2009.10.09 Duct Tape Photos From Remains Released

[AZlawyer]

Call me confused. Where is the Q104 fiber report evidence coming from?

I just ran across a post (#361 dated 10/3/09 in the Evidence thread) that lists:
Q104 Tape crime scene no hair present no trunk fibers :waitasec:

It came from the bench notes. I don't have a link handy for them, though.

There was also a report stating that there was no hair present and no trunk fibers present. That report is completely consistent with the bench notes I listed above. Apparently, none of the fibers on the tape are from the trunk.

 

[beach]

Call me confused. Where is the Q104 fiber report evidence coming from?

I just ran across a post (#361 dated 10/3/09 in the Evidence thread) that lists:
Q104 Tape crime scene no hair present no trunk fibers :waitasec:

That's correct. The fibers are not from the trunk and there isn't any head hair on Q104.

Those fibers are natual fibers (e.g., cotton) and the docs specifically state they do not match the 'trunk fibers'. We are trying now to figure out exactly what items those fibers originated from.


AZ has posted a lot of what I am working on, too. I am almost done and I will include fiber evidence from the clothing, blankets, etc...(other items) found at the remains site.

eta: I will have the links for you asap. It came from that HUGE 1,400 pg. doc dump a while back. And all the info is scattered between about 700 of those pgs. I will have the link and page #'s for ya asap though. Actually, that is mostly all I have left to do, is provide links. It is a job though. lol

 

[kaRN]

I agree....

If it were a spontaneous act you would think the pieces would be of random length

Or just a single piece wrapped around and around. Each piece she tore, was a meditated act.

 

[Harmony 2]

Wow take note of the fringe hair mentioned in the sections of the trunk... I know it seems OT but posting it as a possible tie into the fringe hair on Q104

Page 445
http://www.wftv.com/news/21185313/detail.html#

 

[BondJamesBond]

Voltaire said, "No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking." Or something pretty close to that IIRC

Its just a matter of a little more sustain @ this point and you all will have this figured out.

 

[AZlawyer]

OK, now that we have more measurements, here's one possible placement of the tape (Q62-64) that is consistent with the descriptions of the tape as being over the "lower portion" of the skull.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Are you guys in the Docs that were released on April 23, 2010?

Official Docs. Thread, Post 339. FBI Lab Hairs link? 198 pages pdf?

Anyway, I've read up to page 128. I wrote down everything found in Lane 4 up to page 128 (sidetracked).

I noticed that in Lane 7, 1 long piece of duct tape was found at 12:09 Hrs. and 2 pieces of duct tape were found at 12:32 Hrs. (pdf. pg. 85)

The Report, pages 1 through 4, is dated dated 12/12/08 but the Time Received is 08:38 Hrs.
I'm thinking the items on the report were actually collected on 12/11/08 but the report was turned in early morn of the 12th.

Night all!

 

[AZlawyer]

Are you guys in the Docs that were released on April 23, 2010?

Official Docs. Thread, Post 339. FBI Lab Hairs link? 198 pages pdf?

Anyway, I've read up to page 128. I wrote down everything found in Lane 4 up to page 128 (sidetracked).

I noticed that in Lane 7, 1 long piece of duct tape was found at 12:09 Hrs. and 2 pieces of duct tape were found at 12:32 Hrs. (pdf. pg. 85)

The Report, pages 1 through 4, is dated dated 12/12/08 but the Time Received is 08:38 Hrs.
I'm thinking the items on the report were actually collected on 12/11/08 but the report was turned in early morn of the 12th.

Night all!

Those pieces of duct tape were non-Henkel tape and therefore presumably unrelated.

 

[beach]

OK, now that we have more measurements, here's one possible placement of the tape (Q62-64) that is consistent with the descriptions of the tape as being over the "lower portion" of the skull.

Thanks AZ! Are you thinking here eyes weren't covered at all? :waitasec:

 

[AZlawyer]

Thanks AZ! Are you thinking here eyes weren't covered at all? :waitasec:

Well, the descriptions we have from the crime scene and the ME are that the tape was over the "lower portion" of the skull, the "mouth" area of the skull, and the "mouth and nasal apertures." I'm thinking a piece of tape over the eyes would have been described differently.

 

[beach]

Well, the descriptions we have from the crime scene and the ME are that the tape was over the "lower portion" of the skull, the "mouth" area of the skull, and the "mouth and nasal apertures." I'm thinking a piece of tape over the eyes would have been described differently.

Yeah. I just wanted her eyes covered. I didn't want her to see it all. :cry:

 

[BondJamesBond]

What does it mean in the reports when certain fibers referred to are prefaced by the letters: MTFVTC?

I just bumped the "Fiber Analysis" thread, FYI.

While it makes sense to have some fiber discussion on the duct tape thread...lets try to use the Fiber thread to focus on those details. Bring answers back here as appropriate. I'm going to move a few posts over.

 

[beach]

Are you guys in the Docs that were released on April 23, 2010?

Woe, here is the link.

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21252257/detail.html

 

[beach]

I realize many of us know A LOT of what is included already. Hopefully this will help as a quick resource guide for the basics.

I'm gonna go ahead and post what I have, otherwise it might be the week before trial before I complete this mission. :crazy: This truly is a work in progress, so it is by no means complete. I welcome any and all input, just please cite source and page #'s. I quickly discovered that I had to narrow it down to sleuthing the following:

(1) the Duct Tape found on the remains and at the scene: Q62, Q63, Q64 and Q104
(2) several items submitted to the ME and FBI containing hair/fiber evidence.

There is certainly more out there (e.g., including, but not limited to, items seized from the Pontiac and Anthony residence), but hopefully this will serve as a starting point as a resource.

When I said I was gonna do this, I had NO CLUE what I was getting myself into. :bang: There are many things I would have done differently now that I know better - there are duplicates, docs from the ME, LE, TEU, FBI, and other agencies. I wish I had taken better notes in re. pg. #'s citing exactly where I got each bit of info, but it is ALL contained in 1,405 pg. doc linked link below. I have referenced many pg. #'s, but not all of them. Sorry, but I swear to ya I didn't make a single one of 'em up. :angel: Feel free to dive on in 'cause I welcome any & all input and want to edit as we find them, so PLEASE post or pm me and I will gladly add any more pg.#'s and/or links.

Note: any reference you see to hair being similar to Q59 is the ME designation referring to the hair mass. Likewise, any reference as ≠ Q23-Q25 refer to the trunk of the Pontiac.

Q62​

• 
  Removed from skull
  • Size ~9.5” x 2”
  • Head hairs: ≤ 3” decomp root w/ no root broken; all hairs found are = to Q59 (iow, all hairs found are Caylee’s) per pg. 596
  • Fibers: Manufactured – numerous white textured declustered polyester type; No trunk fibers
  o Wool – black (1)
  o Cotton – blue (1)
  • Photo pgs. 605 & 606; 1112 & 1113; info p. 596
  

Q63​

• Removed from skull
  • Intertwined/stuck together with Q64
  • Size ~7.5”x2”
  • Hair: Head hairs ≤3” decomp root w/ no root broken; all hairs found are = to Q59 per pg. 596
  • Fibers: Manufactured – numerous white textured declustered polyester type; No trunk fibers
  o Wool – black (1)
  o Cotton – blue (1)
  • Photo pgs. 607, 608, 609, 610 & 611; 1114, 1115, 1116, 1117 & 1118; info p. 596
  

Q64​

• Removed from skull
  • Intertwined/stuck together with Q63
  • Size ~9” x 2”
  • Hair: Head hairs ≤3” decomp root w/ no root broken; all hairs found are = to Q59 (iow, all hairs found are Caylee’s) per pg. 596
  • Fibers: Manufactured – numerous white textured declustered polyester type; No trunk fibers
  o Wool – black (1)
  o Cotton – blue (1)
  • Photo pgs. 607, 608, 612, 613 & 614; 1119, 1120, & 1121; info p. 596
  

Q104​

• Found apart from the skull, but in the vicinity of the letters of the “Big Trouble…” t-shirt
  • Hair: Caucasian fringe hairs, hair fragments, very fine, light brown ONLY piece of duct tape found containing no head hair (per FBI, pg. 565, ¶4)
  • Size: ~8.5”x2”
  • Fibers: blue cotton, red cotton, off-white (d), black (d) (mostly opaque), grey-brown (d), blue (d) ≠ Q23-Q25
  • Photo pgs. 1243, 1244 & 1245; info p. 565, 752
  

ALL info relates back to the pdf linked below:

http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21252257/detail.html


Link to the Fiber Analysis post for quick reference.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5198814&postcount=164"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5198814&postcount=164[/ame]

 

[JWG]

As an FYI, the fibers from the trunk were compared with the shorts received from the ME (FBI Q80) and the clothing received from the ME (FBI Q81), as well as with fibers picked from the Henkel tape (FBI Q62, Q63, Q64 and Q104).

Page 9465 indicates that no fibers hand-picked from the trunk liner and trunk debris match Q80 or Q81.

Page 9537 indicates that no fibers from the various vacuum sweepings from the trunk match Q80 or Q81.

Page 9587 summarizes that no common fibers were found between the remains / crime scene and the trunk.

Note that the blanket found near the crime scene (Q103) was not a part of that particular conclusion, although it was sent to the FBI as evidence. The reason it was not part of the conclusion may be that it was already determined it was likely to be found in the trunk (recall Cindy's deposition and her stating that KC kept such a blanket back there).

Also note that the FBI did not compare fibers from the WTP blanket with those found in the trunk. Right now we can only speculate as to why that is, or perhaps it was done as part of a separate report.

Where does that leave us? :waitasec: I think it would be unusual not to find trunk fibers on the WTP blanket or vice versa if the blanket came in contact with the trunk. The question then becomes, would it be unusual for the blanket to be in the trunk? In Cindy's deposition, she said that KC did keep a blanket in the trunk, but not the WTP blanket.

 

[beach]

JWG, I was reading several of your other old posts in the other thread in re. Q104 ("only piece not found on the remains" or something close). What doc contains these big page #'s that you are citing? Is there a link? I was digging around last night, albeit tired as heck, and I couldn't figure out what doc you getting this info from.


Thanks for the added info. I am going to remove the Q103 from the fiber post so not to cause more confusion.

 

[JWG]

JWG, I was ready several of your other old posts in the other thread in re. Q104 ("only piece not found on the remains" or something close). What doc contain these big page #'s that you are citing? Is there a link? I was digging around last night, albeit tired as heck, and I couldn't figure out what doc you getting this info from.


Thanks for the info. I am going to remove the Q103 from the fiber post so not to cause more confusion.

Sorry Beach ... I tend to download the docs onto my computer, and I don't maintain links back to where I got them. The pages I am referring to came from the 1400 page dump from October 9, 2009, if that helps. Note that when I put a page number down it is the discovery page, not the PDF page.

 

[beach]

Sorry Beach ... I tend to download the docs onto my computer, and I don't maintain links back to where I got them. The pages I am referring to came from the 1400 page dump from October 9, 2009, if that helps. Note that when I put a page number down it is the discovery page, not the PDF page.

Oh! Okay...I downloaded that doc, too. That is what I have been working from. I just need to use the discovery pg. # to find what page you are referencing! Thanks much!

 

[beach]

I need to learn how to read a spreadsheet. Q80 are the shorts. Q82 should not be mentioned in my previous post. Geez ... :doh:

I feel SO MUCH better just knowing you've got your info in a spreadsheet! I swear, 2 days into this and I thought, "I really should have used Excel for this, instead of Word." My second, thought was, "A spreadsheet?!? Nah, you're nuts, beach." :rolling:


I haven't been brave enough to get into the trunk fiber evidence yet. All I know is what info I got from the clothes which showed none existed.

 

[BondJamesBond]

FYI only.

I don't see any fiber thread posts makin' their way over here, guys. If anything....I need to move some of the fiber-specific posts off of this thread and over there later.

When you make a breakthrough it'll be ok to post an FYI w/ link here on this thread to the post there...but do your best not to create two threads running in parallel.
TIA.