2011.04.01 MOD ONLY: Frye Hearing Summary (READ ONLY)

Status
Not open for further replies.
JA - So you read Dr. Snufalufagus's (sorry - no idea how to spell his name) after you submitted your report.

Witness - yes
 
JA: You didn't understand that the judge wanted all your opinions?
I didn't know I couldn't bring opinions to bolster my opinions.

JA: Where in that doc does it say protocol?
That's...
Objection JA, non responsive.

Judge: re ask the question
 
JA: did you discuss with dr voss why that was in there?
it seemed apparent to me

it is your testimony then that any testing can't be done on DOC if there is any trash in the area, if I understand you right.
(paraphrased:) Pretty much. Yes.
 
JA: speaking of Dr. Voss is required reading for anyone studying human decomp
those and others involving human decomp
JA: because they are peer reviewed.

JA: you have cited Dr. Voss work in this area
yes
JA: your students cites dr. voss
yes
 
Now JA is getting him to admit that Furton's own students cite Dr. Vass' work.

OUTSTANDING
 
JA - If you don't know what compounds Dr. Vass found, how can you doubt them?
 
JA hammering home about Vass' work being WHOLE BODY DECOMPOSITION.
 
KF - don't agree they are consistent w peer reviewed published compounds (only Vass's studies)
also doesn't agree that compounds are consistent w decompositional event
methal sulphides are but not chlorides (chloroform -is common in household products - JA says it is carcinogen - KF says that is why it is low)
 
KF - don't agree they are consistent w peer reviewed published compounds (only Vass's studies)
also doesn't agree that compounds are consistent w decompositional event
methal sulphides are but not chlorides (chloroform -is common in household products - JA says it is carcinogen - KF says that is why it is low)
 
So.. the chloroform was not from decomposition, according to the defense expert. D'oh!
 
Furton is JB's expert on chloroform and dogs (testitfied on both before lunch)- HHJBP gave permission for JA to cross on chloroform and LDB to cross on dogs
 
Trying to discredit the witnesses opinion on the results of FBI report on chloroform - because that he has no idea how the FBI sample was transported and stored.

The DR. Vass sample report was far greater in chloroform levels - the comparative information between that and the FBI is what the witness/Dr. has used to form his opinion that differs from Dr. Vass's.
 
JA - What this comes down to is your disagreement with Dr. Vass's opinion.

Witness - I don't believe so
 
JA done LDB up next (cross on dogs - she says 15 min) 10 min recess
 
Did JA ask the rule of sequestration (sp?) be invoked over the weekend/week b/c they were not finished with the motion?

Yes HHJP specifically instructed the attorneys to remember that their witnesses were not to watch any videos of prior witness testimony. (although he conceded that in the modern internet world there really is no way to outright prevent it,a nd everyone is on the honor system).
 
Ok..so where the SA is going with this line of questioning (IMHO) is that the levels of chloroform were so high...even with a clean up of the trunk after the fact...that those levels of chloroform are SO HIGH that a clean up would not explain them. But the fact that JA got the witness to admit (before JB objected to the two part question deal) that the stains were of human origin is huge. I get that the DT has coached their witness, but still, he admitted it under oath before the objection.

PS we all now know that the A's don't use stuff in their pool that would comprise those levels. Hence, drowning by accident is void for the defense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
723
Total visitors
859

Forum statistics

Threads
627,055
Messages
18,537,074
Members
241,171
Latest member
why_not_im_bored
Back
Top