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

[grandmaj]

OK when moderating I generally put my ears on but don't always watch the actual testimony.

I have to say I want to cry for Dr. S getting himself involved in this case. As I'm finally watching and not just listening it is sad to see him struggle with words and struggle to make reasons to fit his theory. Or the State's theory.

Ending with him accusing the State of putting hair on the skull. It makes me really sad for him.

 

[Donjeta]

This could be a stupid question:

How do we know that the brown residue was where it was because Caylee had decomposed on her left side and not because the skull dried on its left side after Dr. G had rinsed it with saline? Some of the liquid might have settled there.

 

[mimmy03]

I wonder why the DT didn't rehearse/prepare him better?

Maybe they did rehearse/prepare him and given his decline this is the best he could do. I'm not trying to bash the elderly, but senility is just a fact of life.

 

[Just Jayla]

This could be a stupid question:

How do we know that the brown residue was where it was because Caylee had decomposed on her left side and not because the skull dried on its left side after Dr. G had rinsed it with saline? Some of the liquid might have settled there.

That's why Dr. G is bound to return to the stand.

 

[Donjeta]

Anyway, talking about shoddy, IMO not filing a report until ordered by court more than two years later is shoddy.

Not testing critical evidence is shoddy.

Breaking the skull is shoddy.

And how thorough was his skull examination anyway if he didn't see it was broken?

Maybe he just forgot about the fracture since it was two years until the report?

 

[katydid23]

Here's your link to Autopsy Standards (standards/protocols are often interchangeable, particularly for someone that speaks multiple languages) according to N.A.M.E. or "The National Association of Medical Examiners" an organization that Dr. G. belongs to. Referring to page 13, Section F, Standard 21 which begins:

"Because some findings are only ascertained by in situ inspection, the scalp and cranial contents must be examined before and after the removal of the brain so as to identify signs of disease, injury, and therapy"

Standard/Protocol, call it what ya want, but it wasn't done.

http://thename.org/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=18&Itemid=71

That protocol is discussing autopsies in which there is a brain and soft tissue present. The situation we are discussing involves a skull, a detached skull with NO brain, no soft tissue present. I think those a very different situations.

 

[matou]

Where on this image is the staining supposed to be? Here is the link if anyone would like to place a marker on it and repost. TIA.

http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=...a=X&ei=2sX-TYXCDY2s0AGW9MCVAw&ved=0CCMQ9QEwAQ

 

[katydid23]

So you think that KC went back in the woods later and put the tape on the skull? I can't imagine she would do that but it makes more sense to me now that the duct tape had to be put on later. I just don't know how long it would take for the body to be fully decomposed and skeletonized for the duct tape to stay attached to the skull?

Why does it make more sense the tape would be put on later? Because there was no skin residue? I am not sure what convinced you of that.

 

[RANCH]

CM showed a large picture to the jury, up close of the skull after it was open, with Spitz showing them the stain he was describing? Did you miss that?

http://www.wftv.com/video/28281980/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Day 33 In Casey Anthony Murder Trial Pt. 4 @ 06:49 through about 12:40.

As for sending it to the lab, ding for the defense. Why didn't Dr G send it? It's her case... right?

I thought that Dr G did send samples to the lab.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

There is a reason Dr. S could not even remember how to put his pet skull back together.

None of his testimony should be believed. Something is wrong inside of his skull.

 

[LongtimeMedic]

Where on this image is the staining supposed to be? Here is the link if anyone would like to place a marker on it and repost. TIA.

The image you posted is not the trial photo, for anyone to place a mark on the area Dr. Spitz was describing, that would be a post for a Verified Poster with knowledge of anatomy and physiology.

 

[Donjeta]

It's not the burden of the defense to solve the States case, not to show "proof" of anything except their client didn't do what the State says she did. That is the States job! To point to anything that provides reasonable doubt to the jury, that is the defenses job.

Besides that, unless an officer of the court were present at the second autopsy, it means nothing investigatively for the State, and any samples obtained by the defense, would be discarded by the State as soon as they got it. If you're looking to complain, complain to the State and ask "Why didn't you see or mention that??? that could be the one thread that unravels the entire case if it breaks!!!" Demand from the State, not the Defense.

He just failed to make his point there, or Mason did. If I was sitting on the jury I'd have no idea why they think that the skull decomposing on its left side versus any other side means that their client didn't do it.

 

[seekingjustice**]

OK when moderating I generally put my ears on but don't always watch the actual testimony.

I have to say I want to cry for Dr. S getting himself involved in this case. As I'm finally watching and not just listening it is sad to see him struggle with words and struggle to make reasons to fit his theory. Or the State's theory.

Ending with him accusing the State of putting hair on the skull. It makes me really sad for him.

grandmaj, there were a few times while I was watching and listening to him at the beginning of his testimony, that I felt a tinge of sadness for him. But then I thought of Caylee and I could see and hear that she didn't mean a thing to him, nothing at all, he was simply there, not for justice but to do his job for money.

 

[matou]

The image you posted is not the trial photo, for anyone to place a mark on the area Dr. Spitz was describing, that would be a post for a Verified Poster with knowledge of anatomy and physiology.

I know it's not Caylee's skull. Where is the area that the staining is supposed to be located? Someone stated behind the left interior auditory meatus but I don't have the link. General location is what I'm interested in TY.

 

[LCoastMom]

For all we know, the DT did prep him before his testimony. Given his demeanor, can you imagine a meeting between Dr.Spitz and Baez with Baez trying to "school" him on how to give his testimony. My mental impression of how that would go is not very well. :floorlaugh:

Welcome Talina! Excellent first post! :dance:

:wagon:

 

[GeekyGirl]

This could be a stupid question:

How do we know that the brown residue was where it was because Caylee had decomposed on her left side and not because the skull dried on its left side after Dr. G had rinsed it with saline? Some of the liquid might have settled there.

I don't think that's a stupid question, I know I was wondering the same thing.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

The image you posted is not the trial photo, for anyone to place a mark on the area Dr. Spitz was describing, that would be a post for a Verified Poster with knowledge of anatomy and physiology.

:great:

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

CM showed a large picture to the jury, up close of the skull after it was open, with Spitz showing them the stain he was describing? Did you miss that?

http://www.wftv.com/video/28281980/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Day 33 In Casey Anthony Murder Trial Pt. 4 @ 06:49 through about 12:40.

As for sending it to the lab, ding for the defense. Why didn't Dr G send it? It's her case... right?

The link you have posted is not the trial (if that's what you were trying to do). It is WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer's commentary.

In my opinion, Dr G did send her specimen to the lab. It was contained in both of her washings.

 

[LongtimeMedic]

I know it's not Caylee's skull. Where is the area that the staining is supposed to be located? Someone stated behind the left interior auditory meatus but I don't have the link. General location is what I'm interested in TY.

This is looking down

http://anatomyuniverse.com/SkullReview1_Internal.html

Between 16 and 15 except on the other side. Where you can't see from the bottom because of the ridge (16). JHMHOO!

 

[Dr.Fessel]

CM showed a large picture to the jury, up close of the skull after it was open, with Spitz showing them the stain he was describing? Did you miss that?

http://www.wftv.com/video/28281980/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Day 33 In Casey Anthony Murder Trial Pt. 4 @ 06:49 through about 12:40.

As for sending it to the lab, ding for the defense. Why didn't Dr G send it? It's her case... right?

Dr. G knew which test to do to find answers, she knew which test would yield results on a skeleton that had been in the water for 4 or 5 months. Nobody claimed she could not get the same results from rinsing with the saline solution or scraping. With all the carbon and sulfur in a swamp setting I would not trust any chemical findings on the surface of a skeleton.