Autopsy Report - UCF Osteological Analysis-Duct Tape Info

[Astraea]

LLL....you almost made me spit my coffee....the invisinanny part just did me in Thank you

 

[LambChop]

I am well aware what the report states. I have read it over and over again at this point.

The measurements of the tape were stated above and it took me a very long time to find them. 9.5 inches was the longest. My "home" measurements tell me this would not fit around the head to attach into the hair(and my nephew is 2 and a half with an enormous head though...bless his little heart). Of course as I stated previously, this would depend on Caylees skull size.

I respect those who take the evidence presented at face value, but I can guarantee that other experts could and possibly WILL disagree with Dr. G. If medical examiners were always correct in their findings, some people wouldnt be found not guilty. As a matter of fact we had 60+ cases overturned here where the medical examiner was not correct in his findings..all children. One man spent 7 years in jail and another Mother originally charged for her daughters murder was freed(there was pubic hair evidence that the examiner hid)... no one can erase the public scrutiny of these people while they were charged and/or convicted...it happens....

If OTHERS take the report as telling them that the duct tape was still attached around the face into the back of the hair I respect that, but then I dont see the point for those same people to contribute anymore to this particular thread that is specifically about that evidence. How many ways can one repeat themselves?

You believe in Dr Gs findings..ok...I accept that you do....I personally find them questionable, and contradictory. I have been examining them closely, thus my current responses that can be found herein.

What is the point for defense to discredit Dr. G when they are going for a SODDI defense. KC was in jail when the body was put there, that is latest, right.

To try and discredit Dr. G sends up HUGE RED FLAGS, HUGE...I would imagine. But that is just me. Again, when the jury sees the pictures what can JB say. "Who will you believe me or your eyes."

While I have brought up this question a number of times it is ignored. But what would be the point? I just don't see it. And I would never want to accuse someone of a wrong doing unless I had facts, which there are none at this point. jmo

 

[Swancat63]

My daughter is only 5 ft. tall. She gave birth to a little girl who I adopted in 2008. MY baby is small like my daughter. It is 9 inches from earlobe to earlobe across her mouth. I had to play a game with her to get this measurement(although thru my tears). Because Casey is small like my daughter so maybe Caylee was too. Alot of similarities in this case for me and it breaks my heart. But here it is. It was 9 inches.

 

[AZlawyer]

I am well aware what the report states. I have read it over and over again at this point.

The measurements of the tape were stated above and it took me a very long time to find them. 9.5 inches was the longest. My "home" measurements tell me this would not fit around the head to attach into the hair(and my nephew is 2 and a half with an enormous head though...bless his little heart). Of course as I stated previously, this would depend on Caylees skull size.

I respect those who take the evidence presented at face value, but I can guarantee that other experts could and possibly WILL disagree with Dr. G. If medical examiners were always correct in their findings, some people wouldnt be found not guilty. As a matter of fact we had 60+ cases overturned here where the medical examiner was not correct in his findings..all children. One man spent 7 years in jail and another Mother originally charged for her daughters murder was freed(there was pubic hair evidence that the examiner hid)... no one can erase the public scrutiny of these people while they were charged and/or convicted...it happens....

If OTHERS take the report as telling them that the duct tape was still attached around the face into the back of the hair I respect that, but then I dont see the point for those same people to contribute anymore to this particular thread that is specifically about that evidence. How many ways can one repeat themselves?

You believe in Dr Gs findings..ok...I accept that you do....I personally find them questionable, and contradictory. I have been examining them closely, thus my current responses that can be found herein.

But the part of the report about where the duct tape was on the skull was not a "finding," it was just a description of what was actually sitting there in front of her face. So the choices are not: "Dr G was correct in her findings" or "Dr G was incorrect in her findings." The choices are: "Dr G was telling the truth" or "Dr. G was lying." And photos would definitely have been taken of the skull with the duct tape still on it. We won't see those, because of the Sunshine Law exception for autopsy photos, but the jury will see them for sure. There will be no room for the defense to argue that the duct tape "couldn't fit" when the photos are right there.

 

[Swancat63]

It also would have stuck to any hair that I took down before "the game".

 

[Marina2]

But the part of the report about where the duct tape was on the skull was not a "finding," it was just a description of what was actually sitting there in front of her face. So the choices are not: "Dr G was correct in her findings" or "Dr G was incorrect in her findings." The choices are: "Dr G was telling the truth" or "Dr. G was lying." And photos would definitely have been taken of the skull with the duct tape still on it. We won't see those, because of the Sunshine Law exception for autopsy photos, but the jury will see them for sure. There will be no room for the defense to argue that the duct tape "couldn't fit" when the photos are right there.

I was just going to say that. Same with the statement that the tape had to be cut from the hair. That's not a finding that takes an expert to dispute. It's either a lie or not a lie. If it had to be cut from the hair, it was stuck to the hair.

 

[Swancat63]

Doesn't the fact that there was duct tape on Caylee's head, face or anywhere above the neck, or on the body ANYWHERE raise red flags???

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

LLL....you almost made me spit my coffee....the invisinanny part just did me in Thank you

You are welcome...she is invisible for no one can find this alleged nanny, besides where would KC find the money to pay a nanny, they don't come cheap!

I can't tell you how much I've cried for this precious child I never had the pleasure of meeting personally. Being a grandmother to three beautiful granddaughters it breaks my heart this was the only option Inmate Anthony saw as salvation.

I still want to hear Inmate's defense on this. I just don't feel Inmate Anthony loved Caylee enough to do what was right for her. I feel she is mentally unstable and IMO, her best defense would be to go with a PPD defense. Her mothers harsh way of verbal abuse, never being held responsible for her actions, the constant enableing, denying gave KC a false sense of self. She is THE most important person in her life, no one else matters except her boyfriend du jour...I believe she is bi-polar and was in a manic state due to not having CA as the built in babysitter anymore. She finally was putting her foot down, gave Inmate Anthony an ultimatum, the alleged fight, IMO was the catalyst for Inmate Anthony to take the life of the one who was hindering her lifestyle. She didn't want a child, she was forced to. She didn't want the responsibliity of being a parent. I do feel, had CA handled her family differently, Caylee might have been alive today. Before she tells KC she was going to take custody of Caylee, she should have had those papers in hand and when KC walked out, she walked out alone, not with Caylee in the rage we saw on the jailhouse tapes of her loosing it. I feel this is absolutely the last image Caylee saw of her mother...so sad and all I really want is justice for this precious child taken out of jealousy and inconvenience for her to continue with her partying lifestyle...JMHO

It would do her soul good to finally come clean and spare the gory details of Caylee's last moments alive...that is what I am dreading. To hear the scenario the prosecutions will tell that fits the evidence. Sad..


Justice for Caylee

 

[LambChop]

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

 

[beach]

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

Her visceral reaction to Ashton's theory was as telling as anything I have seen to date. For me, it was the very definition of consciousness of guilt. Good thing for KC that the jury wasn't seated on that date. The defense has a year+ to get her ready and they better hop to it because that is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[LambChop]

Her visceral reaction to Ashton's theory was as telling as anything I have seen to date. For me, it was the very definition of consciousness of guilt. Good thing for KC that the jury wasn't seated on that date. The defense has a year+ to get her ready and they better hop to it because that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Just the emotion could be nothing more than grief, but the holding of the arm with the hand somewhat in a fist. That is pure anger. It appears to define who she really is. jmo

 

[Astraea]

But the part of the report about where the duct tape was on the skull was not a "finding," it was just a description of what was actually sitting there in front of her face. So the choices are not: "Dr G was correct in her findings" or "Dr G was incorrect in her findings." The choices are: "Dr G was telling the truth" or "Dr. G was lying." And photos would definitely have been taken of the skull with the duct tape still on it. We won't see those, because of the Sunshine Law exception for autopsy photos, but the jury will see them for sure. There will be no room for the defense to argue that the duct tape "couldn't fit" when the photos are right there.

I agree of course about the photos, as I have stated time and time again.

I dont think the choices are whether Doctor G is lying or not, nor would I want anyone to think that is what I am trying to indicate. I think it may very well be a case of Dr G reaching a different conclusion then another expert might. We see this often in cases. Experts dont always agree. Dr G sets forth her conclusion that the duct tape was attached tight enough to hold the mandible in place and is still attached tightly enough to the hair mat that it needed to be cut out. I am of the opinion that another expert could possibly question this conclusion as it is outlined in the report.

Because WE are NOT privy to photos, I am only going off Dr Gs description in the report. That description alone doesnt make any sense to ME (or to some other posters in this thread who appear to understand the human skeleton quite well). If the photos were available, I can not say whether I would or would not view them, but due to the fact that they are not, I can only discuss the report that is the basis of the title of this thread.

I also know it is somewhat pointless to even discuss any of this until trial, but I have a feeling the trial is still a long way off. As such, I can only look at the evidence that is available to me now. As far as I am concerned, the discovery released thus far is not a slam dunk. All of it seems questionable. The only part that is absolutely certain at this point is that Caylee was not reported missing by her Mother for a lengthy period of time, and during that time she certainly didnt appear to be searching for her. This to me doesnt mean she killed Caylee. I might be able to go with the lesser charge at this point, but not premeditated murder.

The Decomp in Trunk...questionable according to LEs own experts
The Duct Tape.....questionable according to the current discovery
Chloroform...questionable if not pointless according to LEs own experts
Hair with Death Band....questionable if not pointless according to LEs own experts

When I state questionable or pointless above, I state this due to the fact that in the documents LE and their experts have themselves left room for doubt. This could change at trial, as they will have an opportunity to expand on their beliefs/conclusions.

Some of these things, to me, actually contradict one another on the surface.
Until trial we, simply put, have absolutely no way of knowing what the State or Defense strategies are...we can only take each piece of discovery for its individual values. Thus my current interest in this one piece of discovery

 

[Harmony 2]

My daughter is only 5 ft. tall. She gave birth to a little girl who I adopted in 2008. MY baby is small like my daughter. It is 9 inches from earlobe to earlobe across her mouth. I had to play a game with her to get this measurement(although thru my tears). Because Casey is small like my daughter so maybe Caylee was too. Alot of similarities in this case for me and it breaks my heart. But here it is. It was 9 inches.

Your description brought tears to my eyes... Give your precious, sweet baby an extra hug today Swancat.. and thank you

 

[LambChop]

Snipped.
Until trial we, simply put, have absolutely no way of knowing what the State or Defense strategies are...we can only take each piece of discovery for its individual values. Thus my current interest in this one piece of discovery

I don't know because I can see where the State is going pretty clearly....that is why there is discovery. As for defense if they plan on disputing Dr. G's testimony on what is clearly visible from the pictures I would say defense is going after "accidential death". If they do not challenge Dr. G than they are headed down the SODDI road. I think it is pretty obvious. It's either or plain and simple. jmo

 

[marspiter]

But the part of the report about where the duct tape was on the skull was not a "finding," it was just a description of what was actually sitting there in front of her face. So the choices are not: "Dr G was correct in her findings" or "Dr G was incorrect in her findings." The choices are: "Dr G was telling the truth" or "Dr. G was lying." And photos would definitely have been taken of the skull with the duct tape still on it. We won't see those, because of the Sunshine Law exception for autopsy photos, but the jury will see them for sure. There will be no room for the defense to argue that the duct tape "couldn't fit" when the photos are right there.

I agree of course about the photos, as I have stated time and time again.

I dont think the choices are whether Doctor G is lying or not, nor would I want anyone to think that is what I am trying to indicate. I think it may very well be a case of Dr G reaching a different conclusion then another expert might. We see this often in cases. Experts dont always agree. Dr G sets forth her conclusion that the duct tape was attached tight enough to hold the mandible in place and is still attached tightly enough to the hair mat that it needed to be cut out. I am of the opinion that another expert could possibly question this conclusion as it is outlined in the report.

Because WE are NOT privy to photos, I am only going off Dr Gs description in the report. That description alone doesnt make any sense to ME (or to some other posters in this thread who appear to understand the human skeleton quite well). If the photos were available, I can not say whether I would or would not view them, but due to the fact that they are not, I can only discuss the report that is the basis of the title of this thread.

I also know it is somewhat pointless to even discuss any of this until trial, but I have a feeling the trial is still a long way off. As such, I can only look at the evidence that is available to me now. As far as I am concerned, the discovery released thus far is not a slam dunk. All of it seems questionable. The only part that is absolutely certain at this point is that Caylee was not reported missing by her Mother for a lengthy period of time, and during that time she certainly didnt appear to be searching for her. This to me doesnt mean she killed Caylee. I might be able to go with the lesser charge at this point, but not premeditated murder.

The Decomp in Trunk...questionable according to LEs own experts
The Duct Tape.....questionable according to the current discovery
Chloroform...questionable if not pointless according to LEs own experts
Hair with Death Band....questionable if not pointless according to LEs own experts

When I state questionable or pointless above, I state this due to the fact that in the documents LE and their experts have themselves left room for doubt. This could change at trial, as they will have an opportunity to expand on their beliefs/conclusions.

Some of these things, to me, actually contradict one another on the surface.
Until trial we, simply put, have absolutely no way of knowing what the State or Defense strategies are...we can only take each piece of discovery for its individual values. Thus my current interest in this one piece of discovery

To me there isn't much open for interpretation as AZ was stating. Dr. G either had to cut the tape out or didn't. So its more a question of Dr. G was lying and didn't have to cut out the tape. It's either stuck and had to be cut out as Dr. G said or it wasn't stuck and Dr.G lied in the report. We aren't exactly talking about a broad concept that's open to other view points. This one has a pretty clear Yes or No answer. The tape covering the face is also another pretty clear answer. The tape was found placed in such a way as to cover the child's face and hold the mandible in place. This is not a question of Dr. G's "finding" but more a question of Dr. G's truthfulness as she was looking right at it and gave this description. The duct tape either covered the face or it didn't. So to say it didn't more or less says that Dr. G lied in her report. It's akin to Dr. G saying the fire truck she saw was red, and someone else coming and saying well the truck Dr. G saw could have been yellow. Yes there are yellow fire trucks but Dr. G clearly said she saw a red one so to say otherwise is more an attempt to question Dr. G truthfulness imho.

It also reminds me of the root evidence and the skull proving that Caylee's skull had to be there for at least a certain length of time. Either the roots were present....or they weren't. The expert botanist and the other evidence says the roots were there.

I don't mean to rehash AZ's post but I felt it needed repeating.

 

[Astraea]

To me there isn't much open for interpretation as AZ was stating. Dr. G either had to cut the tape out or didn't. So its more a question of Dr. G was lying and didn't have to cut out the tape. It's either stuck and had to be cut out as Dr. G said or it wasn't stuck and Dr.G lied in the report. We aren't exactly talking about a broad concept that's open to other view points. This one has a pretty clear Yes or No answer. The tape covering the face is also another pretty clear answer. The tape was found placed in such a way as to cover the child's face and hold the mandible in place. This is not a question of Dr. G's "finding" but more a question of Dr. G's truthfulness as she was looking right at it and gave this description. The duct tape either covered the face or it didn't. So to say it didn't more or less says that Dr. G lied in her report. It's akin to Dr. G saying the fire truck she saw was red, and someone else coming and saying well the truck Dr. G saw could have been yellow. Yes there are yellow fire trucks but Dr. G clearly said she saw a red one so to say otherwise is more an attempt to question Dr. G truthfulness imho.

It also reminds me of the root evidence and the skull proving that Caylee's skull had to be there for at least a certain length of time. Either the roots were present....or they weren't. The expert botanist and the other evidence says the roots were there.

I don't mean to rehash AZ's post but I felt it needed repeating.

And as we know, from many trials and studies, experts DO disagree. This does not mean that one or the other is lying.

To make myself clearer (which I should have done upon initial reread), I am not including the tape being cut away from the hair. It would then be an issue of Dr G lying, as this is an act that she performed. My issue is with her conclusion from her observations as outlined in her own words and/or description. Not her acts in the processing of the remains.

 

[marspiter]

And as we know, from many trials and studies, experts DO disagree. This does not mean that one or the other is lying.

To make myself clearer (which I should have done upon initial reread), I am not including the tape being cut away from the hair. It would then be an issue of Dr G lying, as this is an act that she performed. My issue is with her conclusion from her observations as outlined in her own words and/or description. Not her acts in the processing of the remains.

Yes depending on who's paying them experts can and do disagree. Look at Kobi when he was on Nancy Grace and his "expert" opinion on things before and after he was "hired" by the defense. He pretty much disagreed with himself. However I will say it's one thing to argue a concept and something completely different to argue fact.

Take the root evidence as an example. One expert can claim that there is a window of discrepancy as to when "exactly" the body was place based on the root growth. However the expert can not argue that the roots weren't present. Do to evidence showing the roots were in fact there.

It's like the duct tape. The paid "expert" for the defense could argue that this uncommon/rare tape that Casey just happened to have available to her ended up Caylee's face by some other means then Casey putting it there (say the Chupacabre did it). However the "expert" can't really argue the tape wasn't on the face/face region of the skull. It was there and documented as being on Caylee's facial area. To claim the tape was not on Caylee's face would basically be claiming Dr. G lied.

 

[LambChop]

And as we know, from many trials and studies, experts DO disagree. This does not mean that one or the other is lying.

To make myself clearer (which I should have done upon initial reread), I am not including the tape being cut away from the hair. It would then be an issue of Dr G lying, as this is an act that she performed. My issue is with her conclusion from her observations as outlined in her own words and/or description. Not her acts in the processing of the remains.

Would this not be "putting the cart before the horse", somewhat? So the conclusion that Dr. G came to is an issue? And which part would be the issue when you have nothing to compare it to? I don't understand. FYI: I have not seen one expert on here who has disagreed with Dr. G's report so far. I could be wrong but don't recall anyone challenging Dr. G's report.

JMO

 

[Astraea]

I have stated (again and again) that I take issue with Dr Gs description and subsequent conclusion in the report. I take issue, because I find these two things to be contradictory to one another at this time based on the information that is at my disposal.

It is MY opinion at this time, after examining the only evidence available to me, that the measurements of the tape, located in the FBI analysis do not substantiate her findings as they are currently found on the record.

It is MY personal opinion at this time, that in order for the duct tape to secure the mandible in place, and at the same time be attached to the hair, all the while being exposed to said conditions, that the tape would have to reach further around then the current measurements of it would dictate.

I of course also leave this opinion open for change when and/or if this is disputed at trial. I was merely pointing out that as it stands now the conclusion is illogical to me when I take the measurements of the duct tape pieces into consideration.

 

[Astraea]

Would this not be "putting the cart before the horse", somewhat? So the conclusion that Dr. G came to is an issue? And which part would be the issue when you have nothing to compare it to? I don't understand. FYI: I have not seen one expert on here who has disagreed with Dr. G's report so far. I could be wrong but don't recall anyone challenging Dr. G's report.

JMO

In this thread there are posters who take issue with this exact point. I am not aware of them being experts, but it appears to me that they do understand the structure of the human skull, the mandible, and what it would take for it to remain in place with the use of duct tape.

Of course I am only offering my own opinion in regards to the information at my disposal. I will assume that the posters within this very thread who also questioned this particular piece of evidence were going off their personal opinions as well.