Evidence for "Dead body in the Damn Car"

[joypath]

When one is working a "medical-legal" case (that's what we oldtimers call forensic cases!) one always plan on "saving" as much of the testing material as possible. WHY, one might ask? Well, so you can replicate the procedure to confirm your results if necessary, so you can provide some sample to the "other side" and sometimes even to a third or fourth party! Fortunately as the scientific techniques got better and better, the amount of sample needed to test got smaller and smaller! (Yeah, that's why the phlebotomist no longer take 10 tubes of blood from your arm for those pesky annual physicals!). Additionally, the scientific tests became more accurate (free from error especially as the result of care) and precise (being exactly that and neither more nor less). The confidence levels have gone up as the specificity of the testing modalities have increased BUT we are still left with that pesky issue of getting our information across to EVERYBODY!
The entire case CAN rest on the linkage between the stepping stones (HECK NO I will not say PAVERS! ) that the lawyers and witnesses have to connect to the hands of the accused and the victim, hence, THAT's why WE GO TO COURT!

 

[joypath]

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.

A bit back I posted that this technique of "capturing" the local or "high profile" experts by contract be it a handshake agreement or a written contract is a standard game plan to minimize utilization and opinions, even if they NEVER see the light of day! Once specialist A is "captured" by team A, the other side can't chit chat with him or her.

Now of course I discussing conversations under oath, the conversations given under the bright lights of the camera and with the SWAG baskets as a thank you are always covered by free speach unless "gagged" by court order so the defendant won't have to worry about a COV due to excessive publicity! <snicker>

 

[sleutherontheside]

A bit back I posted that this technique of "capturing" the local or "high profile" experts by contract be it a handshake agreement or a written contract is a standard game plan to minimize utilization and opinions, even if they NEVER see the light of day! Once specialist A is "captured" by team A, the other side can't chit chat with him or her.

Now of course I discussing conversations under oath, the conversations given under the bright lights of the camera and with the SWAG baskets as a thank you are always covered by free speach unless "gagged" by court order so the defendant won't have to worry about a COV due to excessive publicity! <snicker>

Thank you Joypath. I posted in the Al threads this exact think. In fact AL in her own words stated that she used to pay $100 to the experts that seemed to vote with the side that paid them... She would call it a consult and then they were "off limits" to the prosecution.

 

[LambChop]

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

I don't know. Harmony2 was gracious enough to provide us with the information and it's location so I am sure you can find what you want from those reports. I know you said you post often from work but when you get some free time to read through the report you may find the answers to all your questions. Or trust the information which is provided by the many experts here on this site. I know I do as they have provided some very interesting info. Happy reading.

 

[ZsaZsa]

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.

That makes sense, otherwise people who have hair of a loved one in a locket would just have a lot of decomposed material.

 

[BeanE]

I am still looking to see if he was an observer in the defense teams autopsy.

I am not sure if the defense performed an autopsy

notthatsmart, this is for you:

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The skeletonized remains of little Caylee found just yards from her own home have now reportedly gone through a second autopsy. Forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee says the skull and bones of little Caylee were examined by Dr. Werner Spitz.

snip

HENRY LEE, PH.D., FORENSIC SCIENTIST, DEFENSE EXPERT: Well, I`ve just confirmed, you know, we understand Dr. Werner Spitz did conduct a second autopsy about five, six days ago.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/07/ng.01.html

I posted this info for you in another thread where you asked about this.

It hurts my feelings when I spend the time and effort to do research for you and you ignore it. Please don't make BeanE sad. :-(

 

[cyberborg]

BBM.

"Hair can provide crime investigators with important clues. Apart from burning, hair is virtually indestructible. It remains identifiable even on bodies in an advanced state of decomposition or attached to objects after a crime has been committed."

http://www.policensw.com/info/forensic/forensic7a.html

Bump.

For those that think hair decomposes (easily) versus shows signs on the hair of decomposition. These are subtle but different.

"For example, in August 1951, a woman's body was found in a rural sport near Nottingham. The victim, Mable Tattershaw, a 48 year old housewife, had been strangled. Minute inspection of her clothing revealed some hairs which were immediately sent to the forensic laboratory, where microscope examination showed them to be identical with the head hair of Leonard Mills, an 18 year old clerk and the chief suspect. Together with other damning evidence, these hairs helped to take a murderer to the scaffold."

 

[BeanE]

Hmm, but will the jury find George Credible?

That is a question worthy of its own thread. Well not per se, but the question of whether the defense will trash GA's credibility to save CA, or if they'll defend his credibility because they need other testimony from him.

And now... back on topic...

 

[joypath]

notthatsmart, this is for you:

I posted this info for you in another thread where you asked about this.

It hurts my feelings when I spend the time and effort to do research for you and you ignore it. Please don't make BeanE sad. :-(

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The skeletonized remains of little Caylee found just yards from her own home have now reportedly gone through a second autopsy. Forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee says the skull and bones of little Caylee were examined by Dr. Werner Spitz.

snip

HENRY LEE, PH.D., FORENSIC SCIENTIST, DEFENSE EXPERT: Well, I`ve just confirmed, you know, we understand Dr. Werner Spitz did conduct a second autopsy about five, six days ago.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../07/ng.01.html
And we also had Werner's son, Daniel, who just happens to be a board certified anatomical, clinical and forensic pathologist like his dad, and one of NG's talking heads confirm it shortly thereafter (sorry, no link not that good at that stuff !)

 

[BeanE]

Oh Crikey! This is so confusing the way they have released these documents.
Does anyone else find it beyond irritating that there is no index and most of them aren't searchable?

If the FBI are basing their comparison on mitochondrial DNA from Q12, and conclude that they are similar, the same, or whatever way you want to put it, wouldn't Casey's and Caylee's mitochondrial dna be similar or the same because they are closely related, meaning the hairs from the trunk could be Casey's? I think the defense will emphasise that it is a very short piece of hair and argue that the discoloration is due to hair dye.

O/T No. I just convert 'em to html and search that. And I've built up many of my own indices over the past year and a half.

 

[cyberborg]

notthatsmart, this is for you:




I posted this info for you in another thread where you asked about this.

It hurts my feelings when I spend the time and effort to do research for you and you ignore it. Please don't make BeanE sad. :-(

Thanks BeanE!! If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again. Just the facts.

Our patience is going to be tried and tested as we slowly head towards trial since a key part of the Defense is to use the passage of time to change people's memories and rewrite history, both to level the playing field as well as favor KC.

Absent determination to keep the record straight, accurate and, honest then there is a real risk that rumors become treated as fact and the record is polluted with a new reality, a new truth --- not the real truth or the whole truth but the truth that the Defense so desperately wants and is also working so diligently to float.

Don't ever lose the faith because we count on you to keep us all honest and on track.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!!! You are very much appreciated as are the others in WS.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[Marina2]

This article is a must read for anyone interested in forensic analysis of hair. It's in depth and explains all the characteristics of hair that are compared microscopically, studies related to reliability of analysis, terms used in reports, and much more. It's lengthy but contains lots of valuable information.

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/current/review/2009_04_review02.htm

Forensic Hair Comparison: Background Information for Interpretation
Cary T. Oien
Unit Chief
Trace Evidence Unit
FBI Laboratory
Quantico, Virginia

Snipped:

"The purpose of this document is to review the bases for microscopic hair analysis and comparison. Hair examinations involve the analysis and comparison of the morphological characteristics present in hair."

"Hairs are remarkably robust, retaining their comparable microscopic characteristics for a very long time, making them very suitable for forensic analysis."


"Microscopic examination also may contribute contextual information regarding the hair in question that may be critically important to the case.
For example, in a case where a husband is accused of bludgeoning his wife with a hammer, finding a hair on the hammer that can be microscopically associated with the victim would likely be of limited significance. However, if the hair also exhibits microscopic characteristics of being crushed or damaged, the significance of the association increases greatly. Similarly, finding hairs that can be microscopically associated with a victim in the trunk of her spouse’s car would not be unusual unless these hairs also exhibited signs of decomposition, showing that they were deposited sometime after the victim’s death."

 

[notthatsmart]

notthatsmart, this is for you:




I posted this info for you in another thread where you asked about this.

It hurts my feelings when I spend the time and effort to do research for you and you ignore it. Please don't make BeanE sad. :-(

Thanks. I am sorry I missed the other one. I don't mean to hurt anyones feelings. You have helped me a lot lately and I appreciate it. You have a wealth of information and are organized. I envy you. Very Sorry.

 

[BeanE]

Thanks. I am sorry I missed the other one. I don't mean to hurt anyones feelings. You have helped me a lot lately and I appreciate it. You have a wealth of information and are organized. I envy you. Very Sorry.

awwww I was just teasing you, nts. There are so many posts, and the threads move so fast, it's easy to miss something

And I am always happy to help you, or anyone, find information on this case. Just leave me a Visitor Message with what you're looking for, and I'll do my best to find it.

Thank you, nts.

:blowkiss:

 

[InspectorGadget]

The implication regarding the food items by lee, was that this may have been the cause of the stink and such in the car. I don't think microscopic food items would leave a car smelling like death for months. This characterization of what/how Lee was thinking when he said this does not jive with the context.

They might have been microscopic by the time looked at them, but perhaps they could have been quite bulky before the maggots ate them.

 

[InspectorGadget]

To be fair .... I think that the problem is that they don't have access to a Lab :waitasec:, wasn't that the problem for the examination of the skeletal remains? As well as the experts are nationally distributed and cannot travel easily :waitasec:. They cannot access autopsy and forensic results online since they are apparently technologically challenged :waitasec: and so resort to reviewing the discovery documents and WS. Just like us sleuthers. They are following your lead NTS.

As to what to test or examine..... It'd be a good start if they completed what they started, e.g., the examination of the trunk and associated candidate evidence since that is very pertinent to this thread. It seems from the recent SA motion that nothing has been done for months.

Wasn't the prosecution's best piece of evidence, Q12, used up in the testing?

 

[BeanE]

They might have been microscopic by the time looked at them, but perhaps they could have been quite bulky before the maggots ate them.

Funny thought I just had. It's usually the prosecution who's accused of manufacturing evidence. And the defense, and those with a pro-defense or pro-defendant bent usually raise holy hecate about it, saying how horribly immoral and unethical and unjust it is.

Any storm in a port, I suppose.

What was that thing about a nail and Henry Lee in the Spector case? I gotta look that up.

Ah well, back to topic.

:cow:

 

[InspectorGadget]

[/B]

They were finished with the car and trash bag. Why would they come back? Not being snarky, just looking for something for them to examine or inspect. Certainly they are not going to come back to inspect the car frame over some silly speculation from Kc about squirrles.

I am not sure if the defense performed an autopsy

I don't think they did but please correct me if I'm wrong.

The only piece of possibly inculpatory evidence that has been released as far as I can see is the Q12 hair with the "death band" and I believe it was used up in the testing, therefore there is nothing left for him to inspect.

I think that this case should result in some much more stringent rules about the release of discovery under the Sunshine law. The fact that these documents do not have an index and most are not searchable has resulted in wild speculation in the media and on the net simply due to the fact that the correct information is too hard to find. The water has further been muddied by the FBI adopting another set of Q & K numbers to OCSO's, resulting in different items having the same numbers. Or was it the same items having different numbers? (I don't even know any more.) It almost looks as if they are trying to confuse everybody!

IMO

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I don't think they did but please correct me if I'm wrong.

The only piece of possibly inculpatory evidence that has been released as far as I can see is the Q12 hair with the "death band" and I believe it was used up in the testing, therefore there is nothing left for him to inspect.

I think that this case should result in some much more stringent rules about the release of discovery under the Sunshine law. The fact that these documents do not have an index and most are not searchable has resulted in wild speculation in the media and on the net simply due to the fact that the correct information is too hard to find. The water has further been muddied by the FBI adopting another set of Q & K numbers to OCSO's, resulting in different items having the same numbers. Or was it the same items having different numbers? (I don't even know any more.) It almost looks as if they are trying to confuse everybody!

IMO

Gee, I think I trust the FBI and OCSO to know what they're doing.

 

[InspectorGadget]

Since when do we need to see all the evidence to arrive at the truth? We may not know the particulars, but I think we know enough. Unless Casey is the victim of more coincidences and amazing circumstances beyond the imagination of Hollywood itself, it's a foregone conclusion that Casey is guilty.

But even if she is guilty how do you explain the amazing coincidence of her lying about Zanny who doesn't exist, and the police finding a Zanny who had visited Sawgrass, where Casey just happened to take the police for no particular reason.

Could she have gone there herself on the morning of Tue 17th June before Tony woke up, maybe between 9 & 1? (or not!). This is the day that Tony didn't go to school so they could sleep in. It seems unlikely to me that Casey could have spoken to Garcia in spanish like he said she did, unless she had a spanish speaking person with her. I don't believe she could have been that fluent for him to think she was Spanish. He would have remembered if this so-called Zenaida wasn't fluent and didn't look hispanic.

I can't reconcile any of this without some other person being involved.