2011.04.08 Frye Hearing Thread

[sleutherontheside]

Hysteria.....kind of like the virgin mary on a piece of toast???

 

[nursebeeme]

jose calling the shape of the stain ridiculous


calling it:

"stigmata type evidence"

 

[Lanie]

Here we go. Baez is bringing up the use of Blue Star, states there was a glow, says there is no evidence this stain was biological, testing showed nothing. Stain has created a mass hysteria. JA objects, about Baez referring to exhibits, JB says photos, JA says Okay.

Refers to email from FBI which generated ridiculous hysteria about the stain being in the form of a child.

 

[2goldfish]

there wasnt any wet garbage that we ever heard of :/

 

[MD MOMMY]

So he was saying the trash was still wet after how many days in a smoltering trunk? I've seen no evidence of wet soggy trash. Did I miss something here?

 

[strawberry]

JB - There was a glow that supposedly showed a body. No DNA on the stain. This stain has created mass hysteria.

Please please please let JA have a powerpoint including one of our pics of the stain!!!

 

[gamom]

JB "every american's car have stains in thier trunks"

Um...not me. To have a stain in your trunk would mean something would have to have spilled or leaked? I don't really keep liquids in my trunk, but that is just me. Especially those that show up as cholorform level of 10,000.

 

[imawitch]

Let me just say how much I adore judge Perry...

bless his heart...

the man isnt taking any chity chitty bang bang today jmo lol

 

[sleutherontheside]

The body in the trunk of the car is a material fact.... JB

 

[Softail]

JB - A body in the trunk of a car is a material fact. I admit that, but more than a stain is required.

 

[mobius99]

Did baez just say "ridiculous hysteria" in reference to the stain in the trunk?

 

[Chiquita71]

JB: luminal, shows there could be a stain of blood but when they did the tests they were negative. no proof it was a bio stain, was tested for DNA: was no dna on the stain. And, I've submitted those exibits to the court. What the stain has done is create "mass hysteria"

JA: asking about what the defense entered as "exihibits"

JB: and email between the FBI which created this hysteria that a form is a child's body. that if you enhance it looks like a child in the fetal position. JA: has no intention of bring up this stigmata....court: is this stain bio when there is no evidence of it?

A body in a trunk is bio evidence, but this jury and this court need something more than a stain in the car. Esp, when all the tests and steps to see if this was bio came back neg.

 

[TiaM]

Jose's argument:

every American has stains in their trunk

that was brilliant! not!!!

BBM

Well I don't.

And with how fastidious GA and CA are, there is no way I'd believe there was ever any previous stain in the Pontiac either.

They can argue, well, ICA drove it, but clearly by GA's maintenance comments, he kept up with the cleaning and care of it. Even CA knew what was supposed to always be in the blue bin, therefore if there was a previous stain, she would have sent George to "detail" it.

 

[SuziQ]

Basically JB is saying a stain in the shape of a child in a fetal position doesn't mean anything.

 

[Melanie]

JB: It's a wet soggy bag of garbage -- as it relates to the large stain in the trunk.

JB: There was gasoline cans in the car

JB: There was a glow as to a POSSIBLE human stain there, but when they did the surilogical (SP) test, there is no proof. It was also tested for DNA, and it came back as negative for DNA. What this stain has done has caused mass hysteria.

JA: Objection. Misunderstood, apologizes.

JB: Again, ridiculous hysteria that this stain looks like a child in a fetal position. I will leave up to JA that he has no intention of introducing this evidence. I think the challenge, or issue before the court, is the biological means, when there is no evidence of it. This court would need something "a bit more" than a stain in the trunk of the car, after all the tests could be or could not be a biological nature -- just because there is no DNA, semen, urine, etc.

TBC

 

[2goldfish]

Here we go. Baez is bringing up the use of Blue Star, states there was a glow, says there is no evidence this stain was biological, testing showed nothing. Stain has created a mass hysteria. JA objects, about Baez referring to exhibits, JB says photos, JA says Okay.

Refers to email from FBI which generated ridiculous hysteria about the stain being in the form of a child.

hmmph. blue star will also glow for bleach. isnt bleach used in the making of chloroform?

 

[MD MOMMY]

Here we go talking about State spending on this case.....WAAHHHHHHH!

 

[Tulessa]

If this is what he is telling ICA, she is in for a rude awakening.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Again the comments about sparing no expense.

Get over it already!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[nursebeeme]

Well I don't.

And with how fastidious GA and CA are, there is no way I'd believe there was ever any previous stain in the Pontiac either.

They can argue, well, ICA drove it, but clearly by GA's maintenance comments, he kept up with the cleaning and care of it. Even CA knew what was supposed to always be in the blue bin, therefore if there was a previous stain, she would have sent George to "detail" it.

sorry for the confusion..

I said it was brilliant! NOT! meaning not so billiant