Evidence for "Dead body in the Damn Car"

[RR0004]

The defense may have their own experts but they won't be able to do their own testing because the hair from the trunk was used up in the FBI testing, it was only 2.5cm long.

...and the so called food that HL stated he saw? What about testing on that? How about pics...even microscopic pics?

 

[RR0004]

Because she ran out of petrol, didn't want to piss Tony off, & wanted to spend the weekend with him before he left.



I hope so. Let's hope they can come up with a "suitable known hair sample"!

She obviously spent time away from TL. He was at school.

 

[magnolia]

I would also like to see them remove 100 hairs from the cadaver, place them to the side, and after the 2.6 days examine the 100 hairs and see if they had postmortem banding and or signs of apparent decompostion on them.

IMO, hairs would not decompose after fresh removal from the scalp.

It makes sense to me that hair would need to be intact/attached to the decomposing body/scalp in order to decompose.

 

[LambChop]

Background Information

Evidence of a hair with decomposition- found in Pontiac's trunk

Q12.1 hair with apparent decomposition at proximal root end (trunk)
Q59 hair from hair mass (remains)
K1 hair from Casey Anthony
Q15 hair from Caylee’s hairbrush

page 2/3329 http://blogs.discovery.com/files/18530294.pdf

page 8/3335 http://blogs.discovery.com/files/18530294.pdf

page 57 http://www.wftv.com/pdf/18740657/detail.html


page 594 of 1405 http://www.wftv.com/download/2009/1009/21252103.pdf

page 625 of 1405 http://www.wftv.com/download/2009/1009/21252103.pdf

Harmony2: This is the last time I will repost you findings, I promise. Not sure why some posters keep missing this along with other very valuable information which has been posted in the past on this very thread but here we are again. Hopefully this will resolve questions.

Death Band: please look at the picture that Harmony2 has so graciously posted for us to examine. You can see the death band is not located at the very end of the hair as you would expect color treated hair to appear. It is clearly not from color treated hair. If the hair is from Caylee it would be similar for MDNA but structurally it would be different as infant's hair is much finer than adults. They know it's Caylee's hair because KC is not 2 years old.

Now off to see if I can find out why this banding process happens.

 

[LambChop]

...and the so called food that HL stated he saw? What about testing on that? How about pics...even microscopic pics?

You are so right, RR0004. With his reputation for him not to do a thorough job, well, what can I say. Does not look good for Dr. Lee continuing in this case. Makes you wonder if it was for process of elimination purposes only, as in AL's speech. Certainly SA can't use him now. My guess is that was what the request for the defense to be allowed to observe at the remains site was all about. JMO

 

[cyberborg]

...and the so called food that HL stated he saw? What about testing on that? How about pics...even microscopic pics?

This is an important point. HL can assert what he wants in the media in order to taint the future Jury pool but CANNOT assert at trial in a Court of Law.

Therefore, if he is a credible expert he not only needs to prove his examination and findings but needs actual real supporting evidence that he collected at the time or later.

We have NOTHING from the Defense so we cannot be sure what he collected and documented at the time -- if anything -- but it does sound like he planned to return to fully document, since this was only a cursory preliminary visit. BUT having briefed JB then IMHO it was decided it didn't really help the Defense versus a Jury visit to smell the trunk .... else they would have been all over it and processing it ..... like they did Kronk.

Although the new Defense stance seems to be completely backing off homicide towards a natural or accidental event as the only viable path.

 

[magnolia]

Harmony2: This is the last time I will repost you findings, I promise. Not sure why some posters keep missing this along with other very valuable information which has been posted in the past on this very thread but here we are again. Hopefully this will resolve questions.

Death Band: please look at the picture that Harmony2 has so graciously posted for us to examine. You can see the death band is not located at the very end of the hair as you would expect color treated hair to appear. It is clearly not from color treated hair. If the hair is from Caylee it would be similar for MDNA but structurally it would be different as infant's hair is much finer than adults. They know it's Caylee's hair because KC is not 2 years old.

Now off to see if I can find out why this banding process happens.

I'm going to say this is IMO, because I don't have time to find the info. right not. The most common postmortem putrid hair proximal end changes do not contain a death band. I suspect this may be why we don't see a reference to banding in the report. The hair exhibited characteristics of apparent decomp., but did not contain a band. IMO

 

[cyberborg]

I firmly believe that HL's sole role was as a sideshow, a talking head who is attractive to TV shows like NG to talk up mis-information. He took over from Kobi since Kobi had started independently, that the evidence against KC was damning and then was hired by the Defense -- only to shut him up and shut him down.

Having eliminated Kobi they used HL as a talking head and then proceeded to replace HL, since he was not that effective with LKB.

The Defense did a land grab of some experts and talking heads and wants to keep them on their team -- and they have an extended team like LKB's hubby (MB) but I think HL has been filed away and I would be surprised if we see him on this -- unless something new comes up.

 

[Harmony 2]

LARRY KOBILINSKY, FORENSIC SCIENTIST: Well, I think that they should be able to get a conviction just based on that. We don`t need a body. And examining the hair -- there are sometimes telltale signs on hair as to whether the hair was post-mortem or not. There`s a band that forms nearby the roots. So they might be able to tell if this was a hair that came off post-mortem.

Now, obviously, when you put the smell of decomposition together with some biological substance, which could very well be fluids of decomposition, and hair -- we don`t know how many hairs, whether it was a clump, whether it was pulled, whether it fell out. There`s a lot that we don`t know. But putting that all together, it certainly sounds very suspicious, and I think a good prosecutor can make a case out of this, even without a body.

GRACE: Koby -- with us is Dr. Lawrence Kobilinsky, forensic scientist -- explain to us how you can tell, with a little more specificity -- how you can tell from a hair whether it`s in life or post-mortem.

KOBILINSKY: Well, there`s been some research done on post-mortem hair, and adjacent to the root -- obviously, the root is connected to the shaft of the hair -- there is a dark band that forms. How wide that forms, we really don`t know, but it does form. And so if that hair had fallen out after an individual dies, it would -- you would look for that banding pattern. That would be one good indication that it is a post-mortem hair.

GRACE: And Koby, how long does it take post-mortem -- after death -- for the band, the dark band, to appear between the shaft and the nucleus, the root of the hair?

KOBILINSKY: Well, there haven`t been very many studies, but it happens over a very short time course -- hours, and perhaps a day, perhaps two days. But it should form and they should be able to see it.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0808/01/ng.01.html

 

[notthatsmart]

Explain how you know that tiny little pieces of cheese or meat are huge amounts of evidence to him. What does that even mean? moo

I mean to say that in the trace evidence world, they examine small amounts of anyone thing. An ounce could be a lot in that context.

 

[cyberborg]

I mean to say that in the trace evidence world, they examine small amounts of anyone thing. An ounce could be a lot in that context.

I think we are going around in circles and we have already exhaustively debated the food in the trash bag and trunk. HL made a broad statement in the media with nothing on any actual samples taken, etc - so it is complete speculation. Trace amounts in food containers do not the smell of a dead body make, especially months after it was removed from the trunk. Nuff said.

 

[marspiter]

I think we are going around in circles and we have already exhaustively debated the food in the trash bag and trunk. HL made a broad statement in the media with nothing on any actual samples taken, etc - so it is complete speculation. Trace amounts in food containers do not the smell of a dead body make, especially months after it was removed from the trunk. Nuff said.

I would also add the processed food the likes of which would have been in the containers found in the the trash and car would not yield a "cadaver" like smell no matter the quantity left in the car. I will say from my experience that yes it would smell bad like the local landfill, or ordinary household trash cans, but nothing like walking into a relatives house after they died and sat in there for a awhile.

I've personally smelt it (dead bodies) and it would be next to impossible to convince me that any amount of trash from food containers smells any where close to that smell.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I mean to say that in the trace evidence world, they examine small amounts of anyone thing. An ounce could be a lot in that context.

But no meat or cheese was was found...

 

[notthatsmart]

Harmony2: This is the last time I will repost you findings, I promise. Not sure why some posters keep missing this along with other very valuable information which has been posted in the past on this very thread but here we are again. Hopefully this will resolve questions.

Death Band: please look at the picture that Harmony2 has so graciously posted for us to examine. You can see the death band is not located at the very end of the hair as you would expect color treated hair to appear. It is clearly not from color treated hair. If the hair is from Caylee it would be similar for MDNA but structurally it would be different as infant's hair is much finer than adults. They know it's Caylee's hair because KC is not 2 years old.

Now off to see if I can find out why this banding process happens.

Is that an actual picture of the the hair in the trunk with the apparent decomposistion?

 

[Tulessa]

Well, any Grandmother anxious to help find her missing grandchild could be forgiven for smirking when she suggested she should have given investigators the dog's hairbrush.... right? That's only a half lie after all- it is a brush, just not Caylee's.

I don't forgive her for anything. IMO she is doing nothing but enabling Casey to lie and get away with murder. To suggest that she didn't know what she was doing insults our intelligence. Great post Zsa.

 

[Tulessa]

was that in fact proven to be an email from ca?

yesssssss

 

[joypath]

Say, sounds like you have a wealth of info here. Hope you could provide some links. Is that true that Koblinsky or Spitz took samples from the funeral home? Koki wasn't there,stated that it was (yes it is) standard protocol and Werner's son confirmed that it was standard protocol. Is it true that they took split samples from SA? Usually standard protocol, IIRC, Strickland mandated that samples be made available IF the defense desires to avail themselves of them, NO COMMENT from anybody from the STATE's SCIENTIFIC community. If so, why wouldn't Sa put that in one of their reports? Not required to notate in most jurisdictions.

Dr Lee. What Florida interview? Link? I know of an Nancy Grace interview This is the one to which I refer, we had to wait 'til he was comfy before he began the chat (IIRC it was immediately post Florida, like right off the plane!), but am not aware of an Florida interview? I have heard rumors that SA gave HL 3 soda cans, but have not seen that in any reports. Did I miss it somewhere? There ya go....I never heard anything about the soda cans, maybe Henry was thirsty? KIDDING!

Even if these samples were obtained, Isn't it the defense responsiblity to maintain Attorney client privildege? I'm not getting it. My response was to your question: what should they be testing....I just can up with a few suggestions for them pro bono!

Did this this Kathy R evaluate the remains? When? Help me out here, do you have any idea when, so I can try to find the links? Was anyone else present at the evalutation?

Again: I was pointing out te drama behind the case of grabbing the high profile expert and then, did they utilize the individual? Me no sabe nada, but believe...NOPE!


Hi NTS! Sorry for the delay but having the day from Hades here! I'm going to cut and paste my answer based on experience & news commentary via NG's show: NOT WITH LINKS as tempus fugits!

 

[joypath]

I would also add the processed food the likes of which would have been in the containers found in the the trash and car would not yield a "cadaver" like smell no matter the quantity left in the car. I will say from my experience that yes it would smell bad like the local landfill, or ordinary household trash cans, but nothing like walking into a relatives house after they died and sat in there for a awhile.

I've personally smelt it (dead bodies) and it would be next to impossible to convince me that any amount of trash from food containers smells any where close to that smell.

I concur!

 

[Tulessa]

I concur!

ROFL. We're going bold also!! :woohoo:

 

[flourish]

BBM

Yes. That's exactly what the FBI meant to say, and they explain it very clearly in their manuals. They aren't required to use words in the same way as Webster's (or whoever) defines those words.

Okay, I can accept that. If the Fbi wants to change defintions of words, that is their perrogative. I wish they wouldn't do that though. I hope they explain to the Jury, because the Jury will probably interpret it wrong knowing the real definition.

Incidentally, I have not seen the Fbi use the words "same as" in these documents. Moo

Okay, so there are these things in language called Synonyms. The free dictionary defines synonyms as

1. A word having the same or nearly the same meaning as another word or other words in a language.
2. A word or an expression that serves as a figurative or symbolic substitute for another.

So sometimes more than one word can mean the same thing.

In addition, sometimes one word has more than one definition, as illustrated above with the listing of two definitions for the word "synonym."

For another example, let's look at the word "obdurate." According to the free dictionary, "obdurate" means

1. a. Hardened in wrongdoing or wickedness; stubbornly impenitent.
b. Hardened against feeling; hardhearted
2. Not giving in to persuasion; intractable.

Again, there is more than one definition for that word.

Then there is the word, "lingo." The free dictionary defines "lingo" as

1. Language that is unintelligible or unfamiliar.
2. The specialized vocabulary of a particular field or discipline.

In various fields of study, there are specialized vocabularies. A good example of this is the word "inclusion." As a teacher, this word means something different to me than it does for my husband, who does not work in education.

The FBI does not "change definitions of words." They simply have their own lingo, which offers additional, or more specified, definitions for various terms they use. This is not unique to the legal field. Do a google search for "medical dictionary," or "educational dictionary," and you will see that those fields, too, have specialized dictionaries to assist with understanding their lingo.

Hope this helps.