Theories On What Happened to Caylee Part #6 (New Smoking Gun Theories for DP)

[AZlawyer]

If there were a cellphone located at the crime scene, wouldn't it be listed with the evidence that was collected there? Could they hold something like that out?

Yes, it would be listed.

 

[AZlawyer]

I thought the same thing....and that it was in response to Cindy's Myspace note on July 3rd.

It wasn't written in response to Cindy's note, because it was written (saved as a file on the computer) on July 2 (although not posted until July 7).

 

[JaJo]

I can never use duct tape or packing tape without getting hair on it. I can't stand it but it seems to pick up everything and anything that floats by it.
I know it was said there were no fingerprints on the duct tape but what about a hair of two that belong to Casey. Would that have been on the autopsy report or something the Pros is holding back?

Did LE say no fingerprints were found on the duct tape? I must have missed that.

 

[AZlawyer]

Speaking of 'smoking guns' and evidence that we may have not seen yet - another poster, Tracey276, posted this link to an article by Wendy Murphy on the Duct Tape thread. Thought it would be of particular interest here.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-21/the-evidence-yoursquore-not-allowed-to-see/full/

The problem I have with this article is that the exceptions to the Sunshine Law that she discussed would all leave a trail in the case docket if they had, in fact, been invoked. There would be a motion to exclude the evidence from public view, a motion to intervene by the press, a hearing, etc. Remember the jail video? We didn't get to see it, but we certainly knew about the request to keep us from seeing it.

What I can't understand is what people think would be the REASON for LE hiding good (i.e., bad-for-Casey) evidence from the defense? I can understand why they would hide evidence that would HELP her (which would, of course, be unethical, but at least you can understand the impulse). But why hide evidence that they want to use at trial? They can't use anything at trial that they don't disclose in at least sufficient time for the defense to examine and respond to it. There can be no surprises at trial. So hiding evidence from the defense would be counterproductive--and hiding evidence from the public would leave a trail of motions for us to follow.

This is why I think, if there was some "smoking gun" piece of evidence, it would have been released. The only possible exception would be if LE is still trying to figure out something about the evidence to make sure it is what they think it is. But even in that case, they will disclose it in plenty of time for the trial.

 

[chefmom]

Getting back to the possible items that may have been left with Caylee by KC, and not yet revealed to the public by the authorities ...

I do remember that KC's friends were interviewed about the tradition of burying beloved pets in that same area. Does anyone recall anyone talking about KC doing this over the years, and leaving things with her pets? Poems, jewelry, etc.

If KC and her friends already had a custom of doing this, and as an earlier WS'er pointed out, the Anthony family is very fond of customs, then I'm thinking that it makes sense that KC left some personal things - of KC's, not Caylee's - with the body.

Because she'd done it for her pets in the past.

Anyone with any info on this idea?

Maybe something homemade? From the photos taken in KC's room and Caylee's room, it would seem that KC had a fondness for artsy stuff, ie drawing, writing, scrapbooking. Perhaps there was something that she had made that was found with her. Something one of the detectives recognized right off the bat that sent them straight back to the A's home? :waitasec:

 

[tweety933]

I think if a child was sitting in a car seat, one could squat in front of her and rip one piece of tape---over mouth---maybe even slapping child to shut up---child may even have fanger prints on tape. The tape had to be pushed on with great force to have held skull in place for so long. Then another piece of tape. I guess we have to say 3 pieces of tape since the report said "several". Doesn't one say "a couple" when there is 2?

So, maybe there is fibers from the carseat on the duct tape that would validate this scenario! I wonder if the carseat fibers were green?

 

[2goaliemom]

The problem I have with this article is that the exceptions to the Sunshine Law that she discussed would all leave a trail in the case docket if they had, in fact, been invoked. There would be a motion to exclude the evidence from public view, a motion to intervene by the press, a hearing, etc. Remember the jail video? We didn't get to see it, but we certainly knew about the request to keep us from seeing it.

What I can't understand is what people think would be the REASON for LE hiding good (i.e., bad-for-Casey) evidence from the defense? I can understand why they would hide evidence that would HELP her (which would, of course, be unethical, but at least you can understand the impulse). But why hide evidence that they want to use at trial? They can't use anything at trial that they don't disclose in at least sufficient time for the defense to examine and respond to it. There can be no surprises at trial. So hiding evidence from the defense would be counterproductive--and hiding evidence from the public would leave a trail of motions for us to follow.

This is why I think, if there was some "smoking gun" piece of evidence, it would have been released. The only possible exception would be if LE is still trying to figure out something about the evidence to make sure it is what they think it is. But even in that case, they will disclose it in plenty of time for the trial.

Great post AZ - I read Wendy Murphy's article too and wonder--is it possible the SA hasn't released certain items because, say for example, the FBI lab hasn't finished their work or that certain investigations are not complete yet? In this way, the SA could release certain evidence closer to trial (and would make it a little harder for JB et al to counter at trial)????:waitasec:

 

[Mama-cita]

I too was under the impression the tape was wrapped AROUND the base of the skull; however, BondJamesBond clarified that the tape was applied in layers e.g., tear a piece apply, tear a piece apply, not wrap around. This changes a lot for me to learn this info.

I appreciate what you are trying to say, however, consider simple human anatomy. Look at the following diagram of a human skull and note where the mandible attaches:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/8915.jpg

Then consider whether a few small overlapping pieces of duct tape would have been enough to keep those two pieces of bone -- which have no articulating pieces -- together. The flesh had long since decayed. No ligaments or tissues of any sort to provide any support. And in spite of that, both of those pieces of bone were located together, in approximate anatomical position, after all the animal activity, after the decomp and nature took it's toll. The only reasonable conclusion is that the tape was placed close enough to the articlulation point of the mandible and the skull, forcefully enough to withstand ALL the elements mentioned previously. The tape went at least beyond her ears, IMO, or else the mandible would have dropped off or been carried off by animals. Think about it logically. These two pieces of bone had NO REASON to be together, yet they were fastened together in such a manner that they remained together, despite the elements. The tape did NOT have to be completely wrapped around her skull to accomplish this, however, if you look at the diagram of the skull you can reasonably see that they were not small pieces of tape...

 

[Kimmer]

I would not be surprised to find some of the A's dog hair on the sticky side of the duct tape...

And I have always thought that the SA office is going to hold onto as much of the real damaging evidence until they absolutly have to turn it over to the defense..

If JB & CO don't want the State to know what theories they are going to use at trial why would the State want to give all of that to JB this early..

I would bet that they will wait until the last minute and then spring a bunch of very damaging evidence on the defense...And watch them squirm

 

[countzero]

I appreciate what you are trying to say, however, consider simple human anatomy. Look at the following diagram of a human skull and note where the mandible attaches:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/8915.jpg

Then consider whether a few small overlapping pieces of duct tape would have been enough to keep those two pieces of bone -- which have no articulating pieces -- together. The flesh had long since decayed. No ligaments or tissues of any sort to provide any support. And in spite of that, both of those pieces of bone were located together, in approximate anatomical position, after all the animal activity, after the decomp and nature took it's toll. The only reasonable conclusion is that the tape was placed close enough to the articlulation point of the mandible and the skull, forcefully enough to withstand ALL the elements mentioned previously. The tape went at least beyond her ears, IMO, or else the mandible would have dropped off or been carried off by animals. Think about it logically. These two pieces of bone had NO REASON to be together, yet they were fastened together in such a manner that they remained together, despite the elements. The tape did NOT have to be completely wrapped around her skull to accomplish this, however, if you look at the diagram of the skull you can reasonably see that they were not small pieces of tape...

I can envision Dr. G giving this testimony with compassion yet speaking words and in a voice which people like me can understand the whys and wherefors of the duct tape placement. She will be speaking for Caylee.

Of all the testimony given, Dr. G's will be the most important for me.

The smoking gun evidence, whatever it is, will be known months before the trial.

 

[chckmate22]

Just a thought here...KC made her 1st statement to police including this sentence "On Tuesday, July 15, 2008, around 12pm, I received a phone call from my daughter, Caylee. Today was the first day I have heard her voice in over 4 weeks." and now we know from autopsy that it is reasonable to believe that Caylee died around the last time she was seen alive on June 16th...Well we now know that for sure that was impossible so does this also add to the aggravating circumstances?

 

[Jolynna]

Just a thought here...KC made her 1st statement to police including this sentence "On Tuesday, July 15, 2008, around 12pm, I received a phone call from my daughter, Caylee. Today was the first day I have heard her voice in over 4 weeks." and now we know from autopsy that it is reasonable to believe that Caylee died around the last time she was seen alive on June 16th...Well we now know that for sure that was impossible so does this also add to the aggravating circumstances?

It does not look good that KC was trying so hard to make people believe Caylee was alive and just fine. "No need to worry about her. I just talked to her."

Not when there is evidence, like the used paper towel, to show KC knew full well Caylee was not alive and just fine.

 

[MidAtlanticNative]

Yorkies don't shed.

Like poodles they have to go to the groomers to get their hair cut. They're ok for people with allergies.

Respectfully, all dogs shed/lose hair. As do humans. Although Yorkies can be said to be among the lightest shedders (I'm sure this is not a real term! :crazy, there's bound to be a stray hair or two around. And wouldn't it be great if one was stuck to that horrible duct tape? Boy, I'd love to read about that...

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Does anyone know what the law is in Florida regarding the handing over of discovery evidence prior to trial? I think in some states it is 30 days prior to scheduled trial date that all evidence must be handed over - from Prosecution to Defense and from Defense to Prosecution. (Ah, but remember in the Michael Peterson case when the Defense "found" a dusty, non-bent blowpoke - the assumed murder weapon per the Prosecution - DURING the trial?!?)

I would hope the Prosecution in the Casey Anthony case will keep the best evidence for last - as if what is already out there is not enough!

I keep thinking of reading Ann Bird's book (adopted-out half sister of murderer Scott Peterson). She spoke with Jackie Peterson, Scott's mother, pretty much throughout Scott's trial and in her book she indicated that neither Scott Peterson's family nor Laci's family had any idea about some of the damning evidence that came out at the trial. They knew a lot, but they didn't know it all until it came out at the trial.

I think Casey Anthony's trial may be the same way.

 

[BeanE]

I appreciate what you are trying to say, however, consider simple human anatomy. Look at the following diagram of a human skull and note where the mandible attaches:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/images/ency/fullsize/8915.jpg

Then consider whether a few small overlapping pieces of duct tape would have been enough to keep those two pieces of bone -- which have no articulating pieces -- together. The flesh had long since decayed. No ligaments or tissues of any sort to provide any support. And in spite of that, both of those pieces of bone were located together, in approximate anatomical position, after all the animal activity, after the decomp and nature took it's toll. The only reasonable conclusion is that the tape was placed close enough to the articlulation point of the mandible and the skull, forcefully enough to withstand ALL the elements mentioned previously. The tape went at least beyond her ears, IMO, or else the mandible would have dropped off or been carried off by animals. Think about it logically. These two pieces of bone had NO REASON to be together, yet they were fastened together in such a manner that they remained together, despite the elements. The tape did NOT have to be completely wrapped around her skull to accomplish this, however, if you look at the diagram of the skull you can reasonably see that they were not small pieces of tape...

Great post, Mama, and I have to agree with most of what you say. For me, I believe the tape did have to be wrapped completely around Caylee's skull *and* overlap in back, in order to hold and still be there when Caylee's remains were found. I think if the tape did not overlap in back, I just don't see how it could have held through water, hurricane, animal activity, etc, and held Caylee's little mandible in place.

I think there were multiple pieces of tape overlapping in front over Caylee's mouth and nose, and wrapped to also overlap in back of her head. I didn't see anything in the report that says this could not be so, but it has been a few days since I read it, so I could be wrong.

I will say that I don't understand why the report would not be more specific about this, except that perhaps there was a reliance on photos or diagrams, and it was therefore not detailed and specific in verbiage.

IMO

 

[MidAtlanticNative]

Does anyone know what the law is in Florida regarding the handing over of discovery evidence prior to trial? I think in some states it is 30 days prior to scheduled trial date that all evidence must be handed over - from Prosecution to Defense and from Defense to Prosecution. (Ah, but remember in the Michael Peterson case when the Defense "found" a dusty, non-bent blowpoke - the assumed murder weapon per the Prosecution - DURING the trial?!?)

I would hope the Prosecution in the Casey Anthony case will keep the best evidence for last - as if what is already out there is not enough!

I keep thinking of reading Ann Bird's book (adopted-out half sister of murderer Scott Peterson). She spoke with Jackie Peterson, Scott's mother, pretty much throughout Scott's trial and in her book she indicated that neither Scott Peterson's family nor Laci's family had any idea about some of the damning evidence that came out at the trial. They knew a lot, but they didn't know it all until it came out at the trial.

I think Casey Anthony's trial may be the same way.

Excerpt from cobblawfirm.com:

RULE 3.220. DISCOVERY

(a) Notice of Discovery. After the filing of the charging document, a defendant may elect to participate in the discovery process provided by these rules, including the taking of discovery depositions, by filing with the court and serving on the prosecuting attorney a “Notice of Discovery” which shall bind both the prosecution and defendant to all discovery procedures contained in these rules. Participation by a defendant in the discovery process, including the taking of any deposition by a defendant or the filing of a public records request under chapter 119, Florida Statutes for law enforcement records relating to the defendant’s pending prosecution, which are nonexempt as a result of a codefendant’s participation in discovery, shall be an election to participate in discovery and triggers a reciprocal discovery obligation for the defendant. If any defendant knowingly or purposely shares in discovery obtained by a codefendant, the defendant shall be deemed to have elected to participate in discovery.

NOTE: These Rules are amended frequently and we have a downloadable section elsewhere on the website.

(b) Prosecutor’s Discovery Obligation.
(1) Within 15 days after service of the Notice of Discovery, the prosecutor shall serve a
written Discovery Exhibit which shall disclose to the defendant and permit the defendant to inspect, copy, test, and photograph the following information and material within the state’s possession or control:

(A) a list of the names and addresses of all persons known to the prosecutor to have...

(c) Disclosure to Prosecution.
(1) After the filing of the charging document and subject to constitutional limitations, the
court may require a defendant to:
(A) appear in a lineup;...

Also here (from floridabar.org.)


Hope this helps.

 

[BeanE]

It wasn't written in response to Cindy's note, because it was written (saved as a file on the computer) on July 2 (although not posted until July 7).

Agreed, it wasn't written in response, but it was posted as a response, wasn't it?

 

[Queenofwands]

***respectfully snipped***
For me, I believe the tape did have to be wrapped completely around Caylee's skull *and* overlap in back, in order to hold and still be there when Caylee's remains were found. I think if the tape did not overlap in back, I just don't see how it could have held through water, hurricane, animal activity, etc, and held Caylee's little mandible in place.

I agree BeanE. :clap: It just doesn't make sense to me that the tape was NOT wrapped around the skull. I think it HAD to be. :detective:

JMO

 

[cecybeans]

Great post AZ - I read Wendy Murphy's article too and wonder--is it possible the SA hasn't released certain items because, say for example, the FBI lab hasn't finished their work or that certain investigations are not complete yet? In this way, the SA could release certain evidence closer to trial (and would make it a little harder for JB et al to counter at trial)????:waitasec:

Conversely, I've also wanted to ask if that privilege belongs to the defense. After they have received discovery, do they have the option to withhold or redact information before it is turned back in to the state and the media can petition for public release?

It just seems like in the last several doc dumps, we've been led to expect certain things (like LP and his crews depos) or other evidentiary items that just didn't seem to show up. Can JB and his team also request items be withheld from the public under the same aegis as the reasons cited in that article?

 

[Brini]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-a...llowed-to-see/

I wanted to bring this link over from the Astro forum. Props to salvarenga for finding it and posting it there. I'm no WM fan, but what she writes here is so very true. The SA office has info that they have no intention of sharing with the public until trial, Sunshine Laws notwithstanding. And you can bet your bottom dollar that it's the stuff that will nail KC cold. If released to the media before trial, it would only serve to taint the potential jury pool. While it's a great pass time to speculate what it is that they've got, all it is right now is speculation.

There's a saying, "It ain't meat til it's on the table." It applies here. We can all speculate "Where's the beef?", but rest assured that the SA will set the table and serve it to us, all in good time.

Yep! The fat lady hasn't sung, yet. But, she's in cosume, and is tuning up!