2011.04.08 Frye Hearing Thread

[21merc7]

False positive again. (Maybe they have been playing with antivirus programs too much.)

I foresee several recesses again...

 

[TiaM]

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

Meaning he's read our very sad thread on said stain. :loser:

BTW - DT - sorry if THE TRUTH happens to be "highly prejudicial". Hurts, doesn't it?

 

[doogiesgirl]

JB saying the confirmatory tests did not show that the stain was biological.

Whatever that means???

moo

 

[Lanie]

Lol, Baez says he anticipates his colleagues argument, saying just because it is not blood, saliva or DNA doesn't mean it is biological, and I disagree. I think he forgot the word not in there.

 

[Softail]

JB - Wet moist garbage. To assume anything else is ridiculous.

 

[SuziQ]

What wet garbage? Is this like the non existent pizza?

 

[MD MOMMY]

JA up...lets do this Jeff!

 

[strawberry]

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?

Let's see...just the red, dried stain from decomp fluid (sorry Caylee )

 

[Chiquita71]

JB: despite all that they cannot confirm that stain is not bio in nature. Blu star and fbi by their own admission can get false positives from tests. I think the confirmatory tests say this is not bio in nature, therefore it is a stain.

We show there was a wet moist bag of garbage in the trunk of the car. anything else is a stretch. we think it shouldn't be mentioned anymore that stain was Bio and came from a decomp body.

JA: there has been no testimony to support this motion. I clearly pointed out the defendent bears the burden.

 

[Softail]

JA - No testimony to support this motion.

 

[Nana46]

In the minority here as I have never had a stain in my trunk.
Sorry.

 

[Chiquita71]

JA: they have not presented any evidence of the facts contained. I have nothing attached to the motion I received. I don't know if the courts copy is different than I received. The defense has presented no evidence here.

 

[Softail]

JA - Attaching something to a motion does not make it proof!

:giggle:

 

[SuziQ]

JA basically saying DT making up stuff and saying it's true. Hmmmm, like pizza and wet garbage?

 

[ynotdivein]

JA: Defense has failed in their burden to prove Dr. Vass testimony irrelevant, motion should be denied.

 

[Lanie]

JA: No testimony presented in regards to this motion.
State does not concede statement of fact in motion, does not waive defenses burden of proof. Does not have an attachment on his copy of the motion. However, attaching something does not make it proof. Vass found fatty acids consistent with decomposition. JA done.

 

[TiaM]

sorry for the confusion..

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

Sweet friend - I wasn't commenting on your comment - I was commenting on JB's original comment that you were quoting!

Sorry that I confused you! :seeya:

(I went back and fixed my comment by doing a BBM - again sorry for the confusion!)

 

[Softail]

JB - If we need to stop the trial and have an evidentiary hearing, we will do that.

 

[doogiesgirl]

JA basically got up and said he is lost by the DT's motion and it should be denied.

ha ha ha

 

[darnudes]

JA basically saying DT making up stuff and saying it's true. Hmmmm, like pizza and wet garbage?

Kinda like ICA

Baez talking about stopping the trial to have a hearing - oh no he didn't!