Poll: your thoughts on the id

[Bittiness39]

I think they are likely holding off on the ID until the scene as clear. As Judge Strickland mentioned during the Emergency Hearing yesterday, it is unusual that a person is tried for murder before the remains are found. I don't fault the defense for trying to gain access to the collected evidence and to the crime scene...but I am extremely happy that all three of Baez's motions were denied. Clearly, they want to spin their own story on whatever evidence that was found that is tied directly to the home. If Casey had a soul she would plead guilty.

 

[mydailyopinions]

I think they know the ID, but are with holding it until the crime scene is released, due to spectators, if they were to release it now, they would have major crowd control to deal with, that and because of the school nearby.
JMHO

 

[nursebeeme]

The prosecutor has already said in the last hearing it will be up to their discretion what photos they hand over. The defense, if they stick with Casey as their suspect, needs everything if they are going to do the best job possible.

**respectfully snipped**
Of course at this point in the game, without id that this is even Caylee (legally speaking of course....but we ARE dealing with the court system), why would the prosecution hand off photos of a crime scene to a defense...when they don't even KNOW who this child is at this point. What if they were handing off photos of, say, Trenton Duckett to Jose Baez.

I found it pretty amazing that the prosecution would even send one or two photos at their discretion until there is an ID made. As the prosecutor also mentioned.... the persons who would process the photos to "share" just happened to be out in the woods on their hands and knees sifting thru evidence in an active crime scene at the moment. If that was my little child murdered I would want those techs to work their hands to the bone not stopping to send my defense lawyer a picture (assuming we are to believe Casey...that someone else had Caylee).

Now after the ID is made that is a whole different ball game. If the prosecution does not share all and everything thru the normal channels of discovery THEN there will be issues and something going on that could hurt both sides of this case. I do not forsee it getting to that point. I do think that until the ID is officially made all of this other defense work is moot. They cannot try to look at crime scenes and autopsies of whick the id is not even made. It also opens up the state to future lawsuits if this would happen to NOT be Caylee.

 

[anastacia129]

Hi Macushla. I have to ask, would you want your guilt presumed before ALL the FACTS are in and to feel you have no choice but to make a plea to something regardless of whether you did it or not out of fear you will be punished worse if you don't? I know more than one person that was completely innocent but felt they had no choice. You wouldn't want to be in that position, I'm sure.

snipped


WOW I think you have probably done more work than baez! :clap: :woohoo:

 

[NancyT]

DNA identity verification may be more difficult in this case because:

1. There is not a DNA sample of Caylee's father available
2. There is no definitive original sample of Caylee's DNA to test against (remember the hairbrush shenanigans?)​

Any DNA experts out there that can confirm or deny this possibility?​

I do believe they have Caylee's DNA to compare this to, but even if they don't, they still have the paternity results which show the DNA.

 

[ThoughtElf]

I do believe they have Caylee's DNA to compare this to, but even if they don't, they still have the paternity results which show the DNA.

From JG's tests, correct? Good thinking. I hadn't thought about that as a resource for the ID process.

 

[nursebeeme]

From JG's tests, correct? Good thinking. I hadn't thought about that as a resource for the ID process.

OMG! That IS great thinking! I am almost certain, knowing that, the results are back and will be released after the cs.

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

Hi Nursebeeme. I only listened to the hearing live and missed the first couple of minutes, so I couldn't relisten to it but I understood the prosecutor to be referring to after they are finished with the investigation and decide to release things. Please correct me if I'm wrong or I'll have to see if I can track down a video of the hearing for clarification.

Kind Regards,
Connie

 

[ishouldbworking]

i just asked a friend of mine who is a forensic scientist - who happens to work for a regional fbi lab - how long it would take to get the 1st DNA (not the cross checks) and this is what she had to say...

...first they will do the hair or bone from the body. Hairs can be done in 2 days. bones in 3-4 assuming everything works well. If they had not previously typed the mom they would then do her sample but only after the bone/hair was completely done. that way no one can ever claim the samples contaminated each other.

It has taken awhile now especially since they said they would be working thru the weekend. They could be having issues with the samples, unlikely since the remains if Caylees are fairly new.

 

[donnam]

DNA identity verification may be more difficult in this case because:

1. There is not a DNA sample of Caylee's father available
2. There is no definitive original sample of Caylee's DNA to test against (remember the hairbrush shenanigans?)​

Any DNA experts out there that can confirm or deny this possibility?​

They may not be ab le to prove who her father is, BUT, through DNA they will KNOW Casey is her mother.

 

[passionflower]

I have a real funny feeling that this is little Caylee in the bag, BUT LE keeps finding more and more bones.........could there be another child there also? Maybe 2 separte crimes will be found. Just my own mind wondering........like little Trenton? a long ago forgotten rime? I just have this odd feeling..........

 

[NancyT]

Hi Macushla. I have to ask, would you want your guilt presumed before ALL the FACTS are in and to feel you have no choice but to make a plea to something regardless of whether you did it or not out of fear you will be punished worse if you don't? I know more than one person that was completely innocent but felt they had no choice. You wouldn't want to be in that position, I'm sure.

As for Tim M. you said,

What reason do you have to presume I am making this up, lying? What have I done to be presumed guilty? If I make a statement as fact, I know it is. If I say I think, I believe, IMO, it looks to me, or any other similar prefix, then I am open to changing my mind because I don't have all the facts yet. For example, my opinions on the ID times is my opinion, based on my particular type of knowledge, but still opinion. What I saw for the 18th might be something different, such as the investigation taking a new direction that it has in the past, as an alternative.

Here is the link. http://www.myfoxorlando.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=8075244&version=1&locale=EN-US The first question is why did LE give him access to the site. Next, where did he go, what did he see. He describes seeing the indentation under the palmetto bush and dead “grass” toward the end. He'd have to be fairly close to see that kind of detail. He said the same on the Geraldo show.

Now, I suppose Tim could be making this up to get media coverage or to get at LP, but I hope not and doubt that. How could the defense team coming in there, taking photos before it was tore up, etc, interfere with the investigation any more than taking Tim in there? Neither interferes, IMO. The motivation might be to make a lot of money on their own photos. Close to $1000 for the last discovery package? Unbelievable. They should have a right to all of it without charge. It costs very little, especially with digital format. She has a constitutional right to that information but I heard the prosecutor in court yesterday say, it will be up to their discretion what photos they allow defense to see. I don't understand that at all. Maybe I'm missing something.

Nancy, I apologize where I misunderstood. I agree with most of what you said. I think you are misunderstanding what I said about the woman sifting soil, though. I certainly wasn't judging her qualifications. I have no way of knowing that. I was judging what I saw. Anyone can get sidetracked, some more than others. My point was, she is no more qualified than the defense team anthropologist. And, her motivation might[/bold] very well be prejudiced, like many posting on this sight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pizg4Ev7rQ&NR=1 Geraldo segment IMO points out contradictions in police behavior.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/orl-bk-caylee-anthony-121208,0,91021.story This video, the sherriff claims the area was under water the whole time. This can't be true, according the the weather history.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=6464439&page=1 entomologist says that insect evidence changes and is destroyed with each passing moment and through scientific examination. All should be able to look at it at the same time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl1u7G8DRos&feature=related Geraldo 12/14/08 part 1, one of the videos of the soil sifting and sorting. There was another I saw with the same women but I've spent too much time today going through everything I've looked at in the last several days, and haven't found it yet.

Spangle, are you positive no LE would have motive to want the evidence to support their view or might not overlook something that doesn't fit their preconceived notion or not follow up on something for the same reason? I've read too many stories to believe this isn't possible. I've seen a document from a state forensic lab with a cut and paste shadow line photocopied and used in court. This shadow divided the stated evidence/test result from the ID of the person charged. So I know it is possible to have corruption within the system. Prison industries is big business and provides a lot of jobs. I read recently they want to build a number of new prisons there. And, I highly doubt there isn't at least one official in Florida that will lie. It seems to me one of their own was recently fired and is connected to this suspect.

Yes, someone is guilty of this horrible thing. But, for my own conscience, if I were on the jury, I would want to know that both sides had an even shot at all the evidence. The prosecutor has already said in the last hearing it will be up to their discretion what photos they hand over. The defense, if they stick with Casey as their suspect, needs everything if they are going to do the best job possible.

First off, to address Tim Miller. I'd watched that earlier, but just watched it all again. No where does he mention how close he got to where the remains were found. I'm not convinced that he had to be standing right at the spot to ascertain how long the remains may have been there due to the indentation. I think you're playing a guessing game too, and while that's what we do here (speculate), it doesn't make your comments factual. Since Tim Miller is an expert however, taking him to the scene is not the equivalent of taking John and/or Jane Doe to the scene.

I also think you're getting confused over the release of evidence (including photos) to the defense. The defense will be entitled to 100% of every photo taken. It will not be at the discretion of the state once discovery kicks in (which has not happened yet, thus the response yesterday of turning photos over at the state's discretion at THIS point in time). Jose' Baez is jumping the gun and that's exactly why his motion, actually motions, were denied. I know you don't understand this, but Jose' Baez has NO right to interfere with an ongoing investigation. For Dr Henry Lee to go on Nancy Grace's show and state that this is done all the time is nothing but pure BS. It just DOES NOT happen, period. I challenged you earlier to find one such case because I knew what a difficult task that would be for you. That may ultimately be the only thing that convinces you though, so maybe a Google search will enlighten you some?

Once LE releases a scene, the defense can have at it. That's what happened at Phil Spector's house when the defense team (including Henry Lee) went in and conducted their own investigation. This is when it came to light that Henry Lee found a piece of a nail at the scene (that LE missed), and while Henry Lee claimed he did not remove that nail tip, another attorney testified that they saw him remove it. This was because discovery is reciprocal and it was not turned over to the state via discovery. Now, since I'm one to believe there should be harsh consequences for the state not turning over discovery items (more importanty, exculpatory evidences), I must also hold the defense accountable for the same. Shame on Henry Lee is all I have to say (well, not really, but I'll spare you, LOL).

You can take it to the bank, if the state tries any underhanded tactics, this defense team will waste NO time in bringing it to the court's attention. I happen to believe there will be nothing underhanded, but I really think this defense team will try and manufacture supposed underhanded tactics. That's what they're good at, smoke and mirrors.

Trust me, this defense team has more than most do at this point. It doesn't matter though, this team (and I have no respect for the majority of the team), has a huge jumpstart over what most defendants have.

Again, I don't want to sound disrespectful, but it's quite apparent that you just don't understand the laws of the nation, or those specific to Florida (not that anyone here knows all of these). Maybe you should brush up a bit in those areas instead of trying to take on little things like, Tim Miller getting to see where the remains were found, or the woman who was sifting dirt and laughing at the same time.

BTW, from what I understand, the state doesn't make money from items via discovery. There are expenses involved in preparing evidences, and that's all the state asks for. To be reimbursed. This case is no exception to that rule. IF and WHEN it's looked at and I hear from any authoritive source that they've got a scam going, then I might consider it to be true, till that time, I'll remain firm in the fact that there is nothing shoddy going on here. You not liking the way it's done means nothing in grand scheme of things.

 

[NancyT]

Hi Nursebeeme. I only listened to the hearing live and missed the first couple of minutes, so I couldn't relisten to it but I understood the prosecutor to be referring to after they are finished with the investigation and decide to release things. Please correct me if I'm wrong or I'll have to see if I can track down a video of the hearing for clarification.

Kind Regards,
Connie

I don't have the link handy, but if you're getting around to some of the sites that have been covering this all along, you'll notice a link where you can watch the hearing in its entirety. The site I used, it came in 2 parts. I think it was Fox, but I wouldn't swear to that.

You are wrong though, she was only speaking to what she was willing to release now, not on down the road via discovery.

 

[NancyT]

i just asked a friend of mine who is a forensic scientist - who happens to work for a regional fbi lab - how long it would take to get the 1st DNA (not the cross checks) and this is what she had to say...

...first they will do the hair or bone from the body. Hairs can be done in 2 days. bones in 3-4 assuming everything works well. If they had not previously typed the mom they would then do her sample but only after the bone/hair was completely done. that way no one can ever claim the samples contaminated each other.

It has taken awhile now especially since they said they would be working thru the weekend. They could be having issues with the samples, unlikely since the remains if Caylees are fairly new.

Thanks!

I believe they had the results back from Laci Peterson in 4 days, which fits what you said here perfectly.

If you can, could you ask your friend if they ever double or even triple check the results at times to be 100% certain there was no mistake? And if they do that, do they test like this simultaneously or concurrently:crazy:. I couldn't resist that.

 

[nursebeeme]

Hi Nursebeeme. I only listened to the hearing live and missed the first couple of minutes, so I couldn't relisten to it but I understood the prosecutor to be referring to after they are finished with the investigation and decide to release things. Please correct me if I'm wrong or I'll have to see if I can track down a video of the hearing for clarification.

Kind Regards,
Connie

Hi Connie,
No, the prosct. was referring to JB's request for photos before the cs is released. His motions had to do with being at the cs and viewing photos, schematics, charts, etc now. Once the ID is confirmed it will be a whole different ball game and JB and team will get all of that evidence thru the normal channels of discovery. If the prosecution were not to hand over discovery in a timely manner than it could be inadmissable at trial so they will be sure to share.
nurse (becky) :blowkiss: (and moo of course

 

[miabellamoure]

My vote: id is caylee; they are holding id until crime scene cleared...

Makes sense to want to keep Defense Experts out until LE, FBI, CSI & ME have finished their work...remember, two many cooks in the kitchen can spoil the broth!

 

[NancyT]

Hi Connie,
No, the prosct. was referring to JB's request for photos before the cs is released. His motions had to do with being at the cs and viewing photos, schematics, charts, etc now. Once the ID is confirmed it will be a whole different ball game and JB and team will get all of that evidence thru the normal channels of discovery. If the prosecution were not to hand over discovery in a timely manner than it could be inadmissable at trial so they will be sure to share.
nurse (becky) :blowkiss: (and moo of course

Your signature is adorable considering your nic.

 

[miabellamoure]

i just asked a friend of mine who is a forensic scientist - who happens to work for a regional fbi lab - how long it would take to get the 1st DNA (not the cross checks) and this is what she had to say...

...first they will do the hair or bone from the body. Hairs can be done in 2 days. bones in 3-4 assuming everything works well. If they had not previously typed the mom they would then do her sample but only after the bone/hair was completely done. that way no one can ever claim the samples contaminated each other.

It has taken awhile now especially since they said they would be working thru the weekend. They could be having issues with the samples, unlikely since the remains if Caylees are fairly new.

Does typing mean blood sample or can it be done with a mouth swab?

Do you think they will repeat testing on KC just to eliminate any reason for claims of contamination by the "defense team"?

How I'd love to be a fly on the wall while that's being done

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

Yes, Nancy, Tim didn't give a measurement of how far away he was but he couldn't see under a bush or the indentation without being pretty darn close, surely well within the tape. I really don't want to argue. Would you care to site the state code that allows for telling the judge no one gets in except someone the sherriff wants? No, I don't know all the laws, and less of Florida law but I've spent more than my fair share of time, for a law abiding citizen that isn't an attorney, reading law. I was just stating some facts and opinions. I'll respect yours and I'll hold to mine.

For others reading your post and not reading my original post, I never said the woman was laughing. The word was smile, used with the intention of implying she wasn't completely focused on her work. Now, I don't have a problem with talking with many kinds of work. But she needs to keep her eyes on the work rather than the others.

If in the hearing the prosecutor was talking about handing over a partial group of photos now, rather than later, I stand corrected. I said earlier I only heard it live and couldn't be sure. But it seems the reporters would be all over him to find out what the photos show if they gave him anything. BTW, do you actually think the price was just for a few CDs? I made a FOIA request once and was Dr's wages for copying a few pages, $100 if I remember correctly. They claimed they had no one in the office except doctors available to copy the documents. Yeah, right. This was a request to the State Police forensic lab. And I only got that after threatening to take them to court because they refused the FOIA. I don't believe either price tag was right or just.

Thanks Nursebeeme. I'll track the video down. I missed part of it and would like to hear it again.

 

[NancyT]

Yes, Nancy, Tim didn't give a measurement of how far away he was but he couldn't see under a bush or the indentation without being pretty darn close, surely well within the tape. I really don't want to argue. Would you care to site the state code that allows for telling the judge no one gets in except someone the sherriff wants? No, I don't know all the laws, and less of Florida law but I've spent more than my fair share of time, for a law abiding citizen that isn't an attorney, reading law. I was just stating some facts and opinions. I'll respect yours and I'll hold to mine.

For others reading your post and not reading my original post, I never said the woman was laughing. The word was smile, used with the intention of implying she wasn't completely focused on her work. Now, I don't have a problem with talking with many kinds of work. But she needs to keep her eyes on the work rather than the others.

If in the hearing the prosecutor was talking about handing over a partial group of photos now, rather than later, I stand corrected. I said earlier I only heard it live and couldn't be sure. But it seems the reporters would be all over him to find out what the photos show if they gave him anything. BTW, do you actually think the price was just for a few CDs? I made a FOIA request once and was Dr's wages for copying a few pages, $100 if I remember correctly. They claimed they had no one in the office except doctors available to copy the documents. Yeah, right. This was a request to the State Police forensic lab. And I only got that after threatening to take them to court because they refused the FOIA. I don't believe either price tag was right or just.

Thanks Nursebeeme. I'll track the video down. I missed part of it and would like to hear it again.

Since I wasn't there, I really wouldn't know how far away Tim Miller had to be, but neither would you. You're entitled to your opinion, but you obviously don't care about all the facts when coming to that opinion. I personally would rather not accuse him of anything unless I am sure. Ultimately for me however, since he is FULLY TRAINED (more so than Jose' Baez), I see no argument arising from his presence.

Sorry about confusing a 3 second clip of smiling vs. laughing. I'll stand corrected on a simple smile, but I do hope for YOUR sake that no one judges any aspect of YOUR life by a 3 sec. clip of video. Again, you don't need more information, you'll run with it regardless of the facts.

As for the cost, yes, since this is not the first trial I've ever followed, I can honestly say that I do believe this cost is realistic. If Jose' can show otherwise however, I will be willing to hear the results. It's not only a matter of the how much this costs to print, or how much media storage needs to be purchased, etc.... employees must be paid to put this discovery together. Unless you're willing to go do it for nothing for the court system in your area, I think it's absurd to think someone else should. Do you realize how long it takes to get some of this ready to be handed over? You think it's an hour? Go give it a shot once.

As for the code for telling the judge what the attorney wants? Wanna try that again? I do believe the JUDGE told the DEFENSE they are not entitled to be at the scene, nor were they entitled to be present at the autopsy, nor are they entitled to discovery at THIS point in time. The ATTORNEY doesn't tell the judge anything. The Judge KNOWS his job already, thus the reason Baez' motions were denied. That decision was based on the ummmmm, I know this is a hard word, the LAW. You think the judge is just up there to toss around his own personal opinion?