Sources: Casey Anthony Intentionally Killed Caylee

[JWG]

Reading this thread I had a terrible vision flash through my mind. What if tot mom put duct tape around Caylee's head to hush her crying and left her hands free. Don't know what happens to fingernails after decomp, but could it be possible that they found fingernails with either duct tape residue, or even dna evidence from a fight she may have had with her killer and that is some of the "overwhelming" evidence??? I know it's terrible to consider, but thoughts anyone? Could fingernails indicate chloroform?

Good question. I found this answer from Argonne National Laboratory:

Fingernails and claws are all made of principally calcium carbonate or similar compounds. Decomposition of fingernails is similar to any living material. These calcium compounds will dissolve in weak acids, much like we find in soil and many parts of the environment. This process will not take too long except in extreme environments.

 

[dtown]

My opinion would be to save the tax payers of Orange County a huge chunk of change!

I think they'll splurge on this one. The nature of Casey's crime, her family's behavior, the investigators' emotional investment, the media attention and the way Caylee has become this country's child all tell me that those "close to the case" probably feel that making a "deal" with Casey would only further victimize Caylee.

 

[sea urchin]

if kc wrapped the duct tape around caylee's head several times, would it hold its shape to show if it had covered both caylee's mouth AND nose? what an awful thought

 

[DesSands]

ITA-and although it may sound cynical, I don't believe "leaks" are just leaks- someone didn't just wake up this morning thinking"Hmm, I think I'll give that reporter a call and tell them how I feel about this case, even if it means I could be suspended or fired for leaking the info." Leaks are usually strategic in nature, LE or SA is "leaking to get a message across to defense or perp or to scare them into making a move that would benefit Prosecution. I think this is a very well thought out leak, maybe designed to show some of their hand to defense in hopes of forcing a deal, say LWOP vs. state putting DP back on table due to the "intentional" act info being leaked. JMO

I'm with you on this one. I was wondering how the prosecution could possibly derail all of the specualtion swirling around the MR and PI's. This info. was detracting from the case at hand. Someone had to start spinning it back to the original case at hand. Caylee was killed by her mother and dumped where she was found. :bang:

 

[ZubenElSchemali]

Turbo, in the last part of the post you quoted, I quoted the article stating that the reports from the entomologist and biologist were in. Now, either someone was lying or this source gave this information after normal business hours yesterday. Also, I wasn't aware that an exact date could be concluded from bug evidence, but I'm open to learning if this is true. I would think they could at least get it pinned down to June though.

 

[TURBOTHINK]

I don't see the reasoning behind someone that close to the case leaking this kind of info. If the report is true, then the state has a slam dunk at trial, an airtight case even for the DP. If this info is true but was leaked...then why? I know that some believe that it is to get Casey to confess and cop to some plea. But why? I'd really think that the prosecutor would want to throw the full force of the book at her, especailly if they have "overwhelming" evidence rather than just making a deal with casey. You make a deal if you feel you case isn't as strong as you'd like it to be.
I also just have a huge issue with the media's ethical violations in this report. News outlets/journalists have ethics policies that deal with "anonymous sources." Most cover the fact that these sources aren't to be used to level personal attacks. This has gone way beyond and gives JB a lot of fuel to complain with more drawn out hearings that the media has declared his client guilty of intentional murder with overwhelming evidence making it impossible for her to get the fair trial in which she is entitled. The media report crossed an ethics line and this report (if it remains unsubstantiated) has served to only further complicate this case.

Many deals are made for convenience and to keep from having a long drawn out trial. We had one here recently where they made a deal for LWOP when they had a slam/dunk DP case. DP cases are very costly to LE and the taxpayers and with all the appeals given the perp, it is more advantageous most times to let them plead with LWOP. That frees up LE, the DA and others to concentrate on other cases also.

As for the media - there is NOTHING about the media today which maintains any ethics. They pick our political candidates with their skewed reporting and they elect them because the masses are too stupid to understand the issues. There are many unethical media out there but I don't believe this is an example of one.

 

[AquaEyes]

There are some thoughts that KC acted in a rage that night in June. There are other thoughts that she planned the act. I think it is a combination of both. I think that she researched the chloroform, etc. on the internet (and obtained the chloroform at some point) for this act to use at some time in the future, motivated by wanting to pursue her lifestyle. The fight culminates from all of the stealing, lying, neglect of child, mooching money, irresponsibility and KC knows she is being "trumped" by her mother in their long-standing conflict by CA saying she is going for custody of Caylee and ending the money source for KC. So, this fight ensues and escalates and KC has to "trump" her mother in exacting the worst wound she can, which is murdering Caylee. She was already 99% willing to do away with Caylee and the events in June gave her the "excuse" (in her mind) to move forward. So, yes, there is haste and sloppiness...AND there is research and planning. Something tells me it was going to be a more planned out act, but ended up being an act of rage with premeditation beforehand.

Of course, just an observation and only an opinion.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Huh? I worked as a reporter and editor for many years and I never heard of any such rule. For starters, there is a general rule that news stories aren't used for personal attacks on individuals. But reporting what a source says on a criminal case isn't a personal attack.

Some newsrooms require that a source based story be verified by at least one other reliable source. We don't know if this reporter did that or not. Often nowadays, especially in broadcast news where the deadline pressure and pressure to get a story out first is greater, that rule doesn't apply.

When you do write a single source story, a good reporter has use some judgement about the reliability of the source. Unless the source is revealed, you're not going to know if that was done or not.

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

 

[bessie]

I'm with you on this one. I was wondering how the prosecution could possibly derail all of the specualtion swirling around the MR and PI's. This info. was detracting from the case at hand. Someone had to start spinning it back to the original case at hand. Caylee was killed by her mother and dumped where she was found. :bang:

Exactly!

 

[cjcord]

. Also, I wasn't aware that an exact date could be concluded from bug evidence, but I'm open to learning if this is true. I would think they could at least get it pinned down to June though.

Insects have a known life cycle. Entymologists could pin down a date or even an hour in some cases.

 

[impatientredhead]

Reading this thread I had a terrible vision flash through my mind. What if tot mom put duct tape around Caylee's head to hush her crying and left her hands free. Don't know what happens to fingernails after decomp, but could it be possible that they found fingernails with either duct tape residue, or even dna evidence from a fight she may have had with her killer and that is some of the "overwhelming" evidence??? I know it's terrible to consider, but thoughts anyone? Could fingernails indicate chloroform?

After the body was found I changed my theory to Caylee suffocating under duct tape wrapped around her head to silence her, but couldn't make sense of the chloroform. A chloroform soaked rag taped to her mouth is such a movie plot line I just have a hard time with it. I would think the duct tape may have scratch marks in it if Caylee was able to struggle to get it off. The sources I could find for toxicology on any of the chemicals and drugs said that hair samples would only show things ingested 5 days before death and earlier. Anything ingested after that would not have time to make the signature markings in the hair or bones. They needed tissue samples for that.

They also said they think the body was dumped on the 18th, which is the shovel borrowing time. I posted this earlier but 2.6 days from the afternoon of the 18th puts us into the very late night of the 15th, very early AM hours of the 16th. I do not believe George saw them on the 16th at all.

 

[kageykaren]

With the reports of the plants removed in the A's backyard & at the crime scene, can we assume now that those seedlings from the hibiscus and other plant may have started maturing in Caylee's remains? Anyone know the growth pattern of these plants from seedlings?

 

[TURBOTHINK]

Turbo, in the last part of the post you quoted, I quoted the article stating that the reports from the entomologist and biologist were in. Now, either someone was lying or this source gave this information after normal business hours yesterday. Also, I wasn't aware that an exact date could be concluded from bug evidence, but I'm open to learning if this is true. I would think they could at least get it pinned down to June though.

They may not be in as in written form. The ONLY evidence the state is required to give the defense is the written reports. They are not required to give them any oral reports. I am guessing they got the information in an oral report by phone.

They can come within days of death forensic entomologists . That is a pretty exact science now. I don't believe the exact date is an important in this case as the length of time the body had been there. I could be wrong on that, but I believe they pretty well have the date pinned down.

I believe the entomology will be the most important in the drugs in the body.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

I don't see the reasoning behind someone that close to the case leaking this kind of info. If the report is true, then the state has a slam dunk at trial, an airtight case even for the DP. If this info is true but was leaked...then why? I know that some believe that it is to get Casey to confess and cop to some plea. But why? I'd really think that the prosecutor would want to throw the full force of the book at her, especailly if they have "overwhelming" evidence rather than just making a deal with casey. You make a deal if you feel you case isn't as strong as you'd like it to be.
I also just have a huge issue with the media's ethical violations in this report. News outlets/journalists have ethics policies that deal with "anonymous sources." Most cover the fact that these sources aren't to be used to level personal attacks. This has gone way beyond and gives JB a lot of fuel to complain with more drawn out hearings that the media has declared his client guilty of intentional murder with overwhelming evidence making it impossible for her to get the fair trial in which she is entitled. The media report crossed an ethics line and this report (if it remains unsubstantiated) has served to only further complicate this case.

I very respectfully disagree.
I'm sure the SA would like to "throw the book" at KC but maybe showing restraint. Along with the DP come years of appeals that puts a burden on the state and taxpayers. LWOP is also a punishment, one that comes with it's own set of perks, like KC knowing she will never see freedom ever again.
We don't know the specifics of the release of this information, if it was in fact a "leak" the news outlet stated a "source", we do not know if it was an anonymous source or not, so at this point to question their ethics is premature. KC will get a fair trial. Hers is no more media frenzied than some others that have been followed. OJ's is probably one of the biggest and that man obviously recieved a fair trial. JB can whine to the court all he wants about a fair trial but he has to get real and look at the evidence against his client and do what is in her best interests and is going to trial really in KC's best interests? (I'm sure we don't even know a quarter of what the state knows). IMVHO.

 

[impatientredhead]

if kc wrapped the duct tape around caylee's head several times, would it hold its shape to show if it had covered both caylee's mouth AND nose? what an awful thought

Even if it only covered the mouth by the time you factor in panic and crying suffocation is still very likely to occur after as the sinus are blocked. Horrifying to think about.

 

[DesSands]

Huh? I worked as a reporter and editor for many years and I never heard of any such rule. For starters, there is a general rule that news stories aren't used for personal attacks on individuals. But reporting what a source says on a criminal case isn't a personal attack.

Some newsrooms require that a source based story be verified by at least one other reliable source. We don't know if this reporter did that or not. Often nowadays, especially in broadcast news where the deadline pressure and pressure to get a story out first is greater, that rule doesn't apply.

When you do write a single source story, a good reporter has use some judgement about the reliability of the source. Unless the source is revealed, you're not going to know if that was done or not.

Glad to see your post. Something I've always wondered about and hopefully you can answer is that most reporters have sources everywhere. Some aggressive reporters actually court their sources in a sense. By befriending them etc etc. And because the sources see so much of them, they come to like and trust them. Is that true? I also edited this post and added ETA and it wound up at the bottom. Please address this too.

 

[Theonly1]

Turbo, in the last part of the post you quoted, I quoted the article stating that the reports from the entomologist and biologist were in. Now, either someone was lying or this source gave this information after normal business hours yesterday. Also, I wasn't aware that an exact date could be concluded from bug evidence, but I'm open to learning if this is true. I would think they could at least get it pinned down to June though.

If my eyes do not deceive me, the area in which Caylee was found was covered in "air potato" vine.

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AG112

When I went to place something at the memorial there I saw "potato" on the ground, as well.

I wonder if this obnoxious Florida weed plays any part in determining when her body was placed there.

More info about the horrendous air potato vine. The more I think about it the more I'm 99% positive it is what is all over the trees near where Caylee was dumped.

http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/32235/

 

[dtown]

Huh? I worked as a reporter and editor for many years and I never heard of any such rule. For starters, there is a general rule that news stories aren't used for personal attacks on individuals. But reporting what a source says on a criminal case isn't a personal attack.

Some newsrooms require that a source based story be verified by at least one other reliable source. We don't know if this reporter did that or not. Often nowadays, especially in broadcast news where the deadline pressure and pressure to get a story out first is greater, that rule doesn't apply.

When you do write a single source story, a good reporter has use some judgement about the reliability of the source. Unless the source is revealed, you're not going to know if that was done or not.

The Orlando Sentinel has such a code ......http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?ID=410
Here's a blurb...

"We should resort to the use of anonymous sources only for vital – never innocuous – information, and only to provide information of which they have firsthand knowledge. We should help the reader to evaluate the worth of the information by providing as much description of the source as possible without revealing his or her identity; ensure that by shielding the identity of one person we are not putting anyone else in jeopardy; make every effort to find additional sources who are independent of one another to corroborate the information; and avoid making an anonymous source the sole basis of a story.
Conversely, we should not allow someone whose identity we are protecting to level a personal attack; "

Just saying, IMO the reporter of this story went WAY out on a limb. Reporting on a crime is legit and understandable. But this report draws the conclusion (from an anonymous source) that Casey is guilty of intentional murder by "overwhelming evidence." The conclusion is where they departed from just reporting "about the crime." You do not compromise your ethics for a time deadline either...not unless you want to be dragged into court.

 

[bessie]

There are some thoughts that KC acted in a rage that night in June. There are other thoughts that she planned the act. I think it is a combination of both. I think that she researched the chloroform, etc. on the internet (and obtained the chloroform at some point) for this act to use at some time in the future, motivated by wanting to pursue her lifestyle. The fight culminates from all of the stealing, lying, neglect of child, mooching money, irresponsibility and KC knows she is being "trumped" by her mother in their long-standing conflict by CA saying she is going for custody of Caylee and ending the money source for KC. So, this fight ensues and escalates and KC has to "trump" her mother in exacting the worst wound she can, which is murdering Caylee. She was already 99% willing to do away with Caylee and the events in June gave her the "excuse" (in her mind) to move forward. So, yes, there is haste and sloppiness...AND there is research and planning. Something tells me it was going to be a more planned out act, but ended up being an act of rage with premeditation beforehand.

Of course, just an observation and only an opinion.

That's my opinion, too, AquaEyes. A fantasy executed in a fit of rage. A fit of rage can last for moments or weeks. In this case, my guess is the "fit" commenced on or about June 9th.

 

[irishbosoxfan]

She didn't break her neck- Dr. G (medical examiner) said there was no damage, breaks, etc to the bones of the body- someone can confirm this with a link-

No what she said was that there was no trauma to the bones before death

I just listened to that video and thought the same thing. There is nothing new in that report. Even the duct tape "source", I must of missed something when the ME gave her report as I didn't hear her say anything about the tape. But then I could be wrong too! :crazy:

A reporter asked about duct tape and Dr G said "I'd rather not get into that"

According to the ME's report, her neck was not broken. She clearly stated "no trauma to the bones." I would take that to mean, the neck bones were intact. So... no broken neck.

The ME hasn't released the report for public consumption but at the press conference she said "no trauma peri mortem" Which means before death== It includes the time prior to the person's death, when we don't see any healing. And skeletal healing will take a couple weeks to show up on the bone. So for that period before the person dies, we would still see it as a perimortem injury. To make it even a little bit more difficult for us, the postmortem period only sets in when the bones lose their resiliency, so they don't bend as well. And so that can take some period of time after the person has died. All of that period between when -- before you start healing, and to that when the bone loses its resiliency, all is a perimortem period.

Now a child can be strangled to death without breaking the hyoid bone--It's very rare for the hyoid to be broken in children and infants because the components that make up the hyoid haven't ossified which means it's much more flexible so it can bend without breaking.