that they are truly slanting the "news" to ultimately sell papers.

1st page, third paragraph (12/13/08), 3rd/4th line (looks like it was hilited):

"Per ??? (Fontane?) A heart-shaped outline was noted on tape, but unable to see it after powder process - no photo of image."


Is that what you're looking for RR? That's it verbatim (except for question marks, couldn't make those words out).

It does look like they took a little liberty with the actual wording...

 

[songline]

wftv link
Casey's attorney said it's not in her best interest to tell what she knows about where Caylee is.
"It does her no good to show her cards to give the prosecution any advantage they have to
put her away for life," Baez said.How's that workin' for ya'?

It has been a while since I have been on the KC case regularly, Still upset with Jaycee case.

I have question?
Based on this alone there is an admission of wrong doing here.
Based on wrong doing; What would give her the PRIVALEDGE not to go up on the stand?
is it the 5th Amendment?
With this much mounted up against her and with the writing on the wall that her entire family
is basically full of Chit, she can still plead the 5th????

Somebody please help me out here because our laws are baffling me?

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Here's the third/last page of Muzikman's latest contribution: Appendix I from the Motion to Dismiss, titled FBI Laboratory Activity and Communication Log. First draft - Please let me know what to correct or fill in blanks. I made _____s where I had no idea what was handwritten and put (?) after words I was pretty sure about but not positive. This is only a loose transcription so don't use this to base any facts or theories on unless you go back to check the original document for yourselves: http://www.filedropper.com/fbilabcommlog
Hope it will be helpful.

12/18/08
No specific items requested. DNAI would like canvas laundry bag(s); doesn't want other from scene unless truly believed to be related to this case. LP__ can work papers/bottles/plastic from scene (as needed) - Nothing really from residence - QDM (?) interested in pieces of plastic, plastic bags (black, white, diff. colored drawstrings); papers only if related to crime.

12/18/08
Email from CU B. - reports should be out 12/19. Q62-Q64 will then have to go to DNAI for swabbing. Q64/Q66 will then have to go to TEU for examples (?) of fabric reinforcements. Telcall from DMAI (P - biologist) - out 12/19 back on mon. 12/22 and 12/23 Tuesday. CU in Mon and Tues as well, so to DMAI on 12/22. TEU okay working items after 12/30.

12/18/08
Telcall with DMAI (S___) - she spoke with ERT C. (not agent C., SA) DMAI may balk at napkins from trash bag from vehicle. ECU needs to verify if specific napkins id'd with decomp - only submit those. TEU (S.) would look at those for decomp only.

12/18/08
Telcall from IA C. - picking up items from ME's office today. Need to go to OCSO as well. Asked if possible to submit all items needed just after new year - She'll have to call EU back - They may want to submit asap just to have it out of their staging area. Telcall from AI C. - Sticker found at scene - heart shape ~ size of man's finger nail - It is stuck to the back of a picture frame. ERT left it on frame and packaged it for latent preservation.

12/22/08
Called IA K.C. (ERT) to acknowledge case.

That's it folks. Please forgive the typos!

 

[Sdavidson11]

This is encouraging and makes sense now that I think about it. It is highly likely that Dr. G. and her team were first to examine the remains. I am fully confident that they were careful to thoroughly document the duct tape and the heart with photographs and verbiage.

I can't find the info from Dr. G yet. I am going to bed and will start again in the morning. I am sure that I remember Dr G saying that and she is so precise, I can't imagine her not taking a photo. Just need to find her info. I will be looking and it will be my mission. Justice for Caylee.

 

[christee]

Is this the only pg released from FBI report abt the sticker adhesive?

http://www.clickorlando.com/download/2009/0924/21103527.pdf

Seems to me the second the adhesive was found someone surely took pics before fingerprint testing
was done.

ETA-just found MM's filedropper link-thx MM!!!

 

[mitzi]

Resp snipped:



I pray to God he doesn't do that at the trial. When he does that smirking he not only looks juvenile, he also angers and alienates anyone who has ever been smirked at--and that's just about everyone, including me. Including jurrors.

ITA with you about Ashton's smirking during the trial...but then I also try to remember how eloquent he was at KC's original bond hearing. This man's got it "goin' on". I hope he gets a chance to do some cross-examination during the trial.

 

[mitzi]

Actually, I suggested that yesterday to the clerk I dealt with, and she said they were "in the process" of setting that up. She did not have a timetable though.

Then we could just sit at home and order'em up!

I do like actually going to the courthouse though, and running into people unexpectedly.

Anyone interesting? LOL! :dance:

 

[mitzi]

My former criminal psych prof, who was a lawyer AND a psychologist said, "NEVER smirk in the courtroom."

His tech was to wear a slightly rumpled suit, and look humble and a little confused.

He's rich. It worked. Juries all wanted to adopt him.

It's the Columbo theory. :crazy:

 

[mitzi]

I imagine they'd call that the "Matlock Effect". It's also very Columbo. Ah, gamesmanship!

Ah shoot!...I should have read ahead before posting. :innocent: Ya beat me to it!

 

[mitzi]

BBM
Perhaps if MM wears a clown suit and brings along a host of disheveled women they might believe that he is in fact with the JB Firm. He can present a handwritten note full of poor grammar just as evidence of employment.

Don't you mean "implorement"? hehe!:crazy:

 

[bananarama]

I think I remember Dr. G's notes or statement about the adhesive of a heart shape of a sticker. If this is the case, I am sure she photographed that evidence. I am not stating this as fact, I will go look for a link, but my memory has something stored regarding that adhesive and Dr. G. Along with the CSI team that found the baby with duct tape on the front part of the skull holding the mandible in place, you would think they would photograph that from every angle and close up. After typing that the residue from a sticker is the least of the defenses problems again here starts the smoke and mirrors. This will be the beginning of the long list of slanderous conclusions by the defense and they are starting with the FBI, these folks have balls of Steele. This will be interesting in how far will they go and who will believe them in the deconstruction of the evidence. I am waiting to see how they will get around the 31 days.:crazy: All I can hope for is Justice for Caylee.

Just re-read Dr. G's report. No mention of the heart sticker at all. Bummer.

 

[Muzikman]

Anyone interesting? LOL! :dance:

Mostly reporters.

 

[ZsaZsa]

wftv link
Casey's attorney said it's not in her best interest to tell what she knows about where Caylee is.
"It does her no good to show her cards to give the prosecution any advantage they have to
put her away for life," Baez said.How's that workin' for ya'?

It has been a while since I have been on the KC case regularly, Still upset with Jaycee case.

I have question?
Based on this alone there is an admission of wrong doing here.
Based on wrong doing; What would give her the PRIVALEDGE not to go up on the stand?
is it the 5th Amendment?
With this much mounted up against her and with the writing on the wall that her entire family
is basically full of Chit, she can still plead the 5th????

Somebody please help me out here because our laws are baffling me?

When this is all over we must make a compilation of all the 'Baez-isms' ...

 

[Jersey*Girl]

I think they're overcharging according to the Sunshine Law (says up to $1 a page for CERTIFIED copies, of which these aren't) but would probably need a lawyer to press the issue farther up the ladder.

I was in there one day and starting taking pix of docs with my camera and got yelled at, they were going to take my camera away. Then I pulled out my trusty iPhone, on which I have a copy of the Sunshine Law, and showed them where it said we were allowed to take photographic copies with a camera. :woohoo: They backed down.

A camera is good for a few pages, but if they don't turn out I have to go back and retake them.... the quality is not the best either.

Can't bring a copier in, but I've considered getting a portable wand doc scanner which I think would do the trick - but good ones are $200+ on Amazon.

Hey Muzikman! I haven't been on the Caylee threads in quite a long time. I just clicked on here & saw your post...thought I'd try to help with a suggestion. My son is only allowed to bring his Language Arts book home once a week. He takes a test on his weekly story every Friday. I was taking snapshots of the pages every Monday when he brought the book home & loading them onto the computer, then deleting the pics on Friday. Then I tried something different...which required so much less time and the "stills" turned out perfect! I started using the video option on my digital!

What about if you use the digital movie recorder on your camera when viewing these docs? You don't have to worry about the flash or over/under exposure, you can turn pages in one hand while holding the camera in the other, then load the "movie" onto your computer. Once you do that, you can take screen capture shots of the pages by just pausing & clicking on "shift/print screen", go into paintshop & press paste - would take alot less time than worrying about the fuzziness or over/under exposure. Plus, and this is a big plus, it would save a ton of memory on the card in your camera. Then you could zip the file or burn the pics to disc to save space - considering the amount of pics that would come from the video.

You've been such an incredible help with supplying all of this stuff. This is a mere suggestion...please don't rip me apart...only trying to help.

:blowkiss:
Jersey

 

[carrie]

There are definitely criminal cases regarding LE destroying evidence, etc. They may not use the word "spoliation" like the civil cases--probably they say "violation of due process." But in this case, I wholeheartedly agree that there is no way the normal processing of a crime scene would qualify as either spoliation of evidence or a violation of due process.

Thanks AZ for sharing your opinion on this. It's great to have some legal folks here on WS.