2011.03.04 Motions Hearing - #2 (PM)

[A_News_Junkie]

Part 2 (there will be at LEAST one more part)
I will post all the links together when I am done - when I post the last video.
Enjoy!
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTeBnA2AZA[/ame]

 

[Marina2]

I just want to say how much I love, love, love Websleuths. It's one of the most resourceful sites on the internet. Just look, on this one page alone we have a member bowdown: to faefrost) who knows exactly how a lawyer should ease out of a contempt charge, videos on demand clap:ty ANJ) and life lessons from baby goats blowkiss: to MissJames).

 

[Purple Iris]

You found it! You found it! I have been searching for that all day! I kept referencing it and couldn't supply the link. THANK YOU SO MUCH! ( I see a good many were on the same page!) FAEFROST I am so sorry I couldn't credit you properly! THANK YOU

Careful.......then we'll have JVM accusing WS of participating in the war against "anything" due to the addictions. :great:

Oh yeah, she would jump on that wagon faster than she can slam her mighty gavel !!!

I know that she is a recovering addict of many things it seems, and Bless the Hearts of those that manage to manage their demons, but, there comes a time also that a person does not have to hear about it all the time, too.

I'll be *carefull*......do not want to contribute to any addictions or have her stake me out for illegal wheeling and dealing.....

M&M's anyone???

Yeah...........M&M's or Reeses Peices.........only for those truely in need.:fence:

 

[Purple Iris]

I just want to say how much I love, love, love Websleuths. It's one of the most resourceful sites on the internet. Just look, on this one page alone we have a member bowdown: to faefrost) who knows exactly how a lawyer should ease out of a contempt charge, videos on demand clap:ty ANJ) and life lessons from baby goats blowkiss: to MissJames).

And, M&M's !!!:floorlaugh: {cough-cough}

 

[Paladine]

I just want to say how much I love, love, love Websleuths. It's one of the most resourceful sites on the internet. Just look, on this one page alone we have a member bowdown: to faefrost) who knows exactly how a lawyer should ease out of a contempt charge, videos on demand clap:ty ANJ) and life lessons from baby goats blowkiss: to MissJames).

I SO agree. I haven't had time to be around for months but when I heard there was a hearing today, I knew I had to come here to get the real scoop. Peeps here know more details about this case, and how those correlate with todays evidence, than most in the media.

 

[joypath]

Okay, I just watched a youtube video on "CG" also known as "Gas Chromatography."

Is it safe to say that the air samples are now admissable at trial and they will argue the "interpretation" of the "findings" and how they're "applied" at trial? Or are they going to do this at the Frye hearing? Challenge the interpretation?

I am confused because they agree that they are not challenging the "validity" of these two machines (The LIBS scared the crap out of me when I looked it up on youtube. It was like listening to a stun gun) as to their "ability" and their "findings."

BUT then they say that they will challenge the "interpretation" of the "findings" and how they are "applied?"

So what does this mean? Interpretation... I guess you can say is an opinion? So the defense is going to challenge what these machines "found" (volatile fatty acids?) and how that "applies" to this case? Applied to what?

ETA: I hope I didn't butcher this post too much... I am just confused?

:twocents: Ya did GOOD in figuring out the neat little note from the defense at least IMHO! :innocent: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/72841857/20110304-Correspondence-To-Court--Jose-Baez

SO...:woohoo:The defense is NOT going to argue the validity of GC/ LIBS instruments.....GUESS that means that the defense accepts that both instruments are utilized in scientific inquiry of "unknowns" and that they have been "accepted & validated" by the scientific community:rocker:. :twocents: DAH, ummmm NO KIDDING as even some of the defense experts had to use at least ONE (GC) of them in UNDERGRAD/GRAD/POST-DOC educational courses!
NO, not arguing the "ability" (what ever THAT means) and the "findings" (which in my world means the values/levels of the concentration of the determined element.... think a half cup of chunky monkey ice cream & a third cup of cherry Garcia makes an awesome B & J mixed sundae where the "findings" are amt & specific ice cream flavors) is unique!

They seem to be "challenging" the interpretation (opinion of the expert) of the "findings" (scientific) and then go on to declare that the expert's application is challenged. UMMMMM to my non-legal mind, FRYE is for the introduction of scientific nuances yet declared as "not accepted by the scientific community as a whole and also NOT YET applied in courts around the States".
BUT ISN'T THE BASIC PRINCIPLE :waitasec: of :banghead:"dueling experts" :banghead:exactly what challenging each others OPINIONS or APPLICATION of retrieved data is by definition???? :waitasec::waitasec:


PS: :innocent: not to be an English major but.....doesn't one have to be a biological entity to have "ability"???

 

[A_News_Junkie]

Links
Part 1
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5PFi2w_3kg&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Part 2
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTeBnA2AZA&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Part 3
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsrUvPFw9Xc[/ame]

THAT IS ALL IN SESSIONS CAPTURED.

 

[Tiki]

I admit to not reading the entire thread - sorry - but is it normal for the defendant to pat her attorney on the knee? see video about 14:17.
Yesterday she grabbed his arm and today a consoling knee pat. It seems a little too "familiar" to me.
I don't understand why she gets away with it - well, gets away with a lot of what she does in court.


http://www.wftv.com/video/27084637/index.html

.

 

[Marina2]

Well, there you have it. CM's last question to the deputy confirms what he related during the In Session commercial break. He sat KC down to the table and got her written statement prior to the handcuffing. All the hoopla over handcuffing, whether she was arrested, whether she was unarrested, etc appears to be irrelevant to that particular statement and that statement has it all. (even, as the deputy states, the stealing). I like how CM conferred with JB after Eberlin said the statement was given prior to the handcuffing. He shut things down immediately after JB answered him.

Thank you so much ANJ, I've looked everywhere for his testimony.

 

[Purple Iris]

I admit to not reading the entire thread - sorry - but is it normal for the defendant to pat her attorney on the knee? see video about 14:17.
Yesterday she grabbed his arm and today a consoling knee pat. It seems a little too "familiar" to me.
I don't understand why she gets away with it - well, gets away with a lot of what she does in court.


http://www.wftv.com/video/27084637/index.html

.

I noticed that also.

Touching, isn't it....ahhhhh....

 

[RR0004]

Sure and she went for a stroll with Det. Allan and said it was just a hassle between her and her mother about custody of Caylee...
And Cindy admitted she wanted anything at all done to stop ICA from leaving the house, including having her charged with theft of a vehicle and stolen cheques, or if she had to - she would sit on her herself.

Can you believe CA was in this kid's face to do something - anything? He probably stuck ICA in his car to calm Cindy down and get her to back off.

Was this stated in one of the hearings? Can you direct me to where I can find that? TIA

 

[Purple Iris]

How do you folks think that Dorothy Simms did today??

I admit that to me, she sounded good, like she really knew her stuff, etc.
Great presentation, no stumbling, clear and concise and to the point.
I'll also admit, even while I don't understand everything that she was talking about, she has me scared a bit.

What is your take on her and what she had to say?
Did Perry buy it??
Are they going to get a win with her on those motions????

 

[logicalgirl]

Was this stated in one of the hearings? Can you direct me to where I can find that? TIA

Oh boy! I am not by any means an expert on where to find this stuff in the hearings, but it was during Det Allan's first testimony, not the second part. There were jaws dropping from coast to coast because this is the first time we've heard this information.

Let me have a look and see what I can do. BRB.

 

[gamom]

How do you folks think that Dorothy Simms did today??

I admit that to me, she sounded good, like she really knew her stuff, etc.
Great presentation, no stumbling, clear and concise and to the point.
I'll also admit, even while I don't understand everything that she was talking about, she has me scared a bit.

What is your take on her and what she had to say?
Did Perry buy it??
Are they going to get a win with her on those motions????

I think she is a good addition to the team. Don't worry, we want KC to have a good trial, so that there is no chance for appeal. I want her BEST case senerio to be life w/o parole.

 

[RR0004]

That's what I recall ,also.She wrote a statement very early on.

...and now I know what all the talk about the different handwriting on the statements meant...or what the As were alluding to...they didn't fill in that info...and you may not be able to trust the person who did.

 

[Marina2]

Was this stated in one of the hearings? Can you direct me to where I can find that? TIA

I think it was Hosey who walked with KC when she stated her mother was causing trouble and trying to get custody. (none of the sargeants' or officers' testimony are on the news sites)
CA said she would sit on KC to keep her from leaving the house during her testimony (cross) on the first day. She also said she requested Eberlin to arrest KC during this cross.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

I agree with both..

Cindy's first 911 call was she wanted Casey ARRESTED for Stealing Money AND Stealing an Auto.
IMO LE first to respond had to do with those issues...then they learned it was about a missing child...

LE had to sift through what they were first dispatched for "I want someone arrested for stealing money and a car" TO "I just found out my grandaughter's been taken"

Exactly. My opinion (not that it is worth :twocents is that the best he can hope to get tossed is anything she said while in cuffs or in the car. Once she was released, she had all the civil liberties of walking around (into her house, bedroom) freely. She took the nap GA told of (the one where he didn't know if she fell asleep) and then accepted the invitation from LE to accompany them to her work in an effort to find her missing child.
Again, his cuffing her and his actions appear to my feeble 'blogger type'(pun) mind as at best her being in custody for theft. Nothing more, more likely something less.
IMHO, Ryan was a new rookie whom was trying to defuse the situation - separate the parties and keep CA safe from CA. (Wink - up to reader which CA is which! LOL)

 

[logicalgirl]

I think it was Hosey who walked with KC when she stated her mother was causing trouble and trying to get custody. (none of the sargeants' or officers' testimony are on the news sites)
CA said she would sit on KC to keep her from leaving the house during her testimony (cross) on the first day. She also said she requested Eberlin to arrest KC during this cross.

Man am I tired and you could be right - so far I have only found out that I commented on it at 6:53 am on day 2 - so that would be 9:53 Florida time, if that is helpful to find it.

 

[jennyb]

I think it was Hosey who walked with KC when she stated her mother was causing trouble and trying to get custody. (none of the sargeants' or officers' testimony are on the news sites)
CA said she would sit on KC to keep her from leaving the house during her testimony (cross) on the first day. She also said she requested Eberlin to arrest KC during this cross.

Yes, I recall it was Hosey too.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

How do you folks think that Dorothy Simms did today??

I admit that to me, she sounded good, like she really knew her stuff, etc.
Great presentation, no stumbling, clear and concise and to the point.
I'll also admit, even while I don't understand everything that she was talking about, she has me scared a bit.

What is your take on her and what she had to say?
Did Perry buy it??
Are they going to get a win with her on those motions????

I've read up on her and she is simply another manipulator. I don't know about her effectiveness, only her deviousness. She seems to be expert at finding irrelevant things/uses logical fallacies related to a professional witness (do they remember a report they did 20 years ago) then manufacturing drama to make it appear they are incompetent. Example - she says to read up on the experts' pst work and try to make them look incompetent by cherry picking bits and pieces of info out of context.

She will probably fool a lot of people, but hopefully not Judge Perry. She's an example of what is wrong with the system. Right up there with "creative motions" Lyon.