Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Analysis of M.E. Report of Caylee - [Vanity]
Vanity | 7/9/2011 | Self

Posted on 07/09/2011 3:32:01 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen

From the Medical Examiner’s Report on Caylee Anthony: _________________________________________________________

Conclusion/Opinion: As often is the case with a skeletonized individual, the exact cause of death cannot be determined with certainty. The manner of death is an opinion based on available information, including circumstances surrounding the death, information from the scene, and examination of the skeletal remains.

The circumstances of death are that this toddler child, with no known medical history, was not reported missing to authorities for approximately 30 days. This child’s remains were eventually found in a wooded, overgrown area, discarded with two trash bags and a laundry bag. Although there is no trauma evident on the skeleton, there is duct tape over the lower facial region still attached to head hair. This duct tape was clearly placed prior to decomposition, keeping the mandible in place.

The clustering of vertebrae at the scene separate from the location of the bags and skull indicate animal activity occurring at this location after decomposition started, but before complete disarticulation of the skeleton. This indicates the body was put in this location prior to complete skeletonization. The roots growing into the vertebrae and bags indicate that the body was placed there months prior to being found. There is nothing inconsistent with the body being placed there soon after the date of being last seen alive.

It is, thus, my opinion that, although the cause of death cannot be determined with certainty, the manner of death is homicide.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: casey; caseyanthony; cayleeanthony
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last
Comments on weaknesses in this examiners conclusion/opinion as far as it’s being used as evidence:

a) Manner of death is described as circumstantial by the conclusion/opinion itself in the first paragraph. People have taken to assuming that the Medical Examiner’s report provided physical evidence of homicide and that all the other evidence in the trial was circumstantial, when, in fact, even the Medical Examiner’s report was circumstantial and the report itself clearly states how it is based on circumstantial evidence in the first paragraph of it’s conclusion/opinion.

b) Also in the first paragraph, it states that the cause of death cannot be determined with certainty, but no possible cause of death is offered anywhere in the report. So saying it cannot be determined with certainty is a misrepresentation which would tend to imply that the cause of death is determined by the report with at least some small amount of certainty. But no cause of death is given in the report - that’s not uncertainty, that’s an unknown. Since no cause of death is offered in this report the conclusion/opinion should simply state that the cause of death cannot be determined in order to be clear to the reader.

c) In the second paragraph, this conclusion/opinion notes that there is no trauma evident on the skeleton. At that age, bones are softer than those of adults and children can often suffer physical trauma without breaking bones. Therefore physical trauma can not be ruled out as a cause of death. For example, a brain injury from a fall is within the realm of possibility, but cannot be supported or ruled out without brain tissue to analyze. However, given that the conclusion/opinion only notes the absence of trauma evident to the skeleton, and does not note that there may have been trauma that is not evident, the conclusion/opinion opens up the possibility that the reader may assume that physical trauma is ruled out as a cause of death. Of course the conclusion/opinion does not rule out ANY cause of death, and, with a careful reading one can see that it technically offers absolutely no cause of death.

d) Also in the second paragraph, the duct tape is noted to have been placed prior to decomposition. One must be careful to note that it does not say that it was placed prior to death. Everyone in this case has argued all along that the duct tape is the murder weapon. But this conclusion/opinion of the Medical Examiner’s report clearly does not go so far as to conclude or speculate that the duct tape was the murder weapon - it only states that it is clear the duct tape was placed prior to decomposition.

e) Referring back to point b), the second paragraph provides an opportunity for the reader to incorrectly infer that suffocation due to the duct tape being placed over the nose and mouth is the cause of death, if they don’t clearly separate the difference between what the paragraph says, “prior to decomposition” and “prior to death”, which the paragraph does not say.

f) In the third paragraph, there is no assertion that the body was placed in the wooded area soon after being last seen alive; it says that there was no evidence inconsistent with that. The third paragraph does state that the body was placed there “months” prior to being found. These statements allow for placement in the woods any time between the second half of June and early October.

General comments:

This report was followed shortly by a homicide charge, as it’s manner of death determination of homicide provided the basis for that charge.

If this report did not offer as it’s conclusion/opinion that the manner of death was homicide, there would be no basis for a murder charge.

The combination of points b) and e) is where this conclusion/opinion is obviously designed to provide a manner of death of homicide based on a cause of death that is implied even though no explicit cause of death is given. Such subtley calls into question the integrity of the Medical Examiner’s office. A few years ago there were very prominent stories circulating in the media about M.E. offices that would give in to pressure from prosecutors to be less than forthright in their investigations in order to get arrests or convictions. One in NY, IIRC, was actually completely shut down.

Medical Examiner’s reports should never imply anything, but should state facts explicitly. M.E.’s must never base their reports on what a prosecuter desires. When an M.E.’s office starts going down this road it sometimes results in wrongful convictions and other times results in charges filed that ultimately become extremely difficult to get a conviction on, thereby wasting millions of dollars.

1 posted on 07/09/2011 3:32:04 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

A few posters here have stated: Justice was served, the jury lawfully found her not guilty. Blame the prosecutors. Don’t blame the jury. Of course, they also say justice is for the accused not the victim. So it doesn’t matter how the child wound up a skeleton in a desolate swamp; justice was served. They say justice is not for the victim.


2 posted on 07/09/2011 3:35:52 PM PDT by Mmogamer (I refudiate the lamestream media, leftists and their prevaricutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

Note to all - important message received !

Speaking of justice for Caylee. I just received a VERY important message on this post.

If this was the work of a child molestor while Caylee was left unattended, there could be a child molestor on the lose at this time and no one suspects them.

That is another ingenius part of our legal system which is concerned with not convicting the wrong person. Once that happens the true perpetrator is never even searched for.

Big hat tip to person who sent me the message !


3 posted on 07/09/2011 3:39:59 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MountainWoman

.


4 posted on 07/09/2011 3:40:55 PM PDT by Morgana (I never said a thing.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

One of the big questions I have had.

Will the investigators close this case?


5 posted on 07/09/2011 3:45:26 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

People have been convicted without the victims even being found. These jurors had more evidence than some cases, but since an insurance policy or huge estate wasn’t involved, motive wasn’t obvious enough to them for conviction.


6 posted on 07/09/2011 3:45:50 PM PDT by skr (May God confound the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

I have no clue why a logical conclusion would find that Caylee was the victim of a homicide at the hands of her mother. Without a REASONABLE DOUBT, she was murdered, and her mother was responsible. Lucky for the beatch I wasn’t on the jury. I could have easily found her guilty of first degree murder, and sentenced her to death. The evidence was very clear.


7 posted on 07/09/2011 3:47:01 PM PDT by runninglips (Republicans = 99 lb weaklings of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen
"If this report did not offer as it’s conclusion/opinion that the manner of death was homicide, there would be no basis for a murder charge."

It would require a complete lack of common sense to eliminate homicide when the body was inside a laundry bag & garbage bags.

Are you saying the cause is a natural death? Why would anyone put the child in these bags & toss her away like garbage - instead of calling 911?

8 posted on 07/09/2011 4:14:54 PM PDT by LADY J ( Change your thoughts and you change your world.. - Norman Vincent Peale))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

I, too, say that the prosecution did not prove their case. Here in Tennessee a Janet March’s wife “disappeared” in August 1996. No body has ever been found and no evidence of foul play was ever found, yet the prosecution was able to convict her husband of murder in 2005.


9 posted on 07/09/2011 4:24:55 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LADY J

I’m glad you brought up natural death. Notice the conclusion of the report states “no known medical history”. There are many cases of death with children every year where they die of natural causes from undiagnosed diseases. So, it is possible the death was natural. I tend to think the chances of that are remote, but they are not zero.

It is very common for people to feel guilty when someone dies under circumstances where they feel they MIGHT be held accountable, even though they did not murder them. For example, an elderly person under your care where you stand to inherit from them.

In this case, Casey lived a partying lifestyle with men who were partiers. It is entirely plausible that she could have been with one of these boneheads and her daughter at the same time, but let Caylee completely out of her sight while she did some crazy things or involved Caylee in some of the crazy things. Suddenly, someone abducts or attacks Caylee, threatens Casey, or Caylee has a fall, a strangulation in a cord, sometimes ignorant people toss babies around (check out youtube for videos), all sorts of things where Casey should know better. Perhaps she and her friend are snorting coke and do not want to call 911. Suddenly she feels very guilty, because she was guilty of negligent homicide, or her friend tells her she is, or her parents tell her she is - who knows ? This would set the whole game in motion to appeal for help with hiding the body. Caylee actually may have died naturally from an undiagnosed condition and Casey may only think that she has guilt. There are countless plausible possibilities that a public who is very angry with Casey refuse to even think about. Based on what I’ve read, it’s even quite possible that Caylee died while under the care of one or both of the parents - and George said to her on no uncertain terms that she should have been watching Caylee and she was going to jail, then offering to help hide the body and get her off. He could have reasoned that once the wooded area was searched, they could hide the body there because the searchers would not search there twice. We have absolutely nothing that proves that this was not what happened.

That’s why I tried to show the subtle deception in the M.E. report here - this report, if you go through sentence by sentence, stands on it’s head to IMPLY (not outright say) that the duct tape is the murder weapon. And it worked, because everyone BELIEVES the duct tape is the murder weapon BECAUSE THE M.E. SAID SO - BUT THEY M.E. NEVER DID SAY SO.

The M.E. report says the tape must have been applied BEFORE DECOMPOSITION. It is SILENT - IT SAYS NOTHING - about whether it was applied BEFORE DEATH.

It therefore IMPLIES (because it does not SAY this explicitly) that the tape could have been applied EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER DEATH.

The report makes the reader think the duct tape was the murder weapon - IF YOU READ IT’S CONCLUSION ABOVE - it never actually says that the duct tape WAS, IN FACT, the murder weapon.

That’s a real hum-dinger of an autopsy, IMHO.


10 posted on 07/09/2011 4:41:07 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mmogamer

That should read “Perry March’s wive, Janet”.


11 posted on 07/09/2011 4:50:25 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Islam is the religion of Satan and Mohammed was his minion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

But why would you put duct tape on a dead child’s mouth?

You’d put it on her while she was still alive. To keep her quiet.

After she is dead is serves no purpose.

So I think she was duct taped prior to dying.


12 posted on 07/09/2011 5:03:26 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Here’s a task for you.

REASONABLY explain how this body got to the location and condition described above WITHOUT it being a homicide.


13 posted on 07/09/2011 5:24:42 PM PDT by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen
The only thing I can say with any certainty about this case is I pray I never have to serve on a jury in these circumstances.

If I give 6 weeks of my life (that I will never get back), sequestered, to do my civic duty...the evidence presented is sketchy, virtually every major witness is guilty of perjury and there is conflicting testimony by all the “expert” witnesses, I will be in jail myself.

I don't believe that convicting a person to life in prison or death should be a matter of...probability. Anthony did not present a sympathetic character.

The prosecution, for whatever reason, over charged and failed to prove their case. I read that there is an election coming up so the DA went for the “Gold”.

That being said...I think if Anthony didn't do it herself...she definitely knows what happened. Even with the lame defense...the prosecution couldn't get a conviction.

14 posted on 07/09/2011 5:38:12 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

Not meaning to butt into the conversation..

I just wonder if you have indisputable evidence that the mom transported the child’s body there?

I say that in sincerity. If there was evidence that you saw or heard, I’d be interested.

I guess that is why I asked earlier..will the investigation continue?


15 posted on 07/09/2011 6:02:17 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Sorry, I tried to do a courtesy ping, but kept misspelling your moniker.


16 posted on 07/09/2011 6:05:59 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: berdie

She was the mother.
She was the primary caregiver.
She was the last one seen with the child.
She didn’t report her child missing.
She repeatedly lied about what happened.

Absent any new information pointing AWAY from her, I have Casey Anthony for manslaughter


17 posted on 07/09/2011 6:49:23 PM PDT by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

Well, we can agree on a few things.

She was the mother, she didn’t report her child missing. and she is a liar.

But how do we know that she was the primary caregiver? Looks to me like the parents had a big part of the little girl’s upbringing. I am not pointing a finger at them. I have no idea what kind of people Ms Anthony ran around with. Having a “wild child” on my life..I know how very little control you have.

How do you know that Anthony was the last one to see the child? Did you see something I did not?


18 posted on 07/09/2011 8:28:00 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
"But why would you put duct tape on a dead child’s mouth?...After she is dead is serves no purpose."

Not really. While I'm not suggesting this is my theory, if the death was the result of negligence on Casey's part, she may have wished to stage it to look like an abduction and murder...ergo, the post-mortem use of duct tape.

19 posted on 07/09/2011 8:37:01 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24
Here’s a task for you.

REASONABLY explain how this body got to the location and condition described above WITHOUT it being a homicide.


Well, I'll do that task if you do one for me first. If you would be so kind, please ask a practicing or retired criminal lawyer (in the U.S.) to write an explanation of why the defense would have to answer that question in court, then post their answer here. I'm fairly sure the defense would not have to answer that question.
20 posted on 07/09/2011 8:37:20 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LADY J

can you even begin to imagine a little child being torn apart from animals while you are out partying??? Dear God...some people have no souls. They are deep, dark and dangerous.


21 posted on 07/09/2011 8:43:24 PM PDT by cubreporter (From TEA to Shining TEA - Go Rush Limbaugh..a giant of all that is good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: berdie

The mother already said the kid died and it was an accident.

The kid was put in a bag like they bury their dogs and dumped in the swamp. Then she went out to party.

There won’t be anymore investigation because there is nobody else to investigate.


22 posted on 07/09/2011 8:47:51 PM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

Well, I don’t know if I agree.

They may have not been able to prove that Mom did it.

But somebody did. Why stop the investigation?

So it was an admitted accident. I can live with that. But who the heck participated?


23 posted on 07/09/2011 9:15:39 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

Interesting.

And very possible.


24 posted on 07/09/2011 9:24:20 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Ping for tomorrow


25 posted on 07/09/2011 9:28:40 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

“ergo, the post-mortem use of duct tape. “

ah, so.


26 posted on 07/09/2011 10:38:19 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: berdie

Evidence consistent with human decomposition was found in the trunk of a car belonging to a Florida woman charged with killing her 3-year-old daughter.

“Both odor analysis and LIBS results appear to be quite consistent with a decompositional event having occurred in the trunk of the vehicle,” said the report from Tennessee’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Testing was conducted on air and carpet samples from the vehicle. The tests indicated “the presence of the five key major compounds associated with human decomposition,” the report said.

The tests also found “an unusually large concentration of chloroform” in the trunk, according to the Oak Ridge report.

The report also says evidence of possible decomposition was found on a hair located among debris in the trunk. The hair is “microscopically similar” to one recovered from Caylee’s hair brush, the report said.


27 posted on 07/09/2011 10:47:24 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: berdie

FBI test results show hair and a stain in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car belong to her daughter, 3-year-old Caylee Anthony. Eyewitness News was also told the evidence found proves that she is dead.

*******

The released court records reveal how Orange County Detective Yuri Melich grilled her, saying she could seem “cold, callous and a monster who doesn’t care, who’s just trying to get away with something.” He told her Caylee “may not be the way we or the way your family last remembers her. We need to find out from you where Caylee is. This, this, this right now is just, this has gone so far down hill and this has become such a mess.”

Casey replied, “Uh-huh.” Then Melich said, “We need to end it. It’s very simple. We just need to end it.” Casey answered, “I agree with you. I have no clue where she is.”

The documents also show Casey’s parents actually led investigators to search a new depression in the dirt near their backyard pool after they had done their own search and that they had their own lawyer the day after her arrest. The documents include a poem Anthony wrote on July 7, eight days before she reported her daughter missing: “What is given, Can be taken away. Everyone lies. Everyone dies.”

The State Attorney’s Office released the more than 400 pages of documents Monday. Eyewitness News found out Casey wanted to give little Caylee up for adoption before she was born, but her mother, Cindy Anthony, was against it. Casey’s own mother called her a sociopath and warned friends to stay away from her. Casey’s ex-fiancé told detectives she had deleted more than 200 pictures of her with her daughter Caylee that were posted online.

According to the transcripts, hours before Casey’s arrest one detective told her, “Caylee’s out there somewhere and her rotting body is starting to decompose.” Casey replied, “I know my mom will never forgive me. I’m never going to forgive myself because there’s that chance that I may not see Caylee again and I don’t want to think about that.”

The documents also show investigators grilled Casey about what happened to her daughter, telling her after the lies she told them they were thinking either she “gave Caylee to someone that you don’t want anyone to find out because you think you’re a bad mom or something happened to Caylee and Caylee’s buried somewhere or in a trash can somewhere and you had something to do with it.”

Casey kept insisting to investigators the last time she saw Caylee was June 9. The detective told her, “The longer this goes the worse it’s gonna be for everyone, everyone.”

Casey kept insisting she doesn’t know what happened to her except that she was last with Zenaida the nanny, who no one knows. She also told investigators she’s absolutely petrified.

http://tinyurl.com/3rcum9a


28 posted on 07/09/2011 10:55:25 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: berdie

Friends told Eyewitness News Casey celebrated Independence Day with her boyfriend Tony Lazarro. She partied and cooked dinner for him and his roommate.

Friends said Lazzaro believed she worked as an event planner at Universal Studios for the two months they were together. She told him her boss allowed her to work from her computer at his Winter Park apartment.

They found out later from her family she wasn’t earning the money she was spending. Instead, Casey was running up her mother’s credit cards.

When Casey called Lazarro for a ride from the Amscot where she abandoned her car, she claimed it had broken down and that her father was going to get it to a shop later. That car holds some of the most significant evidence investigators have revealed, possible evidence of Caylee’s hair, a suspicious stain and the odor of human decomposition, all in the trunk.

http://www.wftv.com/news/17136371/detail.html


29 posted on 07/09/2011 11:04:32 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

Why would anyone duct tape a little girls mouth after she was dead? Her mother is guilty of criminal negligence, criminal abuse, and at the very minimum, manslaughter. When a friend of a person going into a grocery store to rob, and kill a clerk drives away, he is guilty of murder, or manslaughter at minimum. The woman is guilty, and easily proven to be in a court. The fact that the jury could not even go that far proves that they were incompetent.


30 posted on 07/10/2011 12:21:51 AM PDT by runninglips (Republicans = 99 lb weaklings of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: berdie

How could they overcharge, when they presented evidence for murder, manslaughter and lying to authorities? They were given an out with the manslaughter, but could not convict because the girl was attractive and female. If it was an unattractive father, he would be looking at the gallows now.


31 posted on 07/10/2011 12:24:01 AM PDT by runninglips (Republicans = 99 lb weaklings of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

BING BING BING.....we have a winner, and a logical mind.


32 posted on 07/10/2011 12:24:52 AM PDT by runninglips (Republicans = 99 lb weaklings of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
But why would you put duct tape on a dead child’s mouth?

You’d put it on her while she was still alive. To keep her quiet.

After she is dead is serves no purpose.

So I think she was duct taped prior to dying.


Perhaps you have you never heard of corpse desecration...
33 posted on 07/10/2011 12:59:36 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kcvl

Did you even read my first post ?


34 posted on 07/10/2011 1:12:58 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: berdie
One of the big questions I have had.

Will the investigators close this case?


They would need somebody to talk to give them evidence on a new suspect as far as I can see, perhaps as an accessory.

Anyone who names names would be making problems.

Casey, of course, is protected from double jeopardy.
35 posted on 07/10/2011 1:27:57 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
I, too, say that the prosecution did not prove their case. Here in Tennessee a Janet March’s wife “disappeared” in August 1996. No body has ever been found and no evidence of foul play was ever found, yet the prosecution was able to convict her husband of murder in 2005.

Perry March's father admitted to helping him move the body of his wife, testified against him in a plea deal and received jail time.

None of Casey's family members or friends testified that they helped her move the body.
36 posted on 07/10/2011 1:42:37 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

Same way it would get there if it was a homicide. Someone had to “package” that poor baby and dump her in the trees. That still doesn’t give a cause of death. To folks like you and me it seems obvious that indicates murder- trouble with that is many, many times people have hidden dead bodies that weren’t murdered- for different reasons, mostly mental.

The duct tape is puzzling to me- why murder a child with duct tape when she had a pool to drown her in to make it look like an accident? If she killed her in a rage at her mother like many think then why didn’t she just physically strangle her or something like that? Seems like a lot of trouble to do the duct tape thing, strange murder method.

This whole case is so strange, problem is we are trying to make sense of something that a mentally ill person did. Casey is without a doubt mentally ill- that doesn’t in any way excuse whatever she did- lots of folks in prison and even death row with mental issues. She was determined to be sane enough to stand trial but she is far from sane.

The very least she did is trash her baby even if the baby didn’t die as a result of anything she did to her. From there it goes to leaving the child alone for someone else to harm, or her to harm herself, die from heat in the car- drug the baby so she could party and overdose given- some combination of that all the way to cold blooded murder. Casey is definately guilty- but of what?

If I had been on the jury I would have fought tooth and nail for at least the child abuse conviction. I don’t know that I could have fought for the other charges but I wouldn’t have caved all the way. I do think the prosecutor and jury dropped the ball.


37 posted on 07/10/2011 8:16:17 AM PDT by Tammy8 (~Secure the border and deport all illegals- do it now! ~ Support our Troops!~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack; Persevero
>>"But why would you put duct tape on a dead child’s mouth?...After she is dead is serves no purpose."<<

Or perhaps someone wanted the skull to remain intact knowing that the mandible would separate after decomposition in hopes of identification of the remains at some point in the future they put the tape there. A nurse would understand that wouldn’t they? Who was the nurse?

38 posted on 07/10/2011 8:53:42 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
>>The tests also found “an unusually large concentration of chloroform” in the trunk, according to the Oak Ridge report.<<

Chloroform dissipates upon exposure to air. There is no possibility that chloroform could be detected from an instance that occurred months before. Chloroform is formed when chlorine is combined with moisture and heat. When you open the door to a dishwasher and steam escapes there is probably chloroform present because of the chlorine in the detergent. If there was laundry detergent residue in the trunk and moisture was present chloroform could have been produced in the Florida heat. Besides, the detector used was not proven or even peer reviewed to prove effectiveness.

Most of the other results were refuted by other so called expert witnesses.

39 posted on 07/10/2011 9:02:34 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
The mother already said the kid died and it was an accident.

I don't remember that. Could you give me a cite please?

40 posted on 07/10/2011 9:03:38 AM PDT by saminfl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: saminfl

That is what the defense team was claiming in opening statements. They blamed George for getting rid of the body.

Never offered any evidence of either.


41 posted on 07/10/2011 9:10:35 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: saminfl; indylindy
"How in the world can a mother wait 30 days before ever reporting her child missing? That's insane, that's bizarre... The answer is actually relatively simple. She never was missing," Baez said. "Caylee Anthony died on June 16, 2008 when she drowned in her family's swimming pool." Baez also claimed that Casey Anthony's father, George Anthony, found the body in the backyard pool and indicated that he helped dispose of the body.

Well if George was helping somebody, which may or may not be true, he sure the hell wasn't helping OJ.

Why did the medical examiner declare Caylee's death a homicide? Because the poor baby had duct tape on her face for which there is no REASONABLE explanation except that somebody killed her and since Casey's defense attorney told the jury that it was CAsey who dumped the body, along with George and OJ, the only rational and reasonable conclusion is that Caset, alone or in league with others, put the duct tape on her baby.

To think otherwise is irrational or retarded.

42 posted on 07/10/2011 9:18:25 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear
Chloroform dissipates upon exposure to air.

Everything "dissipates upon exposure to air" and yeat levels of chloroform in that trunk were about oreders of magnitude higher than normal. No chlorine or bleach in the trunk.

Most of the other results were refuted by other so called expert witnesses.

You mean like the moron who claimed the duct tape was put on later but in fact the duct tape was holding the mandible to the skull when the kid was found?

43 posted on 07/10/2011 9:42:07 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen

A few possible points, taken from the website http://www.justice4caylee.org/t1208-who-s-who-in-the-anthony-case :

Early police investigators included a team from the Sex Offenses unit;
The Sawgrass Apartments, where Casey said the nanny lived, was home to the employer of Casey’s sometime ‘boyfriend’ Lazaro/Lazzaro/Lazarro and this person, who was a ‘director’ of ‘Society Entertainment’ also did some work for that ‘Fusion’ club which Casy frequented and where she met Lazaro.
Casey had expressed an interest in possibly having Caylee ‘adopted’.
Did Casey sell or ‘rent’ her child to pornographers or child predators? Therefore she didn’t want to expose them to the police? Did those people kill Caylee?
I hope the police don’t give up investigating. This whole case is so odiferous.


44 posted on 07/10/2011 10:05:33 AM PDT by Anselma ( "We will break the middle class between the stones of high taxes and inflation." - Lenin (&BHO?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anselma

Casey did kill Caylee. This sex offender thing may be true, but Casey killed Caylee.


45 posted on 07/10/2011 10:39:14 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
>>Everything "dissipates upon exposure to air" and yeat levels of chloroform in that trunk were about oreders of magnitude higher than normal. No chlorine or bleach in the trunk.<<

Impossible for chloroform to stay present for months and months in an area. They didn’t even do tests on the garbage that I can find. How can you say there was no substance containing chlorine.?

>>You mean like the moron who claimed the duct tape was put on later but in fact the duct tape was holding the mandible to the skull when the kid was found?<<

You evidently didn’t see the interview Greta had with the prosecutor who admitted that the tape could have moved given the high water, violent weather and animal invasion. If the prosecutor himself admits that it’s likely even they had reasonable doubt about the time the tape was put on and where it was put.

46 posted on 07/10/2011 11:14:16 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Why did the medical examiner declare Caylee's death a homicide? Because the poor baby had duct tape on her face for which there is no REASONABLE explanation except that somebody killed her

If you would read the Medical Examiner's Report Conclusion/Opinion at the top of this post, you would notice that it says "This duct tape was clearly placed prior to decomposition". This gives at least HOURS of time after the time of death where the duct tape could have been placed.

If you would actually understand that point made in the ME's Conclusion/Opinion, you would understand that it does NOT - I repeat - NOT - state that the duct tape was necessarily placed prior to death. Ergo, it does NOT state that the duct tape is in fact the murder weapon.

Nobody with duct tape on their face had it placed there for a reasonable reason.

Deviant murderers sometimes desecrate the corpses of their victims in all sorts of ways.

The defense in United States Courts of Law does NOT have to offer EXPLANATIONS. If you are arrested for a crime you do NOT have to explain how the crime happened in order to prove that you did not commit the crime.

The most obvious scenerio for duct tape on the baby's face - but NOT being the actual cause of death is very straightforward:

a) the baby was already dead

b) a person or persons were attempting to set up a scene at which searchers would find the body (let's call them the cleaner(s))

c) the scene was to look like an abducter murdered the child by suffocation with duct tape, then disposed of the body in the woods

d) the body was to be found within a few days - if it was, Casey would not be under suspicion because she would not have been partying for 31 days

e) the body was not found right away - so the cleaner(s) thought no charges would be filed against anyone without a body and they just hoped the body would never be found

f) Casey, instead of staying home and being in mourning, kept up her partying ways that caused her to fall under suspicion

g) Finally the body is found, making everyone assume that Casey was the murderer and she used the duct tape to suffocate the child, even though - again - if you READ the ME Conclusion and my comments at the top of this post - you will see that the duct tape is NOT claimed to be the instrument of murder by the ME. Please read it, it's not coming from me, it's coming from the ME report.
47 posted on 07/10/2011 11:46:52 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen (It's not difficult.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Several witnesses have testified that in the summer of 2008 Casey Anthony’s car contained a strong odor that resembled the stench of a decomposing body.

This is where the distinction between trash and garbage becomes crucial. Defense lawyers say the stench in Anthony’s car was a result of her mistakenly leaving that plastic bag of “garbage” in her car trunk for several days in Florida’s hot summer sun.

Prosecutors counter that the stench is the lingering evidence of the mother’s crime against her daughter. A plastic bag of “trash” is incapable of producing such a strong and distinctive smell, they say.

The issue is further complicated by the fact that investigators found maggots and other insect activity on a wad of paper towels in the white plastic bag. Prosecutors have suggested that the paper towels may have been used to clean up fluid that had flowed from Caylee’s decomposing body while it was still in the car trunk.

Dr. Haskell was asked a hypothetical question that directly tracks the state’s theory in the case. If the body of a young child was stored in the trunk of a car for some time and then moved, would that fit with the insect activity he had found?

He said based on the type of insects he’d found in the paper towels he estimated the body would have been in the car trunk three to five days.

On cross-examination, Defense Attorney Jose Baez challenged Haskell’s assumption that whatever was on the paper towels that attracted the insects must have come from human decomposition. Wouldn’t left-overs from a restaurant forgotten in a hot car attract the same flies, Mr. Baez asked.

Not that quantity, Haskell said.

That’s when Assistant State Attorney Jeffrey Ashton asked Haskell the difference between trash and garbage.

“To my thinking garbage is primarily decomposing organic material,” he said, “versus trash which is any inorganic stuff you are throwing out.”

Haskell said the insects he studies are searching for decomposing organic material, both animal and plant, to “colonize and try to raise their kids in it.”

He said the white plastic bag contained trash – a collection of inorganic materials that were not decomposing.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0612/Casey-Anthony-murder-trial-focuses-on-trash-versus-garbage/(page)/2


48 posted on 07/10/2011 1:17:45 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Orange County Deputy Jason Forgey first explained how dogs are trained to detect human decomposition, and then what happened when his K-9, Gerus, got involved in the Anthony case.

Defense attorney Jose Baez tried to block jurors from seeing certain evidence about Forgey and Gerus, but Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry allowed the state to admit the items, saying that the jury has to decide if police dogs are reliable.

Forgey told jurors that on July 17, 2008 — two days after Caylee’s grandmother reported her missing — Gerus alerted to the trunk of the car after it was taken to the Sheriff’s Office.

The deputy also noted that the smell of death, which he is familiar with, was obvious from Anthony’s car.

“I smelled it. Clear as day,” he said.

Forgey also said Gerus alerted once to a spot near Caylee’s playhouse in her family’s backyard, but after investigators scraped the ground and the dog was sent out to the location a second time, he did not alert.

FBI examiner testifies about chloroform

Prosecutors also called Dr. Michael Rickenbach, a forensic chemist examiner with the FBI, who told jurors he was surprised that residue of chloroform was detected on fabric from a spare tire cover taken from the trunk.

Rickenbach also said a chemical consistent with chloroform was found on fabric from the left and right sides of the trunk liner.

Chloroform can be deadly if inhaled, and investigators said someone at the Anthony’s home searched the Internet for the term on the family computer.

Rickenbach said chloroform is a volatile substance that doesn’t stay around long. He told prosecutor Jeff Ashton he would have expected the chloroform to dissipate by the time the fabric was tested.

“I was surprised to even get any results for chloroform,” he said.

Rickenbach also told Ashton he detected an odor when he opened the can containing the fabric from the spare tire cover.

Vass and fellow scientists at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee found that while not conclusive, nearly all the compounds present in early human decomposition were detected in the trunk of her vehicle.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-06-07/news/os-casey-anthony-trial-day-12-20110607_1_anthony-case-chloroform-casey-anthony


49 posted on 07/10/2011 1:21:00 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Then when you read on down in the interrogation of crime scene investigator Gerardo Bloise;

“You had no idea the evidence would be altered,” Baez asked.

“No,” he said.

The routine drying may have undercut the state’s investigation as much as defense efforts.

Had they been preserved as found and immediately tested, the maggot-covered paper towels might have provided a direct link between Caylee’s dead body and her mother.

Haskell said it is possible to retrieve human host DNA from lice, maggots, and even bed bugs. It is unclear whether the procedure was attempted given the state of the evidence.

The crime scene investigator didn’t know that evidence could be altered when drying it? Then it was unclear whether tests had been attempted. Can you imagine sitting in a jury and the crime scene investigator is shown to not know what he is doing? That alone would cause reasonable doubt about anything those investigators say.

50 posted on 07/10/2011 1:33:31 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson