2011.06.18 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-Two)

[MissJames]

Can anyone list for me the defense experts that WON'T be testifying?
I know DR. Lee won't .
What about the famous Canadian anthropologist? She was "out of the country ,on vacation" when the reports were due,IIRC. Is she out?
Anyone else?
The two Dr.s that were taken off the DT list in the middle of the State deposing one of them.

 

[Nali87]

Dr WS's inability to recall events surrounding the disappearance,his reluctance to take any of that into account ,completely blows any credibility he may have had on his final opinion. It wasn't even so much that he didn't know much about the events,but that he couldn't recall what he did or who he talked to get that info.
He said he talked to CM,but CM was not a lawyer for her back then.

Good point! JB wants to bring his own experts to contradict all the expert witness testimonies, but really the good doctor couldn't argue with the findings. All he made clear was that it could've been a homicide or an accident. Or the babysitter did it. Because you know, he didn't have all the facts. And I learned that somehow not all victims are treated the same. Seems, in the good doctor's opinion, that victims featured on TV deserve a little something something extra. Guess with the 60000 autopsies performed on regular folks, he didn't bother to give his best?

 

[JustMeDeb]

I know a ton of people who are book smart & have degrees up the backside. But they also have no common sense. Credentials don't make you credible.

 

[logicalgirl]

Well they can feel free to blame me. I will tell JB and CM anything they wanna hear, they don't have to pay me a penny - then I'll take the stand and tell the truth (something the DT desperately doesn't want done).

I sure hope Dr. G brings a skull with her and uses it as a demonstrative aid - turning it upside down and showing the jury how you can actually SEE into the cavity without having to desecrate it further.

Or - gosh! Maybe she used one of those tiny mircoscopes that are inserted into the body to do surgery with.....in laproscopic surgeries, but that's only been done for 20 or so years so maybe Dr. Spitz isn't aware of it.

 

[littlemisslegal]

I was quite shocked when he said Casey instead of Caylee.

That's it for me for today! Later guys.

he forgot whom he spoke to at the home- not sure he even knew last name of family was anthony!!

 

[azscr4mbl3r]

Jean caesarez (sp?) makes so many mistakes. She said "Dr. John Garavaglia" instead of "dr. Jan., when referring to the autopsy done by the state. When Dr. Spit was on the stand, she once referred to him as a prosecution witness. She also said the jury was looking at a picture of Caylee's brain in the skull, when it really was a picture of the black sediment, or whatever Dr. Spitz called it, on the inside of the skull cavity. The brain was totally decomposed and the skull was empty when found, and taken into evidence by LE.
There were several other mistakes made, but I cannot recall all of them to write here. The members of Websleuths know th accurate info, but someone not so well acquainted with the case could get a whole different mental picture from the verbal mistakes she makes. Anyone else notice this?

Jean is normally NG's sidekick some might say straight man. I can't say I have ever really figured out where she is coming from half the time.. Best I can figure she tries to present both side to be fair but it comes out sort of a jumble. NG coaxed her to say ***** one night on TV it was priceless. Context was ICA's spiteful ***** comment. :woohoo:

 

[ohiogirl]

If she could examine the skull without cutting the top off, why should she do it?

 

[adb263]

Dr. Spitz says every case is important because there is always someone who cares. Then he pulls someone's skull out of a duffle bag. :waitasec:

With all due respect i believe that skull was manufactured for teaching purposes. Still made me giggle when I read that though!!:crazy:

 

[Nali87]

I agree with this. I think most jurors would have a natural bias towards Dr. G because she is local she came across this case as a function of her job. Dr. Spitz is a hired hand from Michigan. If it comes down to a he said she said, I think Dr. G will win.

Plus remember, they smiled at her. :crazy:

 

[ohiogirl]

Yes, and who exactly does she report to in her job? Shouldn't he/she be made aware of her innacurate and misleading reporting?

I really don't think anyone cares. They all do it. And pat themselves on the back all the while.

 

[RR0004]

[/b]

Hopefully, no juror will get so disgusted at the DT that they give her a harsher result than they would have otherwise. :seeya:

The good thing about today's testimony...besides the obvious...is that it makes subsequent testimony look suspect. By the time they get to Roy K. or George...not one juror will believe what the DT's selling. The DT should definitely have started with a simpler "hypothesis" (as BS speaks about). They just keep adding layers and layers of ridiculous speculation. Their story has morphed into a fantasy IMHO.

 

[ohiogirl]

Later all, thanks for the eventful morning! You guys rock!

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

With all due respect i believe that skull was manufactured for teaching purposes. Still made me giggle when I read that though!!:crazy:

Oh no, no, no. Dr. Spitz was quite adamant that this in fact was a REAL skull. So it was a somebody at some point.

 

[Tuffy]

I thought it was more complicated than that. Haven't experts said something about the difference in long-term use and occasional use in whether or not the hair tests positive for drugs? Seems like every time I've heard experts talk about drugs not being found in hair, I am left with the feeling that maybe drugs WERE used, just not long term. JMO

Drugs could be found in the hair as far back as 9 months prior, and as soon as 2 weeks prior to the test. Any drug use more recent than two weeks prior would not likely show up.

I did not realize that Dr. G stated that drugs might not show up at all in deteriorated hair like that found on Caylee though. I was under the impression that it would remain much longer.

 

[logicalgirl]

Dr. Drew obviously follows the "blogs" and latches onto theories like ones we've had here.
JMO

This week is the first time I have ever seen Dr. Drew except for one show on his Celebrity addicted folks.
I have never seen anyone in the clinical psychology, psychiatry or any or the psychology profession be such a profound mess as that person is - aside from the fact I believe he has not watched five minutes in total of this trial.

His show is complete rubbish. IMO I'd rather watch JVM and god knows I never do that willingly.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

It is my understanding ICA willingly gave her rights to her parents in regards to the burial -vs- cremation.

JB then held a presser about how his client did not want her cremated.

IMO, it was all smoke and mirrors. The defense (ICA included) wanted her cremated but they wanted to blame it on GA/CA. At that time GA/CA/LA were in full cover up mode for MOTY.

This isn't making much sense but in a nutshell, if ICA wanted Caylee to be buried she had to power to do so.

IMO

Agree. And IIRC, Cindy also stated they had some fear of Caylee's grave being desecrated, which made absolutely no sense to me since many were making impromptu memorials for her.

 

[BigFatMommyDog]

The good thing about today's testimony...besides the obvious...is that it makes subsequent testimony look suspect. By the time they get to Roy K. or George...not one juror will believe what the DT's selling. The DT should definitely have started with a simpler "hypothesis" (as BS speaks about). They just keep adding layers and layers of ridiculous speculation. Their story has morphed into a fantasy IHO.

Hmmm, now who does that remind me of?

 

[Turnadot]

According to the tweets the jury wasn't buying what Dr Spitz was selling. Good!

 

[strawberry]

With all due respect i believe that skull was manufactured for teaching purposes. Still made me giggle when I read that though!!:crazy:

Oh no, no, no. Dr. Spitz was quite adamant that this in fact was a REAL skull. So it was a somebody at some point.

Yes, I thought it was a model until he made it very clear it was a real skull!

 

[logicalgirl]

Oh no, no, no. Dr. Spitz was quite adamant that this in fact was a REAL skull. So it was a somebody at some point.

Yes, he even said it was an old person's skull, and not young like Caylee was.
I jumped a mile when he almost dropped it during his testimony.