GUILTY HI - Carly Joann 'Charli' Scott, 27, pregnant, Makawao, 9 Feb 2014 - #6

[puakenikeni]

I have often wondered how much of a role the creek water played in washing away blood evidence on textiles. I have not heard that the bra, skirt, tank top - all showing puncture wounds - were crusty or stiff with dried blood, as one would expect. I'm wondering if the body/clothing/blanket were submerged in the creek immediately after the murder, which would wash away a lot of blood.

I'm also questioning the reliability of testimony that the dismemberment of the available bones occurred "at the time of death."

Another possibility with the blanket was that she was only wrapped in it days after the murder, after she'd stopped oozing blood and the wounds were somewhat dry and saturated with maggots: if she was dragged upon and wrapped loosely in the blanket in this state, then I *guess* I can see how there was little to no blood(?) on the blanket.

This is along the lines of what I wondered as well. Her clothes should definitely have had a lot of blood.
there was one day for her to be unwrapped, during which time what blood there was would have flowed out and dried to some extent, not sure how much in that moist climate, but yeah.

I'm not questioning the forensic science, but I didn't hear a question as to whether the bones might have dried out more slowly in the rain forest environment, nor a question on what "near" time of death means in terms of a working time frame.

 

[Kapua]

Dont know anything for certain other than what's been said. As I said above, judge left the door open for more argumentation on the single hair back at the trial beginning. No idea what's gone down since about it.

Prosecution had said they got no DNA tying SC to crime scene back when they got a trial continuance for more testing. Then when the jeans' hair was announced, they said they got almost nothing useful from the last round of advanced testing and the one hair was the pay dirt. That's all I recall hearing.

Nothing was said about the hoodie, but it could well have been lumped together with clothing.

OK. I missed that vital bit of news at the time of the trial continuance.

It seems odd to me that there was so much testimony about each bit of evidence that was sent out for DNA testing if it's all going to come back with "inconclusive". But thanks for the heads up. This is disappointing to say the least.

The prosecution should fight to have that one hair admitted, IMHO.

 

[puakenikeni]

Yes, it seems odd, and I agree with your premise that there needs to be a payoff.
Maybe it furthers their argument to admit the unadmitted DNA?
From the jury questions, it seems they also are fixated at why items were not tested. Maybe it is necessary to go through all this to convince the jury that the prosecution did a thorough job of attempting to get DNA results, but the degradation from the environment was too severe. Again with the prosecution needing to lay the foundation before they can state what if anything they got in results.

I don't think the jury will give Rivera a pass if they do not hear what was tested and with what results.

 

[Mamamerced]

What would Apo do if he couldn't plant ear worms?

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

I can understand the jury's fascination with the fanny pack. I still cannot believe Earls & Loo did not take 10 seconds to pull the fannypack out of the ground and see what, if anything, was inside! A murder happened here....and you find a fanny pack that appears hastily buried...but you don't pick it up and look inside? Really???

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

This is along the lines of what I wondered as well. Her clothes should definitely have had a lot of blood.
there was one day for her to be unwrapped, during which time what blood there was would have flowed out and dried to some extent, not sure how much in that moist climate, but yeah.

I'm not questioning the forensic science, but I didn't hear a question as to whether the bones might have dried out more slowly in the rain forest environment, nor a question on what "near" time of death means in terms of a working time frame.

He could've been chumming the waters of Nua'ailua Bay by leaving her remains in the stream on night one, allowing the blood to flow via the stream into the ocean. Then on subsequent nights he'd start depositing body parts into the bay, assured of their swift consumption by ocean predators that had been drawn to the area by all the blood flowing into the ocean. Just an idea.

I do think the body & textiles must've been in the stream, possibly held down by stones. It accounts nicely for the lack of blood.

 

[Kapua]

What would Apo do if he couldn't plant ear worms?

I'm expecting him to go for "If the pants don't fit, you must acquit."

 

[Kapua]

He could've been chumming the waters of Nua'ailua Bay by leaving her remains in the stream on night one, allowing the blood to flow via the stream into the ocean. Then on subsequent nights he'd start depositing body parts into the bay, assured of their swift consumption by ocean predators that had been drawn to the area by all the blood flowing into the ocean. Just an idea.

I do think the body & textiles must've been in the stream, possibly held down by stones. It accounts nicely for the lack of blood.

This is an excellent theory! It also fits in with the snorkeling cadaver dog, Pohaku.

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

This is an excellent theory! It also fits in with the snorkeling cadaver dog, Pohaku.

Thanks, Kapua.
The trick is harmonizing the body being in the stream - which explains the lack of blood on the textiles so nicely - with the maggot timeline.

Variations in stream depth (due to lower rainfall upstream) could account for the body being submerged on night one, and subsequently exposed to open air.

 

[Maisiebelle]

I think jurys like DNA evidence. If there isn't any in this case SC might be aquitted.

 

[Napili]

Thanks, Kapua.
The trick is harmonizing the body being in the stream - which explains the lack of blood on the textiles so nicely - with the maggot timeline.

Variations in stream depth (due to lower rainfall upstream) could account for the body being submerged on night one, and subsequently exposed to open air.

To achieve the "chumming" effect, only the bloody clothes would be necessary. Your notion of luring predators to the area w/the scent of blood seems reasonable. But, I don't see him hauling the body around too much. Could have been hauled down, tied, floated to wash off & then hauled back. (If they weren't burns, this could be how he injured his hands) Too big a job to repeat, though, for a wimp.

Maybe this is when the thought of cutting it up was born...(sorry) it's difficult to picture the site, although I was on the island that February. What was the stream, current, tides and wind doing those nights? The tides are key. A high tide could make an otherwise difficult job easy. The two waters would merge and the seawater could even flow up into the stream quite a ways...even without a lot of swelling from rainwater.

Yet, Sunday night, there's still such a short time to do anything! Pesky! Too much. Too much! Unless, he went back there after talking to Cassie & was up all night...?

 

[heartgoesout]

Never thought of this before but he could have burnt the body near the stream. The water would cover up burn marks and also provide cleaning.

 

[Maisiebelle]

Was Charli's clothing wet when it was found?

 

[heartgoesout]

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?227499-PA-Holly-Grim-41-Wescosville-22-Nov-2013-1

If anyone is interested in reviewing Holly Grim's case it is two threads long. It is a mystery and seems to be turning out to be even more tangled questions. Cases can always use fresh eyes. This case is important to me.
After 3 years, without leads, police have just begun digging behind the home of a former coworker of hers. Neither the husband or wife who own the home have been arrested. People are crazy with worry and questions.

 

[puakenikeni]

Sorry, I'll respectfully say that I can't see the whole chumming and washing scenario as likely. Even if he did something so complex, contact with ocean water would leave its mark for the labs to find, with salt residue if nothing else.

I also think the stream was far enough away from the "tree" spot, that a whole body could not be moved from one spot to the other without assistance, and without breaking vegetation to show the passage.

The idea that something could be weighed down temporarily at that part of the stream, thus causing the snorkeling cadaver dog effect, that part I like, just don't see it being her whole deceased body gotten through that much more of the dense jungle.

Also, people do go to Paraquat's. The number of people in those parts who have 4WD rigs capable of doing the whole road down must be substantial. He had no guarantee of people not finding evidence on the beach that had washed back to shore, very quickly. People go to the beach, but don't push through thick jungle, so the beach was the most exposed area to do anything.

 

[Kapua]

Thanks, Kapua.
The trick is harmonizing the body being in the stream - which explains the lack of blood on the textiles so nicely - with the maggot timeline.

Variations in stream depth (due to lower rainfall upstream) could account for the body being submerged on night one, and subsequently exposed to open air.

We have maggots of two different ages/lifecycles and most of the evidence, aside from the jeans, Nala, and the 4Runner, in two places - the same places as the maggots. The two cadaver dogs alerted in those same two places and none of the other places that they were taken. Any theory that lines up with that evidence is possible, IMHO.

 

[Kapua]

I can understand the jury's fascination with the fanny pack. I still cannot believe Earls & Loo did not take 10 seconds to pull the fannypack out of the ground and see what, if anything, was inside! A murder happened here....and you find a fanny pack that appears hastily buried...but you don't pick it up and look inside? Really???

I totally agree. They should have looked inside, whether or not they thought it had anything to do with the crime. They were sloppy, and Apo called them on it.

 

[Kapua]

Was Charli's clothing wet when it was found?

At approx 1:27 in the first session of today's testimony on YouTube, Earles states that he received the blue tank top from officer Bonacorsi WET. Here's a pic of it from today's first session. I still say it's medium blue.

 

[puakenikeni]

Well, anything I leave outside overnight is going to be wet, because I live in a tropical rainforest climate, and it's even more so at Nua'ailua. And I believe the tank top was on top of the other items. While it may have gotten submerged, that's not necessary to account for the top being wet.

I also didn't have that response to the fanny pack deal. I listened to Earl's testimony on that. He never said the fanny pack looked recently buried. The opposite was my impression, something that had been there for some time accruing a soil cover naturally. And Apo is just yapping and trying to make it sound like a piece of evidence.

We're talking only five days after her disappearance. Earls has been doing this awhile. It's not hard for even me to tell something older in the jungle from something new, and I would rate myself as fairly unobservant, unlike the MPD crew.

 

[Moxie_McTavish]

Sorry, I'll respectfully say that I can't see the whole chumming and washing scenario as likely. Even if he did something so complex, contact with ocean water would leave its mark for the labs to find, with salt residue if nothing else.

I also think the stream was far enough away from the "tree" spot, that a whole body could not be moved from one spot to the other without assistance, and without breaking vegetation to show the passage.

The idea that something could be weighed down temporarily at that part of the stream, thus causing the snorkeling cadaver dog effect, that part I like, just don't see it being her whole deceased body gotten through that much more of the dense jungle.

Also, people do go to Paraquat's. The number of people in those parts who have 4WD rigs capable of doing the whole road down must be substantial. He had no guarantee of people not finding evidence on the beach that had washed back to shore, very quickly. People go to the beach, but don't push through thick jungle, so the beach was the most exposed area to do anything.

- I'm not sold on the chumming idea either - it's super speculative to try to figure out motivations for movements - but I do think we need to account for an underwater interval for the textiles (if not the whole body), to account for how clean they are.

- The crime area is about 800 feet upstream, pretty close to the Hana Hwy bridge. Not near the ocean at all. Nothing in that area of stream would ever come into contact with ocean water.

- Do you (or anyone) have in your notes how much further west the stream area where items were found is from the cut tree/crime scene?
I have a collection of quotes from various witnesses regarding distances, but I don't have the info of how far the streambed is from the cut tree. I don't think it's far because that cut tree/crime scene is right on top of an embankment that looks like the riverbed might be just below it: