2011.03.23 Frye Hearing

[nursebeeme]

I hope during the actual trial the cameras focus on the jury and the lawyers because I will not be able to tolerate hour upon hours of ICA's fidgeting/flipping, etc

 

[logicalgirl]

Logical... yes it will resume at 1:30 est

Thank you! Been sitting here since 5:30am my time - got to do something about this bed hair before I get the dogs out for their first (oops) walk.

See ya all back here at 10:30/1:30! Hope this break will clear my mind of DS's incessant questioning style.......

 

[Scamperoo]

Wow! It sure looked like ICA was pizzed at JB when he walked up to her table and talked with her while she was rifling through her notebook. She kept glancing up at him with devil glares, imo. Wonder what that lil exchange was about??

Probably telling her the good ship Casey was going down like the Titanic....

 

[strach304]

So let me get this straight . . . she wants a little cheese with this whine?

There was some kind of velvetta in the trunk trash. This will be their explanation to the jury? Oh boy! They better hope for 12 Cindys.

 

[pip]

ICA is an agitated hot mess today! She's going to have a meltdown at trial I bet.

 

[QueenD]

Wow! It sure looked like ICA was pizzed at JB when he walked up to her table and talked with her while she was rifling through her notebook. She kept glancing up at him with devil glares, imo. Wonder what that lil exchange was about??

He probably told her that the Judge said they could not go to lunch together. She would have to go back to the holding cell. LOL

 

[LancelotLink]

I would assume about 1:30 est....but there is a chance of an error rate....

:floorlaugh:

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

So substance wise (in that load of oysters) where do we stand? What, if any, were the salient points of the defense's opposition; what, if any, were the prosecutions strengths or weaknesses in presenting this material?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

 

[CuriousG]

Busy work....trying to make herself seem important.

I have often wondered if letters written (on yellow legal pad paper) from CA are slipped into those legal pads before the hearings and that's why ICA furiously flips through them right away. And that she's replying to the letters and hiding them in the back of the notepad for JB to deliver after the hearing. IMO, something very suspicious is going on with those legal pads.

 

[Scamperoo]

So substance wise (in that load of oysters) where do we stand? What, if any, were the salient points of the defense's opposition; what, if any, were the prosecutions strengths or weaknesses in presenting this material?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

The defense wouldn't know a salient point if it came up and bit them in the

JMO

 

[repairmom]

So substance wise (in that load of oysters) where do we stand? What, if any, were the salient points of the defense's opposition; what, if any, were the prosecutions strengths or weaknesses in presenting this material?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

I think the witness established that "post mortem banding" is only seen in hair from a decomposing body, but not always seen in every hair from a decomposing body and that "bands" from enzymes or environment are not the same as post mortem bands.

I think the DT showed it is a subjective science and possibly biased by the person interpreting the band.

But, I don't think that does the DT any good if they don't have their own expert to refute the FBI witness.

 

[Amster]

No that was Ann Finnell, Penalty Phase Attorney.

oh....:blushing:

Don't think I've seen her before..

 

[jharres]

So substance wise (in that load of oysters) where do we stand? What, if any, were the salient points of the defense's opposition; what, if any, were the prosecutions strengths or weaknesses in presenting this material?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

I didn't watch all of it, but from what I saw, it appears that the defense was attempting to take this as an opportunity to prove or disprove the assertions and side track the issue. I believe the prosecution did a great job at keeping this on track and in context for a frye hearing. I think this motion by the defense will be denied. (apologies if I used wrong terminology).

 

[PrintGal]

Jinx printgal - I said the same thing just after you - I owe you a coke or would you prefer a shot after what we listened to this morning????:great:

A shot would be most welcome! But only one. If we had to drink each time HHJP said 'sustained' we'd die of alcohol poisoning!

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

I think the witness established that "post mortem banding" is only seen in hair from a decomposing body, but not always seen in every hair from a decomposing body and that "bands" from enzymes or environment are not the same as post mortem bands.

I think the DT showed it is a subjective science and possibly biased by the person interpreting the band.

But, I don't think that does the DT any good if they don't have their own expert to refute the FBI witness.

Agreed, pretty much. However, I think precedent has been established by other jurisdictions for allowing this type of evidence in at trail. And I am not so sure that the "interpretation" of the presence of this banding falls afoul of generally accepted scientific principles and practice

 

[MD MOMMY]

I didn't watch all of it, but from what I saw, it appears that the defense was attempting to take this as an opportunity to prove or disprove the assertions and side track the issue. I believe the prosecution did a great job at keeping this on track and in context for a frye hearing. I think this motion by the defense will be denied. (apologies if I used wrong terminology).

I also think they were using this opportunity to ask additional questions they failed to ask in their depo. That is how it appears to me anyway!

 

[ynotdivein]

We have learned:

1. That exposure to cheese does not cause post-mortem root banding. (Presumably neither does exposure to "pasteurized processed cheese food" a.k.a. Velveeta.) DCS did a fine job of helping the FBI specialist establish that really, the only thing that causes post-mortem root banding is death.

2. That KC did not receive an "As Seen on TV Cami Smart" for her birthday this past weekend.

3. That JA needs an Acme Automatic Objection Device or his voice will never last through trial.

4. That KC is grumpy today.

 

[repairmom]

A shot would be most welcome! But only one. If we had to drink each time HHJP said 'sustained' we'd die of alcohol poisoning!

...or every time DCS said "it's not just a Frye hearing"!!! Hehehe.

 

[CuriousG]

To whichever DT member reads here, one word for your Wardrobe Manager: CAMISOLE.

No kidding!! Why in the world is she wearing such a low cut blouse? Well, at least her commissary purchased sports bra doesn't allow her to bust some cleavage - and I'm sure that really bothers ICA.

 

[Insomnia Momma]

Well I know that I learned that if DS is doing the questioning from now on I'll just have to read the highlights.

Honestly though I think the defense just hammered into everyones skull that post mortem banding is post mortem banding. You can have root darkening but that is NOT banding and Q-12(or Q12.1) which was Caylee's hair HAD post mortem banding.