What Would You Ask Ashton?***OPEN FOR DISCUSSION - POST INTERVIEW***
- Thread starter ynotdivein
- Start date
atthelake
Former Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2011
- Messages
- 9,979
- Reaction score
- 25
Tricia - I do know that tomorrow - Sunday night - will be professional and representative of Websleuths with Jeff on and your support folks ( :wave
will screen out some folks who may be ........well........not supportive and/or representative of WS.
Tricia - I am so very much looking forward to it!
will screen out some folks who may be ........well........not supportive and/or representative of WS. Tricia - I am so very much looking forward to it!
thedeviledadvocate
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 1
The media claimed JB's opening statement was trial changing and jaw dropping, yet as JB was presenting it, Mr. Ashton looked amused.
My question is, was JB's opening statement the equivalent of a giant sucker punch at the start of the fight, or was it completely expected by the prosecution and simply par for the course?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, why did the state decide not to have the further testing done on the adipocere like substance that would have proven if the substance was indeed adipocere?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, why is it policy for CSI's at the CSI lab to destroy their bench notes as Mr. Bloise did? Also, why do they place items in a drying room if this potentially alters evidence?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, what explains the lack of DNA and decomp fluids in the trunk of the car? Why was the alleged decomp stain barely visible instead of being very dark as is the case with most decomp stains? What is a reasonable explanation for how extremely high levels of chloroform could exist in the trunk of the car. If the answer to this is unknown, then why did the state introduce evidence into the trial that they had no idea what it means and could not explain how it got there?
Why didn't the state present some kind of timeline as to when Caylee's death occurred, and why didn't the state present any kind of idea as to where Caylee's death occurred?
My question is, was JB's opening statement the equivalent of a giant sucker punch at the start of the fight, or was it completely expected by the prosecution and simply par for the course?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, why did the state decide not to have the further testing done on the adipocere like substance that would have proven if the substance was indeed adipocere?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, why is it policy for CSI's at the CSI lab to destroy their bench notes as Mr. Bloise did? Also, why do they place items in a drying room if this potentially alters evidence?
As a trial forensic expert Mr. Ashton, what explains the lack of DNA and decomp fluids in the trunk of the car? Why was the alleged decomp stain barely visible instead of being very dark as is the case with most decomp stains? What is a reasonable explanation for how extremely high levels of chloroform could exist in the trunk of the car. If the answer to this is unknown, then why did the state introduce evidence into the trial that they had no idea what it means and could not explain how it got there?
Why didn't the state present some kind of timeline as to when Caylee's death occurred, and why didn't the state present any kind of idea as to where Caylee's death occurred?
Intermezzo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 10,623
- Reaction score
- 1,679
Was did the prosecution not close with the passionate statement given during the DP hearing..
Was Caylee chemically and/or physically restrained while duct tape was being applied and did she look into her killers eyes...etc..?
http://www.wesh.com/video/21931324/detail.html VIDEO
http://www.wesh.com/news/21924382/detail.html
Caylee was almost three when she died, with duct tape over her nose and her mouth. Any child of that age should have had the physical ability to remove the duct tape covering her airway and preventing her from breathing. And the evidence in this case would indicate that Caylee was, if not average, above average in that regard.
A juror might conclude, then, that she must have been restrained, either chemically or physically.
If chemically restrained, her killer prepared some substance in advance that would render her physically unable to resist, administered the substance, awaited its effect, and then methodically applied three pieces of duct tape to completely cut off the flow of air to her mouth or her nose and let nature take its course. At least, Caylee wouldn't have had any fear.
How would jurors apply those facts to the law the court would give them?
If she was physically restrained, her killer would have had to restrain her arms by some means, applying tape while she was conscious. As the killer looked into her face, maybe her killer even saw her eyes as the tape was applied, first one piece, then two, then three, so that no breath was possible. Could Caylee have understood what was happening to her? Did she try to resist? Could her killer see the fear in her eyes as the tape was applied?
These are questions only the jurors will be able to answer in this case.
Was Caylee chemically and/or physically restrained while duct tape was being applied and did she look into her killers eyes...etc..?
http://www.wesh.com/video/21931324/detail.html VIDEO
http://www.wesh.com/news/21924382/detail.html
Caylee was almost three when she died, with duct tape over her nose and her mouth. Any child of that age should have had the physical ability to remove the duct tape covering her airway and preventing her from breathing. And the evidence in this case would indicate that Caylee was, if not average, above average in that regard.
A juror might conclude, then, that she must have been restrained, either chemically or physically.
If chemically restrained, her killer prepared some substance in advance that would render her physically unable to resist, administered the substance, awaited its effect, and then methodically applied three pieces of duct tape to completely cut off the flow of air to her mouth or her nose and let nature take its course. At least, Caylee wouldn't have had any fear.
How would jurors apply those facts to the law the court would give them?
If she was physically restrained, her killer would have had to restrain her arms by some means, applying tape while she was conscious. As the killer looked into her face, maybe her killer even saw her eyes as the tape was applied, first one piece, then two, then three, so that no breath was possible. Could Caylee have understood what was happening to her? Did she try to resist? Could her killer see the fear in her eyes as the tape was applied?
These are questions only the jurors will be able to answer in this case.
vlpate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,113
- Reaction score
- 2,935
Tricia - I do know that tomorrow - Sunday night - will be professional and representative of Websleuths with Jeff on and your support folks ( :wave
Tricia - I am so very much looking forward to it!
It will definitely be interesting to see who shows up in chat. Looking forward to the show. Maybe Jose will call in
zippitydoda
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 2,186
- Reaction score
- 207
Please tell us about what transpired that set off Casey's furious faced explosion at Jose Baez... It happened on June 24th - I believe that Cindy Anthony was on the stand talking about the baby shower - Baez tried to enter a photo, to which Linda Drane Burdick objected. Right after the side bar ended, Jose Baez had his back to Casey, and she went nuts - snarling her her teeth and pointing at him. The Jury was not present.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WmWhzFLgyM"]Casey Anthony angry wants to kill Jose Baez on June 24th - YouTube[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WmWhzFLgyM"]Casey Anthony angry wants to kill Jose Baez on June 24th - YouTube[/ame]
Question for Jeff Ashton:
1. What is your theory about how Roy Kronk came upon Caylee's remains? I don't believe it just happened by chance. I believe he had inside information. Do you and, if so, from whom? Do you believe that, as Leonard Padilla has stated, that a person at the jail overheard Casey telling Jose where the body was and tipped off Roy Kronk about the location?
Also, any other thoughts about Roy Kronk would be appreciated. IMO his involvement and testimony complicated (in a negative way) this case. He had to have inside info, but who and what was his connection???
2. Why, in your opinion, did Judge Perry let Jose Baez get away with so much in this case? At one point he told Baez "I will rule on this at the end of the trial" (forgot the issue, but it was some sort of misconduct, like when Jose kept blindsiding the prosecution with surprise witnesses). Why did Judge Perry allow this behavior and never address it to find Baez in contempt with sanctions??? I believe his failure to address this in the court ended up giving Baez credibility that was undeserved and tainted the jury in a favorable way. And why was Jose allowed to make up fiction and present it to the jury? I understand that Perry did not want to be overturned on appeal and gave Baez latitude, but IMO that latitude was far too much and it was out of line on Perry's part to allow this.
1. What is your theory about how Roy Kronk came upon Caylee's remains? I don't believe it just happened by chance. I believe he had inside information. Do you and, if so, from whom? Do you believe that, as Leonard Padilla has stated, that a person at the jail overheard Casey telling Jose where the body was and tipped off Roy Kronk about the location?
Also, any other thoughts about Roy Kronk would be appreciated. IMO his involvement and testimony complicated (in a negative way) this case. He had to have inside info, but who and what was his connection???
2. Why, in your opinion, did Judge Perry let Jose Baez get away with so much in this case? At one point he told Baez "I will rule on this at the end of the trial" (forgot the issue, but it was some sort of misconduct, like when Jose kept blindsiding the prosecution with surprise witnesses). Why did Judge Perry allow this behavior and never address it to find Baez in contempt with sanctions??? I believe his failure to address this in the court ended up giving Baez credibility that was undeserved and tainted the jury in a favorable way. And why was Jose allowed to make up fiction and present it to the jury? I understand that Perry did not want to be overturned on appeal and gave Baez latitude, but IMO that latitude was far too much and it was out of line on Perry's part to allow this.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Messages
- 29,844
- Reaction score
- 47,976
I have opened the chat room for the radio show early. Here is the link if you would like to join us.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/flashchat/chat.aspx?HostUserURL=websleuths
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/flashchat/chat.aspx?HostUserURL=websleuths
vlpate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,113
- Reaction score
- 2,935
Good job tonight RR0004! I think Jeff did a great job and was honest, even when it wasn't popular for him to be. :rocker:
Well Done 99
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2011
- Messages
- 1,180
- Reaction score
- 2
Truthwillsetufree
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2008
- Messages
- 5,829
- Reaction score
- 2
Good job, good questions...very proud of all the WSers!
Well Done 99
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2011
- Messages
- 1,180
- Reaction score
- 2
Mods, will this now become a discussion thread to allow post-interview comment on Mr Ashton's replies?
logicalgirl
Peace Hawk
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 16,024
- Reaction score
- 2
RR0004
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 19,987
- Reaction score
- -26
I'm blushing...you guys are waaaaay too kind. I wish we had more time. I would have liked for Jeff to answer all the questions on the thread...well almost...lol...KWIM?
Zippy's question above is a doozy.
Well Done 99
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2011
- Messages
- 1,180
- Reaction score
- 2
I wouldn't be blushing RR, I'd be very proud of myself if I were you. You were awesome and sounded fantastic. Your efforts are very much appreciated.
You know, the more I look at Zippy's video, the more I think the snarl is directed at LDB rather than at JB (and JB turns to calm her or something).
There is a split-second moment, also, when she realizes what she's done. Maybe she is capable of feeling guilt after all lol.