The Duct Tape Match #3

[trixi491]

The fingerprints were taken for the purpose of using them as elimination IF latents were found.

What I'm wondering though, wouldn't something have to have been found in order for them to be eliminated (which they were)? Don't they need a print to compare theirs to?

 

[Valhall]

Here's a youtube on how duct tape is made. It's 3M's factory, but I'm sure Henkel has the same process, maybe just different grades of materials.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUMjcqQL2EI&feature=PlayList&p=B7273E20156A9243&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=61"]YouTube - CoolStuffBeingMade.com: How Duct Tape Is Made[/ame]

If you watch the whole thing you see that the duct tape is manufactured in one continuous wide sheet, rolled on to the world's largest and widest duct tape roll and then the individual rolls are "unrolled" and "rerolled" onto smaller rolls from this gigantic roll.

Being an engineer, I'm going to tell you that a package of duct tape (i.e. a multi-pack) is going to be from the same lot. A manufacturer tends to avoid mixing lots into the same package for the purpose of traceability lest their product get blamed for some failure.

So, a multi-pack origination of two separate rolls in the Anthony home would most likely be from the same lot (and even close proximity in the manufacturing process). If there are multiple rolls, but not from a multi-pack, then they could be further down the production line of a production lot. This could lead to slight variations in the cloth as it unspools from that humongoid roll it comes on.

With the lower sales numbers of this type of duct tape, and the sheer volume that is created in one production lot, I find it hard to believe that buying two rolls from the same store would result in two separate lots.

 

[Dear Prudence]

What I'm wondering though, wouldn't something have to have been found in order for them to be eliminated (which they were)? Don't they need a print to compare theirs to?

I have never read a OCSO or FBI report where their prints were compared and eliminated to anything. It could be out there somewhere, but I just haven't seen it.

 

[ZsaZsa]

What I'm wondering though, wouldn't something have to have been found in order for them to be eliminated (which they were)? Don't they need a print to compare theirs to?

Good point, if you think they compared them to Casey's....
AS far as we know they did not find any prints- so nothing to compare with.
That's what I am waiting for because at this point it feels unfinished, I think there is more coming. (hoping anyway).

 

[trixi491]

Good point, if you think they compared them to Casey's....
AS far as we know they did not find any prints- so nothing to compare with.
That's what I am waiting for because at this point it feels unfinished, I think there is more coming. (hoping anyway).

That's what I was debating, on how to read the "elimination prints" as (did they eliminate them or not?). However, I recently read Blink's newest article and she seemed to understand they were eliminated. I know she's been on top of a lot so I'm still very unsure as to how to take it!

 

[ZsaZsa]

I read that as saying they have their prints on record in order to be able to eliminate them from any that are found.
They state they did not find any prints of GA/CA/LA on the tape so they are eliminated.

 

[whisperOFwings]

Here's a youtube on how duct tape is made. It's 3M's factory, but I'm sure Henkel has the same process, maybe just different grades of materials.

snipped for space by me.
Thanks Val, I love field trips.
Very interesting video.

 

[MD MOMMY]

I have never read a OCSO or FBI report where their prints were compared and eliminated to anything. It could be out there somewhere, but I just haven't seen it.

This is where my confusion lies..what is LKB talking about here? I also posted this in the questions area but it's getting lost there.

We haven't seen anything from the State about prints in the docs or am I missing something??? How is she referencing prints? How does she know they have them? OR are there some docs that aren't getting passed on to the public?

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFile... et al.PDF

Page 21 of 91 of the “Renewed Motion to Compel Bench Note..”

Section 19 a Ms. LKB is asking for specific latent print information on 18 prints and 8 areas of prints.

ETA..the link is not working now I'll see if I can find another one.

 

[Dear Prudence]

This is where my confusion lies..what is LKB talking about here? I also posted this in the questions area but it's getting lost there.

We haven't seen anything from the State about prints in the docs or am I missing something??? How is she referencing prints? How does she know they have them? OR are there some docs that aren't getting passed on to the public?

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFile... et al.PDF

Page 21 of 91 of the “Renewed Motion to Compel Bench Note..”

Section 19 a Ms. LKB is asking for specific latent print information on 18 prints and 8 areas of prints.

LKB requested these of the FBI and they said they never received any latent lifts. So, if these prints exist that she's asking for, it would be OCSO that has them, right? Maybe when Jose and Dr. Lee were allowed to examine the car they learned of them then. I really don't know - just taking a SWAG. Maybe I'll go look through old doc dumps later because I'm curious now.

 

[Valhall]

LKB requested these of the FBI and they said they never received any latent lifts. So, if these prints exist that she's asking for, it would be OCSO that has them, right? Maybe when Jose and Dr. Lee were allowed to examine the car they learned of them then. I really don't know - just taking a SWAG. Maybe I'll go look through old doc dumps later because I'm curious now.

It's actually not confusing at all. LKB requested from the FBI all latent lifts. The FBI did not receive any latent lifts from OCSO, therefore they replied "we received no latent lifts in this case". Remember, a latent lift is a powder-developed lift that's literally and physically pulled from an object. So when LKB asked for all latent lifts she was referring to that type of fingerprint evidence. OCSO didn't send any (because they had no need to, even if they did have them) and none of the objects the FBI were sent had any LATENT lifts. That doesn't mean they didn't have fingerprints, it means they had no prints that could be physically "lifted" with a powder procedure.

 

[Pink Panther]

These "sunshine laws" that are supposed to lay bare information that is normally hidden certainly don't seem to be accomplishing their objective, are they??? In fact, it seems, that already there are many "work-arounds" to play on what is fact and fiction in the hand over of "evidence". Embarassing and stoopid to say the least. What's the point again?

MOO

 

[Dear Prudence]

It's actually not confusing at all. LKB requested from the FBI all latent lifts. The FBI did not receive any latent lifts from OCSO, therefore they replied "we received no latent lifts in this case". Remember, a latent lift is a powder-developed lift that's literally and physically pulled from an object. So when LKB asked for all latent lifts she was referring to that type of fingerprint evidence. OCSO didn't send any (because they had no need to, even if they did have them) and none of the objects the FBI were sent had any LATENT lifts. That doesn't mean they didn't have fingerprints, it means they had no prints that could be physically "lifted" with a powder procedure.

Right, but I think what some people are questioning is how LKB knew to ask specifically for 18 latent lifts taken from 8 areas. Have we seen discovery released about these prints or is the defense privy to information that the public is not?

 

[MD MOMMY]

Right, but I think what some people are questioning is how LKB knew to ask specifically for 18 latent lifts taken from 8 areas. Have we seen discovery released about these prints or is the defense privy to information that the public is not?

EXACTLY! She asked specifics. It wasn't a "show me whatcha got" type deal. I've just never personally seen the 18 latent lifts or the 8 areas mentioned by the state in any of the documents. So...if someone could show or tell me where they came from(State docs) I would be eternally grateful.

 

[Valhall]

Very good point. I totally missed the specificity of her request. I know there were some latents lifted from BB's shovel, but they were deemed of no value. You're right, we don't know of any others.

 

[Valhall]

Okay, I found where the "18 latent lifts" that LKB was requesting from the FBI came from.

Go to pages 18-19 of this pdf:

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFile... reports.pdf

There were exactly 18 latent lifts developed from items at the Anthony home. That's the 18 LKB asked for. I can't find anywhere that they were forwarded to the FBI, so that's why the FBI stated they were provided none in this case.

 

[JWG]

Okay, I found where the "18 latent lifts" that LKB was requesting from the FBI came from.

Go to pages 18-19 of this pdf:

http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFile... reports.pdf

There were exactly 18 latent lifts developed from items at the Anthony home. That's the 18 LKB asked for. I can't find anywhere that they were forwarded to the FBI, so that's why the FBI stated they were provided none in this case.

The items that were processed for prints were ones that Cindy had been told by KC were ones that originated from ZFG. That is why those specific items were processed. Here is the document I extracted back in January:

View attachment Fingerprints.pdf

A later report that was released was a little confusing, but it seems to implicate no one but KC:

View attachment LatentPrintReport.pdf

 

[Valhall]

The items that were processed for prints were ones that Cindy had been told by KC were ones that originated from ZFG. That is why those specific items were processed. Here is the document I extracted back in January:

View attachment 5409

A later report that was released was a little confusing, but it seems to implicate no one but KC:

View attachment 5408

Well, see, there you go. They've got Zanny's prints, so what's the point?

/sarcasm off

 

[QB.]

Right, but I think what some people are questioning is how LKB knew to ask specifically for 18 latent lifts taken from 8 areas. Have we seen discovery released about these prints or is the defense privy to information that the public is not?

There are 2 motions that ask for this fingerprint information.
The earlier motion was filed by JB January 28/09
http://www.wftv.com/news/18594108/detail.html
page 4 specifically asks for fingerprint info as outlined on discovery pages 3173, and the 18 lifts from page 3233, and the 8 areas of lifts from page 3234, and the fragment lift from the exterior of the trunk on page 3194.

The later motion was filed by LKB in August, I believe.

I checked the Feb doc dump and , just going on memory here at the moment, there is a gap leaving these pages out.

 

[wenwe4]

Here is the link for the duct tape pics released on 10/9/09

http://www.wftv.com/slideshow/news/21249759/detail.html

**does it appear to anyone else that the left side of the piece of tape on pic 13 of 18 that is an upside down impression of Caylee's ear?*** (sorry to be morbid)

 

[Snaz]

If we are viewing the tape from the fabric side, why is the writing backwards? Aren't the pieces we saw on the posters and gas can from the fabric side as well? And that writing is forward.....