2011.06.18 Sidebar Thread (Trial Day Twenty-Two)

[bonjoviblonde]

I hope they have a picture of the broken skull. If they do, it will prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the doc is lying. You don't forget breaking a toddler's skull.

IMO

They do. JA showed it to him and the jury.

 

[grammieto5]

In regards to the blond lady who some refer to as I believe lawyer gaga. Does anyone know if this is the same lady who trired to go through security at the airport in her panties and bra. It was a few months ago. Every time I see this lady in court I am reminded of the lady at the airport. Thanks

 

[Phoebeb]

Bill S talking about jurors laughing about the duct tape episode

http://www.wftv.com/caseyanthony/index.html

Thanks for this link. I went there, but it's such a confusing page! 2 little video boxes on right, chat on the left. Could someone help me find Bill S. commentary?
TIA

 

[jon_burrows]

@Aphrodite_Jones #caseyanthony Ashton tried to rattle Spitz -- but didn't get far. Spitz owned that courtroom today!

Wow she must have been in another courtroom

I wouldn't believe a word she says. She looked like a trial groupie to me during Scott Peterson's trial. Yucking it up with Geragoss walking in and out of court.

IMO

 

[Tuffy]

May I ask, who is Dr S and what is his role in this trial? TIA

Dr. S is Dr. Spitz, and he is the defense witness that just finished testifying today. I highly recommend you watch his testimony yourself, as it is very amusing, and sad all at the same time.

 

[countzero]

I always felt they cremated Caylee's remains for nefarious reasons. I believe it even more now.

IMO

Dr G has a small piece of Caylee just in case that should happen.

 

[QueenD]

I'm not familiar with Dr. S. Is he usually a defense's witness? If so, then he was chosen by Baez for a distinct reason.

I am not familiar with him much either. The only thing(s) I have heard about him is he is famous for doing exactly what he did today.

 

[ynotdivein]

I wonder if any of our jurors were familiar with Doc Spitz from his previous high-profile appearances? If I were a juror (stops for small fit of guffawing...) hooboy, ok, so if I were a juror, I would have known about him from Spector and written him off from the get-go, AND it would have colored my view of the DT for using him.

ETA: My knowledge of the Spector trial was before my WS addiction--just knew what was in the media in CA at the time.

 

[mitzi]

So was this witness implying that the skull was under water in one place, and the duct tape was also under water, in another place, and then "someone" picked up both, took them to another place put the tape on the skull and then put both back in the place they were found?????

Unbelievable, huh?

I'm sure there is at least one juror, who during deliberations, will say the words, 'Occam's Razor'!

 

[pcrum12]

IMOO I don't think that Dr S was saying that the M.E. deliberately placed the hair in a different position. His comment about the police and he's seen worse was just a provoked comeback to JA suggesting her was saying such. As he later explained, it was of course handled and manipulated when it was moved from crime scene to M.E. lab as per the paper under the skull in the other picture. I really don't think he was saying
that the M.E. was setting up Casey lol. Again in my own opinion.

 

[RR0004]

From what I could tell, Spitz tried to rewrite history to fit his scenario of tampering and skeleton moving. Each time JA shot down part of his theory, he seemed to do a little verbal dance, insinuating and pulling another conspiracy in to bolster the impossible.

The stuff with the hair mat was excruciating. So, if all else fails, blame the water...it was insulting, quite frankly.

I agree with the WSer who said JA should have pointed out the deterioration of the duct tape.
Wonder what Spitz would have come back with?

Spitz himself mentioned the deterioration of the tape, IIRC. It was in an explanation of the elements and the glue, but I could be wrong because I had difficulty following the good doctor's answers. There was never a straight answer. He contradicted himself so many times that I think JA gave up on showing the error(s) of his thinking 'cause it could have been peceived by the jury as him (JA) attempting to confuse and tie up the doctor...when in fact the doctor was just PLAIN CONFUSING!!
Geez...I hope I made sense...lol.

 

[jon_burrows]

They do. JA showed it to him and they jury.

I wonder why JA didn't nail him to wall on that lie...actually point out where he broke her skull. Maybe it was obvious to the jurors?

IMO

 

[Sedona722]

@Aphrodite_Jones #caseyanthony Ashton tried to rattle Spitz -- but didn't get far. Spitz owned that courtroom today!

Wow she must have been in another courtroom

Ahhh, but if you remember her from the Scott Peterson trial, she was just as strange. Also her constantly rubbing up agains Mark Geragos!!:banghead:

IMO she is not very creditable.:loser:

 

[LolaMoon08]

Let's not forget that JA had the good Doctor admit to being on the OJ Simpson trial. A lot of people felt that a guilty man got away with murder in that case. Wonder how many on the jury felt about the OJ Simpson case? Then to sit there and listen to the good Doctor's insinuations of the ME basically posing Caylee's skull a certain way and someone taking the skull from Suburban Drive, putting duct tape on it, and then putting it back there?

And speaking of... if the good Doctor believes the skull was staged... what good does that do with his explanation of the "brain dust" being on that particular side? How can he give a expert opinion about the skull being in a particular position... if the whole skull had been tampered with?

 

[Ada]

At the end, Casey whispered something to Baez (after the judge mentioned working later on Saturdays)...wonder if she asked if they'd be done by then 'cause Baez nodded "yes".

Maybe she asked "am I screwed?"

 

[Tuffy]

I noticed some comments on the other thread in response to my post in which I commented that JA sounded as if he was harrassing Dr. Spitz. I'm unable to respond there because the thread is closed.

At the beginning of the cross, I felt that JA was missing the main point which was that DS was saying that Dr. G didn't perform a completely thorough autopsy that included splitting the skull.

The tone of voice JA used was aggressive, not just a simple exchange of conversation. That's what JB got critisized for earlier in the trial. I can tell when that tone is being used because I hate it and my stomach immediately tightens up making me unable to actually hear what is being said (that's in my own life). It hinders conversation because the tone of voice overtakes the words being said imo. Sort of like intimidation. It's easy when you're on a particular side already to get behind the intimidation. The Juror's aren't supposed to be on a particular side and I want them to hear each persons words and not get caught up in the emotion or 'their side'.

That's why it bothers me - when used by either side.

No, JA didn't miss the point, he was trying to get Dr. S to tell him where it is written that Dr. G should have sawed the skull in half. Dr. S was never able to tell him that. All Dr. S could offer up was that he, himself thought that it should have been done.

 

[corq]

He did not impress me by

-not wearing gloves
-not being able to send a sample to a lab if there is no one to do it for him
-expecting a skull to walk on a table to be photographed
-vaguely blaming colleagues for blatant fraud and misconduct

You'd think he'd have arranged locum tenens' lab privileges for this sort of thing, but I'm not sure how that sort of thing is done. While in other cases I'm happy for a second opinion, after reading up on Spitz' testimony with Phil Spector's trial, I can't help but think this sort of thing is his specialty, but it comes off as non-analytical armchair quarterbacking to other ME's work. /JMO

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk

 

[pcrum12]

I noticed some comments on the other thread in response to my post in which I commented that JA sounded as if he was harrassing Dr. Spitz. I'm unable to respond there because the thread is closed.

At the beginning of the cross, I felt that JA was missing the main point which was that DS was saying that Dr. G didn't perform a completely thorough autopsy that included splitting the skull.

The tone of voice JA used was aggressive, not just a simple exchange of conversation. That's what JB got critisized for earlier in the trial. I can tell when that tone is being used because I hate it and my stomach immediately tightens up making me unable to actually hear what is being said (that's in my own life). It hinders conversation because the tone of voice overtakes the words being said imo. Sort of like intimidation. It's easy when you're on a particular side already to get behind the intimidation. The Juror's aren't supposed to be on a particular side and I want them to hear each persons words and not get caught up in the emotion or 'their side'.

That's why it bothers me - when used by either side.

agree

 

[azscr4mbl3r]

I think there are plenty more tricks up his sleeve.

IMO

I think HHJP left it hanging over JB's head for a reason. Don't forget he sent that mentally challenged woman to jail/fine. I doubt he will be so lenient on JB.
I think he is leaving him on the hook...

 

[~PrinceSSa~]

Dr G has a small piece of Caylee just in case that should happen.

Could you please elaborate. TIA :seeya: