Autopsy Report - UCF Osteological Analysis-Duct Tape Info

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, my question and the logic are not that complicated.

Sorry your brain is fatigued.

I am sorry elementary if that post came off sounding rude :innocent:

I really am totally wiped with this topic for today though, I do hope you will read some of my earlier posts as they were much more clear and concise then the last few.

I think you can see a noticeable deterioration in the quality of them towards the end :crazy:

For what its worth, I dont think that the tape floated there, nor do I believe that Caylee was suffocated with it.
 
I am sorry elementary if that post came off sounding rude :innocent:

I really am totally wiped with this topic for today though, I do hope you will read some of my earlier posts as they were much more clear and concise then the last few.

I think you can see a noticeable deterioration in the quality of them towards the end :crazy:

For what its worth, I dont think that the tape floated there, nor do I believe that Caylee was suffocated with it.

Well, feel better! Then I hope to hear about the evidence and your logic.
 
When a majority of people all come to the same conclusion from reading the same materials the harder it is for someone to come along and question it. If those conclusions are backed by an expert it just verifies to the majority that their conclusions were correct. How else could a jury possibly function? JMO

Also, the evidence provided by the ME is the only chance the victim in this case has to speak. For defense to attack the ME without basis is, again, an assault on the victim.
 
Had Caylee's BODY been found before complete decomp, tests could have been made by the ME to determine COD. Because skin, tissue, internal organs and connective tissue were lacking, an OPINION was made using the bone evidence. There could be no other opinion except homicide because tape was layered over the mouth and nose openings.

For example, if a noose had been found near the remains of a skeleton or actually around the neck of a skeleton, the opinion of COD would be death by strangulation. The person could have committed suicide or could have been murdered. Only the evidence available could clarify that opinion.

Finding the skeleton of a child, with the breathing passages covered with duct tape, can only be considered a homicide because the child wouldn't duct tape their own airways, tripple bag themself, and jump into the water in the woods.

JMOO
 
And who will hold KC down while SA is describing what may have happened. She did not do well when JA was speaking those few minutes. She definitely has a "flash point".

JMO

Ja needs to come up with something other than a hypothetical. Once Kc realizes that he is only guessing, she won't be so upset. IMO

Here's a news flash for Ja, some of us out here are depending on you to show us evidence leading up to the crime that Kc actually did this, and when you throw out a hypothetical like you did in court, and did not mention the trunk, did not mention and dna or dark root end, and did not mention vfa, and did not mention any cadaver dogs, and did not mention any adipocere like substance, well then, it does not sound very convincing. IMO
 
In what way is the report contradictory? Do you have some specific examples where the report contradicts itself?

As to the paper bag I'm not saying it was tossed about in a hap hazard manor. However a paper bag is a paper bag and has qualities that make it a paper bag. For example a paper bag is not a rigid container. It's not like the skull was placed inside a hermetically sealed plastic container or foam molded package. A paper bag is going to allow for some amount of movement. Picture a cantaloupe in a paper bag for example. Even in a box it's still going to allow for a certain amount of movement. There was no connective tissue holding the mandible in place. So therefore something had to be holding it in place. My question is if it's not the duct tape that held it in place then what could have held the mandible in place and underwent all the activity that the skull went through (animals, weather, and such) during it's entire exposure from the time the body was placed to when it was found..

I personally see nothing that can other then the duct tape. The hair mat and roots could contribute but they can't be the sole item holding the mandible in place because the roots would not explain how the mandible stayed on during the animal activity and before the roots grew into the mat.


I wonder if Cm will ask Dr Schultz on the stand: Once you removed the duct tape, did the mandible disarticulate at that point?
 
Had Caylee's BODY been found before complete decomp, tests could have been made by the ME to determine COD. Because skin, tissue, internal organs and connective tissue were lacking, an OPINION was made using the bone evidence. There could be no other opinion except homicide because tape was layered over the mouth and nose openings.

For example, if a noose had been found near the remains of a skeleton or actually around the neck of a skeleton, the opinion of COD would be death by strangulation. The person could have committed suicide or could have been murdered. Only the evidence available could clarify that opinion.

Finding the skeleton of a child, with the breathing passages covered with duct tape, can only be considered a homicide because the child wouldn't duct tape their own airways, tripple bag themself, and jump into the water in the woods.

JMOO

Homicide sounds like murder does it not? I wonder if homicide includes death by accident in Florida?

I have always thought the crime scene without any other knowledge, looks like an abduction rape case to me. IMO
 
Ja needs to come up with something other than a hypothetical. Once Kc realizes that he is only guessing, she won't be so upset. IMO

Here's a news flash for Ja, some of us out here are depending on you to show us evidence leading up to the crime that Kc actually did this, and when you throw out a hypothetical like you did in court, and did not mention the trunk, did not mention and dna or dark root end, and did not mention vfa, and did not mention any cadaver dogs, and did not mention any adipocere like substance, well then, it does not sound very convincing. IMO
It was a hearing to determine whether the death penalty should be taken away or not. This hearing was not the time or place to introduce evidence as to her guilt.
JA's hypothetical was used to illustrate the heinous nature of the crime KC is charged with. This was in answer to AL claiming that the crime was not heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. Rest assured, during the trial JA will introduce all evidence of her guilt that is allowed.
 
Ja needs to come up with something other than a hypothetical. Once Kc realizes that he is only guessing, she won't be so upset. IMO

Here's a news flash for Ja, some of us out here are depending on you to show us evidence leading up to the crime that Kc actually did this, and when you throw out a hypothetical like you did in court, and did not mention the trunk, did not mention and dna or dark root end, and did not mention vfa, and did not mention any cadaver dogs, and did not mention any adipocere like substance, well then, it does not sound very convincing. IMO

LOL - Hang in there for the trial - Ashton was only getting warmed up....
 
Homicide sounds like murder does it not? I wonder if homicide includes death by accident in Florida?

I have always thought the crime scene without any other knowledge, looks like an abduction rape case to me. IMO

We've been over this a couple of days ago - NO it does not.
 
Homicide sounds like murder does it not? I wonder if homicide includes death by accident in Florida?

I have always thought the crime scene without any other knowledge, looks like an abduction rape case to me. IMO

Oh My God! What kind of a person was this Nanny Casey entrusted her precious daughter with!
 
It was a hearing to determine whether the death penalty should be taken away or not. This hearing was not the time or place to introduce evidence as to her guilt.
JA's hypothetical was used to illustrate the heinous nature of the crime KC is charged with. This was in answer to AL claiming that the crime was not heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. Rest assured, during the trial JA will introduce all evidence of her guilt that is allowed.

BBM: If Ashton does such a thing, it is my opinion that Casey will walk. ALL the evidence that we are privy to is muddled, contradictory and confusing as far as I am concerned at this point in time. But this is better left for the strategies thread I guess :innocent:
 
BBM: If Ashton does such a thing, it is my opinion that Casey will walk. ALL the evidence that we are privy to is muddled, contradictory and confusing as far as I am concerned at this point in time. But this is better left for the strategies thread I guess :innocent:
If it's "muddled. contradictory, and confusing" I doubt he will choose to use it.
 
Oh My God! What kind of a person was this Nanny Casey entrusted her precious daughter with!

Have you ever really thought about that? I mean considering the pressure she put herself under and the pressure her mother was putting her under, perhaps she broke that golden rule and gave Caylee to someone that she was not absolutely sure she could trust her with. There are hundreds of sex offenders living in close radius to the Anthony home, there are a lot of drugs going around in the clicks. It really bothers me that Kc was up near the Cassleberry Walmart that day. Sorry to be off topic, but the duct tape thing, I mean to say, a mother would use duct tape on their daughter, just does not make sense to me no matter how people spin it. IMO
 
Oh My God! What kind of a person was this Nanny Casey entrusted her precious daughter with!

Well and that's just it, isn't it? If it was an abduction/rape then what possible reason would KC have had for all those interminable lies and such a malarky story about an imaginanny she couldn't produce?

Although her family and the defense have tried their best to find a SODDI substitute, grasping at any straw available and defying all kinds of logic, the fact is that KC never formally retracted her silly ZFG story. The claims she was "protecting" her family are garbage - the only thing her family looked worried about was what crazy protestors might do to them when she was home on bail. It has been documented by several sources that her own father wanted to beat the snot out of her to get her to tell what happened. If the family was all that worried about their safety from some dark mysterious stranger types, then why did LA and his mom allegedly brag about sneaking out of the house undetected and why were CA and GA on a media campaign to draw attention to the fact that Caylee was missing? KC said words to the effect that she was worried involving LE in Caylee's "kidnapping" would put her in danger (despite no ransom note, etc, like the tv shows/movies she watched would have) - yet the family was happy as pie to have Caylee's picture on every media outlet from here to the sun as soon as the story broke. No low profile for them.

If someone had really taken Caylee away, it would have been much easier for KC to confess to that "accident" than to sit in jail for two years on a Murder One charge. Unless she is fond of the food.

Even if KC could come up with a reasonable abduction/rape theory - the fact that she sat on her unconcerned butt eating cheese puffs and writing cutesy juvenile bff letters to other criminals - makes it look as if any abduction/rape scenario was most likely a result of her extreme negligence.

If someone has a two-year old that is abducted and raped one of two things is going on. One - they allowed it to happen by giving her away, which means they are just as guilty of the rape and murder. Two - if they were forced at all against their will, then the subsequent behavior of not notifying authorities that a human being was kidnapped and in danger, of partying for a whole month before getting caught and being forced to confess, makes them equally negligent in the eyes of the world.

We are getting to the point where, regardless of the minutiae, the irrevocable facts are that KC was the guardian of her own daughter. She either did something directly or indirectly to cause her demise, or if she did not then she cared very very little about it, refused to report it and basically wished her life to go on without consequence because she was very angry about being found out.

Sometimes I am shocked at how this case revolves more around a negligent mother's rights than the silence of a dear little child that no longer has any because her mother stole them from her either "accidentally" or on purpose.

People don't seem to realize that we forfeit our rights to call "accident!" after the fact when we use it as a cheap excuse for getting caught.
 
Sorry to be off topic, but the duct tape thing, I mean to say, a mother would use duct tape on their daughter, just does not make sense to me no matter how people spin it. IMO

RS&BBM

Yup. That's one of the pieces that's gonna convict her. A mother. Using duct tape. On her own child.

And then partying her booty off for 31 days until her own momma hunted her down and called her out on it.

Does not make sense to me either, despite umpteen kinds of spin in the past 2 years. But there it is, plain as the day is long.
 
Well and that's just it, isn't it? If it was an abduction/rape then what possible reason would KC have had for all those interminable lies and such a malarky story about an imaginanny she couldn't produce?

Although her family and the defense have tried their best to find a SODDI substitute, grasping at any straw available and defying all kinds of logic, the fact is that KC never formally retracted her silly ZFG story. The claims she was "protecting" her family are garbage - the only thing her family looked worried about was what crazy protestors might do to them when she was home on bail. It has been documented by several sources that her own father wanted to beat the snot out of her to get her to tell what happened. If the family was all that worried about their safety from some dark mysterious stranger types, then why did LA and his mom allegedly brag about sneaking out of the house undetected and why were CA and GA on a media campaign to draw attention to the fact that Caylee was missing? KC said words to the effect that she was worried involving LE in Caylee's "kidnapping" would put her in danger (despite no ransom note, etc, like the tv shows/movies she watched would have) - yet the family was happy as pie to have Caylee's picture on every media outlet from here to the sun as soon as the story broke. No low profile for them.

If someone had really taken Caylee away, it would have been much easier for KC to confess to that "accident" than to sit in jail for two years on a Murder One charge. Unless she is fond of the food.

Even if KC could come up with a reasonable abduction/rape theory - the fact that she sat on her unconcerned butt eating cheese puffs and writing cutesy juvenile bff letters to other criminals - makes it look as if any abduction/rape scenario was most likely a result of her extreme negligence.

If someone has a two-year old that is abducted and raped one of two things is going on. One - they allowed it to happen by giving her away, which means they are just as guilty of the rape and murder. Two - if they were forced at all against their will, then the subsequent behavior of not notifying authorities that a human being was kidnapped and in danger, of partying for a whole month before getting caught and being forced to confess, makes them equally negligent in the eyes of the world.

We are getting to the point where, regardless of the minutiae, the irrevocable facts are that KC was the guardian of her own daughter. She either did something directly or indirectly to cause her demise, or if she did not then she cared very very little about it, refused to report it and basically wished her life to go on without consequence because she was very angry about being found out.

Sometimes I am shocked at how this case revolves more around a negligent mother's rights than the silence of a dear little child that no longer has any because her mother stole them from her either "accidentally" or on purpose.

People don't seem to realize that we forfeit our rights to call "accident!" after the fact when we use it as a cheap excuse for getting caught.

Bolded by me. Yes, may be guilty of neglect or doing something that ultimately lead to Caylee's death, but not premeditated first degree murder as charged. IMO
 
So, "someone" (sex offender, invisananny, druggie) broke into their home after KC left Caylee with them, murdered Caylee, stole their duct tape, wrapped it around Caylee's mouth. Then went and found a heart shaped sticker from KC's room, dumped Caylee into a bag that matched the one out of their garage, made sure they wrapped her in a Pooh blanket that matched the ones from Caylee's room, then dumped her near the house all to frame KC.

What pressure did KC have? She had a mother that was a bi**h, one that drove her crazy with her control. Welcome to the real world of tons of people that have a spouse, parents or kids. We do not go and kill a child because of that. We manage to have a job and live daily under pressure just like most of the world does. KC would dump Caylee with anyone if it meant she could party or just haul her with her and drug her. KC partied at night, slept the day away and spent the rest of the time on her text messages. If that is pressure pass it on. Sounds like a vacation to me. It is time to stop making excuses for KC. There are none.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
570
Total visitors
743

Forum statistics

Threads
626,761
Messages
18,533,194
Members
241,120
Latest member
SteveH
Back
Top