2010.11.29 Hearing: RE: Defense Won't Have Hair Expert @ Trial

[cyberborg]

ICA is toast. Why have such a large defense team when they seem to be doing nothing to defend her?

MOO

Mel

... yes they seem to be going through the 'motions' literally and putting everything into penalty mitigation IMO.

 

[Leila]

ITA. How Casey can still have confidence in a defense team building nothing but smoke and mirrors and nothing real to defend her with is beyond me. They are going to go until the last minute, then try for a deal. I cannot see them going to in court with such a lack of a defense and getting any sort of win, not even with 50 penalty phase witnesses.

I'm not so sure that the defense team attorneys have been completely honest with Casey about all her options. Of all the attorneys involved, Andrea Lyons is the only one who may have sat down with Casey and talked to her honestly about her chances. But if JB downplayed anything AL said, I can see Casey putting all her trust in JB and doing as he advises.

 

[Leila]

... yes they seem to be going through the 'motions' literally and putting everything into penalty mitigation IMO.

It DOES appear that all the defense efforts are being put into the penalty phase. It looks like they know that a guilty verdict is likely, so all their efforts will be going towards mitigating the death penalty.

 

[chefmom]

It looks like the defense has no counter to the claim that the hair found in Casey's car trunk belonged to Caylee and had a death band on it. They're not refuting this claim.

I would therefore assume that the defense acknowledges that a deceased Caylee was in the trunk of Casey's car. But, they will likely claim that someone else murdered Caylee and placed her in the trunk of Casey's car.

The car was impounded by the police on July 17, 2008, and at that time Caylee's remains were not in the vehicle. According to prosecution expert witnesses, Caylee's remains were placed at the site on Suburban sometime in June of 2008, at a time when the car was in Casey's possession and control.

It's going to be very difficult for the defense to claim that someone else murdered Caylee and placed her in the trunk of Casey's car, and later removed Caylee's body, at a time when the car was in Casey's possession and control.

This is just MOO, but I think they are going to concede that there was a hair in the trunk belonging to Caylee that was probably transfered there since her belongings were there frequently. It just fell off of a blanket, the laundry, KC's person, any number of ways the hair of the child of the car owner could be found in the trunk. Then, they will take a perfuntory stab at explaining away the deathband, poo-pooing it as "junk-science". It's about all he can do other than have CA take the stand and go on about how she "feels" like Caylee is still alive. Neither will work.

 

[chefmom]

ITA. How Casey can still have confidence in a defense team building nothing but smoke and mirrors and nothing real to defend her with is beyond me. They are going to go until the last minute, then try for a deal. I cannot see them going to in court with such a lack of a defense and getting any sort of win, not even with 50 penalty phase witnesses.

I actually think she likes the idea of having an attorney who is willing to lie, point the finger at innocent people, and rob the state blind, all in the name of defending her. She has done these things for a long time now. It is her way of life. I think she only had problems with the honest attorneys who were trying to work within the scope of the law and what would be viewed by their peers as morally right. Probably why we no longer have AL, LKB, LK. They didn't mind defending her, but they weren't going to cross the line and throw their careers away. All, JMO.

 

[joypath]

How do you think HL's slapdown by the judge in the PS trial will play out at ICA's trial? I'm hoping for a challange to his credibility by the SA's. Can they do that when his area of expertise comes up?

:twocents:More a question for the Esquires on board but as a staunch defender of my own credibility on the stand, I'd have to assume that the SA will TRY to introduce some measure of the PS experience within their questioning mechanisms (say something similar to the "was the collection of the ancillary hair(s) discovered at your investigation of the Pontiac in the OCSO garage done in the same manner as your techniques utilized in the PS trial?") and then DUCK as the defense SCREAMS objection!.:truce: IF and that's a huge IF HCL does testify, he had better be en pointe, all factual and NO "chatty cathy" hypothetical mode while on the stand or HE will "open the door" for extraneous career questions, all my humble opinion.:blushing:

 

[LyndyLoo]

Somehow..I get the impression Henry Lee's testimony is going to be very limited..and apparantly he is not responding to the Prosecutions attempts to contact...Its only common sense..You dont respond to things you want to avoid answering..LOL..Poor HL..he has had such a fall from grace....His integrity has been called into question..thus his standing is Nadda..Wadda..I for one dont care about his views any more..He proved to be a bought and paid for witness...Yikes!!

I read somewhere how he billed for $8,000.00 tho defense said they paid him with oranges..LOL..Really in truly..I would love to see his Invoice!!

 

[ynotdivein]

:twocents:More a question for the Esquires on board but as a staunch defender of my own credibility on the stand, I'd have to assume that the SA will TRY to introduce some measure of the PS experience within their questioning mechanisms (say something similar to the "was the collection of the ancillary hair(s) discovered at your investigation of the Pontiac in the OCSO garage done in the same manner as your techniques utilized in the PS trial?") and then DUCK as the defense SCREAMS objection!.:truce: IF and that's a huge IF HCL does testify, he had better be en pointe, all factual and NO "chatty cathy" hypothetical mode while on the stand or HE will "open the door" for extraneous career questions, all my humble opinion.:blushing:

Hi joy! :wave: AZL just posted this on the Verified Lawyers thread in response to a question about whether HL could be impeached on the stand due to his er... *problems* (coff) in the Spector trial....

Only if there's some reason to think he tampered with evidence in this case. And so far there isn't.

But at this point, what benefit to the defense if HL DOES testify?

In fact, what benefit to them in continuing this whole charade? (I know I know... due process and whatnot...)

 

[drip~drop]

Somehow..I get the impression Henry Lee's testimony is going to be very limited..and apparantly he is not responding to the Prosecutions attempts to contact...Its only common sense..You dont respond to things you want to avoid answering..LOL..Poor HL..he has had such a fall from grace....His integrity has been called into question..thus his standing is Nadda..Wadda..I for one dont care about his views any more..He proved to be a bought and paid for witness...Yikes!!

I read somewhere how he billed for $8,000.00 tho defense said they paid him with oranges..LOL..Really in truly..I would love to see his Invoice!!

I wonder how many oranges one gets for 8 grand?:waitasec:

 

[Numbers]

I wonder how many oranges one gets for 8 grand?:waitasec:

Oranges are currently selling for $1252.60 per metric ton (2205 lbs). The weight of an orange is 9 - 11 ounces, or average 10 ounces.

$8000 would buy about 22,532 oranges.

 

[chefmom]

Oranges are currently selling for $1252.60 per metric ton (2205 lbs). The weight of an orange is 9 - 11 ounces, or average 10 ounces.

$8000 would buy about 22,532 oranges.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vfSk-6tIvo&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[Dear Prudence]

This is just MOO, but I think they are going to concede that there was a hair in the trunk belonging to Caylee that was probably transfered there since her belongings were there frequently. It just fell off of a blanket, the laundry, KC's person, any number of ways the hair of the child of the car owner could be found in the trunk. Then, they will take a perfuntory stab at explaining away the deathband, poo-pooing it as "junk-science". It's about all he can do other than have CA take the stand and go on about how she "feels" like Caylee is still alive. Neither will work.

The defense can easily explain Caylee's hair being in the trunk, but they can not easily explain away a hair from Caylee's dead body being in the trunk. As you say, their only option is to attack the science regarding the deathband, but how are they going to do that with no expert testifying? They can't. This is huge. If they have no defense to Caylee being dead in her mother's car trunk, they have no defense period, IMO.

I feel like I'm missing something important when it comes to this hair. How can the defense not refute the hair shows decomposition and expect to prove KC is not guilty? What am I missing?

 

[ynotdivein]

The defense can easily explain Caylee's hair being in the trunk, but they can not easily explain away a hair from Caylee's dead body being in the trunk. As you say, their only option is to attack the science regarding the deathband, but how are they going to do that with no expert testifying? They can't. This is huge. If they have no defense to Caylee being dead in her mother's car trunk, they have no defense period, IMO.

I feel like I'm missing something important when it comes to this hair. How can the defense not refute the hair shows decomposition and expect to prove KC is not guilty? What am I missing?

I am wondering the same thing, DP. All I can figure is, they will say SOD had access to KC's car (and I guess to Caylee) during her month of avidly searching for her missing daughter? :waitasec: Maybe Caylee wasn't in the trunk but this other person transferred one of her hairs there at some point?

Oh but wait. The decomp. Hmph.

Honestly, what is making a lot of sense here is the point made by the OP who brought up the Peterson trial, where the defense did not present a defense--just hoped that the jury would find their own holes in the prosecution argument. I cannot imagine what KC's defense has left.

So glad we can rest easy knowing that, according to JB, this will all make sense when it comes to trial. Can't wait for that "Ohhh!" moment.

 

[MD MOMMY]

WOW I'm super shocked. It seems to me the hair would be a great way to confuse jurrors. I know I was utterly confused upon first hearing about this. There was quite a bit of controversy and confusion understanding the banding process etc. Do you mean to tell me they couldn't find one expert who thinks the death band is poo-poo? IDK I'm in disbelief over here.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Oranges are currently selling for $1252.60 per metric ton (2205 lbs). The weight of an orange is 9 - 11 ounces, or average 10 ounces.

$8000 would buy about 22,532 oranges.

Then I'd say..... "Mimosas all around, courtesy of Dr. Lee."

After all......there are strict regulations about transporting citrus. Best to expend them locally.

 

[chefmom]

Then I'd say..... "Mimosas all around, courtesy of Dr. Lee."

After all......there are strict regulations about transporting citrus. Best to expend them locally.

To WS!

 

[Aedrys]

Oranges are currently selling for $1252.60 per metric ton (2205 lbs). The weight of an orange is 9 - 11 ounces, or average 10 ounces.

$8000 would buy about 22,532 oranges.

Numbers, I think I love you! I can't believe someone knew this information! I am laughing and impressed at the same time! LOL

Seriously, your post made my day today!

 

[Aedrys]

The defense can easily explain Caylee's hair being in the trunk, but they can not easily explain away a hair from Caylee's dead body being in the trunk. As you say, their only option is to attack the science regarding the deathband, but how are they going to do that with no expert testifying? They can't. This is huge. If they have no defense to Caylee being dead in her mother's car trunk, they have no defense period, IMO.

I feel like I'm missing something important when it comes to this hair. How can the defense not refute the hair shows decomposition and expect to prove KC is not guilty? What am I missing?

What you are missing is that the defense is not going for not guilty. They are going for Casey to be alive only. Where she's allowed to continue living apparently is not their concern. I think a conviction with her alive is a win to them at this point. Why else not refute the hair with the death band? I'm not a lawyer, but they are either really are the worst attorneys I've ever heard of, or they don't intend to get her acquitted at all. I'm wondering what the in the heck they are telling Casey that she doesn't see the writing on the wall...

 

[butterfly1978]

The defense can easily explain Caylee's hair being in the trunk, but they can not easily explain away a hair from Caylee's dead body being in the trunk. As you say, their only option is to attack the science regarding the deathband, but how are they going to do that with no expert testifying? They can't. This is huge. If they have no defense to Caylee being dead in her mother's car trunk, they have no defense period, IMO.

I feel like I'm missing something important when it comes to this hair. How can the defense not refute the hair shows decomposition and expect to prove KC is not guilty? What am I missing?

They are going to blame George or Cindy is going to "Confess" JMO

 

[krisskross]

WOW I'm super shocked. It seems to me the hair would be a great way to confuse jurrors. I know I was utterly confused upon first hearing about this. There was quite a bit of controversy and confusion understanding the banding process etc. Do you mean to tell me they couldn't find one expert who thinks the death band is poo-poo? IDK I'm in disbelief over here.

Lets look at what the State's expert is saying about the hair, showing root banding. Their expert is saying this hair found in her car trunk exhibits charcteristics (proximal banding) consistent with decomposition. He/she is careful not to state as a categorical fact that this single hair came from a dead person. It's likely this Petraco guy couldn't argue with that statement.

:twocents:What helps the State considerably, is that in asserting a decomposing body was in that trunk, they are not offering the hair banding evidence in isolation. They will present additional testimony from the cadaver dog handlers, witness statements about the powerful smell, the entomologist's report (damning imo) and if allowed the air sample test results.

Add in her own statements about a smell in her car caused either by squirrels or George hitting something............:waitasec: stick the fork in already.