LOVE AND PROTECT ALL CHILDREN


A discussion of children, their welfare, well being and lives. We must protect them, they are our future.
 
HomeRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
AuthorMessage
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Heading Back To Court; New Case Filings   Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:10 pm

Casey Heading Back To Court; New Case Filings






Posted: 6:10 pm EDT March 22, 2011
Updated: 6:24 pm EDT March 22, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony will have a busy week. She'll be in court Wednesday, Thursday and Friday as both sides argue over scientific evidence. WFTV.com will be streaming the hearings live online and live-blogging from our Casey Anthony section.






LIVE: Court Video @ 9:00am | Live-Blog @ 8:45am






Prosecutors filed paperwork arguing that even defense experts agree the scientific methods used to find evidence of decomposition in the trunk of Casey's car are generally accepted.
The defense will argue this week that the evidence should be thrown out as so-called "junk science." But when prosecutors recently questioned defense experts under oath, they acknowledged the science is "well-respected."
The trial is set to start May 9.

DEFENSE LISTS NEW WITNESSES
The defense has listed three new witnesses with only about a month and a half before Casey's murder trial starts.
One of them is prosecutor Ken Lewis. The defense claims he has evidence that could help Casey.
The other two are doctors the defense wants to testify about Casey's state of mind.

EQUUSEARCH VOLUNTEERS TO TESTIFY FOR PROSECUTION
Prosecutors are now calling on two EquuSearch volunteers, whose testimony the defense had been counting on. The defense claimed the volunteers searched the scene where Caylee's body was found in late summer 2008 and "found nothing," but now they'll testify for the prosecution.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Anthony Judge To Rule On "Death Smell' Evidence   Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:41 pm

Anthony Judge To Rule On 'Death Smell' Evidence


Casey Anthony Charged With First-Degree Murder

POSTED: Tuesday, March 22, 2011
UPDATED: 7:18 pm EDT March 22, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. -- A hearing is expected to begin Wednesday morning in the Casey Anthony case, less than two months before the start of her murder trial.



VIDEO: Anthony To Appear In Court

The two-day hearing will focus on motions regarding scientific evidence in the case.
Judge Belvin Perry will be deciding on whether a jury deserves to hear what scientists hired by the state claim they found in the car Anthony drove around while her daughter, Caylee Anthony, was missing.
Experts for the prosecution claimed they found chemicals that only could have come from human decomposition as well as high levels of chloroform in the car.
Forensic chemist Barry Logan, a defense expert witness, said that those conclusions and others made by experts for the prosecution are not based on "generally accepted scientific principles."
If Perry agrees with Logan, a jury will never hear the state expert's opinions.
Local 6 investigative reporter Tony Pipitone said he expects prosecutor Jeff Ashton to attack Logan in any way possible, including noting that Logan resigned last year as the director of the Washington state crime lab after judges lost faith in its blood alcohol tests.
Evidence like what state experts want to present regarding human decomposition have never been allowed in court to help prove a murder case in the past, but prosecutors believe they have a chance.
Ashton has a history of getting ground-breaking scientific evidence into court. In 1987, he obtained the first conviction in the United States based on DNA.
In addition to telling the jury about chloroform levels and how chemicals behind a smell can prove human decomposition, the state also has an expert who claims a hair pulled from Anthony's trunk came from the head of someone who had already died.
Whether to allow these statements into trial are among many topics expected to be ruled on during the hearing.
Anthony, 25, is charged with first-degree murder in Caylee's death. Caylee was 2 years old when she was reported missing in July 2008. Her remains were found in a wooded area in east Orange County in December 2008.
Pipitone will be live blogging during the hearing.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony's Judge to consider scientific evidence in hearing this week   Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:52 pm

Casey Anthony’s judge to consider scientific evidence in hearings this week

Posted: 02:51 PM ET


Atlanta, GA- This week’s hearings in the Casey Anthony case will focus on a lot of scientific evidence. The defense wants to keep it out of trial based upon the “Frye test.” The Frye standard is used to keep “junk science” from coming from before a jury. The landmark case of United States v Frye, requires a scientific principle or test be “sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” This ensures that a defendant has a fair trial, and that a jury does not base its decisions on science that is unreliable.
According to discovery documents, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee did controlled testing and found levels of chloroform that signify not only that decomposition of a human body had taken place in that trunk, but that the levels calculated were higher than those found in normal human decomposition.
The defense will argue that the science is unreliable, and that Oak Ridge is an experimental laboratory, not a forensic facility, and therefore does not have sufficient quality controls to govern its testing. They also believe the controls the laboratory used were not proper. This alleged lack of quality control methods then affected the lab’s results.
Another big issue is a hair found in Casey’s trunk. Prosecutors say it has signs of decomposition. Discovery documents tell us testing on that hair shows it belonged to Casey or Caylee Anthony.
In this motion, the defense is asking that any hair showing signs of decomposition through post mortem banding, not be allowed to come into this trial as evidence. The defense argues the evidence is unreliable.
The State of Florida has never allowed trial testimony on post mortem changes in a strand of human hair.
Prosecution experts are expected to testify that this hair, found in Anthony’s trunk, was attached to Caylee Anthony’s head, while her body began to decompose…thus proving circumstantially that Caylee was in Casey’s trunk after she died.
And in its Response to Motion to Exclude Unreliable Evidence (Post Mortem Banding), The prosecution argues that any opinion its expert would testify to would be based on “data from accepted methods within the scientific community using generally accepted scientific principles.”
The hearing this Wednesday through Friday will have arguments from both sides and witness testimony. Some out of state witnesses will testify via teleconferencing to cut the expenses of traveling to Orlando.
Stay with In Session for your front row seat to justice!
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: "Who Writes Letters to Casey Anthony?" Profile of Followers of Infamous Women   Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:14 am

"Who Writes Letters to Casey Anthony?" Profile of Followers of Infamous Women




Who writes letters to Casey Anthony?: A Profile of Women Who Follow Infamous Women

And most recently, who are those who support Billie Dunn and Shawn Adkins, "Persons of Interest" in the criminal investigation into the disappearance of Hailey Dunn, 13, last seen alive on December 26, 2010?
They are the "devotees" who are devoted to Billie Dunn, or Casey Anthony, or Misty Croslin, or other such infamous women.

Please note: There are always those who view the case and simply think that the mother may not be involved. Recent polls show that between 8-12% think such. They are not the object of this article. They are those who hold this opinion but as more is known may change their opinion. They may or may not believe she is lying. This is not about the open-minded. Should Billie Jean Dunn plead guilty, they will acknowledge the guilt and move on. This is about the psychological bond that has arisen for some who rage in anger towards those who do not agree with them. The "devotee" mentality is highlighted here and the defense is hyper personal. All are innocent until proven guilty.

Casey Anthony has been in jail for almost 3 years and continues, month by month, to receive money from strangers so that she may buy snacks and small items. Casey Anthony will stand trial in about 6 weeks for the murder of her daughter, Caylee.

Billie Dunn and Shawn Adkins are not yet charged. Misty Croslin, although in prison for the next 25 years, has not been charged in the disappearance of her former step daughter, Hailegh Cummings.

In the cases of Hailey Dunn, Caylee Anthony, and Haleigh Cummings, there were, and are, similarities. All three involved the report of a missing child ranging from 3 to 13. All 3 cases are associated with drugs. All 3 cases are associated with deception. By looking at all 3 cases, are we able to see what kind of people defend those accused, or suspected?

I. The Defenders' Statements.

a. Presumption of Innocence
b. Religious Judging
c. Neo-Gnosticism

The defenders are all drawn to those who, in these cases, are highly suspicious; therefore, there is an element of longing to be 'different' from the rest; which gives the supporter a feeling of being 'special' or 'unique'. They feel an inadequacy within themselves and seek causes. This is why some actually invite and enjoy "persecution" as the more facts challenge them, the more they dig their heels in to 'prove' to the object of their devotion, how 'strong' they are and how much they 'suffer' for the cause. Some will even give up employment for the 'cause' (see Amanda Knox analysis)

In each of these three cases, there was a high media exposure and a high level of deception.


With the media being national, the element of attention is very important to the devotee.

The lies told by Casey Anthony, Misty Croslin, and Billie Jean Dunn only heightened the emotional reaction. No one likes being lied to.
All three lied from the beginning:

1. Casey began with the fantastic Zanny the Nanny babysits while I work' story
2. Misty's 911 call showed the order of importance to Misty:


I was sleeping
the door was open
oh, by the way, a child is missing

The order order in which a 911 call is made tells us priority.

3. Bilie Dunn when asked, "What happened?" said,
"my daughter went missing while I was at work"

showing how important it was to her to let people know she shouldn't be a suspect because she has an alibi. It was transparent, just as was Misty Croslin's. Nancy Grace didn't ask "when" she asked "what".


In each of these cases, the deception was made either to media, or available to media and became well known.


All 3 women indicated linguistically that the missing child was dead:

"I loved that little girl like she was my own" said Misty Croslin. Billie Jean spoke repeatedly in the past tense, as early as January on the Nancy Grace Show. "Caylee loved the park" said Casey, early on. All three made statements referring to the child in the past tense, early in the investigation. (A mother like Desiree Young, may eventually speak of Kyron in the past tense, as she may finally yield to the reality that he is not alive. The timing of the statement is important. Most mothers will not use past tense; with many using present tense language even after the child is buried; the acceptance is too hard)


When the mother of a missing child speaks in past tense terms of the child (something innocent mothers cannot do) it is an indication that she knows the child is deceased. The natural "denial" of maternal instinct is cast aside.


Mothers who have abused, neglected, or abandoned their own children may feel an empathy with these women and choose to support them.

They will say, "what ever happened to the presumption of innocence in this country!" and "the Bible says not to judge!", but they are, however, judging those who disagree with them. These angry posts on Facebook declare that those who disagree with their opinion are guilty of "judging" Billie Jean. This blog alone has received hundreds, perhaps into thousands, of vile posts and threats. The nerve touched is severe and it is raw. The threat they may pose is real.


When mothers report missing children and are seen as obvious liars, we draw an opinion, but readily own that having an opinion is not a formal judgement by judge and jury. The Scripture quoted is out of context and does not forbid judgement, but unrighteous judgment.


The neo-gnosticisim is where some believe to have "hidden knowledge" or a supernatural accessing of information outside of the laws of nature. For some, they will claim "psychic" or "divine" revelation, where families of missing children are often easy prey due to the vulnerability, but the "neo-gnosticism" goes far beyond just the supernatural claims of miraculous obtainment of knowledge.


There are those who say, "I look into her eyes, and I can see her pain..." and
"I know she is innocent". "You may not tell, but I can. I can see where you don't see" as if they possess an x-ray like vision into the mind and heart of another, beyond the normal means of obtaining knowledge through human senses.


Question: What is behind this?


Answer: The acute need to be 'special' or 'different' and can see what no one else can see, except for the few and rare 'gifted' ones.


It comes from a deep inadequacy and self doubt.


It is not just the world of 'soothsaying' or 'divination' of information.


Recently, when Fox Network picked up Dr. Eckman's work, we have some now stand up and declare themselves as "naturals" in lie detection, just like on the Hollywood production "Lie To Me" where one character studies for 20 years, but another is a "natural" in detecting deception. The 'natural' is one in a million but we now have thousands and thousands. Even using Statement Analysis, some may call themselves "human lie detectors". Are they claiming to be good at analysis, or are they claiming to possess something beyond the laws of nature?


Even in religious circles, the neo gnostic claim is used to defraud and make money: "I see someone sitting in the audience in need of being healed of hemorrhoids right now, let me lay hands on ya...." (remember the TV preacher with the little mic in his ear?).


In one sense, we are all gifted, which presupposes faith in Divinity as a gift comes from a gift giver. For the purpose of this article, the "gift" is not a special talent, but as something that allows the "gifted" to discern information, like lie detection, that does not come through the human senses as subject to the laws of nature. This "gnosticism" is as old as mankind and deception is found in antiquity's writings, in many different forms. Recently a man gained a following to predict the end of the world in 1994, sold a lot of books, but now claims he missed a number and set a new date for May of this year. The day after the world ends, we'll get up, put our pants on one leg at a time, and go to work. Perhaps.


It is the same desire to be special: the person believes that he or she can "see" far more than others, because they are "gifted". Are some people better in lie detection than others? Yes, in fact, the longer one is in prison, the better they get at it. But is it a supernatural suspension of nature? No.


There is a drive, likely due from early childhood neglect or abandonment, that causes someone to feel a need to be labeled as "special" or "gifted" and the "gift" tells them that Billie Dunn is innocent. It means that the supporter (mostly women) can "see" into Billie's soul, and this "sight" makes them unique and special, which is why there is often an angry response because you don't see how "special" the woman is.


When the follower feels "ordinary", she can become very hostile.


The deep feeling of the inadequate relate to such sinister and obviously lying characters as Casey, Billie and Misty, that they support them, because they can "see" or "perceive" innocence, and by doing so, can see the goodness or innocence within themselves.


There is another element that pervades this case and may be part of the history of the devotee:


Drugs.


Drugs ruin lives and those with special ties to drugs, who likely have lost children to the State or to relatives, and feel they are "misunderstood" may cling to a nefarious character like the 3 named here and assimilate with them.


Drugs and children do not mix.


Their cause becomes a way of attempting to 'win back' the child they lost due to neglect issues that stem from drug abuse. If Billie can 'overcome drugs' so can the devotee. This is how it is perceived.


It is also this way with sexual abuse, drugs and loss of a child.


All 3 of these women likely come from sexual abuse backgrounds so that this adds an element:


A woman who was sexually abused likely self medicated with drugs; and by doing so, lost custody of a child, to the State or to family.


What does a woman generally say after she loses custody of a child?


"the damned State! They had no reason to take her away from me ! I am a great mother! "


Great mothers don't make claims of greatness: they are too exhausted.


When Billie Jean Dunn said, "I am a wonderful mother" it reeked of guilt of having brought drugs, child porn, neglect, violence and blood lust videos into her child's life. Yet, the devotees rushed to Facebook to post their approval.


They are not able to talk about the cigarette burns on the baby's feet, or that the baby lost weight because mommy was too high to feed the baby, or the druggie boyfriend she invited in who beat her son unconscious. These facts are forgotten, as they are too painful to admit; so they cling to a Billie Dunn or a Casey Anthony, and as each piece of evidence mounts, so does the feeling of a need to be 'persecuted'.


The devotee can show her loyalty by 'suffering' through the taunts and insults of 'infidels'. The insults of others is sometimes sought by devotees, even to the point of being deliberately obnoxious in order to gain attention and be worthy of 'suffering'.


It is similar to the woman who, as a child suffered abuse, and now inflicts punishment on anyone she can; her family, strangers, friends, and so on. She will deliberately pick a fight and demand that you 'forgive' her because of her abuse history, but then attack again when you dare to disagree or question her, or, heaven forbid, need a breather from her.


The bottom line is that unless there is intervention, she will sabotage every healthy relationship in order to suffer, as her need of self punishment causes her to provoke others.


She will see in Billie Jean, the same "misunderstood" mentality.


Some will blame Shawn only.


Why?


Because they, themselves, had a bad man and was deceived, so therefore, since they themselves were 'innocent', so is Billie Dunn, and they cling to her, tenaciously.


The affidavit released showed drug abuse. This did not shake the supporter, for the supporter has had a few drug issues, too.


The affidavit showed she had a man threaten her and her child, but moved him in anyway and the supporter just wants Billie to know: "I've done the same thing, Billie!" and writes such things to a total stranger .


When Billie "broke up" with Shawn, they applauded and felt "victorious" but then defeated each time she would sneak around with him. They thought they had "overcome" the "bad" man in their lives; only to now go back and make more excuses.


Then came the biggest test of all of their allegiance to Billie Dunn: the child pornography and bestiality.


They quickly sought to prove that over 100,000 images could not possibly be Billie's, even though she openly talked of her "hobby" and starred in her own porn video. By this time, some regained their senses and 'surrendered' to reason: child pornography would not allow them to support her any longer. It was an awakening.


They know what child porn means: abused children for the pleasure of others; and the danger to all children by the possessor of child porn. It was too much.


Yet some remained, still. In spite of evidence, they send money to Casey Anthony. They "understand" Misty. And now, with Billie:


They have an attorney.


well, not "they" but Billie; but this is the perception.


It feels like they are going to be "protected" by a lawyer.


They will continue to say outrageous things. Why? So that others will rebuke them and say harsh things and "punish" them, or "test" their loyalty to Billie.


They will not give up.


Should Billie Jean Dunn and Shawn Adkins give up the location of Hailey, they would still send letters of support in prison, just like those who want to marry Amanda Knox, Casey Anthony, or, perhaps even Misty Croslin.


There is a desire to feel "special" and possess a supernatural "gift" that no one has.


There is an assimilation and projection of guilt. Those who have lost children to drugs, or sexual abuse, or to an abusive man (things that happen to many people who cope and survive in life), will project their feelings into Billie, Casey, and Misty.


There is one "punishment" worse than all others for the 'groupie' follower of an infamous mother.


It is a sentence they cannot bear as it strikes into the very heart of what has driven them to the place of idol-like adoration of the Billie Dunns, Misty Croslins and Casey Anthonys. The one thing they cannot bear is to be declared to be:


inconsequential.


This is more than they can bear. It produces rage, and edge emotions where a hot-anger flashes out all reason and understanding.


One devotee wrote, "I don't believe the DA would just talk to anybody!" revealing how deep her need to be unique and to "matter" in this world had driven her.


Everyone matters to someone. Everyone is born with a need to be noticed, and to be of consequence to others.


To the devotee of the infamous, they want one thing more than anything else:


to be noticed which is why they devote only to high media cases.


For them, any attention, even negative attention, is good, but just don't sentence them to the state of inconsequential, or you will see rage, threats, hostility, and perhaps even, despair.


For them to live, is to have a cause in life.


Hailey Dunn will be found, eventually, and the guilty will likely be punished and years from now, when the guilty are sitting in prison, some will continue to write letters, hoping for just a crumb of attention from the one that they just know, they just know, was wrongfully convicted.


For others, it will be just another "personal defeat", and will move on to another cause.


Recently, someone showed me a very funny posting on Facebook. It made me laugh as I thought how clever it was; that is, until I read further and realized that it wasn't clever humor. On the show "The Office", the character of Jim asked Kelly, "what's new?" (I will have to paraphrase the funny answer). Kelly said, "Oh, Brad and Angelina had a baby, Jim!"


To which Jim said, "No, I mean, 'what's up with you?'".


Kelly said, "I just told you."


Charlie Sheen, the actor, was going through a series of either publicity stunts or meltdowns on TV, and many TV hosts were saying how "worried" they were over him and interviewed friends and family, called for interventions, and so on. One day he was fine; the next he needed rehab.


Someone showed me a text on Facebook that caught my funny bone:


"I am so over him and his nonsense!"


I thought, "how clever!" until I read other posts by the same author.


It wasn't a joke.


She was that "involved" in the actor's "life" as she lived through celebrities.


Billie Dunn has made herself into a celebrity. She rode the national fame for a while, with Dr. Lillian Glass pointing out that she clearly enjoyed herself. Casey Anthony did too, to the point where Kathi Belich yelled after her, "Casey, why do you strut like that?!."


Billie Dunn took it to local media and although doesn't have the national exposure, she continued to make public interviews, and as she did, she provoked more and more anger as her statements were deceptive and provocative. She even hit up others for money. Her followers saw that she didn't search, so they gave her money for searching. The devotees saw the drugs, the admission of lying to police, the child porn, the immoral lifestyle, and as quickly as the news releases came, so came the excuses and defense.


She lied while her daughter was missing.


This simple fact wasn't enough.


The emptiness of life drives the devotee into an idolatry like devotion where logic becomes the enemy who 'persecutes' them, and evidence becomes the 'attacker' who has come to hurt them. This is why if they cannot debate the message, they shoot the messenger.


We all project to some degree. I rode my bike with Lance Armstrong, pitched with Tom Seaver, and scored goals with The Great One. I played guitar with Dylan, and tried to look like Cary Grant, and make 'em laugh like Bob Hope...but had to get back to reality.


I hurt for Jonbenet. I watched her on television news; sitting next to my daughter, a little blonde girl the same age as Jonbenet. My daughter will soon graduate as a nurse, RN. Jonbenet never got the chance. She was dressed up like a sexualized Las Vegas showgirl and never saw her high school prom, or her college dreams.


I felt outrage for Caylee, left in the mud while the family dined sumptuously on stuffed crab of some sort.


I felt shame when Nancy Grace said, "Ronald. Ronald. I know you. I know you..." convinced that he wasn't selling drugs and bringing jeapordy into poor Haleigh's life. Drama or not, it didn't sit well with me, especially with what the analysis of his interview with Geraldo showed.


I felt frustration when I watched Nancy Grace ask Billie Dunn if she watched the ball drop on New Year's eve while Hailey was missing.


But I felt deep abiding sadness when the police said "child pornography".


I then knew what Hailey likely suffered under.


I knew it it was something from the analysis. The analysis showed deception and that something was missing, but the analysis didn't tell me what it is that was missing. I saw the violence, I saw the drugs, I saw the deception but what was missing?


Child pornography.


The vilest of the vile. The assault on innocence.


The desire to destroy the Image of God in especially the little ones, who should know little of the ugliness of this world.


I knew what Hailey had gone through because I know what possessors of child pornography do to children: they destroy. They hate. They destroy for their own perverted pleasure.


I pity those who support these infamous women, facts be damned. The unresolved issues in their own lives is all too much to bear; they'd rather distract their pain with the likes of the characters on the news, than face the pain head on, and cope.


Where we give up our inner fantasies of glorious singing or skating or dancing or whatever it may be...in order to get up each day and press on, they cannot. They must be distracted in order to postpone the pain.


"I know, I will think about it tomorrow. That's it. I won't think about it today, I will think about it tomorrow." Scarlett O'Hara


The problem is that unless it is confronted, it never goes away. The devotees know that better than any of us.







Posted by Seamus O Riley at 3/22/2011 07:36:00 PM
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony team fights against 'junk science' at new hearing today   Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:29 am

Casey Anthony team fights against 'junk science' at new hearing today


Casey Anthony's white Pontiac Sunfire has been seized as possible evidence in her trial.
By Amanda Evans, Reporter
Last Updated: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 6:53 AM


The Case Against Casey




  • Latest Casey Anthony News
  • Key Players
  • Case Timeline



ORLANDO --
Attorneys in the case against Casey Anthony are preparing for another round of major hearings starting Wednesday.
Lawyers on both sides of the case will argue over what scientific evidence will be allowed at her trial, which is scheduled to start in just six weeks.
The question up for debate: Is the evidence really accepted science, or just an experiment?
State prosecutors want to put experts on the stand to testify, saying they can prove there was a dead body in Casey Anthony's car.
According to FBI analysts, a hair found in the trunk shows signs of decomposition, and high levels of chloroform were also allegedly found in the trunk.
But the science to prove there was a dead body is relatively new.
So at this week's hearings, Chief Judge Belvin Perry will determine if the science is strong enough to use in court, or too new and experimental.
How big of a deal will that decision be? According to criminal defense attorney David Fussell, who is not connected to the case, it's crucial for both sides.
"Both sides will be fighting out this issue today," said Fussell.
The defense has said the state's so-called proof is just a hunch, calling it "junk science."
Casey's team will also refute reports of police dogs sniffing out traces of decomposition in Casey's white Pontiac.
The science being argued works off of scents as to determine locations of bodies, not if a body was actually there
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: 11 A.M. : Frye Hearing In Casey Centers On Death Band   Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:10 pm

11 A.M.: Frye Hearing In Casey Centers On Death Band


State Raising Several Objections To Questioning




POSTED: 10:51 am EDT March 23, 2011
UPDATED: 11:06 am EDT March 23, 2011


ORLANDO, Fla. -- A Frye hearing in the case against Casey Anthony got off to a slow start Wednesday morning with dozens of objections from prosecutor Jeff Ashton.
So far, the court has taken up the issue of a hair found in Anthony's trunk. Prosecutors say it has signs of decomposition. Tests have shown the hair belongs to Casey or Caylee Anthony.
The defense wants any hair showing signs of decomposition through post mortem banding to not be allowed as evidence at the trial.
The defense argues the evidence is unreliable.
The state of Florida has never allowed trial testimony on post mortem changes in a strand of human hair.
Defense attorney Dorothy Clark Sims is questioning FBI hair and fiber examiner Karen Korsberg Lowe about whether darkening of the root is found on hairs that are not from a decomposing body.
MORE: What's A Frye Hearing?
Lowe said yes, they've done experiments leaving hairs out in soil and water, and there has been both "putrid root" and signs of decomposition on the hair, but not post mortem banding, which is unique to hair from decomposing bodies.
This morning, the defense is trying to prove the science of post mortem banding is still being researched and does not meet the Frye standard
Prosecutor Jeff Ashton keeps objecting to Sims' questions. He feels she's asking things that should have been covered in a deposition, not at a Frye hearing
Frye hearings are only for the purpose of determining if the witness' testimony is based on sound science.
Cindy Anthony is the only family member in courtroom.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony In Court For Hearings On DNA, K-9 Search   Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:07 pm

Casey Anthony In Court For Hearings On DNA, K-9 Search


Posted: 6:10 pm EDT March 22, 2011




Updated: 4:54 pm EDT March 23, 2011

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony was back in court Wednesday, less than seven weeks from the scheduled start of her murder trial. During three days of hearings, defense attorneys will try to get scientific evidence thrown out, claiming it's not reliable technology.
WFTV.com will be streaming the hearings live online and live-blogging from our Casey Anthony section.



LIVE: Watch Court Video | Check Out Live-Blog
CASEY WALKS IN: See Images | Watch Raw Video
FBI EXPERT TESTIMONY: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Pt. 5
BILL SHEAFFER: Analysis Of Day 1 Hearing
K-9 SEARCH TESTIMONY: Yuri Melich | CSI
| CSI # 2
FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST: Part 1 Of 3 | Part 2
COURTROOM OUTBURST: Man Gets Kicked Out
VIDEO REPORT: Evidence Hearing In Casey Case



Lawyers spent all day arguing over scientific evidence, including a hair that was found in the trunk of Casey's car and the cadaver dogs that searched for Caylee's body.
Casey Anthony walked into the court room around 9:00am Wednesday wearing a low-cut pink blouse and dark slacks, with her haired pulled back into a bun (images | video).
The first motion to be heard involved the defense request to have post-mortem banding evidence be excluded as unreliable (read it). Karen Korsberg Lowe, an FBI expert in forensics, was the first to testify on behalf of the prosecution, who believes the evidence should be admissible.
The defense was having a tough day in court. The defense started off trying to keep out its own confidential expert's research, which actually validates the hair evidence the defense wants thrown out as "junk science".
WFTV was the first to report the dark, parallel banding that can indicate hair came from a dead body early in the case. That banding was on one of Caylee's hairs found in Casey's trunk.
The defense tried to challenge the FBI investigators who found the banding. Defense attorney Dorothy Sims asked Lowe whether a hair from a live person could develop dark spots after exposure to water, soil or enzymes.
Lowe believes a hair in Casey's trunk came from a deceased body with DNA similarities to hair from Caylee's hairbrush.
"The characteristics present in this hair were consistent with post-mortem root banding, which I recorded as apparent decomposition," Lowe stated.
Sims' repeated improper questioning sparked a lecture from Chief Judge Belvin Perry.
"How many times do I have to tell you?" Perry asked Sims.
Prosecutor Jeff Ashton was told to stop interrupting her to object, but a stranger to the case caused the biggest outburst.
"The Lord has shown himself in Japan with the destruction!" said an unknown person in the courtroom.
"Out! Remove that person from the courtroom!" Perry said.
When the court returned from lunch, the next motion to be heard was on excluding evidence on K-9 searches (read motion) .
Prosecutor Linda Drane-Burdick's objection to a defense expert's testimony, that a cadaver dog handler could inadvertently cause the dog to alert on an area being searched for a body, brought a comment from defense attorney Jose Baez.
"I can't help it if Ms. Drane-Burdick didn't do her homework.
"He can insult me all day long, all he wants," Drane-Burdick replied.
About 30 minutes later, Baez wasn't so snarky when the prosecutor reduced the defense expert to merely an observer and a reader.
"You're not an expert in that area, but you've read a few articles," Drane-Burdick asked Dr. Scott Grieve.
"Yes," Grieve answered.
Casey is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee Anthony. Casey has pleaded not guilty and says a babysitter kidnapped Caylee.
The trial is set to start May 9.
Getting new science into trials is not new ground for lead prosecutor Jeff Ashton.
In 1987, he was the first prosecutor in the country to get a conviction on DNA evidence. Jimmy Lee Andrews was convicted of burglary and rape.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Man Removed From Anthony Hearing After Outburst   Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:20 pm

Man Removed From Anthony Hearing After Outburst


Casey Anthony, 25, Charged With First-Degree Murder

POSTED: Tuesday, March 22, 2011
UPDATED: 5:15 pm EDT March 23, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. -- A man was escorted from a court hearing in the Casey Anthony murder case after blurting out a remark about the recent earthquake and tsunami in Japan.



VIDEO: Tony Pipitone's Report
LIVE BLOG: Wednesday Archive


The young man, who was sitting in the third row of the gallery, interrupted the proceedings Wednesday afternoon, saying in a calm, clear voice, "the Lord has showed himself in Japan with destruction."
The man, described by Local 6 News reporter Tony Pipitone as in his 20s and dressed casually, was immediately removed from the courtroom. He will not be permitted to return.
No other details about the man were immediately known.
Judge Belvin Perry adjourned the hearing just after 5 p.m. Wednesday, to be continued on Thursday.
The hearing is focusing on motions regarding scientific evidence in the case.
Perry will eventually determine whether a jury deserves to hear what scientists hired by the state claim they found in the car Anthony drove around while her daughter, Caylee Anthony, was missing.
Experts for the prosecution claimed they found chemicals that only could have come from human decomposition, as well as high levels of chloroform, in the car.
FBI analyst Karen Korsberg Lowe testified that she found characteristics of apparent decomposition on the hair, indicating it came from a person who was already dead.








A man was removed from a Casey Anthony court hearing.

Forensic chemist Barry Logan, a defense expert witness, said that those conclusions and others made by experts for the prosecution are not based on "generally accepted scientific principles."
If Perry agrees with Logan, a jury will never hear the state expert's opinions.
Pipitone said he expects prosecutor Jeff Ashton to attack Logan in any way possible, including noting that Logan resigned last year as the director of the Washington state crime lab after judges lost faith in its blood alcohol tests.
Evidence like what state experts want to present regarding human decomposition have never been allowed in court to help prove a murder case in the past, but prosecutors believe they have a chance.
Ashton has a history of getting groundbreaking scientific evidence into court. In 1987, he obtained the first conviction in the United States based on DNA.
Anthony, 25, is charged with first-degree murder in Caylee's death. Caylee was 2 years old when she was reported missing in July 2008. Her remains were found in a wooded area in east Orange County in December 2008.
Pipitone will be live-blogging Thursday's hearing, too.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Judge Perry boots man from court in Casey Anthony hearing   Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:53 pm

Judge Perry boots man from court in Casey Anthony hearing





A unidentified man, standing, mumbling something about Japan is removed from a pre-trial Casey Anthony hearing Wednesday, March 23, 2011at Orange County courthouse. Casey Anthony, 25, is accused of killing her 2-year-old daughter Caylee Marie Anthony in the summer of 2008. (Red Huber, Orlando Sentinel / March 23, 2011)
Amy Pavuk, Orlando Sentinel

3:25 p.m. EDT, March 23, 2011

The Casey Anthony case has drawn all manner of protesters and outspoken observers, and it got one more in court on Wednesday.

Chief Judge Belvin Perry removed a spectator from his courtroom audience in the middle of a hearing in the case.

The man, who was not identified but appeared to be in his 20s, stood up during the hearing after lunch and began speaking. He mentioned "Japan" and "the Lord."

Perry wasted no time having the bailiff remove the man from court.



The hearing continued
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony Case: Will Casey Testify?   Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:55 pm

Casey Anthony Case: Will Casey Testify?




WFTV continues to have excellent coverage of the Case Against Casey. We will be following this case, both on radio and through articles of Statement Analysis. Although some claims to the contrary by networks, the recent ruling by Judge Perry appears to have been the final nail in the coffin.

All that is left is one question that needs to be answered:

Will Casey Anthony take the stand in her own defense?

Now that the entire "Zanny the Nanny" kidnapped Caylee and Casey danced in nightclubs as a means of 'searching' will all be allowed, there is nothing left for the defense, as a jury will hear the story unfold just as it did for the public:


a 911 call


a report of a kidnapping,

a report of a kidnapper, her apartment, her job, Casey's job, and an entire world of fantasy.


What could the defense do?



Conventional wisdom states that the defendant remain silent, leaving the burden of proof upon the prosecution.



By allowing all the statements of Casey in, the jury hears a basic story of fantasy.



This cases the burden to fall upon the defense to defend Casey as 'truthful'.



Who can assert that Zanny took Caylee while Casey was at Universal?


Only Casey.


ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony was back in court Wednesday, less than seven weeks from the scheduled start of her murder trial. During two days of hearings, defense attorneys will try to get scientific evidence thrown out, claiming it's not reliable technology.



WFTV.com will be streaming the hearings live online and live-blogging from our Casey Anthony section.














Prosecutors are standing by their evidence as defense attorneys try to show it's junk science, even calling it a fraud on potential jurors.

Casey Anthony walked into the court room around 9:00am Wednesday wearing a low-cut pink blouse and dark slacks, with her haired pulled back into a bun (images | video).

The first motion to be heard involves the defense request to have post-mortem banding evidence be excluded as unreliable (read it). Karen Korsberg Lowe, an FBI expert in forensics, was the first to testify on behalf of the prosecution, who believes the evidence should be admissible.

Lowe believes a hair in Casey's trunk came from a deceased body with DNA similarities to hair from Caylee's hairbrush.

"The characteristics present in this hair were consistent with post-mortem root banding, which I recorded as apparent decomposition," Lowe stated.

Lowe referred to post-mortem root banding, which is a discoloration of the hair root, which can indicate the hair came from a dead body. However, defense attorneys also asked if there could be another reason for the banding.

Lowe said it's possible.

"I indicated in my report, apparent decomposition to denote that I can't say that's the only possibility for these characteristics being present," said Lowe.

Defense attorneys are also expected to attack evidence about air samples from the trunk of the car that showed the presence of chloroform. Prosecutors filed paperwork arguing that even defense experts agree the scientific methods used to find evidence of decomposition in the trunk of Casey's car are generally accepted. The defense will argue this week that the evidence should be thrown out as so-called "junk science."

But when prosecutors recently questioned defense experts under oath, they acknowledged the science is "well-respected."

In a light moment during Wednesday morning's testimony, there were so many objections by prosecutors that the witness even came to expect objections, getting a laugh from the gallery.

"Sorry, I was waiting to see if there was going to be an objection. I'm sorry could you restate your question?" Lowe asked.

Lowe's testimony was finished around 11:50am. Judge Belvin Perry did not rule on that motion.

When the court returned from lunch, the next motion to be heard was on excluding evidence on K-9 searches (read motion) .

Casey is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee Anthony. Casey has pleaded not guilty and says a babysitter kidnapped Caylee.

The trial is set to start May 9.


DEFENSE LISTS NEW WITNESSES

The defense has listed three new witnesses with only about a month and a half before Casey's murder trial starts.

One of them is prosecutor Ken Lewis. The defense claims he has evidence that could help Casey.

The other two are doctors the defense wants to testify about Casey's state of mind.


EQUUSEARCH VOLUNTEERS TO TESTIFY FOR PROSECUTION

Prosecutors are now calling on two EquuSearch volunteers, whose testimony the defense had been counting on. The defense claimed the volunteers searched the scene where Caylee's body was found in late summer 2008 and "found nothing," but now they'll testify for the prosecution.







Next up for analysis: A Lie Upon a Lie

Posted by Seamus O Riley at 3/23/2011 04:17:00 PM
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony FRYE Hearings Enter Day 2   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:13 am

Casey Anthony Frye Hearings Enter Day 2


Hearing Expected To Continue Thursday




POSTED: 5:58 am EDT March 24, 2011
UPDATED: 6:08 am EDT March 24, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. --A series of evidence hearings will continue on Thursday morning in the Casey Anthony case.


Casey Anthony and the attorneys in the case are expected to meet Judge Belvin Perry in an Orange County courtroom for the second day of Frye hearings in the case, which focus on scientific testimony, opinion and evidence.
On Wednesday, the hearing focused on a piece of hair found in the trunk of Anthony's car. The defense wants the hair kept out of her trial.
The FBI expert who studied a hair strand taken from the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car explained via teleconference that the hair had postmortem banding at the root, which is considered a sign it came from a decomposing body.
"The characteristics in this hair were consistent with postmortem root banding, which I reported as consistent with decomposition,” FBI evidence expert Karen Lowe said.
The evidence is considered significant because the prosecution wants to prove Caylee Anthony's decomposing body was in the car trunk, but Dorothy Sims, who is one of Anthony’s defense attorneys, argued there are uncompleted studies that may show such hair banding can result from causes other than death.
"If there is research the FBI has conducted that shows, in fact, darkening of the roots for causes other than postmortem," Sims said. "We think that's extremely important.”
MORE: What's A Frye Hearing?






The defense also put several witnesses on the witness stand to talk about the the use of cadaver dogs, which are dogs that sniff for dead bodies.
According to witnesses, a cadaver dog alerted to a scent near the trunk of Anthony’s car and in three locations in the Anthonys' yard.
The defense hope to convince Perry the dog’s alerts are not reliable.
Meanwhile, in the middle of testimony Wednesday afternoon, there was an outburst from an unidentified young man sitting in the gallery.
"The Lord has shown himself in Japan with destruction," the young man said.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Thursdsy March 24, 2011 CASEY ANTHONY BACK IN COURT TODAY   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:16 am

Thursday, March 24, 2011


Casey Anthony Case Back in Court Today




ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony was back in court Wednesday, less than seven weeks from the scheduled start of her murder trial. During three days of hearings, defense attorneys will try to get scientific evidence thrown out, claiming it's not reliable technology.






Lawyers spent all day arguing over scientific evidence, including a hair that was found in the trunk of Casey's car and the cadaver dogs that searched for Caylee's body.

Casey Anthony walked into the court room around 9:00am Wednesday wearing a low-cut pink blouse and dark slacks, with her haired pulled back into a bun (images | video).

The first motion to be heard involved the defense request to have post-mortem banding evidence be excluded as unreliable (read it). Karen Korsberg Lowe, an FBI expert in forensics, was the first to testify on behalf of the prosecution, who believes the evidence should be admissible.

The defense was having a tough day in court. The defense started off trying to keep out its own confidential expert's research, which actually validates the hair evidence the defense wants thrown out as "junk science".

WFTV was the first to report the dark, parallel banding that can indicate hair came from a dead body early in the case. That banding was on one of Caylee's hairs found in Casey's trunk.

The defense tried to challenge the FBI investigators who found the banding. Defense attorney Dorothy Sims asked Lowe whether a hair from a live person could develop dark spots after exposure to water, soil or enzymes.

Lowe believes a hair in Casey's trunk came from a deceased body with DNA similarities to hair from Caylee's hairbrush.

"The characteristics present in this hair were consistent with post-mortem root banding, which I recorded as apparent decomposition," Lowe stated.

Sims' repeated improper questioning sparked a lecture from Chief Judge Belvin Perry.

"How many times do I have to tell you?" Perry asked Sims.

Prosecutor Jeff Ashton was told to stop interrupting her to object, but a stranger to the case caused the biggest outburst.

"The Lord has shown himself in Japan with the destruction!" said an unknown person in the courtroom.

"Out! Remove that person from the courtroom!" Perry said.

When the court returned from lunch, the next motion to be heard was on excluding evidence on K-9 searches (read motion) .

Prosecutor Linda Drane-Burdick's objection to a defense expert's testimony, that a cadaver dog handler could inadvertently cause the dog to alert on an area being searched for a body, brought a comment from defense attorney Jose Baez.

"I can't help it if Ms. Drane-Burdick didn't do her homework.

"He can insult me all day long, all he wants," Drane-Burdick replied.

About 30 minutes later, Baez wasn't so snarky when the prosecutor reduced the defense expert to merely an observer and a reader.

"You're not an expert in that area, but you've read a few articles," Drane-Burdick asked Dr. Scott Grieve.

"Yes," Grieve answered.

WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said from what he's heard in court Wednesday, the defense will lose that fight. The evidence that the jury will hear once Casey's murder trial starts in May is mounting.

The jury will hear all the lies Casey told to investigators and to her family right after Caylee was reported missing.

Sheaffer said he's never seen cadaver dog evidence thrown out, and defense arguments to keep out the hair evidence fell short.

"This witness will not let the lawyer confuse her or confuse the issues," Sheaffer said. Sheaffer said if the jury does hear all of the evidence against Casey, the defense will have to create not just doubt, but reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.

"The only person that could refute a lot of this circumstantial evidence is Casey Anthony herself but she comes with too much baggage," he said.

Casey is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee Anthony. Casey has pleaded not guilty and says a babysitter kidnapped Caylee.

The trial is set to start May 9.

Getting new science into trials is not new ground for lead prosecutor Jeff Ashton.

In 1987, he was the first prosecutor in the country to get a conviction on DNA evidence. Jimmy Lee Andrews was convicted of burglary and rape.


Posted by Seamus O Riley at 3/24/2011 06:55:00 AM
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 3/23/11 hearing   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:19 am

Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/23/11 hearing

Posted on March 23, 2011 by Valhall

I think at this point it would be easier to tell you if and when Casey ever looks at her parents then that she didn’t every time. No George again today? Anyone else think Jose has lost some weight? Maybe its more the deflated ego. He has definetely lost presence in the courtroom.
Ok, I think I can speak for almost everyone in the room and watching today that Sims was just whining from the start. “That mean old defense team didn’t spell everything out for us. He just gave us his points in the motions and the case law he is citing for us to have to look up”. WHAA. I was so disappointed in her. I expected so much more. Baez just cannot hold in the emotions he feels. He was visibly steamed that Mr. Ashton was using a prior defense experts reports against them today. Basically using it to make the State’s Frye argument.

I don’t know if you can see in the video but the defense team has huge 3″ or better binders all labeled i.e. “Hair Band Notebook” etc. But did anyone read the information that someone in the office put together for them? In the past 3 years was any research done or were they too busy making color coded charts and binders? Can anyone explain why the State is supposed to do the defense’s legwork for them or produce ANY and ALL research done on a subject? There were some smirks goin’ on in the gallery over that.
The FBI examiner Ms. Lowe was fabulous. Extremely professional, ready, unflappable. Her answers were concise, easy to understand (well…for most everyone except a few on the defense side it seems). Judge Perry seemed also to get exasperated over the 4 questions asked 40 ways. So, look Ms. Sims, here it is from a layperson sitting in court (read future juror type). Death banding is an accepted science. They don’t know what causes it, but they know they can’t duplicate it so far. It is an opaque band close to the root that surrounds the circumference (width) of the strand of hair. NOT the length. It is only found in hairs of decompositional value. It is not similar to a putrid root which can be caused by environmental effects including but not limited to pizza and squirrel. They found a hair belonging to Caylee or Casey with the “death band”. Since as Casey so respectfully told us “well, I’m not dead”, it must be Caylee’s. They know what hairs they can isolate that will and won’t form a death band. Is that so hard?
I don’t know if you could hear the little sidebar? Basically Judge Perry told Ms. Sims that she only needed to ask 2 questions with yes and no answers regarding the Coke (Cook?? sorry my notes aren’t that great) study. Does the FBI use it to form opinion or not? Who’s responsibility is it to gather all those studies and was ‘the’ powerpoint used in teaching but not experiments? Root, partial root, it was banded!!
And then once again we see poor Judge Perry having to school the defense on court procedure laws and etiquette and then an exasperated Judge reads US vs Hanson on Frye in a way that I’ve never seen him react. I don’t think Mr. Ashton’s “objection” behaviours helped. Here is where his ‘passion’ is showing more than his lawyering skills. And he needs to get a handle on it or the juries will be put off as much as we were.
During this we did have some side court entertainment. Baez is now the AV tech and was brought a tripod to set up. Unfortunately for him, even that was beyond his skill level and Ms. Medina had to step in to finish todays project. OH! how the lead attorney’s have fallen. At least it gave him something to do. Before that he was just leisurely flipping through binders and twisting around to see who all came today. When Mr. Ashton objected to the ‘environmental’ effects questions Mason quit counting the ceiling tiles (serious) and chuckled. I think he enjoyed getting a rise out of Ashton again.
Mr. Mason didn’t seem too interested in the arguments. Maybe he felt it was a losing battle. Was he looking at the ceiling thinking “This is a waste, a huge waste”? Look at him between 11:10 and 11:25 specifically and see if you agree with my little assesment. Earlier Ms. Finnell was very interested, but the battle has now bored her and she is on her phone looking at emails or something. The gallery was almost in a stupor until Mr. Ashton made his last statement and slammed his notepad on the podium. Woke everyone up for lunch. Casey has been working off a pile of transcripts and making her notes. I really do think she has decided she is part of the defense team and not the defendant. And we break for lunch.
Again, I don’t know if it came across but I’m sure you all saw the young man who stood up and said “The Lord has shown himself in Japan”. Really? That is what you potentially may have been arrested for? Your one big moment in front of a camera? OK. At least Judge Perry seemed back to his cheery judicial self after the break.
Richard Hornsby dropped by for a few. (sigh) Enough said there.
Now, there is a ‘feeling’ in the court. When a witness is doing well. When information is pertinent or new. Or…when a witness Dr. Fairgrieve is doing poorly. This mornings witness is such a comparison to this afternoon. She had few notes, needed little reference, stated the same conclusion when asked numerous times and was convincing of her education, experience and knowledge. She didn’t reach too far in conclusions and had support for her opinions. Dr. Fairgrieve had piles of reference material, so much so that he couldn’t find what he needed. He didn’t seem to have the experience to qualify his opinion and actually stepped backwards in cross by the State. I think Ms Finnell actually stepped up to Baez during Linda Drane-Burdick’s cross and said “make him stop” cause Baez finally objected and even had the nerve to tell Judge Perry that it was his courtroom and he could make the decision or some such nonsense. Again….say it with me now….and the gallery laughed. Casey actually didn’t seem to be able to take notes during this defense witness debacle. Could she, like all of us, see her case crumbling? Could she see the difference in both preparation and presentation of both sides?
The team of Ashton/Burdick is fantastic. He is the passionate lawyer who states what he wants and theatrically brings in the expertise opinion. She is the precise one who point by point and without fanfare gets the information she wants presented.
Again, I don’t know what you can see. But during Sgt. Brewer’s, the dog Bones, testimony Ms. Burdick gave the defense a pack of papers. I’ll admit it had to be several hundred, but both Baez and Mason had to make dramatic gestures at the amount of paperwork. Nevermind that they gave the State a CD earlier this week with over 5,000 pages on it. Anyway, so Baez wants to object to the papers as hearsay. Look at the gallery, everyone with any legal knowledge knew he would be overruled and there were smirks all around during Baez’s flawed argument. I know that Cindy and Casey have been instructed to not have any emotional expressions, etc., but when Baez was asking Sgt. Brewer during cross if Bones alerted in the yard and if they found anything “NO, leg, no bone, no teeth……” most of us reacted, but they didn’t. That would also be hard for a jury to overlook. He just asked if they found your child’s body part? But then thats just me.
Before you ask around, the nice man sitting with the State today “don’t make a fuss over me being here” didn’t seem to want to give his name. He is a former prosecutor and teaches at the law school of the University of Florida in Forensics. He is there to add another thinking cap (but wants to be clear that they really could do without him) and advise the State. That’s all I know for now. Nice southern gentleman who apparantly didn’t think about the consequences of sitting with the State and the every questioning minds of those watching the trial. Hint hint… a certain journalist with the initials TP will probably have the complete report if you’re interested.
PEACE
Magpie
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Hearing Day 2: 10 AM UPDATE   Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:01 pm

Casey Hearing Day 2: 10 A.M. Update


Amanda Ober, Staff Writer


POSTED: 9:43 am EDT March 24, 2011
UPDATED: 9:53 am EDT March 24, 2011



ORLANDO, Fla. -- Casey Anthony arrived in court in a hot pink cable knit sweater Thursday morning. Her mother, Cindy, is once again the only family member in court. Since she arrived, Anthony has been busy going through binders of information at the defense table and marking certain pages with color tabs on which she makes notes.


On the stand this morning is Deputy Jason Forgey, a canine handler with the Orange County Sheriff's Office. His former cadaver dog, Gerus, was the dog that alerted at Casey's car in July 2008. Along with another dog named Bones, it also alerted to three spots at the Anthonys' home.
Cadaver dogs are known to alert to the scent of remains of human tissue.
Wednesday, the defense presented a witness who claimed these dogs can alert on things like a human diaper, blood from a cut, and other items that don’t necessarily come from a dead body.
Thursday, defense attorney Jose Baez is grilling the deputy about whether or not his dog may respond to handler's cues, how often the dog is subjected to double-blind tests and the dog's training
The defense hopes to have the evidence from the cadaver dogs excluded as from the upcoming trial on the basis that the dogs' alerts are not reliable.
Later Thursday, it's anticipated the focus of the hearing will switch to debating the science behind the air samples that confirmed the presence of chloroform and chemicals consistent with human decomposition in the trunk of Casey's car.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Expert: Casey's Car Definitely Smelled Like Remains   Thu Mar 24, 2011 5:37 pm

Expert: Casey's Car Definitely Smelled Like Remains


Expert Says Smell Of Human Decomposition Is Unmistakable





POSTED: 2:37 pm EDT March 24, 2011
UPDATED: 4:26 pm EDT March 24, 2011






ORLANDO, Fla. -- A scent expert said Thursday that the smell from Casey Anthony's car smelled so strongly of human decomposition, that he had to step back initially.
Dr. Arpad Vass, a researcher at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, is testifying at a hearing in the case Thursday about the methodology he used to test air from Casey Anthony's trunk.
Prosecutor Jeff Ashton established that Vass has spent his whole life smelling odors.
Vass said the scent of human decomposition is unmistakable.
Ashton asked Vass how he reacted when he opened the bag that had the sample of carpet from the back of Casey's car.
"At first, I jumped back about 2 feet because the odor was so strong. But it was definitely the smell of human decomposition," Vass replied.


Both sides are debating the odor issue at a Frye hearing to see if it will be admitted at the trial.
The defense wants the evidence thrown out.
Judge Belvin Perry must decide not whether the expert is correct, but if the methods used to reach the conclusion were based on generally accepted scientific principals.
Jury selection for Anthony's trial is scheduled to begin May 9.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Courtroom Gets Heated In Day 2 Of Casey Hearing   Thu Mar 24, 2011 5:39 pm

Courtroom Gets Heated In Day 2 Of Casey Hearing


Posted: 6:48 am EDT March 24, 2011




Updated: 5:33 pm EDT March 24, 2011

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Lawyers in the case against Casey Anthony were debating scientific evidence in court Thursday, but Chief Judge Belvin Perry had to fight to keep them on topic. The defense filed a motion Thursday, accusing Perry of bias and misstating facts.



MOTION: Claims Perry's Ruling Was Bias
CASEY WALKS IN: See Images | Watch Raw Video
KEY PLAYERS IN CASE: See Images
KEY PLAYERS IN CASE: See Images
K-9 HANDLER TESTIMONY: Pt.1 | Pt. 2 | Pt. 3 | Pt. 4 | Pt. 5
BAEZ ADMONISHED: Baez Unhappy With Witness
AIR SAMPLE EXPERT: Part 1 | Pt. 2 | Pt. 3 | Pt. 4
VIDEO REPORT: Casey Back In Court



Casey's attorneys want him to reconsider his decision to allow the jury to hear Casey's lies to law enforcement and her family.
Their uphill battle continued Thursday with a couple of bombshells from the prosecution's scientist that even got Casey's attention.
Dr. Arpad Vass, a research scientist with the Oak Ridge Laboratory who tested the air and carpeting in Casey's trunk, got her attention when he told the prosecutor his reaction to opening the sealed container holding the carpeting.
"I jumped back 20 feet. It was very strong. To me it was the smell of human decomposition," said Dr. Vass.
Casey's eyes widened when he said that, and then she looked down.
Dr. Vass said human decomposition has a distinct odor. He dropped another bombshell by saying he found eight times more chloroform emanating from her trunk carpet and 10,000 times more chloroform in the air from her trunk than he's even seen with unventilated decomposition.
WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said he expects that prosecutor Jeff Ashton, who was the first in the country to use DNA evidence in a criminal case, will convince Judge Perry to allow Vass's air tests to come into a trial for the first time ever.
However, Casey's attorney Jose Baez did get an Orange County sheriff's cadaver dog handler to admit he could not know for sure why his dog alerted on Casey's trunk.
Forgey testified that his dog was trained to pick up the scent of a dead body, and it alerted on Casey's trunk.
"K-9 Garret jumped inside, front paws only made eye contact with me, came back out of the trunk and gave a final trained alert," Forgey explained.
"Is there any way for you to determine whether your dog's alert was from a live person or a dead person?" Baez asked K-9 handler Lt. Jason Forgey.
"No," Forgey said.
The defense is arguing that the dogs can sense a dead body, but not necessarily remnants of one.
However, Baez was admonished by Judge Perry more than once about improper questioning.
When Baez pressed the issue, the judge stepped in and said the questions he's asking have nothing to do with the defense motion to exclude evidence.
"I believe it does," Baez said.
"Well unfortunately, I don't. So move on," Perry said.
Both sides will continue the battle over scientific evidence at another hearing on Friday April 1. They'll discuss "plant growth evidence," detectives collected along with Caylee's remains and a stain found in the trunk of Casey's car.
Judge Perry will also hear testimony about a heart sticker discovered near Caylee's remains.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony: Court Room Heats UP   Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:56 pm

Thursday, March 24, 2011


Casey Anthony: Court Room Heats Up




ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- Lawyers in the case against Casey Anthony were debating scientific evidence in court Thursday, but Chief Judge Belvin Perry had to fight to keep them on topic. The defense filed a motion Thursday, accusing Perry of bias and misstating facts.

Casey's attorneys want him to reconsider his decision to allow the jury to hear Casey's lies to law enforcement and her family.
Their uphill battle continued Thursday with a couple of bombshells from the prosecution's scientist that even got Casey's attention.
Dr. Arpad Vass, a research scientist with the Oak Ridge Laboratory who tested the air and carpeting in Casey's trunk, got her attention when he told the prosecutor his reaction to opening the sealed container holding the carpeting.
"I jumped back 20 feet. It was very strong. To me it was the smell of human decomposition," said Dr. Vass.

Human decomposition initiates the gag reflex in humans. It is not something anyone needs training on; as suggested that Cindy was a nurse, or George a deputy. Once smelled, it is never forgotten, nor mistaken for anything else; including pizza.

Casey's eyes widened when he said that, and then she looked down.
Dr. Vass said human decomposition has a distinct odor. He dropped another bombshell by saying he found eight times more chloroform emanating from her trunk carpet and 10,000 times more chloroform in the air from her trunk than he's even seen with unventilated decomposition.
WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer said he expects that prosecutor Jeff Ashton, who was the first in the country to use DNA evidence in a criminal case, will convince Judge Perry to allow Vass's air tests to come into a trial for the first time ever.
"The defense is grasping at straws," said Sheaffer.

There isn't much that can be done. The defense must now prove that Zanny the Nanny exists (along with Casey's job, office, and paycheck) and that she kidnapped Caylee, and that Casey went drinking and dancing while looking for Caylee because she was "ugly coping". They will then have Cindy testify that Caylee has been spotted in Brooklyn.


However, Casey's attorney Jose Baez did get an Orange County sheriff's cadaver dog handler to admit he could not know for sure why his dog alerted on Casey's trunk.
Forgey testified that his dog was trained to pick up the scent of a dead body, and it alerted on Casey's trunk.

"K-9 Garret jumped inside, front paws only made eye contact with me, came back out of the trunk and gave a final trained alert," Forgey explained.

"Is there any way for you to determine whether your dog's alert was from a live person or a dead person?" Baez asked K-9 handler Lt. Jason Forgey.

"No," Forgey said.

Jose Baez will be front and center for most, as we watch him for his questions. He will provide much for analysis. (unless Casey takes the stand)


The defense is arguing that the dogs can sense a dead body, but not necessarily remnants of one.
However, Baez was admonished by Judge Perry more than once about improper questioning.
When Baez pressed the issue, the judge stepped in and said the questions he's asking have nothing to do with the defense motion to exclude evidence.
"I believe it does," Baez said.
"Well unfortunately, I don't. So move on," Perry said.
Baez was scolded again for allegedly trying to pull a fast one on prosecutors by challenging something he agreed he would not challenge.
"Someone might assume that you were waiting in ambush," Perry said to Baez.
But Baez claimed he was pressured into that agreement because of the threat of a contempt charge.
"Opportunity happened to land on his lap, that he has a contempt charge lying over opposing counsel's head to basically force his hand," Baez said.
Both sides will continue the battle over scientific evidence at another hearing on Friday April 1. They'll discuss "plant growth evidence," detectives collected along with Caylee's remains and a stain found in the trunk of Casey's car.
Judge Perry will also hear testimony about a heart sticker discovered near Caylee's remains.

Posted by Seamus O Riley at 3/24/2011 07:01:00 PM
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Day 1 and the Defense got fried   Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:59 pm

Day 1 and the defense got fried


Today marked day one of the Frye Hearing in the case against Casey Anthony, and I kept asking myself: How could Casey Anthony sit through the events of the day in court without any emotion? Well, we know she is cold as ice, but I cannot help thinking of the substance of the testimony today: Decomposition, hair, odors of HER BABY!
It is difficult for me to understand how a mother could be so emotionally absent. I will never understand how Casey Anthony can be so distant from the events happening in the courtroom. It appears to me that she has separated herself as a defendant in the case, as if she has created a fantasy for herself as she sits at her table, in the courtroom.
Casey Anthony never, or very rarely, looks up from the “work” she does at the defense table. She reviews documents, books, and binders, making notes of what she’s reading, conferring with the lawyers. It is as if she has decided the best way to approach her situation is to play make-believe – pretending she’s an attorney. Children do this quite well. My niece plays “mommy” and will “cook” and “serve” an entire meal consisting of beverage coasters as bread, pens and pencils as eating utensils, dog and cat toys as food, paper towels bunched into a ball and taped together to make meatballs, etc., and we have a delicious meal! Like my five year old niece totally believes her fantasy, so does Casey Anthony believe in her own make-believe, sitting apart from her life right now, as if someone else is defendant. It’s alarming and odd.
Dogs and Decomposition
The defense is making a big deal where the car was positioned when the K9 was brought to search Casey Anthony’s white Pontiac. The K9 also checked Tony Lazarro’s car for scent of decomposition. None was found.
Strangely, Baez asked OCSO Detective Melich, Investigator Bloise, and Investigator Vincent, who were testifying to the K9 alert of the white Pontiac driven by Casey, to draw on a flip chart where the car was situated in relation to the forensics bay, in the parking lot. Huh? What point was Baez making here? It was never established.
When K9 handler of the dog “Bones” Sergeant Brewer took the stand, she indicated her dog alerted on 3 spots in the back yard of the Anthony home. Mr. Baez did a fair job with the witnesses I saw him question, though I have not seen all the videos as yet. However, when Mr. Baez asked witness Sergeant Brewer if her dog, Bones, can “tell” her what type of substance the dog alerted on, the witness was quite surprised. It was nonsensical, and there was bemused laughter from the courtroom. Mr. Baez, did not laugh, which led me to believe he intended his question be taken seriously. Idiotic question, meant to be cynical, but it fell flat.
A defense witness, Dr. Fairgrieve, was trounced on by the State in his testimony of K9s. He was forced to admit that he had never trained search dogs, only observed their training about 10 to 20 times.
Dr. Fairgrieve has no education/background in the use, training or reliability of K9s, and Linda Drane-Burdick, attorney for the State, used these facts to great advantage.
Dr. Fairgrieve ended up appearing like somewhat of a hack in the field, having only admitted to reading articles related to K9s that anyone could read on the Internet.
The One Hair
This one hair, the hair from Caylee Anthony, has been tested and not only shows the type of “banding” one would see on a hair from a decomposed body, DNA tests concluded that Caylee Anthony cannot be excluded as the source of the hair.
With regards to this testimony, I will rely on the analysis of Attorney Bill Shaeffer when he says the State of Florida met its burden with regards to their argument over the reliability of the appearance of “root banding” (decomposition-like banding on a hair from Caylee Anthony found in the trunk of the Pontiac).
The questioning by the Defense Attorney Sims was terrible and did not seem to make sense as it relates to the purpose of a Frye Hearing.
There were so many objections by Jeff Ashton during Ms. Sims’ questioning of the FBI witness that were sustained, it became embarrassing.
If I were a gambler, I’d agree with Mr. Bill Shaeffer and tell you, the hair will be in evidence, and it will be damning.
It is not looking any better for Casey Anthony today.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony attorney: Judge Perry has 'clear bias'   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:06 pm

Casey Anthony attorney: Judge Perry has 'clear bias'


An expert also testifies about extraordinarily high levels of chloroform levels.






The Casey Anthony defense team filed a scathing motion Thursday that criticized recent orders by Orange-Osceola Chief Judge Belvin Perry and accused the veteran jurist of displaying "clear bias" in the case.

The defense wants a rehearing on earlier attempts to get Casey Anthony's statements to her family, friends and law enforcement officials excluded from her upcoming trial. The motion was filed with the Orange County Clerk of Courts while the prosecution and defense appeared before Perry in court Thursday and questioned witnesses about scientific evidence in the case.
Neither Perry nor the prosecution was initially aware the motion had been filed as they resumed the lengthy hearing Thursday afternoon.
The motion refers to a series of "inaccuracies" in Perry's order regarding Casey Anthony's involvement with law enforcement early on in the case on July 15 and July 16 2008.
"Because there are factual inaccuracies in the court's order which were relied upon in reaching its conclusion, the undersigned respectfully asks that the court grant an additional hearing in order to rule on the actual facts in evidence," defense attorney Cheney Mason wrote in one part of the motion.

In another part of the nine-page document, involving whether Casey Anthony was in custody when she gave early statements to investigators, Mason wrote, "the court did not look at the evidence from the hearing objectively and instead displays a clear bias in explaining law enforcement conduct…"

Mason was the one member of the defense team not in the courtroom Thursday.
When the proceeding ended for the day, lead defense attorney Jose Baez refused to answer any questions about the defense motion, the bias claim or any implication left by the motion that the defense wants Perry off the case.
Trailed by television cameras and reporters, Baez ignored their questions and instead chatted with a young blogger about where he went to school and whether he was interested in the Casey Anthony case.
Court administration spokeswoman Karen Levey said she expects Perry to enter an order on the new motion early Friday.
The latest defense motion brings about recollections of the defense team's successful effort to get Circuit Judge Stan Strickland to recuse himself from the case last year.
In that motion, the defense argued "Judge Strickland seeks publicity in his own right, and that his rulings and decisions from the bench could be improperly influenced by his desire to secure the outcome that maximizes that publicity."
Courthouse sources familiar with the case said they seriously doubted the defense would "get a second bite of the apple" if the attorneys are considering having Perry removed.
Still, the motion challenges Perry's rulings on key issues of whether Casey Anthony's rights were violated, particularly her right to counsel and Miranda warnings.
"The defendant seeks a rehearing on the statement of facts and the applicable law as to the Sixth Amendment issue, as the order on that subject fails to address the matter as to either issue," Mason wrote.
The motion for a rehearing also cites "factual errors between testimony presented at hearing and the order denying [the] motion to suppress statements made to law enforcement officers."
While the motion hit the file in the clerk's office, Baez spent Thursday in Perry's court grilling two important prosecution witnesses. He tried to discredit the handler of a cadaver dog involved in the case and a scientist whose novel findings would help the prosecution place a decomposing human body in the trunk of Casey Anthony's Pontiac Sunfire.
Anthony, 25, is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie. Anthony's trial is set to start May 9.
The hearings on the scientific evidence in the case an all day Wednesday and Thursday. The hearings are scheduled to resume next Fridayand perhaps next Saturdayif necessary.
Chloroform levels extremely high, expert says
Arpad Vass, senior research scientist at Oak Ridge National Laboratory testified for hours Thursday about his extensive research in buried body decomposition as well as surface decomposition.
Anthony's team wants to stop Vass' air-sample and decomposition odor evidence used in her murder trial.
His team examined air samples from a metal can from the trunk of Anthony's car and ran a special test on an air sample and found an extremely high "peak" showing chloroform. Vass said in hundreds of such samples he'd collected through the years he'd never seen chloroform levels that high. His reaction, he said, was "surprise."
Vass says the amount of chloroform found in the air sample from the car was too high to be just from decomposition of a human body. "I don't think so," he said when asked by Assistant State Attorney Jeff Ashton. "It's much greater than that."
Vass said when he opened one sample pulled from carpet in the car, he "jumped back about two feet. It was to me the smell of human decomposition."
A few moments earlier, Vass said, "Human decomposition is as unique to me as a skunk is to anybody else...Human decomposition is very unique."
Vass found a number of chemical compounds from air samples in the vehicle that his research indicates is associated with human decomposition.
He also identified a volatile fatty acid associated with human decomposition from an analysis done on the carpet stain from Casey Anthony's car.
Cadaver dogs 'alerted'
Earlier Thursday the prosecution and defense wrapped up questioning over police dogs used early on in the investigation.
Cadaver dogs "alerted" on the trunk of Casey Anthony's car and the backyard of her family's home during their search for her daughter after she vanished in summer 2008.
Orange County Deputy Jason Forgey, the K-9 handler of "Gerus," the dog that alerted on Casey Anthony's car, testified the entire morning.
When Jose Baez asked what kind of K-9 handler Forgey is, Forgey said, "a good one."
"We're going to find that out this morning," Baez quipped.
Baez questioned Forgey at length about the training of his dogs. Baez especially inquired about handler bias and giving the cadaver dog cues.
Forgey confirmed that his dog was not routinely trained with "double blind" testing in which both the handler and the dog were unaware of where a target item has been hidden for search purposes, but he said some of the dog's training did include that kind of testing.
Forgey said he does not recall telling Detective Yuri Melich that he would "give it a shot" when he was initially asked to have the dog search the car, knowing there was no body there.
This was mid-July 2008 when Casey's car was in the Sheriff's Office custody.
Forgey said he had the Pontiac moved out of a garage bay and into the parking lot. He then had the dog do the search on the Pontiac and another car.
He drew a diagram of the scene on a large sheet of paper for Baez and explained how the search was conducted.
Searching the Pontiac
Forgey described searching the Pontiac. He said he was aware it was the suspect's vehicle beforehand. The dog began alerting around the vehicle and he had the driver's side door opened to ventilate the vehicle.
The dog put his head inside and looked toward the rear seat, Forgey said.
He had the trunk opened. The dog sensed the trunk then looked at Forgey and made a "final trained alert" by sitting down at the rear of the vehicle, the deputy said.
That action, he said, is the way for the dog to signal to the handler that he has hit on the odor of a dead body.
At one point this morning, Baez asked Forgey about testimony he gave to the grand jury. The prosecution immediately objected and Judge Perry ordered the witness not to respond, noting that such testimony is privileged, not public and not to be discussed at this hearing.
Baez moved on to different questions.
Forgey's dog/partner, who retired last year, also made a final trained alert in the "southeast corner of the (Anthony's) yard near the playground area," Forgey said. This area included a playhouse and picnic table.
Forgey then asked another handler from Osceola County to do a search of the yard with her dog. Forgey said he did this to be thorough.
"I wanted a second opinion. I wanted a second dog," he said.
Then Baez asked Forgey what it was about his knowledge that made the dog's alert "less reliable?"
"Nothing," Forgey said, adding that he called for the second dog "to go above and beyond and do the best job I can do."
False positive?
That second dog alerted in the same area. Crime-scene investigators officials then began a search of that area in the yard.
Forgey also says his dog, Gerus, did not alert the next day after the area was scoured by CSI technicians.
Baez asked if he ever noted the dog's initial alert as a "false positive."
"I wouldn't say it's a false positive," Forgey said. "You're calling it a false positive."
The removal of items and soil and grass from the yard during the CSI search could have removed the scent the dog initially picked up.
Forgey also testified that blood from a cut or torn skin could have caused the dog to alert. He added another possibility: "Someone could have laid a deceased person on the ground that was decomposing," Forgey said.
Baez eventually asked Forgey if his nose is certified. Forgey said no, but added, "I've smelled plenty of training aids and plenty of dead bodies."
He explained that he too smelled the strong odor from the trunk of the Pontiac, but that was the only way he could confirm the dog's alert because no human remains were found at that location at that time.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Motion filed by Casey Anthony defense says judge got facts wrong   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:11 pm

Motion filed by Casey Anthony defense says judge got facts wrong


Judge Perry and Casey Anthony
By Kelli Cook, Amanda Evans and Jacqueline Fell, Team Coverage
Last Updated: Thursday, March 24, 2011 6:23 PM


The Case Against Casey





  • LIVE Courtroom Tweets
  • Daily Facebook updates



ORLANDO --
A new motion filed by the defense Thursday in the Case Against Casey says Judge Belvin Perry got the facts wrong, shows bias and is now asking for another hearing.
The defense wants to argue again that statements made by Casey to law enforcement, friends and family should be thrown out.
The motion reads: "because there are factual inaccuracies in the Court's Order which relied upon in reaching its conclusion, the undersigned respectfully asks that the Court grant an additional hearing in order to rule on the actual facts in evidence."
It went on to read: "The Court did not look at the evidence from the Hearing objectively and instead displays a clear bias in explaining law enforcement conduct...."
We spoke with legal expert Mike Saunders, who said that while this motion may appear to be a bold move, defense attorney Jose Baez may not have any other choice.
"They probably know that they're not on his good side, and they have nothing to lose,” Saunders said. “Turn their attention over on other issues."
This motion was filed, even as they're in court fighting the evidence.

  • Catch up now with our LIVE updates from the courtroom!

The motion was filed even as they were in court fighting the evidence.
Earlier, defense attorney Jose Baez was cross-examining Dr. Arpad Vass.
This is the expert from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, also known as "the Body Farm.”
Vass was on the stand for four hours, and even told the judge he was getting "a little tired."
At question are the air tests. Back in August 2008, an air sample from Casey's car was sent to the Body Farm where they found evidence of Chloroform and decomposition.
Dr. Vass testified the levels of chloroform, a highly hazardous material, found in the air sample captured from Casey's car was at levels 10,000 times higher than normal.
He said he was also taken a back from the strong smell of decomposition.
Baez wasn't buying the doctor's air test and still argued his air sample test is still too new to bring it into evidence.
But then came a bombshell from the defense. They called into question whether or not Dr. Vass was looking to take on some sort of financial gain in this case.
Vass is working a patent for a sort of "sniffer machine" that he could sell to law enforcement and make a profit.
Towards the end of the hearing, the defense said they had some late witnesses to add to the list, including one that will testify to their opinion about Casey’s state of mind.
The judge has not ruled whether or not that witness can be admitted late.
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony Hearing: Day 2, March 24. Going to the Dogs   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:16 pm

Thursday, March 24, 2011


Casey Anthony Hearing: Day 2, March 24. Going to the Dogs


First, the good news. There will be no hearing tomorrow. Now, the bad news, there will be a hearing on Friday, April 1 at 8:30 AM to complete the motions not finished today. If they are not finished on Friday, the plan is to continue on Saturday, April 2 at 8:30 AM!

Today's hearing was mind-numbing, to say the least. We managed to get through one witness on the K-9 issue and one witness on the chloroform/trunk odor situation.

Dep. Jason Forgey was the first witness today. He is a canine handler with the OCSO. He told Baez his is a good one!

He used a dog names Gerus for just over six years. He now has a new dog, Griffin.

Baez asked about Gerus' training. He trained with the OCSO and with other outside specialty schools. The schools are run by the Andy Redmond who authored the Cadaver Dog Handbook.

Baez asked what Gerus trained on. Forgey listed the different types of materials he trained on. It is an extensive list.

Forgey filled out training logs. When asked by Baez, "Who gave you the bright idea to keep a training log?" (That was an insult!) Forgey answered that he didn't know. He indicated that the forms had changed over the years.

Gerus was certified after the 400 hours training school in general work and again after a 160 hour specialty training school

There is no State or FDLE training program. Gerus had certified and continued to have a trainer who evaluated the dog on a regular basis.

Gerus was last evaluated February 29, 2008. The evaluator was FDLE certified as a trainer. Deputy Ramos was the trainer. It was cadaver training using bones. Gerus located both bones. There were no problems noted.

The next time the dog was evaluated was in June, 2008.

Baez wanted to know if this was double-blind testing. Forgey didn't know. Baez went after Forgey asking if he wasn't thorough in his reports.

One thing I would like to know is if this is a normal set of procedures for dog training. Otherwise, it has no meaning.

Baez asked if Forgey knew about single and double blind testing. Forgey pointed out that there isn't a space on the form for that sort of information.

Baez next brought up the issue of handler bias. Forgey didn't seem to think much of it, so Baez went on to explain it to the deputy.

Baez then had Forgey go through the entire log to see when Genus was last tested in a double blind situation (neither the handler nor the dog knew the location of the bait.)

Forgey found one in 2005. This testing was for Forgey's own certification as a dog handler. This was done also in July, 2005, November 2005, and the same for a school in 2006.

Baez tried to make a big deal that some of the details of the double blind studies that are not written in the logs. Forgey states that there were other experts there to validify his testimony.

Baez fought mightily to prove that it was quite possible that Forgey "cued" the dog when doing the searches of the Pontiac and the Anthony back yard.

Personally, I think that these searches were indeed double blind since nobody had told Forgey where the target odors were, if there were any.

Baez pointed out that since Forgey filled out the logs, it was possible he could lie or lie by omission.

Linda Burdick objected for relevancy and Judge Perry sustained the objection.

Baez still went on to insinuate Forgey could have lied on the records for Gerus.

I found it odius that Mr. Baez accuses all sorts of people who go on day after day, doing their jobs, and doing them well are liars.

Baez then went on to the actual search of the car, although there was no body in it. Again today, Baez honed in on the phrase that Forgery said he'd, "give it a shot." (I'm wondering what THAT was about!)

Gerus searched two vehicles that day. The Sunfire and a blue truck.

Baez then had Forgey draw the picture. (I'm waiting for an "aha" moment from the defense when all are revealed and there are slight differences in them.)

Baez had Forgey go through how he had conducted the dog search. He first did the blue car and then Ms. Anthony's car. It started at the front bumper (driver side) counterclockwise around the vehicle. He knew it was the suspect's car. The dog started to alert as he approached the vehicle. The second time around he started indicating and had someone open the driver side door. The dog put his head in the car and looked towards the rear seat. They then opened the trunk and the dog jumped up with his front paws only, looked at Forgey and sat for a final trained alert at the trunk.

Baez pointed out that Forgey had to refer to his bond hearing testimony for details and he used this to indicate that the logs weren't detailed enough.

Baez then showed Forgey his police report which is not very long. Baez pointed out that there was no blue car there that day. (Needless to say, Baez is looking for every nook and cranny to get his butter into.)

Dep. Forgery also pointed out that in a "real world" scenario, it's not always possible to do both cars. Baez then tried to get the witness declared "adverse". Linda Burdick corrected the term to hostile because he is a State witness. The judge didn’t agree with this as he is not being hostile!

At this point, Linda Burdick started objecting more. Forgey did mention the blue car/truck in his deposition. Baez then asked what he testified to at the Grand Jury. Forgey is instructed NOT to answer the question.

Baez said that the defense will be asking for this testimony in the future.

Baez asked if the search was videotaped. When Forgey answered that it wasn't he pointed out that while the handbook might state it as a suggestion, it is not a hard and fast rule.

There was a test set up for a new dog with a lineup with one car with a pizza in it to run that scenario due to all the hype in the case!

Mr. Baez was then asked by Judge Perry to look at the four corners of the motion he filed and see if it fit his questioning. Then, Perry told him to move on. (Mind you, there had been no objection at that point!)

Forgey also took Genus to the Anthony home to search the back yard. He they completed a search of the entire yard. He got an alert near the play area and the dog ended up giving him a final alert in the southeast corner of the yard

When he finished the search, he called Osceola County to run a second search to verify the results. He did not call out Dep. Brewer because of the changes in the case. He wanted to go "above and beyond" at that point. He believed the dog was off the leash. The dog was on the lead for the search of the car.

When Sgt. Brewer came out, he told her he'd probed three areas and that the area was clear but did not tell her what the dog did in the yard. Bones alerted at the same locations.

He then informed the detectives of the results. Forensics then began to search where the dogs alerted.

Forgey went back the next day. The area where the dog had alerted skimmed the area. The dog did not alert at that time, nor did Sgt. Brewer's dog.

Baez kept calling the alert a false positive because the dogs didn't alert the second day. Forgey pointed out he didn't believe so and, had Sgt. brewer said yesterday, soil had bee moved and the scene changed.

Judge Perry then called for a bench conference. I do believe that he was telling Baez to get a move on with his witness. This whole cadaver dog thing has been a big waste of time as the testimony will come in and the defense can pull all these cards at the trial.

After the break, Baez continued with Dep. Forgey. He stated that there is no testing for residual odor. He also said that the term "false positive" doesn't really apply.

Baez started going into the smell of garbage in the back of a car until Linda Burdick objected and the judge sustained the objection.

Forgey pointed out he does not know what forensics has. (As I recall, the dog is a tool, and it was the CSI who examined the trunk and discovered there was adipocere, a volatile fatty acid from decomposition in it. It simply isn't the job of the dog or it's handler to identify the nature of what they found. The dog alerts, someone else investigates. This is the fallacy behind Baez' whole argument about false alerts. In fact, I have to wonder if dog handlers ever find out that their dogs have these so-called false alerts in real life because by the time the area has been thoroughly searched or tested, the dog and handler are long gone.)

Linda Burdick briefly cross-examined Forgey, pointing out his years with the OCSO and the number of dogs he trained and how they were trained

Burdick clearly understood that the admissibility of cadaver dog information into a trial rests mainly on the dogs' training and certification. She certainly gave the judge enough information to make a decision! She included both the many hours of training and on-the-job experience. This detective had literally been on thousands of searches with his dogs.

It is also to be noted that she pointed out that Gerus had been trained under situations where a body had been discovered and removed. The dog had alerted on that site.

Burdick then asked for Gerus' records put into evidence. As with last time, Baez objected due to heresay and the judge went through them all. Perry accepted all the documents into evidence.

Burdick, in her final question, elicited the fact that Forgey is a certified dog trainer.

Baez got up and then asked Forgey if he knew what the dogs alerted to and asked him if he knew if his dog had a false alert on urine. Forgey had to go back through the logs to find out. He found an example where Gerus was slightly distracted by animal urine. He did not alert on it.

Baez also asked if Forgey knew what chemicals the dog alerts to. Forgey indicated he was not a chemist and couldn't answer that.

Baez took that to segue to "false alerts" as in the second visit to the yard. Baez then asked if he had training logs for false alerts in "real life" scenarios. Forgey explained that in real life, the dog is not in training and he can't know if there are false positive alerts.

Forgey also took the dog to the remains scene. He stated that the dog did not alert there, but that he had not taken the dog into the area near where the body was found.

Baez tried to go on further, but with one more objection as to relevance, he was finished.

When asked if he had more witnesses, Baez said that he had one who would also testify against Vass and he could testify during that portion.

Arpad Vass is a research scientist at Oak Ridge Laboratory. He gave a brief summary of his education.

He developed an interest in forensic anthropology while working for the department of microbiology. He worked with Dr. Bass, the founder of the Body Farm. He became interested in post-mortem intervals from a biochemical perspective. He earned his PhD in 1991.

He worked in that field for 10 years and published a number of articles on his research. He developed a number of methods to determine post-mortem interval which have been peer reviewed.

He became interested in the location of clandestine graves in about 2000. He felt he would be most productive in studying odor analysis (based on what cadaver dogs do).

They used four subjects and buried them at various depths in the soil and put a piping system around the body with a capture hood at the top to capture the decompositional gasses.

They would collect the gasses with a triple sorbent trap containing activated carbon. They were then taken to the lab and analyzed. These traps have been used for many decades.

They collected data from 2002-2006/7. New samples were taken at shorter to longer intervals as the bodies decomposed.

They studied how these chemicals "liberated" from one time to another.

He first published on these findings in 2004. It discussed the chemical compounds found. With the publication of that study, Vass continued to monitor the graves and in addition on individuals decomposing on the surface in anaerobic conditions.

They also collected the gases with the same traps. There were about six bodies involved. They sampled the gasses from "fresh" to almost skeletonized at intervals. Since these bodies decomposed more quickly, they collected the samples more often.

He also collected samples from a crematorium where the bodies had not been cremated.

There was also research from a Greek scientist whose name I did not catch. He referenced this research in a 2008 paper he published.

Both of his articles were submitted to the Journal of Forensic Sciences for peer review.

Jeff Ashton asked if there had been any disagreement with the material in his 2004 paper and the article was never sent back for any objections or revisions. The same was true for his 2008 paper.

He was given evidence in 2008 to test from this case. Yuri Melich contacted him to see if Vass could ascertain the source of the odor.

The sample was sent in a sealed paint container. Dr. Marcus Wise ran the initial test. Wise is an analytical chemist. Material was removed from the head space of the item and injected it into the GC-MS (gas chromatography mass spectrometer). There was a large peak of chloroform. Vass was surprised at the result. He had never seen chloroform in that amount in any sample he had ever seen.

They then decided to concentrate the sample to see what else they could find in the sample.
They took the carpet sample out of the can and put in a Teldar bag and heated it. They then drew out the sample and tested it.

From that test, they saw the major chloroform peak and another 51 or so compounds.

(At this point, we lost sound.)

When sound returned, Ashton was discussing squirrels. Vass got a squirrel and allowed it to decompose on a control piece of carpeting. It stained the carpet and there was bodily debris on it.

The squirrel smelled nothing at all like decomposition. It hardly had any smell at all.

Based on everything he found, he tried to used Laser-induced spectroscopy to use a non-destructive method to save the carpet piece.

Dr. Martin helped with these tests.

They also received a sample of a paper towel from Dr. Neil Haskell. They had a large amount of fly pupae and Haskell wanted to know what the substance was that attracted the flies.

He studied the stain and discovered it contained the components of adipocere (grave wax).

Based on the results from the paper towels, he decided to check the carpet. Again, he discovered a fatty acid (butyric acid) which is common in early stages of decomposition.

This information is backed up from information from his formerly peer-reviewed papers.

Going back to the chloroform, the levels were uncharacteristically high. It was the dominant peak. Chloroform is a product of decomposition, however the amount of chloroform could not be accounted for by decomposition. There was much more.

There was an explanation about the chloroform that went right over my head. However, it was a huge amount, like 10,000 the amount of the standard sample.

Ashton then asked Dr. Vass if he had smelled human decomposition. He said he had and had also smelled the decomposition of other animals he studied. Based on his experience, he said he can tell the difference between human decomposition an other smells, such as a skunk. He said that when you run over a skunk, you don't have to look at the skunk.

Ashton then asked if he had smelled garbage. Dr. Vass went through all the ill-smelling types of garbage he had smelled and none of it smelled like decomposition.

Then, when Vass opened the can, he detected the strong smell of human decomposition.

Jose Baez started out by telling Vass he is not a chemist. He also pointed out that Mark Wise is an analytical chemist and Dr. Martin is a physicist. Vass entitles himself a research scientist.

He then went through Vass' CV with him.

I'll spare you the details.

Baez accused Vass of being intentionally vague in not listing the type of PhD he has in one article. He pointed out that there are some sources such as Wikipedia that list him as a bio-chemist. (Mind you, Vass DID say he "did some" biochemistry.)

Baez then told Vass he REFUSED to turn over his data base. Ashton objected (the data base is proprietary in nature and does not belong to Vass).

After an objection, Baez then stated that the defense had not received the decompositional data database because it belongs to the sponsor of the research.

Vass said that his publications are taken from the data base and his conclusions were based on the chemicals he found. They were only based on compounds he used in his publications.

Baez was trying to get Vass to say that his results couldn't be verified unless they had the complete data base. Vass replied that the only verification needed was what was in the articles.

Much as he tried, repeating himself, Baez kept asking Vass that IF he wanted to verify his results, wouldn't he ask for the entire database and bench notes?

Baez then tried asking if Vass would want "partial disclosure" of information. Vass didn't understand this because there is a lot of information that may be relevant.

Vass finally agreed that if ALL the information to allow him to replicate the experiment was provided it, that "yes" "partial disclosure" was fine.

Baez then brought up a "sniffer" machine that wasn't used in the tests. Ashton objected and then stated that it went to financial issues. This machine, the Labrador, has not been validated.

Baez asked if the goal was to sell the device to LE was the end goal and he would get royalties from the patent.

I got very angry at this point. Baez tried to get Vass to say that being involved in a high profile case would earn him a lot of money if his Labrador machine were validated.

Vass said it was possible but the machine was not used on the case.

According to Baez, this scientist was going to make a fortune off of the machine.

When Jeff Ashton objected, Baez stated that this financial interest would go to his credibility. Judge Perry pointed out that it would, but that Baez needed to get back to the Frye issue, which is the science.

It sounds like he's trying to turn Vass into the inventor of the Sham-Wow. He spent all that time getting educated as a research scientist in order to get rich if he invents something. The fact is, most of the money would go to the maker. The royalties would be a drop in the bucket of Dr. Vass life. Perhaps Mr. Baez thinks about it from his own perspective.

Baez then set up his easel with paper and had Dr. Vass write stuff on it. What it was, we'll never really know since we couldn't see it. It seemed to be something about error rates. When Baez asked why it was written the way it was, Vass replied that he was "frazzled" by all of this.

Vass then said that an error rate does not apply to the comparison Baez gave him.

Baez asked if Vass if his articles used buried remains. Vass replied that the first one did. Baez asked if the soil would have an effect as to what gasses came out. Vass indicated that the soil could affect the flow of the gasses. In a burial situation, the gasses took 17 days to reach the surface.

The 2008 paper also included bodies on the surface. Baez asked if chloroform was detected in bodies on the surface. According to the 2008 paper, chloroform was not detected in surface cases.

Vass indicated that the issue was oxygen deprivation. In this case, he referred to the bodies laying on the surface being wrapped and anaerobic in nature. (Much like Caylee in the car.)
Baez tried to ask if only buried bodies would have chloroform. Vass pointed out that some of the bodies above ground were wrapped in body bags.

Baez then read from Vass 2008 paper that the top 30 compounds could be found anywhere. Vass said that was as individual compounds, not as a mixture which he deemed to demonstrate human decomposition.

Baez read sections from the article and Ashton objected because it was out of context. Baez had to read the entire section.

There were more questions that I missed. It got pretty complicated for non-scientific me.

Baez did try and get Vass tp say that the author of another paper "disclosed" all HIS compounds. Vass didn't agree with that.

One thing in all this testimony told me that Dr. Vass is a true academic. When he gave his answer, he added, "that's cool." That man is a scientist first.

Baez asked about the bag of garbage found in the trunk. Vass had no memory of even seeing pictures of it. He was sent a list of what was in the trunk. He said he looked at the list and said most were plastic and paper products, not a pile of rotting hot dogs.

There was a bit of confusion about Baez' stipulation about questioning the instruments used in the testing. Apparently, Jeff Ashton believed was going to do so.

Baez said that they were bench notes and problems they ran into during the testing.

Ashton went through the information in the stipulation which was part of the agreement for the State to drop the show cause motion.

Baez then tried to wiggle out of it. Baez then used terms such as coercion, forcing his hand to say that he doesn't understand what was said in open court.

Perry re-read the stipulation that he was only going to attack the results.

All of a sudden, Baez wanted to talk about a machine that wasn't working properly. Perry pointed out that Baez knew it at the time he executed the document.

Perry indicated that Baez was "waiting in ambush". Baez incorrectly said that Ashton was waiting in ambush. He said that Ashton took advantage of him!

Perry then made himself "abundantly clear" and said that both sides overly uses the term "contempt" and that he had only applied sanctions, not contempt. Only the State and Baez used the term contempt.

Perry also said it sounded like Baez was trying to rescind his agreement. Baez could have written it down and he and Perry might or might not have come to agreement.

Baez was in big trouble and tried to weasel out of it.

Perry went on to explain the Frye rules and that his problem with the machinery could come up in trial itself.

Ann Finnel came up and spoke in Baez' ear. Baez asked for a five minute recess.

After a short recess, Baez returned to the podium and said that he would "clearly reiterate" that he would not enter into agreement to rescind it.

He then continued asking questions of Dr. Vass. He asked if it was generally accepted scientific procedure to use the GC-MS to measure human decomposition.

Vass doesn't understand the question because the machine is scientifically accepted to measure the compounds. He finally answered yes.

Baez then asked for another laboratory that uses the machine to measure human decomposition. Vass then stated that all institutions use it and he would like to know if they do measure for human decomposition.

Baez then honed down the number of gasses to exclude gasoline. At the present time, Vass only used a smaller number. He also said that not all the 478 gasses he found are relevant.

Baez asked which compounds Vass found critical and Vass said there were the 30 in his report.

Baez then went after the 30 gasses and if Vass had them written as a protocol.

Ashton voiced the objection that Vass has stated that if all 30 gasses are found, there is human decomposition. Baez said he wanted to know the methodologies how he came to that conclusion.

Ashton pointed out that Dr. Vass had never implied that in his report. (He said that they were consistent with human decomposition.)

The judge allowed the question. He did indicate that the release of the compounds were cyclical and it was a very taphonomic issue. (At that point, I got lost.)
In this case seven of the thirty compounds were found and Baez had him list them.

Baez went on teaching Dr. Vass science. There was a disconnect between the two, for sure. What I found most interesting was that there were only trace amounts of carbon tetrachloride in the trash bags with higher levels in the carpet in the trunk.

I hate to say this, but this whole section of questioning sent me reeling back to my Jr. High days when my mother, who never studied algebra, attempted to instruct my algebra teacher in proper methodology.

At this point, Baez was trying to indicate to Vass that most of the chemicals found in the trunk overlapped with other items in the trunk.

Vass clearly didn't understand what Baez was trying to prove. By eliminating the chemicals found in the trash and junkyard car carpet, there would be no reason to say that he could say there was a possibility of a dead body having decomposed in the car.

It is my conclusion that Baez wouldn't allow him to differentiate between trace and higher than trace amounts.

This was a very painful series of questions because there was never a meeting of the minds as to what the results of the test meant.

Baez then questioned Vass about the paper towels. He referred to the fatty acids found and said that it could be that the individual chemicals would not mean there was a body in the car.

Vass pointed out that this particular combination would indicate it was adipocere or similar to adipocere.

Baez then tried to indicate that it could come from meat.

Vass also said that certain flies were attracted to it. Baez quickly pointed out that Vass wasn't an entomologist.

There was also marijuana found on the napkin. (THC)

Baez continued with the fatty acid found on the paper towels. Baez indicated that it would be consistent with smoking a joint and eating a hamburger.

All Vass would say that the composition of the fatty acids were consistent with adipocere.

There was a comment from Judge Perry that today's hearing would go to 5:30 and would continue next Friday and Saturday, April 1 and 2.

Baez asked Dr. Vass if there was anyone in this country who could replicate his tests. Vass said that everything needed was in his articles. Baez then asked for a laboratory. Vass said it could be done in any lab with the correct equipment.

Then Baez asked if scientists "every day" do what he has done. Vass said the procedures were common and anyone could do it.

Then Baez asked if there was any other scientist who could do what he had done. Vass said that there were at least two people he knew of who could do what he did.

Baez then brought up the case of the Manson Ranch. Baez claimed it went to his methodologies. Judge Perry allowed the questions.

As the questioning continued, Jeff Ashton objected yet again that this testimony was not heading towards the Frye Hearing.

Vass pointed out that this was a totally different situation.

More questions were asked about the Manson Ranch and trash near the samples.

Baez kept pushing the trash, Vass kept putting it off pointing out the differences.

Baez question that "trash could give off false readings" elicited "I don't know how to answer that question" from Vass. (I call a super-over-simplification.)
Baez then mentioned fabric softener sheets that were in the trunk. Vass said that he didn't know but assumed there would be no chloroform in them because it was a carcinogen.

At this point Vass had his arms crossed and was looking at his watch. I think the hours of over-simplification were getting to him.

Baez started talking about air samples from the garage. Dr. Vass looked exhausted and frustrated.

Vass never received air samples from the garage or the Anthony home.

I'm not quite sure what is going on at this point!

Thankfully, Mr. Baez had no further questions and Mr. Ashton had nothing to say.

Baez stated that there were 3 more motions. Ashton asked about the root growth motion. Perry decided that at 8:30 AM April 1 the hearing will reconvene. Jeff Ashton pointed out that the rule of sequestration should still apply since there is still Dr. Logan to testify about both the cadaver dog and the air in the trunk issue. Should the defense decide to add an amended motion concerning root growth, it must be filed by March 29.

The defense wants to add two witnesses (mental health experts). The judge asked why they were added so late. Baez said it was in his motion. Judge Perry told him he had not received the motion yet.

Baez asked to approach about Danziger, but the judge made him speak in court. Baez stated that they had just received the information. Ann Finnel stated that they are for the penalty phase and also for the guilt phase. Their testimony goes to state of mind. Jeff Ashton pointed out he needed the reports.

Finnel pointed out it is not an insanity defense, but their opinions and recent conclusions are ongoing. Jeff Ashton wanted to know when he would get the results. He was not a happy camper about that.

Judge Perry said he had a problem with this because he would want to have her examined. They said it is not a mental health defense. Judge Perry said that it was curious if it went to diminished capacity. Finnell said that wasn't the issue. Ashton said he needed a copy of the report!

Finnel said they could have the report tomorrow and Ashton wanted to conduct depositions as soon as possible.

At that point, my feed went away and I do hope we had heard enough for one day!

Courtroom Gets Heated In Day 2 Of Casey Hearing
Videos available at link
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/24/11 hearing   Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:03 am

Caylee Anthony case: Magpie reports on 03/24/11 hearing

Posted on March 24, 2011 by Valhall

First I want to just thank the Central Florida media who have been so gracious and helpful to me. Not that I would expect anything less from the more public representatives of our State. But, citizen-reporters (i.e. blogging-reporters) are a fairly new and growing group and some of them haven’t been good representatives. So, although I don’t expect any of them to see this, I still want to put it out there.
For today I’m going to start where it almost ended. The big ole Baez blowup over evidence and his semi-apology in response to settling the two teams of attorney’s dispute and Baez’s possible contempt issues. Apparently Baez wants a “do over”. And he’ll stomp his wittle feet and bring up inappropriate content to do it. Funny thing, I don’t think Ms. Finnell was even there the day that they all went outside the court to try to work out their differences so that Judge Perry didn’t have to, yet as he was stammering away and getting louder and more angry it was Ms Finnell that went up to him like Mama Bear and asked him to request a 5 minute recess. I think both she and Ms. Sims knew he was treading on dangerous ground. Mr. Ashton always seems willing though to get in the mud with them and that worries me. As soon as the attorneys (both sides excepts Ms. Burdick) left, the attorneys in the gallery all went, WTH???? In fact one of them said “the Bar wasn’t going to like this” ( meaning the attorneys’ behavior). And many were commenting (including some of the media that routinely cover trials) that they had never seen this type of personal attacks. I found it interesting that Judge Perry also stated that ‘contempt’ had been thrown around by both sides too much. He also discussed, briefly, that contempt and sanctions were distinctly different but that contempt sticks. HMMMM????

I sat in court listening to all the hubbub about the K-9′s hitting in the yard and Baez again, talking about the body parts they didn’t find. I don’t know how anyone can sit through that and not be affected. Casey finally (9:34) coughed a few times and I looked to her thinking “Ok, she has finally had it, she must be crying”. But nope, she had some notes she needed Baez to come get. Really?? Then a few mintues later she had Ms. Medina go up and give Baez more notes.
It is exasperating to see the defense directs. Such a hodgepodge of mishmash questions. They go from point 1 to point 10 and back to point 4 then point 8. This is going to make for a loooonnnggg trial. You can feel the tension and sense of WTH in the gallery.
Do we have a new term? Is it now an ADVERSE witness? Can someone legal look this up for me. Did he mean “this witness seems adverse to my questions cause they are dumb questions”?
So at about the 10:15 mark Judge Perry once again opens up the “Judge Perry school of law”. Hey defense, even I know that you’re trying the case and not within Frye. And I’m completely out of my element (think juror). Then Baez tells Judge Perry he thinks the judge is wrong. Is that your considered legal opinion? After your many years of trial experience?
Even with all the contention in the court during the AM break Baez, ever the little schoolboy who wasn’t on the team, was over at the State’s table having a good ole chat. OH! to be a fly on the monitor.
While I’m watching I kept thinking the defense is like watching a struggle but you can’t tell what their cause is. Just that they’re fighting something and they aren’t very well organized. Then the State (specifically Ms. Burdick) steps up and question by question you come to understand what THEIR cause is and think. WTH? There were alot of ‘DUH’ moments in the gallery today all around.
After the lunch break they all went immediately to sidebar. It seems Ms. Sims thinks that the cameraman is purposefully filming her laptop. I hear she also thinks she has trial stalkers and other idea’s of self-glory. Once again (we did this already this morning) Judge Perry asks the camerman if he’s been a bad boy and taping her laptop and he explains “no” it may be in the wideshot but the contents aren’t apparant. We wouldn’t want to breach that national security!
OK, so please read the next few sentences completely before you say “OH! no Magpie didn’t”. OMG, so here is this multi-doctoral, unbelievably educated, professionally accomplished man who has the most charming Elmer Fudd (Wascally Wabbit) speech affectation. I believe during his deposition someone from the defense actually made fun of it. But >IN MY OPINION< along with all of his expertise, his education etc. it will endure him to the jury. Some expert witnesses can seem so stuffy that it can intimidate a juror and they shut down and discount the testimony. This shows Dr. Vass’s humanity beyond his expertise and will work in his favor.
That brings us out of our naps at about the 2:29 mark. Ms. Sims is almost out of her chair wanting to scream at Baez to drop the ‘labrador’ patent device debacle. This is the hour you can also rack up the most points if you trying to count the number of times Casey’s head pops up in interest when anyone says “high profile trial”. Well, at least we found her interest. A few of the gallery were very impressed (not) when Casey kept giving Baez her notes and pulling reference material out of the binders for him.
Did you guys notice that Baez started to put that stupid definition board up before he asked Judge Perry for permission to enter it into evidence? Lucky for him Mr. Ashton corrected him. HAHAHA. I’m beginning to believe that the defense tactic is right, wrong, who cares let’s try to make the State’s witness look as frazzled and confused as possible so the jury won’t believe them. Even better, if they actually get the witness like poor exhausted Dr. Vass to say they’re frazzled and exhausted. It is even working on Judge Perry. They took one of Florida’s most respected and honored judges and turned him into a copy-maker. Could you hear several of the gallery actually say outloud “Can’t they even organize copies”. I guess we know the answer is “NO”.
By 4:30 we were all just begging to please make it stop. Then Baez asked Judge Perry for a moment and got handed another 4 or so pages of notes. I think there may have been talk of mass drug use to be able to stand much more. Where is that hamburger maryjane that Baez kept talking about.
Personal notes of the day:
At the start of the day Ms. Finnell was in the line for security in front of me. I was surprised (it was really long today over 40 minutes) and I asked her why she said that she would have to join Orange County Courts and pay $30.00 and file paperwork so why bother. I laughed that I would have paid it just for that day. But, she is working pro bono, gotta cut costs somewhere.
Do we know who is paying for all of Baez’s staff’s salaries? Cause that blonde sitting behind them is actually doodling on her legal pad. She seems to be there to fetch Baez a Red Bull as needed. Sheesh. Maybe she was in charge of all those binders we’ve seen this week that have hundred’s of pages and a color coded tab on almost every page.
During the break while the attorneys were literally outside cooling off, one of the deputies came over to Mr. Ashton and the man from University of Florida advising on forensics (Mr. Bernard A. Raum if you’re interested) to let Mr. Raum know that Judge Perry’s court rules precluded anyone from emotional outbursts or facial displays in reaction to witness or court statements. The deputy did this to, in my humble opinion, try to further ease tension due to a complaint by the defense side that both Ashton and Raum were ‘nodding’ in agreement to some of Dr. Vass’s testimony. Not a good time for the deputy to bring any defense complaints up to Ashton. He told the deputy that if the defense had any issues with them to tell Judge Perry. So, again, in my humble opinion, let me tell you why this was done. During Deputy Forgey’s testimony this morning he was discussing (about 10:27 EST) calling Deputy Brewer and her pawed partner, Bones, in for them to also search after his dog alerted. I have no idea why but Cindy was extemely animated and upset. She was taking notes and seemed to obviously disagree and tried to get Baez’s attention. So kettle, meet pot. Anyway, when Baez was asking Dr. Vass to handwrite ‘definitions’ on his favorite new poster board, Mr. Ashton and Mr. Raum were taking great care to be aware of each question and be able to object before Dr. Vass answered. Since they were in agreement to what Baez was asking they were nodding to Vass ‘OK’. Cindy took it as coaching the witness and was again very animated and trying to get someone from the defense’s attention to let them know about this imagined transgression. I just found it very comical that with all of her and George’s drama in court that she would take exception.
I enjoyed getting to meet my fellow out of state Hinky. Thank you for having lunch and discussing your insights. I don’t get to talk about the case much at home. LOL.
And yes, that was me at the very end doing my best to schmoze up to Mr. Bill. He is so charming to everyone there and will take time to answer questions. Now, that is a classy guy. He had just asked me why Cindy was crying when we heard them at sidebar mention “diminished capacity”. WTH. I picked a fine time to chat and ask a few of my own questions. Don’t get too excited, it has to deal with mitigation, but still. Also, the newest defense motion is going to be a doozy (filed yesterday). I got a peak. The defense wants a re-hearing on Miranda/In- Custody and Agents of the State for George, Cindy and Lee. It isn’t such a big deal, but about page 6 they say they feel Judge Perry is biased towards law enforcement along with a few other choice criticisms. Maybe that’s why Mason wasn’t in court today. Might also be why Mr. Ashton was more on edge. They were all reading it at the table today.
PEACE
Magpie
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Casey Anthony - Killer Mother? Sunday March 27   Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:31 am

Casey Anthony – Killer Mother? – Sunday March/27

Posted on March 24th, 2011
by Simon Barrett in crime
Read 235 times.

This week has seen yet another week of pre-trial haggling in the murder case. Did tot mom Casey Anthony ‘top’ her daughter Caylee Anthony? This is a question that will be answered by a jury in the trial that starts in May.
In the meanwhile, the motions and legal wrangling abounds. This week we have the ‘Frye Hearing’. Few people have even heard of a ‘Frye Hearing’, in plain English it establishes the credentials of any scientific evidence that may be introduced during the trial. Items like fingerprints and DNA are well known tools and have legal standing in previous cases.
At issue with the Casey Anthony defense are the use of less well known scientific processes, Cadaver Dogs, Chloroform, hair samples, and plant growth.
To me, it seems like Jose Baez and the defense team are once again trying to throw Cow Dung patties at the wall in the hope that something will stick. So far that effort has merely resulted in some stern beatings meted out by Judge Perry.
Is this carnage for the defense? It’s a good question. So far in the Frye hearings Jose Baez at least has had the good sense to keep his abrasive partner Chaney Mason out of the excitement.
The Cow Patty strategy however does not seem to have achieved much. I was watching Judge Perry as he patiently listened to Baez dig ever increasingly large holes for himself. In some ways I was expecting Judge Perry to interrupt with:

Bailiff can you please take Mr Baez out back and Taser him a couple of times, maybe that will get his attention. Court is in recess for 15 minutes, or until Jose stops twitching!
On Sunday at 3pm central, 4pm eastern the usual gang will be discussing this weeks events. I am still waiting for confirmations from two of the ‘bad boys’ that constitute the gang, but it is shaping up to be the program not to miss.
The listen live link is here.As background you might enjoy our previous program that also touches on the subject of Frye Hearings.
See you on Sunday.
Simon and Jan Barrett
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Defense motion says scientists "sealed the smell" from inside Casey's trunk   Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:17 am

March 24, 2011

Defense motion says scientists "sealed the smell" from inside Casey's trunk

Posted: 12:48 PM ET


Atlanta, GA – Although the upcoming hearing in the Casey Anthony case will, at points, be technical in nature, be sure you listen for testimony on the sealed tin can which prosecutors will say has an air sample from the trunk of Casey’s car. That’s the trunk that George and Cindy Anthony both said smelled like a dead body had been in there.We never knew investigators had done something like that until the defense filed their Amended Motion for Spoliation of Evidence to Exclude all References to the Smell of the Pontiac Sunfire. According to the motion, a cutting of the trunk’s carpet liner was placed in a tin can to “seal the smell.” Does the prosecution actually plan to open it up and pass it for the jury to smell for themselves? That is an unknown at this point, but if it’s up to the defense, this piece of evidence won’t even be allowed at trial. The defense’s motion argues that concentrations in the sample would not be comparable to what concentrations of the trunk’s air was back in July 2008.

The defense says it’s not reliable science because it does not meet the Frye test. The renowned Frye test is the basis of these hearings. It was established by the landmark Supreme Court case of United States v Frye and then applied to Florida courts through the Florida Supreme Court case of Ramirez v State. It establishes that if either side in a legal case has issues as to the reliability of scientific or medical evidence, it can be subject to a Frye hearing.
These hearings in the Casey Anthony case are live on In Session Thursday and Friday!

-Jean Casarez, In Session Correspondent
Back to top Go down
sanny
Hard Core Blogger
avatar

Posts : 108541
Join date : 2009-07-18
Location : Kure Beach, NC

PostSubject: Will Scott Maxwell come to Casey Anthony's rescue?   Fri Mar 25, 2011 8:17 am

Will Scott Maxwell come to Casey Anthony’s rescue?
Uncategorized — posted by mike thomas on March, 24 2011 11:10 AM

My colleague Scott Maxwell has been on something of a crusade about over-hyped dog detectives.
Specifically, he has demanded a review of cases that involve John Preston, a dog trainer who claimed his German Shepherd could sniff out evidence. For example, he could sniff you, sniff a knife and link you to the knife by sitting on it. Or something like that. I actually remember this from the 80’s because I worked in Brevard back then.
Preston was involved in helping convict a disturbing number of people. Jurors will fall for most anything. And now it appears Preston and his dog were frauds. Scott is arguing, quite correctly, these cases need to be reviewed.
Here is his last column.
I bring this up because one key piece of evidence against Casey Anthony is that a “cadaver dog” alerted when it sniffed her trunk and the family backyard, meaning there was a body at both locations at some point. The assumption, of course, is it is Caylee’s body.
This is from our most recent story, in which the dog’s handler, Orange County Deputy Jason Forgey, is testifying.
“The dog put his head inside and looked toward the rear seat, Forgey said.
“He had the trunk opened. Dog sensed the trunk then looked at Forgey and made a “final trained alert” by sitting down at the rear of the vehicle.
“That action, he said, is the way for the dog to signal to the handler that he has hit on the odor of a dead body.”
And then there was this…
“Forgey confirmed that his dog was not routinely trained with “double blind” testing in which both the handler and the dog are unaware of where a target item has been hidden for search purposes.
Forgey said he does not recall telling Detective Yuri Melich that he would “give it a shot” when he was asked to have the dog search the car, knowing there was no body there.”
Here is the story.
This dog ain’t no Lassie.
I told Scott about all this. He immediately alerted by sitting down in front of his computer, signaling to his editor/handler he may be interested. Maybe that way he could bring more attention to people who may have been wrongly convicted because of John Preston’s dog.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011   

Back to top Go down
 
CASEY ANTHONY ~ MARCH ~ 2011
Back to top 
Page 8 of 11Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Casey Anthony verdict shocks Central Florida
» casey anthony is now free
» Casey Anthony defense team files expert witness list
» POLL - Would You Buy Casey Anthony's Book? Please Vote
» Casey Anthony Trial Day 11: Dr. Arpad Vass Air Sample Testimony

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
LOVE AND PROTECT ALL CHILDREN :: CASEY ANTHONY-
Jump to: