2011.06.04 TRIAL Day Ten (Morning Session ONLY)

[uklaw]

Wasn't aware of that. Not relevant to the current trial though, perhaps. I wonder what exculpatory evidence might be withheld in this case since in my estimation the evidence on a circumstantial basis is overwhelming. At least as to the defense strategy on a drowning and body being hidden by George - and Kronk moving the body, and Cindy leaving the pool ladder up and Casey just partying out of fear of her father....... shrug.

I did not know that...interesting. TY.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2009/12/casey-anthony-insufficient-funds/

 

[Feebot]

My eyes are crossed and i have a headache

 

[Chiquita71]

Jose is now getting Ms. Lowe in on the plot against Casey. He is suggesting she knew things before the investigation was over, ways she did not do what was right to do. Ways she messed things up and followed science and instructions that were not what was right and all of her tests are wrong but yet she still gives her opinion.

He is saying she did not send this sample out, she is not the person who does this or that, he is asking if all the work she did and everything she is telling us isn't all wrong.

Jose has asked if she failed tests and if she is any good at any of this, and that the science we have about people being dead and how we determine that stuff is not valuable, that it means nothing.

 

[andalso]

IMO the case is strong enough without the hair. While the hair evidence may create some doubt, it creates reasonable doubt on science, not reasonable doubt on guilt of ICA.... when the totality of the evidence in considered.
If that makes any sense....

 

[GiantPickle]

A little OT, probably asked before, but why do Cindy and George sit on the Prosecution side?

the chairs were offered to them by the prosecution as a courtesy but I think it kinda has become very symbolic since George is being blamed for the death/coverup

 

[bobloblaw]

I can understand your doubt if you do not take her education, her extended work in the field, the four scientific papers she has written on this subject approved by her peers.....if you look at her course and consider it was intense and compacted.

For example, my next door neighbour is a Doctor and a specialist in thoracic lung surgery. He is currently in the States on a six month highly intensive "course" learning how to do lung transplants.
On his return, he will lead the lung transplant team.

You must live in a nice neighbourhood. Shaughnessy?

 

[nursebeeme]

Sorry, I was a few pages back - hadn't come to your warning.

no worries... you all are doing great.. I know it is frustrating. Thanks so much to everyone for keeping your posts on what is being said in the courtroom:rocker:

 

[Donjeta]

So are there any maternal relatives who have died in the trunk since 1998?

 

[Liz]

JB: The child was still missing at that time ????
I thought she was never missing according to his opening statement.

Touche!

 

[eaglemom]

A little OT, probably asked before, but why do Cindy and George sit on the Prosecution side?

They were allowed in the court as next of kin of the victim (through a court process by their attorney) and the court saves seats for them I suppose that is the natural place for them to be

MOO

 

[Sailor Bug]

I don't think the DT is doing much damage. Either there's a band or there isn't, and she testifies that there is a band. Bands are only on hairs from decomp. Pretty simple. Just hope the jury isn't getting confused.

My bold
I as well hope the Jury isn't getting confused.
I think JB is making points here with the Jury.

I think the State should have had the actual hair & pictures enlarged for the Jury to see.
I have binoculars that can take pictures every 5 seconds.
Why isn't there some form of a camera on the microscope to take enlarged pictures
of pertinent information such as this...to keep this testimony crystal clear to this Jury?

 

[GiantPickle]

you can shed a hair anywhere and transfer it anywhere but if you're dead, you're dead...

 

[mitzi]

Problem is he has at least two cases overturned for his witholding exculpatory material from the defense (although one of those was overturned on appeal). He certainly plays fast and loose with the rules of evidence.

Link to this info?

 

[sleutherontheside]

So..JB is now trying to infer that GA was the one to transfer the one hair to Casey's car.

 

[faefrost]

I agree, he has created some reasonable doubt.

He was doing good up until the point where he led the witness into directly comparing the truck hair with those from the remains. At that point he was toasted.

And I can't believe he is still going on and on and on. JB must have slept through that day in Law School where they taught you to score your point and get out quickly.

 

[Chiquita71]

Jose is saying the witness let the evidence become corrupt. He is saying she did not take the proper steps to get the samples in a good way. Jose is saying that what she did could cause other hairs to get on her and if it is something they consider.

Jose is saying that if that can happen then isn't that what happened here?

 

[mombomb]

Cross exam of FBI analyst Karen Lowe by JB - continued

On the topic of reinforcing meaning of hair banding - she doesn't believe they will ever be able to say specifically that hair banding comes from a dead body - just consistent with.

Part of her job is to determine what other tests should be done on a hair.

At the time she examined the hair she made the determination that the hair was similar to the hair in the hairbrush of Caylee - not to the conclusion of all others.

Caylee was still missing at the time of her examination. The hair was found in a common environment where there could be other hairs. Nuclear DNA could be done if tissue is present. Was this hair sent to nuclear DNA to determine if it was Caylee's. No - no tissue present. She agreed she is not a DNA analyst. It is part of her job to determine if an associated hair might go to nuclear or mitochondrial DNA. She might ask for a conference with a DNA analyst to make that determination and extract the DNA if it could be obtained.

The hair either belonged to Caylee, ICA, CA or Cindy's mom - any maternal relative.

Finding hairs in the trunk of a vehicle is not uncommon. Average person looses 100 head hairs every day, majority during grooming. You may have hair on your clothing.

Transferred hair is one person's hair on another and then if that hair is put somewhere else, that is secondary transfer.

She couldn't say if this hair got there by primary or secondary.

Cross examination concluded.

 

[Liz]

CFNews13Casey

Bearded juror has been sitting back, leaning against wall. Just grabbed notebook. #CaseyAnthony
less than 20 seconds ago via Twitter for iPad

 

[grammieto5]

I think this witness speaks English, I understood her

 

[Chiquita71]

If there is a way that a hair can get there, then isn't that the way that hair got there?