Who do you believe? Dr. G or Dr. S?

[LongtimeMedic]

In order to believe that scenario, one must agree with Dr. Spitz that some unknown person picked up this skull, wrapped duct tape on it's mouth, then jammed a sticker through the eye socket far enough that the ME would miss it during examination, oh and certainly they put the hole up to the sunlight to check closely that for sure the sticker couldn't be seen?:waitasec:
Should have been:
"Whose forensic exam defies logic"

You are aware you can't put your finger through an eyesocket into the skull aren't you?

 

[USARDOG]

The "sediment" was from two different areas inside the cranium. Some on the inside of the cap, and some in the crevices of the cribriform plate... which in order to see, you must open the top of the skull. My point... and Dr S's.

It would then seem Caylee's skull was in several positions for differing periods of time as the cribiform plate in in the caudal aspect of the crainium and not "on the L side" (or R side) at all. This sediment also might have been displaced by the washing Dr G did.

<modsnip> if you have ANY evidense of any other person helping in killing Caylee or disposing of her remains I'd appreciat it if you would show it.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

Both DT and SA experts opined that Caylee's body was placed where it was found shortly after death and remained there. That makes sense, as well. Dr. Spitz' theory that someone --after decomp-came and put duct tape around the jaw so they could move it is absolutely preposterous. And claiming that someone in the ME office staged a pix made him look even more like an *advertiser censored*. JMHO.

 

[SoCalSleuth]

PS. If one were to believe Dr. Spitz' theory that would mean one would have to believe that whoever moved the body knew that the jaw would fall off when the skull was lifted, wanted for whatever reason to keep the jaw with the skull, and just happened to have rare duct tape on their person at the time. Seriously, what a joke.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Well, I think LongtimeMedic has a point that perhaps evidence was lost when Dr G rinsed Caylee's skull. I'm not an ME or a doctor, so I really haven't a clue about this kind of stuff, however, I can't imagine someone like Dr G screwing up that badly. I must admit it's possible; she's fallible. And it's my understanding from discussing this with a friend of mine, that Dr G not removing the top of Caylee's cranial cap is a minor thing and not a big deal, insofar as protocol goes.

Missed evidence of what exactly? This was a skeletal skull...no brain inside of it, no soft tissue outside of it? How much evidence could have been left TO miss? Sediment? Even if that sediment were brain matter, it still proves nothing. This skull, by the very nature of where it was dumped, was probably moved from where it was originally dumped by either flooding or animal activity. So what exactly is this sediment supposed to prove?

 

[Hot Dogs]

OK - once again I'm left wondering what the significance is to Dr S's testimony (what the defense thought they were gaining). All I can see is the Dr. S claims the body decomposed while the skull lay on it's left side. So? Maybe it did and was disturbed by animals or flooding (the most likely and reasonable senario). Maybe it was moved around by people. What does that have to do with THIS TRIAL??? This trial is about determining if Casey killed that baby. If they want to go after Kronk for their cockamamy theory, go after HIM in another trial for desicration of a body and bring Dr. S back for his proffering then.
I don't think he brought anything else to this trial.

BBM. You have to understand how defense strategy works. They are going after reasonable doubt. They go at it in a variety of ways. They invoke evidence tampering, crime scene manipulation, botched or incomplete medical exams, multiple explanations for cause of death, etc.

What it has to do with this trial is that if you can get jurors doubting that the state has everything correct you can move things towards your favor. This is how criminal trials work.

 

[BritsKate]

JWG is a long time member here who has sleuthed the heck out of this case and a contributor to Val's site:
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2011/0...ase-a-defense-pathologist-spitz-out-a-report/

 

[gamom]

The deal is, the skull was, according to the State, sitting in the same spot, upright the entire six months, because they say the roots prove that to be fact. Well if that's fact, how does sediment inside the skull come to rest on the upper left inside of the skull?? was it hovering until it dried there?

That may have been a bombshell, had he of had some real fact to go with his theory. But he did not advance the DT theory at all. He did not prove the body was laying on left side at any point. He can't prove that the dust found in the skull was decomposed brain matter because he did not test it or the test came back negative. So his whole theory went "POOF" out the window, just like the human brain does apparently in the act of decomposition.

 

[mydailyopinions]

It would then seem Caylee's skull was in several positions for differing periods of time as the cribiform plate in in the caudal aspect of the crainium and not "on the L side" (or R side) at all. This sediment also might have been displaced by the washing Dr G did.

<modsnip> if you have ANY evidense of any other person helping in killing Caylee or disposing of her remains I'd appreciat it if you would show it.

Or please consult with the defense team, they can't pin it on anybody but Casey, logically.

 

[LongtimeMedic]

From my understanding he did not prepare an autopsy report. For several months until he was required to submit a report in order to testify. Now come on. How do you not prepare an autopsy report when you are a forensic pathologist. If the State had played the same game of finger pointing they could have really impeached him on his testimony leaving the lingering thoughts in the minds of the jurors that he waited to be told what his report should say.

I'm not saying that is what happened. But this man so critical of the ME and he doesn't prepare a detailed autopsy right after he performed it taking notes as he goes. Medic you know that isn't how things work in the medical profession. It just isn't the same as preparing a court ordered report several months later.

His written report was to who hired him... Baez. He had no jurisdiction to file an autopsy report with or any obligation to. As to whether he took or recorded notes, we never heard any of that asked by either side in court. But, yes, he did file a report in March.

 

[katydid23]

The deal is, the skull was, according to the State, sitting in the same spot, upright the entire six months, because they say the roots prove that to be fact. Well if that's fact, how does sediment inside the skull come to rest on the upper left inside of the skull?? was it hovering until it dried there?

The first 2 to 5 days this child was decomposing in a fetal position in a hot, humid trunk. She could have had a buildup of some kind begin at that time.

Also, the Hurricane blew through there at some point. Anything could have crawled in there or been lodged in there during that time. And the roots did in fact tie the skull in an 'upright' position, but it may have been tilted slightly off center, enabling sediment to settle on one side.

But again, who cares? The roots do show that the skull was sitting there for 6 months, imo. Dr. S said nothing with any credibility to make me believe differently. His little theory about the duct tape being put on to the skeleton and possibly moved and returned---how does he get THAT from a little silt in the cranium?
Answer, he doesn't. He gets that from Baez's notes, reminding him what he discovered in his 2nd autopsy. imoo

 

[Kelroy]

I hear you and can see you point to an extent. But if I had to answer who's exam was more thorough, I would still say Dr. G because at least she ran tests. Dr. S did not run any tests, even on things that he found?? How is that thourough? I find that very faulty and careless. Yes, he sawed the skull, but just because you crack a few extra bones, that does not mean you are more thorough.

I agree. It sounds to me like he opened the skull, observed some sediment, and that was it. He couldn't send the sediment to a lab because he's "not a chemist" and "didn't have any help." He didn't run any other tests. I just can't call that thorough.

And then, of course, he flat-out said he's "been outside the mainstream of forensics for some time." And he cited protocol as a reason for opening the skull, but can't remember where the protocol is cited or if it even exists. He couldn't remember what he said in an interview because he fell asleep before he could watch it on TV--an interview he gave just this week. I don't understand how anyone could call anything he said credible, with all due respect.

Let me again add my usual disclaimer: I'm uncomfortable with making fun of/wanting to discredit witnesses simply because they're defense witnesses; I have the utmost respect for defense attorneys; I don't, personally, feel that the state has proven first-degree murder yet. I totally agree that Dr. G is fallible, and as I've said, I had issues with a couple things she said on the stand. Even with all those caveats, I still think Spitz's testimony was embarrassing and, based on that testimony, I feel he is in no position to determine what is and is not "shoddy" work.

 

[USARDOG]

You are aware you can't put your finger through an eyesocket into the skull aren't you?

I am under the impression that the eyesocket is part of the skull. In addition, unless the optic nerve were still in place, and it isn't/wasn't, it would be very easy to see through the eye socked into the crainial vault.

 

[mydailyopinions]

You are aware you can't put your finger through an eyesocket into the skull aren't you?

Sure am, the same way I am aware that unless you are an EXPERT, you cannot properly fit a mandible back to a skull after decomposition, especially with duct tape.

 

[D96s]

BBM. You have to understand how defense strategy works. They are going after reasonable doubt. They go at it in a variety of ways. They invoke evidence tampering, crime scene manipulation, botched or incomplete medical exams, multiple explanations for cause of death, etc.

What it has to do with this trial is that if you can get jurors doubting that the state has everything correct you can move things towards your favor. This is how criminal trials work.

OK - Then the "disturbed" skull is more reasonably explained by the fact that it lay there for six months in an area that is know to have animal activity and flooding. How is it so hard to reason that the body did decompose with the head laying to the left and was then disturbed by animal activity or flooding (skull floated up in the floods and settled in another position). The whole argument he brought about the head laying to the left during decomp is just moot

 

[grandmaj]

Picture this. The smell of decomp in the car so bad that it still smells 3 years later.

You have a wet canvas bag, you have two eroded garbage bags and bones scattered from critters. Now what is left in one area is a hair matte and skull and some bones. Whooooooo who in their right mind would want to go suffering the most ghastly sight, be able to pick up that tiny skull with the hair all a tangled mess, and then apply duct tape to put the mandible back on the body. I mean this is against all civilized behavior as I know it. It would be unbearable to do it with Caylee still intact. But after decomp?

For the life of me, there is absolutely no good excuse or reason to do that. NO way!

He didn't even know how long the lengths of duct tape were, had no dr.s notes. Yet his theory is someone took that skull and taped it after she decomposed. No explanation, no theory just this was some weird thing someone did.

It makes no sense.

 

[Turnadot]

Missed evidence of what exactly? This was a skeletal skull...no brain inside of it, no soft tissue outside of it? How much evidence could have been left TO miss? Sediment? Even if that sediment were brain matter, it still proves nothing. This skull, by the very nature of where it was dumped, probably moved from where it was originally dumped by either flooding or animal activity. So what exactly is this sediment supposed to prove?

I haven't got a clue, lol. I think the defense was trying to show that if Caylee's skull was found upright on the ground, then how did the sediment stay in the upper left.

IIRC, in Melich's report, he stated the skull had been in the position it was found in for some time.

 

[Jolynna]

What bothered me about Dr G's testimony is that she said that there is no reason for the duct tape to be applied postmortem. While I respect that she is an expert, this is speculation on her part. If it were a FACT that there was no reason to apply the duct tape postmortem, and antemortem placement would have killed her, why is it not listed as COD?

BBM

Because it is true that there is no reason to apply duct tape postmortem AND it is also true that something else could have killed Caylee.

If chloroform was used to knock Caylee out and duct tape applied over Caylee's airways and Caylee was bagged and then thrown into the Pontiac trunk, who is to say which weapon was the ultimate cause of death?

Chloroform, tape over every airway, double bagging, a hot car trunk--a child wouldn't survive any of those. There is no benign reason for those items for a child that is living OR dead.

Combine that with hiding the body in a swamp, lying about the where the child is for 31 days and a car trunk reeking of decomposition.

It would have been irresponsible for Dr. G to declare the means of death as anything other than homicide.

I voted for Dr. G.

 

[grandmaj]

His written report was to who hired him... Baez. He had no jurisdiction to file an autopsy report with or any obligation to. As to whether he took or recorded notes, we never heard any of that asked by either side in court. But, yes, he did file a report in March.

So when Baez was asked by the court to share discovery oops I don't have a autopsy report is that how it works?

That isn't how medical professionals work and Baez had an obligation to share any report he received. So if he received one he didn't share it. And the State of FLA paid the bill.

 

[susan1122]

It really struck me that he had no notes to refer to. I think all the other experts or examiners had notes to refer back to. He just had no clue. It was really bizarre. It really sounded like he got a lot of his information from the defense team. Shouldn't have the DT noticed this during their discussions with him that he had no notes and couldn't answer questions?

This is a really good point, which makes me feel that Dr. S is very arrogant. He is so respected and distinguished that everyone just better take his word for it - especially the prosecution. His whole duct tape theory was ridiculous. I do not know if Dr. G should have split Caylee's skull or not. But Dr. S should have remembered if he broke it or not.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/en...hony-dr-werner-spitz-takes-some-big-hits.html