2011.06.13 TRIAL Day Seventeen (Morning Session)

[mck16]

I think he wants them in color so he can tell if they are brown hair, colored hair or bleached hair. jmo

 

[beach]

Thanks, 'Beach. I heartily agree with the intent here but am a little puzzled. If I link to a site regarding another quote ~ how would I even know they were guilty of having posted those photos? Seems overly burdensome to search each site you link to make sure they're not guilty of posting said photos.

Or did you mean just to not post links to those photos but can link for other purposes? TIA!

We have blocked the links to the sites that we are aware have posted them.

If you are linking for some other reason entirely and another site just happens to have them there and we are unaware, that is fine. We can't police the internet, obviously. A couple of sites were promoting the "unpixelated photos" and encouraging lookyloos. We just aren't going to help them.

IOW, don't worry about linking to any site for a reason other than to link the photos. Nothing to worry about there. We realize we will fall a little short but we are doing our best to not help those sites get the "hits" just to exploit Caylee and in total disregard of the spirit of HHJP's order.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Wait- the defense is saying she's drowned so why would they argue this?

To try to prove that the hair banding shows Caylee didn't drown.

I think. :waitasec:

ETA: Oh, I see your confusion. I meant the state, not the defense. Sorry. :floorlaugh:

 

[jon_burrows]

Not necessarily. My printer is set to print in b/w no matter what.

I print in b/w most of the time too even if the source is in color. In fact, I use 'grayscale' because it uses less ink.

IMO

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Baez should have allowed these pictures of the hair banding in from the study and then asked this guy why they could not get a good picture like that of Caylee's hair with the banding.

 

[Soulmagent]

The witness is talking about the hair banding? How interesting! I'm coming in late here. I didn't know we were going to have an expert on the hair banding. Talking about his study. Wow!

Salem

:floorlaugh: Neither did JB!

 

[GreenTeam]

The witness is talking about the hair banding? How interesting! I'm coming in late here. I didn't know we were going to have an expert on the hair banding. Talking about his study. Wow!

Salem

You didn't miss anything other than JB whining about related pics and powerpoint.

 

[TiaM]

Jose is going to milk this for all it's worth with his objections. One small victory goes to his head.

Oh, the national tv suck-ups will be crowing on and on about the MAJOR DT WIN on their shows today/tonight! :banghead:

Never mind that Baez will surely step in it before the day is out! :floorlaugh:

 

[suzihawk]

Oh wait...I think I finally get it! The defense is going to use this study to try to prove that Caylee didn't die in water!

(I think.)

But didn't he allege that she DID die of a simple, everyday drowning in his opening statement? Why would he want to disprove his own theory?

 

[darnudes]

For someone who thinks this hair banding is junk science, Baez has concentrated more on keeping Karen Lowe and Stephen Shaw from testifying than virtually anyone else - In Baez's mind it can't be that insignificant.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

But didn't he allege that she DID die of a simple, everyday drowning in his opening statement? Why would he want to disprove his own theory?

LOL...I meant the state. :floorlaugh:

 

[kathyn2]

I agree!!

oh i so agree! Ja is the epitome of wholesome goodness and decency to me.

 

[luvmy4brats]

To try to prove that the hair banding shows Caylee didn't drown.

I think. :waitasec:

ETA: Oh, I see your confusion. I meant the state, not the defense. Sorry. :floorlaugh:

You may have been correct the first time with the way the defense is jumping all over the place.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

You may have been correct the first time with the way the defense is jumping all over the place.

:floorlaugh: It's funny 'cause it true.

 

[FaerieB]

Oh, the national tv suck-ups will be crowing on and on about the MAJOR DT WIN on their shows today/tonight! :banghead:

Never mind that Baez will surely step in it before the day is out! :floorlaugh:

My personal fav, NG, has already started:

TeamNancyHLN Team Nancy HLN
Major blow to the prosecution. Judge does not allow the use of power point presentation prepared by FBI witness.

Personally I don't qualify the witness being allowed to discuss the study and result but not show photos to accompany it as a "major blow." But that's just me. :cow:

 

[Plumeria5]

Jose is going to milk this for all it's worth with his objections. One small victory goes to his head.

"One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind!"

 

[Donjeta]

Pros: What caused you to be interested in these studies?

Shaw: A thesis I came across, took hairs from living individuals and put them in soil and water got apparent decomposition in those hairs and suggested they be compared to postmortem hairs.

Pros: so the thesis found some artifact from living people's hairs
Did this case give you additional inspiration?

I would have done it anyway, but not so soon, it became more prioritized.

Is the purpose to see if this particular phenomenon can occur in living person's hair

Yes. Volunteers volunteered their hairsamples.

JB objects, judge overrules.

I used 15 hair samples in this sample.

They were pulled from volunteers?
Yes, males and females, youngest was 3, oldest in their fifties.

What environmental conditions

Windowsill, buried, plants, indoors in water, outdoors in sunlight and out of sunlight, 3 vehicles, in trunk, dash, seat. Some vehicles were used normally.

How did you place the hairs so they would be undisturbed?

Used tape to distal end, leaving proximal end free
Told the vehicle user to leave them be, not clean vehicle.

Did you check the hairs at intervals or at the end.

I would check at an earlier time period and a longer time period. 3-7 months.

Objection overruled

Is there a difference between hairbanding and other kinds of decomposing?

IMO it's an obvious difference

Did you find any PMHB?
No.

Two different examiners examined the hair samples, Examiner 1 correctly identified all the post mortem hairs and initially identified one antemortem hair as banded. Examiner 2 did the same. They did not identify the same AM hairs as banded so in their confirmed results they excluded them.

 

[cloud9]

Baez just doesn't know when to quit, does he....

Exactly!

 

[LaLaw2000]

Brad Cooper, the defendant, had to leave the courtroom even during recess. He also was not allowed to chair hop. There was a court deputy stationed no more than 4 feet from Cooper during the entire trial. This letting ICA do her 'thing' in this courtroom is ridiculous, IMO.

(Nancy Cooper was the victim)

 

[TortillaChip]

that's going to be a pic of the actual hair? I hope so, as the jury has probably been waiting for this, all this time......too bad the other comparisons are out.