2011.01.06 Baez Slapped with Formal Sanction

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope -- he is not a "spring chicken" as we say up here! :innocent:
spitz2009widmertrial.jpg

No he isn't ... he's around 84 which is dangerous age for any major surgery let alone emergency surgery for something like this ...
So it's quite possible it will take longer for someone his age to recover ...
 
Yes but by keeping the mystery going he is just making it a trial of surprises and that isn't legal in Florida as he has been so told by CJPerry many many times. :maddening: So imo he still has nothing and more so ICA has nothing on appeal.

And although he's been warned and warned about it, I still cringe at the thought of Jose pulling stuff he's not supposed to in trial ... just to create the confusion and disruption to the proceedings ... it seems to be the only thing he's good at ..,
 
D.r Spitz is not a young man, and surgery like this is bound to hit him harder. He may not be available to testify at the trial. Where does that leave the defense, do they get a continuation until they can find another Forensic Pathologist?

To do what? A second autopsy on the ashes?? :waitasec:
 
Well if Dr Spitz should succumb to this illness I bet Baez will wish he had asked him to write a report on his autopsy...:innocent:
 
For some reason I thought HHJP asked both sides and it was agreed that after the SA filed their response to the defense motion to suppress re. George, Cindy, Lee, etal.. that he was going to rule on the pleadings... :waitasec:

Maybe that was another motion or I misunderstood?
 
For some reason I thought HHJP asked both sides and it was agreed that after the SA filed their response to the defense motion to suppress re. George, Cindy, Lee, etal.. that he was going to rule on the pleadings... :waitasec:

Maybe that was another motion or I misunderstood?

There were so many motions filed and the State said during the hearing that some would require a hearing and some could be ruled on once the State repsonded to the others. These are the motions the State agreed to have HHJP rule on "four corners of the page":

http://www.wesh.com/pdf/26541157/detail.html
 
Regarding the Dr Barry Logan who appears to be dodging Baez's phone calls - isn't he the director of the lab where Caylee's shorts and the laundry bag were sent for Touch DNA?

If this is his thing, he personally is only minimally involved with DNA. His field of expertise is Toxicology and blood alcohol and drug testing procedures, and lots to do with impaired driving. His CV only mentions DNA once, as a "Laboratory service."

So - how could he have Important Opinions regarding the DNA when he's a drunk driving expert himself?

Dr. Logan

Dr. Logan's CV

:twocents: UMMMMM perhps a quick seminar regarding regulations of laboratories and "staffing"/titles might help a bit:
NMS Labs’ accreditations and licensure are numerous, specific requirements of each accreditation agency are slightly varied BUT the Federal regulations are the "cover-alls" for the basics. (Don't get too concerned over the term "clinical laboratory", in the terms of the regulations crafted it means the testing of biological materials from a human or the :innocent: SEXIST terminology!:innocent:)
No person shall be a director of a clinical laboratory unless he conforms with one of the following requirements:

(1) He shall hold a doctor of science degree or its equivalent in the basic sciences of chemistry, biology or microbiology or a doctoral degree in public health, medicine, osteopathy, pharmacy, dentistry or veterinary medicine from a college or university recognized by the National Committee of Regional Accrediting Agencies or the Department of Education of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and who has had 2 years’ experience in a laboratory acceptable to the Department or is certified by the American Board of Pathology, American Osteopathic Board of Pathology, American Board of Microbiology, American Board of Bioanalysis. American Board of Clinical Chemistry, or other national accrediting board in laboratory specialties acceptable to the Department.
(2) He shall hold a master of science degree or its equivalent in the basic sciences from a college or university recognized by the National Committee of Regional Accrediting Agencies or the Department of Education of the Commonwealth, in chemistry, biology or microbiology, and who has had a minimum of 4 years’ experience in a laboratory acceptable to the Department.
(3) He shall hold a bachelor of science degree or its equivalent in the basic sciences from a college or university recognized by the National Committee of Regional Accrediting Agencies or the Department of Education, in chemistry, biology or microbiology, and who has had a minimum of 5 years experience in laboratory work in a laboratory acceptable to the Department.
(b) In addition, he may be required to pass a written, oral or practical qualifying examination in general laboratory science in one or more of the laboratory categories.
(c) On and after July 1, 1973, the proposed director of a clinical laboratory applying for a permit shall meet the requirements in subsection (a)(1) or (2).
(d) On and after July 1, 1974, the proposed director of a clinical laboratory applying for a permit shall meet the requirements in subsection (a)(1). (e) The limitations of subsections (c) and (d) will not apply to those persons operating a clinical laboratory prior to February 6, 1973.

:truce: SO...getting the drift of the "flexibility" of the title? NOW, getting the good Ph.D. certified as an "expert" in that which the defense gang wants to fight about, that will be the challenge or NOT if the Frye hearing is going to be an emphasis on TECHNIQUES within a laboratory vs interpretation of data. (IMO). And forget not, WSrs, that the :great: SA TEAM :great:will have the ability to cross Dr. Logan, request that he support his theories just as I assume :waitasec: (ANTICIPATE?) the defense will do to the state scientific specialists.
 
O/T I'll make this quick before a mod smacks me upside the head for derailing this thread....

KC is young, white, a single mom, nice appearance. The jury will find it difficult to see evil wrapped in such a 'normal' package. By the time trial arrives the defense will have her looking like the sweet little girl next door and will portray her as a confused victim of the system, of her parents, and of a young pregnancy who 'lost' her baby under tragic, beyond her control circumstances.

They were able to see right through Scott Peterson and there was only one small piece of evidence connecting him with Lacy's murder, otherwise it was all circumstantial. I don't think there is one type of person who gets convicted, jails are full of rich white folks who thought their big name defense Attorneys were going to get them off..
 
Courtesy of AnnInOhio on IS:

Werner Spitz is unable to testify in an Ohio case because he managed -- somehow -- to perforate his bowel with a chicken bone.

http://www.wlwt.com/download/2011/0125/26613859.pdf

In re: Baez's big secret that he felt he had to *seal*: :floorlaugh:

He is scheduled to be a Guest Speaker on March 17, 2011:

http://www.med.umich.edu/survival_flight/Conference/2011 Spring Conference.htm

http://umaortic.net/survival_flight/Brochure - 2011 Spring.pdf
 
D.r Spitz is not a young man, and surgery like this is bound to hit him harder. He may not be available to testify at the trial. Where does that leave the defense, do they get a continuation until they can find another Forensic Pathologist?


Well, if he were part of a practice/office rather than a lone wolf consultant who according to the "purchasing" Esquire did not memorialize his findings at the immediate examination, another member of the group would pick up the case from his bench notes! NOW, given that Dr. Werner Spitz WAS a member of a medical examiner's office and prior to that in clinical practice, are we really, I mean really, suppose to believe that he did NOT transcribe ANYTHING from DECEMBER,2008? :waitasec:

:twocents: Oh yeah, anybody in almost any area of clinical practice has heard the slogan: "if it isn't documented, it wasn't DONE"! :truce: and NO site inspector :rocker: will "give you a break" with THAT quote!
 
BTW - this is the 3rd time this case has been tried here in the tri-state area.

Here is a little taste of attempt 2....... http://www.wlwt.com/r/19043779/detail.html
"Assistant Warren County Prosecutor Travis Vieux cross-examined Spitz, who admitted he had not spoken to any witnesses or examined any police reports when conducting his own investigation.Vieux and Spitz sparred over statements taken from various editions of the legendary pathologist's textbook, with the pathologist sometimes claiming he could not remember its contents when the prosecutor presented excerpts that appeared to contradict some of his testimony.Spitz said growing evidence suggests that otherwise healthy people can die from "sudden death syndrome," and he raised the possibility that Sarah Widmer might have suffered a seizure or some other problem that had not been diagnosed.He said that even a competently performed autopsy might not reveal information that would indicate what had caused her to drown, but Spitz said three bruises found underneath Sarah Widmer's scalp likely came from a single blow sustained on the curved edge of the bathtub."


JB -- I am up here in the area, want me to run over to the hospital and pick up the report and FedEx it and a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken to you? LMAO- rocb (Rolling on a chicken bone!)


IMO - More important is what the jury thought of Dr. Spitz, they did not like him during the second trial:

http://www.oxfordpress.com/news/crime/widmer-juror-all-but-2-wanted-to-convict-742070.html
The jury asked to see Spitz’s textbook about an hour after they started deliberating and again an hour before they announced they were deadlocked. The jury was denied both times because the book wasn’t entered into evidence.

The juror said some had wanted the text book to study Spitz’s theory of hemodilution and how water-suffused blood could have exacerbated the bruising on Sarah Widmer’s neck.

“Some of us didn’t find him as credible, even though he had an awesome resume. He is 80-some years old and in a lot of his testimony he said the injuries were on the wrong side of her body,” she said. “He did other things that he kind of lost credibility. We wanted to see the book, but I never personally wanted it because I thought it would confuse people with the terminology and these people would have had no clue what it meant.”

 
Ha Ha Ha Ha ~snorts~

Knee slapper.. :)

OOOH I know! He's obviously familiar with the breathalyzer for alcohol (seems to be his forte on his c.v.)
Maybe he'll be doing a decomposition vs alcohol smellometer type deal-y-O?



All kidding aside: both instruments function on the same basic scientific principle SO.....is THAT his battle ground? if so, no need for a Frye as the instrumentation has been utilized in laboratories for ages~:seeya:

Oh yeah, and has produced some damning sent you off to jail/prison results in the area of BAC!.....:floorlaugh:
 
Honestly though, what will happen if Dr. Spitz or another defense expert witness is unavailable due to health, infirmity or heaven forbid in the case of the 84 year old pathologist who just underwent major abdonimal gastric surgery, death? How much of a delay would be allowed for an expert? Especially if it becomes clear at this point that it is unlikely for the expert to be available come trial?
 
Not surprising as he didn't know what was in his own book!

Make no 'bones' about it -- not knowing your own book makes you look kinda like a 'chicken $hit.' (Sorry Beach, but I just had too!)

Speaking of "Bones", Reichs has a new book coming out in August:

http://books.simonandschuster.com/Flash-and-Bones/Kathy-Reichs/9781439102411

It's her fourth book since she was retained in this case, no wonder she has no time for this case, with all the book tours and speaking engagements......:

http://authors.simonandschuster.com/Kathy-Reichs/1136559/books
 
Whats stopping Baez from sending out the P.I to knock on his door as he did the TES workers that wouldn't answer his calls?


GIT on it Baez! Stalk your expert witnesses! You know how :)

A restraining order? :waitasec:

It is for these:

2wc08z4.jpg


Please excuse the size ... :blushing:

BBM

If I had a nickel for every time I've said that to a wom.......ummmm nevermind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
209
Guests online
583
Total visitors
792

Forum statistics

Threads
625,834
Messages
18,511,418
Members
240,855
Latest member
du0tine
Back
Top