Title: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 07:59:04 PM When I first heard Baez's opening statement, I was thinking, ok, it's been more than 3 minutes, why don't we know? He threw Kronk under the bus and I was thinking, ok.....we knew that could happen. Then he through the whole dysfunctional family under the bus and I thought ok, as a whole, he is probably right. Then he got to what happened that day and said it was an accident, Caylee drowned in the pool and George found her. Even if Caylee did drown and George had her in his arms, why would he hide it? He would immediately do something about it, their *dirty little secret* would have nothing to do with an accidental drowning. It makes absolutely no sense. I still don't know what to believe about George or Lee and sexual abuse on Casey. What would that have to do with an accident that happened with both Casey and George at home? Baez never said that, Casey was being sexually abused against her will and Casey died because they weren't watching her. They couldn't find a 2 year old and they knew she could get out the screen porch and they didn't both head straight for the pool? Would of been my first look, anywhere else in the house would of been safe. Who would look under beds or in closets, first? Then Baez added the crime scene and how the police were hiding something about searching there. The picture of Det. Allen pointing in the direction of the remains, means nothing. He was pointing to a general area. People that were right there on the scene said it was covered in water. The police fired the one officer that didn't do his job and investigate what Kronk was telling him. They fired him because he lied about what happened. Baez also threw the prosecution under the bus for rushing to judgment about Casey's guilt. It sounded somewhat good at the time, more in a what in the world moment, than anything that made sense. It was every single theory that monkey's have put out there. Throw it all against the wall and see if anything sticks. The jury is going to long forget that opening statement, after they hear weeks and weeks of powerful evidence against Casey and Casey alone. Should we still be worried about what the jury can do, of course but remaining positive and believing in the truth is going to carry the day. If they were so sure this was an accident and had a witness to it, George. Why would they allow Casey to spend almost 3 years in jail and face a death penalty? The answer to me is, they wouldn't. They aren't grasping at straws they are grasping in thin air and it has no substance. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:11:07 PM Sorry about all the typo's in my last post. I am trying to not over-think my posts and just hit post. The one sentence should of read: Baez never said that, Casey was being sexually abused against her will and Caylee died because they weren't watching her. I also forgot about a few other things Baez threw under the bus. The hair, the air sample, Dr. Vass in particular, the FBI, Oakridge and I am sure there are many more I can't think of right now. I am going to re-watch the entire opening and look for more. Oh, I just thought of one more.......if only the *lying canine* wasn't retired, they could just talk to him, lol. The jury has to be thinking this is as crazy as it sounded. Just too much stuff to explain an accidental drowning of a beloved baby. Baez made a point of putting George at the house with Casey at the time of the accident.........he should of really thought that out. Why wouldn't it still be an accident? Makes absolutely no sense, never will. Why would any of them duct tape her mouth? She was already accidentally dead. Where in the world did Kronk just happen to find her? Not just one piece of duct tape to make it look like an abduction killer but three pieces, covering both the mouth and the nose. Just doesn't work. Casey couldn't admit to an accident that never happened, because the cause of death would of been apparent and it most certainly wasn't an accidental drowning. ::rhino:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:14:33 PM One other thing that is bothering me and has since Linda began this morning. Let me preface this by saying, I still say she did an amazing job this morning and she wants justice for Caylee as much as we do and for all of the right reasons. I don't think she or the state of the LE rushed to judgment at all. I think they dotted every i and crossed every t. The problem I had with her opening statement was her lack of visuals. The defense had visual after visual along with Baez's stupid white board and markers. Where were the pictures of Caylee? I know someone tweeted that they showed one picture of Caylee along side of a picture of her precious remains. Why not have picture after picture of her? Why not have the time line and the party pictures up front and personal for all of the jurors. I just don't understand why it was all spoken word, no matter how well it was done. They knew that the defense was going to go after Dr. Vass, why didn't they let the jury know what an amazing man he was? I know that hindsight is 20/20 but could they really not see Baez having a Perry Mason moment? I have been afraid of it for a long time. How does the saying go, "when you have the law on your side, use the law but when you have nothing, use everything?" That is exactly what Baez did and now the state has to live every accusation Baez threw out there. Where did he come up with the Dr. Vass finding bodies with coat hangers? I have yet to read or hear of that anywhere. If opening statements were meant to be no holds barred, why did Linda not use the same tactics? Don't mean to sound harsh to Linda, just feeling very afraid at the moment. I am never watching JVM again. I usually stick to that rule but so many others were watching her, I gave in and did it too. I have learned my lesson. Thank you all for being here, it means so much to me and I know Caylee is watching us. ::MonkeyAngel:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:27:14 PM Tony just sunk the defense. Casey never told him that she was sexually abused by George and if Lee did try to "feel her up", it didn't happen. Every time this abuse came up it was to boyfriends that she wanted to be feeling sorry for her....or a jail pal where she may have been "cooking" up her defense. Cindy, looked like she could hug Tony and I mean that in a good way. George looked like, he was relieved the truth was being told, no matter what. George and Cindy and Lee have stood by her from the beginning and they are now realizing that she was and is EVIL, evil enough to kill Caylee and evil enough to use her own family as pawns for her defense. Baez, had no defense and threw George under the bus without another thought. I am coming closer and closer to feeling sorry for George. These accusations if not true must be such a crippling blow from his only daughter, who he has tried to help for almost 3 years. I still need to hear from Cindy and Lee to see what they will now say. Hopefully, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I am leery of sympathy for any of them.....do I need to be talked out of drinking any of the Kool-Aid or are any of you feeling the same way? It is almost scary to put it in type, they have taken us on such a crazy ride. ::MonkeyNoNo:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:44:50 PM Baez just asked for a mistrial, because the state are defaming his clients character? It isn't going over very well so far. When the state asks each witness did they see Casey looking for Caylee, was she missing Caylee? etc etc. The judge says Baez, you keep asking each witness if she was a good mother, etc, etc....same difference. Motion for mistrial DENIED ::monkeydenied:: ::monkeydenied:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:47:52 PM News bulletin just in: Amazing mothers do not allow their toddlers to sleep in the same bed as men they have just met!!!!!!!!!!!!! They also do not allow them to open doors to strangers or be out on 2nd floor balconies alone. Do I think she beat Caylee constantly? Probably not, do I think she ignored her when no one else was around? Absolutely and she never provided a thing for that child, Cindy and George provided it. I wish the state would bring that up each time. She never provided anything that a normal parent would have to. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:49:55 PM Will Waters is now on the stand, he is the guy that had the huge crush on Casey and the one she went to Ikea with and also spent the 4th of July with. She was leading him on and he was really falling for her. She was the hostess for his party, was also the security so no one could still his stuff. How ironic is that? lol ::MonkeyDevil:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:52:29 PM Can anyone tell me who this is and how he is affiliated? Will Waters met Casey getting ready for a 4th of July party at his house. She helped get the house ready for the party, went to the liquor store but had no ID with her. She helped him with the party and he seemed to fall hard for her. It was kind of pitiful hearing his puppy dog love for her in his statements and depositions. He seemed to really want a girlfriend and a wife really bad. She was stringing him along and watched fireworks with him, while Casey was texting Tony L, in NY. She kept him on her list, in case, Tony L, really did not come back from NY. She seemed to always be keeping a back-up boy somewhere. She knew she had no where to go and she couldn't go back home. The day or so after the party, Will Waters and Casey went to Ikea, she was gonna help him with what furnishings would be good for his house. She also talked to him, till the time she picked Tony L. up from the airport on his return to Florida. She was definitely leading Will Waters on. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:55:04 PM Will Waters says that Casey drove Amy's car to his house. Said that her car was broken down and needed an alignment or tune-up. On July 4th and 5th, Casey never told him that Caylee was kidnapped or missing, objection by state, over-ruled. They went to target on July 5th, then Ikea, they spent 2 to 2 1/2 hours at Ikea, they were looking for furniture for her new house. Casey was window shopping for her new house!!!! Casey was gonna have a stay in nanny for Caylee at the new house. Casey told him he was an event coordinate at Universal and she did a lot of the work at home on her computer. They then went to Zaxby's Restaurant for lunch. They were later suppose to go out to dinner and for a helicopter ride but Casey canceled on him. Never happened, Tony was home. Poor Will Waters was stood up at the last minute. Casey told him she had trouble with a Na Naw. He didn't know what a Na Naw was. Lot's of text messaging after that but he never saw her again after July 5th. They made plans after that but they never happened. Of course not, her main squeeze, Tony L, was back in town and to her Will Waters didn't matter anymore. People were just disposable to her. ::MonkeyMad:: Defense questioning Will Waters now, talking about the "world" Casey was living in. The made up world of her working and having a perfect life. The world of Casey Anthony that he knew was that she was gonna move in with Amy and have a live-in nanny and pay for this with her job at universal. She was living in a fake "world" and he believed every word of it. Almost too hard to listen too, he is making Casey seem like an alien instead of just plain EVIL. ::MonkeyMad:: Was Will Waters there when Caylee drowned, when she died, same old questions..... State now asking if Casey was convincing that she lived in this fake "world", I don't know why the state asked that. Will answered yes. Wish Linda or Jeff would do all the questioning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:56:50 PM Baez just said his "word" is his "word". Ya, right, he has already gone back on his word, how many times? Judge is denying Baez again. The state is not going for remorse to a death, they are wondering why Caylee was not reported to anyone missing. Period. Denied, denied, denied. ::monkeydenied:: ::monkeydenied:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 08:58:55 PM Defense wants her video of buying beer out, makes her look bad. State says she was over 21, nothing wrong with it, other than she had just killed her baby, well, I am saying that but they wanted to. ::piggy:: Videos are authentic and will be admitted. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:00:42 PM Target videos are gonna be shown to the jury with a stipulation, the judge is now reading. The video is a true and authentic represenation of that Target trip. Jury now seeing Target videos. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:02:27 PM Techincal problems with Target video. They have moved on to JC Penny video with a stipulation that it is true and accurate, they are showing it to the jury. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:03:55 PM Ikea video is now being played with the same stipulations. Shows her and Will on their window shopping date. Defense objected to all of these videos being shown because it shows "lack of remorse" judge over-rules this everytime. They are now gonna show Target Videos with the same stipulations. All of these videos have objections from the defense, they are all over-ruled. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:06:51 PM Forgot to mention, Linda is questioning her. Yay, love Linda. She is pointing out what the dumpster and parking lot looked like where Casey abandoned the car. This manager was at work, when she noticed the Pontiac Sunfire, parked by the dumpster. They are showing how the car was parked in the space, she is saying the car was parked straight. I thought Tony L, said it was in the space crooked? First day the manager just noticed the car in the space, June 27th, sees it there on Sat, June 28th and she walked up to the car and got the tag number. She looked around the car for a note to see that the car was left because they broke down and were coming back. She looked inside the car and saw that it was messy with a blanket in the back seat. She wrote down the tag number and called the Orlando Police Dpt to report an abandoned car. They do that before they have the car towed, to see if it was reported stolen. It had not been reported stolen. She told her compliance officer and he said to wait one more day to have it towed. They have a contract with Johnson Towing to do their tows. She was off on Sunday but the car was still there on Monday and she called Johnson's tow company to have it towed. The car didn't seem to have been moved during the 3 days it was in the Amscot parking lot. She saw the tow truck come and saw them tow it away. She noticed no odor from the car but there was an odor from the dumpster that is normal and usually there. That place of the parking spot always smells. There is a grocery store and a pizza parlor using the same dumpster. No one ever came in and inquired about the vehicle. Defense is up, they are asking her about the cameras that are up in the parking lot. Baez is insinuating that the cameras should of acted as a deterrent for anyone to commit a crime or abandon a "dead body" car, as usual he is making no sense. No further questions. Linda up, asked about the odor and she said she smelled what she thought was the dumpster only. Baez, making sure he got in that it was just "trash" she smelled. Witness excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:08:25 PM Simon Birch, the tow company guy from Johnson's Wrecker Service, is the next witness called by the state. He was the manager for day to day operations. The company was secured with fences and barb wire. He lived on site. He received the car on June 30th. Judge reads stipulation that it is a true and accurate statement that Johnsons received the car. He is looking at paperwork on the car and says it is all true. They notified the Orange County Sheriff they towed the vehicle and found the true owners. George and Cindy Anthony. The tow driver filled out all the right paperwork when he brought it in to the tow yard. They then stored the vehicle according to company policy. They introduced a picture of the tow yard to the jury. Shows the mobile home Simon Birch lived in and that the tow yard was entirely fenced in. Only the office during regular business hours was open to public access and it has bullet proof glass. The rest of the yard is completely off limits to the public at all times. He says the reason for the bullet proof glass is that people are never happy about having their cars towed. Unless they are murderers, with a "dead body" car (added by me). The car was secured for around 2 weeks. Depending on the year of the vehicle than either take title or scrap it. They sent out a notice on the 3rd business day to the last registered owner. He started paying more attention to the car on the 3rd day, on the 4th or 5th day, he looked at it to see if it was worth their trouble to title the car. Inspected it quite thoroughly. He made sure the car was locked, it was. He noticed a strong odor when he went to look through the window, with his hand up to the glass. He use to work at a garbage company. He was exposed to a wide variety of odors. In his 30 years in the towing business, he has been exposed to up to 8 dead bodies in vehicles, that smelled. He was also use to odors of items left in cars for long periods of time. Cars are towed all the time with items in them that can eventually rot and stink. He can distinguish trash or garbage from the smell of DECOMPOSITION. IT IS VERY UNIQUE!!!!! At first smell, he thought it might be decomp but it wasn't strong because the car was sealed. His first thought was it smelled like decomp, it triggered his memory of decomp but it wasn't as strong as some he had smelled because the car was sealed. Cindy and George came to the office, Cindy was having a fit and he came to his clerk to see what was going on. Cindy was unruly and agitated, very upset, wanted to know why it cost so much and why they didn't notify them earlier. He answered their questions, the mail was stuck in the mail during the 4th of July holiday and the Anthony's were gone the next weekend. The mail was sent out on time but the Anthony's didn't know about it till that day. Lunch recess till 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:10:15 PM Simon Birch on the stand, Linda questioning him about the storage fee's and general info on the towing yard. He first went to the car with George Anthony, NOT George and Cindy. Showing a picture where the car was being kept and how he and George got to it. Drawing a pathway from the office to where the car was kept. They talked on the way to the car, George said he was sorry for Cindy's behavior. George apologized profusely for Cindy. George told him that his grand daughter had been missing for a long time and they were under a lot of stress and would probably get divorced over this. George had the keys to the car and thought George would just get in the car and drive away. George got in the car and the car wouldn't start. As the door was opened the smell came out intently, almost as you were releasing it into the atmosphere. He said to himself, that is the smell of decomposition but he just said that is phew that is some odor. He said it is not a smell you can forget, it is the same as he had just smelled recently from another decomposed body. He doesn't know why he didn't say what it smelled like out loud but he didn't want to give his opinion on the odor with his grand daughter missing and George already so riled up. The car had a very strong battery connection in it and it just re-fused to fire. George had no gas can with him at that time and Simon Birch saw that the gas gauge was on E. The battery was working but the car wasn't starting, he didn't think it was a battery issue. George said then, I have some gas with me, let me go get it. He brought back an old metal gas can, seen better days. Not a new one. It was well worn, it had no tape!!!!!!!!! George didn't bring gas to the car at first, he waited to see if it would need it. Simon suggested that the trunk be opened because of the odor. They stood side by side, opened the trunk and the odor was very bad. Flies flew out and they saw a white, standard garbage bag inside the trunk. Nothing else in the trunk, no other items stood out. They looked in the garbage bag, side by side. It had a drawstring pull. Not sure who opened it, he was just trying to appease George. Simon saw a pizza box and some papers, no food stuff!!!!! The bag was very light and it was just regular household refuse, not like it could hold half a chicken that could create this smell. Simon offered to dispose of it for him. Simon took the bag out of the trunk and walked to the fence line, showing the jury where he went. Used his left hand and threw it over the fence, a six foot fence. It went over like you would expect a bag of papers to go over and he was gonna go get it and put it in the trash when George left. He saw George drive out, George pulled out of fenced in area and said he was sorry again for the ruckus. Simon went back later and put the bag in the dumpster. Defense up now with Simon Birch, Baez asks him about notifying owners of towed cars. Asks him about George telling him his daughter was missing. Mr. Birch said that he knew the car smelled of decomp. Baez is asking about the starting of the car and the gas. Did George try to start the car before he went to get gas and Simon said yes. Baez is referring to his deposition of 2008. The deposition says that they opened the trunk before he got the gas. At this point, I am confused. Baez is meandering. He is questioning Simon Birch on his expert opinion of odors. George definitely brought gas can with him and it was an old metal can. Took George back to the gas can in George's car and then back to the Pontiac. He is asking Simon Birch if he would ever obstruct justice and if he would let a car with the smell of homicide in it drive away. If he is such an expert and a part of the chain of custody of Orange County Sheriffs, why did he let the smelly car drive out and not notify anyone of the smell of death. The car was later towed by Johnson Wrecker company to forensics and Birch never contacted the police then. One of his guys told him that the car was taken to the forensics bay. Simon never saw the car in the forensics bay at first, he did see it later on. Police didn't take a statement from him till July 24, 2008, nine days after the car left his yard. Baez is asking stupid questions, they are sustained!!!! Simon agrees that later he knew that the car, the smell and the case were a significant issue. He has a contract with Orange County, Baez is acting as if the towing company and Orange County were in cahoots about something. George knew the car was at Amscot for 3 days, yet they were complaining about why they hadn't been notified before. Baez is obviously trying to imply something here, he kind of gave up and stopped the questioning. Linda asking Mr Birch about calling the police the day he saw the Anthony's on TV. He attempted to find the bag in the dumpster. The bag was not there. When he couldn't find the bag, he then called the police. The bag was only over the fence for minutes before he put it in the dumpster. Linda asked him if the smell seemed to follow the bag as he threw it over the fence. Before Baez could object, he said no, it didn't seem to. Meaning it was not the bag that smelled, it was the car. Baez asking stupid, meandering questions and doesn't complete most of them. He is going in circles and Mr Birch is as confused as I am. Baez seems to be making a big deal out of when the Anthony's were notified of the car. Now Baez is asking him about what he told the police on the phone. He says he believes that a pizza box was in the bag but he may have recollected it from what he saw on TV. Baez is spinning and so is my head. Mr Birch said he was 70 percent sure that a pizza box was in there but not 100 percent sure. Mr Birch comes across as very, very believable and honest. He is challenging Baez, yay!!!!! He can't swear he saw a pizza box but he is pretty sure. Baez is done and so is Casey, stick a fork in her. ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:11:49 PM George is on the stand, Jeff is questioning him. Where was the notice found? On the front door on Sunday, which they don't use, they use the garage drawer. The notice was just for certified mail from Johnson, they didn't know what it was about. The post office wasn't open Sunday, George couldn't go on Monday because he had job interview. On Tuesday George went to the Post office and got the certified letter. He then saw that it was from a towing company. It said that the car was towed on June 30th, George was concerned because he thought Casey had the car and why didn't they know Casey didn't have the car. Casey was supposed to have the car in Jacksonville, Florida. George called Cindy and then went to the tow company. He went alone first and they told him it was over 500 dollars and George was mad that they weren't notified sooner. It was there for over 2 weeks and the tow yard was just a short distance away. Cindy said she would come home and take George to get the car. George brought a gas can with him because it was a common thing for him to bring gas to a car that had been left and towed. They were very upset at the cost of the tow. Mr Birch gave them a little discount just to get them out of there. Cindy was being very, very vocal. They paid and George was escorted out to the car. George could smell the car from 3 feet away. The odor reminded George of something he smelled, years prior and he was concerned. You never forget that smell, George thought it could be his daughter or his grand daughter at the same time. He was hoping that they weren't in the trunk dead. He didn't want to believe what he was smelling. The odor it reminded him from his past was that of a human corpse!!!!! He had a set of keys with him. When he got to the car, he checked it for damage. He unlocked the car and opened the driver's side door, the odor was worse. He saw no blood inside and that relieved him a bit. The car would turn over but it was out of gas. He went to the trunk and either whispered out loud or to himself, please don't let it be Casey or Caylee. He found the bag, it had maggots, a Arm and Hammer container, a pizza box. He hadn't touched the bag yet, it was partially opened. Then Simon said this has to be the smell of your car and Simon threw it out. Simon reached in and pulled out the bag and threw it over the fence. George was relieved that no body was in the trunk. George never touched the bag but he could see through the bag and saw a pizza box and the detergent container. George and Simon went to his car, got gas and took gas back to the Pontiac. When he got back to the car it was still very smelly, even though the bag was out. He had to drive the car home with the windows down, he could of never of driven with them up. He just wanted to get it home, he was very upset and concern that he didn't know where Casey and Caylee were. Cindy followed him home, it was raining so he had to put it in the garage to air it out. He opened the sun roof, all windows and the trunk. George is the one that always maintained the car, washing, vacuuming, etc. George noticed a stain in the trunk he had never seen before, a subtle stain about the size of a basketball. He couldn't tell if it was a wet stain or a powdery one. The car was messy inside, Jeff, laughs and says maybe by your standards. Showing a picture of the inside of the Pontiac Sun fire, jury gets to see it. Front seat picture shown, backseat picture shown. George says the cleanliness appears to be the same as he saw it. George went to work shortly after because it was his new job. Cindy said that she would try to get hold of Casey. Jeff is done, subject to recall, recess for 15 min. To me, it sounds like George himself did no cleaning of the car. I think this is where Cindy becomes the car cleaner. ::rhino:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:13:24 PM George is going back on the stand. Baez is going to cross-examine him. Baez has George write on the stupid, huge calendar, the day he found the tow notice. He is questioning George about how long takes to be delivered from a mile and a half away. George says he has no idea. Baez is asking him dumb questions, they are sustained. Cindy found the notice on the front door. George doesn't know exactly where Cindy found it but he thinks, in the crease of the door. No, they haven't used that door and they couldn't see it from the street. No other notices on the door with it. The notice was not RED as Baez suggests, George says it was pale, yellowish color. George doesn't control when mail is delivered but he usually picks it up. George doesn't have a problem with the mail service lol he just doesn't control it. It usually works out pretty good lol That entire week, he only got that one notice from the tow yard? Yes, Baez is asking stupid questions, all sustained. No second notice from tow yard, no 3rd notice, no final notice. More dumb questions, all sustained. George never received another notice that entire week. You can see front door from the front, basically but he didn't see the notice. George called Amscot the day he got the notice, after he went to work. He called Cindy to come get him to take him to the tow yard and he knew to take the gas can with him from past experiences. Baez wants to know if he had lucky thinking the car was out of gas? Sustained. Was it a fortunate guess? lol Sustained. Baez seems very lost. George doesn't remember which gas can he took to the tow yard, so he can't know if it had duct tape. Baez is fishing and fishing. SUSTAINED OVER AND OVER. George hadn't spoken himself to Casey since June 24th. Was George concerned when he went to the tow yard about the two most precious things in his life. He told people at the tow yard, that he hadn't seen his grand daughter or his daughter. Actually only one, Simon Birch. He knew his son had already gone looking for Casey by the time he went to the tow yard. He was concerned when he went to the tow yard. Baez is spinning and spinning. When George got in the car, he smelled decomp, he did not ask Mr Birch to go with him to the trunk. Baez is going to a transcript with LE. The judge is making him read the whole paragraph of the statement, not just a bit. Baez starts reading something completely different and Jeff asks for a sidebar. Baez is sooo messy. Baez is reading from the transcript. It is George asking Mr Birch to walk to the trunk with him. George says yes that must be true. Baez asks George if he wants to distance himself from the evidence. George says, no and wants to explain that he just didn't know that something was really, really wrong. Baez asks him if he is a stand up guy and George says, yes. Baez fumbles, Jeff objects, sustained and stricken. All George saw in the trunk was a bag of garbage. Judge is scolding Baez. George never smelled a worsening smell of decomp, just decomp. Baez is making it seem that George never touched the bag, because he didn't want to leave fingerprints. He should of known it was a potential crime scene, either as a detective or a human being. He should of called 911, why didn't he? George says looking back, he would of done a lot of things differently. George didn't think the car was evidence at the time, he was hoping that the smell was from the garbage, even though he thought it might be decomp. Baez asking stupid questions, sustained. George told no one when he got to work about the car or the smell. George says he went to the police without Cindy knowing about it. It wasn't a secret, he was just doing anything to find his grand daughter. George admits that in his transcript to LE that he had knowledge of what a dead body smelled like and it was 6 months before Caylee's body was found. That doesn't even make sense as I type it but that is what was said, lol. They are at the judge's bench now, have been for some time. Baez is very animated, Jeff is very composed, Mason is just probably mumbling...... He asked George if he knew Caylee was dead when he drove that car home. He knew as a former detective to distance himself from that car. Sustained Jeff is back up. George doesn't know when the notice was place on his front door. He didn't see it till Sunday. If Caylee drowned, and George took that lil girl's body down to the swamp then there would be no evidence in the car? George says NO!!!!!! George leaves the witness stand. IF IT MAKES NO SENSE, THERE IS NO DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:15:07 PM Just a quick note, my posts today are not transcripts and they are not verbatim. I am just typing fast as they talk, hit spell check and then post. Please don't kill the messenger. I am doing it as much as I can for Boo and other monkeys at work. Klaas, if you don't want me to do this, please let me know. ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:16:48 PM Tony Lazzaro is back on the stand. They ask him what his AOL name is for and what is Casey's. His is just his parts of his name and the lucky number 7. Casey's is CaseyOMarie. They are looking at AOL instant messages between him and Casey. They want them entered into evidence and Baez objects....another sidebar They sent the jurors out, the judge has a problem with the dates of the IM's. The IM's the judge read are naughty in nature and JP doesn't want to know why they want them in. Judge P reads that Casey tells him that he can't come over but in a few days he can come over whenever and however in a few days. Mr George says that it shows that it will be after the baby and the parents are gone. Judge is questioning him how it comes in and Mr George says that it shows motive, JP wants to know how. She was locked in that home because of her daughter, after she kills her she won't be. JP is not going to let it in. He is gonna let the jury go for the day he wants to go over all other text messages. Tony L. can stand down. Jury is told they are going to see the Lightning game 7 in quality on a 65inch TV. JP is very sweet to the jury and they are very sweet back to him. Jury is excused till 9am tomorrow. I sure wish those juicy IM's came in, would give the jury an idea of the Casey we know. Don't think the state will need them, the case they are building seems huge. IMO Recess till copies of messages can be made. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:36:32 PM Oh no, I have been typing since the trial started. I hit something and I lost the whole thing. Don't know what happened and I can't seem to find it anywhere. It was just in the reply box. I am so sad. Tony was up first, Mr George questioned him about the night of July 16, 2008, They talked about a Blockbuster receipt, it was dated July 16th, at 7pm, 2008. Tony talked about Amy coming to the door and then Cindy. Cindy was mad and told Casey she was going home, Casey said no, she was coming back. They left. Later a deputy came to Tony's and took Casey's cell phone. He came back an hour later and searched Tony's apt. Only Nate and Tony were home. Lee came around midnight and took a bag of Casey's clothes and her laptop. Lee seemed very upset. Tony said he started getting text messages from Casey the next morning. She basically said she was the worse mother in the world for leaving Caylee with a psycho nanny. Casey said if they never find Caylee, guess who is going to spend eternity in jail. Casey, told Tony she loved him. Tony said why are you texting, not calling. Later Tony called her and questioned her. The questions were going no where and he hung up. Then Baez asked Tony if everything seemed bizarre and unreal and did Casey talk as if Caylee was still alive? He asked more questions but they were stupid and sustained. Tony seemed upset just reliving it. Tony was done. Cindy was up next, Linda is questioning her, she identified photos of the house and the backyard. Linda marked the playhouse and Cindy started crying, she never really stopped. Casey sat stone faced for most of it and never looked at Casey. Cindy said she never suspected Casey was pregnant, Casey came to her work and told her in the car. They told George then everyone, they made a Winnie the Pooh nursery. Cindy cried at pictures of the nursery. They then talked about the door out to the backyard, the glass door, Cindy is crying, 15 min recess. Sorry if I forgot anything, I had to recall. Recess for 15min. Casey was crying during recess to Ms Simms, couldn't tell if it was real or not. Back from recess, talking about the sliding glass doors again, one set goes out of the master bedroom, the other goes through the living room. The living room door is the one mostly used. They baby-proofed the house. Caylee usually slept with Casey, only napped in her room occasionally. Caylee was very verbal. Could tell you a story. They could mostly understand what she was saying. Cindy never went 24 hours without seeing Caylee prior to June 2008. Cindy took her birthday week off. She took off Sat, Sunday and the entire week, she had Caylee everyday. She took Caylee to Mt. Dora to see her father on Father's day. Casey and lee had plans that day and George went to work on Father's day, 3-11 shift. Went to Mt. Dora mid-morning till 2:30, 50 minute drive to and from. Cindy says she took pictures and video on Father's Day at Mt. Dora, the nursing home. Identifies a pic of that day, says that's our Caylee. Published the pic to the jury. Caylee in blue dress, smiling with coloring book. Casey is crying now. Cindy and Caylee left the nursing home and went to her mother's home had lunch and left back to Hopespring Dr. Got home and Caylee wanted to go swimming. Cindy wanted her to eat something, she didn't eat much at Mt. Dora. Then they went out swimming. Talking about the ladder, part of it is bolted to the pool, part is detachable. When Caylee was a toddler, they started removing the ladder for safety. They laid it on it's side when not in use. The ladder is too heavy for a small child to pick up. They stayed in the pool an hour or more, at least an hour. Caylee had on a life-jacket. While they were in the pool, Casey came home, did not get in the pool. Cindy and Caylee got out of the pool. Casey came out with a towel and got Caylee. Cindy took off her life-jacket and swimsuit in the pool. Cindy removed the ladder and went inside of the house. Cindy recalls that evening like it was yesterday. Cindy wanted to document that day because her father was taking a turn for the worse. She told Casey about the videos and showed Casey the videos, Cindy and Casey cried while watching the videos. Casey is crying in the courtroom. Casey saved the pictures and the video on the computer. They went to bed and George came home later after they were in bed. Cindy had an early day the next day. She left home the next day, June 16th at 7:30 am. Cindy said she never saw Caylee again, Cindy is crying. She thought Caylee was home that morning when she left for work. She believed that her daughter had a job, an even coordinator at Universal Studios. She thought she planned events for Mardi Gras or celebrities, worked behind the scenes, her hours were always different. Cindy believed this because Casey told her this. She saw other evidence of her working, like her lanyard and texts and emails from her work to her. Cindy had seen Casey working at Universal before, that was before Caylee was born. She believed that after Caylee was born, Casey went back to work 3 months later. She was fired because she had 3 marks against her but she thought she got her job back. The emails she saw were from Hard Rock Cafe. Casey printed and showed Cindy this email. Cindy watched Caylee when Casey went to work at night. Cindy was usually the babysitter, if she was not home, George was the babysitter. Cindy and Casey went out together and left Caylee with George!!!!!! Cindy believed in June of 2008, that Casey had a babysitter named Zanny, Casey referred to her as the nanny. Cindy did not have a full name of this nanny. Casey had been talking about the nanny since 2006. Zanny was the nanny of an IT person and he offered her to Casey as a nanny. Lauren Gibs had been the primary sitter. The co-worker referred to is Jeff Hopkins. Zanny the nanny had been his sitter. Cindy wants the picture of Caylee taken down, so she doesn't cry, the judge takes it down. Cindy knew Lauren Gibbs personally and knew where she lived. Cindy never met Zanny, she can't describe her. In 2006, 2007, 2008, Zanny lived in diff places. Casey told Cindy of all these places. Zanny moved around quite frequently. Cindy never drove Caylee to the nanny or picked her up from there. Cindy never asked Casey to contribute money to the home, she wanted her to clean house and chores. Casey pitched in without asking. Casey didn't have to supply any money for living there. Casey would get dressed and appeared to go to work, Casey always had extra clothes with her. She was mostly dressed for work. Cindy never found Zanny the nanny, from the 15th of July till 6 weeks ago!!!!!!!!! OMG, Cindy said she was still looking for the nanny 6 weeks ago!!!!!!!!!! Cindy talked to Casey on June 16th, left messages mostly but may of had a brief conversation around 4ish, lasted a few seconds. Casey said she was gonna spend the night at Zanny's but she couldn't drop of Caylee with Cindy cuz Cindy had a meeting. So was going to take Caylee to Zanny's and they were gonna spend the night. George had to work, Monday June 16th, 3 to 11. It made sense for her to go to Zanny and spend the night of June 16th, 2008. She thought Caylee would come home with Casey on Tuesday, June 17th. Casey made up excuses about meetings why she couldn't come home on Tuesday. Caylee was gonna stay at Zanny's again on Tues night. Cindy thought they would come home on Wed but Casey, said the negotiations for Hard Rock were ongoing and they were gonna head to Tampa. Casey would take the Nanny with her and take her to Busch Gardens in Tampa. Also going was Juliette Lewis a co-worker and her daughter Annabelle. Cindy thought they were coming home Sat, June 21, 2008, Cindy talked to Casey everday while she was gone, once during the day and in the evenings. Caylee never talked to her on the phone, Cindy asked but there was always a reason she couldn't talk to Caylee. ALWAYS a reason why she couldn't talk to Caylee. On Sat, Casey told her they were gonna go back to the park and enjoy the stay, on Sunday, June 22, 2008. She thought they would next come home on Monday, June 23, 2008. That didn't happen, Cindy waited all day for her to come home. By 4pm Cindy was concerned and talked to her co-workers about it. Casey called and said she was in a car accident, don't panic. Casey said that she witnessed Zanny get in a car accident and had been at the hospital all day with Zanny. Casey and Caylee were just fine. She didn't let her talk to Cindy, always a reason. The toddlers were not around the emergency room so Cindy couldn't talk to her. On June 24, 2008, there was an incident with the shed, Cindy knew that George called the sheriff dept. Cindy knew in the morning about the shed break-in, she told Casey about it, when they were talking about Zanny in the hospital. Cindy found out that George had seen Casey in the house on June 24, 2008. After learning that Casey was at the house and not in the hospital in Tampa, Cindy called Casey and Casey told her that she drove home because she needed Zanny's insurance information and stopped home to get some things. Asked her why she didn't bring Caylee home an Cindy could take off work to watch her. Casey told Cindy that she had given George the gas cans, Casey told her that she took them to Tampa with her cuz her gas gauge was broken. She told Cindy this on June 24th but she knew Casey hadn't been home since June 16th but Cindy says she didn't think of this. She asked Casey why she was doing this and not someone from Zanny's family. She wanted Caylee home. Casey told her that Zanny's mother was very ill and Zanny's family was taking care of her. Casey was the only one that could help Zanny. She wanted Caylee close to her so she wasn't going to bring her home. Cindy started missing Caylee June 16, 2008. Cindy started sleeping with Caylee's teddy bear, named Teddy. She needed something to cuddle with. Caylee is remaining stone faced through all of this. 10 minute break, I am going to hit post before this one disappears too, Lil. Sorry for anything I missed from starting over. I think I got most of the points. Everything we really knew before but now the jury knows it too. I think the most shocking thing of the day is that CINDY SAID SHE WAS STILL LOOKING FOR ZANNY THE NANNY SIX WEEKS AGO!!!!!!!!!!!!! ::MonkeyNoNo:: Good Morning monkeys ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:38:09 PM Back from recess, Cindy is taking the stand. Side bar. George looks calm in the gallery. Linda is questioning Cindy. After 4 or 5 nights of sleeping with the teddy bear, Cindy noticed the teddy bear was missing. Someone had taken the teddy bear our of the house. WE HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THIS BEFORE. Casey was still staying in Tampa with Zanny and Zanny was released from the hospital and took Zanny to the Hard Rock Motel. Cindy was expecting Casey to come home that Thursday but she never showed up. Casey called and said she had to be de-briefed and would be home later that night, that never happened. Cindy thought Casey and Jeff Hopkins were dating this whole time and Casey told her that Jeff wanted to see Casey, so she was going to take Caylee to Jeff Hopkins and his son Zachary. Cindy never met Jeff or Zach but she was supposed to meet him a few times, it just never happened from 2007 to 2008. Jeff and Casey started out as friends but turned into someone Casey would marry. Christmas of 2007, she was supposed to meet with Jeff's mom and Zachary but that never happened. They went to see Santa in 2007 but Zachary, had an asthma attack and could not come. Cindy says that night Casey and Jeff were gonna meet for dinner and then come home Friday, that never happened. Jeff was rich and didn't have to work if he didn't want to. Jeff had a suite and Casey and Caylee were gonna spend the night with Jeff at the motel. Cindy thought that was ok because Casey was a grown woman and Caylee was her daughter. Caylee was Casey's daughter and she didn't interfere with Casey's life. Cindy had vacation again she had to use or lose, Cindy was off June 30 thru July 4, 2008. She went back on Monday, July 5, 2008. So Casey was at a party suite in a the Hard Rock in Orlando but she never came home for more clothes or anything. Cindy had other things to do in her life than wait for Casey and Caylee to come home. They were busy and went to the beach. She talked to Casey once a day that whole time, she thought she knew where Casey and Caylee were. Cindy thought, Casey was gonna head back to work on that Monday July 5, 2008 and Zanny was gonna keep Caylee. Cindy told her that she was at a pool party event but she wasn't invited. I am confused on the time line here. Cindy had time off that whole time and Casey and Caylee were on Universal property 30 min drive but she couldn't see them. Cindy decided to drive out to Universal on July 3rd, Cindy had issues and she really wanted do see Casey. The issues she had were money issues involving Casey!!!!!! Cindy left the bank and drove to Universal, parked and walked to the park and went to guest services. She wanted to pick up Caylee. She didn't tell Casey she was coming. Cindy called Casey from guess services and Casey told her she was not there!!!! She was NOW in Jacksonville, Florida. Casey took Caylee there, following Jeff Hopkins to rekindle their love affair. Casey didn't want to tell Cindy she was taking Caylee away again, so she didn't. Cindy was in shock, she didn't know what to think, Casey had lied to her for the last couple of days. She believed she was in Jacksonville but she didn't believe it at the same time. She enlisted Lee on July 3, 2008 to find Casey. She called a friend of Caseys in Jacksonville, Ryan Paesly and he hadn't seen Casey yet but they had plans to see him. So now Cindy believed she was in Jacksonville. So crazy!!!!!! She asked Lee if he had spoken to Casey but he said no. Cindy created her own my space account to try to get in touch with her. Lee thought Casey wasn't in Jacksonville because of the chatter on my space, saying that Casey was gonna be downtown 4th of July weekend. Lee found out where she might be in downtown Orlando. Cindy was upset and felt betrayed. Casey was posting pics on myspace that showed she was lying. Cindy created the my space account to friend Casey and show her that she felt betrayed by her. She wrote the My Space letter to Casey on July 3, 2008. Linda is trying to get the My Space letter from Cindy in, defense objects. Judge is reading it. They are taking a side bar to discuss it. I am going to post this now before it disappears and start a new post. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:39:37 PM Back from side bar, Cindy is on the stand, Linda is questioning her. The My Space is not entered into evidence. Cindy asked Casey why she never responded to the My Space and she thought Cindy was being hard on her. Cindy thought it was private between her and Casey and Casey told her it was private. Side bar...grrrrr Why didn't they get the My Space in? I will never understand that. It was posted publicly, everyone has seen it, why can't the jury see it. The judge ruled against the contents being known to the jury. I hope they figure out a way to get it in. Casey is calm listening to her mom talk about all her lying and Baez is smirking as if he is happy she is telling about all the lying Casey was doing. When is anyone going to tell us that Casey went down the rabbit hole and was never seen again? NOT ONE SINGLE BIT OF THIS MAKES SENSE!!!!! What can the jury be thinking? They need to let all of this in, it is the truth of exactly what happened. I think the Tony texts were relevant and this My Space post by Cindy was definitely relevant. Back from sidebar, the judge is excusing the jury for the day. What a waste, a huge, waste of a day. Cindy leaves as a witness. The scheduled a hearing with Mr. Lippman, Tuesday morning, he is the attorney for George and Cindy Anthony. Judge is going to decide on the Grand Jury testimony of George Anthony on Tuesday Morning. Court is adjourned till Tuesday Morning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:42:22 PM Mr Lippman is up representing Lee Anthony, he has a motion to keep him from being sequestered. Mason objects. Lippman has the same arguments as with Cindy and George. Asks had Lee been deposed by the defense? No. Defense did not want to take his deposition. The state has taken it. Lee did give a written report to LE. Mason wants Lee out because he is a witness and because he is only the uncle, an uncle is not next of kin. Mumbles on and on.........how many more next of kin are going to show up, they could fill a courtroom full of them. Oh brother. Maybe fill a courtroom with Casey's boyfriends but not next of kin. Wants Judge Perry to draw a line. Says JBP should of not let George and Cindy in, they have heard everything and been called and recalled. They should have no rights, it doesn't outweigh Casey's right to a fair trial. Mason is citing law. Who's rights are more important the victim's next of kin or the defendant? Judge says, when Lee gave his depo, the defense was there, Mr Baez did cross examination. Baez only asked Lee, did Casey ever tell you anything about an accident, a death, a murder? Lee mostly testified to his search, the computer and after Caylee went missing. Mason says Lee was acting as an agent of the police. He doesn't know what else the state is going to ask him. Lippman has more law about next of kin, it is not confined in criminal sequestration, only in victim. Uncles should be allowed in. Judge says Lee Anthony's testimony won't be colored by listening, he is in. George's Grand Jury testimony will not be allowed in. It is no different than what he has said during this trial. Recess till 9am. ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:43:41 PM Wow, I just typed forever and lost the whole thing again. So bummed. Cindy wrote on my space because she felt betrayed by Casey lies. Casey told her to get use to her and Caylee being gone, it was gonna happen sooner or later. They never noticed the notice on the front door, till July 15th, it was hard to see. Casey said she was staying in Jacksonville for an impromptu wedding of Jeff's mother in the hospital chapel. Casey was trying to rekindle her love with Jeff, a wealthy man. Cindy talked to her everyday and George asked about her every day, she told George to stay out of it. George went to get the letter on July 15th and told Cindy it was from a tow company. Cindy told Casey she had a lot of explaining to do. The car was in ORLANDO. Casey never explained. George told Cindy she had to go with him and it was gonna be almost 500 dollars. Cindy went to bank, got the 500 dollars and they went to tow company. Cindy never smelled the car at the tow company. She smelled it as soon as she got home and asked George, what died? At the time it was a figure of speech, she was told of the garbage and believed it to be garbage, even though she as a nurse had smelled rotting flesh and decomp before. Mama doll was in the car seat, Cindy took it out and it stunk like the car, she wiped the face and then used Fe breeze on the doll and the car, almost a whole can. Cindy took out clothes, Caylee's backpack and Casey's purse. She had told George to go to work for his first day. She alone, worked on the car and did all of the removal of items and the spraying of the Fe Breeze. George went to work. Recess......................... My first post was better, this was what I remembered, don't know why I keep losing posts. ::MonkeyMad:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:45:07 PM Cindy back on the stand, a picture was submitted, Cindy testified to one of her steak knives being in the car. The defense objected, they had a sidebar and JBP told the jury to disregard the steak knife. Showing a picture of the car seat, Cindy crying. The car seat was in the car when she got it. Other items in the car, Casey's dress pants, boots, shoes. Cindy removed the pants, cuz they stunk like the car. She put them in the washer. Cindy placed the dryer sheets. Another pic of the car published to the jury. The boots were left in the car, they were in the well of the back seat. In another depo Cindy told them that she did not place the dryer sheets in the car, she didn't remember then, she does now. She has had flash backs of putting the dryer sheets in, she was on meds the day of the first depo. She said in the first depo, she did not know of a reason she would put dryer sheets in the back of the car, she just didn't remember putting them there, she NOW knows for sure, she did. Cindy went forward with the first depo with her on the meds, saying it was the best she could do under the circumstance. She now knows for sure, she is the one who put dryer sheets in the car. Showing a picture of a blue storage bin with clothes in it and mama doll on top and Casey's purse and a hanger in it. This was turned over to the LE. The mama doll is the one in the car seat. This is the stuff Cindy removed from the car. Published to the jury, Cindy is crying, Casey is stone faced. Besides wiping down the doll with a Clorox wipe, she went through Casey's purse. She found a yellow envelope, she found Amy H's resume's. Cindy looked through Caylee's back pack to see what was inside of it. It is a purple, print backpack, with clothes and items inside. Cindy very upset, Casey stone faced. Cindy remove Caylee's toothbrush briefly, she just held the items then put them back in. The back pack was on the floor of the trunk. The blue bin was in the trunk of the car as well. Plastic hangers were in the blue bin. Cindy did not clean or vacuum the trunk. She only brushed her hand over it and threw a few pieces of debris away. Cindy then went to work. Cindy left the car with all of the doors open, sun roof open, trunk and engine cover up. Cindy went to work, called Casey on the way to work, never got a hold of her. Went to work for an hour and a half. She talked to people when she got back, why she left abruptly. She told co workers about the car her supervisor told her to go home but she had worked hard on a project and she wanted to work on a patient dosage issue. The people at work knew she hadn't seen Caylee for a month, they knew all about Caylee, cuz she was always at Cindy's work. She told the co workers that something, "died in the car", it was a figure of speech. She also told them that George said there was a bag of garbage in the trunk. Cindy finally went home. She tried to call Casey, no answer. Cindy thought it was strange that Casey had Amy's resume and she decided to call Amy. Cindy knew by then that Casey was LYING. She made arrangements to pick up Amy at the mall and Amy took her to Casey. Amy knew where she was and they went to Tony's. While they drove, they talked about the lies on the way to Tony's. They got to Tony's. Amy led Cindy right up to Tony's apt. Amy went to the door and Cindy stayed in the hallway. Amy knocked, Cindy stepped outside and Cindy popped around. Cindy asked her what she was doing there and that they needed to talk. She didn't see Caylee, she asked where she was and Casey said with the nanny. Cindy could smell smoke in the apt, so she didn't even go to look, she knew Caylee would not be in that smoky environment. Cindy told Casey she was coming with her, reluctantly, she didn't gather her stuff, no purse, no cell phone, just put on her flip flops. Casey told cindy she was coming back. Cindy drove, Casey in front and Amy in back. Cindy continued to question Casey about Caylee's whereabouts, Cindy realized with Amy there it wasn't a good idea. Cindy drove Amy home and watched her get in her condo safely. Then Cindy told Casey to answer her. Casey told her that she would take her to Caylee but then made excuses not to. She asked Casey why the car was at the tow yard? Casey wouldn't tell her anything and wanted to go back to Tony's. As Cindy was driving, she noticed a police dept and pulled in to show Casey she meant business. That LE sub station was closed. Cindy told Casey this was her last chance to tell her the truth. The argued about issues and Cindy dialed 911 for the first time. Side bar................ Gonna post this now before I lose it. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:46:42 PM Sidebar over.........10:35am. Now a 15 min recess. That poor jury must be so tired of this. I think Cindy is telling the truth. Casey is watching her every move, especially when she left the witness stand. Cindy looks so heartbroken, she keeps her head down most of the time. Casey is just stone faced, she primps and plays with her horrid bangs but other than that she makes no facial gestures. She isn't even trying to play attorney or talk to Ms. Simms. She sticks her chest out almost constantly, looks so out of place and very deliberate. A deputy just told Casey something and she gave him a sly little smile, she flirts with anyone and anything who pays her the slightest attention. Casey got up and left on her own, went out the side door, I was surprised to not see a deputy follow her. One must of been waiting for her. Casey has definitely been told about acting out and talking, this is the least she has talked to anyone since the beginning of the trial, with or without the jury present. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 09:48:40 PM Court back, JBP, figuring out what instructions to give the jury about the 911 calls they will be hearing. He is going to instruct them that some of the call will not be testimony, especially criminal acts, stolen car and money. Linda will not introduce the transcripts of the recordings, the videos of the calls will have a rolling text as to what was being said. Mason doesn't want the tape to be played at all even with instructions that the criminal acts be ignored. He is showing the judge law to consider, the judge isn't impressed. He knows a law that goes against Mason's law. He is going to add a further instruction that the criminal acts talked about in the tape are not part of this case or indictment. Mason is still mumbling...........The judge is now reading the instruction he is going to give the jury, prior to them hearing the tapes. The judge seems very sure that he is covering all of his bases.......Mason continues to mumble objections. Cindy is on stand and jury is coming back in. Linda is introducing the tapes into evidence, over objections from the defense. JBP is now reading the jury the instructions concerning criminal acts mentioned in the tape. The tape is to be considered by the jury for Cindy Anthony's excited utterance and statements and not any crime mentioned in the tapes. The tape is published to the jury. Now playing the tape. Jury is listening to the first 911 call. Daughter stole car and money from Cindy's bank account. Trying to establish jurisdiction. 911 says that is sheriff not Orlando, he is transferring her. Cindy talking in background that she is going to get a court order to get Caylee, Casey doesn't want to play that way, she wants another day, Cindy says no, I have given you a month. Cindy is crying on the stand, Casey is stone faced. Cindy drove home, instead of calling the sheriff from the side of the road. Cindy called no one else, she just went home. Lee called her as she almost got home and George called Lee and lee was waiting for her at home. Lee met her at the house, the garage door was open and Lee was waiting for her, they all went into the house, Casey ran past her brother into the house. Cindy told Lee what was going on....she needed to find Caylee and Casey was refusing to tell her anything. Cindy didn't call sheriff immediately, Lee wanted to talk to Casey first. They spoke to Casey and insisted Casey tell them where Caylee was. Cindy wanted to be taken to the nanny. Casey said Caylee was asleep and they could get her the next day. Cindy said she wanted to go now and wake her up, she could be up all night and not go to work the next day. Casey insisted they not get her that night, not wake Caylee up. Cindy insisted it be that night, she had enough, she called 911 again. Linda is introducing the next 911 call. Defense is objecting with the same objections, JBP is instructing the jury, the call is a true and accurate call. No other instructions. She wants Casey arrested and a possibly missing child, a 3 yr old. She wants her daughter arrested for stealing an auto and money, she explains she has called once before. She tells them she just got the car from the impound and she wants an officer to come to her house NOW. Her daughter is 22 and her name is Casey Anthony and she wants her arrested. Cindy says she has the car back and the bank statements. Cindy says she found the car and Casey but can't find her grand daughter. Cindy is describing Casey. Cindy is very upset on the stand, Casey is stone faced. Casey had no weapons on her, Casey is not telling her, where her daughter is. They say they will send a deputy out as soon as one is available. The call is over. The judge instructs the jury again not to pay attention to the stolen car or money that was mentioned in the call. Linda questioning Cindy again. Casey was allowed to have the car. The LE never came....seemed like forever. They kept talking to Casey. Cindy was trying to stay close to the garage in case they came, she paced back and forth, she was getting angrier and angrier as she waited. Lee was in the room with Casey, Lee was sitting on her bed, leaning up against her dresser. Cindy over heard Casey talking to Lee, she heard Casey crying and tell Lee that Caylee was gone for 31 days and that Zanny had taken her. Cindy is crying very hard now. She says she lost it and started yelling at Casey, she swore at her and hit the bed, asked her why didn't she tell her that Caylee was taken? Next call is being introduced with defense objections noted. JBP is reading stipulation to jury that the call they are going to hear is true and accurate representation. It is being published. Cindy is completely broken down on the stand. Last call being played. Cindy is crying and screaming on the phone. We are talking about a 3 yr old girl and the babysitter stole her. Casey just admitted to her that Casey was trying to find her, herself. Something is wrong, the IT SMELLS LIKE A DEAD BODY HAS BEEN IN THE DAMN CAR. Giving info on Caylee. Tells someone in the background, that Caylee is missing, she has been missing for a month. Cindy is crying badly on the phone and doubled over crying on the stand. Casey looks worried but no other emotion. Casey is now on the phone, talking very matter of fact. Saying that she talked to her daughter that day for about a minute. Talking about a car stolen but it was her car. They are now talking about Caylee, they ask who has her? Casey says Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales, they ask why she hasn't reported her missing for 31 days, Casey says she was searching for her, herself, which was stupid. The deputies are there at the home, the call is ended. Cindy is a mess and can barely walk, she is being helped out, now hugging George and leaving court. Court is in recess for five minutes. Just OMG...................... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:02:37 PM Cindy is back on the stand. Linda questioning her about the call. Who else was Cindy addressing in the background? It was George, he had just come home. George was shocked, Cindy collapsed in his arms and George was trying to hold her up. LE arrived very shortly after the last call was made. Everything from then on was a blur, she was collapsed in George's arms. Much later in the evening, Cindy provided a written statement. When the LE first arrived, Casey was still on the phone with the 911. Cindy took the LE to Casey. The next day, Cindy turned over the car and the items she had removed from the car in an effort to find Caylee. All but the slacks, the LE didn't want the slacks, she had washed. They turned over the computers a few days later to assist in locating Caylee. They also turned over items they believed the nanny might have been in contact with later. For evidence of the nanny. They never asked for her cell phone till she was at the sheriff and then they wanted to look at her cell phone and they took her phone for a half hour and they returned it back to her. Cindy eventually gave samples of her hair and DNA to assist in finding Caylee. Lee arranged a tip line to locate Caylee, they all set up a command center to locate Caylee. On July 16, 2008, Casey called home after she was arrested. They are introducing the first phone call from jail into evidence, over defense objections. JBP is instructing the jury of a stipulation of the call from OC Jail, it is true and accurate and they may use it to deliberate. The call is being played to the jury. Casey starts saying, very snarky, I just saw your nice lil cameos on TV, Cindy says which one? Casey is cussing her out and says, You don't know my involvement is? Casey is being very mean to Cindy and she wants Tony's number. Cindy sounds afraid of Casey to me. Casey is being very abusive to Cindy. Lee is on phone now, Casey only wants Tony's number and Lee tells her that won't do her any good now. Casey is very mean to him and tells him not to come to her bond hearing. The call to her mom was a huge, Fing waste. Lee tells her he is not gonna listen to her garbage and what she is putting there mom through. Lee wants to know what is going on and Casey says she has no clue where Caylee is. Putting Christina on the phone but she only wants Tony's number. Her only concern is Tony's number. She won't talk to Cristina, Casey says Tony has nothing to do with Caylee. Christina wants to know why she wants Tony's number. She was arrested on a fng whim today. Christina is begging for info on Caylee and saying she will die if anything happened to Caylee. Casey is cussing and saying f this and f that. Casey is making up all kinds of crazy stuff, the LE will not listen to her. The need to listen to her but they won't find Caylee without her help, they need to look for the nanny in New York and North Carolina, Casey lies without a single pause. Casey said she is not fng crying every two seconds, like she wants to, she has to talk to detectives. Casey says she just watched the Fng news and no one is on her side, they just want Caylee back........that's all I want too. She wants Lee back on the phone so she can get Tony's number. Casey can't get a hold of anyone, all numbers are disconnected, the nanny was the last one to have Caylee. Lee says he doesn't have Tony's number, Casey calls him a fng liar and she wants the number, she hasn't slept in 4 days. She just wants to talk to Tony, she says she is the one that set up the My Space for Caylee, gives Christina the password for the My Space. Caseyomarie is the log in for the My Space, the password is Cays234. Christina is now giving Casey Tony's number. Christina asks if Tony knows anything and Casey says Tony hasn't seen Caylee since the first of June. Casey is trying to memorize Tony's number. Casey gives them more info on how to find Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales. Casey knows that Zanny is not where she said she was, she was with them when they went there. Casey says she has no idea where her daughter is, that is the absolute truth. Casey hangs up. At some point during the call, Casey says the famous, this was a huge, waste calling her mom. Court is recessed for lunch until 1:30 pm. Cindy was very upset listening to the call, Casey was very composed. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:04:33 PM Lunch over, Cindy on the stand, Baez questioning her. Is Cindy and Casey alike? Somewhat. Did you teach Casey to tell the truth? I thought I did. What kind of mother was Casey? A very loving mother, had a maternal instinct from the beginning. She was a natural mother, Caylee adored Casey. She didn't want to sleep without Casey. Caylee followed Casey alot. Did she cry if Casey left? No, not really, she was fine with grandma and grandpa. Did she ever witness Casey abuse or torture Caylee? No. Did she ever go without food or anything? No. The first time she went to the Dr was June 30th? No, that is when I found out, Casey had gone to the Dr before that. Did you go to your brothers wedding on June 17th? Yes. Shows her a pic of Casey at that wedding, did she think Casey was pregnant in that photo? No, I did not. Casey was sick and wanted to lie down during the wedding and her brother Rick asked her if Casey could be pregnant. Cindy told Rick that she and George did not think Casey was pregnant at that time. Was Casey sedentary during that time? Yes, she was at a desk position now. Baez being mean to Cindy, just answer my questions please. Was she or was she not sedentary? Yes, she had a sit down job. Where you concerned that she had a large protruding belly? Did you think it was because she was not active in sports? Yes. Are you aware that Casey has been in jail and sedentary for a long time? Yes. Do you see her with a huge belly now? I haven't seen her, I know she isn't eating. Can I have Miss Anthony stand? Judge asks them to approach for sidebar. I don't know if the state objected to her standing, I just heard the judge ask them to approach. Judge tell Casey to stand. Baez asks Cindy if she can see Casey, she says, she can only see waist up. Cindy gets down and Casey comes forward, she looks at Casey. Baez asks, does she look like she has a big belly and Cindy says she doesn't look as big. Cindy said Casey said she had woman issues and an ovarian cyst, Casey saw a gyn at 19 for the first time. Casey had irregular periods and a cyst. Casey got her period at 10 yrs old. From the age of 10 to the age of 19, being a medical professional, did you ever take her to a gyn? No, I considered it and it was too traumatic for her to see a gyn. She had periods like me and I didn't think it was necessary to see a gyn. Cindy hadn't seen a gyn till she was 20. When did Casey have sex for the first time? Objection sustained. Who is the father of Caylee? Cindy said Casey told her Jesse Grund. Did Cindy find the father was not Jesse Grund? Yes. Who did she tell you was the father when Jesse wasn't? Eric Baker, he was 2 years younger than Casey and he was an old friend and she saw him at the same time she was seeing Jesse and they got together one night. Eric Baker was in a fight with his gf. He was from Kentucky or North Carolina. Did Cindy try to find Eric Baker to see him or speak to him? No. Did there come a time when they found out that meeting Eric Baker was no longer possible? Yes, Casey called her one day hysterical and said that Eric was in an accident and died, Caylee had a half brother. Is Eric Baker on Caylee's birth certificate? No. More questions about Eric Baker, all sustained. Tell me about Jeff Hopkins? Casey was engaged to Jesse Grund at the time and she met Jeff at work, he was in IT, he had a son, named Zachary. She confided in Jeff about her relationship with Jesse. Cindy heard about Jeffrey Hopkins from that time on till this all started. Cindy saw a picture of Zachary once on Caseys phone, with Jeff, it was listed as her boyfriend on Casey's phone. Do you know now that Jeff Hopkins never existed? Did you ever speak to Jeff Hopkins? Do you know LE never found him? Sustained. What was Jeff's mom's name? Jules. Did you find out that Jules had cancer? Yes, Casey told her in the last 2 weeks in July that Jules had an impromptu wedding? Casey, told her she was going to the wedding and it would delay her from coming home. Did you find out that Jules was dead? Yes, Casey told her that. Was Casey and Jeff the same age? Yes. Was Zach the same age? No, he was a year older than Caylee. Was Jeff a widower? No, he got custody of Zach later after he found out he was a father. Did Casey say she was going to marry and live with Jeff Hopkins? Yes, that is what Casey told me. Did you ever meet him? No, something always came up and it didn't happen. The plans were always canceled the day of. Did you ever buy food to meet Jeff? Lots of times, I made a cake or something to have for him, food or something, she wanted to be prepared. Did you ever tell anyone about Jeff? Yes. Did it ever occur to you that these imaginary people were not real and you heard about them for quite sometime? I did not know they were imaginary. Did you ever hear about Juliette Lewis? Yes. Did you ever see her? NO. Did you ever found out what she looked like? Yes, we waited for her for over an hour in the Universal parking lot for over an hour for Juliette. Did you ever see Juliette Lewis? No but Caylee would say Annabelle, Juliette's daughter, if Cindy asked her about her. Did Cindy ever see Annabelle? No. Did you ever see Raquel Ferrel? No. Did you ever see a pic of Raquel Ferrel? No. Do you have any evidence that Raquel Ferrel existed? No. Did you ever see a pic of Zanny the Nanny? No. Did you ever meet Zanny? No. When did you first hear about Zanny the nanny? Same time as Jeff Hopkins. Casey didn't call her Zanny the nanny, she just called her the nanny. Did you ever try to meet Zanny? No. Zanny cut her hair often and Casey said she was a perfect 10. A beautiful person on the inside and out and had a great smile. Was Zanny Hispanic? I don't know, that wasn't a qualification for someone to watch Caylee or be Casey's friend. Did you ever see her pack for Zanny? No. Did Caylee ever appear excited to have been with Zanny the Nanny? No, it never came up. Did Caylee ever talk about Zanny? She had scratches on her leg and Cindy asked her about them and Casey said Zanny had a dog that did it. How often did Zanny watch Caylee? Not often, it was usually Cindy or George, Casey usually dropped Caylee off at Cindy's work. Did Casey ever tell you about problems in Zanny's life? Zanny moved a lot, had other jobs, part time jobs and she watched Zach. Casey talked about Zanny as if she was a friend. Did Zanny's mother have cancer too? No, sir, she had heart issues. What was Zanny's mom's name? Gloria. What was Zanny's sisters name? Samantha. Did Samantha live with Zanny and Juliette? No, Samantha lived alone. Did you ever talk to Gloria about her heart condition? No. Did you ever talk to Samantha? No, I didn't know about Samantha till Caylee went missing. Did you ever have any reason to believe these were anything but imaginary people? I just found out that they are imaginary. You testified under oath that up until 6 weeks ago that you were looking for Zanny? For 2 and a half years you were looking for Zanny? Yes, ever since this started we have looked for her, Florida, New York, every tip. Was this George's idea or yours? It was mine. We went and looked in CA for her. Did you find her in CA. No but we followed up a tip. Did you hire Mr Dom Casey? No, he volunteered to help us after you had a falling out with him. Did Dom Casey, look in Puerto Rico for her? Yes, there was a tip. Did you ever believe that Caylee was flown to Puerto Rico on a private jet? SUSTAINED. More stupid questions sustained about Casey's graduation. Mrs. Anthony throughout all of these years did it ever occur to you that all of these people Casey was talking about were not real? No sir. The reason you believed Casey was because you thought all of these people were real? SUSTAINED. Did there come a time that you thought Zanny was Amy or Jesse? Yes. Why did you think that? Actually, when I spoke to the FBI about it, I thought more that it was Ricardo Morales. It was the FBI that put the notion that Amy was the nanny in her head. Lots more stupid questions sustained. Did you give LE, Zanny's phone number? I gave what I thought was Zanny's number. Was that number ever followed up on? I found out it was not Zanny but another of Casey's friends. Which LE did you give this number to? Sgt. Posey. Mrs Anthony, do you believe Caylee is alive? Sustained. Do you recall the pics of inside of your home? Yes. Do you have white carpet? Cream colored. Is there a lock used on the sliding door. Sometimes. Did you ever say that Caylee could get out of the sliding door easily? I might have. Baez making JBP mad, sustained over and over. Did you tell Det Melich about the ladder incident? What ladder incident? The one where the ladder was attached to the pool? I told someone that I found the ladder on the pool and the gate open. I came home from work on the 16th and let the dogs out and the ladder was attached and the gate was open. Were you alarmed by this so much you told co-workers? Yes, I told Co workers that someone was swimming in my pool. It wasn't George it wasn't Casey, so it had to be someone else. Did you tell Debbie Polisano that this happened? I don't recall, we weren't close out of work. Did you tell anyone else about the ladder and the gate at work? I don't know my office is open and someone else could have heard. Caylee loved to swim? Yes she did. On vacation you and Caylee swam everyday? Yes. You used to put on her protective vest? Yes. She also used to like to swim naked. Did you tell LE that Casey could of forgotten to take the ladder down? Yes, if Casey came home and swam, she could have. You swam on father's day with Caylee did you not? Yes, for an hour and half. Did you take the ladder down that night? Yes. Are you 100 percent certain you took the ladder down? I am as certain as you could be, I was asked the next day and remembered taking the ladder down. Did you talk to two men after this case was over? Seth Watts. I don't know what you mean, this case isn't over. Do you remember Seth Watts? Yes, he was with the Media. Do you remember an LE from the OJ Simpson case, Mark Furman? He is now a person from the media, is he not? Yes, I learned this later. Did you tell Seth Watts and Mark Furman that you forgot to take the ladder down? No sir, I did not. Did Casey try to reach you Monday July 16, 2008? Yes but i found out later how many times. I had a meeting at work. I know now that there were numerous calls July 16, 2008 around 4pm. Now about July 15, 2008, did you find the notice on your door from the tow yard? Yes. Is that common for notices to be on your door? We have a common mail box and they don't put those notices in your mailbox. So you saw the notice on July 15, 2008? Yes. What day did you tell the LE that you found the notice? I didn't tell them anything about the notice, I was referring to the certified letter not the notice. When you got the car and it was in the garage, what you were smelling was garbage? Yes Sir. And you are clear about that? Yes Sir. Why did you say dead body on the 911 call? I don't know it just blurted out. The first time you called 911 you didn't tell them about the smell? No. I used the car as a reason to call them, that it was stolen. Is the reason that you told them that the car smelled like a dead body was to get the police there? Yes. That you wanted them there right now? Yes. You got the letter around lunch? No, George did. You spoke with Casey after lunch? Yes, I spoke to her and left messages for her. Recess till 3pm........ This is not a transcript or verbatim, it is as accurate as I could type as I listened. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:06:32 PM Court is back in session. Mason called for a sidebar, Cindy is back on the stand. Baez questioning. The calls that you received, June 16, 2008, 4pm, there were 6 calls? I don't know, she found that out later. I never realized there were 6. You work for Gentiva Health Care? Yes, I had health care. Baez is playing a short portion of the 3rd 911 call. That is the portion where you told George, what was going on? Yes, I had the phone in my hand, when I saw George pull up. Playing a little further back. You don't hear George saying anything on that tape, do you? No, he was getting out of the car. Do you hear him say anything on that tape? No, I don't hear him say anything. When you and Lee were questioning Casey, George wasn't involved in that? George wasn't home when Lee and I were talking to Casey. George never questioned Casey? No, the sheriffs came and we were all separated. You said on that 911 tape that Caylee was gone since June 7th? I said that because I didn't remember when Father's day was. What did you write on your statement that night? June 7th. The 7th? yes. If I show you your statement will that refresh your memory? What day did you put on that statement? June 8th. In the phone call you said June 7th, in your statement you said June 8th. LE told you that the date was actually June 15, 2008, did you not want LE to go to the nursing home? Yes, I did not want them to upset my parents. Did you tell the responding LE, July 15th, 2008 that Casey had issues with seizures? Sustained. Are you a RN? Yes sir. What are you doing now? I am on disability. Is that because of this case? Yes sir. Do you have a financial gain in this case? Did you start a foundation in Caylee's name? Yes. Have you made money on this case? No, we lost money during this case. Did you license money for pics? Yes, Mr. Conway arranged that for 20 grand. Mr. Conway got 6 grand of that. We paid past due bills with the rest of it. Did you make a book deal? Mr. Conway arranged a meeting for a book deal, I met Mr Luka, Lee's atty there. Was Lee trying to get a book deal. No. Do you plan on making money off this case, with future projects in this case? No. Have you flown to New York with ABC News? Not for a long time? How many networks have you flown to New York for? Once for a 48hour interview and we have not been back since. Baez is done.........please stick a fork in him. ::MonkeyMad:: Linda is up, went right to sidebar....Who provided food, clothing and shelter, you did, correct? Yes, yes ma'am I did. Did you provide her clothing? Yes. Did you like to spoil her with clothing? Yes. Did you provide the home for Caylee? Yes. Has Casey's weight fluctuated since she has been in jail? Yes, it has. When you found out that Jesse Grund was the father of Caylee, did you tell George? Yes. Did you discuss with Greta Van Sustern that you found the gate open? Yes. Did you tell your co-workers that the gate and ladder incident was prior to the gas can incident? Yes. Did the gate lock from the inside? Yes. Do you know for sure that the gate was unlocked any other day? No. Did you only know that it was unlocked July 16th, 2008. Yes. Did George know the gate was unlocked? No. Caylee can't reach the gate lock? No. So that only leaves Casey. When you told the LE that the car smelled like a dead body, you did that to get them there faster? Yes. Did you tell anyone at work that it smelled like garbage. No. I have never smelled garbage that smelled like that before. Did that car smell like a dead body? It was something that I have never smelled before. Worse than what you smelled as rotting flesh as a nurse? Different, from a larger area. What happened when you first smelled the car? I almost went down to the floor. Was George upset about the smell too? Yes. Was the trademarking of your daughters name to avoid exploitation? Yes, ma'am. Did you believe the elaborate lies center around who was caring for Caylee, besides Jeff Hopkins? Yes or her employment. Baez is up. Did the car smell like nothing than you had ever smell before? Even when you were a nurse. Yes, it was stronger than even rotting flesh. Did you call LE to tell them about this rotting flesh in your home? No, because I thought it was garbage. Was George's reaction similar to yours? George was crying and very upset at the smell. Did all of these lies begin when Caylee was born? Yes. When Casey was graduating from High School, did you plan a party for her? Yes. What did you find out about her graduating? We were called the day before and told that Casey was going to graduate but not walk with her class. They still had the party but they did not go to the graduation. If not for that call, would you have been attending that graduation? Yes. Baez is done, again I beg, some please stick a FORK in him. ::MonkeyMad:: Jury is removed from court for court business. Now discussing six felony convictions for Casey not being allowed in. Baez wants to wait till tomorrow to argue this. Baez is talking in circles, I don't have a clue what he is saying. Not one of it makes a bit of sense but they want to wait till tomorrow to try to make any sense at all. Good luck with that, lol. ::piggy:: Linda is arguing now that Mr. Baez is making no sense and I agree with her and hope the judge does too. She wants the felony convictions to come in, because they should!!!!!!!! JBP, is citing law and now saying that, the burden is on Baez not to have them come in. He is going to give Baez the night to come up with something. Judge Perry was the judge in the case law he is citing to Baez....so I have an idea how this is going to go. Baez will have 10 min in the morning to convince the judge he is wrong, lol. If he can't the six felony convictions will be known to the jury, with some stipulations. Those are gonna be the shortest 10 minutes of Baez's life. ::MonkeyShovel:: He is telling the prosecution that they will need to be careful with bringing in the six prior felony convictions, he used the word "surgical" Next witness, Amy Huzienga. Baez is whining that he needs time to find files for her. Linda said that, Amy has been waiting all weekend in Orlando to testify. JBP wants to know how long it will take them to get the file for Amy Huzienga, Baez said he was working on the file and does not have it with him. JBP, said that if they can't do it today, they will work a full day Saturday. JBP is now very MAD, he gave them room to store files and has seen no stored files. Asked Baez if he has stored files. Baez says no, they have not used the space that he gave the defense for files. JBP, says HE IS NOT STOPPING ANYMORE FOR THE DEFENSE TO GET FILES!!!!! You are not sequestered, you go home every evening, the jury can't. The jury wanted to work Memorial Day but because all of you didn't want to work Memorial Day, they spent the day away from home and families. We will take as long as this takes to try this case but we will not waste time!!!!!!!!!! Five minute recess. The judge has had it with the defense. They had better have files ready from here on out!!!!!!!!!!! Go Judge GO!!!!! ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:08:03 PM 3:08 pm Court is back in session. Amy Huizenga is on the witness stand. Mr. George is questioning. How old are you? 26 years old. Where do you work? On a cruise ship. Did you meet Casey Anthony? Yes. Did you consider yourself a good friend? Yes, we were close friends. In 2008 did you know that Casey had a job? Yes, she was an event planner for Universal. How much time did you spend with Casey? Once or twice a week after she met her and Ricardo. We texted a lot more than that. Who were you living with? Troy Brown. During this time period did you see Caylee? Yes, most of the time she was already in bed when I got to JP and Ricardo's. Did you ever go out when Casey couldn't? Yes, her mom couldn't sit Caylee. Did you hang out with Casey and Caylee at Ricardo's? Yes, most of the time, Casey put Caylee to bed at Ricardo's. Were you aware that Ricardo and Casey were together as bf and gf? Yes but they were off and on, they were always breaking up. Did you ever consider moving in with Casey? Yes, we always talked about it, getting an apt and moving into her house. Did you make an appt to find an apt and it didn't work out? Yes, more than once. When did Casey say that you could move into her parent's house? Early June, July. Did you ever want to meet Casey's parents? Yes, I wanted to meet her mom, we made no specific plans to meet her mom. Did Casey ever discuss things not working out with her mother? Yes, when Cindy couldn't babysit. It happened more frequently and Casey was getting more frustrated with it. Showing Amy, a transcript of text messages. Do you recognize this message? Yes, it is from Casey. Did you give your phone to LE? Yes. Does that appear to be a true text message you received from Casey? Yes, received into evidence. YAY!!! Text msg says, Downtown, my mom owes me. Did the defendant tell you anything about her relationship with her mother? Yes, she it was strained and difficult, her mom said she was an unfit mother. Was this frequent? Yes. What did she say about her mother? She said her mom was crazy and she needed space and her mom didn't understand that. Did you move into Ricardo's? Yes, the beginning of June, it was JP Chats place. She wrecked her car and needed to live close to work, they let her stay there. Were you ever going to go get another car? Yes, Casey was going to take me to Jacksonville on June 13th to get a new car early in the day. Amy texted Casey to make sure she was up but Casey said she was at the hospital with her dad. Amy rented a car to go to Jacksonville. Casey told her later that she was at the hospital because her dad had a stroke. Casey contacted her later that day and wanted Amy to go to Fusion. Did you ever look for other work during that time? Yes. Did you ever ask Casey to help you get a job? Yes, she was working at Universal and I wanted to work at Universal and gave her my resume. Was there a time when you did not see Casey at all? Yes, for a period of about 3 weeks. During that time period did you stay in contact? Yes, with texts. What were the texts about? Car trouble a few times and a bad smell in her car. Showing Amy a text message from Casey. Amy says it is true and accurate, received in evidence. Text says: There was definitely part of a dead animal plastered to the frame of my car, June 27th, 2008. Did you have phone calls prior to this about a smell? Yes, twice, first it was about a bad smell and then my dad definitely ran over something with my car. Two days later, she said the smell had gotten worse and something had definitely gotten run over. The text message was the end of the story about the smell. Next text message says, I ran out of gas again, the previous time was about a week before. Next text message, two weeks in a row my stupid car ran out of gas. Next time she mentions running out of gas the car was at Amscot and Casey was hoping it wouldn't be towed. Was there a time that Casey came to see you? Yes, very early in the morning. Did you know that she had not been staying at home? She didn't say that but it was implied that she had a new boyfriend, Tony L. Was she upset with her mother at this time? More frustrated, with her mom over Caylee. Her mom wanted to see Caylee and she didn't want to take Caylee to see her mother because of problems at home. Did she inform you that she was keeping Caylee from her mom? Yes, she said that George and Cindy were having drama, George had cheated on Cindy and they were getting a divorce. Is this the first time you had heard about the possibility of divorce? No. Why did she want to keep Caylee from her mom? She wanted to keep Caylee from drama, she also wanted her space. Did she ever tell you she resented her mom? No, not resentment, just frustration, resentment goes deep it didn't seem that deep. Did you ever start looking into moving into the Anthony's home? Yes, I even got a moving truck ready. Did that ever get set up? No, lots of reasons, landscaping, lots of people over. Did she ever tell you that there was a time that you wouldn't be taking over the house? Yes, none of it made sense, the bank deal was just undone. Was this in June or July? This was in July. What adjectives did Casey use to describe her mom? Mainly crazy, she complained alot about her mom wanting to see Caylee and the past relationship with her mom. The defendant shows up at your door and asks if she could stay with you on June 30th? No. Did she end up staying there. Yes, it wasn't Amy's place to say that Casey could stay and she felt bad about that. Did you know Will Waters? Yes. Did you tell her that she was invited to a 4th of July at Will Waters? Yes but she said she couldn't come because of Caylee. Amy told her to bring her, it would be fun. Did you ever ask her here Caylee was? She told her the beach with the nanny, etc. Did you attend the 4th of July party at Will Waters with Casey? Yes. Do you remember July 5th? Yes. Why? I woke up to Casey's typing on her laptop, she was extremely happy that Tony L. was coming back from New York. Do you know what Casey did July 5th 2008? Yes, she spent the day with Will Waters. Did you make plans to go to Puerto Rico? Yes. Was Casey invited? Yes but she had to work it out to find someone to watch Caylee. You went to Puerto Rico? Yes. When you came back, who picked you up? Casey in Amy's small red Toyota, they had to make two trips for all the people and the luggage. Did you go later to the mall? Yes. Did you get a call from Cindy Anthony while you were at the mall? Yes, she was very upset. Were you afraid to talk to her? Yes. Why? Because Casey told me she was crazy. Did Cindy tell you what was going on? Yes. Did you agree to take her to Casey? Yes. When you got there what happened? Casey was sitting on the couch and I motioned for her to come out. Cindy was out of view. What was Cindy like when she saw Casey? A massive explosion of mother and daughter, Cindy was very angry, lots of confrontation and defense. What was the first question Cindy asked of Casey. Where is Caylee!!!! Did the defendant agree to take Cindy to see Caylee? Yes with a great deal of difficulty. What was the demeanor like once they were in the car? Only talked when Cindy asked her where was Caylee. Casey said with the nanny. What was Casey's attitude like? Like a 16yr old with her arms crossed. Sustained. The judge is excusing the jury for the day. They are going to be allowed edited copies of the St. Pete Times. They will get back copies and then future copies. Jury is excused for the day. Amy is told to be back by 8:45, to be called promptly at 9am. Hearing at 8:30 am. JBP wants the state to have statements ready for arguments, with regards to Huggins case law. Giving them more case law to read, they need to find gems in one judges dissent. A balancing test must be done. To allow six prior felony convictions in, they must be very careful in how they try to get them in. The judge wants to prevent reversible error. Once that bell is rung, they cannot re-ring it. Get directly to the facts, no editorial comments, or opening or closing arguments allowed. They each have 10 min. He is giving them more case law to go over. Court is adjourned till 8:30am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:11:07 PM 5:30 Court time: Judge has taken the bench, Mr Ashton is arguing Huggins v State: Punitive father of Ms Caylee? Is proof that Ms Casey is not truthful. Judge says we are dealing with more imaginary people? Also dealing with all of the dealings with Jeff Hopkins and Mr Baker, is any of this true? Is Mr in fact the father of Caylee? The defense is saying they are not saying any of this is true or exculpatory at this time. Judge is giving them case law. Again the Huggins Case. Wereley was written by District Court of Appeals Judge Poston, who now sits on the Florida Supreme Court, Judge wants them to be very careful of it. The matter is now over for the day, the State will bring it up again later if need be. The Judge thanks the court staff for working late with the state and the defense over this matter, the last email was at 10:30pm last night. Seems as though Casey has everyone, including the judge, the state her own defense and the REST OF THE WORLD, confused with her imaginary people. ::MonkeyEek:: Court is in recess till 9:00am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:12:57 PM 9:04am Court is in session, Amy Huizenga will be the first witness. Jury is entering the court. Baez is questioning her. How long were you friends? 5 months max. You never even saw her most of that time, correct? Yes, we kept in contact through texts. Showing Amy text messages. These are your text messages from April 4th through July? Yes. This covers the entire time you were friends with Casey? A little longer but ya. The youth today, that is all you do is text? Yes, I had a lot of down time. You live on the phone? Yes. This shows a good picture of Casey and you as well? Yes. The texts that were admitted, there is only one that refers to Casey's mom watching Caylee and her going out? I haven't read them all. There are numerous messages in here that Casey says she can't go out, she is sick or gives other excuses why she can't go out? Yes. Your not Casey so you don't know why she is giving you these excuses why she can't go out? True. You can't testify intelligently about Casey and her mother's relationship? It was one sided, you can only know what one person is telling you. You only knew her for 5 months? Yes but I knew some of my best friends for that length of time. You knew her for 5 months but there is only 1 text about the smell of her car? Yes. You were drinking quite heavily during that time? No, not anymore than anyone else my age. You would drink? Yes. When you crashed your car where you drinking and driving? No, I had stopped drinking 3 hrs before I drove, I nodded off on the way home from work. Is that the only time you crashed? From falling asleep yes. He is being mean to Amy, she is being sweet. He is having her look at certain a text message. He is asking her about a text that says something about her driving, the state objects and they go to sidebar. Baez is trying to make Amy such a party girl that whatever she says is no better than Casey's non-existent people. The test message has to deal with her hitting a guard rail and not getting a DUI. The defense is going to paint everyone is wrong in this case besides Casey, who is just a poor little girl who fell down a rabbit hole. This just gets curiouser and curiouser.......... Recess is over: Baez is questioning Amy. During that accident you totaled your car? The air bag blew up? Yes. Did you send out a text message to call you in case you passed out? I don't know, did I? Amy looks at page and says she doesn't know if she hit her head or not. Is that because you didn't have your bearings straight? No, I just never hit an air bag before. Did that cause you memory problems? No. You never saw a Dr? No. You said Casey dated Ricardo and moved in with Ricardo? Yes. You met Jesse Grund later? Yes Did you go out with Jesse Grund later? No, we met up to discuss this case. Can you tell anything to this jury to help them find out what happened to Caylee? No. Baez also tried to get Amy to say that she told Jesse, she had always wanted to meet a good Christian boy. Amy said she did say that, he then asked her if she had been intimate with any other of Casey's boyfriends? That was sustained and he gave up. Amy wants to say something and they all went to sidebar. Baez tried to make Amy seem like a drunk with a possible head injury and a boyfriend stealer. So imo Baez was being his usual smarmy self. Amy held her own ground and came off as a young woman that partied but seemed to still have an education, a job and a life. Something that Casey has never had, except in her head. 9:37am Sidebar over Amy has left the witness stand. State calling Lee Anthony. Here we go............................... Mr George is questioning him. How old are you? 28. Where are you working? Not currently working. Where do you live? Orlando. Do you live with your parents? No During 2008 did you live with your parents? No. During June 2008 did you have contact with Casey, your sister? Yes, through My Space and numerous times during July 2008. Did you visit your mom during June 2008? Yes. Did your mom ask for any assistance. Sustained. More questions all sustained. What did you do at your mom's house on July 3? I was never at my mom's house on July 3? No. Did you help your mom set up a My Space account? No. Did you try to find out where Casey was on July 3, 2008? Yes, I found out through Face Book that Casey was going to the Dragon Club on July 3, 2008. Who did you go with? My gf at the time Mallory Parker. Did you try to find her? Yes, we went to the night club, I finally texted her to meet me, then I had Mallory to try to text her to make contact her. Did you go anywhere but the Dragon Room to find her? No, I did not. How long did you stay at the Dragon Room? Longer than an hour. Did you finally call her? Yes but she didn't pick up. Did she finally pick up? Yes but she said she was out on her own, doing her own thing. When you finally talked to her, did you ask her where she was? Yes, she told me she was in Jacksonville, I knew it was a lie. What did she say? She said she was with a friend at a country western bar. Did you call her out? Yes, I told her she was lying and knew she was downtown Orlando. Did you ask her where Caylee was? Yes, she said she was being watched while she was out with her friend. Did you ask her who this friend was? I don't believe I did. When you called her out and said that she was lying, what did she say? She said I was wrong. When you said that wasn't in Jacksonville, what did she say? She said I was wrong and that she was in Jacksonville. What did you say next? I told her to call mom. What did she do? She hung up on me. I told her that they were worried about her and I was worried about her, she said that everything is fine and she hung up on me. Did you ever call her back? Numerous times. Did she ever pick up? No. Did you keep looking for her that night? Yes, I stayed on Church Street and went to more bars and kept looking for her. Did you see her? No. When did you leave? 2am. Did you come to learn that no one in your family, no one had seen Caylee for a couple of weeks? Yes. Did you still look for Casey? No, my mom told me not to. Did you see your mother from July 4-15? No. Did you speak with her? Yes, once and she asked me not to pursue Casey any longer, she was determined and she had it under control. Do you recall getting a depo July 30, 2009? Yes. Showing him the depo to refresh his memory. Did that help you remember how your mom was feeling? No, there was nothing I read there that helped me. When was the next time you saw your sister? July 15, 2008 at my parent's house. What time did you get to your parents house? 8pm I believe. Was there anyone home? No. How did you get in the house? The garage door. When you got there what was the first thing you noticed? The smell of the car and writing on the windshield. What do you remember about the smell? Just that it was potent and strong. Was the smell offensive? Yes, I walked around the car. Who arrived at the house? My mom and my sister. What was the first thing they said? Casey went to her room when she entered, I don't recall what was said. Mr George is referring him to his depo. What is the first thing that your sister said to you? No one is listening to me, why bother? What was your sister's state? Combative. How about your mom? Equally or more combative. Did you enter Casey's bedroom? I was in the door. What did Casey tell you? That she was with the nanny. Had your sister ever mentioned a nanny to you? No. Were you aware that your sister ever had a nanny? No. What did Casey say about the nanny? Casey said that Caylee was already asleep with the nanny and she didn't want to wake her or change her routine. Did that make any sense to you? To a routine point of view, yes but not really because why not appease my mother and get Caylee back. Mr George is showing him depo. How long were your mom and sister arguing in your sisters bedroom? Couple minutes at a time. What did your sister say about getting Caylee? Tomorrow, it was always tomorrow. Did you offer to go get Caylee that night? Yes, I could get Caylee or my roommate could get Caylee. What did Casey say to that? She was responsive at one time but Cindy wouldn't allow anyone else to go get her. Mr. George asks for a recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:14:30 PM 10:30 Recess is over. Lee is back on stand. Mr George is questioning him. The jury is coming in. Mr Anthony do you recall asking your sister, why won't you let us see Caylee? I don't recall, along the lines that she was asleep, we will get her tomorrow. Mr George is showing Lee a statement with LE. Lee doesn't seem to be remembering anything, I am really beginning to wonder what is going on. Lee seems very flaky, imo. They are taking a sidebar....... When you asked your sister, why won't you allow us to see Caylee? What did you tell Det Edwards? BECAUSE MAYBE I AM A SPITEFUL BITCH!! When your mom was away from the room did you try to reason with your sister? Yes. Did you ask her what was going on, what was happening? At one point she said that Caylee was missing, someone had kidnapped her. We will get to that, initially when you were talking to Casey did she say anything about your mom? I can't recall. Mr George is refreshing his memory with a statement. I would like to refresh it with Cindy's hammer. What did you tell Det Edwards? When my mom would leave, Casey would express that my mom would say.........Objection, hearsay. Sustained. Side bar................. Lee is not going to give any testimony willingly and Ms Simms is very quick with her objections. I am still very worried about Lee's testimony. He seems to be trying to protect his sister. imo ::piggy:: They are showing Casey wiping tears...she knows that Lee is trying to still help her, once again...she thinks her big brother will come to her rescue. They just said that Lee has not made eye contact with Casey though, so that gives me a little hope. Maybe that is why she is crying. They really need to figure out the right way to ask him questions, to get this all in. He is saying that he can't remember a thing. Side bar over...............10:46 Mr George has given Lee something to read. Do you recall the statement that you just read? Can you tell the jury what you just read? What did you exactly tell Det Edwards Casey said? What did your sister say, when you asked her what is going on? What is the deal? I can't recall. Mr George is approaching Lee. Mr George doesn't seem to know what he is doing, JBP is trying to help him get this testimony. What did your sister tell you. She told me that my mother, numerous times that she had thrown it in my sister's face that I am an unfit mother for Caylee and maybe I am. I went on to say that Casey was a mistake but the best mistake that Casey had ever made. Where you get frustrating with your sister. Very, yes, nothing was making sense to me, why couldn't we just go get Caylee and bring her home, there was no reason not to just bring her home for mom. Do you recall what your sister told you? No, I don't. Side bar again............... Baez was worried about Amy's head injury and memory? I am much more worried about Lee's he is refusing to remember anything and Mr George doesn't seem to know how to get him to either refresh his memory or impeach him for not answering the way he did in all his statements and depos. ::MonkeyNoNo:: ::MonkeyNoNo:: ::MonkeyNoNo:: Sidebar over.........Mr George asks, where you aware of a police call being made? My mom said she was gonna call the police and at one point I remember my mom making a phone call. Did you try to get your sister to talk to you so your mom wouldn't call the police? Yes, I role played with her, humor me for a second. The LE is gonna show up and say, hey Ms Anthony how are you doing? Where is your daughter? She is with the nanny and the cops will say OK, let's go get her. What did Casey say to you? She just stared at me and said that she had not seen Caylee in 31 days, that she had been kidnapped and that the nanny took her. At that time were you given the name of the Nanny. Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales. Have you ever heard that name before? No. Did your mom hear this? No, she could just tell that I was no longer in the doorway and that we were talking about something while she wasn't there. What did your mom say? She said, WHAT DID YOU DO? WE COULD OF FOUND HER? Objection, sustained, lol, ya try to unring that bell. What did your sister say next, where she last saw Caylee. Saw Grass Apts. She was staying with Tony L., she was trying to find Caylee herself, she camped out at the Saw Grass Apts, watching the place. Did she tell you how long she did this? A couple days. Did she tell you where else she searched? Stores, a park, normal places. When did your sister say that she last talked to Caylee? That same day, July 15, 2008. What happened with that phone call? The only other person on the phone was Caylee, I don't know what Caylee said but Casey told her to put an adult on the phone. Did you ask her at that moment, why she hadn't told anybody? I don't believe I did. Upon hearing this news, what did you do? That Caylee was missing? Yes. I went into search mode, I found out where her bf, Tony L. lived and made arrangements to go see him at his apt. While you were at his apt did you tell Tony L what was going on? Yes. Did you take any items from Tony's apt? Yes, a laptop, a duffel bag, a backpack and a bag with knick knacks. When you saw the laptop, what did you notice? The laptop had a Blue Screen. What did that mean to you? A virus, I attempted to reboot it but it still had a blue screen. What did you do with it then? I just took it with me. Showing Lee an envelope full of items. Objection. Judge called a sidebar to look at the envelope. Still at side bar, gonna post this now, before I accidentally lose it. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:16:05 PM 11:20 Side bar is over.......... Mr George questioning Lee Anthony. Mr Anthony you still have the exhibit in front of you? Yes. What are they? Receipts, movie stubs, a photo copy of notes of mine. How many receipts are there. Maybe a dozen, I don't know. They are right in front of you, can you count them? I count 19. Did you come into possession of those receipts? No, I never had possession of those receipts. Where did you find those receipts? They were in Casey's possession and in things I brought back with me that night. When did you know that they were in her things? After a few days, at a family sit down. How many bags? I put the laptop in a bag, so three. When you got back to the Anthony house did you look in the bags? No. Do you know what those receipts were in? They had to be in the backpack. When LE first arrived at your home, did you speak with them? No, I did not, the first officer came into the home, into my sisters bedroom and started asking my sister questions. Were you present for that? I was in another room. Was your dad home then? Yes, he had gotten home minutes before. After the LE arrived did you have any conversation with your sister on that night? Yes. Where? In the garage. Did the car still smell bad? Yes. What did you talk about. She told me about the phone call from Caylee that day and I talked about how bad the car smelled. Was it difficult to stay in the garage with the car smelling that bad? Yes, sir. When the items that were brought back to Hopespring, did you see any items that belonged to Caylee? I don't believe so. Mr George is done. Ms Simms is on cross. Are you Casey's older brother? Yes. On July 3, 2008 did you receive phone calls from your mother? There was no mention of Caylee being missing during that phone call? Correct. Your mother didn't call your father that night did she? I have no idea. When were you in Chicago? Not on July 3rd cuz I was downtown Orlando, maybe sometime in June. On July 15, 2008, you said you were present when your mom called the police? At that time you didn't think that Casey had broken any law at that time. Objection, sustained. The Pontiac Sunfire was the car Casey drove right? Yes. Your father had an extra set of keys for that car and he could access the trunk? Yes. At one time you were talking to Casey and she was crying? Yes. When your father arrived he did not go into Casey's room and ask her what was going on? No, he didn't. There were no questions your father asked you before LE came. No, not that i recall. During this time that the confrontation occurred between Casey and your mom you were there. Yes as the mediator. Your mom was focused on finding Caylee. Yes. There were times that your mother didn't give Casey a chance to respond? Yes. When you got to Tony's were the bags already packed? Yes, except for the laptop, I packed that. Did Tony pack the bags? Objection, short side bar. Mr Anthony, did you have an occasion to see how both you and your sister pack bags? You shove items in bags, correct? Yes. That was not how your sister would pack that bag? She didn't pack those bags. The bags that you picked up, they had no odor? No. Your family, it is your father that details the cars inside and out? Yes. He would do that every weekend or every other weekend? Absolutely. The laptop with the blue screen? Mr Lazzaro was there when you obtained that laptop? Yes. You don't know if Tony caused the blue screen, objection......sustained. Mr George back up........... Ms Simms asked you about the phone call from your mom on July 3rd that Caylee wasn't missing? What was that phone call about? Objection, hearsay, side bar........objection must of been sustained. When the police arrived on July 15th, were you all separated? Eventually, yes. When your sister told you this kidnapping scenario, did your focus leave your sister and go to Caylee. Yes. When the police arrived their focus was not on Casey, it was on Caylee missing. Objection sustained. Were the police focused on Caylee? Yes. When you had subsequent interviews with LE, did that ask you about you the kidnapping and Zenaida Fernadez-Gonzales. Yes. Lee Anthony was excused and I am in shock!!!!!!!!! Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:17:45 PM Next witness Deputy Fletcher. Linda is questioning him. Where you the first individual to arrive that day on July 15th? Yes, I was alone in marked car and full uniform. When you arrived at that residence you arrived for a stolen car? Yes and a verbal altercation between mother and daughter. Who answered the door? I don't remember? Did you talk to someone? Yes, I made contact with the one who made the call. Was Cindy and George and Lee at home? Yes. What was their demeanor? George didn't say too much, Cindy was very upset. Was Cindy the initial caller? I think I learned that. What did Cindy say? She said her grand daughter was missing. How soon did you talk to Casey, after your arrival? 10-15 min. What did Casey say? She did not say much. Were you asking Casey questions? Yes. Were you getting answers? No, not at first. Did you ever get answers? Yes, she finally said her daughter was missing for a month and she was looking for her, herself, I couldn't understand why she didn't call sooner. Who arrived next? Sgt Hosey. What happened when he arrived? Sgt Hosey, took over the scene. Did you ask Casey where she last saw her child? She knew and was willing to take us there. Where you involved in taking her? Yes, I drove my marked patrol car to the complex and Dep. Acevedo drove Casey in a marked patrol car. Where did you go? To Saw Grass Apts. Do you know the Apt number? No. She refreshes his memory. Now he knows the apt is 210. Did you contact any occupants of the apt 210? I tried to but the blinds were open and no furniture, it appeared to be vacant, no lights on, no answer to a knock on the door. Did you tell Casey that? I don't remember. Baez up. You arrived at the house and the garage was up? Yes. The car was open? Yes. You walked by the car? Yes. You did not observe any odor of decomp coming from that car? No. How many other LE where there? Four. Lots of stupid questions all sustained. Mr Fletcher, as part of your report were you supposed to put down things other LE told you? No. If someone briefs you of something, that should go in your report? No. How does that work then? You make a supplemental report. You put in your supplemental report anything that Casey Anthony told you? No. You did not observe Zanny the Nanny? Did you put anything in your report, about any decomp? All the rest of the stupid questions were sustained. None of them really made any sense. LDB was on the ball. Lunch is in recess till 1:30.........Judge goes onto tell them they might want to read case law concerning impeachment of LE. What a mess of a morning, imo. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:19:10 PM 1:30pm Court is back in session. Baez asking about Jail House videos. They want the state to proffer which videos, they might want to introduce. To speed up the process. So there won't be so many objections to what is relevant. Linda said that she was only told today after 3 years that Baez might want redacted. She said we had a hearing on this and you ruled these videos were admissible and she has heard nothing since. Baez says that he is filing this Motion in Liminity now because they are talking about 5 hours of video. He doesn't want the jury to see Ms Anthony in action. Things not to do with this trial. Did the defense have the ability to view these videos? Yes they did. JBP said we have numerous hearings and the week before we went to Pinellas County he offered to hear all motions they wanted to be heard and there were motion deadlines. Why were there no motions filed about this then. There was a discovery cut off prior to Dec 31, 2010. Why was this motion not filed. Baez says we have been faced with many types of issues in this case and the practice of our craft, we don't pick up on and we later realize this has to be addressed. The moment I thought this was an issue I spoke to LDB and she refused to help. They have not been sitting around doing nothing, they have done the best job they can with the resources they have. We have done everything we can and this is not being brought up before this matter has been presented and blah, blah blah. JBP, said that well, let me get to the point, this motion should of been heard before the deadline December 31, 2010. Unless there is something you didn't know about these videos, you should of filed this motion before the deadline. The problem with you doing it at this date, is simply there is no time to redact the portion you are talking about. You have five lawyers sitting over there, that have had ample time sitting over there, that could of filed this before the deadline. You can still try to do something but it may not be timely. Returning the jury................ Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:20:26 PM 1:42 Dep Aceveido on the stand, LDB questioning her. Where were you assigned? To sector 2. Would that include Hopespring Drive? Yes. Did you arrive after Dep Fletcher? Yes, ma'am. What time did you arrive? 10:52. Who did you meet at the door? Cpl. Fletcher. Did you take statements from Cindy, George, Lee, Casey? Yes. Did Sgt Hosey arrive next? Yes. Did Sgt Hosey tell you to escort Casey to Saw Grass Apts. Yes. Did Casey get in the marked patrol vehicle? Yes. Did you ask her if she would get in the patrol car voluntarily? Yes. What steps do you take to make sure that Ms Anthony was in there voluntarily? I asked her if she was fine, did she want to be in there. Did she ever ask to go back or say she wasn't there voluntarily? No, ma'am. Where did you take her? To Saw Grass Apts. How long did it take you to get there? Only a few minutes. What time did you arrive at Saw Grass Apts? Refreshes her memory. The time you arrived is? 12:05am. What did you do at the Saw Grass Apts? Casey told her which apt it was. What did Casey do? She directed us to a single apt. Did she point to an apt #? Yes, it was Apt #210. Did you ask her if she was certain that is where she last saw her daughter? Yes, she said it was. What did you do next? We returned her to her residence. What time was that? 12:25am. What happened to Casey then? I let her out of the patrol car. Baez is questioning.............. When you arrived Mrs Anthony, what was her demeanor like? She was upset. What was George's demeanor like? Calm, quiet. What was George like? Calm, quiet. Just like Mr. Anthony? Yes. How long were you at the home before you went to Saw Grass? 2 hrs. Did you see the car in the garage. Yes. Did you smell an odor of the car? Yes. Can you describe the odor? A garbage like odor. Did you think that CSI should be called? No sir. Baez is done. Linda is questioning........... Did you notice the car trunk was open? Yes. How close did you get to the car? I don't know, I passed by the car. Do you have any experience with decomp? No ma'am. Linda is done. Baez is questioning............. How long were you at the house in total? 3 hours. How many other LE were there when you were there? 4. Witness excused Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:21:43 PM 2pm New witness on the stand.......... This witness works at Saw Grass Apts. Did you check to see if Ms Gonzales was a tenant? Yes I did, she wasn't. I am having tech difficulties with CNN gonna find another stream. Trying all streams and can not find one that works......I will keep trying. ::MonkeyMad:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:23:11 PM Found a link...........11:04 Sgt Posey is on the stand, Linda is questioning...... Missed some of it due to tech diff. What was his job? To take over the scene. Did you direct the LE to take written statements? Yes, I did. Did that include Casey? Yes, it did. What happened then? I walked and talked with Casey, to find out about her missing daughter. Was this after you knew that the child was missing or kidnapped? Just missing. Did you see Casey return from Saw Grass without the child? Yes I did. Did you ask where else the child could be? Yes I did, she said she was with the nanny, Zenaida. Did you then take Casey for a walk? Yes, I walked her away, her and her mother weren't getting along and Casey told him that her mother was trying to take the baby from her, I just wanted to let her know, we weren't there to take the baby away. What did Casey tell you? That she wanted to keep her mom from getting the child from her. Did you have any further success, finding the child? No, I did not. What did you do next? I called Det Yuri Melich. Linda is done.............. Mason is up.............. Your are out of uniform, why are you out of uniform? Are you still LE, are you a det? No, I just wanted to wear a suit today and look nice. I am now a Lt. How many sectors do you control? 6. How many were there when you got there? 3 marked patrol cars. Do you know how long the other deputies had been there before you got there? I want to say 45 min before I got there. Do you know what the call was for? Yes. The call was for a stolen car, did you find out that was bogus? No. Was Casey handcuffed? I don't know. Did you hear anyone ask to take the handcuffs off? No. Not for any purpose? Yes. Since then have you found out that she was indeed handcuffed? Yes. It was not in your presence? I don't remember her being handcuffed. Did you see her being driven to Saw Grass? Yes, sir. Did you see her put in the cage of the patrol car? Yes that was where Casey was put, in the rear of the vehicle. When you approached the property of Hopespring Dr was that your first time there? Yes. Was the car in the garage? Was the car trunk opened? Yes. Did you call CSI? No, I didn't. Did you write any reports about the car? No I didn't. When you went for a walk with Casey were you in full uniform? Yes. How far did you walk with her? 40 yards. Did you or anyone else advise her of her Miranda Rights? No. Did she have anyway to get out of Acevido's patrol car? Yes, she could of asked to be let out. Could she have gotten out on her own? No, they can't be unlocked from the inside. Were you present when Casey came back from Saw Grass? Did she say see ya, gonna go out for the night now? No, she didn't. Was she kept there till Det Melich was called? She was talking with 3 deputies. Do you know how long it was before Det Melich arrived? One and a half to two hours. So Casey was in the house with all of those deputies for all that time? No, they went in and out and walked around the house. All the LE stayed that whole time? Yes. You weren't gonna let Casey leave were you? I can't say that. What happened when Det Melich arrived? Det Melich took over the case. You are not part of any of the chain of custody, including your walk with Casey are you? No. So you are the same as the protesters that came to the house? What? I don't get it and it made no sense. Linda up............... Were you advised by Casey that the child was alive and well? Yes. Were you advised that the child was with the babysitter that night? Yes. Did Casey tell you that she wanted her mother kept away from the child? Yes. Were you there with all of the armed deputies? Yes. Do you remember George, Cindy, Lee, and Casey being there? Yes. Did you know that Lee left? No. Did you tell Lee or anyone else they couldn't leave? No. Do you know if you would of told Dep Acevido to tell Casey that she was going free and willingly? Yes. When Casey came back did you or anyone else tell her that she couldn't leave? No. Did she walk and talk with you freely? Yes. Mason up................. Was George upset or calm? Generally calm but upset. Did he advise you he was an ex cop? Yes he did. Was Cindy upset? She was upset, fearful, angry and calm. Did Casey have a flat effect? Yes, she did. You know what a flat effect means right? Yes I do. Court is in recess for 15 minutes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:24:43 PM 2:52 Court is back from recess....... Next witness is Det. Yuri Melich. Linda is questioning........... How are you employed? With OC Sheriff Office for 10 years. In 2008 did you have a different assignment? Yes I was the Det Cpl for the Child Abuse Unit. Prior to your promotion to that Unit, what did you do? I was in the Homicide Unit for 2 years, prior to that I was in Home Burglary Unit. Prior to that were you on a Patrol Unit? Yes I was. Were you called by Sgt Posey to Hopespring Drive? I was. Did you contact Casey when you arrived? I did. Were you aware that she gave written statements prior to your arrival? I was. Linda showing him Casey's written statement. Were you provided that upon your arrival to the house? Yes, I was. Did you ask Casey if this was her statement? I did. Did you ask her if she filled this out? I did. Baez is objecting, JBP is looking at the statement. Linda says that this statement has been verified. Objection over ruled. Statement taken into evidence and handed back to Det. Melich. Published to the jury. Baez tries to object again and JBP tells him, it's in now. lol. Renewed objections on record. Det Melich you see the doc in front of you? I do. Showing Casey's written statement. He is reading the statement to the jury. Talks about Caylee, her age description and what she was wearing. On Mon June 8th between 9am and 1pm, I dropped my daughter off with Zenaida Hernandaz-Gonzales. I went to work and when I came back, no one was there and Caylee was not there. I stayed there for awhile and paced back and forth and went to Jay Blanchard Park looking for my daughter. I have been staying where I felt comfortable, with my bf Tony L. I have been searching for her, here, there and everywhere from popular bars to blah blah blah. It goes on lie after lie, this is a statement that we have all read a lot of times. She insists that Zanny has her and doesn't know if she will ever see her again.................. Did you speak with Casey that day? Yes. Was it in the spare bedroom? Yes. Did you record your conversation with her? Yes. Linda is putting the recording into evidence over defense objections. Is the transcript an accurate version of what was on the tape? Yes. The tape of the meeting between Casey Anthony and Det Melich is being played to the jury in the courtroom. Asking her about her statement and asking her if it is true, she says yes, he tells her this is being recorded. He warns her against fabricating a story. Asks her if she wants to stick with this story, she says she wants to stick with it. They go over her statement of what Casey says happened with Caylee. It is all the same lies about Zanny and Saw Grass. She goes into details about Saw Grass. Has known Zanny for 4 years. Talks about Jeffery Michael Hopkins who worked with her at universal. She talks about his son and the fact that he has moved recently. She says she got a new phone through Universal for work but she lost it. She says she has one other number for Zanny and Jeff on her other phone. She is trying to figure out her sims card. She filed an incident report with her job at universal. Talking about phone charging problems. She left the phone on her desk and was gone for 3 or 4 days, she made a report about the phone missing 9 days ago to the people at Universal. She is going on and on about looking for a new nanny, Jeff helped her out with Zanny. Lauren Gibbs watched Caylee before this. wow the truth in there, LAUREN EXISTS!!!! but she quit sitting for Casey when she found out that Casey wasn't working and felt used. She started taking Caylee to Zanny in 2006-2007 first at one place and then moved to Saw Grass. She goes on and on..........the lies are endless, full of details and names and relatives of all the non-existent people. She dropped off Caylee on June 9th, 2008, went to work, came back to pick up Caylee and no one was there. She called and the phone was no longer in service. She sat on the steps and waited, no one came. She went to Jay Blanchard Park. She was upset and frantic and didn't want to go home, she didn't know what she would say. So she went to her bf Tony's apt, a neutral place. Did you tell Tony she was missing? No, she didn't but she called Jeff Hopkins and Zanny's mom named Gloria. She has no numbers for any of these people on her sims cards. All of their numbers have changed a couple of different times. She does have a current number for Jeff, if she can just find that missing phone, lol. Do you still work at Universal? Yes, where does Juliette work, she works at Universal with me but her number just changed. She no longer works at Universal with me, she just moved. She went to Fusion Ultra Lounge to find Zanny and a few other bars. The only people she told Caylee was kidnapped was Juliett Lewis and Jeff Hopkins, she has no numbers for them, because of that darn lost phone. lol Why didn't you call prior to today? I was naive to think that I could handle this myself and afraid of my parents involved. Fear of Caylee being hurt, just fear of the unknown. Did you hurt Caylee in anyway? No sir. Are you afraid to say something happened to her and what people may think of you? No sir. Did Zanny have another job? She was a seasonal employee for Universal. I want to talk about money you may have taken from other people do you take drugs......ecstacy,etc...etc..etc? No. Casey is giving more info about Zenaida. Telling about Caylee, her hair, eyes, birthmark. Anything else? I just want my daughter back. Linda up.......... Det Melich, did you leave to go look at place Casey told you about? Yes. Where did you go? One of the places, Zanny's family had lived there at one point. Off Glenwood and Robinson, 301 N Hillside. Casey pointed out two windows. Did you come out to find that Casey's friends lived on Glenwood? Yes, came to find out that Ricardo and Amy lived on Glenwood, Casey never mentioned that. Where else did you go? Saw Grass Apts, Casey directed him. They never got out there. Casey pointed out Apt #210. Where else did you go? To Town homes that Zenaida had once lived, she didn't remember which one. Did you go anywhere else? No. What else did you do? It was getting light out and Casey was gonna show him which Apt door to knock on, she never picked an apt out. What time is it now? Just after 6am. Where did you go next with Casey? I drove her home. Did she have her cell phone? I don't know, I didn't have it. What did you do then? I dropped her off at home, we had small talk and I told her I would look for Caylee. Linda is done............ Baez is questioning Det. Yuri Melich. Do you ever go by the name Dick Tracy Orlando? Objection JUST OMG!!!! Baez wants to approach to tell JBP how this is relevant. ::MonkeyMad:: Side bar.................. JBP is excusing the jury for 10 minutes for a legal matter. How crazy is this? ::MonkeyNoNo:: ::MonkeyNoNo:: ::MonkeyNoNo:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:25:59 PM 4pm Going back on the record. Baez is telling him that once a witness is on the stand you can ask him about his bias and credibility. JBP says what specifically are you talking about? Just the fact that LE was blogging about this case shows his bias. JBP says are you saying he was unprofessional? Baez says yes. JBP is now citing case law to Baez. The case law he is citing was done by a judge friend of his on a death penalty case. Involving a detective in the case. Citing more law, the appellate attack on the detective's professionalism was not upheld. Too broad for impeachment, need to find something in the blog, specific to credibility. Baez giving an example, Sept 29th date, JBP does not have this one. Baez is going to put it on the overhead for all to see. "A true missing person investigation is a murder investigation case without a body". Baez says that when faced that this was an accident, he chose to go with a murder case. JBP says what puts this on record of this being an accident? Baez says, that George and Cindy both told him it could of been an accident. JBP wants to know what in a pool besides a body could indicate a drowning? Baez says, blood, hair other evidence. On and on...if you don't look you will never know. The LE was so clever they came up with air in a car but not clever enough to look in the pool. Jeff says, the court asks what record evidence is there that the child drowned? There is none, other than the defense saying she did. Jeff is citing law. The underlying bias is relevant to the issues of credibility is not relevant. This shows nothing and is inadmissible. Jeff says, that Cindy did not say that she told Det Melich about a ladder. That would have to come up. Do these blogs show a bias against this client, no. These blogs were made while he was home recovering from a broken leg. MOTION DENIED----------------NO DICK TRACY FOR YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!! ::monkeydenied:: ::monkeydenied:: ::monkeydenied:: ::monkeydenied:: Mason asking for something, can't hear him. JBP says he will look into it. Baez says he will not to try to use any other blogs. He wants to inquire to his supervisor reprimanding Det. Melich but Baez says himself he can't use it, lol. JBP didn't know about the reprimand. He is asking Baez which post has to do with this case? JBP is reading the only relevant comment about this is a comment that Yuri can't comment on the case, it is only for his recovery from his broken leg. JBP reads a very general in nature post and he even says that he wants to find Caylee. Baez says he still wants to bring this up at a later date and JBP says ok. For now it won't be mentioned. Five minute recess................ Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 07, 2011, 10:27:26 PM 4:35 Court is back in session...... Det. Yuri Melich on the stand. Baez questioning. Det Melich, you arrived on the scene at 4am? Yes. The first thing you did was meet with Dep. Posey? Yes. Without giving us any info, can you give us a general idea of what was going on when you arrived? A missing person case. What else? Stolen money, something like that. Were you aware that they took Casey to Saw Grass Apts at that time? Yes but I don't know who took her. Did you have any other information about Casey's actions that evening? He saw the statement of Casey. Did you feel sufficiently informed of the situation when you arrived? I knew I was there for a missing child. Did you see the Pontiac that night? I don't recall. Do you remember anyone talking about the car? Yes, eventually someone told me about the car. Were you aware that the child was missing? Yes. You never secured the car? No. You never called CSI? No. You never secured that car in any way? No. One of the first things you looked at with Ms Anthony was she was a suspect? No, I thought she had a missing child. Did you tell anyone to take the handcuffs off Casey? No, I didn't know she was in handcuffs. You didn't think after you read her statement, she was a suspect? No. Her version is suspect to you, her story is suspect to you and she is not a suspect. No, she was not a suspect. Did you read her statement over? Did you notice that part of her statement was in quotations? Yes. That is the only part of her statement that is in quotations? Yes. Do you think that something put in quotations it is to stand out, make important? No. You later document in your report that she went somewhere to feel safe and you put feel safe in quotes. Did you put that in quotes to make that important? No, I don't know why I put this in quotes. The statements that you took from her that we heard awhile ago, do you have one with you? No, not with me. Baez gives him one. You are basically telling her she is fabricating her story aren't you? No, I was making sure she was correct in her statement. She tells you that she had known Zanny for 4 years? Yes, almost 4 years. She tells you that she was introduced to Zanny by Jeffrey Michael Hopkins, when you question her about Jeffrey Michael Hopkins she cannot give you any info on him? Yes, she told me he worked at Universal. Baez is going in circles I can't make sense enough of his questions to type them. Asking about the Sim cards? Det Melich says he was just trying to confirm the info about the Sims cards. You state has she spoke to anyone else and she says Juliette Lewis, she states she is one of my co-workers at Universal Studios. You then to go on to ask her about a phone number for Juliette? Yes. Then she tells you she is in New York and doesn't work at Universal anymore? Yes. But she has no number for this person? She said she didn't have one. Did you tell her this makes no sense? I can't tell you what I felt, I can't tell you this was unique. She only gave you two outcry witnesses and you weren't think at that specific moment that was unique? Sustained. You did nothing to identify these two individuals did you? Yes, I went to Universal. You ask her if she has a drug problem about cocaine,meth ecstasy and prescriptions narcotics? Yes. Then you ask her if she ever COMMITTED SUICIDE? Yuri says no, cuz then she would be dead. Laughter and Baez changes it to attempting to commit suicide? Yuri says yes. Baez asks if he asked her if she had been to Lakeside (mental health facility)? Yes. Did you ask her all of this because something just wasn't right? I asked her because it was a normal way to proceed with an interview. Asked about Casey having seizures, objection sustained. Do you have a copy of your report sir? No. Baez is showing Linda something. Baez is done............ Det. Melich excused subject to recall. JBP excusing the jurors. JBP says as of Friday where they think they are and when they will be wrapping their case up and when the defense will need to start. LDB said numerically half-way with case in chief. Scientific witness may take longer. By the end of the week they could be up to witness number 49. A lot of it will be marking evidence. JBP will have another clerk ready to mark evidence and cart it away. They will be playing the jail visitation videos within the next days. Baez may have a slight chance of redacting but they think it will all be admissible. They have all transcripts but a 2 hour visit with George and Cindy because of an error of possible duplication. It may not be ready till Friday. LDB says that she will have copies of the transcripts. JBP does not want to read them tonight, he read enough to read last night. Baez says that he may slow things down, what is new? Baez is begging for JAC money for out of state witnesses, they need it five days in advance. JBP asked for the motions and Baez says they are not ready, what is new? Court is adjourned for the day till 9am tomorrow. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:22:24 PM Good Morning monkeys ::MonkeyKiss:: Hoping for a good day of Just us for Caylee. ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:23:38 PM 9:00am Court is session: State first witness is Jeffrey Hopkins, they are returning the jury: How old are you? 26. Do you know Casey? Yes, since middle school. Just acquaintances. Worked at Universal Studios in 2002, never worked with Casey. Never introduced Casey Anthony to Zenaida, never lived in Jacksonville. Met her in 2008 at the Ale house, it was unexpected, not planned they were both just there at the same time. Made small talk, exchanged numbers. Never saw her again since July 7, 2008. Got mass text msgs from Casey concerning Fusion. Doesn't know Zanny, never introduced Casey to Zanny. Casey never told him Caylee was missing. Mr George done. Baez questioning, Are you Jeffrey Michael Hopkins, No. Only knew Casey in school. They may of had a crush on each other. Never had a son Zach. Never knew anything about Zanny the Nanny. All of these stories do not pertain to him and he knows nothing about what happened to Caylee. Mr George questioning, When did LE first contact you? July 16th, you are not the Jeffery Hopkins in this case? No Next witness, Leonard Turtora, Works at Universal, security, works with Orlando Police. Met Det Melich, Det Allen and Det Wells assisted them. Asked him if Casey was a current employee? Found that she was not a current employee but found out that she had been employed by a Third Party business, not Universal. She was employed by Color Vision but not since April 2006. He checked for Jeffrey Hopkins, he was employed from late 2001 to 2002. He checked for Juliet Lewis, she was never employed. He checked for Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales and Zenaida Gonzales, she was never employed. He checked for her boss Tom Manly, he was never employed. He talked to Casey Anthony on speaker phone but he didn't know what she was talking about. He heard her agree to come to Universal. They later came to Universal. He met Det. Melich, Allen, Wells and Casey Anthony at Universal. They parked 50 feet from the security gate. He asked her if she was a current employee and she didn't have her ID on her, she said she didn't know if she had her ID number, she did not. She said she worked in events. He asked planning or entertainment, she said a little of both, that was not possible. They looked her up in the data base and her supposed boss and he didn't exist. She started walking them to a building that he knew that it was not the Event's building. They kept walking and Det Melich asked Mr. Turtora if this was the Event building? He said no. Casey put her hands in her back pockets and said she did not work there. Det Melich, other Detectives and Casey went into a conference room. He saw a Det come out once to use a cell phone. They were then done in the room and left the property. Mason questioning, Did you already know by the time they got there, that Casey didn't work there? Did you know it was a sham? No. Did you make it clear to the det that she didn't work there? You verified it in the computer? Yes. You knew she was only working there as a 3rd party? Yes. Was Casey crying? No. Det Allen and Det Wells were also there. Even though you knew you she didn't work there, you let her walk to an arbitrary building? Yes sir. Took two minutes to walk to the building. Let her walk to the building, walk down a hallway and let her say I don't work here. Mason is blaming it on this guy. Mason says they already knew she didn't work there. No one gave her Miranda rights, took her to a small room. Mason trying to show how small a room it was that they took her in. She went in the small room with 3 detectives. She was in the small room with the detectives for 30 to 40 minutes. Did he check on her boss Tom Manley? Yes, was he real or imaginary? Imaginary. Linda up........ Casey knew she didn't work there, she knew when she came to the gate she didn't work there? Correct. She maintained this charade? Correct. Did the detectives handcuff her? No. Did she appear to resist them? No. When they emerged from the room, did she appear upset? No, she was asking them about still looking for missing children in other states. Witness excused. Next witness, Det Yuri Melich......Linda is questioning. Sidebar..............Back from sidebar. Did you drop off Casey at her house at 6am July 16, 2008? Yes. What time did you arrive at Universal? 9:30. Why did you take her to Universal? Casey told him she had outcry witnesses there and she had no numbers for them, Zenaida also was a seasonal employee. She had also mentioned a lost phone at Universal. He though the suspect was Zenaida Gonzales, who Casey said had Caylee. He put Casey on speaker phone with Leonard Turtora and asked her if he could take her to Universal. He asked her for her work phone and extension and who her bosses name was. There were no such numbers or boss. He asked her if she would come to Universal and show him her office? She said yes. Det Allen and Wells went to get Casey and brought her to Universal. She wanted to come and show them her office. She arrived at Universal with the detectives within the hour. He saw her first at the security gate, she was not in handcuffs, they were not in uniform. They made no threats to her. What happened when she got there. Casey talked to the security guard and said she was an employee and didn't have her ID, she gave a name of a boss. The security guard knew she wasn't an employee but she was very convincing and was sure she could show them her office. Mr. Tutorra signed them in. Casey led them to a building, they didn't know where she was going to take them. She just started walking. Linda is showing Det Melich a picture of the layout of Universal. Published to the jury. It shows the path that Casey took them on to find her office at Universal. Red arrows showing the path that Casey took to find her office. From where they parked to where she stopped and said she didn't work there. Halfway down the hallway, Casey stops, puts her hands in her back pocket and says she does not work there. Publishing a picture of the hallway to the jury. Mr Turtora found them a small room in the same building to talk with Casey. She agreed to speak with them. Linda is now showing a picture of the small room they talked in. Looks like a nice clean room with blue walls and a nice white couch and white chair, paintings on the wall. The furniture the day they were there were in different spots, other than that everything is the same. They sat on the nice white furniture. Det Melich and Casey on the couch. Det Wells and Allen were also there. They taped the conversation. Casey was not under arrest. Casey did not say she wanted to leave. Casey knew that she was being recorded, the recorder was in plain sight. Linda is asking about the audio they made that day. Det. Melich says that the audio and the transcript is true and accurate. Linda is entering them into evidence over previous motions and objections. Received into evidence. Statement is just over an hour. Linda is going to publish this to the jury. The judge is going to play it for the jury but it will last an hour so he is giving them a 10 minute recess. Recess until 10:10 Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:25:09 PM 10:10 Court is in session: Det Melich is the witness, Linda is up........ Jury is going to listen to the audio and see the transcript of the Universal recording: Date is July 16, 2008. Det Melich, Allen, Wells, Casey. She is agreeing to this taping. Det Melich is telling Casey that everything has been a lie. Casey is saying uh huh. He wants her to stop the lying. She says not everything she told him is a lie. She still does not know where Caylee is. He is telling her they have 30yrs experience. They know she is lying. It is like a snowball going down hill, she needs to stop it. You know where Caylee is and we need to find her. Caylee may not be in good shape or the way your family last remembers her but we need to find her. We need to end this. Casey says I don't know where Caylee is and this wouldn't be happening if she did. Melich is telling her Zanny is a lie, her job is a lie, everything is a lie. I could look at you as a person who is scared, or a person is a cold, callous monster, one of those two options. You seem bright, are you scared or are you this cold callous person. Casey said she is scared because she doesn't know where her daughter is. Det Wells, says your whole reason for being here is helping to find your daughter right. Casey says right. Det Wells says all you have done is lie, this whole trip here is a lie. You let us walk all the way to your office, right. Casey says I understand how this looks. Det Wells, says over the years I have made mistakes, you make mistakes, we all make mistakes. You need to own up to making a mistake. We know that you are afraid but you keep lying. That makes no sense unless you just don't care. You want us to find your daughter but your not helping. You have given bad address, take us to a place you don't work, do you see how bad this looks? By hiding this, by burying this, you are making everything worse, make everyone suffer. Admit that something horrible happened, tell your parents. How old are you? 22. Go to your parents and tell them what happened, don't let them suffer, don't let everyone suffer. Say your sorry and let them forgive you. When is the last time someone hurt you and lied over and over, doesn't it get worse? Casey says yes it does. Det Wells, says he has sat down with mothers who have run over their babies, babies who have drowned in swimming pools. He has also seen people who have done bad things to their babies and lied about it and people didn't want to help them. He is trying to give Casey a way to talk to them. Just let them know what happened and they can try to help her explain what happened. A young mother could come forward and say something horrible happened. Casey says the only horrible thing that happened was that I left my daughter with Zenaida. Det Melich says if that was the truth, Zenaida would exist and we wouldn't be at a job you haven't worked at in years. None of this makes sense. If something happened to Caylee, let us know, you were a young mother and something horrible happened, my life isn't good, things are wrong and you made a mistake. The other way just makes you look like a cold, liar, tell me the truth. When this snowball hits the bottom of the hill everyone is going to be hurt. Det Wells says stop me when I am wrong. You took you daughter to the nanny. Casey says I dropped her off at the bottom of the stairs, where I have before. You never called the police, your parents did, after they found your car. When the police get involved the first thing you do is lie to the detectives, you bring us out here where you don't work, right? Casey is agreeing this is all true. Det Wells, says does this sound reasonable to you? I never called police, I looked for her on my own. I got my parents car towed and they had to report Caylee missing, I gave the LE bad addresses, does this make sense to you? Casey says she took them to where she took her daughter last. Wells, says how did bringing us here, help your daughter? We came here to look for clues, how is that helping find you daughter? Casey said it's not. She said Caylee has been here, maybe security can help us find her. Caylee has been to Disney, Sea World maybe coming here can help find her. The detective says, whoa, how can that help find her? How can coming to an office that doesn't exist help? Casey says I wanted to come out here and talk to security and see if they would help me. Casey says, Jeff and Juliet Lewis did work here. Casey says that what they told her. Is Caylee daddy dead? Yes, I have a copy of the obit somewhere on my computer. Casey says Zanny has an ID, she has seen it, Casey has an ID, her parents have seen it. They ask her why did they come here. Casey says no purpose to come up here. Casey says I am trying to think of places to find her. Detective says she is not helping by not answering questions and going off with stories about other things. Casey says she is scared and running out of options. She hasn't seen her daughter in a month. Detective wants to know how lying to them is helping find her daughter. Casey says she is trying to help. Did the conversation with Caylee really happen on the phone recently? Yes, that really happened, Caylee said Hi Mommy. She read me a book. She wasn't upset like she gets when she hasn't seen my mom but she isn't upset when she hasn't seen me for a while. The detective says she has been missing for five weeks but she is not upset with you on the phone. Casey says she is always like that, she cries for Cindy but not for Casey. This is the first time she has been away from me more than one day. The detective and she was not upset? Casey says no, she was just reading her a book. Det Allen says I have children I would of called LE right away and been so upset, why didn't you. Casey says she maybe just missed a call or a message from the nanny and something fell through a crack. You haven't seen her for five weeks and she calls you and you can't talk to an adult, why didn't you call the LE then? Casey said she thought it was odd but she didn't call the LE. Detectives say Ricardo said she stayed with him June 9th and they drove right by there, why did she point at an old folks home when Ricardo lived right across from the street. Casey said Zanny lived at the old folks home. A detective is telling Casey everything that comes out of your mouth is a lie. Either you gave Caylee to someone or she is buried somewhere right now or in a trash can. Everything you told us a lie. Casey says not everything. Det. says this needs to end. Casey says I don't know what happened to Caylee, the last time I saw her was June 9th. Det tells Casey, that Caylee is in a dumpster or buried or rotting somewhere. You need to tell us where Caylee is RIGHT NOW, NO MORE LIES!!!!! Casey says that I left her at that apt with Zanny. The det says, we looked at that apt video, you weren't there. This is telling us that you are a cold blooded monster, you are giving us no choice, this is your opportunity to tell us, we are going to find out. We have so many resources trying to find her. Your lies are not helping us find Caylee. Tell us what happened to Caylee. Casey says I dropped her off with Zenaida. I would of not sold my daughter, I would of given my mom custody and left. I would not of let anything happen to my daughter. The only mistake I have made is dropping off my daughter with someone I trusted. No that is not what happened. Your mom knows your lying, your father knows, everyone knows. My phone is ringing right now, your mom keeps calling. Casey says this is the truth, they say no it's not. You didn't see her for 5 weeks and you thought she would of shown up? Casey says she is glad she saw her mom. The det says you could of seen your mom this whole time. Casey says I am petrified of my mom and she reacted just the same as I thought. They ask her are you more afraid of your mom than telling the truth? Casey says no, in a back wards way she came out here to find Caylee, she came to Universal to find Caylee. They ask her was she gonna take a cab here at 3 yrs old? Did you think she was gonna be sitting in the lobby, the person who has kept her from you for five weeks, brought her here and you would find her here to your office where you don't work? Casey is agreeing that it makes no sense. Casey says she is telling them all those places she told them that Caylee has been to. The old folks home? Casey says yes, Zanny has been there. At the old folks home? No. Detective asks Casey if Caylee is in a better place and Casey laughs and says no, the best place would be with her. They are asking her who you have gone to, to help with finding Caylee. Casey says her one goal is to find Caylee. She will lie, steal do anything to find her daughter. Detectives say maybe your not a monster, maybe you have pressure, who puts the most pressure on you? Casey says my mom. Casey says she would never let anything happen to Caylee. The detective says she has tears in her eyes, Casey sounds like she is crying. She said that her mom is right about everything about her, that she took Cindy's credit cards for material things, food, clothes, shopping, she was extremely selfish. Her mom is right about the things she said about here, she brought that on herself. She says the car is hers to use and the gas gauge is broken. The car broke down on Goldenrod and 50th, two guys helped her push it into the Amscot parking lot. The car is in her parents name, she bought the car from her brother. She ran out of gas, she didn't abandon it, she called her Tony L. to pick her up. The detectives ask how they can help her find Caylee. Do you have a computer? Yes. If we check my logs we can try to find emails from Zanny. Casey says yes you can have my computer, I know that Zanny's info has to be on my computer. Casey says that Zanny has been at different houses, doesn't know some of the addresses. One of them is Andover Lakes. Casey says she has names for her room mates, Raquel Ferral and Jennifer Rosa. She rarely saw them, their schedules were different than hers. Zanny had a boyfriend for a couple of months but he was there never there when Caylee was. This has come at such a surprise there were no warnings. Casey says she went to Valencia College for a year and a half. She still says she worked at Universal Events as a seasonal employee. She takes no meds and Caylee takes no meds, Caylee has had one cold in two and a half years. Her dad has come to Dr visits with Caylee and Casey and her mom has come with her for Dr visits. She is saying that Caylee likes to walk around Underhill Lake. They laugh about Casey almost laying down on the couch. She says that Caylee loved to play at Jay Blanchard Park. Do you remember what you did on June the 8th? I think my mom took her to Mt. Dora to see her parents. I was at my boyfriend Tony's. Tony is your current boyfriend right? The baby went up with your mom to see her parents. Casey says her grandfather is 88 and her grandmother is 82. They are making small talk and Casey seems giggly and talkative. They tell her that you are going to be our biggest help and Casey tells them, she could of gone anywhere, New York, etc etc. Did the Nanny love Caylee weird or too much. No, she was good and just praised Caylee and this just happened. Zanny was non-chalant with me the day this happened. Casey said she would check on Caylee on line or text her during the day. Casey says bad news, the phone doesn't save many messages, they tell her they can get all her phone info. She says she gave them to Yuri on a Zip drive. Not actual messages, just the times they have them. Zanny has had 2 diff phone numbers and lived different places. Did she live at the apt that where you dropped Caylee off? Yes and I know other people that live there. Zanny never told me much and looking back now things didn't seem right. I would pick her up at a grocery store to make things easier on Zanny. Casey says honestly the only thing I care about is finding Caylee. My mom told me yesterday she would never forgive me and I will never forgive myself. Even if my car was working, what would I have done, just driven around? If anything happened again I would tell my parents right away. That was the biggest mistake I have made is not telling my parents. Casey says she is sorry she gave them the run around. She has really been trying to find Caylee and she will offer up her computer in a heartbeat and anything else to help find Caylee. I should of called you right off the bat, my biggest mistake was not notifying anyone my daughter was missing. They are agreeing with her. They are gonna put Zenaida in DAVID, Casey says her parents are looking for Zanny under other names now too. The swear Casey to tell the truth. It is over. Linda asks who was that talking at the end, he said Appie Wells and Sgt John Allen. Melich says they checked with Saw Grass and zanny never lived there. Their was no surveillance video. They checked for video at Amscot but they were not working, they were dummies. Casey gave him a zip drive containing pics of Caylee and cell numbers from June and July, he was there with her when she gave him that. It was from a desktop computer in the same room he did his interview with her at her residence the spare room. What happened when you left Universal. They looked through a LE data base, named DAVID for Zenaida. The put in all kinds of variables for the name. Did Casey say Zanny had a car? Yes a silver Ford Focus. Did OC Sheriff office receive tips? Yes over 6000 tips in total. Sightings of Zenaida and Caylee. They never located Zenaida Gonzales. They never found out anything concerning Zenaida or Caylee from all of those tips. Did you collect Casey's cell phone? Yes. Linda is showing Det Melich a package of evidence. It is a Nokia cell phone. Casey's cell phone. They obtained a court order to get records for it and downloaded her list of contacts from the phone. Melich gave the phone to a forensic examiner. Did you also find out who Casey's phone carrier was? Yes A T &T also known as Cellular. He obtained records from them. Linda is marking cell phone records as exhibits. The judge is reading a stipulation, saying the records are true and accurate. Linda introduces a composite exhibit into evidence. Asking Det Melich did you collect personal items of the victim from Cindy Anthony? Yes, Cindy is introducing them into evidence. Showing evidence to Det. Melich. Linda asks them if they were what he collected from Cindy as property of Caylee. 4 Toothbrushes, 1 brush, 1 comb, 1 thermometer all belonging to Caylee. He turned them over to CSI. Linda is asking Det Melich about searching the DAVID data banks in the car on the way from Universal. They then drove her to the Sheriffs office and placed Casey Anthony under arrest. Linda is done............... Baez is pleasing the court............... Does Det Melich turn to the jury when he talks? Yes. Was he taught this as LE. He said the jury is the one deciding this matter so he talks to them. When this all started, Zenaida was the suspect and not Casey? Yes. This is after Casey lied, he found out about the odor in the car, where she worked, that Jeff Hopkins and Juliet Lewis and Zanny never worked at Universal and Casey was still never a suspect at that point. Can you look at this jury and tell them that she was never a suspect. Yuri looks at the jury and tells them that she was a suspect of lying because she admitted that. Can you tell the jury that Casey wasn't a suspect? I thought Caylee was the lying mother of a missing daughter. If we didn't think Zenaida was real, they wouldn't of shown Casey pics of Zenaida to look at. Baez says you never thought she was a suspect or their was foul play? Det Melich, tells the jury he knew that Casey was lying but he couldn't figure out why. Baez is asking him after going to the Anthony home and looking at the statement, he knew that Casey was handcuffed. Sustained. Baez says after you knew all of this information, you took Casey on a trip to show you places. Yes. She took you to a senior home and told you Zanny lived there. Yes. Baez says you knew that these were bizarre events and briefed others on this? I didn't know it was a senior home or that Saw Grass was an empty apt. Baez asks tells him you still took Casey to Universal when you knew it was all a lie. No, that isn't the way it happened. Baez is talking in circles. You can't put your finger on all of these lies? Yes. Something is odd? Yes. You talked to Mr Turtora and found out that none of these people worked there, you asked her about her mental health? Yes. After knowing that she didn't work there you called her and put her on speaker phone so Mr Turtora can hear her? Yes. That she lost a phone? Yes. You found out that all of this was not true and you still asked Sgt Allen to pick Casey up and bring her to Universal? Yes. Sgt Allen knew all about the lies too? Yes. Baez says you still continued on with the ruse? No, it wasn't a ruse, she was so matter of fact about it, I didn't know what to think, she walked them up to a building, into a security gate with two officers in tow, he can't imagine why she would do all of this, so he let her. She had no ID? No. You get into the gate and walk through the gate, she was very persuasive, convincing and that she walked with purpose? Yes. Baez showing him the path at Universal they took. Det Melich met them at the security gate, she was walking with purpose, leading them to her office and then they made a right, down a hallway, making small talk and taking them to her office. Did she have a nameplate? I don't know. Did she have a computer in her office. I don't recall. Did you just keep walking, she just kept going? Yes. Then she stopped and reality set in? That is when she told us that she didn't work here. Is that when you thought something was wrong with this KID? No, I thought her whole story was odd. As a LE, many times you deal with ppl that have drug issues and mental health issues and ppl that fall into neither of those category? Yes. I did not lump Casey into a category at this time. You took Casey into a small room and said if she said Zanny is sitting in that chair, DON'T SIT THERE!!! What would you have done? Objection, imo for STUPIDITY, lol. Baez is making about as much sense as Casey at this point, the jury must think they are going crazy too. Side bar.............. Taking a lunch break until 1:30pm Judge is citing law and tells them they must have a good faith basis to ask questions. I think he is only talking to the defense. ::piggy:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:26:24 PM Oh, one more thing, I know my posts are long, I hope that is ok. Like I said they are not transcripts or verbatim, they are as close as I can come and I add a few comments of my own. I know I don't type everyone of Baez's questions because if they don't make sense to me, I can't type fast, I type what I hear. I am not picking on him, though I have every reason to, lol. You can tell my comments, they are very sarcastic, lol. Please feel free to snip what I have typed anywhere and use it in your posts. Note: Please be sure to link back to Magic Eye's posts if you use even a snip of them, please. She's doing a great job! Muffy My court comments also look different than my regular posts, like this one, I am putting the time and court information on them. ::MonkeyKiss:: Just us for Caylee ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:27:31 PM 1:30pm Court is in session: Det. Melich is on the witness stand, Baez may it please the court, During the questioning at Universal Studios it was a pressing matter? Yes. You were doing all you could to find Caylee? Yes. You questioned Ms Anthony? Yes. This opportunity to confront her with the stories you were hearing? Yes, to ask her why they were there? Yes. To employ techniques how to question people? Yes. You have had training on interrogating people? Yes. Psychological techniques to interrogate people. Yes, to get to the truth of the matter. You used a trust building process with her? Yes. The techniques you employed did not work with Ms Anthony? Yes, but they did not work with Casey. They did not work on her is your words, we did find out that she was still lying and these were imaginary people. You were getting all kinds of calls from Cindy, she was blowing up your phone? Yes. George Anthony never blew up your phone or called you? No. Did you ever leave the room to answer the phone? Yes, it was Cindy Anthony. It was at this time you heard about the incident with the pool ladder being down and the gate being open. Yes, sometime in June. You had this info and you went back into this room with Casey and didn't ask her about it? No, I didn't ask her about it. Baez is referring to a depo with Melich, they were all present. In the depo, in reference to the ladder did you find that to be important info? I did say that was important, any info was important. Did you have the opportunity to go back in the room at Universal and ask Casey about the ladder and the pool? Yes. And you did not? Objection by LDB and side bar....Side bar over....Sustained, another question....The majority of the info that Casey was giving you, you knew that it was not true? Yes. That the child was last seen June 9, 2008, you found out that wasn't true? Yes but I did not know that until after her arrest. You were able to verify many other people saw Caylee alive after June 9th? Yes. As well as she wasn't a student at Valencia? That was much further down the road, that we found out she wasn't a student at Valencia. You were able to collect Casey's cell phone? Yes. She volunteered her computer? Yes. You collected certain items from Cindy? Yes. Did you ever hear that the hair brush given was not Caylee's...LDB objection sustained. That hairbrush was tested for mitro DNA? Objection, Sustained. Baez is done. Linda is up........ Det Melich did Cindy give you a specific date that this pool incident happened? No, sometimes in early June. Were you in the room when Sgt Allen suggested a pool accident in the pool, Casey doesn't adopt that in the interview? No. Did Casey ever adopt the pool accident? No absolutely not. Baez is up......... Did the scenarios include beatings of children to death and running over babies and other horrible deaths? Yes. Casey didn't adopt any of those scenarios, did she? No. LDB offering evidence into court, numerous items. Defense renews all previous objections, they are received into evidence. These are jail house visits and the total time is 5 hours. The judge is reading a stipulation, that these are true and accurate. Publishing exhibit 57, jail visit with Lee. Casey wants the phone turned up. Lee says he will speak up. Lee says how are you? Casey laughs. Says I don't want to start crying and Lee says I don't want to either. Lee says we have an hour and mom and dad will come next. Baez wouldn't help them set up these visits, they had to do it. These visits will be recorded, however you can write us a letter that is not monitored. If you give a letter to Baez he will read it. Lee will write to her and he wants him to write directly to them. Casey says she will get a pen and paper and do that. Lee wants to go over stuff, Casey is agreeing. Lee tells her Jose works for you with atty client privilege, even though you ask him to reach out to us, he doesn't have to do that. He will decide if it's in his best interest or yours. He may not do it. He may not let you reach out to us. Baez has said that his number one focus is you then Caylee, the truth is it is a business the truth is his number one concern is him then you then Caylee. Our number one focus is on Caylee, then you, then mom, then dad, I don't give a spit about Baez, are my priorities right? Casey says yes, that his her focus too. Do you feel comfortable with this, if not then you can write us, ok? Casey says yes. Lee says that the police has been reaching out to Baez and he has never returned a call to the LE. He faxed a letter saying you would be willing to cooperate but he hasn't. I want to make you aware about Baez. How did Jose become your atty? It happened at random, I was talking to people and they said he was good, so he came to see me the next day. Who gave you his number? An inmate and 3 other ppl confirmed him. Lee asked about how she felt about Baez. She said he is doing a good job but I am his focus. You can write a letter to me whenever you want to reach out to us and help find Caylee, no matter how confident you feel in Jose or LE. Do you want to talk to LE? Yes and no, things I have told them, they have confused everything I have told them, so Baez is her only outlet. Lee says I don't know how you feel about Baez but you know how I feel about you and Caylee. Baez tries and objection and JBP says no. Lee says you gave them the wrong date, did you know that then? No, I found out that later. Wouldn't you agree that it would be in your best interest to tell them the right date? Casey says No, they have misconstrued things I have said and I don't trust them anymore, I would rather write to you or LE a letter. Lee says write without going through Jose, who can alter it. Casey says she agrees, that would be the best way to say the truth without it being misconstrued. Lee says he has been doing his own research and found a Jeff Hopkins and Juliet. Casey says good. Casey says they have misconstrued everything she has said from the beginning. Lee wants her to write to him or mom or dad or LE, not Baez. Casey says she knows. Lee says letters to him will remain among them only, do you trust me? Casey says she does. Lee is going to ask her some stuff, feel free not to answer or give him a signal if she doesn't want to answer. Lee asks her names, if he can trust, if he can say a name tip me off somehow. Annie? Don't even bother. Milena don't even bother. Trust Amy she is genuine. Trust Ricardo, don't worry about him. Tony she is on the fence about. Jessie don't trust him, investigate him. Trust mom, trust dad. Will, I don't know about him. Is there anyone you don't trust you want me to look into? Honestly at the moment I can't think of anyone on. I will look into Jesse, Ricardo, Will, Tony. I don't know of any others at the moment. Lee says that is where he has been going so far, so he will stay on course. Lee wants to know where I should focus? Places that are familiar to us, the family, ask mom, she should remember places I have mentioned. Try to go through mom to get this. Lee asks with places or people? Casey says places. Patrick Beaugois should be talked to, I don't know him well but he is the first person who has came to see me and that meant a lot. Lee says we have tried with LE and dad tried over and over to make attempts to try to get a hold of you. They were told by Baez and LE that she couldn't have visits by family or anyone for 7 days. Casey that is BS. That is the reason why we haven't visited. Baez and LE may have their own agenda. Casey says everything from LE is all BS. When Melich read me my rights, he said there is going to be no bond, period. Lee says, yes Melich told them that for sure. Casey says Melich never said that at a hearing. Just like Baez is cutting mom and dad out. Lee asks if she has ever gotten a letter from us, Casey says she has never received a thing. Lee says they are giving them to Baez. Baez is not giving them to Casey. Casey acts all put out about this. Lee says he is not saying anything not true. Because of your age as an adult we do not have any say in your atty, if you want to change jockeys in this horse race you can. Make it known that you want a change. Lee says we can't trust LE or Baez, Lee has learned this through Trenton Duckett, Casey knows this has happened. Lee said Trenton is telling him how to manipulate the LE and media....Trenton only cares about Caylee, not Casey, not mom, not day no one but Caylee. Casey wants the focus on Caylee not on her. Lee says the only way we can get info out to the media is not through Baez it is through the family, they are working with the media. Lee can correct the media and get things known to media. If you want your voice heard about Caylee get it to us. Casey said this is OK, Lee it needs to be done. Lee says are there any places or clues out there I can look, my space? Possibly. Face Book? Possibly. Photo Bucket? No. Do you have a bank account? Yes, mom knows that, she is my executor. Lee tells her that doesn't work now. Talking about her Wachovia Bank Acct. Any clues at the house? No outside of stuff on the computer. How about the laptop? No. Casey says to check the family computer, may have a pic on there that may help. Casey says to check them. Lee needs the password to the desktop. Casey gives it to him, he said it doesn't work. Casey says that was the PW she used. For the My space for Caylee it is CaseyOmarie, PW cays234. Nothing at Ricardo's, nothing at Tony's. Nothing at Jesse's house. Fusion? No. Your text message records? Quite possibly yes. Did you really have a diff phone. Yes and that is what worried me. OMG it cut off...Casey are you still there, we have five minutes. You need to recover that phone and get Jeff's phone a Jacksonville number. There are four numbers you need from that phone. Do you remember a day or a time? No, we talked very vaguely over the last two months. Are there any clues as relates to email? No. Any meaning behind the passwords you use? Yes. My space and Face Book passwords mean something.....move on. How about your tattoo? That is Caylee related, no clue in that. Tell me anything you want me to get out there? Coming from me, I love my daughter, she and my family is my only concern. All I want to do is to see her again. To see her laugh, to see her smile that is all I want. Lee says that is all he wants. Casey says you have everything you need now to help you. Did you work with Juliette? Does she know Heather? Look into that. Wow, what a mess. Typed as much as I could understand. Next video is 36 minutes for part one. The judge is giving a special recess for 15 minutes. Court recessed till 2:55. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:28:41 PM 3:00pm Court is back in session: Mr. Baez is making an objection to the jail visitation videos. He cites law and renews all of his objections of relevance and talking bad about Baez. That her counsel may obstruct justice, destroy evidence or with-hold evidence. He is asking for a MISTRIAL. There are many allegations against her counsel of choice and other rotten things in these jail house visits. They are too prejudicial. The statements may confuse the jury. We is asking for a MISTRIAL again. LDB, is saying that Baez is raising new issues today that he has never raised. He missed deadlines and they request the judge to deny MISTRIAL. She also said that they were already in evidence. Judge says that the deadline was long gone. Was there ever any motions to redact these visits? LDB says no. Judge asks Baez if he ever did anything right about getting these redacted? Baez says he did not. It is his fault. When were the videos brought up, Baez says in 2008. The judge says the deadlines can be harsh but there must be some finality. He said his brethren feels the same. Motion for MISTRIAL DENIED, ALL NEW MOTIONS DENIED!!! There is 12 min of dead air that LDB wants to go by before they start talking. The judge and defense agree. The jury is returning. July 25, 2008 George and Cindy jail visitation: Stipulation that this recording is true and accurate. Casey says Hi, Cindy says Hi. Cindy says we forgive anything you have said or done. Casey is laughing and says don't worry, I haven't said anything. Casey says she just talked to Lee. They are showing her the Caylee T-shirts. Cindy says, everyone is looking for her. Casey says good. Cindy said, can we find her. Cindy wants her to look up so she can look into her eyes. Cindy says I saw the picture of an apt with drums, I know who apt that is. Casey says Zanny's is set up just like that. Cindy wants a password, Casey says she gave it to Lee. Casey is laughing. Cindy wants her to look up. Cindy asks her if Zanny is working alone, Casey says I don't know. Casey said she is not getting letters from Baez. Casey is going to have a lot of questions for Baez. They are talking about a lady at the airport. The sheriff's Dpt is looking into this. Casey says she wants everyone looking into this, them, Lee, Baez. She doesn't want just one person running errands for her. Casey want them looking in New York, Miami. Zanny's mom's name is Gloria she is 55. Zanny could be staying with an aunt in New York. Casey said could we have an extra 15 minutes cuz of the mess up and they will allow it. George, says hey gorgeous, how are you doing. Casey says she looks like Hell. George says to keep her hopes up. He wants to give her the big Papa Jo hug. Casey said her only concern is her mom and dad and Caylee. Casey said it has all been local. She hasn't gone anywhere else. She has been getting very few updates. She is staying away from news. Cindy wants to know what she should tell Zanny, Casey said that she needs to return Caylee. I forgive her, she just needs to bring Caylee home. What do you want me to tell Caylee? That mommy loves her very much, she is the most important thing in the world to me and to be brave and I truly, truly love that little girl and I miss her so much and I miss you guys. I know Lee's priority list, I am the last on my list. Lee and I have made an agreement to write you letters through the mail. I am protecting our family, not through anything I have done. Cindy is anyone threatening us? Casey says just leave it alone. Cindy says we are strong family there is no reason to protect us. Cindy said, why did Zanny never get a chance to get the car? That doesn't make sense. Casey says, mom this is being recorded, don't go there, Lee knows everything. Cindy asks has anyone been in our house? Casey said she has a key, she may have been. Casey asked about the rest of the family. Cindy said her mom is not doing good. Everyone sends their love and they know that she did nothing to Caylee. George says, Casey what can I do? Talk to the media, keep it focused on Caylee. George said is there anything you want to say directly to me at all. Casey said, I just wish none of this ever happened. George says be strong. We know where you are at. Casey says she feels safe in jail. George says he wants to get Caylee home today. Mom and I worry about you being here. Casey said she is in a protective cell and being watched at all times. George asked her when she has last talked to Baez and if she would reach out to the sheriffs office. Casey says they twist her words. George says can you call us. Casey said she needs money in an account to make calls. Cindy asks if she wants to tell anyone anything. Casey said tell Amy she is sorry and tell Ryan she is grateful for his help, if he is in town come see her. Does she want to talk to Tony. Casey said what good would it do, he wouldn't take her calls, he hasn't come to see her. She would love to reach out to Tony but what good would it do? Casey says not to trust Jesse, he may know Zanny. Cindy said Jesse's parents are reaching out to them and think Casey is a good mom. As far as Jesse, he is very questionable. Cindy asks where is her little Tiffany heart ring? Casey doesn't know where it is. Cindy said who gave it to her? Casey says Jeff. Cindy said Tom Frank or Tom Manley? Casey said there were both. Cindy is asking if she can get help from Mike Kozak. Casey is asking about an Earl. Talking about her My Space CaseyOmarie, her password isTimer55. They are talking about Mark Hopkins/CharlieBrown/Markymark. Casey ran into Mark Hopkins mom at Target. She would have no info. Zanny' car is a silver For d Focus, has a floral car seat for Caylee. Zanny had sock, clothes, diapers, toys, you name it. She was only a nanny for Caylee, Zach and Annabelle. Who cut Caylee's hair or Casey's hair. No one. She told Lee to check her phone records. What was the last day you saw Caylee, Casey said July 16, 2008. Cindy asks about a Tara and Casey says OMG you mean Mark Hawkins Psycho ex-wife. She knows nothing. Tara told Cindy that she talked to Casey for over an hour. Jesse and Tara don't know what the Hell they are talking about. Mom, this is why things are being misconstrued. Casey says she is fine and eating to the best of her ability. Cindy said she hasn't been cooking either, people are bring stuff to the house. Cindy is asking about Puerto Rico. Casey was planning on going but nothing was scheduled in advance. Cindy says Amy's flight number was written in her handwriting. She talks about a menu and Casey says that was food for her, she and Caylee are the exact same kind of tiny person. Casey says I love you and I miss you. Cindy says our whole lives are turned upside down. Casey says I know I would do anything to change this. Cindy says we will see her little face again. Casey is all happy cuz they have been given extra time. Cindy asks if Caylee had ever stayed overnight at Tony's. Tony admitted to Lee that their were drugs at his home. Casey said, his room mates smoked pot. Caylee would never be in that environment. Cindy asks if there have have been any other visits and Casey says yes Patrick Bougois, dad would remember him from track in high school. She was short with him and was glad he stopped by. Cindy is asking about a Tia Torres in the neighborhood. Casey says she doesn't know her and doesn't know many in the neighborhood. Tia said that Casey said Cindy had mental issues. Cindy is saying Casey was always the mom of her friends. Casey said she would lie or steal or do anything to get her back. Cindy said Casey we have to find her before her 3rd bday. Casey said, mom we have 3 weeks. Cindy said I don't want to wait that long. Cindy asks if we will be able to find Caylee and Casey says I don't know. Cindy said Melich is convinced that something happened to her. Casey put the phone down and said that is not right, why would she do that? Cindy said what was that all about? Casey says I am in protective custody, they have to put me in my cell, for my own protection. Cindy asks if she has talked to a psychologist, Casey says she can't open up to her cuz she doesn't trust her. Casey says Baez fought for personal contact with her and they have it, she is still chained at her feet but her hands are loose, they sit at a table together. George asks Casey did you borrow anything from anyone else that Caylee would be held for. Casey said no except from what I took from mom and Amy there is nothing else. I am sorry to Amy but it was a time of desperation. George says why desperation. Casey doesn't give him a clear answer. They talk about not getting her out on bond, they want her out. George wants to take her pain away and says I miss you too. I wish I could of been a better dad. Casey says you have been a great dad and a great grandfather. Caylee was so lucky to have both of you and is still so lucky to have you. George says all their little things in the house bring them so much pain. George wishes Casey would of came to him sooner and none of this would of happened. George says that they can't change things now. George says he wanted to reach over and hug her at the bond hearing. Casey is crying. Casey said if she can't be there herself she is glad they will be home if Caylee comes home. Cindy is talking about Det Melich threatening to send a squad car to the nursing home, so now she knows how Casey feels. Casey had to walk away again. Casey comes back laughing. George want to know if she is eating? She says tell him I ate coleslaw. She ate bologna and grits. She eats 3 small meals a day, less than 3500 cals, no real juice. She says she has things to look forward to now, seeing them in jail visits. She can count on seeing lots of Jose, he is putting in an appeal for a bond. It may be awhile. Cindy wants a description of Zanny. five feet seven, thin 140ish, fairly tanned, brown eyes, no tattoos, Casey has seen her in a bathing suit. Has curly hair but uses a straightener, Zany gave her a curling iron. No one has ever drawn a composite of Zany. She wants someone to bring her a sketch artist and she will describe Zany perfectly. She wants them to full for her full name Zenia Fernandez-Gonzales. Her dad's name is Victor. Her mom's name is Gloria, they are divorced. Gloria got a lot of money from the divorce. Casey is explaining that her step-dad adopted her. Her sister name is Samantha, the whitest name possible. Samantha was a student at CF, she is older than Zany by a year, year and a half. Cindy wants to know if Zany ever took Carlee to the beach? Casey says you know all the place over the last month I have mentioned to you? Those are the places that Zany was taking Carlee. Could Jeff ever look preppy looking? Did he wear horn rim glasses? No, he wore tight jeans though and dressed nicely. Casey doesn't know Jeff's sisters name. Zan's room-mates are Raquel Farrell and Jennifer Rosa, the both worked together at a distribution cataloger. When is the last time you saw Raquel and Jennifer? More than a month ago. Raquel was a student she was a server at Friday's. They each came from families with decent amounts of money. Does dad want to ask me anything? Cindy is smiling and saying sorry for it. George has been doing yard work and they got a flat tire. Casey said hey, laughs that happened to me. Cindy said the reward for finding Carlee is 225.000 dollars and Casey said gee that is more than half my bond.......Cindy said she is getting a lot of nice calls of people saying they will find Carlee. You got strength from me, your dad and your brother. Don't think anyone can threaten us. We don't need protecting we have been through a lot. We love you a lot. George is telling his finger analogy. Dad is the thumb, Casey said mom is the middle finger and Lee and Casey are fingers and Carlee is the pinkie and we are missing two fingers. Casey says I AM STILL HERE!!!. George wants Casey to talk to the FBI, Casey says that will be fine. Casey said she doesn't like Allen or Milch but she does like Happy Wells. She would speak to Happy alone or with Baez. She has had nice talks with Happy. Casey feels very comfortable talking to Happy Wells. Casey doesn't know if he is a Diet or a Deputy. Casey says he is the bigger guy that came to the house. They called him Happy, his last name is Wells. Casey doesn't want anyone telling her she is lying, she wants someone that will listen to her. Cindy is gonna work on getting Happy Wells for her today. Does Casey want her atty present or not? Casey says she doesn't care. Cindy thinks she should have an atty present. Cindy asks where to look and Casey says locally. Casey said just know how much I miss you guys. Cindy says if we don't find her they are pinning a case against you. Casey says they have from the start, especially the other two. Casey says I just want her back. Cindy said to stay positive. Casey said she is. Cindy asks her what her gut tells her if she is still local and Casey said her gut tells her that she is close, she is not far. Casey asks Cindy if she talked to Ryan in Jacksonville, Casey thinks she should talk to Ryan. Jose said everything will make sense once they find Carlee. Casey tell Lee that she loves him. Cindy says lee has been a rock for the whole family. Cindy said they have unconditional love for her. Jail visit tape is over. DB tells the judge the next video is 44 minutes long. Judge gives them a stretch break and asks them if they want to work past five or listen to part of the tape today and part tomorrow. Recess for a stretch break Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:29:54 PM 4:40pm Court in Session Jury wants to stay late and listen late today, after 5pm Next tape of Lee and Casey, jail visitation. Lee says, he is sorry for dominating the last conversation. Casey asked if he got her letters and that is where she is leaving it. Lee understands what she said in the letter. Other than that, he needs to know on the day Caylee went missing, did Casey speak to 3 people over the phone, two that you text messaged prior to mom? Casey says that is about right. Lee says he knows who those 3 ppl are. Lee asks Casey if any of those 3 are involved and Casey says that she thinks so as time goes on. Two that have been in touch with mom are those the two? Casey says yes. Lee says one you talked to first, one you talked to next. Casey doesn't know the order. Lee says how about the one you spoke to more recently in texts. Casey says that he needs to pay attention to both of those people. Those 3 people prior to this have they ever talked to each other? Casey says even down to those last 2 that she referenced, they were all intertwined. Lee saw the call she made to order food on the 17th, saw a couple of calls to order food. Casey said that was probably Tony's room mate. She let him use her phone. Lee said you were out and about and you know what I mean. Was it during the day or night and Casey said definitely during the day. Lee wants to know about the other phone, was it purchased for you by someone else? No Do you know when you purchased it? No, I may have a receipt for it at home. Do you think the person wanted to talk to you on only that phone? Casey says no, I used the same Sims card. Lee said in regards to the other 2 but back to the 1st person and I know your feelings about them. You had a long call with them right before the frantic calling went down. Would *she* have any idea of what happened right before all this went down? Would she open up to me? Casey said I would hope so. Lee says I am going to reach out to her. I am going to refer to the other guys as the Full Sail? crew. When did you meet them? The last weekend of May. They all met her the first week of June at the apt, we went to the pool. Lee said do you remember the last time Caylee was there, when you had her there? Casey says, right after mom's bday. Lee said he already knew that, Casey said I figured. Casey said you are very thorough. Lee said if I look for the Zanny should I look in the area or complex? Casey said yes, I do have a friend in that area that complex. Lee says I don't know how to ask this, would that reference any of the 3 that I said earlier? Lee said you said Zanny had a 407 number a 302 number and a 952 number, is that right? Casey said yes those are the three numbers. Lee asked if there are any other area codes or states? Casey says she got a call from Miami and Jacksonville and up the east coast. 631 is New York Casey said, Lee said i want to know about a 602 and Casey said that is Mark Hawkins. Lee said is there anyone else that might have knowledge besides Jeff or Juliet and Lee says he has already found Jeff and Juliet did work at Universal. Casey said that is good. Is it just those 3 area codes that I need to focus on? Lee asks about texts and Casey says she texted with everyone that was her main way to communicate. Lee wants to know if the person who took Caylee had resources out of Orlando? Yes. How about out of the state of Florida? Casey says yes. Lee says how about as far as I have gone recently? Casey says yes. Lee said people that he has been in contact with people, he has been in contact with football with, should he consider that state? Casey says yes, he should obviously consider that. Lee tells her that based on the contact, what I know right now, everything has changed from a month ago. Even if we have been used to something before the last month, those rules have changed. Are we still working on the same time, the same instances, the same area as the situation has changed, let me know. Because of where you are I need to pick up where you left off. I know you trust me to do the right thing. That is the first thing I realized is that the thing that you have been stressed about and now someone else needs to stress and react to it now because of where you are. I am going to cuss reporters out, Lee said. Casey says be nice. Lee says well the media can't chase me around. Casey says her and Baez have discussed that and maybe they should set up media places to talk to them so they don't follow them around. Lee says whatever it will all go away. Casey says it will just take a lil while. Lee asks if you want to tell mom or dad or anything? Casey says just go off the leads I have given you for now, I will be seeing Jose later and give him anything else she can think of. Lee says just remember that LE needs to know that you and Baez are gonna work with them. Lee wants Jose to probe other resources, without Lee making an A$$ out of himself, he wants that to happen, so Lee want to know if anyone else is helping out. Lee tells her that he set up a phone account for her to call him, she has already called him once. He wants a time she is gonna call and she says between 3 and 4pm and he will drop anything to pick up a call from her. He is gonna want to use the whole 15 minutes. Casey says, Lee that will be fine, I am doing nothing but reading all day anyway, I am happy to talk to you. Lee says don't worry about it costing mucho dollars. Lee says that mom is working with the media to find Caylee, she never stops. Dad is working real hard with charities and reward money set up and office space and supplies and massive volunteers. Lee tells her that Fred Robinson and his wife and Holly have all been tremendous support. They reference the Lord a lot and they want you to know to put things behind you and use the Lord as a crutch and Casey says she has had more faith now. Lee says people are praying for her and strangers are all reaching out and to let you know they love her. Regardless of what you may hear, the good people out there know and they have offered up their unconditional support and resources. He says if you think of any other resources let us know. Lee says she can talk now and she would rather have Lee talk. Lee said he has taken over the My Space site and he changed all profiles to mirror that site and is searching for volunteers, Josh Duckett is helping them, they have a website for Caylee. Charities have offered fliers, billboards, mobile billboards if you have a ball hitch, t-shirts. Casey said she saw the t-shirts on mom and dad. They are working on a bracelet for Caylee. They have a huge fund-raiser in Daytona for Caylee, huge raffles and auctions for charities. Right now the ppl that have RSVP'd are in the thousands. Casey says that is what she wants. Lee wants something from Casey to say. Casey says to write this down. I want to openly thank not only our family but our friends in the community for their support. I want to thank all the charities for their time and resources and effort and if anyone has info on Caylee to come forward. Lee says OK, anything you want to say to the person or the persons who have Caylee you want to say? Casey says, we miss her, we love her, we want her to come home where she is safe with her family. I know in my heart and in my gut and every ounce of my being that we will be together again. Casey said, I thought about this after Jose left the other day. I want to thank you and want to tell you how much I love you, not only to you but to mom and to dad that it will be soon and we will have our family back together. Casey tells him the George hand analogy and they will soon be all back together. Mom said we are stronger than we have ever been and I truly believe that. I love you guys so much. Lee says I love you too, we are gonna find Caylee. End of that tape, time is 5:21, jury is excused. Judge asks Mr Mason if he has served this motion on the State of Florida that he wants heard at 8:30 tomorrow morning. Mason says he doesn't know what the judge is talking about. JBP said haven't we heard one of these before? What is the difference between this one and the one we have heard. Mason said I don't know what this is about it was written by Ann Finnel. Baez said he has talked to LDB about this matter and they don't need to have a hearing. Mr Ashton, said he just received a new expert witness from the defense, they got a one page download from the internet on this expert witness. They have also received new discovery for George Anthony's medical records. They will have to have hearings on both of these. The expert is Sally Karioth, she is some kind of behavior grief expert. Mr Baez says that it is incumbent upon them to have an expert on the grief process. She will be speaking of something in the grief nature, she won't need to examine Ms Anthony so they won't have to worry about that, lol. Baez says he gets discovery all the time so na na na...lol. Baez says it would be malpractice on his part not to explain to the jury the different reactions people have to death and dying. Baez had no idea this would become an issue and as soon as he did, he put her on the witness list. Jeff Ashton says, the court heard and denied this coming in before. He is saying that Baez already tried to have an expert witness that will not have to examine his client. This is not a surprise, Baez contemplated doing this in April and it didn't work. The judge says they can go ahead and take a depo of this witness and citing law that says grief and bereavement is not allowed for some purposes. The witness must produce a report, they must state all opinions they are going to give. Baez is going to speak to this witness this evening and he says he just thought of that and no matter what Mr Ashton says that what Baez says is the truth........is the truth!!!!!!!! so there!!!! The judge calms Baez down like a child and says it's been a long day and Jeff didn't try to hurt Baez's feelings and Baez should put his big boy panties on. OK, the judge didn't add all of that. ::piggy:: Jeff is saying this is late and is this going to be used during trial and good cause of why this is going to be used. I think he is talking about George's medical records. Jeff wants to know when they will have a hearing on George's medical records? It will be held Saturday at 1pm. The other expert will have to be deposed and Baez better make sure his witness is ready to be deposed. Court is in recess till 9am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:49:12 PM Good Morning monkeys, here we go........... ::MonkeyGavel:: Another great day for Just us for Caylee. ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:50:34 PM 9am Friday June 2, 2011 Court is in Session: Judge is on the bench, Linda is gonna play the July 30, 2008 Jail Visitation. George and Cindy Anthony visiting Casey in Jail. Baez is noting his previous objections. Especially about it making Baez look bad. Jury is coming in. Judge is reading the stipulation to the jury concerning the Jail Video. Says it is true and accurate recording of the visitation and it should be true in fact in their deliberations. George and Cindy are talking to each other first. Casey came in and sat down. They say good morning, they show Casey their Caylee T-shirts and said Annie had those done. Casey said to thank Annie. Casey is talking about how she is sleeping well. They said it was good to see each other yesterday. Casey asked how dad was doing, he says hi beautiful, he said how glad he is to see her. Even for just a moment and he loves her, the house is too quiet without Casey and Caylee there. Casey said I know, it has been two weeks. George said that the outpouring of love and Casey said that she just wish that more people were focused on finding Caylee. George says his only focus is finding Caylee. He tells her about all that is done to find Caylee. Cindy says Caylee will be on the cover of People magazine on Friday. Casey said good. Cindy asks Casey is there anything..........Casey stops her and says mom, stop it is good. Cindy says is there anything I should tell Caylee. Casey says just tell her I love her. Casey says she just wants to go home, everyday I wake up, I just want to go home. I want to just go home and find her. I can't do anything from where I am at. I feel helpless here not helping her find her. Cindy said what else can I do. Casey says I know you went on Larry King and that is good he is very insightful. Holly went on Larry king. They are talking about Lauren, she had a baby, Casey is crying cuz she wants to see the new baby. Cindy is saying all kinds of old friends are all calling and helping. They are talking about Shirley Pleasea and Cindy said she is not well. Casey said her heart is aching cuz she wants to be back with the family. Caylee said everyday she feels more and more like they will see Caylee again. They talk about Casey seeing a minister. She talked about him telling her story that lifted her heart and spirits. He went to bed and had a very heavy heart and woke up in a closet and he kept laughing and he laughed and laughed and forgot why his heart was heavy. Laughter is good. Cindy said laughing is as good as crying for you. Cindy said I know you are consumed with Caylee but you need to laugh. Casey said it happened right before she saw Jose and she really needed it. They got her morning all mixed up and took her to the court by mistake and sent her back to jail. She saw the same ladies at the bond hearing and they made her laugh and feel better. We have to keep everything in our conversations together quiet about everything, talk about everything else but information. She was so glad she saw them yesterday at the Bond Hearing and she had a nice little field trip, she hadn't slept much the night before. She has been enlightened and feels better since yesterday. I am glad you got the chance to come, I know it was last minute. They came to a jail visit and Casey wasn't there. It was all a mix up. Casey said she was glad she got a shower the night before. George wants to talk to Casey. His parents aren't doing well, he is telling Casey about it. They want the best for her and they are sorry they weren't around enough for Caylee. Casey said it's ok they got to see her enough. They always had asked how everyone is, so they have been in touch. Casey says I know. George said we miss you a lot. I wish I could of been a better dad a better grandpa. Casey, said dad, I can't say this enough you have been the best dad and the very best grandfather ever. You have always been the best mom and dad ever. Casey said we will all be back together, don't worry. Tell mom to eat, I have always been skinny but I am worried about mom. George tells her to eat no matter what they give you and stay positive. Casey says there is so much they can all do, just keep your focus where it should be. The media is trying to show things in a bad light but people know the truth. She wants to talk to Ryan and Annie but in private not in public. She doesn't want anyone else in the public, she wants them to thank Annie again. She declined visits last night, she doesn't know who they were, she needed to sleep. Cindy is crying and says I love you, she is trying to stay strong for you but it is getting harder everyday. Casey says I know it's harder, I know it more than anyone right now. Cindy can't wait till Caylee and Casey are back home. Caylee can't see any of the. Cindy asks if Caylee is being hurt or harmed. Casey said she feels in her gut she is still OK. Cindy said from now on, never let anyone outside of the family have her. Casey says she will never let her out of her sight, she is thinking about jobs and schedules. Cindy says you will never need to work, we will figure it out. Casey says I know she is not just my little girl, she is all of ours. Casey is using the hand analogy and has been telling that story to other people. Tell dad to breath, it is ok. Cindy said it is very hard Cays. Casey said they are doing everything they can to find Caylee. Casey is talking about how she can't say much. Because of the certain circumstances of why she is here, she hasn't written them any letters. She will try to if she finds time to. Casey said her face is wet and she can't wipe her face. She doesn't know who came to see her last night but she is declining all but family now. She appreciates Ryan and Amy wanting to come see her and talk to her. Cindy has talked to them both. Casey says she hasn't been crying everyday, she is keeping her wits about her, this is the strongest she has ever been. She just thinks about Cindy and George and that keeps her from crying. Cindy said she wants to crawl up into a ball but she can't. Casey said that everyone is saying that Lee is the loud one, then Cindy then Casey and dad will always be quiet and process things before talking. We need dad to be like that. Casey said oh man it is good to see you guys. I have to keep saying that. Cindy is glad they waited till this am to come see her. She will see no one but family. She wants her time spent with family. Cindy asks if they should make another jail visit appt. and Cindy says she will do it, they have to schedule it. They have one more visit left open this week. Cindy asks anything you want me to tell Lee? Casey said she just wants to thank him. He told her all about the charities and she thanks all of them for doing different things to find Caylee. Cindy said she would of had more time to talk about Caylee and not the 911 tapes....Casey tells them to defer questions. Audio cuts out. Linda wants to put the next one into evidence and Baez asks for a side bar on that. Sidebar...........I don't know if they are gonna continue with this tape or the next one. I am going to post before I lose this post. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:51:42 PM 9:45 Friday June 2, 2010 Court is in Session: They are at side bar over Jail Visitation Videos........... Side bar is over............. Judge state may proceed. Linda wants to publish a August 3, 2008, George Anthony visits Casey. Judge tells jury it is a true and accurate recording. George says Good Morning beautiful how are you. Casey says hi. George says everyone loves you and misses you, your family, your grandparents, your aunts your uncles. Everyone is reaching out and wants Caylee back. Casey says she just want to see Caylee. George says that is only 6 days till Caylee's 3rd birthday. Casey says she wants to be home before Caylee's birthday. George says they were gonna have a small party and now it will be a big one. George asks about Jose, he is trying to reach out to Jose and can't get a hold of him. Jose is not returning his calls. George is telling him about a charity and how it went. They are exhausting every avenue they can. Donations, foundations, everyone is focused on Caylee. The whole world is focused on Caylee. You name it and they are focused on this. George says we get Caylee home and we will get you figured out. Casey says she wants to be there, when Caylee gets home. George said they have joined a life club of missing children. When you get out and Caylee is with us we are going to focus on other missing children. Nothing else matters. George knows Caylee is close, he tells her the moon and the stars Caylee, Jo Jo loves you, mommy loves you, CeCe loves you. George said this is destroying your mother, he wishes he would of listened more to Casey now and Casey says he was the best dad ever. George wants Casey to talk to a Scott a remarkable man, he is with an agency but he want Casey to talk to him. George will set it up and she can have Jose there. Casey said DAD, I know that but the most important thing is, I WANT TO COME HOME, George said he is trying financially to get her out and has reached out to family for money and it is hard. George said that court matter was already decided before they went to court. He knows a lot about this because of what he use to do. George asks her if she is eating? Casey said she is doing the best she can. Casey said she is doing what she can. He asks if she can write and she said it has to be supervised. She did write with Jose last night. Jose is giving her stuff from Lauren and Annie, cards. George is talking about the charity at Daytona it was woooo. He wants Casey involved in this missing children thing when she gets out. he is talking about songs and videos they showed of Caylee. The played Sponge Bob Square Pants, George knows all of Caylee's songs by heart. George says we love you, we love her, we want you home. George says we want you to help us. Casey said I have done everything I can. George says they can be put into protective custody and they can get Caylee back and Casey said she has talked to Jose about that and they are doing everything they can. George hopes Jose is being genuine, he hopes that Jose is trying to get Caylee back not just protect Casey, Casey takes up for Jose and says he is doing the right thing by her. George wants everyone home. Casey says it is not you or mom's fault. George asks if anyone has threatened the family? Casey says she doesn't know. She only knows from Jose, she doesn't want to watch tv or the news it is all about her and not Caylee. People magazine was all about her but it was all about Casey. Casey seems mad about the People magazine article. She says that people are lying to George and Cindy. Casey wants to come home and hide in her bedroom so no one can talk about her. George tells her that she is a great mom, mom knows that, Lee knows that. Holly knows that and has been on Nancy Grace. Casey said everyone is gonna feel dumb when Caylee comes home. George says and when you come home to. George says everything is gonna change when they come home. The faith will continue and they will become closer. This is the toughest thing they have ever gone through. George says that Lee is just a marketing genius, with what he is doing, he is just remarkable. People want to hire him right now because of Lee's passion and they want to get Mallory and Casey involved in missing people when this is over. George asks her if she needs commissary money and she says she doesn't need anything extra. She has a bible and that is all she needs. George tells her to read certain passages. Casey says she keeps the bible in bed with her and reads it all the time. George asks Casey to talk and she says she has nothing else to say but she loves them. She wants to see Caylee laugh, she wants to be with her baby. Her birthday is just a few days away. George said no more little parties, they are gonna have a big cake and get her a lil red mustang car. That is all material but they need to get all of their lives back in check and be straight with her. George has opened up more to Cindy in the last few weeks than he has in the last few years and it felt good. They all need to be open. George is talking about his Caylee T-shirt, they have more being made, more fliers, more posters, more bill boards. The billboards are everywhere all lit up. Magnetic signs on the cars. She is a beautiful little girl, even prettier than in her pictures. She also has an amazing personality. Casey said she is the best of all of them. She is the best of the four of us. Casey said she is the point of the star. George is thankful that you have your mom's good looks and her personality and she is a fighter. George said where you are at is hard and he never thought anyone in his family would be there, he would trade places with Casey. He is doing everything he can with Caylee. George wants to set up a phone account with Casey so they can talk on the phone. Casey says that is ok. She only gets 3 visits a week but he wants to talk to her more. Casey says she has called but no one has answered, no missed calls are from OCC. They only see private numbers. George asked how it is in there? Casey says it is the best that it can be, it is what it is. She is just worried about Caylee and you guys. George says they have lost weight through stress and things. He says they try to get rest but they go 24 hrs a day, there is no stone unturned. He went into Caylee's room today and wanted to bring Casey from her room but he can't. He went into Casey's room and said prayers. All of their love is present at home. George says I miss you sweetie, I miss your hug, my papa Jo hugs, I miss you so much, I am sorry I have been so tough sometimes. She says I love you too and you were the best, you will always be my buddy besides my dad. George says he is sorry for his tough love. George says he knows how much she loves Lee and mom and Caylee. Casey says she misses Caylee so much. George says she is just like you. They got a postcard from a teacher that had Lee and Casey in elementary school and says how good Lee and Casey were in school. This teacher has reached out, he won't say her name but Casey says she knows who she is. George says so many people are reaching out. Casey said the media is making her look bad because she can't see anyone else in jail. She wants no names out there. Casey said she is strong and got her strength from George and mom and Lee and Caylee. She is stronger now and won't hold back her love anymore, now. George is talking about strangers who are reaching out. wooow. Casey is glad to know there are so many ppl reaching out. George says ppl have big hearts out there and they are supporting Casey and Caylee. Casey said she is getting letters from all over the country for support. George said it is remarkable, he is worried about Casey and wants her to keep eating. George says if anything pops in your head...she cuts him off an says she will tell Jose if she thinks anything else. Jose came to her last night and his heart is in the right place, he was there till midnight last night. She met a new atty with Jose and he is a good guy. George is talking about America's most wanted, John Walsh, all stops are being pulled. George is not trying to be part of the media focus but they have all joined a club now, the missing children club. Casey says she is going to be part of missing children when she gets out. The missing children are so important. George says if you have any ideas besides posters, billboards? He has a bracelet and a trust fund just for Caylee. Mom and I are trying everything they can to get Casey out. They try everyday harder and harder. Cindy got sick last night, she hit a barrier but you can't stop her. Casey says I know mom will be ok, she just keeps going. George tell Casey that Cindy will just keep going and going, she is strong and Casey is strong like her mom. They have five minutes left. George has to talk to the media after this and he will tell them they had a good visit. Casey is worried about this being on TV later. George told the media to be compassionate. They wanted to know what George is gonna ask her, he didn't know what he was gonna say, none of it is scripted and never has been. Casey says that she just loves that little girl more than anything. George hopes she is having fun and watching videos and is ok, he hopes who ever has her is being good to her, he is driving places asking questions. George said they need to know everything, Casey says she has told them everything. Casey wants out to find Caylee. Casey wants to be careful. George said they say we are talking in code, we are not. Casey says she is telling everything she can but the media is messing it up. One minute left, Casey says I love you and miss you and I love Caylee and miss her. We will all be back together soon. George says he wants to here Caylee say Jo Jo swim, Jo Jo walk? I want to pull her in her wagon. George says I love you. Court is in recess.........they will play the final jail visitation when they come back in 15 minutes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:53:10 PM 10:47 Court is back in session Friday, June 2, 2011 Judge says Mason canceled the hearing at 8:30 in the morning. LDB says that she wants no stipulation about statements made against Baez in the tapes. Baez, says he wants a stipulation for op ions being expressed about him by the Anthony family toward Baez. The judge says these tapes have been out there since the beginning of time and he is not going to hear bickering about it now. Returns the jury. JBP is fed up with Baez. ::piggy:: Judge tells the jury he has the hamburger issue worked out, lol. He is working on two other matters but he is working on cost. The budget will make a difference in what he does. The jury may not get both requests but they may get one. Do they have a preference between steak and Italian. LDB publishes the next Jail Visitation. August 14, 2008 Jail Visitation. Judge reads that his is a true and accurate recording of the visitation. It should be considered as true in your deliberations. LDB wants it read again. Not sure why. George and Cindy are at jail visit. Casey comes in later. They say good morning, George says good morning beautiful. Casey asks, why is mom crying already? George says cuz we haven't seen you. George asks how she is, she says she was asleep, they are sorry they woke her up. Casey is pointing out their new butterfly Caylee t-shirts. Casey is reading them, they say fly home baby. Cindy is getting on phone crying, Casey is laughing at her. Casey asks her how she is feeling, she says she is not doing well. Lee is sick and dad is blowing up at the media. Cindy said they said this morning that CAYLEE IS DEAD, SHE DROWNED IN THE POOL. Casey said what else is new. Casey said she saw it too. Cindy said she is getting hate mail, Casey says she has only gotten positive mail. Cindy wants something to go on. Casey says she has nothing else to give them, Casey is getting mad. She just sits there and waits everyday. Cindy asked her if Jose asked her who she wants to speak with? She says she picked DAD. Cindy says fine, here is your dad and hands him the phone. George gets on the phone and tells Casey she is the boss. Casey said no she isn't. She has told Jose everything and the media is not helping. The LE did not even give her 24 hours to help find Caylee before putting her, here. George wants to meet with Casey. Casey said she already discussed this and she said yes. George says it has not been set up. George wants to meet with her privately, Casey says that Jose is keeping her advised of everything. George says Jose should not be in the middle of Casey and Caylee. She is taking up for Jose focusing on her. She said she knows where everyone's priorities are, she has known from day one. Casey is upset now, having a fit, she wants to speak now, the media is gonna have a field day. CAN SOMEONE LET ME, COME ON, NO ONE IS LETTING ME SPEAK, GIVE ME 3 SECONDS TO SPEAK, I AM NOT IN CONTROL OVER THIS. MY ENTIRE LIFE HAS BEEN TAKEN FROM ME, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN TAKEN FROM ME. JOSE IS THE ONLY ONE I CAN COUNT ON. THE MEDIA IS SPINNING EVERYTHING I AM SAYING. SHE DOESN'T WANT TO GIVE THE MEDIA ANYMORE TO THROW AT HER. Cindy says this will all go away when Caylee comes home. Casey says she has been here for a month, what else and she do, she has been away for a month, Cindy says I am sorry. Casey says I am trying but I need to be home to help. Here all I do is focus on myself and my case right now. Cindy says no the focus needs to be on Caylee. What else can we do. Casey says I don't know. CASEY IS GONNA HANG UP, SHE IS FRUSTRATED AND ANGRY AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME SHE HAS BEEN ANGRY THIS ENTIRE TIME, SHE CANT EVEN SWALLOW RIGHT NOW. Cindy says she has been in Lakeville and Casey says so? I have nothing right now. Cindy says she has nothing either and Casey says she has dad and Lee and the community but Casey has nothing and no one. Cindy said Jose has to honor her wishes. Cindy tells her that Jose is in New York, Casey says he is there for me. Cindy said to talk to Dominic while he is gone. Casey said she knows who she can talk to and who she can't. She hopes they tell her what she is honestly up against. Casey says I know what I am up against. Cindy said we dint have the means to get you out and Casey said you did have the opportunity and you blew it. She is the maddest she has ever been right now. She is so mad and hurt right now. George says he is sorry they are upsetting her. Casey says they are to expect her to know something new right now, after she has been in jail for a month. She has given everything she knows. George says it is just hard, they have never been through this before. Casey said they need to stick together. She is mad at Cindy for saying Cindy has nothing when she is the one sitting in jail. They have each other all she has is Jose. Casey wants them to understand her side on this. She knows all of their side but no one will see her side. She doesn't want to give anyone else anything to throw back at her at trial. George said he is just trying to help. Casey said she wants to see Lee but he would interrogate her. Mom would dominate her. Dad you and I have been separated for awhile and she only wants to see her dad, George says thank you. She said it was hard to choose between the 3 of you and I made a choice and I want you DAD. Cindy collapsed. Casey said it was a hard decision but she wants to see her DAD. Casey say she is just sitting there biding her time, George wants her to expedite this and tell them I want to see my DAD and I want to see my DAD now, Casey said she has tried that. It didn't work. George is gonna do this on his own and get them together. Casey says OK. George asks her how she got through Caylee's birthday, she said she didn't she had her head under the covers and read her bible, it was the first time she broke down and she is still recovering from that. Hearing that mom made her special chili and people were over and she is mad about that. George said it was just us and mom made her great chili and cornbread. There was one young guy that came, they never met him before and let him in, he was alone. Casey said well the bible says to love thy neighbor and she is glad they let him come. George said he was a great guy and they are glad he came. George is asking about her eating and she is saying that she eats and sleeps so the jail won't worry and bother about her. George says Casey is lucky to be in protective custody and Casey says no other people are too but they aren't bombarded by the media. She is sorry she upset mom today but she had to let her emotion out today, she is so frustrated. George thought she would not see them today and is thankful she did. They think this won't be released. Casey says I am an emotional wreck and she wants this personal. She doesn't want this to be another business transaction. She is sorry she upset mom but she is upset and getting sick too. Cindy is on the phone, Casey says I am sorry I upset you. I can't hold my frustration in all the time. Cindy says you don't know how hard this is? Casey says ya cuz I'm in Jail? Cindy says it is obscene what people are saying. Casey says she hears it too and it sickening and disgusting and people need to get a life and shut up. They are sad people passing judgments about stuff they don't know, stuff is all fabricated and twisted. I am not giving the media anything when I get out of here, sucks for them but too bad. I will do whatever the Hell I have to. Cindy says do you still think she is ok? Casey says I feel stronger every day that she is coming home. Cindy wants to know what to say to Zanny? Casey says just tell her I forgive her and I want my baby back. Cindy says do you think they will actually give her back? Casey says I don't know, I hope so, the family is broken and it's a tragedy. She doesn't want to be one of those parents that have to wonder every day if she is gonna wonder where Caylee is ever day for the rest of her life. Casey is mad at Cindy now for asking for info and she says that is why she wants to talk to DAD, only. She chose DAD for a reason, she took a half hour to think of who she wanted but she picked DAD. It was a hard choice but she made it. Cindy said it was hard going in Caylee's room now and Casey says I saw you in there in People magazine. Cindy says I want my girls back, I know where you are but I want Caylee. Casey says she is not ok in jail but Cindy says at least you are safe. Cindy says I don't know if they are feeding her, Casey says mom I feel she is ok, even on her birthday I could feel that entire day, she was still ok. Cindy says a lot of people we don't know are sending Caylee balloons and stuffed animals. Casey says she is glad that have support and Casey has gotten letters of support. Cindy wants to know why someone can send her a bible but she couldn't. Jose tried to give it to her, they don't know who has the bible from Cindy. Jose probably still has that bible. George is talking, George wants her to write Sheriff Kevin Beary and she wants to see him and do it today. Casey said how am I going to get it to him. George is telling her how and she says she is going to do that. They can make it a private face to face meeting. Without anyone else being there. George trusts the people but Casey doesn't trust them. Now Casey doesn't trust it at all. George tells her how quick it can happen and gives her the info about Kevin Beary again. Casey says she will do that this morning. George says great, then I can hug you and talk to you. Casey says even then all I can do is tell you I love you. Casey says she wants to do this. George says I love you so much and Casey says she loves him and she loves lee and she is sorry she missed a visit with Lee and she is sorry she missed a visit with George and Cindy. Casey says that she knows Lee got sick from running himself ragged. George says this is their 24 hour a day job. Casey wants to be home so she can get Caylee back faster. George tells her again to set up the meeting with him. Casey says she was the boss but she isn't know, she is being told what do to everyday and when to do it. Cindy is on the phone, Casey said it is hard on everybody and she wishes she could make it easier. Cindy wants to know if she wants more visits? Casey says they can show these videos and Cindy says they are going to pick and choose what they put on the TV. Cindy says the media is being nice to them again. Casey says good, if they are nice talk to them if not don't. She says she is not giving them S&it cuz she is a victim as much as the rest of you. Please give Lee my love and Mallory my love, I love you mom. George is on the phone and says know you can trust me. She says I know that. Visit is over. Judge calls a sidebar...................... Judge tells jury to ignore opinions made about Baez. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:54:08 PM 11:42 Friday, June 2, 2011 Court in session: Next witness, Charity Beasley, LDP is questioning her. She is a CSI for the sheriff. She collected items. She had the car towed to the forensic lab, she sealed the car with tape prior to it being towed from the Hopespring Drive, she followed the tow truck, she followed the entire way and turned it over to CSI Boise. She was given items at the residence by Cindy Anthony. Some of the items were given in a blue plastic crate. A doll, a backpack, a toothbrush, misc items and plastic hangers. She was also given a laptop by Cindy. It was unplugged and off. Did she try to turn it on? No she did not. She filled out a property form when she collected the items. She recorded the items on the property form with the name and number of the laptop. She refreshed her memory of the name and number of the laptop. It is the one she collected, she recorded the info about it at the Anthony residence. She provided the other items to CSI Boise, she gave the laptop to another CSI Kahn. Mason is up, When you went to the Hopespring Drive had you talked to Det Melich? No. You didn't go there blind, what did you know? I was told it was a missing persons case. Mr Mason is telling her to look at him, she is looking at the jury. Mason asks her about the towing of the car, where you there to be official about the towing of the car? Yes, I was there to see to it and seal it. Mason asks did you seal the trunk? Yes. Did you smell any odors from the trunk of that car? She does not recall. Mason asks her this computer you were handed by Cindy, did you open it? No. Did you look to see if it had a live battery? No. You just handed it over to Ms Khan? Yes. Were you involved in anything else in this case? No sir I was not. No questions by Linda, witness excused. Jury is recessed for lunch until 1:30 pm. Talking to the jury about their lunch variety changing next week, they will be taken to another floor for a buffet to be brought in. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:55:37 PM 1:30pm Court is in Session: Mason and LDB taking up matters before the jury comes in about not wasting the court's time. Jury is coming in next witness is Wilda McBride. LDB is questioning her. How are you employed? Orange county sheriff's office for 10yrs. Worked in Missing Persons unit as a Missing Person's Unit. She is not a sworn law officer. She assists them doing background work. In July, 2008 she met with George, did he take you to a location off of Narcoosee Rd. Caylee was missing and she was told by Det Melich to take him to Johnson's Wrecker on July 16, 2008 to recover a garbage bag. it was already dark out, the gate was closed they called the number on the gate and called the number on the gate and they gained entrance into Johnson's Towing, she showed him OC Sheriff ID. George Anthony was there and showed her which dumpster the garbage bag was in. She had a camera with her. She is shown the dumpster they went to in a picture, the photo is accurate, this was taken prior to them looking in the dumpster. The picture is published to the jury. There are sections to the lid of the dumpster, they were not that way when she got there, they were opened by her and George Anthony and an employee of Johnson's Wrecker, nothing inside was touched prior to taking this photo. Showing a picture of 2 trash bags inside the dumpster the one on the right with blue handles is the one in question with a pizza box inside. This photo is accurate prior to removing it from the dumpster. It is published to the jury. It is a white large trash bag, partially filled, with blue handles showing. The witness is circling the bag they removed. She never opened that bag, no one else touched the bag but her and she had gloves on, she retrieved it and put it in a brown paper bag. She covered the top of the brown paper bag with another paper bag to fully enclose the white bag. She closed her official vehicle trunk and no one had access to the bag. George never touched the bag, he was dropped off at home on the way to the OC Sheriff's office. She took it directly to CSI Bloise. She never had access to it again, she just did the property item form for it and then Det melich came down. She was also retrieved other items from 4937 Hopespring Drive on July 17th, 2008, digital camera and a tower computer. The time she got them was 12:15pm, July 17th, 2008, she and Tanya Depanio also was with her. They were an HP Pavilion Tower and a Polaroid Digital camera. She took them to the OC Sheriff's office and turned them in as evidence. Witness is excused......... Next witness Christine Narkiewizz........ LDB questioning her..... She is a CSI for OC Sheriff's office, she has degree's in criminal science, she is getting her masters in criminal science, in July she had been employed since March 2008. Det Melich gave her crime scene items. She was asked to go to OC Correctional Facility to take samples from Casey Anthony. She refers to her report, she arrived at 2144 hours, she got Buccal swabs from Casey from both sides of her cheek. She used sealed sterile items to obtain samples, she wore gloves and a mask. Linda shows her a package containing 2 Buccal swabs from the left cheek of Casey Anthony's mouth, the envelope is sealed, she is breaking the seal and looking inside. She says those are the swabs she took, she sees her handwriting and seals on the swabs. Linda hands her another envelope and she says it contains 2 Buccal swabs from the right cheek of Casey Anthony, she opens the item and says it does contain those items, she can see her ID on them. Her handwriting and her seals. They were turned over to CSI Bloise, they were sealed prior to handing them over. They were taken and handed over the same day, July 21, 2008. She also collected hair standards from Casey Anthony. She followed FBI protocol for loose hair and pulled hair. Casey rubbed through her hair and as hair fell out it fell on a brown paper. She pulled the other hairs out of Casey Anthony's hair. The paper was part of a large roll in her CSI van and only taken out when utilized. Linda is showing her another envelope, the witness says it has her handwriting on it and her initial with the seal and the date, it also said loose head hair standards. The item was sealed by her on the day taken, July 21, 2008, it was turned over to CSI Bloise. They are talking about pulled head hair. She used disposable tweezers but they didn't work properly so she used her hands. She used gloves and took care to make sure she didn't mix in her skin cells or hair with the pull head hair of Casey Anthony. Linda is showing her another envelope, she says it is her handwriting and it has her initials and the date and that it contains pulled hair samples of Casey Anthony on July 21, 2008, they were sealed and she turned them over to CSI Bloise. Linda is showing her 3 envelopes, looking at first one, she recognizes it is her handwriting, initials and date, it says 4 toothbrushes from Caylee Anthony that she obtained from Det. Melich, it was sealed and dated July 28, 2008. The next envelope has her handwriting, initials and date on it, it contains one hair brush of Caylee Anthony, it was sealed July 28, 2008. Hands her the third envelope, has her initials, handwriting and the date it contains one comb of Caylee Anthony, dated July 28, 2008 given to her by Det Melich, Linda hands her another envelope, she recognizes it, has her initials, handwriting and seal, it says one thermometer of Caylee Anthony, given to her by Det Melich. She points out Casey as the one that she took samples from, Baez stipulated to it so she didn't have to point her out in court. Baez up.............. You wore gloves? Yes. That is to protect cross contamination? Yes. You take extraordinary precautions while taking DNA samples? Correct. You also wore a mask to avoid contamination? Yes. While collecting DNA you don't speak? Yes. You are aware now that you don't need lots of blood to get DNA? Yes. In the process of gathering DNA, you also know about touch DNA? Yes. The packaging you use, protects the DNA sample? Yes. If we go back 20 years we can still get that DNA? Yes, if has not all been used. Witness is excused. Next witness is Geraldo Bloise. He is employed by OC Sheriff's office for 11 years as CSI2, he has prior experience with being a police officer in San Juan Puerto Rico, he has training with the FBI. He has a BA and a Masters Degree in CSI. He processes crime scenes and documents, collects and preserves crime scene evidence, he does not do analysis. On July 16, 2008 he received a white Pontiac Sun fire. He got it through Det Beasley, it came on a tow truck, to the forensic garage. It went into a bay. It arrived in good condition, all doors, hood and trunk were sealed. WISH ME LUCK, I CAN BARELY UNDERSTAND HIM, lol Linda is showing him a pic of the White Pontiac Sun fire, he is showing on the picture where the seals are located. Picture published to the jury. Shows him next photo of the front of the car, he shows her the seals on the hood. Published to jury. Shows another pic of car, driver side, points out the seals. He also obtained other items from Det Beasley, they were in a black plastic garbage bag. Linda hands him a brown envelope and another brown envelope. He recognizes them because of his handwriting and the date, this is a black plastic bag with yellow handles given to him by Det Beasley. He was also give a blue plastic crate, the crate contained a doll, a child's backpack, a toothbrush, other paper items and plastic clothes hangers. He has come into contact with the odor of human decomposition, about 30 to 40 times and has gone to get fingerprints of decomposing bodies at the ME. He has had experience with different levels of decomposition. In dumpsters and landfills. He broke the seal on the driver side door first, he immediately smelled the odor of decomp coming from the car. That is the first part of the car he inspected and documented. To document it, he took pics of the exterior and interior, documented what he observed in notes to use in a written report. Showing a pic of the gas gauge. He determined the gas gauge was working properly, he took a pic first, then poured in more gas and took another pic to show the gas gauge was working, this was several months later. His opinion is the gas gauge was working correctly. Published all of that to the jury. Showing a pic of the driver's seat interior, published to the jury. Shows another pic of the driver's seat. The pic shows sunglasses a black CD case and a brown belt. Published to jury. Shows another pic of the rear passenger side with a baby car seat and a pair of black shoes. Shows another pic of the baby car seat, it fairly and accurately shows the car that day. Published to jury. Shows another pic of driver side backseat, shows a pair of shoes and a pair of boots and a fabric softener sheet. He knows that to be a dryer sheet. Published to jury. Shows another pic, it is underneath the vehicle, it fairly and accurately shows the underneath of the car on July 16, 2008, published to jury. He determined that there were items under the car. He did find a dry leaf under the front tire and under the back area. There were no animal parts underneath the car. Next pic shows the trunk of the car, it fairly and accurately shows the trunk of the car on July 16, 2008, published to jury. What is circled near the center? A plastic item that holds the spare tire down. He removed the plastic item. He placed markers in the trunk to mark items in the trunk, shows a pic of these markers in the trunk, published to jury. Marker A was for a dryer sheet, a diff dryer sheet than the rear inside. The marker B shows dirt residue. Next picture shows the back area of the spare tire cover well, it has been removed from the car. The spare tire cover was removed, the picture fairly and accurately shows the well after the cover was removed. The picture shows a piece removed, wood and carpet. Next picture shows Marker C the inside of the trunk the location where he located a dry leaf. He circled the dry leaf. The spare tire was with the car when he received it, the spare tire would of covered the dry leaf. The spare tire cover made of wood and carpet would of covered the area where the dry leaf was found. Court is in recess at 2:55pm for a break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:56:41 PM 3:10pm Court is Back in session, Friday June 3, 2011 Linda is back up, Geraldo Bloise is the witness. Showing him a pic of the trunk area when he removed the trunk liner and the tire. Next photo shows the liner after it was removed from car. It is published to the jury. Looking at markers, letter L and letter R, showing left side and right side of spare tire cover. It is one piece of continuous fabric that covered the trunk at one time. Next photo shows a close up of the removed trunk liner, the left side area, the pointer 12 shows a hair he found, it is published to the jury. Pointer Marker 12 shows a single human hair, he took a close up of the hair. Show the photo of this. This is a close up of the hair. it fairly and accurately depicts the hair. Published to the jury. Showing him in the same photo a small red fabric fiber by the hair, he is outlining where the hair is. Showing then where the hair was located on the trunk picture where that hair would of been if the liner was still in the trunk. Shows next photo, it is a blue plastic crate, he received from Det Beasley. He secured the whole crate in a box and then secured it in an evidence locker. Next photo is of a child's backpack, then preserved it as evidence. He collected other evidence from the trunk over the next days, other hairs, dryer sheet. Linda hands him an envelope and he recognizes it with his initial and the tag number and the time 1447 hours and 7-17-08 and where he found this hair. This is a different hair than the one from the pointer marker 12, this hair came from the front of the trunk, he collected it with a tweezer with a magnifier. He then sealed it, preserved it and submitted it to the lab. Gives him next envelope, he recognizes it as his name, 7-17-2008 1440 hours, it is a dryer sheet found in the trunk of the car. Next envelope, he recognizes his name, 7-17-08, 1600 hours, location collected inside the trunk floor, petri dish containing dirt and hair. Next envelope, he recognizes his name and collected inside trunk, well area, dirt particles, 7-17-2008, 12:16am. Next envelope, he recognizes, located well trunk, right side, petri dish with dirt and hair. Next envelopes, recognizes 7-22-2008 1800 hours, location, spare tire cover, petri dish with hair. Next envelope, recognizes location spare tire cover, petri dish with hair. Next envelope, recognizes 7-23-08 1600 hours, location bottom of the radiator under car, dry leaf. Next envelope, recognizes 7-23-08 2348, location on backseat under black shoes, dryer sheet from backseat of car. Next envelope, recognizes 7-25-08 1400 hours, location under front liner of trunk, petri dish with hair. Next one, recognizes 7-25-08 location liner of trunk, petri dish of hair. Next item, 7-25-08 1410hrs, located left sight of trunk liner, petri dish of hair. Next one, 7-25-08 1415 hrs, location left side trunk liner, petri dish with hair. Next one, 7-25-08, 1418hrs, location left side of trunk liner, petri dish with hair. Next one, 7-25-08, 1420hrs, location left liner by turn signal, petri dish with hair. Next item, 7-25-08, 1422 hrs, location left side liner, petri dish with hair. This is the item 21 in the photograph with marker 12. All of this evidence is sealed and not tampered with in any way. Next item, witness is standing down to examine it. He recognizes item 7-17-08, came from interior of trunk, description, right side liner, left side liner, spare tire cover. The left and right are separate, the spare tire cover has been cut, there are 3 pieces in this box of evidence. He takes the witness stand again. Linda is opening the box....Jeff is helping, opening with a scissor. Witness is coming down to the box. Helping to open it. Bloise puts on gloves.....seeing item #26 spare tire cover, Bloise retrieves it and shows it to jury. Linda is marking it with a yellow note. He sat that down. Reaches in for Item #22, it is piece of the spare tire cover, from the spare tire well. There are other items in the box, the left side of the liner, the plastic cover from the trunk. Reaches in for the right side of liner, Linda is marking these items as they come out. Witness is taking stand again. Linda hands him an envelope, he recognizes it item #27, 7-??-08, 1300 hrs, two swabs the trunk. Five minute recess till 4:05 pm, stretch break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:57:40 PM I want to add this to my summary, that piece of cut trunk liner seems to be Red's CAN OF DEATH!!!!! Hope they get to open it for the jurors, it still must reek, it has been sealed allllllll this time!!!!!! Here is to hoping. ::MonkeyGavel:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 05:58:44 PM June 3, 2011 4:10pm Court is in session: Jury is coming back in........... Geraldo Bloise is on the witness stand........ Linda is showing him a box, he recognizes it as item #2, July 17, 2008 12:30am, piece of tire cover. Next item#31 7-25-08 5pm, piece of spare tire cover. Linda is introducing Item #1 a human hair, introducing Article#2 Dryer sheet. Introducing Article #4, dirt. Introducing Article #5 petri dish containing dirt residue. Next Article #5 petri dish hair, next article #12 Dryer sheet. Next piece of hair, next Article 16 as a hair, next Article 17 as a hair, next Article 18 as a hair. Next Article #19, as a hair. Next Article 20 as a hair. Next Article #21 as a hair. Next Article #7, petri dish containing hair. Next Article #8 as a hair. Next Article #9 as vegetation. Linda has no further questions......... Baez is up and pleasing the court. When he first got the car he did an exterior inspection, then an internal one, that would include the driver side the back seat and the trunk? Yes. Upon opening the door you smelled decomp? Yes, You don't know if it was human or not? Yes. That could be animal, meat or human? Yes, to all. You have smelled various bodies in stages of decomp? Yes. In various environments? Yes. One of the common things you see when you see a decomp body you see maggots? Yes, depending on the stage. Would you see thousand to hundred of thousands of maggots? Yes. That would include puparia? Yes but that is not my expertise, so I don't feel comfortable talking about that. I am not going to ask you to identify them. OK. When you go to ME, you mainly smell formaldehyde? Yes. That is what ME's use? Yes but different areas, some have no chemicals, just the body. Do you smell formaldehyde and fecal matter at the ME too? Yes. It is hard to pinpoint, what comes from what? Depends, if i do fingerprints of a decomp body that is unique, once you smell it you never forget that smell. You can tell the difference between chemical and decomp, you will never forget that smell. Does decomp smell change? Yes, it can depending on the age of decomp. Once a body orifices are exposed it smells different than a newly dead body? Yes. After you did you gas gauge experiment, you never took it for a spin, did you? No. Did you get information about the car before you got it? No. You weren't aware that Cindy put in the dryer sheets or sprayed it with Fe Breeze? No. Were those dry leaves sent out anywhere for analysis? Yes. Did they assist this investigation? Not to my knowledge. Did you focus on the trunk? No. You did a thorough search of the trunk. Correct. Part of that search is using tweezers and pulling out hairs? Yes. You also vacuumed it with a filter? Yes. That could pick up the most minute particles? Yes. You also used an alternate light source? Yes. You used that to identify stains? Yes. When you did that you found a portion of the car that had a stain? Yes. It is not uncommon that trunks have stains? It is possible. Fairly common though right? Yes. You used a product called Blue Star? Yes. This was to help you identify blood? Yes. Blood would be important right? Yes. Blue Star is better than Lumanal? Yes. When you sprayed the stain area with Blue Star tell the jury what the results were. Negative results. You then went a step further and tried to get a presumptive result? Yes. Tell the jury what the presumptive test was? Negative results. Did you swab for DNA even though the Blue Star and Presumptive tests were negative you also did a swab for DNA? Yes. What were the results? I don't know. How many hairs did you find? 12 hairs in total. When did you collect the first set of hairs? July 17, 2008. These hairs are of diff lengths? Yes. They were different sizes and colors? I couldn't tell all the hairs. How many hairs did you select by hand? 12 by hand. Some where dark brown? Don't remember. Asked more stupid questions, sustained. Did you find animal hair in the car? I don't know. You are experienced in trace recovery? Yes. He is telling the jury that trace evidence is minute evidence. As part of your job you don't want to contaminate any evidence, you wear a white jumpsuit and a hairnet and gloves and mask. Yes. This is all to protect evidence? Right. That is because we all shed 100 hairs a day? Yes. To find hairs in the trunk of the car is common? I don't think that is very common. Baez gives examples of hair transfer and the witness says that is possible. How old is this car? 98. Have you ever inspected older cars? Sometimes. Those are usually much more dirty than a car that is a year old? Depends on the owner. Did you send each and every hair for Mitrochondrial DNA? I don't know, I just sent them to the lab. You send evidence to labs all the time? Yes. You are aware of where to send evidence? Correct. Witness says he just puts DNA, he doesn't say Mitro DNA or reg DNA. The lab makes that decision. How many by vacuum? 11. So now you have 23? Yes. How many times did you look for hair? 12 times. Did you search the car well for hair? Yes. This car is as thorough as you have been with any car? I searched it more times than I have before. Question about Dr Henry Lee, objection, JBP did loud SUSTAINED........went to side bar immediately. Back from side bar..... Linda moves to strike the question from the record, JBP won't but tells the jury to disregard it. Baez says the defense went in to inspect the car? Yes. While we were there additional hairs were found? Yes. Were animal hairs found? No, I destroyed the notes when I made my report. You wrote this report Jan 1, 2009, this was 6 months after you inspected the car? Yes. He explains that is the date his supervisor saw it. It was signed and dated after he wrote it. Was it not reviewed till 6 months later? Yes. You testified about some garbage you received as evidence? Yes, trash. You had some trash that was given to you? Yes. Was it moist trash? Yes. Baez says OK we will talk trash. In this trash there were multiple items? Correct. A bottle of chewing tobacco spit? He can't find it. Baez asks him if he can find it in his report? He says he sees no spit, in his report, just a can of empty chewing tobacco. He is talking about a bottle with brown liquid. Baez asks him if this is chewing tobacco spit? He doesn't know what is in it. Baez asks about packages of food, objection, Sustained. Baez is done Linda up....When you referred to negative results of Blue Star, what did they refer to? Blood. How do you take notes? Handwritten notes, log. Do you take your notes and make a report, then can destroy your notes, based on LE policy? Yes He gives the legal decision he uses to destroy the notes. Universal process is used to prevent precautions? Yes. Did the defense wear hair nets? NO. Based on your experience you have, do you have an opinion of what the odor of decomp is? Yes, human decomposition, based on 23 years of experience, IT WAS THE SMELL OF HUMAN DECOMPOSITION. Baez is up........ The notes destroyed can never be seen by the defense? No. Because you don't have the notes, we can't know if everything you noted is in your report. No, everything is in my report. Did you testify saying decomp that means you can't tell if it was human and you answered correct? It's possible. You have now changed with LDB to HUMAN DECOMPOSITION? She asked me my opinion of what I smelled with my experience, you didn't, I always put decomposition in my reports. Witness is excused, subject to recall. 5:08 Jury is excused for the day Any other matters JBP asks? Nothing from state or defense. Karen Lowe is the next witness tomorrow for hair-banding. JBP wants a rough guesstimate when the state will wrap up? LDB says Friday, June 17th, 2008. Court is in recess till 9am tomorrow morning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:10:01 PM Good Morning monkeys, looks like its almost time to start, let's hope we see a lot of this. ::boxingbaez:: and quite a bit of this ::boxingcasey:: A saw one crazy pundit on Dr. Drew last night, I don't think she had ever heard of the case before..............we are lucky to still have a TV left, lol. Just us for Caylee ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:10:56 PM 9:am Sat, June 4, 2011 Court is in session: Next witness is Karen Lowe, FBI Agent: Baez is renewing objections based on Frye Hearings, JBP is telling him he is kind of crazy and tells him why, has to do with a mini-Frye hearing, that is what they have Frye Hearings for. Baez is trying to cite law but I can't understand him and I don't think the judge can either. Something about a voir dire and a predicate. JBP will just renew Baez's objections and it will be his previous rulings. The state must lay a proper foundation. If there is some problem they will voir dire her. The judge says I will just renew your objections. Baez wants to voir dire the witness and JBP says well we had that at the Frye Hearing, so the simple answer to that is no. Unless she testifies to something totally different than at the Frye Hearing about her qualifications at the Frye hearing, we have established that already. Judge is trying to school Baez but it isn't working, JBP says you can maintain your objections but I have RULED!!!!! JBP says we have wasted enough time. Bringing jury in: Karen Korsbaeg Lowe is the next witness: FBI CSI for FBI Quantico, VA BA in Science, Master's in Science, various courses. Spent over a year in training with hair and fibers. She was qualified as an examiner for 13 years. She has been an expert at trials all over the country, most of her testimony is about microscopic trace evidence, mostly hair. Baez doing brief voir Dire. This is the first time you have ever testified on hair banding? Yes. Side Bar.......Side Bar over..... The topics you are going to cover today in your testimony, it was a 6 month course? Yes. The courses that you have taken on this topic you are going to testify on today, was it 3? Yes, the year long training had 3 just on hair. The rest is on the job training? Yes. Sustained no further questions. End of voir dire, she is an expert on trace evidence and hair. Jeff Ashton is up.............. How long has trace and hair evidence been around? Late 1800's. Hair from the 1930's. Hair is done in the steps, Collection, Comparison and Identification. Hair is not like DNA, one hair can not be said to come from one hair but they can be excluded with different characteristics. Microscopically hair can be examined to find out race, how they were taken, other characteristics. Are there signs of decomp related to hair, yes the first papers were in 1988, hairs that showed hair in apparent decomp. A decomp banding made of air spaces. Post mortem root band seems to be between soft and hard carotene. In 1998 there was another case study on this. Another paper was done on this same thing. Another paper a two part paper done by Lych, they used 22 samples for decomp, they saw root banding at 2 days, 4 days etc, etc. Hair under all kinds of weather and circumstances. These were taken from known decomposed bodies. One of them was hair taken from live hairs to see if they would get the same banding, they did not. Does the research show what causes the post mortem decomp banding, no it just shows the banding. Jeff is going to use a chart with this witness, the witness will step down to the chart. The chart shows different Human Hair Roots and pictures of them, microscopically. Using the chart, Jeff asks her to explain the chart, antigen is active growth stage, the hair cuticle reacts with the internal root sheath. They are shed before death and show no root banding. The only hairs that we see with root banding is antigen hair, hairs still growing out of the head. Decamp hair is tapered and can be hardened and come to a point. The appearance of decamp can not be replicated by any known process other than decamp. Shows four examples of apparent decamp root banding. Witness is taking the stand again. Done with the chart. Is it a mathematically precise process, no it is a visual process, although they have found some math related, just not a standard yet. When your doing an examination of a hair, are you looking at the hair in 2D or 3D. She is looking at the hair through 3D. She has hairs in a reference collection to compare hairs to. They use known hair examples. Guesstimate of decomp hairs over 2000 cases is a fair number, doesn't even want to guess at the number. When you have seen decomp banding, where they already known to be of dead people? Yes. How frequently have you seen post mortem banding? Yes. Were you provided hair in the Caylee Anthony case? Yes. Showing her items. She is shown a sample and recognizes it with her lab markings, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it, shown another and recognizes it. Where you given certain items from known individuals? Yes. Shows her item, she recognizes it, shows her another item, she recognizes it. Shows another item and she recognizes it, from Cindy Anthony. Shown another item and she recognizes it, from George Anthony. Were you also submitted a hair brush as a purported hair brush and comb from Caylee Anthony. She is shown a purported hair brush from Caylee Anthony and recognizes it. She is shown a purported comb from Caylee Anthony and recognizes it. How many hairs did you find from these items. She is referring to notes. At least 11 or more hairs. In any of the hairs did you find any that showed decomp? Yes, one did, Q-12. Shows her Q-12, state exhibit 99. the hair is a Caucasian hair that had a post mortem dark band. She examined it with a stereo microscope and another microscope in 3d. It was 9 inches long, light brown. She compared it to a sample from Casey and Caylee, it did not compare to Casey's but it did compare to a hair from Caylee's hair brush. She concluded they were similar. Based upon that examination do you have an opinion that the hair in Q-12 had apparent decomp? Yes. Has that ever been found under other circumstances? No, only decomp has been shown to show that root banding. She re-mounted the hair and sent it to another lab. Showing her another exhibit, she is opening with scissors. She recognizes it as the portion of Q-12 that she sent for Mitro DNA. Introducing that into evidence. Why do you use the word apparent decomp? Because that has not yet been shown to be replicated under any other circumstance so they still use the word apparent to be scientific. Baez is pleasing the court....... This goes back to the 1930's in the FBI Labs? People still have hair but the science has changed? Yes. What has changed is the FBI's position? There have numerous trials. Baez is asking stupid questions, I can't understand they are Sustained. You have read reports organized by Congress, that is respected, is it not? She doesn't know how to answer.......going to side bar. I am having a hard time typing for Baez, he is not making sense, so I can't type it by ear, lol. Mid morning recess....... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:12:29 PM 10:25 Sat June 4, 2011 Court is in session: Recess is over...... JBP is asking Baez about a paper called "Strengthening Forensic Science", Baez wants to use it but JBP said that it may or may not be a learned treatise. Baez is citing law or trying to. Showing that law to Jeff Ashton. Baez is reading to fast and JBP tells him to slow down. Baez is reading something into the record that hair analysis is unreliable. JBP tells Baez that she did not say it was identical, she said it was similar. She testified to this already. Jeff Ashton wants this to be proffered cuz it makes no sense. JBP wants to take it through the numbers with the witness, this is no different than what she testified to in her direct examination. He is schooling Baez and told him you didn't even have this with you to ask her about it, now you do. JBP says lets get her back in here and ask her about it. JBP seems to be very tired of Baez but coping. Karen Lowe is returning to witness stand........ Baez asks her if she is familiar with this report? She says yes. The Natl Academy of Science is respected and started by Congress? Yes. To give guidance on the scientific community on how to do things? Well, it can but it is not all scientific, so yes and no. Are you aware of the criticisms in this report about microscopic hair analysis? Yes but some of it is not qualified and she agrees with some of it and not all of it. You can't identify someone by their hair alone? No. JBP says did your lab try to do that? she says No. Are you familiar with a forensic analyst by the name of Michael Malone? Yes. Are you familiar with the Gates case? Yes. A man was convicted on Mr. Malone's hair testimony and this conviction was later overturned? Yes. It was overturned later by mitro DNA. His testimony was correct according to you? If he said the hairs were microscopically similar to the evidence. You would agree with that? Objection. JBP is telling Baez not to even go any further. Ashton asks would you say this is a scientific treatise but not basically written in stone? Baez is asking her about another study, about accuracy rate of hair comparisons and Mitro DNA. She doesn't agree, she has said a lot of times now that hair comparisons cannot be 100 percent. Jeff says your honor the proffered statements of this examination have not gone against it, it has agreed with it. This witness hasn't said there was an identification in this case. He can't impeach her on what she hasn't said. JBP is getting angry, he says I have made myself abundantly clear and Mr Baez heard me..........Baez is whimpering about I will not use other cases. Baez is making no sense at all to me at this point. I think the judge is lost too. Returning the jury.......... Karen Lowe is back on the witness stand... Baez is up....... Ms Lowe we were discussing the history of hair analysis and then the Congressional report? Yes. It tried to look for a better way to introduce forensic science in the courtroom? Yes. You find this paper, authoritative? Yes. They were critical of hair analysis? The criticism is about something they already do not do. They use DNA. They use nuclear DNA, instead of Mitro DNA. Cindy, Casey and Caylee all have the same Mitro DNA? Sustained. That is the reason why one hair comes from one individual and this was a problem the NES report saw in 2009? Yes, they suggested doing DNA with hair. This is the first time you have testified in banding in hair? Yes. Are you an expert in it? My training experience gives me my knowledge and my on the job training and 4 papers on it. You don't know what causes post mortem banding? No. You don't know when it develops? No, it varies. Not everyone who is deceased has post mortem root banding? Yes. You don't know how often hair banding comes up in deceased people? No. The testimony you have given here today is based on your training and on the job training using opinion? Yes that together with all I know about it. You really can't testify on this specific topic of post mortem banding? I testified on what I know for sure, there was post mortem root banding on the hair in this case. You have never rendered an opinion on an unknown person having a single root banding? No. You requested more hairs? Yes, I wanted more hairs. You stated that if they found more than one hair with root banding it would make it a stronger case? No. I just wanted to know it was from a body and not some other random possibility what caused the root banding. You wanted more hairs for no reason what so ever? Sustained. You did actually get more hairs? I did. When was the next time you got some hairs? Refers to report. Baez says never mind, we will start with your first report, you were given more hairs in your first report? Yes. These hairs had different characteristics? Yes. Throughout all the other hairs there were no decomp hairs? Yes. You did another report on more hairs on Aug 6th report? None of those hairs had decomp. After that you did another report on Aug 13th? Sustained items not in evidence. You did another report on Oct 6th you were given multiple items and vacuum sweepings? None of the hairs had decomp. You did a report on Oct 15th, correct? Yes. What did you find? No hair with decomp. You did a report on Oct 21? Yes. What did you find? No hair with decomp. Nov 6th you were given more items from the trash bag? Yes. What did you find? No hair with decomp. You did a report on June 25, 2009, of the items found in the car, what did you find? Sustained. Jeff wants to know which items? Q319 through Q337 what did you find? No hair with apparent decomp were found. Where there any other items we have not discussed? Yes. What were your findings? No hair with apparent decomp. So after you tried to find more hairs to make your case stronger, LE helped you. You couldn't make the case stronger? Sustained. Where there any other hairs that showed signs of decomp? No, not from the car. You still can't say that one hair was from a dead person? No, not one 100 percent but it had the characteristics of post mortem banding. There are no standards of what post mortem root banding? Right it is my opinion. There are no error rates as to the identification of this banding? That is correct. When did you first examine this hair, Q12? July 21, 2008. When you do these inspections the post mortem root banding should be at the root? Yes. This hair banding was not at the root, it was slightly above it? Objection, side bar......... Side bar over.......... Baez is up..........the pic you took of the Q12 hair, you never showed it to this jury? Objection, item not in evidence. Rephrase the question...ma'am at looking at that photo can you see where the band is? I would like to look at it under a microscope. Is that why you don't feel comfortable not showing this jury the photo? Sustained, impeachment. Ms Lowe, would you say that it is difficult to view a pic to view the characteristics of a hair but you wouldn't be able to capture the changes? So it is difficult to know where the root ends in a photo? Can be, depends on the hair. Knowing these difficulties you still brought photos to show the jury? Yes, because they showed root banding. These articles you read don't come with hairs, they come with photos? Yes. Did you fail your first proficiency test? Yes. After your depo was taken your lab developed a study............objection relevance...Side Bar..... Side bar over......... JBP asks the name of this study? Jeff Ashton says the study doesn't have a name, it is being done by Steven Shaw. JBP asks her if any of her testimony has to do with this study of Steven Shaw? She says no. Objection sustained. Recess for 5 minutes............ Recess is over......... Baez is up........... Karen Lowe on witness stand: Ms Lowe did you go to meetings on trying to reinforce that post mortem root bandings exist? No, I think the most we will ever go to is that the hair came from a dead body. You saw this hair and the root banding? Yes. At the time you examined this hair you didn't know who it belonged to? I thought it was similar to a hair from a hair brush belonging to Caylee. Were you told this brush belonged only to Caylee? Yes. Baez asked if she knew of anything to do with the brush being used by others? Objection.....sustained. The little girl was still missing at this time? Yes. You can actually do nuclear DNA if you have a root? Yes. You have this hair with a root and you didn't send it for nuclear DNA? Yes, there was no tissue on the root. You are not the one to make that call? Yes I am, I send it to Mitro or Nuclear DNA, sometimes I will ask the DNA examiner if they think it could have nuclear DNA. So now we can say that the hair belonged to Caylee, Cindy, Casey or Cindy's mother? Yes. Finding hairs in a trunk is not that uncommon? Yes, you shed up to 100 hairs per day. If you shed a hair from one person to another that is called transfer? Right. There is also something called secondary transfer? Yes. You would want to know if this came from primary or secondary transfer? Not exactly. Don't you want to know how a hair got there? Depends. Jeff Ashton up................ Are the standards you use long existent with FBI policy? Yes, there is an accompanying statement, that it is not positive without DNA, it is just based on characteristics. Was the hair with decomp an anagen hair or a tillagen hair? It was an anagen hair. Mitro DNA will have the same maternal line? Yes. Did you eliminate the victim's mother as a suspect of the decomp root? Yes. It could have come from another maternal relative that had 9inch light brown hair? Yes. Was the decomp hair treated in anyway? No. Her hair in the hairbrush did not have a root band? Yes. The hair banding you found in the Q12 decomp hair and the hair you found of Caylee's hairbrush, the decomp was not something found in the hair from the hairbrush? No. Baez up.......... You don't know the treatments of Casey's hair? Yes. At then end of the day you can't say that Q12 came from a dead body? No, it just had characteristics of a decomp hair. Witness is Mike Vincent.............. Linda is up, he is the CSI for Orange County Sheriff's office. He has a lot of prior LE experience. He served in the Air force for 8 years as LE. He has been in CSI with LE for 30 years. He is the assistant supervisor of Geraldo Bloise. In July, 2008 he was the asst. supervisor of Geraldo Bloise. He assisted with the examination of the Pontiac Sun Fire. He initially collected stain samples for blood on the trunk liner, they came out negative. He also collected air samples and piece of the trunk liner and put them in tin cans. The collection of air samples began on July 21, 2008, he was assisted by people from the University of Florida. He is telling the jury how air sample collecting began. They tried to suck the air out of the trunk with a syringe then transferred the air into 2 teflar bags. He also hung a filter to absorb the air, they performed the procedure, he watched. The samples were sent to Oakridge Labs in Tennessee. She is showing the witness a package, he notes his seal and his initials. The tefflar bag is sealed inside the brown envelope. Did you also cut a sample of the stain from the trunk liner? Yes. Linda hands him a tin can and he recognizes it with his initials and seal and date, 7-22-08. That item in the can, did you send it to Oakridge Labs? Yes, it was shipped there. On July 23, 2008, did you observe another attempt to collect air samples? Yes. How did it differ? It was done by Dr. Sigmund, he put in a filter in the trunk and left it there for 30 minutes, then sealed it. She hands him an envelope and he recognizes it as his initials and seal, the date is July 23, 2008. Once it was collected and sealed and sent to Oakridge Labs in Tennessee. On August 29th, did you conduct another examination to collect samples from it? Yes. Prior to doing this did you receive equipment to do this collection? Yes, Dr Vass sent me a portable air pump and 9 test tubes and instructions on how to collect the air samples. Did you use this equipment on the trunk? Yes on Aug 29th and Aug 30th. He is explaining the air pump and the test tubes for the jury, he is explaining how it all worked. He attaches the pump to the test tubes and then collected samples from the trunk and the forensic bay itself. She handing him envelopes as a group, he is looking at all the envelopes, he recognizes them all because they have his label and his unit evidence tape. He put all of these in another envelope and sealed and initialed that envelope. Hands him one envelope, it is from the passenger side of the car, the collection process took 69 minutes. Next one is passenger are and it took 69 minutes. Next one is from the trash bag on Aug 30th, took 72 minutes. Next one was inside the trunk, shut the trunk and let the pump run 69 minutes. Next one passenger area, took 69 minutes. Next one was air in the garage, it lasted 77 minutes on Aug 30th. The next one is a blank one, that was shipped clean to check for contamination of the others. Next one was from the air in the garage on Aug 30th, for 77 minutes, shipped to Dr. Vass. Did you collect items from the wheel well and send them to Oakridge, Yes. She hands him envelope, he recognizes it as a substance on the inside tire well, it was scraped off, it was sent to Dr Vass, the initials on the seal are Geraldo Bloise. Did you collect other pieces of the stain on the spare tire cover on Oct 8th? Yes. Did you also collect pieces of the spare tire cover that were not stained? Yes as a control. Hands him a can, it is sealed and initialed by him, it was sent to oakridge, it is a 6 inch by 6 inch stain of the spare tire cover. Hands him a can, it is labeled by him, it is 2 and half by 2 inch spare tire cover. Which was the control piece? The smaller one. Did you collect hair standards and buccal swabs from Cindy, George and Lee? On Oct 7, 2008. Yes. Are these samples collected in the same fashion from each person? Yes, he did the buccal swabs and the hair swabs all the same. Hair was pulled with tweezers or the person will pull them out with their fingers. Linda hands them envelopes, first one is 2 buccal swabs from Cindy, next, 2 buccal swabs from George, next 2 buccal swabs from Lee. They all went into sealed boxes into a sealed envelope, initialed by him. Next envelope, one petri dish of hairs from George, next is one petri dish of hairs from Lee, next is one petri dish of hairs from Cindy. They were all sealed and initialed by him. Did you examine gas cans? Yes. Showing him a pic of the metal red gas can with his info. It is introduced into evidence and published to the jury. Did you change or alter the gas can between the time you collected it and took a pic of it? No. Then he swabbed it for DNA and fingerprints, then returned the item to the Anthony's on Aug 13th at 1103 hours to Cindy. It had no DNA or fingerprints. Linda is introducing hair and buccal standards into evidence. Linda is done........ Baez is up........ When you processed the car on July 17, 2008, you tested for blood? Yes. That was caught on TV, right? The test for blood was not on TV. Just the bay the car was in was on TV? When you tested with Blue Star were the cameras there? I don't know. Lots of stupid questions about how the media got there. All sustained. This is the very first time you have taken air samples? Yes, I had never heard of it being done. This was for you an experiment? No, it was new but I wouldn't call it an experiment. There were multiple tries to collect air samples? Yes. You did it more than once because you couldn't do it right? No. They weren't being done by me. You were part of this process right? Yes, I observed. First there was the syringe then the carbon filters then you got sent the little pump by Dr. Vass? Yes. The problem you had with air samples is that is air is free flowing right? I don't know what you mean. Was the air on different days, different air? Yes. Do you have any info of the air on this car on June 16, 2008? No. Did you sample the air in the Anthony garage? No. The dumpster where this car was by for 3 weeks? No. You attempted to get samples of the bay? Yes. To compare them to the air in the car? What? The forensic bay air is evidence in this case? Yes. Baez is making no sense but I am trying. The reason you took other samples from places other than the trunk was to compare the samples to the trunk? Correct, OK. The problem is you took this on Aug 29, 2008, you didn't take it July 16th for air that was free flowing? Correct. So this air shouldn't be compared to the air in the trunk? I don't understand your question. Objection...Sustained. You also sampled the trash air? Yes. You didn't take this on July 16th you took it on Aug 29th? There was a significant difference of the air on July 16th and the air on Aug 29th? I don't know. Was the trash immediately taken to the dry room? I don't know. Showing him defense Exhibit C, not admitted to evidence. Does this look like the trash when you first got it? I don't know. Do you see a difference in the trash in the other picture? Yes. Why was it put in the dry room? I don't know you would have to ask Bloise. You are his supervisor though right? Yes but I don't know why he put it there. With your common knowledge of being a human being that has trash and dealt with trash all your life, the odor would be significantly different if it was wet or dry? Yes, the smell would be different. When you took the air sample of the trash on Aug 29th the trash was dry? That is possible, the trash was stored in a brown box. The trash wasn't wet when you took the air sample, right? Yes. Showing the witness the metal pic gas can. Linda wants him to lay a predicate that is the same gas can. It is. When you got the gas can, it is metal and had some gas dripping? It was completely dry. Pointing to an area, is that showing wetness? No, it was dry. You processed this can for fingerprints, did it have any? No. Wants to know if it has been wiped down? It did not appear to have any fingerprints. Baez is done.... Linda is up..... The gas can was pointed out and he retrieved it using gloves, he took possession of it and carried it by it's handle. The Pontiac Sun Fire where was it stored between July 15th and Aug 29th when you took those samples? In the secured bay. Did it ever smell any different? No, it did not diminish in smell. Was the garbage stored separately from the car the entire time? Yes, it was. Linda is done. Witness is excused. Judge is excusing the jury. He is telling them he has worked out the kinks with the restaurant #1 and he is trying to work out the kinks in restaurant #2. The hamburgers should be working out, lol. JBP asking anything else, Linda says that an issue has arisen, they want computer forensic people to be exempted from the rule of sequestration so they can talk to them. They want to talk to them for a limited purpose. Baez says is this a person not on the witness list? Mason says, you want a new consultant for what? Linda says I have a new consultant working with me that will have to talk to the witnesses for a limited purpose. She wants a 3 way conversation instead of relaying it down the grapevine. Defense doesn't object, JBP allows it. Linda did it the right way. Mason says this last witness talks about trash like Geraldo and wants to know if they broke the rule of sequestration? JBP says people use trash and garbage interchangeably. Could also be called refuse or waste management. They will have a matter in his hearing at 830am Mon morning but they won't be involved in that. Court is in recess till 9am Monday morning................. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:31:11 PM Monday June, June 6, 2011, 9am Court is in session: Dr Arpad Vass is the first witness up. Jeff Ashton is up........... Worked for Oakridge Natl Lab. BA In Science, Ph.D In Forensic Science, Master's In Forensic Science. Met with Dr. Bass, developed a PH. Dissertation with Dr. Bass. In Forensic Science, he started working with Dr Bass at the Body Farm in Tennessee, with the post mortem interval. Oakridge Natl, Lab, The Body Farm is a unique. It studies all different types of corpses, donated to science. They are actual Human Bodies. Varied surroundings, some buried, some surface. Dr. Vass was looking at post mortem interval. Looking at the breakdown of human soft body tissue. They analyze the fluid to determine how long a body has been dead. There are 4 stages of decomposition of a human body. Fresh stage, bloat stage, active decay and the mummification or skeltonzation of the human body. The cells are liquefying from the inside out. Blisters, skin slippage is the first signs of decomp. Then putrefaction, micro-organisms start breaking down the body causing liquefaction. This is the fresh stage. Next stage is the bloat stage, the generation of gas. Make chemicals that cause gas. The orifices can be can become blocked so they gases build up in the body causing bloat. Active decay is when the major decomp occur. The last stage is mummification or skeleton stage. He was looking at post mortem interval at the liquefaction phase, to screen for a variety of compounds. There are only a few that could be useful to determine how long a body had been dead. He published his findings. He published a paper on 40 violative fatty acids. In his 20 years working at the decay facility he published more papers did many tests. During violative fatty acid tests, he worked at the body farm. He went to Oakridge after his PH.d, in 1992. The Dpt of Energy runs OakRidge Natl Lab. 4500 employees, national guests and many projects with many teams. The Oak Ridge Natl Lab has a broad range of projects. Dr Vass's work at the Oak Ridge Lab is in different fields. After the third model he used of decomp, it was used as the international mark of time of death. In early 2001 another project became his focus. He had thought time of death was the most important thing to know, he then thought he was wrong and moved into the detection of clandestine graves. It is always hard to find a clandestine grave. Then the use of cavadar dogs or geo physic metal rods to discover bodies. He was looking for a more universal way to find clandestine graves. They looked at odor evolution at demop events. They utilized the body farm, to study bodies buried at different depths and which chemicals were being produced during decomp. There was an underground piping system to study these bodies. They were trying to develop an instrument of odor detection. He has experience the odor of decomp, over the years, 20 years at the facility, 50 bodies start to finish. He looked at 100's of decomp bodies over his years. The odor of human decomp is unique. He has worked with animal decomp and the odor of that also, mostly pigs. The odor of human decom is different than animal decomp, in his opinion. Animals have a muskier scent, pigs have a sweeter scent, Human bodies have a totally different scent. He published a paper in Journal of Forensic Science in 2004. Side Bar............ Side bar over............... Jeff Ashton up....Dr Vass's research continued after his paper he published in 2004. They started to look at human bodies on the surface. They were using different techniques to study these bodies. The were using a triple sorbent trap or TST trap. They used an air pump though the trap do analyzes the odor compounds taken from the decomposing bodies. He is explaining the process used to obtain the samples. Too far over my head for me to type it all. It permits him to detect even minute amounts of decomp odors. He studied the above ground remains for 2 to 3 years. He updated his findings of surface decomp bodies in 2008. Judge Perry finds him an expert in this field over Baez objections. Dr Vass was contacted by Yuri Melich in this case. They began to send Dr Vass items in this case. He was sent first a metal evidence can. Being shown the can. Dr Vass recognizes the box. Jeff opens the box. Dr Vass recognizes the can sent to him. It is put into evidence over Baez's objections. Side bar over metal can........Side bar over...... Metal can in evidence. Dr Vass is talking about sending air pumps and triple sorbent traps to OC Forensic Unit. He recieved the triple sorbent traps back. He recognizes the packages of triple sorbent traps sent back to him. They are received into evidence. Morning recess until 10:40 am........ Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:32:09 PM Good Morning monkeys, had to start typing right away so didn't get a chance to say hello. Here we go again, on the way to justice for Caylee. Dr. Vass is sooo cool, he is so happy to be talking about dead bodies, I don't seem to mind, even this early in the morning.....lol. Wonder if the jury is in shock!!!!! ::MonkeyShocked:: Good to see all of you here, enjoy your coffee and breakfast while listen about the body farm...................Yikes..... ::MonkeyEek:: Would already like to punch Baez a few times.....Dr Vass looks like he wants to punch him to, lol. ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:33:13 PM Monday, June 6, 2011 court is in session. 10:40am back from morning recess......... Dr. Vass is on witness stand. Jeff Ashton is questioning him............... With the items in this case were you assisted with them? Yes, by Dr. Wise. He made sure the instruments were working to analyze the odors in the case. The first analysis done on the can, the lid was cracked and a syringe was used to obtain a small amt of the odor. They used an instrument to test it. They used the head space, a volume of air in the can, the can contained a sample of the car liner. Baez is objecting.......side bar.........Cindy is busy writing something or taking lots of notes on this testimony. George is watching her. Side bar is over.............. Dr Vass and Dr Watts went over the graph of the smell in the can. There was a large peak of chloroform on the graph, Dr Vass is very familiar with chloroform. The chloroform was shockingly high, unusually high. So the next step, is they tried to narrow down the chloroform peak. He was with Dr. Watts during the analysis. The removed the carpet from the metal can and places it in a tedlar bag, designed to contain air samples for air testing. They incubated it for 2 days at body temperature. The tedlar bag is used because it won't change temperature. They wanted to get what compounds they were getting from the carpet liner specifically. They extracted 20 ml. they did a GCMS analysis. They identified different compounds. The result was they were able to identify 50 compounds from this sample. GCMS instrument showed them, a very large peak was chloroform. The amount was shocking, they have never seen chloroform in that amount that high before in 20 years. Did you attempt to quantify the amount of chloroform. Yes, the peak was chloroform and roughly approximated the amount of chloroform was in the parts of millions and this was only a minimum amount of chloroform that must of been on the trunk liner, it had already evaporated, as that is what chloroform does over time. After all the evaporation was in the parts of millions? Yes. They ran tests on other carpet liners and air samples to see if they had chloroform. Admitted into evidence this report on other tests for chloroform. Looking at graphs, can see the huge peak of chloroform, he is circling the tallest peak. The actual number of chloroform is 16 million counts of chloroform, above 16 million. This is from the carpet liner in this case. Discussing other compounds found, they were normal compounds found from gasoline. He was not surprised to see gasoline odor in a trunk that had a gas can in it. Looking at a second chart of a sample car trunk liner from a junkyard, a similar car, make year etc. It shows a chloroform peak, it is very short compared to the one in the case. This peak was 5000 at the most. That is as compared to 16 million found in the trunk liner in the case. Dr Vass said he had never seen chloroform levels that high. All of this was published to the jury. They also tested it with another test, LIBS, laser induced, breakdown spectrometry. Dr Vass got excited and had to be slowed down. He is quite the character, lol. Has gone completely over my head, can't even type what he is saying.....all I know is that it is cool and the electrons are going crazy!!!!!!! He is talking about the laser. Talking about light signatures from the laser. The results of this test were used in his report. The result was that he found a decomp event in the carpet liner. Ashton shows him the report, he recognizes it and publishes it to the jury. Baez objects and want to voir dire the witness as to that particular item. Baez is up.......... Your not a physicist? Correct. Dr Martin performed this LIBS laser? Correct. Your not even allowed to touch it? Sustained. Dr Vass says he is laser qualified. You were not present for this laser procedure? Correct. Next question is SUSTAINED.......JUDGE IS NOT HAPPY AND REMOVES THE JURY....... JBP is citing case law to Baez.....schooling Baez......he is discussing how experts can testify in court. Experts can use info and use info as they would when not in court. It is their expert opinion. They can have an expert opinion. He is making it abundantly clear that experts can rely on other experts, in the subject to express their opinions. Baez was going in the wrong direction. He wants to know what Baez is trying to get at, asks him to proceed without the jury. Baez up.... What were the results of the LIBS examination? Decomp. Dr Vass refers to the report. Baez wants to know what was found in the report. You do not personally conduct LIBBS examinations? The elements are common are they not? Yes. You are not a physicist? No but I know all about it and can make a conclusion that they were decomp and confirms what his nose tells him. Baez wants to know if these elements are found in nature. Yes but these were elevated because it was DECOMP. Baez is asking stupid questions that I can't understand and Dr. Vass tells Baez that, Baez just doesn't get it, lol. The only comparison you did is a junkyard car and the car in the case? Yes. Baez objects to Dr Vass's testimony. JBP over rules for now but wants state and defense to read law over the lunch recess so they can move faster. Returning the jury. The judge seems to want the state to lay a proper foundation to question Dr Vass about exams he did not do, himself. Jury is returned. Mr Ashton is up, Dr Vass is on the witness stand....... Chart is on the screen for the jury. Dr Vass is explaining it to the jury. Comparing samples from the junkyard carpet lining sample to the carpet lining in the case. Dr Vass also performed some chemical tests on the carpet lining in the case. This was to extract compounds not in gas form. That analysis showed a presence of violative fatty acid. It is the first compound liberated during decomp. That was actually in the carpet itself. When Dr Vass first opened the can, he jumped back a foot or two and he was shocked that little bitty can could contain such a powerful odor he knew it as human decomp after smelling human decomp for over 20 years. He was also given scrapings from a substance in the wheel well, he is being shown an envelope containing those samples. He recognizes them. It is admitted into evidence. Dr Vass performed exams on this sample. It had acidic acid, it is a bi-product of human decomp, it is also a bi-product of manufacturing chloroform. He is being shown a big brown box, Jeff is opening it up. Dr Vass is looking at it. He recognizes the items contained as being sent by Dr. Haskell. Jeff tries to get it admitted into evidence, objection and side bar.......... Side bar is over....... Dr Vass when you received this item in evidence, was it sealed? Absolutely, fully sealed. Baez is inspecting the box. No further objections, received into evidence. Jury is recessed for lunch till 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:34:24 PM Monday June 6, 2011 1:30pm Court is in session: JBP asked that movies be approved for the jury to see. Dr Vass is on the witness stand........ Jeff Ashton is up.......... Jeff is asking about additional tests. These have to do with the paper towels in the trash bag in the trunk. They found fatty acids on the paper towel's they make up adiopecere or grave wax, it is associated with grave wax. He received back 8 triple sorbent traps. He requested those for confirm that the carpet sample was the point source for the decomp odor. The triple sorbent traps were able to confirm that the carpet sample was the source for the decomp odor. The triple sorbent traps found a few compounds but not as many as the carpet liner. The trash odor was not the same as the carpet liner decomp odor. Dr Vass, says that as you walk down the street you may notice many odors, flowers, food, etc.....they are all made up of different compounds. A rose may have 12 chemicals that make up that odor and garbage may have 20 chemicals that make up that odor, they may have some common compounds but each has it's own set of chemicals that gives it it's unique odor. The 30 decomp chemicals, they eliminated any overlapping chemicals, they eliminated some from the gas, some from trash, squirrel remnants, etc...etc. That left approximately 13 compounds of those, that left 7 significant compounds that were found significant to human decomposition. Just because they overlapped did not mean they were not part of decomp but to be fair they eliminated them anyway. Decomposition is cycles, early is different than late decomp. It is rare that you would find all 30 significant decomp signals. The source of the odor was human decomposition. The scrapings from the tire well were had elements of decomp and puteric acid which is an element of decomp. The findings of the paper towels, was adipocere, every one of the fatty acids, grave wax. Taken all of the instrumental examinations and adding to that Dr Vass's olfactory senses, his opinion is that there was no other plausible explanation other than a human decomposing body in the trunk of that car!!!!!! Baez up......... You are not a chemist? Correct. You are not a Bio-chemist? Correct. His PhD is in Anthropology not chemistry. Dr Vass has two masters, neither in chemistry. He has to consult with others about chemistry. When is the last time you took a course in chemistry? In the 1980's. Have you allowed people to think you were a chemist? No. Have you read a Face Book Acct? Sustained. Have you ever read a Wiki acct to say your a chemist? No. Sustained. Just more stupid questions, all sustained. Are you gonna make money off of this case? Not to my knowledge. You have comprised and made a data base of compounds? Yes. How many chemical compounds are in this data base? 478. Baez now writing on a huge note pad for the jury. He asked him if he buried 4 bodies? Yes. You set up all the contraptions you testified to? Yes. It showed you what? What was coming up to the surface. How many days were the bodies buried, 17 days? No, it took 17 days for the chemicals to get up to the surface. Now this data base you have comprised, you have not turned over to the defense, have you sir? Side bar Objection over ruled. You have not turned this data base over to the defense, have you? It is not mine to turn over. Do you know if it has been turned over? I thought you had been given the data base. Baez says we were given a list of the chemicals not the data base. This was a part of the grant, this data base? Yes. Without this money and these grants, you can't keep up your research? Yes. You are an inventor of this Labrador? I am listed as one. This Labrador uses this data base? Partially. Your purpose of the devices, the goal is to sell these to LE all over the country? No, I had to file this according to the grant, it is just an aid to his research, it was developed as part of that grant and he had to file this to the people who gave them a grant. Badgering, sustained. Your goal is to sell these to LE all across the country? No, my goal was to create a project to aid in finding clandestine graves. Before that was done.......Sustained. Next question. You get royalties if this device is sold? I don't know, if a licensee ever comes in I would get something maybe, relatively insignificant. Sustained, asked and answered. Baez is asking the same question about money, Dr. Vass is trying to answer, he would eventually get 15 percent.........Sustained. You billed this Labrador to this case? No, I did this voluntarily. In 2006 did you start this? That was way before this and it was the initial idea. Objection, side bar................... ::piggy:: Baez has me all confused, I can't type what he is asking, cuz none of it makes much sense, it is "and" this and "and" that and he just goes around and around in circles. OK, my Baez rant is over for now.....just for now..... ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: ::boxingbaez2:: Side bar over....... Do you have to file a financial interest? No. In your report did you disclose that you had a financial interest in the data base? No. The differences between a research lab and a forensic lab is you do experiments? It is our product. You have no protocol to follow? The protocols are published. Is that different than what you did in this case? I do not think so. In the reports, those were buried bodies? We used the same instruments and tests. There is nothing in writing about procedures? Yes, they are listed in those publications, yes. Those are about buried remains? Nothey were buried and surface. Do you have quality control? Yes, we have quality control, blanks and standards. Is there anything in writing to show you had contamination? I don't understand. He finally answers that everything was done right and followed by Dr. Weiss, I keep getting a diff name for the Dr that did the tests, not sure what it is. Did you do qualitative and quantitative tests? Yes. This was a serious matter? Yes. Were you trying to do qualitative or quantitative analysis? Both. You did a prelim report in Aug? Yes. Not your final conclusions? Yes. You were aware sir that before you even wrote........objection, move to strike, approach....side bar. IMO Baez is asking all of these stupid questions because he knows that every word that Dr Vass, said was taken to heart by the jury and he has no real way around it. THERE WAS A DEAD BODY IN THAT DAMN CAR!!!!!!!!! ::MonkeyMad:: ::MonkeyMad:: Side bar over......... You released your report on this case? Were you made aware this was made public? Yes, I was upset with all the media attention I was receiving and exchanged emails about it. You were made aware some of your findings were released before you released your final report. I was upset......Objection Sustained. How many chemicals do you say that you found in the carpet sample? 54. In your 2nd report you said how many chemicals? I don't remember. Baez is handing him his report to refresh his memory. So in our prelim report you listed 54? Yes. In your 2nd report you said 51? Yes and gives the reason to eliminated some in his prelim report due to duplication. Baez is writing down a lot of numbers on his chart and Dr Vass is agreeing with it. You came up with the same exact percentages? Yes but I don't know what I eliminated from the prelim report. Dr Vass says everything was corrected in the final report. Baez is asking him about the junkyard car, why he got it and how many? He put 3 cars because he took 2 samples from one car, they only used 2 junkyard cars. Dr Vass later fixed the final report with a affidavit. Baez is using bench notes and it is very confusing. Objection, asked and answered. Baez asking about the history of junkyard cars and history of Casey's car. You did a qualitative and not a quantitative exam of those junkyard cars. Yes, I don't know. Baez is asking him about the smell of a rose and garbage, none of it makes sense. Dr Vass is trying to answer but it makes no sense to him either and he is a genius. lol. He says he doesn't know what makes a rose smell like a rose and garbage smell like garbage other than chemicals. You do not know the chemical break ground of the items in the car? No but they were just plastic and empty boxes, he does not know the chemical breakdown. He did sample the air around the trash from the car. Baez says yes but you did this in August and not July? Correct. He says again that the sample was not taken the same day as the air in the garage. Just same nonsense over and over. Vass can't really answer any of this, no matter how hard he tries. You used a complicated table to verify the decomp odor in the trunk, did you not. I did. Do you have that table in front of you? Yes. Do you have the air sample from the trash in front of you? Yes. Baez is asking him about the air samples he put in his report, he is saying yes to each. You did not use #118 from the state? No, because the complete liner was removed then and it was not a valid comparison. You used everything else? Yes and now he is trying to explain how things work to Baez....good luck. It is making sense to me. The point source of the odor was in the liner, even though the liner was removed it still had traces of everything in it. Baez is back to his big scribble pad and Dr Vass is agreeing to some overlaps. Dr Vass is trying to explain it to him again. Some things overlap and some things don't. Casper my dog on my lap, gets it, lol. Tries to get Dr Vass to get to agree with him and he won't. Baez is now smiling, like he caught in him a lie. Baez says out of 30 chemicals, you found 3? Dr Vass can't answer it the way Baez wants. Ashton is asking court reporter to read back the last question that didn't make sense, I can't hear her. Dr. Vass says you cannot account for but you can't make conclusions on chemicals that you cannot account for? What???? You are not a physicist? No. Can you account what chemicals were found in the Libbs report, calcium, magnesium, iron, sodium.......Mr Baez says these are every day chemicals and you are not a physicist? Yes, I am not a physicist. Isn't that cool that the junkyard car had less chemicals than the one with a dead body in Florida? lol They tried to find a worse case car in a junkyard, environment, blood from a car wreck. He didn't collect the junkyard cars but their lids may have been open. Nothing else made sense. JBP mercifully takes the afternoon recess...... Court is in recess............2:55 Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:35:37 PM Monday, June 6, 2011 Court is in Session. Back from afternoon recess, 3:15pm Dr Vass on the witness stand.............. Baez questioning. Before I go further, while we are talking about the carpet liner samples. You know they used a chemical called Blue Star? Yes. It is used to find blood with an alternating light source? Yes. Did you tell them to use Blue Star? I don't recall that no. Baez is looking through a report. The spraying of a carpet sample with Blue Star was never done? I didn't do that, no. Someone just went and got the ingredients? No, a chemist looked at that MSDS sheet of Blue Star and Fe Breeze and they would not have any effect on the chemicals in the trunk. You are not a chemist, so you don't know that do you? What did you find? Baez is writing them down on his big pad. Calcium, Sodium, Magnesium, Iron and Carbon. Dr Vass how many of these items would be found on a piece of soil you picked up from the ground. Probably small amounts of each of them, I don't know. And what you did was a qualitative analysis not a quantitative analysis? Yes. The paper towels, what you found was a fatty acid? Yes. The included Palmitic Acid, Stearic Acid, Oleic and Myrsistic? Dr Vass says yes and also I think..........Palmitolaic. Baez adds this to his pad. You mentioned in your report these are like adipocere? Same thing. What is interesting about adipocere is it is made up of triglycerides, these all have carbons in them........he is talking to the jury about how fatty acid is made up in fatty tissue. These paper towels were found in the trash in the trunk. Adipocere could be from a hamburger? No, well maybe but it would have be be raw and almost all fat. You could find this same thing in chicken? No. Dr Vass then tells Baez what adipocere is made of. Lots of things need to happen to make up adipocere. Can this fatty acid you found on these paper towels can be found in meat? I don't know, maybe in mammals. Did you also find THC? Yes, the products of marijuana. So these towels could of been touched by meat and someone with the munchies? Dr Vass said the meat would have to be raw and you would have to have a bag over your head. It would have to be pounds of raw meat. How did the marijuana get there? I don't know, it just was, we were being thorough and it was there. You have protocols when using this data base? You have only used these protocols 2 times so far? The first time at Barker Ranch in CA? Objection...........side bar.......... Side Bar over............. JBP is excusing the jurors for a brief matter that needs to be taken up outside of their presence. Baez is questioning Dr Vass....... You were sent soil samples from a ranch? Yes. You said they were signs of a decomp event? Yes. You then went to the location? Yes. You used devices to determine if there were bodies? Yes. And you did not find anything? Yes but with a caveat at the depth we dug, we had just gotten to the depth of 40 years ago. You stated then that the science was at it's infancy stage? Objection. Sustained. Same question. Sustained. The only time you have used this specific data base to find a body was at the Barker Ranch? No. What is your way of coming up with bodies? There is no error rate for this. You can't compare this like a ruler. In the previous time line, we did not understand geographic properties that would effect our search then. Baez says no further questions on that. Did you say Sir, this is at the infancy of this science and that you were frustrated? Sounds like something I might say, I was frustrated. Digging holes was very frustrating. Mr. Ashton is up................ You don't know till this day that there are bodies there are not? No sir. JBP says the Barker Ranch has to do with the Charles Manson case? Dr Vass, says it was 40 to 50 years ago but has nothing to do with this case. JBP is schooling Baez that the Barker Ranch and what was done there has no bearing on this case, is irrelevant and totally different. JBP says anything else before I return this jury? No. Returning the Jury 3:50pm............... Dr Vass is on the witness stand, Baez is questioning.......... Dr Vass, protocols would also include proper selection of these samples? Could have, yes. You have protocols that would prevent having these not to contaminate these samples with areas with gasoline? Yes. That is common sense. You are aware that these samples were taken around gasoline? Yes, it was a garage. You were aware that spray cans, soft drinks etc etc... could cause false readings? Yes but you can't take that out of context. Those were written for environmental tests. You don't want samples taken near trash or garbage? Unless that is part of a crime scene. You said in your protocol you don't want samples taken around trash or gas because of false readings? Yes but that doesn't make sense here. Can you tell the jury what divining rods are? Objection..........yep you guessed it....side bar............side bar over.......... Dr Vass on the witness stand, Baez questioning... Dr Vass you have testified about finding clandestine graves? Objection. Sustained. Do you know what diving rods are? Yes. Can you make coat hangers into diving rods? Yes. Have you taught people how to do that? Yes, it is a hobby of mine. You have attempted to put electronic leashes on flies, have you not? SUSTAINED. This is the first time you have ever testified about your data base in a court of law? Yes. Is it the........sustained. Are there any other papers that have the same findings that your data base has? Yes, Dr. Staphalopouls. He is located in Greece? Yes. The only person that agrees with you in the world......sustained. The only other person in the world that does your type of study is in Greece? Yes, that I know of. And he uses a different data base? Yes, he had a different study. Sir, you testified under direct examination that the smell of human decomp is unique? Yes, to me it is. He asked you what your opinion was and you said that the smell of human decomp is unique. Did you ever tell a newspaper that a rotten potato can smell like human decomp? I may have said that but we looked at a rotting potato and the decomp composition is completely different. One of the key markers that you have found is fluoride? Yes some type of fluoride? And in this case.....objection...sustained. The positive control you used is the blanket of a child that was dead in a trunk for 3 months but you don't know any of the other circumstances that were the same as in this case? Again you are twisting things around, if you eliminate the fluoride and the gasoline. You still have 10 out of 30 and 8 were found in the trunk of the car. That is 80 percent. You did not collect any of the samples? Yes. Not only did you not collect these items you do not know the history of these items? Objection..sustained. You have no idea of what was in this car in the Florida Pontiac Sun fire for the 10 years it was there? No. You have no idea of the history of the junkyard cars? No. And you have no idea of the history of the car the blanket was found in? No and I don't know the history of of a lot of trunks of dead babies. Baez wants to strike that and JBP over rules him. You do not know the history of any of these things? Dr Vass says that is what is so cool about forensics, every case is different. Sir, you are not a member of the Academy of Forensic Science? No. You are not a member of any science group? No and my background is so diverse that I wouldn't know which one to join. Baez gets smart with Dr Vass and it is sustained. Baez is done. Jeff Ashton is up.......... Your career has centered around decomposition? Yes. Do you think you are going to have a financial gain from this case? No. Were you asked about this by Mr Baez in a deposition? You mean the Inquisition? laughs. Did you have to ask someone else about this because you had no idea about that? Yes, I did. In seeking out a control sample, was getting a contaminated sample going to a junk yard? Absolutely. You talked about compound diffusion,what did you mean? Some samples cannot contaminate others. What was the item that had the highest source of odor? The spare tire cover. Did you look up the composition of Blue Star? No, someone sent me that, I did look up Fe Breeze. Did either of those contain chloroform? No. The paper towels that contained fatty acid, you said it could of came from meat? explain how? It would have to be a mammal, raw, sufficient size, decomposing, anaerobic environment, usually found within the human body. So you would have to have pounds of rotting meat wrapped up in plastic and it had a very, high fat content? Could it be caused by someone eating a hamburger and wiping their face? No. You were asked about the Stathopopuls study? Was it one or two bodies? Yes, two bodies that were found floating in the Med. Sea. Did they have an overlap with the compounds you have? Yes. How did you come up with your positive control? We had to find a child in a trunk who died, unfortunately we found a child that was wrapped in a blanket and left in a trunk in Montana for 3 months. How did the test on this case compare to the one in Montana? Four compounds were the same, the only one that wasn't there was the chloroform. Did you test the Montana ones for fluoride? No. Do you know why the case here did not have fluoride? Adults usually have Florine in their decomp because they have been drinking fluorinated water. You will bio-cumulate Florine water in your bone and tissue. In countries that do not have fluorinated water they will not have Florine in their bodies. A small child like the one in Montana and Florida will not have ingested enough Florine in their lives for it to show up in there bodies. Jeff is done......Baez is up........ Studies have not been done on this fluoride? No. You are telling this jury and give them info as an expert witness that has never been studied? Fortunately, we have not had a lot of children to study. These paper towels were found in the trash bag? Yes. Sir, you have no information that those paper towels and that stain have anything in common? Yes, Dr Haskell, sent me those paper towels, on those paper towels he identified fly pupae. Baez strikes question. You have no first hand knowledge that those paper towels have anything to do with that stain in that trunk? No but they were both there. You have no idea how these fatty meat acids got on these paper towels. Well they were attracting flies..........You found meat on those towels? No, we found fatty acids. Next question sustained...no further questions. Dr Vass may stand down but he is not excused. Jury can stand and stretch......sidebar....sidebar over...... Next witness will take too long so he is excusing the jury. Movies have been approved. Jury is excused at 4:40pm. Jeff Ashton is telling JBP that the defense has served Dr Vass with a subpoena and they want it quashed according to Florida laws. They want him to give his data base and testify about it. The judge is looking up law. Baez said the defense will withdraw the subpoena. The defense wants to call Dr Vass in their state in chief and Jeff Ashton says they will let Dr Vass know he can go home until then. Court is in recess till 9am, Tuesday, June 7, 2011. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:42:30 PM Good Morning monkeys, Just wanted to let you know before I start typing for today's trial. I will be away from the computer today from about 8:30am pst till later today. Get my grand babies.....yay ::MonkeyAngel:: I will summarize this morning till they get here. Things will be back to normal tomorrow. Hoping for another good day of Justice for Caylee ::MonkeyAngel:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:44:17 PM Tuesday, June 7, 2011 9:00am Court is in session: States first witness is Geraldo Bloise. Linda is up........... Did you receive a trash bag from Awilda McBride? Yes, July 16th 11:06pm. He took possession from McBride. He removed the items from the plastic bag and photographed each item as it was removed. Showing the jury the trash bag as received from McBride, pic published to jury. White trash bag with blue handles, it was contained in two brown bags, one on top, one under. The pic shows the white trash bag on the brown paper bag. The brown paper bag has some liquid on it. The exterior of the plastic bag was a little wet. The handles were not tied and the mouth of the bag was open. He took a picture of the whole bag and then took the items out and took a pic of that, it is published to the jury. He pulled the items out of the bag. The pic shows the items after they were pulled from the bag. Published to the jury. He did a visual and photos of the items then he put them in a dry room. Some of the items were wet but smelled like normal trash, did NOT smell like the car. The items were in the dry room for from July 16th to July 18th and then they were place into a box into an evidence locker. So they were in the dry room for 2 days. The were then dry. Showing a picture taken of the items July 16, 2008 when he received them. A close up photo, everything is empty, published to the jury. He is pointing out a napkin in the close up photo. He is pointing out napkins in a plastic bag, he put them in the plastic bag on the night he received them July 16th, 2008. Published to the jury. They are napkins or paper towels. He eventually placed all of the items out on a table and photographed them. Napkins, alum foil, empty box of cigs, bottle of Arm and Hammer detergent, coat hanger published to jury. Next picture shows items he inventoried from trash bag, published to the jury. Dryer sheet, foil, papers, bottle of Cyrstal Lite, other items...Next photo is a table full of items from the white plastic trash bag, published to the jury. This is the entire contents of the plastic bag. Next picture is of a receipt from Fusion Ultra Lounge, it was in the white trash bag. Baez objects to it being put into evidence....overruled, published to the jury. Next photo is a document from Full Sail University, it was in the white trash bag. It is received into evidence and published to jury. Linda is showing him a box, he recognizes it as the box he put all the trash items in, it has his seals and initials. She hands him another box, he recognizes it with his initials and seals, it contains the paper towels from the trash bag. She asks to introduce them and Baez objects because of chain of custody, one can be admitted, the other has to wait till the person who gave it to him testifies about it. Bloise did a written inventory of all the items he collected from the white trash bag. He is referred to it, there are 37 items in the bag. He placed each of them into separate items. They are...empty Cherry Coke can, empty Coke Classic, empty Milw Lite beer can, empty Sprite can, empty Copenhagen tobacco can, one hair pin, 3 plastic tie wraps, empty Dr Pepper plastic bottle, empty Coke can, empty Mt Dew can, Empty Oscar Meyer plastic container, Cyrstal Lite bottle with brown liquid in it, empty Kiwi shoe cleaner, empty Arm and Hammer detergent, empty Crystal Lite bottle, empty pizza box, empty Coke Classic can, empty Velveeta, empty Velveeta carton, empty Velveeta carton, empty Parliment cig box, empty Marlboro pack, empty Velveeta box, Doc Full Sail, 4 dryer sheets, 3 foil pieces, piece of fabric that says made in Honduras, I missed some of the items, he was talking fast, lol. 37 items in total all items were empty but the bottle that had brown liquid. Everything else was totally empty. The dryer sheets were in the vehicle not the trash bag. Linda is done.... Baez is up.....................trying to find his props..... He is pleasing the court. The trash you originally collected was wet? Correct. Some were wet and some were dry. You put them in the dry room to dry? Yes. Then they were dry? Yes. He is showing him a photo...these two photos look completely different because of what was done in the dry room. You were testifying about things being empty after coming out of the dry room. You had no idea that this would latter become critical evidence? Correct. So it was not your intention to destroy evidence but that is kinda what happened? Linda objects, Sustained. Sir, you had no idea the evidence would be altered? No, I just wanted to preserve it by the protocols we had. I did not try to destroy any evidence, I followed protocol. My question to you is that you had no idea that you were altering evidence before the jury saw it? Sustained. Was it you that packaged the paper toweling? Yes. They were at one time moist? Yes and then they were placed in the dry room? Yes. and then they were placed in a plastic bag? He is talking in circles. You separated these towels and place in a plastic bag? Yes. You did not know later on that it would need to be tested for DNA? No, I saw no blood or body fluid, just wet and he saw no forensic values for DNA. You know that you can test for things other than blood for DNA? Yes. You can test saliva and semen for DNA? Yes. And sir it was not your intention to destroy evidence? Objection. Sustained. JBP tells Baez to move on. Linda is up. Why do you need to dry these items? To inspect them. They let it dry because it preserves the condition, if the item is left wet it will become moldy. The protocol says they must be dried. Baez is up. As part of your protocol you dry evidence? Correct. Did you know air samples would be taken of the trash? No. You are aware.......objection...sustained. Witness is excused. Next witness is Arpad Vass. Jeff Ashton is up. He is correcting a mistake he made yesterday about a can. Jeff Ashton got cans mixed up. Showing Dr Vass a can and asking him if he sees his initials on it and he is changing one can for another. Objection overruled and can is submitted into evidence. Jeff is done. Baez is up.... Asked him about a can of evidence he examined. Jeff asks for a side bar.......... Side bar is over............. Dr Vass you mistakenly admitted the wrong piece of evidence in this case? Apparently, yes. One reason you are not...........sustained. You are not accustomed to handling evidence? No, we are not a forensic lab? Sustained.................Baez is done. Dr Vass is excused. Baez needs time to find things, court is in recess till 10:20......... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 06:45:21 PM Tuesday, June 7, 2011 10:20am Court is in session: Next witness is Dr. Micheal Rickenbach. He works for the FBI as a Forensic Tech. He has been with the FBI for 20 years, 2 BA in Science, a Master's in Science and a Ph.D in Science. He has testified many times. Judge Perry has excepted him as an expert in Forensic Science. He examined a few items belonging to Caylee Marie Anthony. He examined items during a break and recognized them. Moving the first item into evidence, something in a black trash bag. Moving next item into evidence it is the trunk spare tire liner. Showing the Dr a box of evidence, he recognizes it and it is moved into evidence. Next item is a box, he recognizes it. Next item is a can in a plastic bag, he recognizes it. All received into evidence. Were you asked if you inspected these items for Chloroform? Yes. How? He did a visual exam first then he took samples and placed them into a vial and did head space Chromatography. First item is Q, it is a piece of spare tire cover. He opened the can observed the material inside and took a cutting and put it in a sealed glass vial then did head space Chromatography. When you opened the can, how did you describe that smell in your report? Baez asks for a side bar.......... Side bar over......... What was the results of Q? Residue of chloroform were on that specimen. What is Q? It was a piece of spare tire cover, it was subjected to the same analysis, what was the result? It had residue of chloroform. Showing him Q, it was subjected to the same analysis, had the same result, residue of chloroform. Q23 is a the spare tire cover, he shows the jury the part he tested. Q23 had residues of chloroform. Q24 is a piece of left side of trunk liner, it had residue consistent with chloroform. The difference between consistent only one technique was positive, not both. Q25 is right side of trunk liner, it was consistent with chloroform. The results on the left and right side of the trunk liner were consistent with chloroform. Jeff is done Baez is up.......... Tell the jury about the GCMS is an instrument for the separation and analysis of chemicals. It is very, very sensitive. It can detect things down to very, very small amounts of chemicals. Then you did a second test? Yes, it is a little different, it uses a different filter. Residue is usually found in a liquid state, these items had no liquid but the instrument found the residue in very, very small amounts. You can find chloroform in household items? Correct. It can be in detergents and drinking water. It can also be found in chlorine in a swimming pool? I don't know. If someone threw a bathing suit...sustained. Do you know anything else chloroform can be found in? I just know cleaning products. That would be found in small amounts, similar to these items, yes. Baez just got out his big scribble pad. Can you explain what a GCMS is? It is a signal coming from the instrument, it detects it, with a graph. The witness is going to the big scribble pad. The FBI Dr is drawing a GCMS graph. Looks to me like an EKG, don't know how else to describe it, a graph with points up and down. There is a thing called a quantitative analysis and a qualitative analysis, what is the difference. The FBI Dr says, qualitative tells you its there and quantitative tells you how much. If you are going to report out an amount you need a standard. He did two standards. How did you determine they were at very, very low amounts? By running two samples. He found out using a known amount of chloroform, it was positive for chloroform. It was not the most chloroform he had seen in 20 years. It was not shockingly high. Baez is breaking it down to item tested. Q22 is a piece of a spare tire cover, it had residue of chloroform, very low levels. Q23 was the spare tire cover, the entire cover, he ran a test on an area of it, it had low levels of chloroform. Q24 was the left side of trunk liner, this was consistent with chloroform, consistent means one test detected it and the second method didn't pick it up. Consistent is a tricky phrase right? Yes. Q25 was the right trunk liner, it was consistent with chloroform, one test was very low levels, 2nd test didn't pick it up. Next item is Q44 a piece of the spare tire cover, it had residue of chloroform at low levels compared to positive control. Q45 was a piece of the spare tire, it had residue of chloroform at low levels. Did you test the steering wheel cover? Side bar........... Side bar is over................ Baez is still up, objection, sustained. Dr, these levels, residue levels are equal to what you might find in a common cleaning product? Yes. Jeff Ashton is up......... Did you find anything else that found cleaning products? I didn't do analysis for cleaning products. You talked about low levels, that is relative to high? Yes. Have you ever tested a dry item for chloroform? No, they are usually liquid. What might be a high or low quantity of a carpet sample? I don't know, I have never done a test on one. With regard to the spare tire cover, how did it come to you? How was it packed? Inside a cardboard box. What effect would that cardboard box have on a substance like this? It would leak out. Were you surprised you got any level of chloroform off of these items? Yes, it is a violative substance and I was very surprised to get any amount of chloroform but I was still able to get chloroform off that unsealed object. High and low is intensity of the peak. Sort of an idea of how much is there. The control standard is one you mixed, a known amount of chloroform, a known amount of chloroform it was one hundred parts per million. That is the standard he used to determine detect the qualitative positive control. Later on he was asked to give quantity, it is a very rough estimate of the level he detected. Q22 is a piece of spare tire cover in an air tight can, was that a better way to submit it in a can is the appropriate way to do it. On Q22 he could find better how much chloroform was on it. He later gave a percentage of it to the standard...it was 5 percent of the positive control. A very rough estimate. Q23 was about .1 percent, Q23 was the actual unsealed trunk liner. The sealed item contained much higher levels of chloroform. Q24 was in a sealed container and the rough percentage on that was 1 percent compared to positive control. Q25 was roughly 2 percent. Whatever the amount of chloroform is on the sample, would it have evaporated prior to it being put in the can? It is possible. If the trunk were left open for hours and the sample was taken 2 weeks before the sample was taken, would you expect it to evaporate? Yes, I would expect less to remain than in a closed container. Other than testing for chloroform in liquid, have you ever tested chloroform in an air sample? No, I have no first hand knowledge of air samples. So your examples of high, low or shocking, you have no knowledge of that from your testing? Correct, it was based on my testing, not air samples. Objections all over ruled. Jeff is done. Baez is up and dropped his big scribble pad, smiled as he picked it up. Dr. you testified that doing a quantitative amount is not the correct way to do it? Yes. You would not do that? No, I would not give an amount because it is not appropriate in a court of law. You have no experience in collecting chloroform in a solid carpet samples? No. So trying to guess how much would be wrong? Yes, that is why I did it in a qualitative way. To give a quantitative amount would be speculation? Yes. Jeff is back up. If no way to determine the amount of chloroform, how do you know it is in cleaning products? It is just the amounts that are detectable. So when you answered Baez you simply meant you have detected chloroform in cleaning products? Yes. Witness is excused, subject to recall. Next state witness is Jason R. Forgey. Linda is up.......... He works for the OC Sherrif's office, he is a canine handler. He currently handles a German Shepard. He has handled canines since 2001. He cross trained with the Canine Unit, prior to going into the Canine Unit. He transferred there in 2001. He received a dog in 2001, he went into training and had a blood hound originally. He trained with a dog and he went to scent training. That training was 5 weeks long, 3 weeks in a classroom and 2 weeks in a field. His first dog was Canine Garret. He did follow up training of 2 training tracks a month. He was tested with his dog quarterly. He worked with Canine Garret for 10 to 11 months till he had to be put down. Then he received Ike another blood hound, trained the same. You teach the dog how to scent train. He worked with Canine Ike years later in 2005, he gave him to another trainer. He worked with other dogs at the same time. He received Bones a cadaver dog. A cadaver dog is a single purpose dog. He is taught to find human decomp. He was part of the 911 disaster. He used Bones there. He is explaining how you teach a cadaver dog. You imprint him on the odor and then train him to do a final alert. Like telling him to sit, then you reward him. You put odor in one can and put out multiple cans and you reinforce when he gets the right one with a treat or a toy and praise. I final trained alert is a sit or a down at finding decomp. The dog is taught to work to source and then alert. You will see his behavior change, body and breathing changes, he is finding the odor, working to source then give final trained alert. You can see that there is a behavioral change then the dog will give a final, trained alert. He trained Bones to do this. Bones final, trained alert was a sit. What sort of aid did you use to imprint bones on decomp? He used rags with human decomp, rags soaked in a chest cavity of a dead person. Then move to different training aides...he went next to human bones, placentas, chest cavity rags, pseudo scent of drowned victims. A man made odor made to smell like a drowned victim. The tablet puts out an odor to be like a drowned victim. Other training aides were blood, tissue, grave dirt. Bones was taken out of the canine unit because they wanted a full service dog not a one purpose dog. Bones was tried to make a full service dog but he didn't work out, then they made the decision to retire Bones and he went home with a Capt of the agency. He went to work at another agency to be used as a cadaver dog in Osceola County. Forgey was the only cadaver dog user in the area. Then Forgey got a full service dog, he got Gerris, a German Shepard. Gerris came from Germany, he was 21 months old when Forgey got him his birthday was October 20th, he will be nine this October. Gerris was sent through a full service training. A 400 hour school of basic dog training, scent, man tracking, criminal apprehension. Gerris was then certified by FDLE. He was evaluated in all his training and passed his certification. Forgey was tested with him. After he was certified Gerris receive additional training in cadaver training, 100 hours. My grand kids are here. Stopping for now. Time for kissing and hugging and feeding breakfast, it is only 9am here. ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:04:28 PM 9am, Wednesday, June 8, 2011 Court is in session: Baez is objecting to the dog handler that is going to testify first. JBP schools him on the law and she is going to testify. Kristine Brewer is the State's first witness. Linda is up............... She is a supervisor of the Osceola County Sheriff's office. She started out in patrol, then traffic unit, then tactical unit, back on patrol, collateral duty with a canine. Her primary duty is a patrol supervisor. Her dog is named Bones. Bones came from the Orange County Sheriff's Office. She did dog obedience and tracking trainer as a hobby, prior to her working with work canines. Bones was given to her to work with, he was already a trained dog. His training paperwork came with him from Dep. Forgey. He then kept up his training records since she got him in 2005. Linda is showing the witness his training records. They are true and accurate of the majority of Bones training records, excluding vet records. They are introduced into evidence, after the judge reviews them. Dep Brewer first bonded with the dog in 2005. Dep Forgey met with her to discuss Bones about his cadaver searches with Bones. She and Bones then had regular training sessions, several hours a week. She kept a training log. Bones and she attended training programs: Basic Cadaver Course by Amy Redman, who is an authority on Cadaver Dog Training. Linda shows her a certificate she got for that course. It was a multi-day course, Bones was taken through, wood, glass, high grass, pavement, the targets must be found. Sometimes the trainer knew where, sometimes they didn't. Bones performance was very good, he had no false alerts and no misses. He was able to find all targets. Dep Brewer has trained him on human blood, placenta, bones, teeth, semen, human tissue. They attended several schools the next one was: A Water Seminar. All the targets are in water, the shoreline. He must be able to locate a source in the water or by it. Different sources were used, a written record was kept. Bones had no false alerts or misses. Linda shows her a certificate of completion for that seminar. She trains with him, with distractors, items she does not want him to alert to, toys, dog treats, food, animal remains. Multiple dogs do not distract him either. She has never had any problems with Bones alerting to food sources. His next training seminar was: The Advanced Land Seminar, sponsored by Country Class Canines, Lisa Higgins was the leader. She has a long history in canine training. Bones was required to complete a course, in buried, hanging, surface, diff depths, diff levels of decomp. Bones final trained alert is a "sit". Bones will look up above him if it is hanging and then sit below. The date of that training was 3-19-09. It was also his NNDDA Certification date. Linda shows the witness his records and Certificate from that seminar. Bones has been trained on residual odor, the item was placed and then removed and the odor has remained. They took cold human blood put it on a tile, then removed it and Bones could still alert to where it was. They also did this with a human body. Bones reward is a tennis ball. He is never rewarded with food, he is given that for being a good dog, lol. She also keep tracks of Bones "real world" calls, not training. He did one on Aug 3, 2005, he was called out for a search, he did not alert on that day. It was later searched and they found a dead dog. In May 2006, Bones was called out and Bones did not alert, it was searched and a dead animal was located. On May 10, 2006, Bones was called out and did not alert, it was dug and it was a dead dog. on Sept 5, 2006, Bones was called out to a search, he did not alert, they later searched and they found a dead opossum. On June 6, 2009, Bones was called out, he did not alert, they later searched and they found small animal remains. Bones has never falsely alerted on any occasion. Bones has alerted and human bones were located. On Mar 1, 2007, Bones was called to a location and alerted to several small bone fragments from a skeleton. On Oct 8, 2007, Bones was called to a location, to find a dead body buried in the woods for 2 to 3 weeks, Bones found and alerted exactly on the area where the body was later dug up. On Nov 8, 2007, Bones was called out to find an elderly lady deceased, he gave the final alert outside of her wall. Bones was called out to a landfill in Highlands County, he searched for several days, Bones alerted to a comforter that a baby had been born on. It was discarded in the trash. On March 6, 2008, Bones was called out to search, a human skull had been found, Bones alerted on additional bones in the area. He was called out May 14, 2009, he did a water search for young male who had drowned, they did a boat search of a large Lake, Bones alerted to an area of the water and they found his body. On May 19, 2009, Bones was called out to a burned human body, Bones alerted to it. In Dec 2010, Bones was called out to two bodies buried, Bones alerted to the graves. Bones is a single purpose dog, Cadaver only. He is called to many counties and out of state. Dep Brewer can tell when Bones gives her indicators that he is on to a scent. He picks his head up, paws, leave her and not come back when called because he wants the odor so bad. Side bar.......... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:05:31 PM 9:50 am, Wednesday, June 8, 2011 Court is in session: Side Bar is over Kristine Brewer is the witness. She is the canine handler of Bones........ Linda is up........ On July 17, 2008, she and Bones were called to the Anthony's residence. It was pretty dark already but still light enough to see. Darkness does not matter to the canine. They went to the back yard, just her and Dep Forgey, she was given no other info other than another dog had already searched. She walked to the back yard with Bones on lead through the gate, just past the gate she put his search collar on and she took him off lead. Bones did a search of the yard, the swimming pool, the whole yard, he kept going back to one area and gave a final alert. He sat. This was his trained final alert. Linda is publishing a photo to the jury. Sgt Brewer shows the area of the trained final alert. She shows with a pen an area by the bench and the playhouse. She then put Bones up and then Dep Forgey says his dog alerted there too. When she came back the next day the surface had been changed, there were several crime scene units there and they had disturbed the dirt. She ran Bones that day and he had no alerts. Her opinion is that whatever he alerted on had been moved. Baez is up............... He is pleasing the court. He is asking the alerts the cadaver dog does, she doesn't say find me some bones, some decomp fluid? No. The dog can alert on something from a live person, a drop of blood from a fingernail can cause it? Yes. Your training tells you to not use an old car? Yes. You try to train him without a bleeding person around? Yes. Showing her the photo of the final alert in the backyard. He is asking him about where Dep Forgey's dog alerted 6 -8 feet away? She doesn't know exactly where the other dog alerted. He is asking her more about where the other dog hit and she doesn't know. You were they for 2 days and you never employed your dog inside the house? Right. Where you told you could not deploy your dog in the house or the screened porch? No, they didn't ask me. Are you aware of any dog searches inside the home? No. Baez is done. Sgt Brewer is excused. Next witness is Sandra Osborne. Linda is up. Sandra is a Computer Forensic expert for the Orange County Sheriff's office. She has lots of computer training and she holds two certificates in training. She received classroom instruction and was tested. She had to do computer forensics. In the last 4 years, she has done 100's of exams of computers. She has testified as an expert witness in court before. JBP is accepted as an expert witness in Forensic Computer Analysis. Det Osborne, received items from the case of Caylee Marie Anthony. The first item was a cell phone owned by Casey. Linda is showing her evidence, she recognizes it, the label is hers and she sealed the package. It is a Nokia Cell Phone. She got forensic data from this phone. She used a tool called Cell Bright. She retrieved text messages, pics, whatever is in the phone. Sometimes the phone can hamper the way she extracts data, other things can hamper the extraction the data. She tried to find Zenaide Fernandez-Gonzales, she was not able to find her on it. She could only extract so much info on that phone due to soft ware. She is talking about Sim Cards. Casey's Nokia phone did have a Sim card. She used the Sim card to extract data from it. The Sim Card had no more info on it than the phone had. She gave the data she found and gave it to detectives. It was an easily readable report. She also received a laptop computer from Det Beasley. She received a desk top computer as well. Gives both serial numbers. She received the desktop on July 17th from Awilda McBride. She received a Polaroid Digital Camera and a Nikon Cool Pics Camera. She used a N-case software to extract info from the digital cameras. She received all files from the cameras. She located video files of Caylee Anthony. She was able to determine the date of the video files. The dates from the Nikon Cool pics camera was June 15th 2008, the video was taken at a nursing facility. The date and time of this video was embedded in the camera. The date and time settings were almost the same as real time. July 21, 2008 and 10:56am, there was a two min difference. She examined the laptop. She examined the desktop, it was a Hewlett Packard computer. It was not on at the time. She used different tools to examine it. She used the N-case Software. It is a standard used in the computer forensic world. She has used it since 2006. It is a reliable way to extract info from computers. N-Case tool can examine every bit on a hard-drive. She protected the original hard drive and removed the cables from the hard-drive. Her soft ware did not change anything on the computer, it was in a read only mode. She worked on a copy of the hard drive not the original hard drive. The computer was returned to the family after a copy was made of the hard drive. She stored them on 2 different sources, she has one with her in court. JBP is calling a 15 minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:06:32 PM 10:50 am, Wednesday, June 8, 2011 Court is in session: 15 minute recess is over......... Det Osborne is still on the witness stand, she is a computer forensic expert. Linda is up.......... Det Osborne is explaining the soft ware N-Case. She says she can see all the info on the hard drive, even deleted and in the un-allocated space. They are talking about the HP desktop computer. She is talking about the computer BIOS. She conducted it was July 18, 12:13 pm. The clock in the computer was the same time. She notes all the browsers and other applications. It had Windows XP. It had Mozilla Fire fox browser, Safari and Internet explorer. She was asked to find any info on Zenaida Fernandez- Gonzales and Caylee Marie Anthony. She found recent activity to find Zenaida, in the morning of July 16th , 2008. From people search, high school re-unions etc. Age from 22-29 in Orlando and Jacksonville. She found no other info on Zenaida on the computer. She is explaining how she searched the history of the computer. She used Net-Analysis. She could tell which user is making the search, the temporary internet files log which user account is being used. That is also true with the internet history and the cookies. Det Melich asked her to perform a key word search for chloroform in late Aug 2008. She used N-Case software to do this. She found searches for chloroform in deleted space on the hard-drive. She was then able to view the deleted space. She got a complete internet history from Mozilla Fire fox for chloroform. It had never been overwritten. It was the complete search. She alerted another individual that she found hits on chloroform. It was a complete file and she turned it over to her Sgt. He then took it and copied it out to another source and examined it on his own machine. She also looked at a computer owned by Ricardo Morales, she received it in Oct 2008 from Det Allen. She examined his hard drive and booted it into her program. It was an Apple computer. The date and time were Oct 28th, 3:24pm when she received it, it was set to 3 hours later, same date. She is showing a photo of Casey holding Caylee in Ricardo Morales apt, she says she found that pic on his computer. She was searching for a pic of Caylee with the pink t-shirt on. Once an image is found on the computer she can find out when the image was taken, the date is embedded in the file. JPB says they are taking a 5 minute recess. Recess is over............ 11:35am. Baez wants an instruction read to the jury about the bruise under Caylee's eye in this photo with Casey in the pink shirt at Ricardo's apartment. JBP is looking for it. Can't find it, he is going to put something together very quickly, they are returning the jury. He is telling them to disregard the bruise under the eye in the photo, it was not a result of abuse or anything of that nature. The witness finds the photo on the thumb drive and computer of Ricardo Morales, it was later sold to the Globe. The photo was put on the computer Jan 28, 2008. Showing another picture of Casey and Caylee in Ricardo's apt. They are sitting on the couch, Caylee is in the pink t-shirt "Big trouble", Casey is playing a guitar. Baez asks for side bar................. Side bar over.....................11:50pm. The camera that took this photo was a Cannon Powershot HD70, the date the pic was embedded in the computer, March 18, 2008. Linda is done............ Baez is up................. There are 2 user created profiles on this computer? Yes. That doesn't mean that only 2 people were using this computer? No. There could be multiple people that were using these profiles? Correct. So, if I used the owner profile and the computer stays on, I don't have to use the password? Depends on the setting on the computer. You don't know that information? No. So anyone could go go the computer and use that profile? Yes. Do you know the date and time the searches were done for chloroform? No. You never saw the Cannon Powershot Camera? No. You don't know if the date and time were set correctly on the camera? Objection, sustained. You don't know if everyone sets a date and time on their camera? No. You were asked to perform searches on Ricardo Morales's computer for chloroform? Correct. You didn't find any pictures referencing chloroform on that computer? No. He is now showing her Defense Exhibit 1, The picture on Ricardo's computer showing, "win her over with chloroform". This was posted on Ricardo's My Space Acct. If Ricardo Morales posted this on his my-space why was it not on his computer you examined? It would not appear on his computer, you can post on someone else's computer, or on a phone or on a different computer or it could of been deleted on the computer in the unallocated space and overwritten. That could of happened to any computer you have examined? Yes. Baez is done. Linda is up............... If you are doing a keyword search, would the pixels of the picture be found on the computer? No, Words embedded in a picture are not going to appear in a keyword search, they are pixels. Ricardo's computer had no search hits for the word chloroform. The witness is excused. JBP is recessing for the lunch break. Will resume at 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:07:26 PM Oh no, I have typed since lunch and hit a button to send it and lost it all again. ::MonkeyNoNo:: I forgot to save it to notepad. ::MonkeyNoNo:: I tried everything to get it back but it is gone. Ok, here is what I remember. Kevin Stenger was up first and he showed us that Casey looked up chloroform and he is a det from the Orange County Sheriff's office. He then asked John Bradley to help him with his search of the deleted internet history, that seemed to be deleted all the same day. It was a huge file and was contiguous. John Bradley was declared an expert in computer forensics and he showed the jury his report of how Casey searched for chloroform, head injury and lots of other weird things, lol. Baez tried to make it seem as if she only spent seconds to do it and then went to My Space but My Space was just an ad or a cookie and John Bradley took us through the whole deleted history up until she was looking up, internal bleeding, some kind of injury to an artery and lots of crazy things, they were all done at the same time and the history seemed to be deleted all at once. Linda was doing a really good job and Baez didn't seem to try much to get anything stopped. It is what it is. Sorry about losing everything, my hubby can't believe I did that again and I am kicking myself, lol. I am going back to typing in note pad and saving it. Anyway, Linda looked good and the witnesses were pretty easy to understand and the jury got to see it all in writing. Casey looked like, uh oh, they caught me and she forgot to draw half her eye brows on. ::piggy:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:08:28 PM 3:20pm, Wed June 8, 2011. Court is in session. John Bradley is on the witness stand. Linda is up........... He is still explaining the report of the deleted history. He sees a cookie on the system that came from My Space. He sees auto-generated ad ware. Linda is showing him his report page by page. He is pointing out hits on Face Book, it is auto-generated. The user is now on Face Book.com. Linda is introducing a new page into evidence from March 21, 2008. It is another CacheBack page. The entry 3-21-08 is for user generated activity for Chemistry/chloroform.com, that is the way it looks today and could be the way it looked back then. He is talking about the next entry Linda is showing him the search term is for "how to make chloroform" the next one is similar but "how to make chloroform" correctly. The user at the time misspelled chloroform on the first try. Some of these items might have been bookmarked. Next items are system generated the next one user generated is a search for chloroform. This is the result for that search. Next one is an entry for instructables.com for "making weapons out of household items". Next one is for a search result for a google search, a search for "neck breaking" it appears to be a genuine search. The next one is a wiki.com search for "My Space". Next entry is for Face Book.com site, request, read message. Linda shows the witness the remainder of the report, it appears to be Face Book activity through the remainder of the report except for 2 add tracking items. The rest of the pages of the report are Face Book activity. He is going through lots of pages. Some are ad tracking. He was not asked to perform any other examinations by the Orange County Sheriff's office. Linda is done......... Baez is up.............. You were originally approached by Sgt Stenger? Yes. He approached you because he was using your soft ware and there was a bug in it. Well, no not really, this was an extraordinary case. You stayed up all night trying to fix it? Yes. You don't just look at this blindly you worked all night and you put something together for him. Yes. I was here for 3 days and worked on it for him. After that you were hired for this case? Can you clarify that? You were asked to be a witness for this case? Yes, I did that for free. I could get paid but I am not sure. You haven't discussed what you are going to be paid? No. Is it the advertising that your concerned about? What? This is a high profile case and you have a link on your soft ware page for this case? Yes, I put that up recently to show how CacheBack might be used. If i go to your website, I will find an article about this case? Yes. Do you consider that an advertisement? It is subtle and it was put up after 2 years. It doesn't hurt the promotion of your product either? I am not overwhelmed with calls for it. It says you are the number one choice for forensic computer work? Yes but that was up there before this case. Baez is showing the witness how long the user was looking chloroform before another website came up? This is a 57 page document, where should I look? Baez gives him a page to look at. It is March 18, 2008 at 2:43pm. Baez wants to know how long between the search for chloroform was 7 seconds before a page comes up? Yes. The next time someone looked up chloroform how long before another page comes up? 1 second later. OK so you got 7 seconds then 1 second. The witness says let me explain something to you first. Baez is badgering him and Linda objects. The judge lets the witness explain. He is explaining the seconds disparity, he is explaining that he can't replicate that. Baez giggles and says that's OK. Baez now asks about peroxide and then someone types in? I can't say someone typed that in but it was a search for self-defense on wiki.com. So someone searched for wiki.com for self-defense. So wiki may have links that come up and may have been clicked on? Yes. So after that it was reality based self-defense? I didn't know what RBSD was, it was just an acronym. That one was for hand to hand combat? Did the investigators tell you that hand to hand combat had anything to do with this case? No sir. And the next one was head injuries? Did they tell you that had anything to do with this case. And the next one is Meningeal Artery? Yes. Did the investigators tell you that had anything to do with this case? The next one was for chest injuries and internal bleeding? Did the investigators tell you that anyone was internally bleeding 3 months before this case? No sir. Someone is looking at Hypbobelemia? Yes sir. Did anyone tell you that Hypobelemia had anything to do with this case. No sir. Baez shows him the next thing. It is the first chloroform search there. Now that is at 3:16.30? No, there are 2 chloroform searches before that. Baez says, he is sorry, he is going backwards. Is there a My Space before that one? No. Baez is asking him about all the searches for chloroform. The first search is how long? Approx 17 seconds. Going to the next search for the prior search for chloroform, how long is that search? 2 mins 25 seconds. The next search for chloroform and the next page? 21 seconds. Baez says when you gave us the 2 mins and 25 secs was there any other pages that came up between them? No. So that is the longest time anyone spent looking at chloroform? The one talking about chloroform habit? Did you look at that page? Yes I did. It was information about a chloroform habit in the 1800's? Yes. The next one is "how to make weapons out of household items". Did the investigators tell you that someone is making weapons at their house and that is relevant? No. What is the next one you have? You mean search? Yes, what is the next one you have? It is a Google search for neck-breaking. Do you have anything prior to that for self-defense for women? The witness is going back to look. He can't find anything for that. Did you look that up? I don't know anything about a book, unless you can enlighten me. Baez goes up to show him. Baez is walking back, smirking all the way. Baez asks about another entry, the witness says they may have two different reports and Baez says he will just move along. Do you see at 3-23-08 the site home security basics? Yes but I don't know what that is. Do you see the next one at blogger.com about Zombie's.com. Do they tell you that zombies have anything to do with this case? Does this appear to be someone fast surfing to you? His answer is basically 3 years later I could not replicate this. Things could of been clickable options or cookies, what was auto inserted or anything? Baez says if you go to the next one that would take you to funny.com, that would be funny household weapons? Yes. Next there might be some banner ads? Yes. Then you have neck breaking? How long before they click to fighting arts.com? 1min 54 sec. That is a Kung fu site is it not? I don't know. All of these searches have to do with funny household items and etc. I agree. Then you have the word shovel. Yes, on wiki.com. Are you aware of the movie Shovel? No. When you were consulted in 2009, that was only a few months after this case came about? Yes, apparently so. Those links were available at that time, would you have been able to tell the jury the actual page rather than a link? Sustained. The link doesn't tell you anything about the actual website? Yes. Some could be jokes, some could be medical facts...ect. Yes, I would agree with that. The user may not even be looking at this stuff? Objection, sustained. A computer examiner could never testify to what a person is reading on the computer? Correct. At the end of the day sir, the information you that could be gleaned from here could not mean anything. No, they could be very relevant. Keep in mind that we are talking about Fire Fox so I have no idea what other browser was being used. We are talking about a little over 3 mins in time, they were looking at these items? Yes but that is just decoding. So the only dates you were given was the month of March? No, I wasn't given the month of March. I was given certain things to work with. Oh so, you weren't even given the whole month of March? Correct, I was given stuff to decode. Baez is asking about who was on the computer and the witness says it was user generated use with Fire Fox. Baez says if you take everything into consideration you can't put into context how this 3 minutes were put into context during the month of March? That is correct. Objection..Sustained. Baez is done........ Linda is up............. The issue Sgt Stenger ran into was decoding the deleted information from the Fire Fox browser. Why was he not able to decode that? He didn't have the soft ware to complete it. So you worked with him in December of 2009? Yes. Where you aware that the history was from 2008? I don't know. Are you aware that websites can change dramatically? Yes. When Mr. Baez says that all it take is 7 seconds? Well that is not true, the Google is looking for it and takes a certain amount of time, not the time they were looking at it. When someone types into a search engine How to Make Chloroform, they are trying to figure out how to make chloroform? Objection, sustained. The wiki doesn't always keep you on their page, you can click off of it? Yes. You can't tell if items were printed off the internet for later review. That is correct? Does the passage of time change how the site would of appeared? Yes. Can you tell how that website would appear 18 months later? Yes, were you just trying to tell the jury what searches were made? Yes. The searches that were made, that whole time frame encompassed an hour? That is correct. The one for chemistry.com/chloroform how many times was that site visited? 84 times. Linda is done........ Baez is up............. The witness shows Baez what he is looking for, lol. Baez takes the report from the witness and hands it back to him. That is the copy of the report you submitted? No, I didn't submit it, someone else did. Baez can't ask him about someone else's report. Objection..sustained. They are going to side bar.......... Side bar is over...... The judge is letting the jury go for the day. He wants someone to verify if Sgt. Stenger is still in the building. He was a previous expert witness for the state today. John Bradley is excused till the morning. JBP asks if there is anything else? There is nothing else, court is in recess till 9am tomorrow morning. JBP asks if the jury can watch Hangover 2 and X-Men? No objections. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:24:55 PM Good Morning monkeys ::MonkeyKiss:: Here is to hoping lots of good stuff comes out today. I would love to see Lee back on the stand, I can't wait to see what he got limited-use immunity for. See ya in court. ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:25:55 PM 9:00am, Thursday, June 9, 2011 Court is in session: State witness John Bradley is back on the stand......... Baez is up for recross............... John Bradley is a computer forensic expert for the state. Baez is pleasing the court. John Bradley says he had the headers and the footers for the history he decoded. He was asked to do that because OC had done a net analysis. He used a different software. He was given one deleted Fire Fox 2 history file. Baez is showing him a copy of a report and he asks if it is authored by him, lol. When he mentioned the 84 hits to SySpot.com, he did not have the whole URL for that. He is correcting Baez on what reports that he is looking at. He is approaching the witness with a report not created by him. He did not perform that report at all. All he can testify to is the URL links that he found. They do not refer to 84 hits? Mr Bradley says that it does not refer to the URL site, it just counts how many times it was hit. Baez asks about the page refreshing and Bradley doesn't know. He was brought in 9 months later....Sustained and he is arguing with the judge about it. There are no other internet searches in Apr, June, July 2008? He doesn't recall looking at anything outside the month of March. Linda asked about printing out pages but you have no evidence that any pages were printed out, unless the printer left an artifact? Correct. Mr Bradley can't speak to what was found or not found, he does not know. He was given no information but the data file. Baez is done.............. Linda is up.......... The data file you were given encompassed a time in March 2008? Yes. The tab will only refresh if they page is open? He explains that the page is not refreshed unless the user asks it to be refreshed. The time sequence we alluded to, will a page remain active and use a new page and the old page will remain open. Any succession on the internet history does not mean one tab is open and another tab is closed? The site we are talking about is a blog? I don't know which one? The Syspot? Sustained. Anyone can write a blog? Sustained. The witness is excused. Sidebar........... Sidebar is over.......... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:35:17 PM 9:20am, Thursday June 9, 2008 Court is in session: Next state witness is Lee Anthony. Mr Frank is up.............. On July 16, 2008 you were doing some searching on the Anthony family desk computer? In Aug 2008 did Casey return home? Yes, she did. Did Casey then tell you a different story about what happened to Caylee? Yes she did, she told me that Zanny and her sister met her at a Jay Blanchard Park and Zanny held Casey down and took Caylee from her with the help of her sister. She was held by her wrists, they were sitting on a park bench and she was held down. Casey told him why but he doesn't recall. Mr Frank is referring him to his deposition. He is showing him the Depo of July 30, 2009. Lee is reading the lines he was asked to. What was the reason Caylee was being taken? Casey wasn't being a good mother and was taking Caylee from her to teach her a lesson and not to go to the police. She gave him a detailed description of Zanny, 5 feet 10 inches, long hair, good complexion, 100 lbs and she tanned, she was Hispanic. Casey saw Caylee being taken from her, Lee doesn't recall again, having his memory refreshed. Showing him a depot taken in Feb 2009, Lee says Casey was shocked at what was happening and it felt surreal to her. She did not do anything to stop Caylee from being taken from her because she was scared. Then Zanny was controlling her through My Space, she had Casey's PW and was sending her messages on what to instruct her to do. She went to the places Zanny told her to go to. Timer55 was the My Space PW. Timer55 meant she did not create it but she thought it meant it was the date Caylee was taken from her till the day of Caylee's Birthday and she would be given back in 55 days. She said she did not create this PW, Zanny did. She did not say how Zanny was able to change her PW. Mr George is done.......... Baez is up............ Your sister told you another story about imaginary Zanny the Nanny? She told me another story about Zanny the Nanny. She told Casey to go to places to see Caylee? Yes. Was there anymore detail into that? Like stores and places like that? Yes, to look for Caylee, walk around. None of these imaginary My Space posts of this imaginary Zanny the Nanny panned out? Casey never was successful in meeting Caylee and Zanny the Nanny never materialized? No. Witness is excused. Linda is telling JPB the defense wants time to discuss the next event about to occur, they are at side bar....... JBP called for a 5 minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:36:52 PM 9:55 Thursday, June 9, 2011 Court is in session. They just came back from a 5 minute recess...went to side bar...side bar is over..... Linda is introducing something into evidence and Judge is reading a stipulation. An OC meter employee made a 911 call and it is going to be played for them, it a true and accurate recording. Orange County employees are telling 911 that Roy Kronk found a skull. The operator is asking for information. They tell them not to touch it. Roy Kronk will wait for LE to get there. This is a guy from utility customer service, name is Rusty. Roy Kronk will be a OC vehicle. The next state witness is Edward Turso. He is employed by the OC Sheriff's office as a deputy. He is in Sector 2 and was in Dec 11, 2008. He arrived on scene to Suburban Drive to meet with Roy Kronk. He has been shown his report and notes the time was 9:32am. It was right at an intersection in a wooded area. He met Roy Kronk and Roy Kronk told him he had to relieve himself in the woods and he found a skull. Kronk led him into the woods, they passed the skull, then walked back to it. Dep Turso walked over to the skull, looked at it and walked away. Neither of them touched it. He had Roy Kronk write a statement and he called his Sgt. He taped off the scene. Linda is done............ Baez is up.......... Did Mr Kronk tell you that he called 3 times in Aug? Sustained. Where you aware......sustained. Did you have any conversations with Mr Kronk...sustained and the Judge tells him to move on. Baez is asking Mason for help. How far did you go into the woods? 20 feet from the street? Was there grass that was mowed before you get into the wooded area? I don't remember if there was a mowed section. You don't recall or you don't remember? I don't remember. How far did you walk past the skull? 5 feet. They walked back to the skull. There was a fallen tree by it. Do you remember seeing a bright red bag? No. I just focused on the skull and the black bag next to it. Baez wants a side bar............ Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:37:53 PM 10:15am June 9, 2011, Court is in session. Baez is up........ Dep Turso, told Mr Kronk to write a statement, he gave Mr Kronk, no other instructions. Baez is done...... The witness is excused for the day. JBP is taking another recess. The jury has been excused. JBP is telling the gallery that crime scene photos are going to be shown next and that if you are queasy you need to leave. If you show any reactions you will be escorted out by deputies. Recess for 10 minutes. Poor baby Caylee. My heart is breaking all over again.... ::MonkeyAngel:: I wonder if Casey will have any reaction? ::boxingcasey2:: ::boxingcasey2:: ::boxingcasey2:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:39:00 PM 10:40 Thursday, June 9, 2011 Court is in session: Returning from a 10 minute recess.... Next state witness is Jennifer Welch. Back from recess, went right to a JBP called sidebar........sidebar over. JBP says the pool camera is instructed to blur or pixelate the photos of the skull. No one else or any journalist will use a cell phone or any other device will be allowed. Any gallery members using a camera will have it confiscated and be escorted out by deputies. Jury is returned. Linda is up......... Jennifer Welch is a OC forensic unit employee for just over 5 years. Her assignment is CSI. She was a CSI in December of 2008. She was called to a location on Suburban Dr. The address was 8900 block of Suburban Drive, she arrived at 1125 hours. It was raining on scene and dence vegetation, there were several LE present, none in the woods, they were stationed on the street. A crime scene area had been taped off. Part of her job is to take initial photos of the scene, prior to recovery of any evidence. She took crime scene photos. Linda is showing the first photo. She says they are looking at the dense vegetation, present at the crime scene area. Next photo is up, it is a true and accurate photo of the woods as they were that morning. It shows the path that led into the wooded area, she is showing the path to the wooded area with a blue pen. Next photo, it fairly and accurately shows the exterior of the wooded area of the crime scene. She is showing on this photo the path that led to the crime scene. They are taken in a panoramic view of the area. Next photo is the next section of woods as they were found that morning. She can't tell where the path is in this photo. Next photo, is a fair and accurate portion of the woods as she found them that morning. Can't see the path in this photo, it is out of the picture. The item to the left of the photo is crime scene tape. The next photo is of the wooded area and the street, it is a fair and accurate photo of the area that morning, Dec 11, 2008. It is the vantage point to the East, she is pointing out the crime scene tape and LE vehicles. Next photo is the beginning of the path that goes down to the crime scene, it is fair and accurate. She is marking the pathway on this photo. Linda is asking about an item that appears in the photo, it is a sign that advertises for Kinder Care Daycare. Welch marks the path on this photo. Next photo is shows a continuation of the pathway, it is fair and accurate. Linda is pointing out raindrops on the photo. Next photo is a fair and accurate condition of the woods as you go further down the path into the woods. Welch is showing how the path goes through the wooded area. Next photo is a fair and accurate view of the woods as they appeared that morning. Welch is showing how the path made it's way through the woods. Linda is asking what are the items that she is indicating. They are hanging vines. Next photo is a fair and accurate representation of the floor of the woods. The office of the ME recovered a skull from this area. Welch shows where the skull is. Casey is crying or trying to. Next photo is a fair and accurate representation of the skull as it was found by her and the ME. She is showing which part is the top of the skull and which is the right side of the skull. Next photo is the location of the skull from further back. Welch is marking where the skull is found, West of the log. Next photo is the view looking back at the road. She is standing near the skull, looking West as she takes the photo, a light pole is in the photo. Next photo is another angle of other evidence items, it shows the skull and other items of evidence. Welch identifies the other items in the photo and where the skull is. The skull is West of the log, then there is a black plastic bag and then at the NW area is a off- white canvas bag and there is a Disney bag. Next photo is crime scene as she found it with other items taken into evidence. Welch shows where the log is, the off-white canvas bag and the black plastic bag. Next photo shows the area the skull was found in. Welch says she is standing to the NW of the skull among the vegetation. The vegetation obscured her view of the skull but she shows where the skull is and the front of the skull. Next photo is near where the skull was located. Welch is pointing out the log in the photo, she is marking the log. She shows the other evidence items, on the west side of the log. The red item is a Disney bag. There is a black plastic bag and off-white canvas bag. Next photo is shows a view of the evidence items under the log. Welch points out where the log is and where other items of evidence are. In this photo you can see a pair of shorts. Next photo shows a different vantage point of the evidence items. Welch points out the skull, the pair of shorts and black plastic bag, barely visible is the Disney bag. Next photo is a close-up image of the skull as she found it. She points out the items, the skull and black plastic bag. Next photo shows another angle of evidence items. Welch points out the black plastic bag and a pair of shorts. Next photo shows evidence items. Welch points out a small section of beer bottle found on scene and a portion of the black plastic bag. Next photo shows a view of the skull and other items of evidence. Welch points out the black plastic bag and clothing remnants. The clothing remnant is a collar with a tag still present. She points out the front of the skull. Next photo shows one of the evidence items. Welch points out a close-up of the clothing remnants, she points out the collar with the tag. She points out the front of the skull with DUCT TAPE. Next photo shows evidence items. Welch points out the off-white canvass bag, the black plastic bag and the skull. Prior to collection Welch could tell that no portion of the off-white canvas was in the black plastic bag. Next photo is of evidence that was found. Welch says her vantage point was standing to the east of the black plastic bag which would of been North NE of the skull. You can see the off-white canvas bag and the black plastic bag, Linda shows her an item in the corner and she says it appears to be DUCT TAPE. It is on the skull. Next photo shows the evidence items from a different vantage point. Welch says her vantage point was standing partially over the log to the SE of the skull, she leaned over the log to take the photo. She points out the black plastic bag, the off-white canvas bag and the red plastic Disney bag and the skull. Next photo shows a close up of items of evidence. Welch points out a close-up of the DUCT TAPE on the skull and the clothing item remnants, she points out the direction of the tag on the collar. Next photo is another angle of the same evidence item, there is another item in the photo. Welch points out it is a blanket, she thought it was a towel. Next photo shows another vantage point. Welch says it was a view pointing to Suburban Drive, it has the off-white canvas bag in it. Next photo shows the scene as the ME arrived and began to remove the remains. Welch shows which items are in the photo, the black plastic bag, the red plastic Disney bag, the skull with DUCT TAPE present and the chief ME is removing it from the scene. Linda is done with the witness.... Baez is up.......... He is pleasing the court. He wants to talk to her about her position. As a CSI, the first thing she should do is document the scene? Yes. You want to try to show the jurors what it looked like when you arrived? Yes. Part of the reason is you never get a 2nd chance at a crime scene? Yes. Once people come in, it starts to become contaminated? Yes. If the body has been tampered with, it would affect everyone to determine what happened at that location? Yes. Some of the things you also look for is to see if the scene is stage? Yes. You need to be very careful of what may be a staged scene? Yes. That is because sometimes people try to conceal items of evidence? They may. Then there are some stages scenes where people try to make it look like something else happened there? Yes. That is why it is important to make sure the scene has not been tampered with? Yes, that would be correct. Baez is showing her a photo. He is drawing her attention to the duct tape area. Can you draw a circle around the duct tape? Now is it fair to say that the duct tape is somewhat in the air in this photo? It appears it could be. You can see almost the entire width of the duct tape? Yes. Is this the front portion of the skull? Yes. Is this the end of the duct tape? Yes, if that is the duct tape. Is the skull flat on the ground, pointed? I can't tell if it is flat on the ground but it appears to be pointed. Shows her another photo. Baez circles the duct tape, here you see the duct tape and not the skull? Yes. It appears to be lying on the surface? I can't tell. There end piece appears to be here and the other end piece down there? It appears to be. Baez shows her another photo. This is a close up of the duct tape, correct? Yes. This is the entire width of the duct tape? Yes. This appears to be the end of the duct tape? Yes. It appears to be an uneven edge? Yes, it appears to be. Baez shows her another photo. We see now almost the entire width of the duct tape? Yes. This appears to be the end of the duct tape? It appears to be a section of the ending. Baez shows her another photo. This is Inv Hansen and he is collecting the skull at this time? Yes. He is also collecting the duct tape at the same time? Is he applying force to lift it? Yes, you would have to. Is he also grabbing vegetation? Yes. He is also applying pressure? He would have to to collect the skull. He is not wearing any protective foot wear is he? No. The other guy in the photo is also not wearing protective foot wear? No. They could be standing on other items of evidence? They could be. Baez is done..... No other questions from Linda. JBP has the attorneys approach for side bar. The witness is excused subject to recall. Side bar is over.......... Next witness is Steven Hanson. Jeff is up............ He is the asst Chief ME for District 9. He supervises all investigators but he also does CSI. He went to the location of Suburban Drive at 11am, December 11, 2008. He arrived and took photos. Jeff shows him a photo. It shows the South side of Suburban Drive. It was raining when he arrived. It is a photo surrounding the crime scene. Jeff shows him a photo. It shows the opening of the growth, the path that led into the area where the remains were found. Hanson marks the path. Jeff shows him another photo. It shows a view moving further into the woods. Hanson shows him the path and explains that you take photos of a large crime scene area then you take smaller photos as you get to the actual crime scene. Jeff shows him another photo and he points out a plastic advertisement on the ground. He shows the path down to the remains, it slightly curves to the right. Jeff shows him another photo of the continuation of the path. Hanson points out the path. Jeff shows him another photo that is further into the area in question. In this photo do we see the first hint of the area we are talking about? Yes and he circles a fallen log and the area is just beyond that. Jeff shows him another photograph. Hanson points out a line around the area of concern as he gets closer to it. It was taken with flash. The area was dark and raining but the pictures look better than it was that day because of the flash. They are taking the lunch break until 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:40:12 PM 1:30pm Thursday June 8, 2011 Court is in session State witness is ME Kevin Hanson. Jeff is asking him about crime scene photos, that he, himself took. First photos were of the crime scene area then as he got closer and closer to the remains. Then photos of the skull and the remains area. When he first started taking this series of photographs, he did not notice the duct tape. He is now pointing out the duct tape on the skull. This photo was taken with vegetation, then they started clearing out the vegetation. They were taking pictures for 3 to 4 hours. The next photo shows the vines cleared away and the fallen log removed. He put a blue line at the bottom of the photo where the log was removed. They removed vines to better take photos of the remains. Next photo is a close-up of the skull, after the vines have been cleared away and the log removed. The ground had nothing removed. This photo was taken from the opposite side from the other's were. They moved outside of the area where the log was, it was taken from the other side, so you could now see the front of the skull. The camera is probably 2 and a half feet off the ground. It was a digital camera and had a flip out screen. He was able to rotate the camera down and not have to get down on the ground. In this photo you can see the duct tape. He couldn't tell it was more than one piece at this point. He circled the duct tape. The duct tape was difficult to tell where it was because of the hair mat and the undergrowth, that photo shows exactly what they saw. There was a great deal of leaf debris around the skull. The recorded it exactly as found and then they started to make some changes. He shows the jury the hair mat that he is talking about. It appeared to be all hair around the skull. The matter on top of the skull was hair also. Next photo shows the skull the duct tape and the bags. The ME has to understand the remains scene better than the broad photos that the rest of the CSI take. ME has the authority over the remains, LE owns the crime scene but ME has the remains. He was hoping all of the bones were in the bag. He considered the bags as containing additional remains, so he was in control over the bags and the skull, this was agreed to by LE. Next photo shows the skull the duct tape and the plastic bag. This photo shows the skulls position. It seemed to be embedded in the vines and leaf debris. The debris was up to the mid eye socket. He is showing on his own skull the leaf debris, it was just below his eye sockets and went around the circumference of the head. The skull was angled, it was not straight up. It was difficult to tell because of the leaf debris around it. They decided to remove the skull and the tape together, with the leaf debris too, they wanted to recover all of the evidence around the skull. They realized the duct tape and the hair mat were going to be important. They tried to collect a large portion of the area to include the skull and the debris and put it in a paper bag for transport. Next photo is a photo of him removing the skull from the ground. One of the CSI was holding a bag open so he could hold the skull and the debris around it. About 6 to 8 inches away from the skull and scooped up all of it and put it in a paper bag. He scooped till he felt harder ground. He made sure that the hair mat and the tape was almost in the same position. May have not been exact same position but as much as possible. They collected the bag and the canvas bag next to it and they collected long bones that were in the same proximity. They were all placed in a plastic shroud and then a body bag. He collected cloth items, he later found out were shorts. He also collected a large piece of cloth he later found out was a blanket. He handed it over to Gary Utz. He transferred the remains over to his office and he signed for all the other bones for the most part, going back and forth with additional remains. His first trip to the crime scene was on Dec 11, 2008 his last trip was on Dec 17, 2008. He kept going back for additional remains found. Dr. John Shultz was at the crime scene. He is the head anthropologist. He was at the ME on Dec 11, 2008. The remains were found in Orange County, Florida. Jeff Ashton is done......... Mason is up............ Says this is the only time I want to see you, laughs. He is showing the ME a photo. He is asking him what is lying in the grass? ME says a machete and something else that looked like an arrow. Did you use a machete? No, do you know who used a machete? There was some clearing of the woods before you got there? It looked like someone had cut a path and cleared it a little bit but he didn't do it. He only reviewed his own photos. How many LE and CSI were on the scene? Lots. Was the media there? Not at first but they got there later. So you don't know how many people were there and where they went? No. Was the rotted log there when you got there. Yes. Do you know who removed the log? Yes sir, raises hand, that was me. Mason shows him a photo. Mason doesn't know how to use the equipment, Linda is helping him. He asks Linda to stay there and help him, she says no, I don't work for you. The witness can't see the photo, now he can. He says he sees duct tape laying on the ground, is that correct? There is a portion of the duct tape looking like it was laying on the ground. Is there an edge there of the end of the tape? I don't know if it was lying on the ground, it had just come off the skull. Was there any scales used to take these photos? No sir. Did this skull seem to be somewhat embedded, how deep was it? I don't know, it was just in leaf debris. When you were asked to come there and look at the scene, did you know that anyone had lifted the skull? I had heard someone had kicked it. Objection, Sustained. On your watch, no one moved it? Correct. Mason shows another photo, do you see that sir? Yes. Do you know who all the other feet belong to? Two of them were mine and the others were authorized to be there. What reason did you have to gather the skull the way you did? To gather as much as I could and the debris around it. So if the duct tape was positioned flat....objection sustained. If the duct tape was flat, the duct tape would have changed position? It could have. Dr Utz was the on call ME? I don't know if he was on call but he got the remains when I went back to the office. Later Dr. G came in and she took over? Yes, it seemed that way, it was Dr stuff. You went out there repeatedly? Yes, I went out there and got the remains and took it back to the ME office. Someone else put it together? Yes. Did you observe it? No, I was doing my job. Somebody was assembling the skeleton but it wasn't you? Someone was. Was it photographed? Not by me. Mason is taking a moment to talk to Baez. The log you moved, did you photograph the whole log before you moved it? I don't know. Where did you move it to? Off to the side. Did you look at all the photo's you took? Yes. Do you have knowledge of a white board laying across the log, like a 2 by 4? No, I never saw it and it shouldn't of been moved till I got there. Witness is excused. Next state witness is Dr. Jerry Utz. He is the Chief Deputy ME for Orange County, since April 2008. He has a BS and and MD and training in anatomic and clinical pathology and lots of other stuff and he is licensed to practice medicine in Florida and Ohio. He was involved in the ME office's examination of Caylee Anthony. He knew of her as a missing child first. He then found out that remains were found, he was working and called by Dr. G. She was leaving town and asked him to take over the investigation. He had talked to Inv. Hanson and was prepared to receive the remains at the ME office. He let the FBI have some of the remains. The first thing he saw in this case, was a large bag that contained another bag that contained the bags and fabric and leaf litter. There was another bag that contained the skull and the duct tape and the hair and leaf litter. He then took photos of the items he received. He shows him the first photo he directed to be taken. In this photo he sees two plastic garbage type bags with yellow handles, mixed with leaf litter and debris and a long bone, a leg bone. The off-white item is a laundry bag, a fabric laundry bag, mixed in with the other bags and the leaf litter. Eventually these items were photographed separately. The next photo is the skull with the duct tape and the leaf litter. This is a human skull that is facing the ******* and it is upright and over the jaw and the facial bones are silver-grey colored tape, there is also hair that is extending over the top of the skull. Next photo is of the skull, from directly above the skull, the skull has not been moved since the last photo. Strands of hair are going down over the skull, the hair mat is partially shown in this photo. Next photo is the skull from the side. Looking at the right side and the back of the skull and the strands of hair and the mat of hair in the back. You can also see the tape. The tape appears to come around to the sides of the skull. Next photo is the skull again at this time from the rear and left side and there is several leaves and twigs that are obscuring the skull, you can see the hair mat with a leaf over it. He is circling the hair mat. The thicker objects in the hair mat appear to be plant roots. Next photo is of someone tilting the skull, it is being supported so the face part is perpendicular to the camera. The hands are cradling the skull. Looking at the skull face on so you can see the eye sockets and the hair that is partially covering the eye sockets. Right below that is the tape, this is not in 3d, what part of the tape is this. The tape was not loose, they were stuck together, he thinks 3 pieces of tape. Next photo is of the skull taken from a different angle. The skull has been tilted so now the bottom is upward toward the camera. This is the bottom of the jawbone or the mandible and your looking up from this direction and this is a portion of the tape and the rest of this is the hair and what appear to be plant roots and pieces of leaves. Does the mandible stay in place? It does. Is that unusual? It is, by this time of decomp the mandible is usually detached. It is still attached because of the hair mat and the roots, the tape was still stuck to the hair, the fabric of the tape had stuck to the mandible. You can see that in this picture and in another picture you can see the fabric of the tape stuck to the mandible and roots growing through it. The hair and tape had to be cut, to keep the duct tape as much intact as possible. Next photo is of the skull with the mandible removed. Looking at the skull from the bottom and the mandible has been removed so you can see the upper jaw and some teeth. Covering the back of the skull is the hair mat. How did you remove the mandible? After I removed the tape and part of the hair, the mandible was easily removed. Have you ever seen remains this old with the mandible still part of the skull? I have not. Was this leaf debris under the skull or around the skull. The skull was sitting on it in the paper bag when it was delivered to him. Next photo has the mandible and tape still on the skull. Goes back in time with the skull tilted down on the left side and your looking at the lower jaw. They lifted the tape to show how the fabric backing of the tape is partially attached to the lower mandible. Jeff is magnifying the photo. You can see how the fabric that is coming from the tape is sticking into the mandible and some hair strands are still stuck to the tape. Some of the tape is lightly adhering to the mandible, also plant roots. The root appears to go under the tape and comes out. You can see multiple layers of tape? Yes. Next photo is of the tape after it ws removed. This is what the tape looked like after it was separated from the remains. You can see the layers of the tape and much of the fabric backing. The tape was taken into evidence and then released to the FBI. Jeff is showing the witness an evidence bag the tape was put in it and sent to the FBI. Next photo is a close up photo of the emblem that appeared on the tape (Henkle) it was still clear in the deteriorated condition, the tape was not cleaned or cleared. The emblem stood out clearly. The next photo is of a fabric laundry bag. Next photo is of a different aspect of the fabric laundry bag. This is the fabric laundry bag, of canvas off-white. The opening is a hard ring. It seemed to be waterproofed. Next photo is of the inside of the canvas laundry bag. Taken looking directly into the opening of the bag, there are two handles. There was nothing inside the bag, if there was it was just debris, it had not been cleaned. Then next photo is of the canvas laundry bag label. Next photo is also of the laundry bag label, says Whitney Design. Jeff is going to fast for the jury and they spoke up. Next photo is of the garbage bags with the yellow handles. Seems to be pretty intact with a hole in the bottom. The yellow handles are tied closed. Next photo is a closer look at the ties of the bag tied closed. The knot appears at the top of the bag. The bag at the time it was found was torn. Next photo is a close up of the knot and how tight the bag was closed. The opening is about a couple inches in diameter. Next photo is a 2nd bag that was in the same large grouping that Inv. Hanson brought. Another black garbage bag with yellow ties. Next photo is a pair of shorts, striped, button still intact. Afternoon recess for 15 minutes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 09, 2011, 07:42:33 PM 3:25 Thursday, June 9, 2011 Court is in session, afternoon recess is over. The judge is telling the jury they are recessing for the day. He does not want them speculating on the cause of recessing early for the day. After the jury has left he tells the court that Casey Anthony is ill and they are recessing for the day. The judge tells the media that no one wants to talk about it and the attorneys want to be left alone. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 10:30:26 AM Good morning monkeys, I see people already, so she must of had a overnight cure, give her a bucket and move on..............She didn't even look up at one photo. I was so mad yesterday, I was still going on about it last night lol. Hoping for a good day of Justice for Caylee ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 10:31:09 AM 9:00am Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session: Dr. Gary Utz its returning to witness stand. Jeff Ashton is up........... Next photo shows a pair of shorts, very dirty and tattered with button intact. It appeared the garment could of been torn or cut before decomp or after. Next photo is the tag of the shorts. "Circo Brand" from Target. Next photo is from another tag on the shorts showing its composition and size 24 months. Next photo is a the back of the same tag on the shorts, the washing instruction label. The next photo are separate letters that would have eventually spelled "Big Trouble comes in Small Packages", they are showing the pink t-shirt on Caylee in split screen with the letters with the remains. The next photo is the remnants of the shirt, the neck and the tag, size 3T. Last photo is of portion of a blanket and another portion of a piece of fabric he couldn't identify. The duct tape was sent to the FBI. His involvement in this investigation ended on the following Monday. It then went to Dr. G. She came back on Friday Dec 12, 2008 and took over the case. Jeff is done.......... Mason is up. What do you do? I am a forensic Pathologist. What does that mean? A Dr. that diagnoses disease states and performs autopsies and investigates death, cause of death and manner of death? Before the remains were found you were aware of the hoopla surrounding this missing girl? Just as a media watcher. After the remains were found, Chief Hanson took pictures, made reports and came back to you, you were in charge? Yes. Dr G was gone elsewhere? She was. Dr. G came back into town and took over the case. Do you know why? She had a very good working relationship with the LE, he was new and didn't have that relationship. Was did Dr. G take over for the media reasons? No, she just felt the need to take the course, she would have been involved in any rate. You would of stayed on that case if Dr. G. didn't come back and take over? Yes. There was no duct tape on the left side of the skull was there? What do you mean by on? You saw photos yesterday of the duct tape of the tape on the left side. There was none on the left side? There was some. There was no duct tape circling the skull. No. There was no duct tape stuck to the left side? There was some adherence. You did no examinations of the duct tape? I did not? Were you wearing gloves? Were you suited up? I was. You then released it to the FBI? There was no human tissue on the DNA was there? I didn't see any or test for any. I was there to remove the duct tape. Did you see any evidence of trauma? No. You saw any evidence of trauma to bones? Some but no breaking. Was there any healing fractures? No. Did you cut through the skull? Removing the top part. It was not done. If that body was found 4 months prior, you might of found evidence of death? Yes. You were asked about clothing that was brought to you. What size were the shorts? 24 months. Where you involved in seeking further exams of these remains, with Dr. Shultz. Only the exams of the early evening of Dec 11, 2011. Dr. Shultz is an anthropology. Did you do any texts for toxicology? Objection. Sustained. Did you work with Dr. G on this case? I did not. Did you work with a toxicologist on this case? I did not. Was the bottom jaw held in place by the hair and roots? Yes. When you picked up the remains from the table where they were presented? Yes. When you held the skull in your hands, the mandible did not come off? It did not sir. You have moments ago talked about the duty you have, to determine the cause and manner of death? Yes. You do not know the cause of death in this case? I did not make the determination of cause of death in this case? I do not. The manner of death has been determined by Dr. G as a homicide. Yes. Questions......sustained. You have not rendered an opinion in the manner of death in this case? I have not. Mason is done............ Jeff is up.......... Showing a photo of the skull, showing the left side and showing the tape on the left side. Showing a photo, where he is lifting up the tape on the right side. Tape is on the left side and the right side. Witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 10:31:57 AM 9:33am Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session: Dr. John Shultz is the witness. Jeff Ashton is up........ Dr. Shultz is an Associate Professor of Anthropology. He has a sub field of Forensic Anthropology. He has degrees in Anthropology, Master in Human Biology.....human anatomy. He has a PH.d in Forensic Anthropology. He studies Forensic Archeology and taphotemy. He spent five years at the Human Identification Laboratory. He has studied many skeletonized bodies. He specialty is detecting human remains and using ground penetrating radar. When he arrived at UCF he worked with the ME's and the Sheriff's Dept. He was the on call Anthropologist for the ME's Office. On Dec 11, 2008, he received a phone call from Steve Hanson and Dr. G. To go to the remains scene of Caylee Anthony. He did not go Dec 11, he went the next day but directly to the ME's office. He looked in the bag and saw the skull and the duct tape on the bag. He was there when the skull and the duct tape were photographed. He was holding the skull up in one of the photos. Jeff is showing him a photo. The mandible was close to the correct anatomical position. He was surprised that the mandible was still intact. It would usually of been separated at this level of decomp. The tape was adhered to the hair. The other bones that were brought in had no evidence of trauma. He had an advisory role in the recovery of the rest of the remains, they were underneath the leaf litter. The recovery was processed in a very careful manner. The bones were of a small child and it was a heavily wooded area. They decided to process the scene on their hands and knees, removing leaf litter and screen all leaf litter from initial location of skull and bags. Screening means sifting for bones. A mesh box would sift the material for remains and evidence. Everything was sifted twice. They used a very small size screen because the bones were so small. The Sheriff's Dept took photos and documented the recovery stations. Looking at a photo, is of a blue canopy, main area station...where the skull was found. It is showing people on their hands and knees and using flags. There was a mapping process to document the spacial relationship to where items were found. They also mapped out all of the skeleton remains were found. They used a computerized mapping process. When remains were found, he would examine them. Some of the bones found were not human and he let them know. The search area increased in size and additional CSI came and found additional remains. Talking about the canopy photo, showing the process, removing vines, plant debris, root debris, all the debris was collected and sifted for remains and evidence. When items were located they would place numbered flags and photograph them. The bones were then removed. He wanted to know where bones were found and in what order. The bones were disarticulated and found in many areas. Next photo is of the process of recovery, flags being placed. Showing a CSI on her hands and knees locating remains. The CSI would place a flag, then place the bone in an evidence bag . He told the Sheriff's office what were human bones and they were transported to the ME. Next photo is of bones that were found. A number of vertebrae, the spine, they are separated, no soft tissue and roots growing through it. The important thing about this photo is that all of these vertebrae bones were transported at one time, they were in a different location than the skull. Next photo is of one of the bone fragments and the Manila envelope that was labeled where it was found and who recovered the remains. Next photo is of 2 bones found, they are the largest bones in the body, the lower leg bones. They are doing a split screen to show how the bones relate to each other. The top of the bones have been chewed on by animals. Casey is *crying* and being held by Ms Simms. They are at side bar......side bar is over. JBP is telling the jury it is time for morning recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 12:06:05 PM 10:40am Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session. Back from 20 minute morning recess. Witness is Dr. John Schultz. Showing a photo of a bone, this is a fragment of bone that fits into the bone in the other photo. Next photo is bones taken at Dr. Schultz direction, hands and finger bones. The purpose of this photo is to document it. He placed a quarter in the photo to demonstrate how tiny the bones were. The recovery effort of the remains took from Dec 11, 2008 till the mapping was finished Dec 20, 2008. Showing next photo of bones found during recovery. The bones represent part of the pelvis, one of them has some animal damage and some adiopecere (grave wax) one of these bones was found almost completely buried in the muck. The pelvis bone in the left of the photo was the one almost completely buried. Next photo is of the skeleton layed out in anatomical order after all the bones were recovered. They found all but one tooth and all of the spine, many of the ribs and the long bones and bones of the hands and feet. Just a few bones were not recovered. The 9 day effort was a successful recovery, because of the degree of decomp and animal activity and time at the site. Next photo is a survey showing where the bones were found. He is explaining where the bones were found to the jury. This map shows where all the bones were found. He has a list, where all the bones were found. In Area A they found primary deposit area, where the body was placed in the woods. He goes on to say he can tell how the body was dispersed and scattered throughout the area. They started at Area A and moved south. When an area was searched he would talk to CSI Susan Mearce. Then they expanded west and east. They kept expanding till no more remains were found. They cleared the whole area for surface debris and even the ground was scraped. In Area A they found the initial area, the skull, the bags, the hand bones, the legs were found there as well as the left foot. In Area B the upper arm bone was found. In Area F they found the trunk of the body and the lower legs were dragged to this area, the lower legs were still attached. In Area D they only found one bone, for the right foot, had carnivore damage, no other bones of the right foot was found. In Area E they found one hand bone. In Area G they had most of the spinal column and most of the ribs attached, this was consistent with animal damage. Area H, ribs that are separated. Area I had they found 20 vertebrae. As the trunk was dragged through the woods, it stayed attached. It probably still had tissue when it was dragged by an animal. Based upon this dispersal pattern, his opinion that this body was deposited in Area A as almost a complete unit. There is no indication that the body was dismembered by a tool. It was a natural decomposition event. The one particular bone they found that was buried is important because.........Side bar.........Side bar is over.... Jeff is asking for the witness to be considered an expert in Forensic Anthropology. He is explaining dispersal at the scene and how long the body had been at the scene. The one bone was almost completely buried. The whole area had been flooded at one time. This bone was buried sometime over the summer. It was close to the Palmetto trunk. It was in the lowest area, deposited by an animal, then almost completely buried. Based on this, his opinion is that the remains were dry, no decomp odor, slight erosion on the bone, it appeared to have been there for around 6 months. The dispersal of the bones was done by animal activity. The bones were chewed on and there are missing bones, they could of been chewed and nothing remained of them. Jeff is done.......... Mason is up............. You examine the bones yourself? Correct. Did you x-ray the bones? Yes. In the examination of the bones and x-ray of the bones you found no evidence of prior fractures? No. No evidence of twists or torquing of bones? No. No evidence that this child had any trauma before her death? No evidence. Mason is showing him the map of bones from the recovery site. How far is Area A from the pavement of the road? Without a ruler, I would say 25 feet. Did you participate in the measurements at all? No, I already said that. So this map just shows the area of the remains? Yes. When I ask you how far the skull was from the edge of the pavement? You can't tell me? If I had a ruler. Do you know when the dispersement took place? What are you asking me? You know what was located in Area A? They were all located in bags originally? Yes. The other areas were there were bones but no bags? I couldn't tell you. The majority of the bones were found in the Area A with the bags? Yes. It was only after you recovered the bones from Area A that you knew there were missing bones? No, I wouldn't say that, people were finding bones outside of Area A while we were still at Area A. You don't have any scientific data to show us when Area A were dispersed? No. Same with B,C,D,E,F and I? Yes. You do not know how this child died? I wouldn't answer that question. Duct tape was not covering the nasal aperture? No. Mason is done........ Jeff Ashton is up.......... What is the nasal aperture? The hole where the nose would of been. Do you know if the tape was covering the nose? No. The nose wasn't there anymore? No. Jeff is showing him a photo of the remains map. He is referring to his report. What was found in Area A, he is showing him on the map. What was in Area B? He is showing him on the map. What was in Area F? He is showing him on the map, clavicles, parts of pelvis and leg bones. What was in Area G? That is where we see separation of the spinal column and some ribs. In Area H there were just a few bones. In Area I they found 20 vertebrae. Jeff is done........ The witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 12:06:54 PM 11:30am Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session. Next witness is Dr. Jan Garavaglia. She is Chief ME for Orange and Osceola Counties. Prior to this she was employed as a ME in other areas. She is a MD. Internship in St. Louis. She has a ton of education. Goes on and on, she is board certified in many areas. She became involved in the death of Caylee Marie Anthony on Dec 11, 2008. She was alerted by Steve Hanson. She was late for the airport and had ran back in and was told that they had found remains. She was not sure who it was at that time. She had an engagement she could not get out of, she told Dr. Utz to handle it. Recovery is a long process and her absence for the night would not matter. She returned the following evening. She then reviewed the photos of the scene and the ones taken at the ME office. She went out to the scene, reviewed all the photos and made suggestions of what should be done and got other consultants in. He is showing her a photo she reviewed. It is of the hair mat and the roots that have grown through the hair. Next photo shows hair mat and the roots that have grown completely through the hair mat and holes in the hair mat, probably from insect activity. Next photo shows they teased out some of the hair from the hair mat to test for toxicological examination. It also shows the length of the hair, it is more than six inches in length. Next photo shows is of the hair and the roots with a scale to show the size. Did you examine a baby blanket? Yes. Did you have that photographed? Yes. He is showing her a picture of the blanket. This blanket came into the ME office in this condition, just unfolded. She can detect some figures on the blanket. She took a close-up of the figures. The next photo shows the figures. The figure is Winnie the pooh with Piglet on his back. Next photo shows the other side of that blanket. That blanket had plant material growing in it. The next photo shows the amount of plant activity growing through the blanket. Next photo shows a scale with the blanket, shows lots of plant and root growth. Next photo shows another photo of the root material in the blanket with a scale. Next photo shows the same same blanket with root material and a scale from a different side. There was also root material growing in the 2 plastic bags through the holes in the bags. Next photo shows the root material growing through the black plastic bags. There was also a canvas laundry bag with a shiny inside and the roots were only growing up and over the canvas bag. Next photo shows the plant growth on the canvas bag. There were roots in bones and the bags and the blanket. The t-shirt was disintegrated and the shorts had no plant growth. To assist in identifying this child was through Nuclear DNA, they sent a bone off to the FBI to get DNA evaluation. Showing a photo of the bone after it came back from DNA testing. The portion that is missing from this bone was used for DNA testing, it was the right tibia. She received a report from the FBI, that the remains were that of Caylee Marie Anthony. She is to determine cause of death and manner of death. Manner of death is based on scientific principles and gathering all the info of the case, medical history all scientific information to come up with an opinion. Objection...Side bar JBP is recessing for lunch until 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 02:56:44 PM 1:46pm Friday June 10, 2011 Court is in Session. Dr. Jan Garavaglia is back on witness stand. Jeff Ashton is up......... Dr. Jan Garavaglia is the Chief ME for Orange and Osceola Counties. Jeff is showing her items marked for evidence. First item contains the canvas laundry bag. Next item is baby blanket, next item is body bag with leaf litter, next item is tied black plastic bag, next item is untied black plastic bag, next item is shorts, next item is t-shirt, letters and stitching, next item is the hair mat. Manner of death is the classification of death based on all the information avail to us. Accident, homicide, etc. She brings in to bear all her experience. Her opinion is manner of death is HOMICIDE. Based on 3 main items. First a red flag is when a child is not reported to authorities with an injury, that is foul play. 2nd is that the child's body was hidden also it is often found that these children's bodys are in suitcases or plastic bags like in this case. Another flag would be the duct tape. There is no reason for a child to have duct tape on their face. There is no reason for a child to have duct tape after they died. The cause of death is the chain of events that led up to the child's death. What led up to the death. She cannot render a medical conclusion of cause of death. She can reliably say it is a homicide but she does not know what means it would of occurred. The possible object with the body was duct tape that could of caused death or suffocation with a plastic bag. She is aware of the chloroform in this case, a child subjected to a large amount of chloroform could of caused a child's death. She doesn't have enough scientific cause to say what was the cause of death but it certainly was a homicide. She can't rule out any trauma because the body was so decomposed. Their was no antemortem injury to the bones that would of created death. There was no history of illness to cause the child's death. Jeff is done......... Mason is up............... You live in Orlando? Yes. For the period of time of 4 months you were aware of the media attention that was caused by this case, she does not watch news but she had heard of this case. Did you know there was circus-like activity around the Anthony's home? No. Was she aware that it would be in her district? No, she was hoping it would be in Lake County. She was told by investigators about chloroform involved. Did you bring in an expert for chloroform? I brought in an expert, a toxicologist, of bones. You sent him a piece of bone from the left femur? Yes. She sent Dr. Goldburger a piece of the left femur to test for chloroform and other volatile chemicals. Meaning that you were looking for chemicals that could of contributed to this child's death? Yes. He did a myriad of tests? No, it was very limited what he could do with bone. When he was done, the tests were negative to each and every test? That is correct. Were you present when Dr. Warner Spitz.......Objection...side bar....side bar over......Did the defense team's Dr. Warner Spitz attend the autopsy? No, she was informed by her office that someone from the defense wanted to come but it is office policy that no one is allowed to come. Were you aware that Dr. Spitz performed a 2nd autopsy? Objection.......sustained. What tests did Dr. Goldburger perform. Tested her hair, scrapings from the bone marrow, bone, tested the washing she did of the cranial cavity. All were tested for chloroform and Xanax. You did not cut open the cranial? No, absolutely not. You found no antemortem trauma? No. We found post-mortem trauma of animal activity. You never found about any trauma to this child did you? No, I did not. You are confirming that despite all of this testing there is no scientific causes of this child's death. You call it a homicide instead of an accident? No, the circumstances involved only supported a homicide. Nothing from the media was entered into her decision. She would not place any suggestions into her saying it was ONLY A HOMICIDE. What scientific information did you use? Systematic observational studies, all the accidental causes, accidental drownings are immediately called in. Everything has to be put into the circumstance of death, all studies, all known information. By her experience and what is know by the way homicides occur, there is no logical explanation to not report a child missing and toss it into a field and leave it to rot. Even hiding a child's body is indication and duct tape anywhere on a child is indication. What of this is scientific? Accidental deaths are reported and if you do not report and injury to authorities you are risking a child's life. We know through our morgue that accidents are reported. You are telling this jury that this death was not 100% accidental? What if someone finds a totally dead child that was obviously drowned? They call 911. No matter how stiff a body is, they want help to save that child. He is badgering her. Objection....sustained. Cause of death you don't know, manner of death was homicide? Yes, the manner of death was defensible as homicide. From other cases? Yes. If these remains were found 4 months before you would of had a better chance of finding cause of death? Absolutely. You said the duct tape was only on the lower mandible? Yes. Mason is done............... Jeff is up......... The defense wanted to do a 2nd autopsy? Yes. Did you keep the body the same way as it was? Yes. Except for the items we sent for testing. You kept everything intact for them? Yes. Did the testing for the substances you did from the bones and hair, did you think you would find anything? No, not from bones. At the stage of 4 months earlier, which would of been August after 2 months, what would the body be like? Skeletonized, internal organs completely gone. Dr G is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 03:10:16 PM 2:35pm Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session. There is a matter going to be taken outside of the jury's presence. He is excusing the jury. He is giving them some deserts to enjoy and a special break. Casey is visibly upset and not sad, she is mad, mad, mad. Jeff Ashton is asking the court to explain to the media that they are going to show photos of the skull and they are to be pixelated or blurred. Baez wants a proffer for this tape. He is showing a tape to the judge and gallery. Casey is very, very mad. Casey is definitely watching this and she is MAD, MAD, MAD!!!! Baez is upset and has his arms crossed. In Session's says that the CD is showing Caylee's smiling face superimposed with images of her skull. The judge wants to know what is the relevance of this CD? Jeff Ashton says this is a graphic representation of showing that a single piece of duct tape could of killed her. The skull has to be there to show a one to one ratio of the duct tape. The tape shows that the duct tape was the murder weapon. Baez says that he has heard a lot of testimony about chloroform being the cause of death and now this fantasy tape shows a different cause. This goes to 403 that it can't be used. He says these images are disgusting and have no relevance. Baez says that the ME or the anthropologist could do this without this graphic depiction. The judge is telling them to reference McDuffy V State. The judge needs to re-read it, he hasn't read it in awhile. Baez tries to talk and JBP cuts him off. Baez says if 403 was ever created for a matter it was created for this matter. There is no testimony and can be no testimony that the duct tape was in this position. He is also citing Pierce V State. He goes on to cite the case. He says there is no testimony that this duct tape was on this child's face. One piece was found 9 feet away. Judge tells Baez that this is going to be a proffer and he wants no objections. Next witness is outside of juror's presence. Michael Warren. He is a forensic anthropologist. He is an Asst Professor of Forensic Anthropology. Did you work with Dr. Shultz in this case? I did. They took photos of the decedents skull and photos of the actual duct tape and photos of the actual child. The scales in the photo are exactly comparable. There is no way to match the tape to the child's skull because it has no soft tissue. By using the skull and the photo, he can make sure that the tape is in the right place. It is not possible without this evidence that he can decide where the tape would have been. There are some measurements out there but not the one's that he needed. Using other methods would not be as an exact as this evidence. Jeff is done proffering.... Baez is up......... When did you find out about duct tape being a murder weapon in this case? The first day but Mr. Ashton was not there. He made the suggestion to Mr. Ashton. You weren't present when the duct tape was removed from the skull? No, I wasn't. So you only know from photographs what the hair mat and skull looked like? Objection. The hair mat was underneath Caylee's skull. Yes. When she was alive, the hair was not in a hair mat. You don't know when this photo was taken? No. Children grow rather rapidly, don't they? Yes. The photo looked like it was close to the time she died. Judge asks Dr. what is the purpose of this demonstration? A skull was utilized, explain to me why? We took a photo of the skull with a scale and a photo of the duct tape with a scale, he can then use the photo of Caylee is a landmark. Judge asks, is the skull in the photo necessary for you to explain this evidence? Without the animation? Yes but not as clearly. It takes the science out of the demonstration. Jeff Ashton is up.............. There has not been significant growth between the photo and the photo of the skull? Yes. Jeff is done.............. Judge is asking Baez about case law he wants him to look at. Baez gives him more case law. Recess until about 3:15 pm......Court is in recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 04:24:38 PM 3:35pm Friday June 10, 2011 Court is in session. State's witness is Dr. Michael Warren. Jeff Ashton is up........... He is Associate Professor of Forensic Anthropology at the University of Florida, he is the Director the the Human Identification Laboratory. He has lots of education. He has been qualified to be an expert witness 16-18 times, in Florida, Alabama and New York. The judge declares him an expert witness. He has a special interest in children forensics. He became involved in the death of Caylee Marie Anthony by Dr. G and Dr. Shultz. He traveled to Dr. G's office. He saw what position the mandible was in when it was first found. It was still articulated at the TMJ. That is noteworthy because that joint is very lax. There is nothing to hold that jaw in place after surface decomposition. In his history he has had cases where the jaw was still intact. The decedents had tape over their face, other than that he has never seen it. He is familiar with the position of the duct tape but the duct tape had moved. He determined that a single piece of duct tape would of been sufficient to cover both nose and mouth. He did scientific studies to find out various landmarks on a child's face. Which anatomical features were you interested in? The nasal aperture and he bottom of the teeth and or airway. He was able to get estimates from one landmark from the middle of the eye to the bottom of the chin. The other method he used was video superposition. It is primarily used to identify the descendant. You take a video of that skull and a photo of that person and you super impose. You compare landmarks, the bottom of the teeth and the edge of the orbits, the root of the nose and the contours of the skull. In this case ID of the skull was not necessary? Correct. I used that technique to super-impose a photo of the duct tape with a scale on it and a photo of the skull with a scale on it and a photo of the decedent, when she was alive. Does what you created, help explain your testimony? Yes it would. The tape is received into evidence. JBP is instructing the jury that this evidence is only to illustrate the expert's opinion, the expert's opinion is to be only believed if you believe he is an expert in that field. Like all other witnesses you can give it whatever weight you want. Showing the Video to the court..... Casey is showing no emotion now. Simms is talking to her, while the video is playing. Casey seems calm but not watching the video again. Video is over....Dr. Warren says a single piece of tape would of made breathing impossible. Jeff is done........... Baez is up and brought an easel....... He is pleasing the court. You were hired very early in this case? Yes. You never saw the duct tape attached to the hair mat? No, just photos. What is the program you used to design this video? Quick time with Photo Shop. It doesn't give you precise measurements? Yes it can give you very precise measurements. You don't know how old that photo you got of Caylee is? You got it off the internet? Yes. You are showing that a single piece of duct tape could of covered both her nose and mouth? Yes. You can't testify that duct tape had anything to do with her death? True. Baez is drawing on his big pad. He is showing the ground and the mandible and the skull on top, the duct tape was found in front attached to the hair? Yes. He is using pens of many colors. The hair is generally on top of the head? I can't see it. The witness stands down to look at the big pad. The duct tape was attached to her hair? Yes. It was your understanding too, based on consultation at the scene? Objection........Sustained. Based on the evidence you were given to form your opinions that Caylee Marie's remains were in 3 bags? Yes. Were you able to see the canvas bag? No. Were you able to see the shape of the bag? No. Can you close that bag? I don't know, I have only seen photos of that bag after it was recovered. Objection....Sustained. You don't know where the duct tape was? Yes, it was over the mandible and the mouth. There is no way that the body would of............objection....side bar.......side bar is over..... He is showing the witness an item of evidence. It is a photo where you can clearly see the hair mat. When the skull was found the hair mat was on the surface? Yes. Slightly above it was the mandible? Yes. In order for the hair mat to be underneath the skull on the surface. The skull must of been moved that way? Correct. That was quite graphic? It was. Was that to appeal to the jury's emotions? Objection.....side bar....... Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 06:17:37 PM 4:12pm Friday June 10, 2011 Court is in session. State's witness is Dr. Michael Warren. Side bar is over, the judge asked the jury to step out for a minute. Baez is proffering. You asked for this movie to be prepared? Yes. Was it for the purpose to appeal to the jury? No. Was it for the purpose to show the jury something of a graphic nature? No. Was it to make the jury emotional? No. It was just for the purpose of demonstrating to the jury? Yes. Judge calls for a 5 min break........break is over. 4:25pm Baez is up......... You are aware another piece of duct tape was found 9 feet away? I was not aware of that? What you showed us was just one possibility? True. There are other possible scenarios that could involve both her death and the duct tape? NO. What I am saying that there are other possibilities that could involve her death. Yes. You have no quick time movies of that, do you? No Jeff Ashton is up......... The duct tape was place prior to decomposition. That mandible was held in place by the duct tape. The duct tape was never stuck to the bone, when the tissue decomp the hair stuck to the tape, keeping the mandible in place. Jeff is showing him a photo. This is the photo that Mr. Baez showed you? Yes. The hair is not under the mandible, when the scalp decomposes the hair slides down and settles around the base of the skull, often called a bird's nest. Hair preserves fairly well, it lasts awhile. Jeff is done...... Baez is up........ Baez is showing him a photo. There is root growth under the mandible? Yes. Do you see roots attached to the hair mat? I do. The roots could also keep the mandible attached to the skull? That's possible. Baez is done........ Jeff is up...... Are you familiar with plant growth involving decomp? Yes. Roots can keep a mandible in place but the hair would of had to fall off first? Correct. So the only thing holding the mandible in place would be the tape? YES Baez is up............ You are not a botanist? No. You don't know the position of that body? No. Or where the hair was? No. All you have is hair stuck to duct tape. Yes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 10, 2011, 06:20:02 PM 4:35 Friday, June 10, 2011 Court is in session. Next state's witness is Michael Vincent. Linda is up.............. He is a CSI, from Orange County Sheriff's office. He has testified previously in this case. Did you collect insects in this case from the Pontiac Sun Fire? Yes, I did. Linda is showing him a piece of evidence. It is one small vial containing maggots in a preserving solution, he collected and sealed it in an envelope and sent it to Dr. Haskel. It came from the trash bag in the trunk. Next item is vial of insect pupae, it was sealed by Inv. Welsh and shipped by him to Dr. Haskel. Linda is done. Baez is up....... You inspected the trunk and the items found in the trunk on July 17, 2008. You didn't collect this evidence on that day? No. An entomologist can tell what stage an insect is in? Objection......sustained. You have some training in entomology? Yes sir. You went to a course in entomology? Yes, sir. This taught you that insects go through life stages? Yes. They can help pinpoint time of death? Yes. You saw insect activity in the trunk? No. Baez is done. Witness is excused. Next witness is Robin Maynard She is a CSI with the OC Sheriff's office. She helped with the crime scene in Dec 2008. Linda hands her a piece of evidence, it is pupae collected 12-14-08 at the crime scene. She relayed that she collected it and consulted with Dr. Neil Haskel. She documented the location of the collection, she sealed it and sent it to Dr. Haskel. The next item is insect evidence collected on Suburban Dr, Dec 2008, sent it to Neil Haskel. Next item is insect evidence, sent to Neil Haskel. Next item is insect evidence, sent to Neil Haskel. A lot more insect samples were collected by her and sent to Neil Haskell. All items indicated where they were collected and the date. Next item is a red heart sticker on a piece of cardboard. Linda is done.... Baez is up....... The insect collection you did was done by several people? Yes. It was throughly done? Yes. To the point where Dr. Haskel said he had enough samples? Yes. You said that the red heart sticker on cardboard was found in a lane? Yes. Was other garbage including a beer bottle there too? Yes. So many items that you stopped collecting them? I don't know there were lots of people collecting them. This was a local dumping place? I wouldn't say that? It is by a school? Yes. Kids walk to school there? I don't know. Baez is done. The judge is excusing the jury for the day. He asked them how the desert lady was. Baez is asking for a mistrial due to the highly prejudicial evidence admitted today. The video of the super-imposed skull and photos. The judge asks him one question. Has not both the state and the defense advance theories about the locations of the duct tape? Yes. Did the expert say that there could be other possibilities? Yes but it can't be out weighed by that beautiful child and a skull super imposed with duct tape. Jeff says the witness said that beautiful child did have duct tape over her face, her mouth, her nose or both. That video was sufficient to show that child could be killed with duct tape. It was a fair and necessary demonstration for this case. JBP asks when does the defense want him to rule on the mistrial? The judge says he can rule on a mistrial up until the time the jury reaches a verdict. Correct? The judge could rule on this evidence at the time a verdict is reached. Request for a mistrial DENIED. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 11, 2011, 01:35:43 PM 9pm Saturday June 11, 2011 Court is in session: Next state witness is Neil Haskell. Forensic Entomologist, various degrees from Purdue University. Lots of experience in forensic Entomology. Qualified as an expert witness in 28 states and Canada, Germany, Spain, Belize. He is made an expert in forensic entomology. Entomology is the study of insects. He was contacted in 2008 in the death of Caylee Marie Anthony, in early Sept, 2008. Michael Vincent sent him insects from the car. Larvae and pupae. He received the first two samples in early September. He asked for a possibility for adults of the species. Michael Vincent then looked in the trash bag and sent him adults and the trash bag from the trunk. He sent the adults to someone else in his field to identify. In his report to them, he stated that they would be regularly found in stages of decomp. That is from the witnesses own testimony too. The flies were found in the paper towels from the white plastic bag in the trunk. All of them found were dead. He found an abundance of puparia, larvae and adult flies on the paper towels. The flies were on the towels, attracted to the substance on the towels, he thought that it was decomposition fluid on the paper towels. The paper towels were analyzed by Dr. Arpad Vass. He stated that the material was adiopocere. He knows himself what adiopocere is. He next he looked at time lines of the paper towels and impact of decomp and temperatures and the age of the insects. In addition to the tiny flies he found a leg of a fly called blowfly. A southern species of a blowfly. These flies are frequently found in decomp, human and otherwise. If the body of a young child was in that trunk for a long time and then moved to another location? Absolutely, at the time of death, decomp begins and there is a progression....associated with the different stages of decomp, different insects come into feed. The blowflies are the first ones in. They are there immediately, esp if temps are hot. As the body decomp changes the insects change. The florid fly comes next and the decomp has progressed. The decomp usually is seen within just a few days in heat. They are very tiny. They then lay eggs. They can get in to very small openings. He has recovered them in cracks in concrete. He found an absence of the early decomp flies and a greater amount of the latter decomp flies. That tells him that the body had to be deposited very early into the trunk and the first set of flies had left and now the florid flies had colonized the decomp. Trunks can exclude the blowflies from the most part, especially if the car is well sealed. The body being wrapped in plastic bags would lessen the amount of blowflies. If it is totally closed and wrapped it can delay the blowflies to the point the decomp is so late, they no longer want it. The amount of time the body was in the car, was 3, 4 or 5 days, in his opinion. The significance of heat in the trunk is important, the flies are cold blooded and the growth development is very fast, to larvae and puparia. At some point he found out the remains of Caylee had been found. He came to Florida on Dec 16, 2008. Between Dec 11 and the day he came he consulted with people on the remains scene. He went to the remains scene and the impound lot and the ME's office. He took a large number of specimens from the scene and the ME's office. Took samples to be examined, he followed chain of custody and then examined the insect samples following protocols under microscopes. Once they identify the insect they relate it to known growth development. Life cycle of the insects is temperature dependent. What he found from the ME's office he found insects from advanced decomp. He found two species of blowfly puparia and Florid flies and Housefly species. Then he found a species of the soldier fly, all hatched out. All were present in advanced decomp events. He found he went through life cycles of many species but it could of been earlier than those life cycles. In his opinion the body was placed in the woods after it had been in the trunk. In his opinion the body was placed by Suburban Dr for many, many months....based on the recovery scene..early June or July. It was placed there as a decomposing body not skeletal remains. In his opinion it had considerable soft tissue left when it was place in the woods. The body was not in the trunk very long due to temperatures in the trunk, it was then placed in the woods off of Suburban. Jeff is done......... Baez is up............ He is pleasing the court. You were first consulted by Dr. Vass? Yes, they were talking about another case and he mentioned this case. He and Dr. Vass go back 25 years with the Body Farm. Dr. Vass is an anthropologist, he was studying with Dr. Bass. The statements that you made to Dr. Vass that these were coffin flies, that was before you had seen any of the samples? I don't remember. Looking at a copy of his report, he received items from the trash, the first two vials received. They were not from the trunk, they were from the trash bag. They were the Florid flies, look like fruit flies, gnat size. Baez says these flies are found anywhere? Yes the can be found lots of places. In your report these can be found in garbage? They were found in a trash bag you changed it...laughter. These came from a trash bag in the car. You wanted some adult flies? Yes. He checked the trunk and that turned up negative results? Correct. Then he told you he found some more insect activity in the trash bag from the trunk. He found and sent more Florid flies from the paper towels in the trunk, there were some adults. DNA can be grabbed from lots of things? Yes. You can get DNA from insects? Yes. These paper towels were sent for DNA analysis? I don't know. I sent them for a bio-chemistry test to Dr. Vass? Yes. On the actual paper towels? Yes, it was adiopocere. What tests did he run? I don't know, I trusted him to do the right tests. You can't tell this jury what was done to these paper towels only what Dr. Vass told you? Correct. A blowfly leg was found on the paper towel in the trash bag? Yes. They are the early colonists for decomp, they are also found in your house? Only if there is unprocessed meat. You can find them on your window sill? Not mine. Other houses can have them? Yes. Blowflies lay lots of eggs? Tens of thousands. All you could find is part of a leg? Yes. You can find parts of blowflies in any garbage? Yes. Later he examined filters from vacuum cleaners, there were some Florid flies and other carrion insects. Baez is showing him a report. This was sent to you in early 2011? Yes. Almost 3 years later you got the vacuuming of the car? Yes. You were able to pick out a few more insects? Yes. They came from decomposing fluids. Do you know if they got into the trash or didn't make it into the trash. It is my opinion they were in the trunk, they didn't get into the trash bag. This wasn't very many insects? Correct. Part of your job is to do a PMI (post mortem interval) to show how long a person might be deceased, or how long the insects might be attracted to an item. In July, 2008 you could of had a better PMI if you had access to the trunk. Lots of questions that I can't understand. If you got entomological evidence on July 16th, 2008 you could of traced it back? Depends on what was in the car on July 16th, 2008. You weren't give items on July 16, 2008, you weren't contacted till Sep 2008. Correct. In Dec you came down and conducted a investigation of the remains scene? Yes. It was the biggest scene you had been in? Yes, the biggest in 30 years. What was collected at the remains scene was all that could of been found? I thought they did an excellent job. Lots of LE and diff agencies were there? Yes. Most of the insects he saw from the scene were at the ME's office. The witness is looking at his report. He found specimens of different insects from the scene. Baez is asking him about his report. I can't hear him very well, he is away from the mic. Baez is drawing on his big pad. You have evidence that the body decomposed earlier in another area? Yes. The reason you feel so confident with these findings is because you go to see how thorough the remains scene was collected? Yes. Asking him about water, objection...sustained. Tell us Dr. Haskell does submersion in water wash away certain blowfly evidence, would that change your opinion, objection...Sustained. Isn't it true sir that eggs or larvae were washed off during the early portion of decomp, that would account for the small amount of insects? If that is what I said, yes. Asking him about samples he received. He was hired in Sep 2008? That is when I started working on the case, yes. Then you went to the remains scene and the ME's office? Yes. You submitted reports? Yes. When did you do the report for Dec 2008? He signed off on his reports almost a year after Dec 2008? Yes. Sir, you have been retained by the states attorney's office? How much have you been paid. 20-22k, from the state, he still hasn't been sent any payment from Baez. Baez says the check is in the mail. By the time you send your final bill you will be in the area of 30 to 40K? I don't know. Baez is done............... Jeff is up and asks Baez to leave his drawings. Is there a difference between trash and garbage? Yes, garbage is decomposing material, versus trash that is non-organic. Is that significant? Yes. Insects will not go to non-organic material. There was no organic material in the trash bag from the trunk. Only empty food containers that the insects would not want to raise families in. The majority of the Florids were on that paper toweling, attracted to the adipocere or picked up in the decomp fluids when they were mopped up by the paper towels. The insects would of gone with the fluids in the paper towels. Then they went through there life cycles in the paper towels. There was no plants decomposing in that trash bag. There was an unusual lack of blowflies in the trunk because the blowflies couldn't get it or it was too decomposed for the mother flies to want to lay eggs there. A portion of decomp happened in the trunk, then was moved to the remains site. Jeff is done. Baez is up.............. Sir, you were present when they collected the trash or garbage? No. Your definition of trash or garbage could be different than mine? Yes. You were not present when this bag was collected and you don't know if it was soaking wet when it was collected? There is nothing to suggest that it was. Baez is showing him a picture. Photos of two states exhibits. Judge instructs Baez how to do this. Shows him the photo of actual items of evidence. Then asks him if he saw them as they were collected before drying? He says probably not. Shows him a picture of the items before they were dried, I can't hear Baez. Baez asks him if he inspected the trunk for ways for flies to get in? He said no. Baez is done. Jeff is up............ Jeff shows him the same photo and asks him if he sees organic items? He says no. Jeff is done. Baez is up and asks him if he sees any organic matter in the photo and he says no. The witness is excused. Taking the morning recess. 4 6/11 10:35:50 a.m. 9:50am Sat June 11, 2011 Court is in session. Next states witness is Jennifer Welch. She has testified in this case previously. You were at the remains scene on Dec 11, 2008. How long were LE at the remains scene? 10 days. She took photos of items as they were collected. There were 50 or more people at the crime scene. To document the scene they set up a baseline and search lanes and then a grid. As items were found then were flagged prior to the collection. There was a wall of vegetation, hanging vines, trees, Palmetto trunks, there was leaf litter and then roots in the surface then larger roots. It was difficult to walk on the surface due to large amounts of vegetation, as they cleared it was still difficult. To assist to clear the area they were provided tools. Linda is showing a photo to the witness. It shows a machete and a cover for the machete, they are standard issue items from the CSI. They were owned by the OC Sheriff's Office, she doesn't recall these items already at the scene. Linda is showing her another photo of large roots on the surface of the scene after some clearing and an evidence flag. They cleared the west of the baseline they set up and this photo is taken after it was cleared 0-4 inches. Next photo shows an evidence flag to indicate a bone. This bone was collected and she made a measurement of how far in the ground this bone was. Next photo shows the depth this bone was found. Next photo shows the bone she collected that was partially buried. In addition to photography she collected and document at the remain scene. She collected over 390 items of evidence. It included bottles and trash and pieces of black plastic bags that were scattered throughout the scene. She collected a piece of duct tape near the area where the skull was collected to the SW. Showing her an envelope of an item she collected at the remains scene, it is a piece of duct tape collected at the scene. The witness extracts it from the bag and show it to the jury. There are markings on the duct tape it says Henkle Consumer Adhesive. Did you also collect on the scene plastic paint strips with words? Yes I did. She hands the witness an envelope and the witness opens the envelope. It is pink wording strips. Lettering she found at the remains scene. The witness shows the items to the jury. She is holding up pink strips of lettering that say "Big Trouble Comes in Small Packages". They are dirty, aged and stained. Linda is done............ Baez is up........ He is showing the witness a photo of the wooded area and the street of Suburban. He wants to know how far the grass area is? She doesn't know. He wants her to guess the distance from the street to the grass? 10ft. He asked her how far into the woods was the skull found? She is referring to a report. According to a report written by a CSI it was 19 feet, 8 inches. He wants the witness to stand down to show the jury how far that is. She steps down, he has her hold one end of the measuring tape and he holds another to show 19 feet, 8 inches. The grass area was 10 feet? Yes. So this is how far the skull would be? Yes but it was hidden by vegetation. The duct tape that was just introduced into evidence, where was this item found? To the SW of the skull. How far away? She doesn't know. Was it in Area A? No. It wasn't in the area where the bag and the skull was collected? That is correct. That is the same kind that was found with the skull? Yes, it had the same emblem. He is showing her a photo of stones. Where they found where the remains were? One was. Were they stone pavers? Yes, they could be consistent with stone pavers. Baez is done. The witness is excused. Taking a recess till 11:30am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 11, 2011, 01:41:07 PM 9:50am Sat June 11, 2011 Court is in session. Next states witness is Jennifer Welch, CSI. Linda is up......... She has testified in this case previously. You were at the remains scene on Dec 11, 2008. How long were LE at the remains scene? 10 days. She took photos of items as they were collected. There were 50 or more people at the crime scene. To document the scene they set up a baseline and search lanes and then a grid. As items were found they were flagged prior to the collection. There was a wall of vegetation, hanging vines, trees, Palmetto trunks, there was leaf litter and then roots in the surface then larger roots. It was difficult to walk on the surface due to large amounts of vegetation, as they cleared it was still difficult. To assist to clear the area they were provided tools. Linda is showing a photo to the witness. It shows a machete and a cover for the machete, they are standard issue items from the CSI. They were owned by the OC Sheriff's office, she doesn't recall these items already at the scene. Linda is showing her another photo of large roots on the surface of the scene after some clearing and an evidence flag. They cleared the west of the baseline they set up and this photo is taken after it was cleared 0-4 inches. Next photo shows an evidence flag to indicate a bone. This bone was collected and she made a measurement of how far in the ground this bone was. Next photo shows the depth this bone was found. Next photo shows the bone she collected that was partially buried. In addition to photography she collected and document at the remain scene. She collected over 390 items of evidence. It included bottles and trash and black plastic bag pieces that were scattered throughout the scene. She collected a piece of duct tape near the area where the skull was collected to the SW. Showing her an envelope of an item she collected at the remains scene, it is a piece of duct tape collected at the scene. The witness extracts it from the bag and show it to the jury. There are markings on the duct tape it says Henkle Consumer Adhesive. Did you also collect on the scene plastic paint strips with words? Yes I did. She hands the witness an envelope and the witness opens the envelope. It is pink wording strips. Lettering she found at the remains scene. The witness shows the items to the jury. She is holding up pink strips of lettering that say "Big Trouble Comes in Small Packages". They are dirty, aged and stained. Linda is done............ Baez is up........ He is showing the witness a photo of the wooded area and the street of Suburban. He wants to know how far the grass area is? She doesn't know. He wants her to guess the distance from the street to the grass? 10ft. He asked her how far into the woods was the skull found? She is referring to a report. According to a report written by a CSI it was 19 feet, 8 inches. He wants the witness to stand down to show the jury how far that is. She steps down, he has her hold one end of the measuring tape and he holds another to show 19 feet, 8 inches. The grass area was 10 feet? Yes. So this is how far the skull would be? Yes but it was hidden by vegetation. The duct tape that was just introduced into evidence, where was this item found? To the SW of the skull. How far away? She doesn't know. Was it in Area A? No. It wasn't in the area where the bag and the skull was collected? That is correct. That is the same kind that was found with the skull? Yes, it had the same emblem. He is showing her a photo of stones. Where they found where the remains were? One was. Were they stone pavers? Yes, they could be consistent with stone pavers. Baez is done. The witness is excused. Taking a recess till 11:30am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 11, 2011, 01:41:52 PM 11:35am Sat June 11, 2011 Court is in session. Next witness is Ronald Murdock. He is a Forensic Supervisor at the OC Sheriff's Office. He goes to major crime scenes and has administrative duties. He had supervisory duties over the remains crime scene. He arrived on Dec 12, 2008. He assisted in diagramming that scene, he used Total Station to diagram the remains scene. He got the information to put in from Jennifer Welch. He used other landmarks, roadway, lights. That included the documentation where each bone was flagged and recovered. He grouped those bones into various areas, he met with Dr. Shultz about documenting the bones. Did you document a piece of duct tape that was found away from the skull? Yes. The Total Station program was on his lap top, it allowed him to print out the various screens from the Total Station program. She is handing the witness those printouts. First item is a diagram of the remains scene and all of the bones in those areas, the roadway, other landmarks and the duct tape. Looking at another print out, it shows just the circled area where the bones were located. He is publishing those two exhibits from his laptop. First one has the bones in the diagram. It is an overview of the roadway of Suburban Dr and the location of the bones. The bones are circled in red. He is zooming in on the bones. Some areas have lots of bones, esp A and I. There are so many bones it looks like an ink blot. Lots of dots, the skull is one of those dots. The system he utilized gives him the distance from Suburban Dr to the center of area A is 19 .8 feet. The other line represents the brush line of grass that the county maintains. The edge of the roadway to the wooded area is approx 5 feet. Next photo shows the circled areas, the letter D-1 was a piece of duct tape. He gave all the duct tape, the letter D. It was a piece of Henkle Duct Tape. There are two other pieces of duct tape that was not Henkle Duct Tape. He used a surveying company to diagram the remains scene. He also participated in a search warrant of the Anthony's house on Dec 11, 2008. He was in charge of the evidence located at the Anthony house. She is showing him a photo it shows the evening hours of Dec 8, 2008. It shows the item and clothes found in a shed on the Anthony property. Next photo shows the interior of another shed as it existed on Dec 11, 2008. There is an item in this photo that was collected. He is circling it on his monitor. She is showing him the item. It is the red metal gas can with another item of evidence attached. Next photo shows a variety of stickers that were collected at the Anthony residence. Baez asks for side bar.......sidebar is over. 12:07pm Next photo shows a photo of Casey Anthony's bedroom on Dec 11, 2008. Witness is refreshing his memory of the room. Next photo is another photo of the same room. Baez is objecting to these photos, over-ruled. Next photo is of stickers found in Casey Anthony's room on Dec 20, 2008. Next photo is of Caylee's bedroom. It was taken Dec 11, 2008. He collected items of evidence from Caylee's bedroom, she is showing him those items. First item is Winnie the Pooh bedding from Caylee Anthony's bedroom. Next item is Winnie the Pooh bedding items collected from the office room, dresser drawer in the Anthony's home Dec 11, 2008. He collected items from the Anthony's garage on Dec 11, 2008. First photo is of the Anthony's garage. Next photo is a close-up of items in the Anthony garage. It shows black plastic bags with yellow handles, they have items in them. The items in those bags were removed and photographed. The first item is in the next photo, it shows an off-white canvas laundry bag, brand name Whitney Design. Linda hands him next evidence item it is the actual off-white canvas laundry bag, brand name Whitney Design found in the black plastic bag in the Anthony's garage on Dec 11, 2008. He also collected various garbage bags, collected from the Anthony residence. Linda hands him several bags, they contain the black garbage bags with yellow handles found in the Anthony garage on Dec 8, 2011. One bag was found in a suitcase. One bag was found inside of a cooler. Next item is a black garbage bag with yellow handles from the south shed. Next item is 2 black garbage bags with yellow handles, inside of a dog crate in the Anthony garage. One of the black plastic garbage bags with yellow handles was packaged with the canvas laundry bag it contained, when found in the Anthony's garage. Linda is done......... Baez is up.......... The diagram you showed us earlier showed us a piece of Henkle Duct Tape outside of the Area A? Yes. Can you tell us how far it was away from the skull? Approx 6.27 feet. The search warrant for the Anthony home, you knew you were looking for a special duct tape? Yes, I knew it had a brand name. You didn't find any in the garage? No. Did you find it in an area with other tape? I don't recall. You didn't find the Henkle brand wrapped around any pipes or wires? No, it would of been collected if found. You collected the items? I was in charge of collecting the items. You went into the attic? Someone did. They didn't find any Henkle duct tape? No. You searched the pool, the shed, it was thoroughly searched and you found no Henkle duct tape? No, we didn't find any other than on the gas can. How many people were searching the Anthony home? 10 people. The gas can was the only item you found Henkle brand duct tape was on the round red gas can? Yes. Baez is showing a photo of one of the sheds. You took all of these items out of the shed? Yes. There was no Henkle brand duct tape on any of these items? No. Not on the shovel, the saw, the lawn equipment? No. This lawn mower had no Henkle brand duct tape? No. Was there a lock on that shed? Yes. How was that shed opened. I am not sure. Except for the bedding you only collected black garbage bags? The witness is looking over the evidence collected. That shed had a black garbage bag collected. As it relates to any duct tape, the only place you found Henkle duct tape was on the red, round gas can? Yes. Did you ever find the roll of Henkle brand duct tape? No. Did you search the cars on the property? Yes. You found no Henkle brand duct tape in them? No. Witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 11, 2011, 01:42:42 PM 12:41 Sat June 11, 2011 Court is in session. Next state witness is Gerald J. Johnston. Linda is up........... He owns the land survey firm, Allen and Company. He provided a survey for the OC Sheriff's Office, in Dec 2008. He has seen the video and the animation of what he provided, he used measurements provided to him. Linda is showing him a piece of evidence, it is a CD of the video he provided of the crime scene. The jury is now seeing the video. It is in 3D, it is a combination of the ground topography conditions seen that day. They stripped away the trees to show what was going on, on the ground. The pavement is several feet higher than the woods as it falls away from the road. It shows all views of a 3-Dimensional Fly Through of Suburban Drive on Dec 11, 2008. It shows that trees were removed to show the ground. It shows that the ground cover had been removed by CSI before this was taken. It is now showing where flags indicated bones that were recovered from the OC Sheriff's items, he was provided those measurements by the OC Sheriff's Office. Witness is excused. The judge is dismissing the jurors for the day. Court is in recess till Monday morning at 9am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 13, 2011, 10:38:28 AM 9:00am Monday June 13, 2011 Court is in session. First state witness is Stephen Shaw. Jeff Ashton is up............. Stephen Shaw is Hair and Fiber Examiner for the FBI. He has been employed as this for 6 years. He has 2 degrees in hair and textile. He has had additional training as a hair and fiber examiner for one year at the FBI including ID tests, matching tests, oral boards and final tests. He has previously testified as an expert in court 12 times, Florida, NY, CA, other states. The judge makes him an Hair and Fiber Identification expert. In Dec 2008, he became involved with a hair in the case of Caylee Anthony. It was the part of the quality assurance procedure. They have another examiner perform the same tests to make sure the first one was correct. It confirmed the apparent decomp and microscopic similar from the sample hair to the hair brush. He was given a hair mass to examine it was submitted by OC Sheriff's office. He examined the hair mass, hairs microscopically and compared it to the hair from the trunk of the vehicle. He found decomp on a hair in the hair mass, it was at a later stage of decomp. It had the band and the root but it had a brushed like appearance related to later decomp. All of the hairs were microscopically similar. This hair and the hair mass were consistent to each other and the hair found in the trunk. He has done research in the FBI for decomp found in hair. The preliminary results are from 600 hairs from living persons, stored in different locations, indoors in water, out doors in sunlight cars and car trunks in different climates and in different locations.....time periods varied....he then examined the root ends of the hairs, none had root banding. Known deceased hairs he tested confirmed post-banded hairs. Examiners did make mistakes on two of the hairs, they eventually compared these hairs and confirmed they were not death banded. Side bar.........Side bar is over. Baez wants a proffer over the power point demonstration. Baez says he had no knowledge, lol. Of the power point demo. Baez wants things to be done in a just way.........Oh brother, lol. Ashton says that everything in the power point has been provided to the defense. Baez is still going on and on and says he only got the photos and they are black and white photos, color is different. If it is going in living color, there is a difference. Now he is worried about living,,,,,,,geesh. The only one he is worried about living is his beloved Casey. Yuck..... Looking at photos on the monitor, they are hairs used in the study he performed. Hairs from living people before and after they were studied. Baez wants to know if the dark area in the living samples, show decomp and he says no. It is not apparent decomp. It is something natural in someones hair. Next photo is hair stored in the trunk of the vehicle they are from a living person, more photos from living people, none had the band. The darkening in the root area is not a band. When you refer to the banding what do you mean? Band has to be above the root bulb and it has to be opaque of a certain thickness, in a known dead person's hair. The decomp in living hair is not the same. The testimony can be confusing antemortem means from a living person and postmortem means from a dead person. Prior to this case was this banding known? Yes. Showing more slides of hair in the tests. These are postmortem hairs. Baez is just going on and on asking about the test done on Hair-Banding by the FBI. Jurors are not in the court during this proffering. Baez asks if the climate is the number one factor in decomp? Yes, in the rate of decomp. He said hairs in warmer climates will produce bands faster, lol. Baez is done, done, done and I bet he wished he never asked that question, lol. Are there are differences in hair from adults and children? No, we don't can't tell if a hair came from a child or a an adult. A hair from a young child can be thinner. There were two children in the test, there were no difference in the findings. Were any of these hairs exposed to trash or garbage? No, not that I am aware of. Mr Baez is done, he says they may be cumulative and the power point says it is improper bolstering and improper climates. He says we are talking apples and oranges. Also 403, an unfair prejudice, we were given this at the last possible second and we can't do a similar study. Judge says it is not a 403, it is a 6th amendment right. Baez says it is both. The power point is just not fair. Judge is asking when this study was done? March, 2011. They told the state and the defense then that it was done. The judge wants to know when and what was told to the state and the defense of this study. Ms Lowe told the state and the defense of this study in Mar 2011. It was provided to the state in color photos and the fact the study had been done in May. They were emailed in color. Jeff Ashton says the state and defense were told by a teleconference that the study was done. Arrangements were made over numerous photos. The photos were requested and sent to the local FBI in color. They have been provided in color many times. The state has them in color, Jeff did not know that the defense printed them out in black and white. The state emailed them in color. He is not responsible for the defense printing them out in color. Ms Simms says some were sent last week. Jeff says they were not aware they had black and white photos that were not acceptable. Ms Simms is complaining about when she got the photos and the day she got them. She has not been able to cross examine in deposition all of this experiment. She requested but she was not given color copies or make her own. The FBI says it could not release it because it was currently research material. Jeff Ashton is addressing the improper bolstering argument. This does not come under improper bolstering. Baez has a concern of finding himself in the middle of trial and he can't do a thing about this power-point. He has done every single thing they can and the FBI has been wonderful, however it is still unfair.......just unfair. He has never done anything about this unfortunately but Ms Simms has. This test began after the depo was taken after Mr Shaw was deposed. Ashton says that the FBI offered to have this examined in person and the defense did not do it. This study was contemplated before this case. This case spurred him on but it had already been contemplated. Judge now says what Casey is charged with......the state has indicated that they seek the Death Penalty. Rule 3.220 says the state must provide certain things to the defendant, it is not the FBI's responsibility to provide it, it is the state. He goes on to say that he finds it troubling that the state in the 9th hour provides a power-point in color that was not provided to the defense. The power-point is denied. However, the the expert has testified and it will stay as is. It is the state of Florida not the FBI responsibility for this power-point, it will not be shown to the jury. The FBI expert can testify about it but the photo's from the power point can not be used. The defense could open the door to the power point if it asks anything about the photos. Recess for five minutes. 10:15 Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 13, 2011, 12:57:40 PM 11:15am Monday, June 13, 2011 Court is in session. Next state witness is Elisabeth Fontaine, FBI She is a forensic latent print examiner for the FBI. She has a masters degree in Forensic Science and a masters degree in chemistry and training at the FBI. She completed an 18month training latent prints and other prints. She has processed 75 thousand prints. She successfully completed the FBI certification in fingerprinting. She had a supervisor at first then worked on her own but still had her work looked over by someone else. That is normal protocol. She did work on the Caylee Marie Anthony. It was on 3 piece of duct tape in the case. He handed her a piece of evidence, she identified it as the bag that the duct tape was in. Did you separate the 3 pieces or were they already separated? She is referring to her notes. One item was separate, 2 were stacked or stuck together, she examined them stuck together and separated. Q62, Q63 were approx. 6 inches in length. The glue was almost gone and the duct tape was no longer sticky, it had migrated and formed a glob of fibers and glue. She examined Q62 and Q63 for fingerprints, she was told that the duct tape was found on remains and in an area that could be flooded. She had no expectations that there would be latent prints. Because latent prints are very fragile and consist of oil, etc. She still processed them the same for latent prints. She found no latent fingerprints. She did however find something she did see. On Q63 she saw an outline of a heart shape that appeared on the edge of the duct tape. She was using an alternate light source after super glue to analyze items. That is used to raise otherwise invisible prints. The outline was approx the size of the dime. She compared it to the outline of a band-aid that you would wear for an extended period of time. At the time, she didn't know that it would be important, she called over a supervisor to view it as well. She came over and viewed it as well. She did not photograph it because it was not her job, she notes it and continues on. The FBI does not expect her to photograph the item, she went on to process it, she later tried to photograph it but it was gone. She had already used solvents and performed other tests on the duct tape which removed the heart shaped residue. She used a RAM dye stain. She also used black powder and alternate black powder. When she went back to take a photo of the heart shape residue, it was gone. It was the size of a dime in the shape of a heart. Jeff is done........ Baez is up.......... He is pleasing the court. Who is the first person to get these items? It went to evidence control then went to trace evidence, it is not detailed in her records. She does not know the travel path of these 3 pieces of duct tape. The FBI receives it and decides who is going to see it. Evidence control got it and was sent to trace evidence and then to her. Trace evidence contacted her to see if anything needed to be photographed, visible prints. They were looking for hair, fibers? Yes. What is the first thing you did? I don't remember what I did, I think I started with the one not stuck together. When you got Q62 what is the first process you did. When I got the 3 pieces of duct tape, I looked at them to see if I could see any prints, it is the first step. The second step is a laser to detect latent prints. This allows you to see any items on the evidence? Yes, we look at items with a laser for prints. The 3rd step is ultra violet. This helps you pick up fingerprints you could have missed? Yes. What is step four? It goes to back to trace evidence for fibers, etc. She then got the 3 pieces of duct tape they were now all separate. Next step is super glue, all 3 pieces of duct tape were super glued to add moisture to the air, the air is attracted to the moisture and lets the super glue harden over the prints. The next step is the Ruvis system. It is an ultra violet light that is done through a camera, you look at not the object but at the monitor, it takes away any 3d effect on that item, debris...etc. The object is enlarged on the monitor. The next step is the RAM dye stain that is used on super glue. It gives the super glue a orange glow. After the RAM, she uses alternate black powder. The final step is the traditional black powder. To test for oil left by latent prints. Then you went on to Q63? Yes. When you saw this small item, it was something that you just visibly saw? After processing the item it was no longer visible. You saw this after you had gotten it back from the trace evidence twice? Yes. After you received this you did a report and you said that they had no finger prints at all? Yes. You are aware that after you examine it, it goes on to another FBI examiner? Yes. And you are aware it was later contaminated? Objection.......side bar.....side bar is over. 9:00am Objection sustained. Baez is still up. You filled out a report? Yes. After doing a complete and total workup you were not able to find any fingerprints on any duct tape? No. Baez is done. Jeff is up.......... Was Q63 on top of Q64? Yes. Witness is excused. Jeff Ashton says his next witness will not be here until tomorrow afternoon. Judge is talking to the jury. He says the state will end their presentation Wed and the defense hopes to start then. We are ahead of schedule. We may probably be done by the end of next week with all of the evidence. We may get you to deliberating the 25th or the 27th of June. Side bar......Side bar is over. CJP is recessing till tomorrow afternoon at 1pm. Court is adjourned for the day. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 14, 2011, 03:50:39 PM Comcast has been down in my area ::MonkeyNoNo:: Just came back up, will start typing now. ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 14, 2011, 03:52:06 PM 1:45 Tuesday June 14, 2011 Court is in session Alina Burroughs is the state witness. Baez is now up....... He is showing the witness a photo of the stamp in the photo. Do you see 37cents? Yes. Do you know how long ago we had 37cent stamps? I don't know when the letter was sent. Did you see old items here, baby shower items? Yes. There are star stickers here? Yes. You see Pluto and Mickey Mouse? Yes. Did you see a lot of scrap book items in the room? Yes. Did you see scrap book items for children? No, not for children. Did you find any stickers in Caylee's room. There was a scrapbook page. They are not in evidence? No. Did you search Cindy and George's room? Yes. Did you find anything like a sticker in their room? No. He is approaching the witness with a photo that is not introduced in evidence. It is a photo of an item off of suburban object. Is it a sticker? I don't know, I have never held it. Did you find that item at the Anthony home? Not to my knowledge without measurements, I am not comfortable saying. How far away from Suburban Drive was an elementary School? Close not sure of a measurement. He is showing her a photo for measurements? She still can't give measurements. You were involved at the scene of Suburban Dr for how many days? 9 days. The only traffic allowed through was school buses. No other people were allowed down the street to pick up kids. Was there anything there to give you an idea there was anything other than a school? No. Baez is done. Witness is excused. Next state witness is Robin........Baez objected to witness and Linda and he are having a side bar in the middle of the court. Last witness is coming back to the stand. Alina Burroughs is back on the stand.......... Mr Baez is up.............. He is now showing her the item that she looked at. It is now received into evidence because Baez wanted to ask her about an item that was not in evidence because, he objected to it. Witness is opening the envelope. Have you seen the item? It is the heart shaped sticker. You did not find anything like that at the Anthony home? No further questions. Baez is done......... Witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 14, 2011, 03:53:33 PM 2:05 Wednesday June 14, 2011 Court is in session. Next state witness is Cindy Anthony. Linda is up........... When you testified last, we had gone up through the time periods of July. When your grand daughter was found on Dec 8, 2011, where were you? Coming home from CA. When you came in July 2008 through Dec 2008, did you ever notice items missing? Yes, her teddy bear, name Teddy and her Winnie the Pooh blanket. She hadn't seen the blanket since May. Is the hair style you had in the videos that you had for a significant period of time? Yes. How about the length of your hair? It changes. The length of hair we see in the July 2008 videos how long was it? The same. Is it processed? Yes, it is highlighted or processed. She is showing her a photo of Caylee. Do you know when that was taken? Early 2008, the first couple of months. Do you see the length of her hair in that photo? Yes. Had her hair grown? Yes but I would trim the ends off to keep it healthy. Did you process Caylee's hair, Absolutely not. Do you have knowledge of what your daughter Casey had done on her hair? Casey started doing different things after Caylee was born. She cut it shorter and had highlights put in it but then she let it grow out and back to it's natural color. Showing her another photo of Casey holding Caylee. That photo was taken in the beginning of 2007. Why do you think that? Caylee is chunkier and the clothing she wore in that and her hair was a lot shorter and curlier when she was younger. Showing Cindy her deposition. Do you recall saying that the photo was taken around Caylee's 2nd birthday? Objection-over-ruled. Yes, I remember making that statement. What hair style has your son Lee had in 2008 and before? Short and then shaved down. It would only get like an inch long. He never processed his hair. Does your mother live in the area. Was she ever in the Sun Fire. Yes. Prior to June 2008, when was your mom in the Sun Fire? I don't know. When was the last time your mother was in the car? I can't say. What kind of hair does your mother have? Shoulder length, blond, brown, mostly gray and white. Have any of your brothers been in the Sun Fire? I don't think so, maybe my older brother. He keeps his hair very short and it is blond. In 2008 were you aware there was any duct tape in your home? I recall black duct tape, blue and possibly silver. I used the black when we had protesters. Was it kept anywhere other than the garage? No. Was any of the duct tape in your home used at the command center. No, not ours...kid finders did and George bought some. I don't believe that came from our house. Have you ever made a statement that duct tape was used at the command center? I don't know. Linda is showing her, her deposition. She now remembers that George told her that he put a piece of tape on the gas can, it came back from the sheriff's office without it. The depo shows Cindy saying that it was used at the command center. She recalls using duct tape at the command center but did not know where it came from. Showing her a photo from the command center of a poster of Caylee with the Henkle Brand duct tape on it. She is showing Cindy a photo of canvas laundry bags. Do those pictures accurately reflect the items you had? Yes, the bottom one we used in Caylee's room for her stuffed animals. Next photo is of the canvas laundry bags. Cindy says they are the same that they had at home. The top item is cylindrical? She used it to keep Caylee's plastic balls in, then she put it in the laundry room on the shelf. She hadn't looked for that item or seen that item for a long time. The item at the bottom of the photo is a long canvas bag, it kept Caylee's stuffed animals but they were moved into a tree for stuffed animals and it was moved to the garage area. Did you ever make the statement you saw the last item it was in Caylee's bedroom? Yes but she forgot she had switched it out and put it in the garage. She recalls saying that she said she made a statement that it was last seen in Caylee's bedroom. Do you recall after the police made a search, it was no longer in Caylee's bedroom. Yes but my memory has gotten better over time. Showing Cindy a picture of the garage. The two canvas bags we were referring to, were either on of them stored in the garage. Cindy is circling a black garbage bag on a shelf. They were stored that way to not collect dust. After the search warrant of Dec 2008 did you see either one of those items again? No. She is showing Cindy a photo of items in the shed. It is little plastic balls that you would find in a ball pit. Linda is showing her a photo of Casey and Caylee, Caylee is wearing a pink shirt with "Big Trouble" on it. Do you recognize that shirt? The first time I saw it was at a depo in this case. You have never seen that shirt at your house? Do you do the laundry at your house? Usually, George does it sometimes. You never saw the picture of Caylee in this shirt? No. Court is in afternoon recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 14, 2011, 04:23:24 PM 3:05pm Wednesday June 14, 2011, Court is in session. Question from the jury, can we see exhibit 313, we did not see it after it was introduced. JP thinks it was the heart shaped item. The jury want to know if they can give a typed list of exhibits during deliberations. Judge Perry wants it put on the document cam so the jury can see the heart shaped item found at the scene. Baez has a problem with a sticker being shown because it was stuck to cardboard and it is now not stuck to cardboard. Linda says it was not stuck to cardboard, it was photographed on the cardboard. The judge is saying the jury will see 313 because that is what they asked for. They may be able to hold it. Baez says it was stuck to a piece of cardboard. JBP says asks if there is record testimony that says it was stuck? JBP is going to have the testimony of the CSI that recovered that item to say if it was stuck or not. He is going to bring the jury in and show it to them and see if they want to hold it. Baez is still arguing about it being altered. The jury must be made aware that the sticker was stuck to the cardboard. JBP wants to go off the record, call and find out if there was testimony that it was ever stuck to the cardboard. He will tell the jury that he will get that exhibit and look at it in the meantime, we will bring in the jury and finish Ms. Anthony's testimony. Cindy Anthony is back on the witness stand. Court is in session. 3:20pm. Baez is up............... He is pleasing the court. She does not want to look at him. Your grand daughter was found on Dec 11, 2008 and the police executed a search warrant on your home? Yes. You did not go back for a couple days? Yes. You were home for a few days and got to see what the police did in your absence. When you got home did you see a list of what they took? No, it took a lot for us to get a copy of what they took. On Dec 20, 2001 the police came back with a search warrant, did you have a confrontation with the LE, when they came back? Yes. George had to be taken to the back area? Sustained. Mrs Anthony did you tell LE that there was a missing blanket? I don't know. Are you aware that is a statement you made to them. No. Are you aware on the search warrant of Dec 11, 2008 there was mention of a Winnie the Pooh blanket. Objection........side bar......side bar over......oops side bar again over the heart shaped sticker matter, the judge must of received the info he wanted from the court about the testimony. Side bar........side bar is over. Baez is up........ Mrs Anthony, when you came home your house was a mess, the LE turned your house upside down and never put anything back? Yes. Included in the items they took, they took Caylee's bedding set? Yes. You knew then they were interested in Caylee's bedding? They looked in every drawer turned over everything in most of the house. He is asking Cindy about her depot. What exactly was the question asked to you? Objection...improper impeachment. Baez says he is not trying to impeach her. Linda is arguing to the judge this is hearsay. Judge says he can read the question. Baez reads were you asked. Did Casey remove any duct tape from the house when she was out of jail, the two times she was out. Cindy doesn't remember this. It was a 2 day depo and she doesn't remember. He is asking Cindy what she said, objection....JP tells him how to go about doing this. Baez takes a moment with Mason. Baez is showing Cindy her depo. The date is July 29, 2009. Having her read from the depot. Did Casey remove any duct tape when she was out of jail for that period of time, the two period of times. As far as I remember no, because we only had one roll of duct tape and George was using that. It was your understanding that you only had one roll of duct tape? Yes, we had one roll of duct tape, a black roll of duct tape for the protesters, I may have used it too. He is showing Cindy evidence and also showing the jury, it is the photo of Casey with short hair playing with Caylee. Now asking how long have you owned the Sun Fire? Since 2000. You hair length has changed many times, so has Casey, so has Caylee and so has your mother. No my mother never had longer hair than 5 inches. Lee's hair is usually very short. Going back to photo with Casey and Caylee. Caylee would of been younger than 2 years old? Maybe 18 months. The shorts are 24months. Caylee no long fit into these shorts did she? No. She fit into 3t's. She had outgrown these shorts? Would whoever put these shorts on her did not know her size? Sustained. Linda has no questions. Cindy may stand down. Judge Perry is talking to the jury. Do they want to see a picture of it or have it handled by you? They want both. Linda says that it is was attached to cardboard and now is separated. They are showing it to the jury. They are passing it around to the jurors. Judge Perry tells the jury when the evidence was collected it was attached to the cardboard. The jurors are looking at the heart shaped sticker. Next witness has several stipulations first, she is handing the judge something in writing. The defense has no objections to the stipulation. Linda wants the stipulations and the affadavits read. The copies of the video taken by WFTV are true and accurate. The parties have agreed to this fact and they are to be considered true in your deliberations. He is reading and affadavit of a professional journalist of WFTV.inc. Affadavit of person who took the video, he took on July 28, 2008 of a command center on Chickasaw Blvd. Linda is introducing a photo and a video into evidence. First is a photo of a Caylee Anthony missing poster with Henkle duct tape on it. Now Linda says there are several more stipulations at this juncture. Stipulation is read by the Judge, In 2008 Cindy Anthony was employed by Gentiva Health Services, these are business records and time card history reports. No objections to the stipulations. Received into evidence. Linda has another stipulation, just is reading it. In 2008, George Anthony was employed by Security Force. These are true and accurate in your deliberations. They are his work records and a weekly time report of George Anthony. Received into evidence. Linda has another stipulation with multiple documents. Side bar. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 14, 2011, 05:49:26 PM 4:15pm Wednesday June 14, 2011 Court is in session. We are between witnesses, we are still at sidebar....sidebar is over. Linda is up........ The stipulation they were talking about at side bar is placed into evidence. Judge is reading it, It is from Photo Bucket and should be considered true and accurate in your deliberations. Linda hands the judge 2 other stipulations. The judge reads that the remains found on Suburban Dr. were of Caylee Marie Anthony. All witnesses referring to Casey Marie Anthony are referring to the defendant of Casey Marie Anthony. Next state witness is Jennifer Welch. Frank George is up......... Jennifer Welch has testified before in this case, she is a CSI for the OC Sheriff's office. He is asking her about coming into contact with Casey Anthony to photograph of a tattoo on her back. She took 23 photos on this instance, not all were of the tattoo. They are showing a picture of Casey's back and the tattoo. Shows clearly the Bella Vita tattoo. Shows more photos of the tattoo. Taken August 2009. Witness is excused. Next state witness is Bobby Williams. Frank George is up........... Mr. Williams works at Cast Iron Tattoo as the manager and the artist for the last 8 years. He worked there in July 2008. He has known Casey for roughly 7 years. He saw her at the tattoo shop. She came in to get tattooed. She had an appt. She made it over the phone 3 to 4 days prior. When he spoke to her on the phone she told him she wanted the tattoo, Bella Vita done in a feminine type font. He usually asks what they want ahead of time. She came in July 2, 2008 and he drew the design and applied the tattoo. It took 30 minutes to draw and apply. He is being shown the Bella Vita tattoo on the shoulder of Casey Anthony, he says that is the one he did that day. Side bar.........side bar is over. 4:40pm. Hmmm they seem to be at break for 5 minutes. Frank George asked that the witness be allowed to step down. Appears break is over and although jury has not been brought back in, they are having a side bar...sidebar is over. 4:55pm Jury is coming back in. Bobby Williams is back on the stand. Frank George is up.......... Showing a photo of the Bella Vita tattoo on Casey's back. You drew out this design before it was applied? Yes. Did the defendant agree to it? Yes. Even the star like symbols? Yes. How was Casey that day? Normal, seemed pretty happy. We talked about the process of the tattoo, she was on the phone the majority of the time. How much did that tattoo cost? 65 dollars, she paid in cash. She stayed after the tattoo and they ordered pizza and she had a couple of slices, she paid. She came in a couple of days later to make another appt for July 19, 2008. She came by herself on July 2, 2008 she was alone, she came on July 15, 2008 and she was alone. she was alone on July 19, 2008. She was happy and normal. She told him on July 15, 2008 that she was gonna bring a friend to the next appt. He knew that she had a daughter. She said that Caylee was with the nanny but she would bring Caylee to the July 19, 2008 appt. Frank George is done. Baez is up......... Is it customary for people to get tattoo's for people that have passed? Yes. Did you do the tattoos for Cindy and George Anthony? Sustained. Did you do any tattoos for any other member of the Anthony family? Sustained. Baez is done. Frank George is up........... Did she appear to be mournful when she got the Bella Vita tattoo? Sustained. Side bar....side bar is over. Witness can be excused. Judge Perry is excusing the jury for the day. Side bar....side bar is over, judge is looking at computer monitor. Mason is asking for a mistrial on several grounds. The morphing of the skull and now the heart shaped sticker not being dime shaped and now the issue of remorse. He is citing case law now....about consciousness of guilt. Jeff says, as to tattoo the only evidence presented to this court is that her daughter was alive, absent from her custody against her will. He is asking the judge about the defense question about a love one who had passed? He says no grounds for mistrial. Judge Perry says Motion for Mistrial will be denied. Jeff Ashton is saying the he needs to formally move in two cans of carpet samples. Other than that the state is at rest. The defense can't start until Thursday. Mason wants to know whether the state is resting or not resting? Jeff says they will finish tomorrow. Court will be in session at 9am tomorrow morning. Linda wants to know if they can take the defense on their word that they will have no witnesses till Thursday? The judge says only the state will put anything on tomorrow. They will do the last minute items and then rest. Judge is talking about law concerning circumstantial evidence. Both side are aware of the facts. The facts are the facts. Judge is asking about depositions for the grief expert. Jeff says they have arranged that for Saturday. Judge tells them to consider another case. Durband V State, it does not exactly deal with the issue of grief but it has some application to this case. Court is in recess till tomorrow morning at 9:00am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 15, 2011, 01:24:20 PM 9:15am Wednesday, June 15, 2011 Court is in session. One issue before the judge brings the jury in. The state has an exhibit issue. They also have a new stipulation. The stipulation will read that on July 2, 2008 Casey Anthony got a tattoo "Bella Vita" this is true and accurate for your deliberations. The state wants to enter two cans into evidence, they contain carpet samples. They may be used later but any use will have a proffer to it. Mason wants to know how the jury wanted the heart-shaped item yesterday, if they were not to be talking to each other about this case and were not deliberating. No instruction will be given. Jury is coming in. The judge is reading the stipulation to the jury that Casey Anthony got a tattoo "Bella Vita" this is true and accurate and can be used in your deliberations. The state just entered the 2 cans into evidence. Linda says, "At this point, the state rests". Judge asks for a side bar...side bar is over. The judge is excusing the jury for the day, they will reconvene tomorrow morning, June 16, 2011 at 9:00am. Taking up legal matters without the jury present. Mason handed the court a whole lot of cases and a memorandum. The cases he cited, the judge is familiar with all but Baugh and Kennedy. He will read it or Baez can go straight into his argument without him reading it. The state has already given him theirs on Monday. He had an opportunity to read the states. Mason is up........ Wish me luck, he is gonna mumble, lol. It is established in the jurisprudence in this country, we are entitled to ask for a judgment of acquittal. The Florida Supreme Court has a law he is citing, he is citing Serrano. That was one of Mason's cases. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that there is a special type of review, the motion of judgment of acquittal. He is going on and on with case law for Judgment of Acquittal. He is saying this case is based on purely circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He says Dr G. did not follow the law when she said it had to be a homicide based on circumstantial facts. The state in preventing it's evidence has used the untruthfulness to family and friends and this began with the "Nanny" in 2006. They don't know when the child died, where she died, how she died, who was with her when she died. They do not know if it was an accidental death and if anyone helped to cover up an accidental death. The state has not proven that there was no premeditation if there was a murder at all. The evidence for a murder must beyond a reasonable doubt, Mason doesn't think the state has met that burden. There has been in this case no premeditation, just a stacking of incidents, a stacking of evidence. He is citing the case, Smith, a woman floating in the bay wrapped in chains and a blue bed spread floating around her. Despite being missing for a long time, she was not reported missing by her husband for a very long time. The court ruled in that court the state could not prove first degree murder because there was no premeditation, they lowered it to second degree murder. In this case, we have no cause of death, under than the speculation of Dr. G. Looks like CJP is not buying any of this, he is making his sour puss face. Now Mason is talking about his doomed Serrano case. Nelson Serrano was convicted of the execution style of 4 people, etc, etc. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time. There was no question to the cause of death but the issue was that Serrano was the shooter, it went on for weeks and weeks and years later it is in the appellate court. It should reiterate that every reasonable hypothesis should be used to be assured that this case is beyond a reasonable doubt. He is now talking about a case Linda handed him this morning about Felony Child Abuse making the murder First Degree. Caylee Marie had no prior child abuse, no broken bones, no bone torquing. Casey Marie Anthony was a loving, doting mother as seen by all witnesses. Judge asks him about a case Louis V State, how would Mason square Louis with this. Mason says Louis is trying to undo it but the law today is Brooks. He is moving on to Kennedy V State....the Kennedy court said, the standard for aggravated child abuse, it talks about the court making an error in area in not finding out what aggravated child abuse. The complete definition is that a reasonable parent would not cause the acts that would knowingly cause the child apparent pain and harm. All the witnesses were asked about torture, discipline any acts at all by the defendant to her daughter. None were found. Aggravated child abuse was not found. To count 3, aggravated manslaughter, it was raised to aggravated because Caylee was young. The duct tape either being on the child or near the child means nothing. There has been no evidence as culpable conduct on the part of Casey Anthony. Mason goes on and on and CJP says isn't it a little late in the day for that argument? Mason says they filed motions about Miranda rights but there is another aspect of it. Mason goes on to say that statements Casey gave LE statements not voluntarily and the jury needs to disregard them. She was never given Miranda rights even though she was put in a cage and surrounded by LE. Mason is talking about other cases he has cited for CJBP to read. The state is required to prove every element to beyond a reasonable doubt and they have not done that. He is citing another case that gave no cause of death. Where is any cause of death in this case? This is a special case because of the notoriety and needs to be looked at carefully, there is not enough evidence to prove these charges against Casey Anthony. Talking about hair in the case now, the Supreme Court in Ballard reversed the judgment of Murder and the Death Penalty, there was not just hair evidence there was bloody evidence and a cause of death. Talking about a death conviction of Cox, the Supreme Court reversed the conviction that was gained only because of circumstantial evidence. The death sentence was not just commuted to life but acquitted. Another case that was a death sentence, reversed to a 2nd degree murder because of no pre-meditation. If the homicide is not pre-meditated it must not be first degree murder it must be 2nd degree murder. In this case, this is an accidental death. He is talking about Serrano and comparing it to the love that Casey had for Caylee. The state is trying to make this loving relationship into something different. He is talking about the heart shaped sticker not found close to the body. The only evidence that any heart shape sticker was poofed by the FBI. We have no evidence that about that heart shape sticker, the duct tape is questionable, did the duct tape fall down to the mouth? The only person that had access to the duct tape is the grand father, that is what we learned yesterday. Now directing his thoughts to case law provided to him by the State of Florida. Judge Perry is asking him what record of accidental death can the court look at? Mason says there is none but there is going to be, the state has the burden not the defense. He is citing law, the state gave him. In this case the cause of death was not in dispute. The testimony of the defendant was proven wrong, there was no mystery about the cause of death. More case law, I think provided by the state. He isn't making much sense and jumping around and I am having a hard time making sentences out of it, lol. He is going on about the Serrano case again. Each case that the state gave him had cause of death. How was this child killed, where was this child killed, was she killed at all. He says that he has tried murder cases for 40 years and he knows all of these could have, may have, might of been can not exclude there was no murder at all, there was no pre-meditation, there was no history to establish aggravated child abuse. All 3 of the first charges are screaming for acquittal. Mason is done....... Linda is up..... The law is the law and while the great portion of what Mason dealt with, he tried to compare those cases to the unique facts in this case. The cases she gave the court were not given because they were quite similar but because the court must lean toward the State of Florida. The reason the Serrano Case was in the packet was because the defendants theory of innocence was an alibi. The state had ample evidence to show Serrano's alibi was lacking. In this case, the defendant said over and over to everyone that Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzales had taken her child. That was proven never to have occurred. The fact that the states opening included an accidental drowning changes none of the facts. Dr G. has stated unequivocally that this was not an accident. George Anthony has said this did not happen. This cannot be an alibi compared to the alibi used in Serrano. Linda is citing a case that the state did not die due to the defendant. Dr Beaver could not perform a regular autopsy because of advanced decomp but still said it was a homicide. Hypothesis propounded by the defense, Dr. Beaver said didn't happen because of his knowledge, the grave site and other common sense that it was a homicide. A reasonable jury can decide that Caylee Marie Anthony died do to the fact that she had 3 pieces of duct tape applied to her nose and mouth, that she died to a high amount of chloroform or a combination of the two. That Caylee's body was in her mother's trunk. Casey did provide a motive to eliminate the child. The state proved that Ms Anthony started to think about killing the child in March when she looked up how to make Chloroform, etc. The state does not have to provide details of the death, it can be decided upon circumstantial evidence. The only real case that needs to be decided for Judgment of Acquittal is in the Brooks case in 2005 by the Supreme Court. The merger doctrine between aggravated child abuse and first degree murder, shaking a child to death could be considered to be aggravated child abuse, the court found the mechanism that resulted in the Dorsey case was more than a single instantaneous act. Cites another case where a mother drowned her daughter by holding her down in a swimming pool. Was holding the child a single act of child abuse? The panels disagreed that the Brooks decision was Dicta. The other opinions to have to do with this case is Lymm V State, where regardless the language of Brooks, the surrounding acts in Lymm would take it out of Brooks. More than one hold or grip, did not constitute a single act of abuse. Since a reasonable jury can conclude that the death of Caylee was by multiple pieces of duct tape, that would not be a single act of abuse. The administration of a poison would also keep it from being a single act of child abuse. The next thing is premeditation, the question is, can the jury conclude due to Ms. Anthony's computer searches, that this was an intentional act by the defendant to cause the child's death. There is no fixed period of time for pre-mediation. When she put not one but two then three pieces of duct tape over Caylee's face it was pre-meditated. We request you deny a Judgment of Acquittal. Linda is done...... Mason is up........ He thanks Linda for bringing up the chloroform. He says there was no sign of chloroform in her remains. They tried to prove there was chloroform used on the victim and they could not. There were not 3 pieces of duct tape wrapped around this child's head, to do with cause of death or anything to do with Casey Anthony. There is no witness, there is no possession. There is only George Anthony using that duct tape on a gas can and a command center. All the computer searches seem to have to do with self defense. He is saying in the Johnson case, what a world of difference, he did not say that the evidence was based on guessing like Dr. G. did. If the court will please read Abdul, a case cited by the defense. They got gas and duct tape to light the victim on fire. Norton they cited was a gun shot would and that was not establish pre-meditated murder, it goes to show how weak this case is. Then go to Louis, there is a suggestion in that case that the drowning of holding the victim down is more than one case. Bad cases do not make good law. There is no evidence that mother dunked her child more than one time. In this case there is no evidence that chloroform was used. All of this is guessing and speculating and not in this country, I hope you look at all this information and come to Judgment of Acquittal. Mason is done. The judge says he has spent much time reviewing all the cases cited and the testimony in this case. He has recessed until 11:15am, today. Sorry if some of this doesn't make sense, Mason was citing law fast and mumbling and not finishing sentences. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 15, 2011, 01:26:57 PM 11:15am Wednesday June 15, 2011 Court is in session. The judge says that both the state and the defense have presented their arguments for their judgment of Acquittal. Both cite Serrano V State of Florida. There is another case the court took into consideration, the court in that opinion went on to say, when faced with a judgment of acquittal the judge must rule in the light of the most favorable to the State. Another says, under the circumstantial standard when viewed in the light the court must judge in favor of the state. He goes on to say that the judgment of acquittal must be denied and it becomes the juries duty to decide whether there is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether there is a premeditated design to kill the jury must decide that. They must decide the nature of the weapon used, the manner of the homicide in question, where the elements of pre mediation are sought to be under circumstantial evidence, the jury must decide. The succints of this case is that the defendant was in fact the last person with the victim and she did have motive. In another case the evidence showed that the defendant was the last to be seen with the victim and he was no longer dating the victim's mother. He was found with a blood spot on his pants, fiber evidence and he made statements that were inconsistent. That evidence was enough to convict him of First Degree Murder and Kidnapping. The next case has some interesting facts....in this case the evidence showed that the defendant who was 52 years old and met the victims mother, he was the last person seen with the victim. The last time the child was seen, she was seen sleeping with the victim, then she abruptly disappeared. The Supreme Court when deciding this case cited an Epperly V State decision, the victim was last seen leaving a motel, she left with the defendant, went to a lake house and ultimately disappeared, her body never being found. The court goes into a long dissertation in that particular case and talks about premeditation and what premeditation meant. There is another case the Supreme Court of Mass, which is still a good law in Mass, although it is not binding on this case. This case shows that on the first floor a tenant heard moaning sounds in the cellar, she and her husband went to the cellar and found a boy lying naked on the cellar floor. The police arrived and they took the boy for treatment to the hospital, he was later released, came back home and he got worse and then died. The defendant was the last one seen with the victim. He was seen with the defendant by two different people. They observed the victim and the defendant together on the front porch. The victim was found dead later on that day. The court concluded that this was sufficient evidence that the child was last with the defendant and found naked lying in the cellar dead. The next case is a Supreme Court of Arkansas a defendant and his co-defendant were the last seen with the victim. The defendant was the one that said the co-defendant was the last one seen with the victim and the court found it was sufficient. The court looked at Louis and found that on the doctrine of merger. One the felony murder statue states that aggravated child abuse is related to first degree murder based on the number of times of aggravated child abuse. In this case there is more than a single act of aggravated child abuse. In this case there is 3 applications of duct tape, the use of chloroform, the child was placed in trash bags and another container. The defendant said after the child was missing, she was alive and safe during this time. There is more than one case of child abuse. The defense's motion of Judgment of Acquittal are hear-by denied. The jury must decide. The state has provided sufficient evidence for all the charges. The court is in recess till tomorrow morning at 9:AM. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 10:11:27 AM 9:00am Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Defense first witness is Gerardo Bloise Baez is up........ Gerardo Bloise is a CSI for the OC Sheriff's Office. Baez is pleasing the court. On July 23, 2008 you were asked to inspect a vehicle? Yes. Who did this car belong to? Tony Lazzaro. You did an exterior and interior inspection of the car and you did an alternative light source test? Yes, I did. I checked the trunk area and I saw a stain in the trunk. I then used a alternative light source and it was positive, I then a presumptive blood test. What were the results? Negative. What did you do next. I photographed the interior and exterior. Did you place the car on a lift? No. Did you collect any items from Tony's car? No. What did you do Aug 6, 2008? That was a search warrant at the Anthony family residence. His assignment was to check the bedroom that belonged to Casey and check for clothing and inspect the clothing using an alternative light source and then collect any clothing. He checked the living room area, the garage area. Did you check George and Cindy's room? Just cursory. You did go further in Casey's room? Yes. He is showing the defendant, defense exhibits. The first one is of Casey's bedroom. Describing the items in Casey's room. A single bed, items on the wall, a dresser, a closet. What were you there to do that day? To collect clothing, check those items with alternative light source and collect the pieces of clothing. You were going to now look at all of Casey's clothing? Yes. What was your goal? To look for stains. How do you do that? I put some black cover on the window to get the room dark and then use alternative light source then check for stain, the separate that item then collect it as evidence. What is this photo you are looking at now? That is the closet. Is that where you got all the items of clothing? Most of them. Did you do a thorough job of collecting clothing? Yes. Showing now one of the items you inspected, did you find a suspected stain on this item? That was the charcoal pants, no stain was found. Were these pair of pants that Casey was wearing June 16, 2008? Yes. You found no stains on these pants? No. Do you do one piece of clothing at a time? Yes. Do you photograph stains as you find them? Yes. He is showing the witness a stain and asking him about it. What do you do with an item that has a stain? I submit those items to the FBI lab. Is that a large stain? I would say a medium stain. Showing witness another photo, is that another piece of clothing? Yes, an arrow is on it to show stains, small stains. These are the types of details you are looking for? Yes, just stains like that. After you inspected all of her clothing, what did you do next? I collected it and submitted it to the FBI. Were you wearing protective clothing? Yes, I was in full gear, I do not speak, because I am by myself, lots of laughter. Was Alina Burroughs with you? Did you talk to her. Oh no these pics were in the Lab, I was by myself. When you were in Casey's room you were with Alina Burroughs and Det. Melich. Did Det Melich go into the crime scene? Yes. Then I submitted the items to the FBI lab along with the photos and property forms. Are these items protected in anyway from further contamination? Yes, paper bags. Like the bags we see here today? yes. Baez is done....... Linda is up...... The search warrant scope was for Casey's clothing only? Yes. You were aware that the pants worn by Casey Anthony, did you know they were washed by her mother? Yes. When you inspected Tony's Jeep did it smell like there had been a dead body in it? No. Linda is done..... Baez is back up.... When you smelled Tony's Jeep, did it smell like there had been a bag of garbage left in it for 3 weeks? No. Baez is done. Witness is excused. Next defense witness is Heather Seubert. She is the unit chief of the firearms unit in the FBI lab in Quantico. She was the unit chief in the DNA unit, in 2008. She worked with MDNA and Nuclear DNA. She is has tons of education and work with LE and the FBI What is serology? The study of fluids, blood and semen. She has studied in serology, she has trained other's at the FBI lab. She is very qualified. The judge is declaring her an expert in Serology and DNA analysis. How were you involved in this case. I was assigned to this case when it was received at the FBI lab. She made a report on Oct 8, 2008. He is taking her section by section of this report. What do Q's and K's mean? They are assigned to items of evidence. A q item is a unknown sample and a K item is a known sample. Were you given items that had to do with a Pontiac Sun fire? Yes, received under a letter of communication on July 8, 2008, items of evidence. Side bar.....side bar is over. Judge says he needs to take up matters outside of the jury. In recess for a special break. 9:50am Looks like they are going in the judges chamber. 9:50am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 11:21:09 AM 10:10am Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Back from special break. The defense witness Heather Seubert is back on the witness stand. She is an expert witness from the FBI. Baez is up.... Looking at two items, swabs from spare tire cover, collected from the Pontiac Sun Fire. Mr Ashton is telling Baez how to introduce evidence, lol. What is the first thing you did with these two swab items. We examined them in the lab, a chemical test was done of that swab, performed by a biologist. It is a test for the positive test for blood, each of those swabs were negative for blood. Next item is a piece of spare tire cover, negative for blood. That item was a spare tire cover, that item had brown and yellowish stains, they were tested and negative for blood. The next item was a left side of trunk liner, it had brown and yellow stains, they tested negative for blood. Next item is the right side of the trunk liner. It had brown and yellow stains and they tested negative for blood. What did you do with the swabs after they were tested for blood? They are not kept by the lab. Did you do any other tests on those items? Yes on those items we also swabbed and tested for DNA typing. The results were no DNA found. Why did you do the DNA test? We were looking for any other biological material that was not blood. What can you get DNA from in a persons body? Any cell of a human body besides one type of blood cells. Next items are clothing items. First item was dark grey pants. No chemical testing performed. Next item was a blue pair of pants, had a stain that tested negative for blood. Next item is a pair of jeans, no stains were observed. Next item is a light grey skirt, had stains, tested negative for blood. Next item was a yellow skirt, had stains that were negative for blood. Next item was light yellow skirt, had stains, tested negative for blood. Next item was a light blue shirt, had stains, tested negative for blood. Next was a shirt, had stains, tested next for blood. Next item was a bright pink shirt, had no stains. Next item was a light pink shirt, had no stains. Next item was a green shirt, had no stains. There was no blood on any of the clothing items received. Next item is piece of the spare tire cover, tested for blood, negative. Next item is a piece of the spare tire cover and tested negative blood. Both of those items were tested next for DNA, both tested negative. Talking about a report of Oct 9, 2008. Next item is shovel and a label from the shovel blade. They were examined for the presence of blood, they were negative, no DNA was found. Some touch DNA was found but it was not usable. Talking about levels of DNA...objection...side bar....sidebar is over 10:40 Baez is up....... Talking about touch DNA. Baez is using his big pad. What is Low Copy Number? It is a type of DNA process but we know that there is going to be a limited number of DNA there, so you make more copies of the DNA to enhance the DNA profile. With that result you have to figure in the Low Copy Number to have a reliable result. Touch DNA is different from Low Copy Number. You don't enhance Touch DNA, you only do that with Low Copy Number. Telling the jury the whole DNA process. To find a DNA type they need 200 RFU's. Other labs and other kits can report lower levels, right? Yes. What is the threshold to exclude a person? The 200 RFU's. There is also a threshold at 50 RFU's at a peak. Other labs may use a threshold for a peak that is lower. Is the FBI Lab Number conservative? Yes. The shovel had DNA but it was lower than the standards of the FBI lab. Objection.....sidebar....sidebar is over 11:00am. Brief legal matter outside the presence of the jury. Baez is proffering. What is the peak RFU that was found on the shovel? There was an X for the female at 55 RFU's. Ashton asks if it can exclude a man? She cannot draw any conclusion can be drawn. Ashton wants the jury to be told of this. Baez says he wants the fact known that there was an artifact. Ashton wants to know what the relevance of that is. Baez says that there is something there. We are discussing DNA material past the 50 RFU threshold. He wants the witness to say there was a portion of DNA there and nothing more? Ashton says for what point? It has no scientific point. Baez says if the shovel is not relevant why is it in evidence. Jeff gets up and the judge tells him to calm down. Jeff says that this is scientifically meaningless. The judge says he can ask about that in the State's cross. The judge is asking the witness what those results mean, is it DNA? It is a peak above 50 RFU, she has no other information. It could be from a female it could be from a male. There is no conclusion. The judge says you can draw no conclusions from it? No sir. The judge says he will permit the question and the state can clear it up and the jury can take it for what it's worth. Returning the jury. Baez is up, witness is till on the stand. We talked about how much DNA is present on the shovel. You mentioned that at one of the markers you saw something at the 50 RFU point? Yes. What is the best way to summarize what is there and what is not there? No result was there for DNA, at the sex point there was 55 RFU but it was not enough to report about. It was inconclusive to which sex. Jeff asks for a side bar.......11:10am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 12:27:12 PM 11:10am Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Back from side bar. The defense witness Heather Seubert is back on the witness stand. She is an expert witness from the FBI. Baez is up.... Looking at report from March 19, 2009. These items are duct tape from the ME's office. They were submitted from the FBI. She examined the top side of the tape, the silver side of the tape. They were swabbed for biological material. The logo Henkle was throughout the tape. They found a DNA profile but it was below the threshold for the FBI reporting policy. How many markers were there? 6 out of the 9 that were tested. The witness is going to Baez's Big Pad. They looked for 13 areas on the DNA....talking about DNA. She used two different DNA kits on the samples. She listed out 9 of the 13 locations needed. As it relates to the non-sticky side of the duct tape what did you find? It did not meet my reporting threshold. How many markers do you need to exclude someone? One marker. Could you exclude Casey Anthony from the one marker? Yes. Could you exclude Caylee Anthony? Yes. She then tested the known blood samples from other family members, Lee, George, Cindy. All of those individuals were excluded from this profile. What did you do next to find out who this might be? I tested the people in the lab. Did you find someone who matched these markers. She knew it was a female marker so she identified those people in the lab and it turned out to be Laurie Godison in the FBI lab. Can this DNA contaminate DNA that was already there? Depends on the quantity of the DNA. On this item the profile was low, so she would expect to see a mixture and she didn't. It is still possible that other DNA was contaminated? No, I would of expected it to be contained there. What if it was too low, would it still be there? Objection..sustained. Can contaminated DNA override DNA already there? If a large presence of DNA was put over a small amount of DNA it would be possible. The tape got to the FBI last in the line. Yes. Is that common? What. Would it have been better for the FBI to get the duct tape first? Any time an item is touched it can be contaminated but my test would of been no different. Who decides where the evidence goes? It follows the FBI protocol. Was it your understanding that the duct tape had been exposed to numerous elements? Yes, we knew it was outside in a swamp that had water in it at times. Do the elements degrade DNA? Sure, sunlight, humidity, different factors can effect DNA. Why do the test? Because it is still evidence in this case and I needed to test it for DNA. You can still get DNA from items under water? It is possible but there would be several different factors in the time the item was submerged, was it semen was it blood? You can also get DNA profiles from someone who has been burned? Yes. Are there multiple variables that determine if a DNA profile can be found? Do you know all the variables of an item? No. Is it possible for you to know if you can get DNA from an item before you test it? Depends, if it looks like a blood stain, I think I can get one, other stains, I don't know. Where would you stand a chance of getting a DNA profile on duct tape? Top side or sticky side? Jeff asks for a side bar, 11:40..side bar is over..... The higher likely hood would be the underside touching someones face. If it was put on violently, would you expect to find tissue on it? Yes. Did you test the sticky side? Yes, it was inconclusive. Was there a readout? Yes there was a peak found at the D-3 location, it was a 17. Is Caylee Anthony a 17 at the D-3 marker? No, she is a 14/15. Could you exclude Caylee Anthony at that marker? Yes. Could you exclude Casey Anthony at that marker? Yes, she is also a 14/15. Moving to her Aug 19, 2009 report. What are the item you received on this report? A pair of shorts. Where did these shorts come from? From the ME's office. What tests were done on those shorts? Tests for blood and semen, both were negative. Next item is clothing, letters, stitching and stretch material. Tested possible for blood but was found to be negative. It was then sent for DNA typing, there was no DNA from that item. Next item is a blanket. Did you find blood on that blanket? It tested possible for blood but it was negative. No DNA was found on the blanket. It was also looked at for the presence of semen, that was negative. Next item is a laundry bag. Ran blood tests, it was positive but insufficient quantity for testing for blood. No DNA was present. Next item is a blanket. Tested for the blood and semen. It had a possible test for blood but the test was negative, tested negative for DNA. Baez just struck all evidence for this blanket, it was his mistake. Next item is doll. Where did the doll come from? Collected from Sun Fire, was in the car seat. Was tested for presence of blood that test was negative. Next report was Dec 16, 2008. On page 2 of your report were you given the profiles of Cindy, George and Lee Anthony? Yes, buccal samples. Were you asked to conduct a paternity test for Lee Anthony being the father of Caylee Anthony? Side Bar........ Judge is recessing for lunch. 12:00am. Jeff is objecting to this question, Baez knows that the FBI does not do paternity testing and this was not in good faith. Judge asks Baez was this a good faith question? I have two very good faith reasons for asking this question. First it was tested for paternity for Lee Anthony being the parent of Caylee Anthony. The FBI does not normally do it but they did do it in this case and it was sent out after that. It was in black and white in a report, how is that not in a good faith basis? Jeff Ashton knew I was going to ask this question. Jeff asks the FBI witness if she was ever asked to perform a paternity test for Lee being the father of Caylee? On Sep 12, 2008, she spoke to Nick Savage that she could run the test and then send it to a further lab for testing. Does that in any way mention Lee Anthony? No. Jeff says that LE did not ask for this test. There is no good faith basis for that and that is hearsay and not relevant. Baez is asking the witness, who did you think you they asked for the paternity test? Nick Savage asked her if she could run the result and find out if Lee could be the father of Caylee. So they ran the test and if he was a possible father they would send it to another lab. She then reported out that Lee Anthony could NOT be the father of Caylee Anthony. Jeff wants to know, how is this a good faith basis, asking what some LE asked someone to do. That is not the question Baez asked and that is not what he was trying to tell the jury. The judge says that he doesn't know what was in Baez or Jeff's mind but they are not to ask questions unless you want to ask the LE what they asked. I am not going to venture to speculate why you asked that. There is a case called Del Monte Banana Company, read it, it talks about good faith basis. There is another case Brock, please read those cases for a good faith basis for asking questions. That is all I am going to say. Jeff wants the last question stricken and the judge says he will look at the question. He does not have a hearing problem and the amplification of your objections does not need to be raised. He will ask the court reporter to mark the last question and he will consider striking it. Court is in recess till 1:30pm. Edit make correction in red, per Magic Eyes. MB Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 02:58:08 PM Hi, just a quick note to let you know I will be gone today from about 4:00pm trial time today. Sorry I won't be typing the last hour of today's trial. I will be back tomorrow morning. On the good side, I get my two grand daughters all afternoon, can't wait for huggin' and kissin', I really need it right now. Sorry for the off-topic, just wanted to let everyone in the trial thread know what is going on. ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 03:00:21 PM 1:40pm Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Defense witness Heather Seubert is back on the stand. Baez is up........ Did you do a paternity test to see if Lee Anthony was the father of Caylee Anthony? She is checking her report of Dec 16, 2008. She says that report does not address that. Baez tells her she has two reports on that day, she is still looking for it. She can't find it, she is asking for a copy of it. Baez is handing her a copy. Can you read to the jury the results? Based on the STR typing results the DNA obtained from Caylee Anthony could not have originated from Lee Anthony. These types of tests are not done very often at the FBI lab are they? Sustained. Moving to the same report she doesn't have, lol. She found it now. Can you explain to the jury what you did with the car seat from the Pontiac Sun Fire? It was examined for the presence of blood, it was negative. Did you do anything further with the car seat? No. Next item is the steering wheel cover from the Pontiac Sun Fire, she examined it for stains, no stains were found, no testing was done. Next item is debris from the spare tire wheel well and a swab from the spare tire wheel well. He didn't ask her a question about this. He just asked her if they had gone over all her results and she said yes. Baez is done......... Jeff is up...... You did a phenylalanine test for blood in the stains from the trunk? She explains how they do the test. It changes color if blood is found. When a body decomposes a body's blood also decomposes? Would this test react to fat? It is possible if there is intact red blood cells. The stain you tested is being identified as being decomposition fluid? Does your test, refute that? No. Does your test indicate that the fluid was not from a human body? My testing was negative for blood, that is all I can testify to. Could the stains still be decomposition fluid? It is possible, it just wasn't blood. What happens to DNA when cell decomposes? The DNA is degraded. When the cells break down the DNA breaks down. In order for your testing to work, you have to have intact strands of DNA? Yes, I need 13 markers. If a cell is decomposing you don't expect to find DNA? Yes, it breaks down when the body breaks down. Jeff is referring her to Baez's Big Pad. This result that counsel wrote on this chart this 50, what does it mean? It is the reliable result in the laboratory, she explains the process to show what is needed to get any result at all on DNA. 50 is when the computer sees a true peak for DNA, that is what is set at the FBI lab for analysis. What is a peak at 55 mean? It was located at a certain marker and it was inconclusive, she can give no information on what this can mean. It was the sex chromosome? Yes. You can't tell which sex this was? It was just inconclusive. Does this mean there is potentially an entire DNA profile there? You could perform a low copy technique on it but I have no idea what that result would be. You could never tell if this was a male or a female? It is possible but I do not know. There was a single result on the sticky side of the tape? Yes, well below the threshold of our testing at that marker. Side bar.....Side bar is over. Now the judge wants to just see the attorneys and not the court reporter at side bar. Shoot, that means no transcript later of what they are saying, must be juicy for no court reporter. Judge and Attorney only side bar 2:15pm. Side bar is over........ The judge is going to let Mr Baez ask an additional question. The marker that is on the sticky side of the duct tape, when you saw this, did you try to eliminate anyone besides Caylee and Casey? Yes, I tried with all the lab personnel and all the known samples. This is different because you only had one marker, this is different than the other one you had 6? Yes the top side had 6 markers and the bottom side of the duct tape had 1 marker. How many people did you go through. All five of the known samples, then the known reference samples from the lab, there was 5 of them. Did you find someone who could not be excluded? That was inconclusive and did not meet her threshold to find or eliminate anyone? Was there another individual that had that marker at that location? Yes, one of their markers at D3 was a 16/17. You saw no 16 at the D3, did you? There was just a 17 at the peak. This could be 2 things, a person could have 2 peaks or 1 peak? Yes, a person could have 1 peak or 2 peaks. You only found one peak? Yes. Because it was so low you could not find out what it was? Yes, it was lower than the thresholds at the lab. Baez is done......... Jeff is up.......... The reality of this, is that this peak means nothing? Right, it was inconclusive. If it meant anything it is not the DNA of George Anthony? Yes, Mr George Anthony did not have a 17. She is clearing a mistake up, Caylee was a 14/15 and Casey is a 15/19, she is sorry for that mistake. Mr Baez spent a great deal of time asking you about blood, you testified that you tested for blood? Yes, it is one of the tests we did. If someone is shot or stabbed they would have blood? Yes. If someone is killed and it does not involve blood shed, it would not show blood? Yes, I would have no way of knowing if it happened or not. Were you involved in the order of the testing of the duct tape? No. You were not expecting to find any DNA on the duct tape? If any I would of expected to find it on the sticky side but after learning that the exposure and amount of time there was probably not going to be DNA. For DNA to survive on an object in a swampy area for 6 months would be unlikely? Objection. Sustained. Side bar......A deputy just told someone not to talk in the gallery, it was not Cindy or George. Side bar is over. 2:35. Jeff is still up.... How is the area the remains were found described to you? Water in it, a swampy type of area. What would happen to the DNA in Florida, in the heat for 6 months? The cells would die and the DNA would degrade. Would that answer include all of the other items at the remains scene? Yes. Mr Baez asked you about a paternity test, the FBI doesn't normally do paternity tests? Correct. You got Caylee DNA's from a bone? Yes, a tibia. To do this paternity test, you tested Lee Anthony? Yes and he wasn't. To summarize all of the testing you have done here. The stain in the car, all you know is that it was not blood? Yes. All of the DNA found at the remains scene was of a FBI lab staff member? Yes. Jeff is done...... Baez is up....... You talked about cells breaking down, there is no longer an ability to get DNA? Yes. You can't tell when you can no longer get DNA from decomp? It depends, if you use a tooth or a bone, that will remain longer....all of the other tissues will start to degrade and the ability to collect DNA is less likely. Baez asks her if this is in the latter part of the decomp? She says she can't give an answer, it would vary. What you can say is that you did not get DNA or blood from the trunk of that car? Correct. Is it your understanding from the early stages of decomp there is blood? Yes, the possibility would exist. Would blood leak out on the carpet of a trunk liner? Within the confinement of a trunk all of those fluids would run together. If it is contained in a plastic bag and there is a hole in the bag could it leak out? It is possible. As you were giving the answer to Mr Ashton did you take into consideration what your protocols were? Yes, what is based on the SOP of the lab. The 17 allele you cannot give information on? It was inconclusive. When you discussed about the out door elements and the potential to find DNA, you did say the expectation if duct tape was place around someone's mouth you would.....sustained. Would you expect to find more DNA on the sticky side or the non-sticky side? The sticky side. Baez is done... Jeff is up......... Blood spilled from the body, still continues to decompose? Yes along with the other fluids. Jeff is done. Witness is excused. Court is taking a break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 04:05:20 PM 3:10pm Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session and back from a break. Next Defense witness is Robin Maynard. Baez is up............ She is the founder and president of Libby's Co. In Dec 2008 she was a CSI for the OC Sheriff's Office. Baez is showing her a photo. It is of a card board mat with a pink,red heart shaped material. When you collect an item of evidence like that, what do you do to record an item like that? I was in the sifting operation. A map couldn't be made in the area where I was, so I would sift and the evidence was collected. I would note on the bucket where the item was located, which lane. What lane was this in? Lane 6, 45 feet from the baseline. He is showing her a photo that is stipulated that it is not to scale. He forgot to publish the heart photo to the jury, he is putting it back up. Now he is showing where on that photo it shows which lane and where it was found. She circled the information. He is now putting up a photo of the map, she is showing where lane 6 is and where 45 feet from the baseline would be in lane 6. He wants to know where the bones were found? She says the bones that were sifted can not be exact, they were in buckets of material that needed to be sifted. There were 13 bones that were found through sifting. She put them down on the map according to where the bones were found. Was there a bone found in this area? She said yes there was a bone found in that area, she is not sure where it was located. No cross. She is excused. Next defense witness is Ron Murdock. He was also a state's witness. he is a supervisor in the OC Sheriff's Office in the forensic unit. Baez is asking him to hook up a display. He is doing that with his laptop. Can you draw a circle around the area in lane 6, 45 feet from the baseline, can you show us how far from the skull the heart-shaped sticker was found? Baez is publishing it to the jury. How far is the distance from the skull are to the area the heart-shaped sticker was found? 30feet. He wants him to mark that with an X. He is marking that location on a piece of paper. Baez is done. No cross. The witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 04:24:29 PM 3:30pm Thursday June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Next defense witness is Jennifer Welch. She also testified for the state. She is a CSI for the OC Sheriff's Office. Baez says they have entered into a stipulation for various exhibits. There are 7 exhibits in all. You were in charge of documenting the scene on Suburban Dr? Yes. Were there a lot of items at the scene, trash? Yes. Over 300 items were collected? Yes. At some point did you just stop collecting trash? Some big items, eventually. Were there any bones found past a certain area? No. He is showing her a photo. Does that appear to be items from sifting? No they were just collected, not from sifting, they were not sent to the lab. He is showing her another photos of items collected. Were any of these items sent to the lab for testing? No. What lane were these in? Collected from lane 4. He is showing her another photo of items collected, they were not sent to the lab, they came from lane 1. Next photo shows he shows her lane 1 and lane 4. He is now showing her another photo of items collected, they were not sent to the lab, they were found in lane 3. Now showing her another photo of items collected, they were not sent to the lab, they were collected from lane 3. Now showing another photo of items collected, they were not sent to lab, they were found in the clearing east of the wooded area near the fence. Baez is done. Linda is up........ Inv. Welch would it be fair to classify the area that Caylee Marie's remains were found in as a trash dump? Yes. Witness is excused. Next witness is Lorie Gottesman. She is the supervisory forensic examiner for the FBI. She has been there for 20 years. She has lots of education. What is a question document examiner? She examines all kinds of evidence and compares question items with know items for known origin. What training do you have in that? Intensive training at the FBI. She examines any type of written items, torn items, doesn't have to be a document. She is a member of many scientific societies. She has been an expert in court before more than 20 times. She is declared an expert witness in Question Document Examination. Do you work with various instruments? Yes, the Esta Machine, the VSC a tool used for a variety of reasons, lights and filters, a camera, a monitor, she is able to see different spectrum's of light with it. He is referring her to her report. She received 3 pieces of duct tape, Q62, Q63, Q64. They came from the victim, herself. She is looking at her report so see where the items came from. They came from the ME's Office. What were you asked to look at these 3 pieces of duct tape for? I was asked to look for a heart-shape or any remnants from one. Did you use the VSC for this? Yes. Baez is showing a photo of the VSC in use with documents. She is explaining to the jury how it works. It allows you to see, the human eyes cannot see. She tried to see if she could see any residue of the heart-shaped sticker with the VSC. After using all the different lights and filters, she was unable to find any sticker fragments or residue. Was there any evidence of a sticker on these pieces of duct tape. No. After you conducted your examination were you asked to submit a DNA sample? Yes. Why? They found an unknown profile from a piece of the duct tape and they needed to eliminate it. She gave them her DNA and later found out it was her DNA on the duct tape. When she handled the duct tape, she handled it with care. She wore gloves. She has no idea how it happened or when? You at no time sneezed on it or anything like that? No sir. Were they in protective material? Yes, they were in a glassine material. You exercised great care with these items? Yes. Were you given other items of evidence in this case? Yes. He is referring her to her report. He is referring to trash items. What were you asked to do in this report? I was given a number of pieces of plastic and give an overall assessment of the plastic and try to match it with other pieces of plastic. She was not able to match any of the bags found at the remains scene to the Anthony home. Baez is done. Jeff is up......... You got the duct tape after latent print had already examined it? Yes, you knew they had saw something and noted it and then could not find it again? Yes. You tried to find pieces of garbage bags that matched known bags from the crime scene? I tried to compare the bags from the ME's office to bags found at the Anthony's residence? Yes and they did not match up. Some of them she could say no, they were not a match and some were inconclusive. Jeff is done. Baez is up..... When talking about the duct tape, you were asked to compare DNA from the suspects....Sustained. Witness is excused and may go back home to Virginia. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 16, 2011, 04:37:00 PM 3:15pm Thursday, June 16, 2011 Court is in session. Next defense witness is Cary Oien. He is currently employed as the section chief of the FBI. He has been with the FBI for over 15 years. He has lots of education. He was a trace examiner and a hair and fiber examiner at the FBI. He is admitted as an expert in Hair and Fiber Analysis. In Feb 2008, he manged the whole trace evidence unit for the FBI. He conducted an examination of this case. His report of Sept 2008, shows that Miss Lowe was not in the lab, he conducted the analysis because she was not in the lab. He looked at the shovel, the one that came from Mr. Burner. It was received into the trace unit for trace evidence. It also had a sticker on it that was examined for hair and fiber. He examined the stickers and mounted the debris on them. On the sticker he found a quarter inch human hair that was Caucasian. It was not big enough to compare to a known sample. It was then submitted to DNA, he does not know what the results were. As the section chief, to insure quality control in the lab? Yes that is one of the jobs I do. Each different unit also has their own quality control person. The FBI lab is accredited with the right agencies. It is a broad reaching accreditation program. If a lab is not accredited by these organizations are they pretty much on there own or are they....objection. Side bar.. Sidebar is over...Baez is done....... Jeff is up....... The hair fragment you found means nothing? Yes. The witness is excused. The judge is excusing the jury for the day. 4:25pm No other matters for today, court is in recess till 9am, tomorrow morning. Yay, I made it all the way through the testimony. Grand kids are late, lol. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 10:08:20 AM 9:00am Friday, June 17, 2011 Court is in Session. Defense witness is Dr. Timothy Huntington. Baez is up...... Dr. Huntington is an Assistant Professor of Forensic Entomology. He has lots of education. He consults as an expert with LE. He has received lots of training. He is Board Certified with the Board of Entomology. He has done a lot of studies in forensic entomology. (Now he his a diplomat for the bug world). The judge has declared him an expert in forensic entomology. He received a phone call from LKB on Dec 11, 2008 about this case and came to Florida on Dec 13, 2008. He got the entomology report from Dr. Neal Haskell and then he reviewed specimens. He received some of the specimens but not all of them. He knows what species identification were and the number of insects collected. Now he is talking about the bug world and what forensic entomology is. Insects and dead people. Can include insects infesting the people while they are still alive. The help establish the time of death. Insects discover dead bodies very quickly. The witness is going to Baez Big Pad. Baez is gonna give him multiple colors to make his points. He drew a lil bug and now going through the cycle of a bug's life. Now talking about maggots and dead bodies, it is very easy to tell one stage from the next. Maggots will leave a shell behind as they change, the shell can be evidence or disappear, they are very thin and flimsy. The next flies go through 3 stages of development. Grade school maggots, middle school maggots and high school maggots. The jury must feel like they are back in 3rd grade science. Pupae is the cocoon stage. They are now changing into an adult fly. He says to look 30 feet away from a dead body for insects trying to crawl away from them. Ashton just asked for a side bar, I think he wants a hall pass......side bar over. Judge announces a brief legal matter they need to do outside of the jury's presence. The jury is excused. Baez is up........ Dr. Huntington you did not conduct a post mortem interval did you? No and neither did Dr. Haskell. On July 2008 there were items collected, would it of been possible at that time to do a post mortem interval estimation? Yes but it was not done. Do you plan on only saying that you did not do a post mortem interval estimation? Jeff is up.... If you could assume that the maggots were from a human body, you could find out when they were born? He had no reason to assume they those maggots came from a human body. Judge asks if Baez filed a report from Dr Huntington. None of this made sense, they are now taking a 10 min break. Mr George is requesting a side bar with the court reporter, the judge says that will count in their 10 min break. 9:55 ten minute break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 12:05:54 PM 10:10 Friday, June 17, 2011 Court is in session. Back from a 10 minute break. The defense witness is till Dr. Timothy Huntington. Baez is up............. The witness is going to Baez's Big Pad. How does all this tell you how long a person has been deceased? It all has to do with temperature. If you know the stages of the insect and the temperature you can figure out how long it takes till the next stage. It is basically a mathematical finding of the stages, species of the sample, developmental rates and the temperature. Baez just asked him about "live human cadavers". He has done studies on decomposition in the trunk of a car. Showing a big photo of a car. He conduced research in November of last year. He received cars from a junkyard and got them icky. He wanted to find out what kind of a barrier a trunk would cause to insects. He placed bodies of pigs in the trunks of cars. He didn't use any Pontiac Sun Fires. This car was the most intact vehicle of the one's that were donated. He inspected the trunk of the Pontiac Sun fire in this Case in July of 2009. He looked for spaces and gaps to allow insects to pass through. Back to the car in the big photo. He placed dead pigs in the trunk of the car in September in Nebraska and waited and watched for insect colonization of the pig remains. He did not camp out there, he was busy teaching but he did check it daily. The weather was cool and rainy. Insects being cold blooded, are not active in cold weather and rain greatly suppresses insect activity. If you are a tiny insect, one drop of rain is like a 50 gallon bucket coming down on you. Yes, he is saying all of this, lol. Next big photo is the back window, blowflies are lining the windows. This photo was taken on day 10 in September in Nebraska. It is cooler in Nebraska in September than it is in the summer in Florida, yep he really said it. lol. Blowflies show up soon after death, minutes after. If you have a heart attack in a hammock they will be on you in minutes. He has timed them at 13 seconds. The fact that the flies in the car are now dead is important. They go through there life cycle and die inside the closed container, they do not fight their way out. They want to get in to the dead body more than they ever want to leave. Next big photo is of decomposed remains of a pig on day 11. Covered in maggots, crawling away from the pig and looking for a place to pupate. The black material is decomp fluid, body fluids, body waste, maggot waste. Is that stain distinguishable? When you see a stain like this.........side bar....... Judge just announced a brief legal matter that needs to be taken up outside the presence of the jury. Jury excused 10:50am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 12:28:35 PM Shoot, lol I am using Notepad and I still messed up. Instead of posting the legal matters taken outside the presence of the jury, I posted the same post twice. Don't even ask me how I did it. This last guy has driven me buggy. Here is what I remember when the judge excused the jury and then talked about whether this witness was going to testify to something not in his deposition. The judge had them read parts of the Dr. Huntington's deposition and told them that he could testify to basic decomp and stains. The judge didn't care about what color a stain was, because all stains are discolorations. Jeff said that it was against a court order that this witness was now going to testify to things he did not have in his report. Baez and Ashton argued about it. Baez apologized to the court and then had the witness testify that Baez did not have anything to do with his report and did not ask him to testify to anything not in his report or add anything. Everyone got upset and none of it made very much sense. The judge just wanted this guy to testify and get it over with. He said he could testify to general decomp, decomp stains and insect activity. There was a lot more but it all got down to the same thing, the judge was going to let this witness testify and Jeff Ashton was very unhappy about it and Baez looked as if he just won the lottery. Oh, one more thing, Jeff commented on Baez texting on his phone and pointed it out to the judge. The judge got mad and said that he had enough of this editorializing. He didn't care what Baez was doing, standing on his head, standing on one leg, etc, lol. I am sorry again for messing up, Notepad must of even asked me if I wanted to delete that whole long thing and I said yes. lol. I have been trying to break them up so they aren't so long so, sometimes I have more than one Notepad opened. I may type fast but that doesn't make me one lil bit smarter. ::piggy:: I do have all of the witnesses testimony when the jury came back and that will be posted next. ::justice2NJ:: Edit to fix typo per ME. MB Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 12:47:09 PM 11:40am Friday, June 17, 2011 Court is in session. Dr. Timothy Huntington is still on the stand the jury is back in. Baez is up....... Can you tell me in this photo what is happening? It is a decomposing pig with insect movement on day 11. You see numerous maggots moving away to find a place to pupate. Down here you see maggots that are already pupating. They are burrowing into the carpet, they can and will actually pupate in the carpet, they think they are hiding. You see a decomp ring that comes from a body, this part here trails away from the body. This is where the maggots are pulling the fluid away from the body. Could you take some paper towels and just wipe that up? No, it is very greasy, if you took Crisco and let it burn and get disgusting it would be that kind of mess. I don't even think that professional cleaners could get that out. When you have seen a dead body on carpet, I have never seen a case where the carpet is cleaned, they are removed and destroyed. Can you give us an example dealing with a stain in the trunk of a car? The reason these particular cars are used is that there was never gonna be another use for these cars besides smashing, they were donated by a tow truck company. These carpets were never gonna be cleaned because they were never gonna be used again. I could of never done this experiment on a rental car or my wife's car. What did you find in this study? I learned that the barrier of a car, the trunk, poses very little barrier to insects, especially the blowflies after death. They are very picky and they go in immediately. They will only colonize a body for a certain point of decomp. They had no problem gaining access to the trunk. That would be in cooler temperatures? Yes, I found it interesting that given the cool temperatures there were so many of them in the car in such a short time. What insect evidence in this case were you given to look at? There were no early colonizers in the evidence, there was one leg of a blowfly, he doesn't even know if it was a blowfly. One leg doesn't mean anything, if we looked hard enough we would find one in this court room. Why is that important? If we assume there is a body in a car trunk, there is not going to be one fly attracted to it, there are going to be many. You would expect to find hundreds if not thousands of these blowflies, given they have 6 legs each, this would be a lot of legs. He would of expected to find, hundreds, thousands of these insects not only in the trunk but in the passenger area. The one leg means nothing especially since it was in a bag of trash. What insects do we have here? Most in the bag of trash were fruit flies, small brown flies that eat just about anything, they are very, very common, we all have them in our home at some point or another. Since all that were recovered were found in the bag of trash, they mean nothing of forensic value. They are exactly the types of insects you expect to find in a bag of trash. Because these insects are so small they require very little food. The numbers in the trash bag is not remarkable. They are not early colonizers of a decomposing human body, they are one of the last flies that will colonize a dead human body. Taking a lunch recess until 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 03:43:45 PM 1:30pm Friday, June 17, 2011 Court is in Session Defense witness Timothy Huffington is back on the stand after noon recess. Baez is up........... Baez is pleasing the court and made an effort to say may it please Mr. Ashton. In regards to the trash bag in the trunk of the car, did you find anything outside of the trash bag..sustained. Was there any insect evidence outside the trash bag in the car, 2 samples of evidence that contained insect material. Did the number of insects tell you anything, outside of the trash bag? A very low number of the same insects inside of the trash bag. Do you think there is a difference between trash and garbage? I think it is regional. In entomology is there a difference? No, I use them interchangeably. Are you aware of paper towels found inside of the trash? Yes. Tell us about them? The towels did contain some empty cocoons, there was no live material, just those empty casings. What is your opinion of what that means? Given the material inside of the garbage bag, that didn't surprise me, they look for hidden, secretive places. The crumpled up paper towel makes a perfect place, in fact I use them in my lab. Do you know if these specific insects were pupating in that area or is there anything to give you information they were used to clean up decomposition fluids? When you find a pupation site, such as a paper towel, they leave the food source to find a place to pupate not feed. You found them in the cocoon stage? The empty pupae stage. The maggots have fed they have left they have become adults. What in your professional opinion attracted these insects to this trash bag? There was a number of cans of tobacco spit. These scuttle flies are very attracted to this. I also saw a dried up piece of meat in a Bologna container but my opinion is the tobacco spit was the attraction. These scuttle flies are very small and can get into very tiny spaces. Baez is showing the witness a poster of two photo's in state's evidence. The witness is going down to the poster. They are pictures of the trash that was in the bag in the trunk. Baez is laughing and the judge says to move along folks. Baez is asking the witness which one of these photos, depict the one you saw the most? The dry garbage. What is the difference with insect evidence if you had them attracted to this photo of damp garbage or the dry garbage? Damp garbage because of laying eggs, they need moisture and the maggots don't feed well on dry material. If you have a piece of fresh meat or beef jerky, the maggots would feed on the fresh meat. How did they get insect evidence off this dry garbage? The evidence that is in the dry garbage is the remains of the insects. Do they attract to anything, do you need a hamburger? No, it doesn't have to be a substantial amount of material for them to be attracted to it. The flies are attracted to the smell of decomp, when we die, we have bacteria that eats us from the inside out, that is why it smells. Meat and garbage does the same thing, different food sources or organic material will have differed bacteria which will attract their attention. Is there anything else in the trash you thing the jury will find interesting as it relates to your entomological findings? There were lots of these puparia attached to the dry things, the dryer sheet, a piece of paper, again that reinforces that the maggots aren't feeding, they are crawling away from what they fed on. Is this anything but a result of a bag of trash in the trunk of a car for 3 weeks? I would expect to find the same thing in a bag of trash in any trunk or car. Baez is asking him about the insects at the recovery site. They are the insects that would normally be there at that time of year. What are missing is the early colonization of insects in a decomposing body. It was a readily accessible body, the early insects should of been there. What does that tell you? That the body was moved from some other location to where it was found. Is there something in the soil that you can find to tell you where a body decomposed? Objection..side bar....side bar over. Dr. Huntington you were talking about the soil when a body decomposes? When the body fluids come out of the body they will leech into the soil and it changes the biotic or animal community. It changes the microorganisms. It will kill off the plants. The soil itself will tell if it is a place where a body is decomposed. There will be a stain on the ground where someone would decompose? Would that also include a body in a couple of plastic bags? If they are entirely sealed, no, if there are holes or tears in the bag the fluids would leak out. Would that stain outdoors be something you would investigate to further your investigation? Yes, if there is none of that plant activity......Objection overruled, because you spend so much time looking at decomposing bodies, anything that is unusual is certainly going to stand out. Did you find in the canvas bags, or the bags did you find any early blowflies? Yes, a few. Where any of the colonizers found at the site A? Just with the bags, which show the body was moved. You expect some of those insects to be moved with the body, if the body decomposed at that site, they would of been found all over that remains site in much larger numbers. Baez is done......... Jeff Ashton is up............... Do you mean to suggest to this jury that this body fully skeletonized and then was moved? No sir. When you say the body decomposed, you mean the very early decomposition happened else where? Yes. Which would be defined as what? I think there are five stages of insects in decomp. The first is fresh stage or active bloat stage. How many days would that take on a child. I don't know on a child? Well, can you give us some idea of how many days? I don't know. What is an accumulative degree day? It is the average temperature minus one? What does minus one mean? Is is a mathematical construct meaning it has no biological meaning. Jeff asked about a certain day and he said it varies by area and insects. Decomp is temperature dependent? Yes. They lost me, lol. Crazy bug math. In terms of anything a minimum threshold of zero is easy........not to me. What? Jeff is making it easy for him. If you have 2 90 degree days minus 1 60 degree days. 1 and a half 90 degree days. OMG WHAT? How long do you believe this body was at another location before it was removed to the remains site? He just keeps talking nonsense. Jeff asks him normal questions and he won't answer in English. It is 95 degrees today, what if it happened today? 2 to 4 days. Then you would agree that the body was roughly placed at the remain site was placed there roughly 2 to 4 days did it stay at the remains site? If it was all consistent, yes. There is nothing about the scene that would refute that? I am hesitating but yes. So that means this body was in some other location for 2 to 4 days. Clearly, at some point the early insects were not able to get to the body? No, because they were there and then they were moved. Your not talking about a precise window of opportunity? It can be that clear. Is it usually that clear? It can be because we are talking about early decomp flies, they lose attraction at a specific point. They are not going to colonize remains that are not going to be good to their offspring, they switch that off. Then they are no longer attracted, it can be a very distinct time. So you are telling us that it had a full compliment of early insects on it and they were washed off? I didn't say that. The flies are not at the scene in this case because in my opinion because of post mortem movement. The insects go with the body, don't they? It depends on where the body was, what it was contained in. So your saying that this body was moved in a precise window of when insects would want it and when they wouldn't? He is giving a lot of different scenarios, I can't understand any of them. Isn't the one thing you forgot that the body was inaccessible to the flies? No, the early colonizers were with the body indicating they had access. I do not get any of this. Jeff is showing him the picture of the pig decomposing, he asks did all these insects get here at once? No. Is the fact that the body was in a trunk and then moved possible? Yes, it is possible. The witness is referring him to Dr. Haskells report talking about a low number of early colonizers. The judge asked Jeff to help him find it. Do you recall me asking if you generally agreed with Dr Haskell in his deposition? Please read what he said. "The early observation was that the body was stored in a place that prevented early colonizers". Jeff says I then asked you if there was anything that you disagreed with, your answer was there was not a lot to disagree with. His report is the same as what I would give. Have you changed your mind since you gave this deposition? That is possible. You just said that it isn't. It depends in the circumstance. Is there anything different now than it was then, with regards to the environmental conditions? No. Would the place stink where it was kept from the early colonizers, that is a fair assumption. That place would stink and you could not get the stink out. Yes. As you said you can not clean it out or get it out? Yes, it would smell bad. That smell would be difficult to ever get out? Yes. When you examined this car 2 years later, all the trunk liner had been removed, there was no garbage in the car and the garbage was removed more than 2 years ago?.........Side bar.......Side bar over....... Jeff is still up............ When you looked at the trunk in July 2010 it still smelled didn't it. Yes. I could still attribute it to a bag of garbage. When have you ever smelled garbage that would of smelled after 2 years? I have never left a bag of garbage in a trunk. You were hired on Dec 11, 2008, when did you create this pig experiment? In 2010. Was this created for this case? No sir, it was not, many bodies have been recovered from trunks, this was just a study done because of that. I had the occasion to meet an owner of a tow truck company and he said hey, I could give you some cars and I said then I could do an experiment with pigs, lol or something like that. I wanted to do this experiment for a long time. In how many occasions in your practice how many occasions have you worked with a body in a trunk? No, never. So all of your opinions you have given us today, have come from your experiment with pigs in a trunk? No, there are other studies. How many involved with small children, how many involved with a child wrapped in a blanket, how many wrapped in a blanket wrapped in a garbage bag wrapped in a garbage bag? None. Why didn't you wrap your pigs in a blanket? lol, he asked that. or pigs in a blanket in a bag? You would agree that this is not an accurate description of Caylee wrapped in a blanket, then a laundry bag then 2 garbage bags? Yes. I was looking at the ability to access a vehicles trunk. But you only did one barrier? You did not place 4 different barriers? If the flies could smell the body wrapped in those things, they could still get to the body. You just said that you never had body in a trunk? I had one of a head of a victim placed in a garbage bag placed in the trunk of a vehicle. Based upon that one study that you can tell this jury that there is no way that bags could be a barrier? No, there are many studies that have to do with barriers of trash bags. Why couldn't a trash bag that is sealed and closed not exclude these early colonizers? When a fly can smell the odors of decomp the female fly will actually deposit eggs on an outside layer or the drawstrings, if the odors are emitting from the bag, the maggots will then crawl in. Did you ever experiment with the effects of chloroform and attracting flies? No sir. Did you in any of your experiments use chloroform and insects and bodies? No. It can be used to kill insects can't it? What would chloroform do to the early colonizers? If the child is placed in the trunk alive and there is a lot of chloroform in the trunk, what effect would that have on early colonizers? I don't know there are no studies on that, the dose would have to be very high. If it acted like other things that have been studied, commercial pesticides have been used to get rid of the early colonizers, they are very short lived. Blow flies can detect parts per billion of what they are attracted to. If there was anything but a complete displacement of the odor, it shouldn't distract the flies. For all you know the chloroform in parts per million, might well deter the early colonizers? No. Why would you if it has never been studied? What you are proposing is a 100 percent displacement of chemicals in the air, I find that extremely unlikely. No, what I am suggesting sir, is that the air would of changed and you just don't know what that effect that would have on the early colonizers. The molecules of chloroform changing the air space you would have to replace every single one of those molecules one for one to prevent the attractiveness to flies. Are there studies on this? I don't know. The paper towels that were found in the garbage what was on those? I don't. You never read a report on what was on those paper towels? Yes, I would like to read from that report so I don't mess it up. He is reading that Dr Vass called it adiopecere. Do you agree with Dr Vass's report? Yes. What is adiopecere, body fat that has decomposed. You think they were attracted to a little of tobacco spit instead of adiopecere? I don't think that was a little bit of tobacco spit. You wouldn't expect to find those flies on adiopecere. This is the container, he is showing him a can on a photo, that contained tobacco spit? That is one of several that contained tobacco spit. Jeff is showing him the cans again now, the witness is pointing out in the close up photos, several, maybe 3, 4, 5 of them were used as spittoons. How can you tell that from the photo? Everyone that I know that has done that leaves remnants of tobacco spit on the cans. You can see that on the cans? I don't have the actual photos here, they are on my computer. Well, I just happen to have the ACTUAL cans here that you can show me. Baez objects to using the actual cans because he doesn't know if they are in the same condition. Over ruled. He is opening the box containing the cans.....he hands the witness a bag containing a can, that is not the one...shows him another. That is what I am talking about. Jeff says this brown substance? Baez asks to see the item. The witness says that comes from tobacco spit. Jeff says there is nothing in this can. The witness says, I would have to have a flashlight or cut open the can. The witness says that eventually the spit would evaporate. Do you recall seeing this as the inventory as the garbage bag? It indicates the cans were empty? Yes. In the cans? No, on the cans. I would have to refer to the photos to show you that. With all that being said, you would agree with me that tobacco spit doesn't smell like tobacco spit ever? I couldn't put that qualifier on there, the ever, there would be a lessen degree of smell. Are you saying saliva would smell like a decomposing body? You would not expect tobacco spit to smell like a dead body? No. There is nothing in here that anyone in here could eat if fresh? There is a photo of salami container and something inside of there. It might be a remnant scrap of food, outside of that there is no food. So outside of that there is no food besides what you think you see in this salami package? Jeff says, I would like to pull it out now. Court is in recess for a break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 17, 2011, 05:49:51 PM 3:35pm Friday, June 17, 2011 court is in session. Warning: This is not a transcript and it is not verbatim. It was hard to understand what Timothy Huntington was saying, I got it as close as possible. I left out anything I couldn't make out. Defense witness Timothy Huntington is still on the stand. Jeff is up........... Approaching the witness with a bag of evidence. It is a salami container. What is inside? A piece of paper. Now that we have examined that, you would agree that there is no food in that trash bag? There does not appear to be any food in the trash. You talked about cleaning up a decomp fluid? You could take a paper towel and clean up a small amount of fluid? Yes. You could vacuum up the insects? Yes. The only thing you could not get rid of is the smell? I think get rid of is an overstatement. I think getting rid of would include removing the carpet liner and such. With my pigs it would of been impossible to clean up after that. What were the accumulate degree days for your pig experiment? I don't know? What was the avg temp? 60 degrees. So that would be 10 days at 60 degrees what would that be at 90? Then he does the math, about six and change, not 2? Not 2. So you would say that your pig experiment does not match a child in a trunk wrapped in a blanket and 3 bags decomposing? Again it would depend but no not 2 days, it would be more. If the trunk was hotter than 90 degrees the decomp would go faster? Yes. Jeff is done......... Baez is up............ Dr Huntington you don't disagree with Dr Haskell's report? No. Can you explain why the two of you don't disagree? The evidence at the site of recovery speaks for itself, it was there for months, the evidence suggests that the body was moved after death at some period. Also after some stage of decomposition was passed? Yes. You mentioned there were early colonizers in the canvas laundry bag? Yes. Can you look at Dr. Haskell's report and see how many early colonizers were there? There were 75 puparia. That is not considered a lot? That is very few when you realize that one female fly can lay hundreds of eggs. Wouldn't you expect to find that many in the trunk? I would expect to find many more than 75. Since each has six legs, we are talking many times one leg? Yes. You do disagree with Dr Haskell where the body was prior to it being moved? Yes...sustained Dr Haskell's report suggests that the body was in a car trunk and I don't find any reason to think there was a body in the trunk. You were given all these hypotheticals about chloroform, do you think the chloroform would stop the 75 in the bag? If it would prevent it you wouldn't of seen the evidence in the bag. Does the evidence in the bag help you argue against a body being in the car? Yes. Have you ever heard about an air sample in a forensic case? Sustained. Are air samples recognized within the forensic community? Sustained. Your a member of the academy of forensic science? Yes. Do you keep up to date on the area of decomp? Yes, because I teach in this area. Side bar......very long side bar.......sidebar over 4:07pm Baez is up........ About adipocere? Did the report say adipocere? No, it said a fatty deposit, like adipocere. These fatty acids could also be other items including meat products and other things that could become adipocere. During the process of decomp, is adipocere a by product of decomp. Yes. Can you tell us when adipocere develops? Jeff is proffering about adipocere....what is your expertise in adipocere? Being around remains. Have you ever tested a substance and said it was adipocere? No, it is what someone tells me it is. My actual study of the production of adipocere or the presence or absence of it, I have never tested for adipocere. Judge asks all attorneys of both sides to approach the bench. Side bar.......side bar is over Jeff is doing voir doir of Tim Huntington for knowledge of adipocere....... Have you just read about adipocere? No, I have had it pointed it out to me by others. So you would say that you are not an expert in adipocere? Then Dr Vass wouldn't be considered an expert in it either.....Sustained Baez is up.............. How long does it take for adipocere to develop? It depends on environmental factors, including temperatures. Would it be cooler temperatures or hotter temperatures. It depends. Does it take weeks or months to develop? It depends. Sustained. What stage does it show up in? Later stages. The garbage that Mr Ashton asked you to see, you saw it when it was first collected and afterwards? In photos, yes. Is it a proper practice to alter evidence? Sustained. The garbage that you saw today, it was garbage that was collected 3 years ago and it was put in a dry room? Yes, it is not in the same condition as it was when it was collected. So, to come here today and show you evidence that was collected then put in a dry room then three years later to be expected to be the same? Sustained. I would expect the physical evidence now to be different than when it was collected. Baez is showing him a photo of the damp garbage. You or Dr. Haskell never got to see the garbage in this condition? What could you have found in this garbage that could of helped you in entomology? I would of requested a DNA test of the maggots involved. Sustained. Sustained. The maggots also eat remnants of food do they not? Yes. Mr Ashton asked you about a garbage being an obstacle for insects, do you recall that? He is showing him a photo of the bag of garbage as it was collected and asks if it is knotted? Yes it is knotted. Yet insect found a way in. So trash bags are not a big deterrent to insects? No, not with that big of a space opened at the ties. Mr Ashton asked you if your pig study was done for this case? You said it was not? Is that why you didn't use trash bags? I would of used the same car, wrapped the pigs differently. I would not of done it in Nebraska, I would of done it in the summertime of Florida. Mr Ashton asked you if your study relates to this case? Yes. Based on what you learned based on carpet from decomp fluid. Can you look at this photo and tell me if this stain came from decomp? Sidebar.......Objection over ruled He can answer the last question. Looking at the photo it does not look like any decomp stain I have seen. Homicides, suicides, natural deaths. He is showing the pig decomp photo. Is this what decomp fluid looks like? Yes. Shows him photo of trunk, is this what a decomp stain looks like? No. Talking about smell, if a body is in a car and runs out of gas....sustained. Would 4 people be able to ride in a car and be able to stand the smell? Sustained. Sir you never rendered the opinion that chewing tobacco smells the same as a decomposing body have you? No. You have never rendered the opinion that dry trash smells like a decomposing body? Sustained. Baez is done.......... Jeff is up......... What is the condition of the garbage when it was in the trunk? I don't know. If nothing was added to the bag, we do know that there was no food in the bag? Yes, sir. When something gets wet, non-food items don't become food do they? No, not as I understand the definitions of food. You have talked about adipocere and decomp stains? You got your Ph.d and your masters in 2008 the same year this case happened. Yes. Did you study adipocere and the appearance of decomp? No. So your knowledge of adipocere and decomp stains began in 2008? No, I started working for a mortuary at 16, in high school and seen lots of bodies in those conditions. This is the first time you have ever been asked to look at a photo and determine if it was a human decomp stain? Yes. You did a report in this case and you were told to put everything you knew about this case in this report? Yes. That report does not contain any opinion about identifying a stain, does it? No. It's not in here, is it? It's not in there. You said that pig experiment is not intended to be a representation of what would happen in this case? No but I also didn't tell them that it would be. Jeff is done.......... Baez is up.......... You are the youngest board certified entomologist? Yes. You were certified before your PH.d? Yes. How much experience do you have in the field with regards to forensic anthropology? Sustained. You asked in your report if you had included your opinion of the decomp stain? Yes. Were you unaware that you would be asked about pigs in a blanket? Yes. Is that why you did not put it in your report? I didn't know that it would be brought up with me. Do you deal with photos identifying evidence? Yes. That is very often the way forensic science works? Yes. I would think that any forensic entomologist could have the same opinion with the same photos. Jeff is up...... I thought you just told me you had never been asked to look at a stain of decomp in a photo and give your opinion on it? I meant in a court of law. You discussed with Mr Baez your opinion on your photo of the decomp in the trunk, why didn't you put it in your report? There was no reason to because it had nothing to do with entomology. Weren't you instructed to include everything in your report? Yes. Court is in recess till 9am Saturday morning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 18, 2011, 10:08:01 AM 9pm Sat, June 18, 2011 Court is in session: The defense witness is Dr. Rodriguez He is a Forensic Anthropologist, he is declared an expert witness. He got examined info from the case. He examined photos and the evidence collected at the scene. He examined the remains at the ME's office. The report looked good but he saw that the report did not say where the body had been placed at the remains site for the area of decomposition. Why is that important? We can find decomp evidence and trace evidence. Teeth will fall out as the teeth are removed. In looking for those areas the condition....Jeff wants to voir dire.......going to side bar......back from side bar. Baez is back up. What would you look for to try to determine where the initial decomp site was? The soil would change, the vegetation would die. The insects would feed and reproduce in that area and their remains will be found in that area in the soil. Did you look for any soil change throughout the scene? I didn't see any, and didn't see any in the report. Have you found victims with duct tape? What do you do with remains that have duct tape? I have looked at numerous cases where the body has been bound and looking at those types of cases. If the body still has soft tissues we look at the positioning of the tape. If the body has undergone mummification, it is still attached to the tissues. If we see a skeletonized body with tape, it has nothing to adhere to. Side bar.......side bar is over...Jury is sent from court. Ashton is making an objection: The witness is testifying to things not in his report. There is no opinion that references anything to do with duct tape. Baez is told to pull out the court order and read it!!! This ought to be good, lol. Judge asking, what opinion are you about to give about the duct tape? The duct tape is in 2 diff positions. One cannot make an absolute finding as the position of the duct tape to the finding of the restriction of that duct tape on skeleton remains. Especially after the duct tape was moved by animals. It could of been around the eyes instead of a nose and mouth. He has had a case where the duct tape was held by soil. Judge asked when did you form that opinion? Early on when I got the photos, prior to my report which is dated Feb 24, 2011, he did not mention it because it was a non-issue. He could make no opinion then so he could not put it in his report but he told Mr Baez on the phone. Were you ever told that every opinion had to be placed in a report. Were you ever shown this court's order that expert's opinions be in a report or not given in court? I was never informed that by Mr. Baez. Mr Baez says, do you recall getting some emails from me prior to giving your report, do you remember me telling you that you had to put all your opinions in your report? Yes. We met two nights ago, was it at that time that we had decided to include your report the duct tape to rebut the testimony of the super-imposition was not true...do you have an opinion on whether that super-imposition was not correct. I do, it is unheard of to scientifically to show where that duct tape was, you could reposition that duct tape anywhere on that skull anywhere on that head. I would be stepping off scientific rules to do that. Mr Baez says we asked them to put their opinions in their report. I told them I would suffer dire results. This was a difficult task to to, they had to file these reports in 20 days. We were never given this video super-imposition CD. We did not anticipate this CD and I asked my witness to help rebut that video. Judge says is your witness lying about when you told me he told you before the deadline? He says that he thought Ashton was trying to pull a fast one by using reports and not taking a deposition and do the work. I am going to ask you what I asked you at side bar. You are trying to decide which Court Orders you are going to comply with and which ones you are not going to comply with. Both side have been playing games and this is not a game. This order was entered because both sides were trying to play games. I am at that point now in trial, there are major things not in their reports. If the opinion comes about you disclose it, it is not hard to do Mr. Baez, it is quite easy to do even if it happens at the last minute. Here I am faced with here the last minute of what to do. We were scheduled to be here for a rule of sequestration and the exclusion of a witness is a very harsh rule that is not to be done in most of the exaggerated conditions but they list a couple of other things that you can do. This appears to be to me quite intentional. This was not inadvertent and the question is should Ms Anthony be punished for this. Case law says I can do contempt, an instruction to the jury concerning the violation in judging the credibility of the witness. What other witness do you have available for today. This witness is going to step down so he can have his depo taken. He will testify next week, Monday, he will entertain a possible violation if the state wants to draft one. He may proceed with contempt proceedings against Baez at the end of this trial. WOOOOOOOT. Baez is trying......Judge said this is not my first rodeo. I tried one or two cases and in one of my cases, at the conclusion of the defenses opening statement and at the end of the first questions, I found myself in a boat without a paddle. At the noon recess I found my PI to help, he found an additional 4 to 5 witness, that night I talked to them and set up depositions to determine what they would testify to......so the witness would not be surprised. All my orders were designed to do was be prepared so we would have no gotcha moments with someone not be prepared. We will take a 10 minute recess and Dr. Rodriguez will give a depo at 1pm today and lightning does not strike twice at the same place. If there are other cases of this I will not promise what I will do if it happens again with this witness. The state will take his deposition. 10 minute recess..........wow just wow. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 18, 2011, 11:17:57 AM 10:00am Sat, June 18, 2011 Court is in session. Mr Mason wants the judge to tell the jury the reason why we have changed what we are doing. The judge says you want to do it? Mason says I will and then the judge says I will let Ashton tell them after you. Judge says ok I will tell them. The judge tells the jury that we are going to take another witness to accommodate him from being out of town. Dr. Rodriguez will be back Monday. Next defense witness is Dr. Werner Spitz. Mason is up.......... Dr Spitz is a MD, he is a Forensic Pathologist. He went to medical school from 1946 -1950, Wow I wasn't born. Then he went to Palestine before it became Israel. He had LOTS AND LOTS of education, training and experience. He is going on and on about doing autopsies and pathology. Mason asks him if he remembers when he had his first appt in academia? He finally says 1959. In 1961 he left this country and worked at the University in Berlin, Germany. Then he returned to the US. It goes on and on and on..........He is in the 70's now....lol. Drinking my tea as he goes through his life, he is telling stories about each place he worked. All his appts are emeritus now. He has basically outlived everyone he has ever known or worked with. He is still licensed to practice medicine in this country and most countries in Europe. Mason is now reading all of his awards but he doesn't remember if he got them. He has testified as an expert witness in all 50 states and in foreign countries. In the last 7 years he has testified as an expert witness around 300 times. He is declared an expert witness in Forensic Pathology........finally, lol. Mason up..... Do you remember how you got involved in the Caylee Anthony case? He received a call from the Baez Law Firm to possibly consult with the firm. What is the first thing you did? I requested to attend the postmortem exam by Dr G. Did you request to be allowed to be in attendance? Objection..side bar........side bar over.....Objection over ruled. Yes, I requested to attend the autopsy by Dr G and wasn't allowed to. Why did you want to? It would of been useful to have seen the body at the first autopsy so I could see what Dr. G. saw. I was given access to the remains at the Bryant Funeral Home in Orlando, I conducted the 2nd autopsy at that place. Had Dr G finished the first autopsy report when you did yours? I don't remember, I don't think so. I came to Orlando with all kinds of equipment but I did not bring a saw but the skull had not been opened. The profession dictates that the interior of the skull should be examined and it had not been done. Mason is approaching the witness. Dr. Spitz is told to open the bag and take the contents out, it is a skull, not of the deceased. It is a real adult skull. He brought it because it was necessary for the trier of fact to observe...Sustained. Mason wants him to demonstrate opening the skull, it has already been sawed and he lifts the top portion off. He then says you look into the interior of the skull. Did you take photos of the autopsy you performed on Caylee Anthony? I did, Mason is showing the witness, photos of the autopsy, Casey is hiding her face and not looking. He is putting big photos of Caylee's skull up on an easel. The witness is stepping down. They are now looking at the photos of the skull. What is remarkable about the contents we have before them? This is what represents the base of the skull, the bottom of this. This is the where the top was sawed off. He is describing Caylee's skull. In the base of the skull you see black flecks, they represent the last permanent result of decomposition. The brain has dissolved. Some of this sediment comes from the brain, some of it is dust, it's lost. They indicate the position of this skull over the decomposition process. The specks are left over after the entire brain is gone. Those elements by gravity are left in the skull, it tells you the position of the skull. What was the position of the skull? It was on the left side down. He is showing how the skull would of been left to decompose. The witness is returning to the stand. The photos are coming down but not before Casey tries to fake hiding her face again. Did you review Dr G's report? Yes. What if any problems or deficiencies did you detect in her report? I examined the entire skeleton, there were very little bones missing. The skull had not been opened, so I opened it. There are certain things that I did not find. Like some discoloration of the skull where the ear is, the little protrusion from the back of the skull. There were no fractures or no blows, the skull was intact, undamaged. There was some damage to long bones from postmortem chewing from animals. Casey is trying to cry. The thigh bone was opened by the people that did the first autopsy. He thought they opened it to take bone marrow for the purpose of removing certain material in diagnoses but I learned that was not the case. So, based on this determination the cause of death remains unknown for the people that did the first autopsy and for me as well. Did you read Dr. G's report on duct tape? I know there was some duct tape on the lower face, that were loosely on the face but there was not a shred of soft tissue, no skin, nothing, he didn't even need to use gloves. It was a totally clean skull, no bacteria to contaminate him. He could handle the remains of the 3 year old child without gloves. The tape was not there when he got the remains. The tape in pictures show it was somewhere near the left side, hanging on hair and hanging on roots of vegetation where it was excavated from under the surface of the ground, vegetation had grown into this material. Plants had benefited from the minerals from decomp. Dr G. says that duct tape was applied to the face prior to decomp, what is your idea of that? I don't think so, the duct tape would of not stuck after the body decomposed, it was stuck to the roots and hair. There was nothing on bone to suggest duct tape and nothing on the duct tape to suggest it was stuck to bone. It is my opinion that this duct tape was placed to hold the lower jaw in place, because it would of fallen off. He then picks up the skull and the lower jaw drops off. Sir, would you expect there would be DNA if it had been placed on the face? Yes, I would of expected it, if it had been attached to the face it would of had DNA. I put duct tape on my arm and it pulled out hair from my arm with roots attached when I took it off. It is my opinion that the duct tape was not put on the face before it decomposed. What does adipocere mean? It is a stage in decomp that is when the tissue is broken down and becomes slimy, smelly, it is like soap. It it especially fat that is similar to wet soap. How long does it take for adipocere to develop? Side bar....side bar over. Adipocere takes a warm environment and begin to develop within like 10 or 12 days. Did you find any presence of adipocere on Caylee's remains? No, it was clean of all soft tissue. Did you read all of Dr. G's reports? Yes. Did you read any cause of death in this case? You can rule out causes of death but you can not tell why this child died. You can rule out some but not all. Would you rule out suicide? Yes. Can you rule out accidental death? No. What is the manner of death in this case? There are 4 manners of cause of death, homicide, suicide, natural death and accidental. Do you know what the manner of death is? No. How many autopsies have you done around the world? 60,000, I have been practicing forensic pathology for 56 years. Mason is done. Ten minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 18, 2011, 01:13:05 PM 11:15am Sat, June 18, 2011 Court is in session. Warning this is not a transcript or verbatim, it is what I could hear and type at the time. Back from a 10 minute recess. Defense witness is Dr. Werner Spitz is back on the stand. Back from recess, starts with a side bar.....side bar over, jury coming in. Jeff is up......... Dr the medical investigation requires information outside of the medical opinion? What were you given in this case? I did an autopsy, I went to the crime scene, I went to the Anthony home. In order to do an adequate manner of death, you need an entire investigation? I understand that and I asked questions and they gave me information I asked for, I asked sufficient questions about what I think happened here. Who did you ask? I asked Mr Baez, Mr Mason, I spoke to the Anthony's, I don't remember who those people were. Did you read police reports? Yes. Which ones? I don't remember. What were the facts you knew about this case besides the autopsy on the body? I knew there was a lapse of time between the disappearance of the child and the reporting of it. Isn't that important to evaluate? Yes, everything has to be like a jig saw puzzle, it all needs to fit together. You can not take one item by itself. What is your understanding of the last time Caylee Marie Anthony was seen alive? I know that Caylee Anthony was allegedly taken to a baby-sitter, that occurred when she was alive. What did you use to come to the opinion that the manner of the death was undetermined? I don't know any facts of when she was alive, I have no facts of what she was doing or what was happening to her. Would you agree that Dr G had more info than you do? If she knew that, I know everything that she put in her report, I do not recall any info that was not in her report. I read her report, I was totally familiar. What did she report about Caylee being last alive? I don't recall. It is common to summarize in death reports? Yes, I don't but many people do. At the very least do you need to read the police reports do find out how this child died? Yes. But you just told us that you don't remember anything. No, that is not correct. You asked me what happened, what happened before CASEY disappeared, all I know is she was a healthy 3 year old. What do you feel was significant leading up to her death? A pool in the yard that creates a possibility of drowning. I knew that she was missing for a month before being reported missing. Do you recall other facts? I don't know unless you want to remind me. You also said the failure of Dr G to open the skull was a violation of protocol? Yes, this child made national news and we open the head...objection didn't answer the question. What protocol was violated? The head was not opened to see inside the skull. Let me say this, the skull is part of the body, when you do the autopsy, you examine the whole body, when you buy a house you buy a house with a basement, if you don't want a basement then you buy one without one but it has a dining room a kitchen. What? Dr what I am asking you where this protocol is published. It is not, I just know I have been trained to do it and trained others to do it. I made that protocol but I don't know where it is. I have been out of the mainstream of forensic pathology for a long time. The skull not being opened was a failure, it tells me about a shoddy autopsy, if the head was not opened it provokes me. I am sorry I did not mean to upset you. A skull is opened in a traditional autopsy to examine the brain? No, that is not the only reason, each case beckons a certain examination of certain things. I would of never have know how this head was positioned if I didn't open it. There is also a protocol that says you must open the chest if you are going to examine the ribs? No. You mean you can look at the skull without opening it? You wrote this book? He is showing him a book. It is a text book in forensic pathology. I wrote most of the trauma chapters. There are articles written by Dr. Vass and Dr. Haskell, would you say this is an authoritative treatise on death? Will you tell me where it tells you to open a skull that has been skeletonized? Sir this is not a book of protocols, it tells you how to interpret death. The question is the chapter in this book that you edited, does this contain a protocol on the opening of a skeletonized skull? It is not a book on protocol, it is a book of injuries. It doesn't say go and open the head, it does show finding of injuries you would see if the head was opened. Are you aware of this report on skeleton remains? Who wrote it? Ashton tells him many names and what it is. He is showing the witness the report that talks about not opening skeletonized skulls. This was written by lawyers for lawyers, written in legalese, I can't understand this document, I have never been a lawyer. Ashton wants him to read a particular section that is not in legalese. Ashton is showing him and asking him to read it to himself. I have never seen this, I can tell you that. It would be fair to say that the failure to open the skull, would you say it was just the way you would of done it? No, this should of been done in a case of national significance, wouldn't you think that an autopsy would be required, a whole one not just below the head? Is the fact this is a significant case to you important? Yes, it is more important because it is a high profile case. Are you saying that this case is more important than a less high profile case? No, people want to know about this case but they should of known about what was in the head. This is a national case, the head should of been opened. How many interviews have you done concerning this case. He says one locally and one other. Jeff asks him about another interview. He says that was the one he mentioned, he gave it in Detroit and it was broadcast in Orlando and the Detroit News heard that I was coming to Orlando and called me. That was the extent of my media response in this case. Jeff asks, you gave another interview to a female newswomen? Yes, it was about logistics. You don't recall giving her your theories about brain dust, about tape being applied to the skull? I was going to watch it but I fell asleep. Were you on 2 other national shows? I don't remember that. You like high profile cases,don't you? No, every case is high profile to me and I open every skull in every case. Were you involved in Phil Spector, OJ Simpson? Yes. When you opened the skull, you broke it, didn't you? I broke it? I didn't know I broke it. I see the break in the skull but I didn't know I did that. Did you test the sediment you found? No, I scrapped the skull and kept it for possible testing and then I was told this was tested by someone else, I don't know who tested it but it found it's way to an LE lab and they tested it. Who told you that? I don't know. You don't know if that is brain dust or dirt, do you? That is the settlement of a decomposing brain, please believe me, this skull of CASEY Anthony is not the first skull I have opened and find this sediment. Without examining it you can't tell if this is brain dust or just dirt? No, I can tell you this is brain dust, from a decomposing brain. Do you know the area where this body was found? Yes, I went there. That area has water do you not think that could be sediment from dirty water as it infiltrates the skull? You know this sediment is so common in skeleton remains that I don't have to test it to know it is brain dust. You don't need to bother to have the sediment examined, you know without a doubt it is brain dust? Yes, they can analyze that but it is still my opinion. Did you know that it was washed several times to get traces of what was in the skull? I am aware that the ME put in saline water and swished it around and tested it. That couldn't be where the sediment was left after the washings? No, I determined the cause of death because of the sediment in another case, an overdose of sleeping pills. This sediment is sticky and it stays there for a long time. You sent that sediment for chemical analysis? Yes, because there was someone to work with. If I had been with Dr G, I would of had her open the skull and we could of avoided this skerfuffle. Can you put your skull back together? You want me to put this back together? Yes, I want to ask you a few questions about it. Tries to put skull back together and Jeff helps him. Your theory is that this skull decomposed on the left side with the face slightly up? Yes. The brain is still intact when it starts decomposing? Yes. The skin decomposes and the brain starts decomposing and the hair falls? No, the hair is kinda clumped together and much of the tissue receives some of that creamy, soapy stuff so the hair would stay put on it's side. When people come they move the hair. So your saying the skin has completely decomposed and the brain has completely decomposed and the hair wouldn't fall? Not from the right side, the hair falls with gravity, it doesn't fall up. The massive hair would fall this way if it was found in this position? No, some of it would be on the right side. Some of the hair would stay on the back on the ground on the shrubbery. Jeff is showing him a photo of Caylee's skull and remains. Would you agree that the mass of hair has fallen back, not to the side, wouldn't you agree? Sir you are looking at this picture, shows the skull like this? She has long hair and it is sitting on the base of the skull. The hair is glued to the bone, the hair matted itself to the skull when it was placed at that location. You would agree that this photo shows the hair mass has fallen backwards and not to the side? The hair in this photo speaks for itself and most of the hair is on the base of this skull. He is showing with a paper towel and the skull how the hair would look, he put the skull on the paper towel and wrapped the skull with the hair and showing the jury it. Dr. the photo shows that the hair has not fallen to the back or the side? I don't see any evidence of hair falling, maybe the water washed around it and splashed the hair to the bone, glued it to the bone. So the water displaced the hair but it didn't displace the residue? Yes, it seems quite likely because the hair is now here, it just can't get here. So the hair didn't just slough off? The hair is sticky. Did you look at this hair? No but I know it was sticky, it was not in a clean environment, the dried up adipocere would still be there and stick the hair to the bone. You realize this photo does not agree with your theory because it is not on the side. No, I don't see why it can't be, it was in water. Your theory is that the duct tape was placed after the skull was fully skeletonized? Yes, after the skin was decomposed through the whole process of decomp, it is looking at you, it is looking at me, there is all kinds of debris. How did this person put duct tape on the skull? The person had a roll of duct tape, sorry I didn't bring you duct tape, I have a roll. They just tore off pieces and attached the lower jaw to the face with duct tape. Your theory is that the skull was found on the left side, right? Did the person pick up the skull on the left side? I don't know how the duct tape was applied. If the skull was on it's side they would have to pick up the skull, the mandible would of stayed where it was? The person would of had to pick up the skull and then the mandible and then place it in anatomical position and then place the duct tape? I don't know how well they replaced the mandible. Do you recall that Dr. G. said the mandible was in anatomical position? Yes. He would of had to take a piece of duct tape and place it around? I didn't see the duct tape on both sides. If your theory is correct then the duct tape would have to hold both sides of the mandible? You would have to attach the duct tape you would of had to done it on both sides? Why would it take 3 pieces of duct tape to attach the mandible to the jaw if it was on both sides? Maybe they put one piece and it didn't reach, so they put two. There was 3 pieces of duct tape, 8 inches long. Why is there no glue residue on the skull? There is no glue residue on my forearm when I put duct tape on my arm. Why would there be residue on the bone? Why isn't the duct tape still stuck to the bone? Because of intervention of water, the water would remove the glue. So if this person removed this skull, attached the mandible to it with 3 pieces of duct tape and put it back. They could of taken the skull somewhere put the duct tape and then brought it back to the remains scene. Then why was the hair still stuck to the tape? I am not sure the tape still had a stickiness to stick to the hair, the heat, the water would take away the stickiness. Are you aware that Dr. Utz had to cut the hair to remove the tape? Some she needed to cut, some she did not need to cut. So this person picked up the skull, picked up the mandible, put them back in position and then put on 3 pieces of duct tape and then the strands of hair would be there? No, the strands of hair were placed over the front. Someone in the LE or the ME Office put the strands of hair there? Yes and it wouldn't be the first time, people sit in jail for a long time because bloody clothing is thrown away. Is it your opinion that someone draped the hair over the face? Yes, the photos look different because someone rearranged them. WOW JUST WOW. Jeff is done........ Mason is up... You were asked if there are other reasons to open the skull, are there other reasons to open the skull? If you look at medical literature you will find that there are inside fractures of the skull that are not apparent on the outside. You can open a skull and find a fracture on the inside that is not on the outside. Another one is that in certain types of death, there would be hemorrhage in the base of the skull in the area of the middle ears and areas behind the lower jaw. That didn't happen here. How does that occur? If you smother someone or suffocate them, it would cause discoloration on the skull. Yes, it doesn't happen every time but it does happen. You were asked if you sent the brain matter for chemical analysis? I did not, I don't have a lab. Did you later find out that the sediment was sent to a toxicologist Dr. Goldburger? Did he find the presence of poison or chloroform? No he did not. Last issue Mr Ashton was asking you about the presence of duct tape, do you know how many people handled that skull? No. Do you know if that skull was manipulated in anyway? Yes, because manipulated means done by man and this skull was manipulated, that is why the hair is different in the photos. The skull didn't get itself to the ME's office and put itself on the brown paper to be photographed, this picture of the hair is different than this picture of the hair, so someone manipulated it. So someone had to do it? Someone had to do it, yes. Witness is excused. 12:34pm. Judge asks attorneys to approach the side bar...sidebar over. Judge is excusing the jury till 9:00am, Monday morning. Judge is saying so there will be no confusion about requirements of reports. Let's make sure that you re-read that and comply so we won't have any more hiccups. Be ready to work next Saturday until 3:00pm. I am not going to hurry you so we will just extend the working hours, we may extend the daily working hours till 5:30 - 6:00pm. Court is in recess till 9:00am Monday morning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 20, 2011, 10:01:03 AM 9:00am Mon, June 20, 2011 Court is in session. Judge Perry not happy right from the first, Mason has a matter to be taken up at side bar and he said he wants those done at 8:30am from now on. Jeff Ashton up........ You indicated that a sanctions package may be needed. He did take a Depot for Dr Rodriguez. He wants to review it again and not have him called first. He took a 3 hour depot. The witness has an opinion not written in his report. He wants to say that you can't tell a human decomp from another odor. He also said that Mr Eichenbloom showed up outside on Sat and then showed up at his office but he had no report. He got a report and a 24 power point slide, yesterday, he believes it is another discovery violation. He wants to prepare a sanctions package for this witness too. This witness want to show negative DNA evidence. He wants Dr Rodriguez not to testify till he can review his depot and not have Mr. Eichenbloom testify till he can look at what he was given yesterday. Baez is up............ The defense gave the state the names of these witness and they could depose them. He got them to do a an opinion of what they thought they would testify to but the state is intentionally not taking depositions. Baez thinks that the court had made it clear that this is not a game and this is a clear show of gamesmanship by Jeff Ashton. He is a skilled prosecutor and he did not take depositions and he had a court order that he could use as both a sword and a shield. As it pertains to Dr Rodriguez the state gave him a depot and he is ready to give his opinion. Duct tape does not stay in the same place after death and decomp, it is common sense. We want Dr. Eichenbloom to talk about low copy DNA, lack of DNA. The state wants to say that there is no DNA on the items because of the environment, we think there should still be able to get DNA, degraded or otherwise. We will be wishing to exercise all of our depositions and we sent Mr. Eichenbloom to Jeff Ashton on Sat and he sent him away. I then told him to prepare a report and any demonstrative aids and send it to Jeff Ashton. All this does is merely explain DNA, Mr Ashton should know all of this stuff already. As to Mr Ashton now wants to have these witness delayed, he could of taken these depositions all this time and now he wants to during trial. That is not fair to our time, the court's time and the juror's time. Mr Ashton was not taking depots on purpose. He was trying to use the order of reports as a sword and a shield. We did not want to try to disobey this order intentionally, it disturbs me to think that anyone would say this about me. I have labored day and night for this case and would do nothing wrong. We don't have to make experts issue reports although this court has made us do that. This prosecutor has decided on his own not to do the tools afforded to use him he is trying to get me sanctioned. He is just not going after Casey's life, he is going after her attorney too. He should not be allowed at the strike of twelve to say ok, now I want to utilize something that is done in a manner that is unreasonable. My experts have obvious opinions and Jeff Ashton knows it. Judge Perry asks them to look at the clock and tell him what time it is. Jeff says 9:25, Baez says 9:26. The judge says that shows that you can't agree on even the simplest of matters. The jury has been there already for an hour according to the deputy. From now on all attorneys will be here at 8:30am, if there is nothing to be heard we will start at 9:00am. We will work a full day this Saturday. The rules of discovery allows him to set whatever timelines are necessary. He is reading one of his orders to them. It is dated Dec 20, 2010. When experts have not prepared reports both have to file the experts CV, the summary of the experts opinions and grounds for each opinions. That was done because there was a couple of reports that contained nothing. The court thought that order cleared up the situation, it did not. Another order granting sanctions and orders of motions to compel. The judge is reading these orders. It is basically saying each side had to submit reports of the opinions of what each expert was going to say. The court in those 2 orders required both the state and the defense give all opinions of experts. The purpose of depositions is for the expert to expound on those depositions. It is never the intent of this court's order to alleviate the reports with a deposition. The order was clear. This court does not make threats, it makes rules. When the court was given a state exhibit that was not given to the defense it was excluded. The court was put in a proverbial corner on Sat. The exclusion law, does not want to exclude testimony because it hurts the defendant. Despite the due process, that is the final ultimate sanction. There has never been a case that has been excluded and upheld but now we have someone that is violating a court's order where the ultimate order of exclusion would be proper. Yes, there has been gamesmanship in this case. It is quite evident that there is a friction between attorneys. That is something that the Florida Bar will deal with and at the end of this trial, this court will deal with violations. It is not proper to deal with it now. As to the request to the state to defer the testimony of Mr. Rodriguez, I grant that. We are going to have a short day on Wednesday and that is because of me and I have explained the reasons behind it. If I was the state or the defense, I would go through the reports of all my experts and make sure that their opinions are in their reports or depositions. Somethings will come up but all opinions must be stated. Enough is enough. Both side are forewarned that exclusion even at the price of having to do it all over again, even though I don't think I will have to do it all over again because of it happening over and over again. Exclusion will be an option. He asked Mr Baez who is the next witness, he said it was going to be Mr. Eichlenbloom but since this happened we are waiting for our next witness. He tells the deputy to let the jury go to 10:15. We may be starting the trial at 8:30am every day from now on. If you don't want to be professional, I will work you very full days, including reducing the lunch hour. All of this is going to stop or you are going to be working some very fierce days. Be prepared to work some very full days. The judge is not a happy man. He is very worried about his sequestered jury. Court is in recess until 10:25am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 20, 2011, 11:14:34 AM 11:00am Mon, June 20, 2011 Court is in session. Wow, court is in recess till 9am tomorrow. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 09:58:54 AM 8:45 Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session, Jury is not in court. Jeff is up......... Upon review off McDuffy v State, a violation of a discovery has happened but he doesn't believe an exclusion would be the best interest of the state and the defendant and the case. He has been able to overcome procedural aspect in most areas. One area he can not, he says the witness says that DNA is recoverable from decomp fluid. If properly provided it would of been subject to a Frye Hearing. He has supplied it with no peer review just anecdotal infor of his own. He says he was never told he had to prepare a report and did not come to the conclusion till sat. We ask that the DNA that could of come from the carpet stains be excluded, they would never over come a Frye Hearing and citing law. He would like this excluded as a sanction of not obeying the court's order on discovery. We would request an instruction to the jury saying that we did not get this opinion of this witness as ordered by the court...... Baez is up......... I filed a response with the court in Dec 2010 about Mr Eicenbloom, I said his field of expertise was DNA and scene recover. I said that he would testify of DNA and scene recovery and testify to such. The substance of facts that he would be called to testify to DNA and crime scene analysis. I raise that because this is a very complex case, especially forensically. I would like Mr Eichenbloom to talk about DNA that should of been at the crime scene. As these issues came up and we knew that we wanted to take the benefit of your Honor's example. I wanted to take that knowledge and use it, take full advantage of it and expand issues that he would testify to. It was not to make any gotta moments. I want to call him to testify to DNA degradation. While I would like to talk about exclusion that Mr Ashton was talking about the no DNA found. Mr Ashton talking about sanctions being needed here, is not so, in efforts to move things along and I don't know if this is acceptable to Jeff to let Mr Eichlenbloom to testify to low copy DNA and explain issues of degradation. I don't know if Mr Ashton will allow this. Mr Mason will deal with other issues with the other witness but I would just like to move forward with this trial. Jeff Ashton is up......... The state did not offer any DNA evidence in this case. The defense did. If the expert does not testify to DNA in decomp fluid, I am good with that, I believe however the instruction to the jury should be made. Judge is up......... The state had DNA tested and the state was billed? Yes, Jeff says, the shorts she was wearing and the bag she was found in. What about the tape and the carpet samples? They were never tested to my knowledge. He wants to testify to DNA in the carpet fluid and DNA on the duct tape. In other words he was not aware those items could be tested for DNA and was unaware they were not. Baez is up..... We are talking about totally different DNA testing. He is talking about low copy DNA. We asked if they could test DNA but it was denied by the state. The witness is a pioneer in this field but he was denied. We sent two items to the ASCLAD lab and that type of DNA was not low copy DNA it was DSNR. The judge asked if there is no low copy labs in the US? Baez says not in the USA. It is done by many people in Western Europe, low copy DNA has not been Frye tested in Florida. Jeff is up............ He is explaining the witness uses low copy DNA and the states can do it. It just runs more PCR on the DNA than normal. Baez is up........ That is not true, it is not just extra runs in the DNA process it is a whole new test in DNA. I don't know how much it is done in the states but it is just now coming up. We object to any instruction to the jury, to punish the defense. We have already conceded that he won't testify to anything that Jeff mentioned. Judge says we will allow the instruction to be read to the jury. The court will do out of an abundance of caution. We will schedule a Frye hearing on the other stuff to see if it is admissible. At the time period it will not be admitted as a sanction but I will not permanently shut the door. I will allow a witness to testify by video conferencing. They are looking over Jeff's instruction to the jury. Baez says we disagree with Mr Ashton's instruction and the Judge says do you have one? He says we can call other witness in the meantime and prepare an instruction. Between the states instruction and the defense instruction he will fashion one. 9:15am Jury coming in. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 10:01:27 AM 9:15am Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session. Next defense witness is Jennifer Welch. She is a CSI with the OC Sheriff's Office. Simms is up......... Asking her about a report of end of day observations, clearing the scene report. Dec 12-14, 2008. The areas had been cleared of leaf litter to 0-4 inches around the tree roots it was cleared from 0-10 inches. Can you read the last sentence? That is what I just read. You testified you took photos when you arrived? Did you alter the remains? The vegetation around the area was cleared including the vines being tied back, nothing was removed on top of the skull. They are numbered with CSI call numbers? Yes. Are you familiar with the Call ID #1932? No, I don't recall that number. Did you take photos of the area being cleared? She is handing a photo to the witness. Simms doesn't know how to work the equipment to publish and Jeff is helping her. Can you identify this photo and tell the jury what it is? It is the scene after the vegetation has been cleared. Is this the scene after the vegetation has been removed? Yes. Can you tell me in your report, if you could look on page 5, can you tell me whether there is a log or a tree near the remains and what happened to that log? The skull was found underneath the log, the log was moved by CSI Stephen Hansen and another CSI Meares. Next photo is being shown. Is that photo of the remains scene? When was this taken? This appears to be a photo after vegetation has been moved out of the way. When you say that after, you mean vines hanging and nothing touching the skull? Yes, nothing that was touching the items. Simms is done. Jeff is up........ Can you tell us what portion of the scene this is? Showing her a photo of the remains scene. I can't tell you precisely where anything was at in that photo. It is a photo of the whole remains scene cleared of vegetation. Simms is up....... How did you identify the grouping of photos with CSI call numbers? I took the photos they were uploaded the system gives it a call ID number. The system created the numbers, I didn't. Can you verify they were given call numbers? Not by looking and what day they were taken. You can tell they were taken between certain dates. What call ID numbers do you have? She lists quite a few numbers. Witness is excused subject to recall. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 11:36:40 AM 9:35am Tues, June 21, 2011 court is in session. Next defense witness is Jane Bock. She is a forensic botanist. She has 2 masters and a Ph.d in botany. She has taught botany for 40 years. She still teaches occasionally, she has authored 80 or more peer reviewed papers on botany. She has written 3 books. She is made an expert witness in the area of Forensic Botany. What items have you reviewed? I have looked at photos taken by the ME and the CSI and I have visited the remains site. I have read several documents concerning the case. Which documents? The ME report, the description of the remains site. I have read the report of David Hall a forensic botanist. I visited the remains on Feb 1, 2009. I had a photographer with me and he took photos for me. Showing a photo taken of the remains site on Feb 1, 2009. A huge poster board picture of the remains site. Can you describe this area on the ground? Leaf litter. What is leaf litter? Leaves that fall off, mostly leaves but pieces of stems and needles from evergreen plants. After reading the reports and visiting the scene some seven weeks later, can you tell if the remains were at the scene? Yes, they were placed there two weeks prior to their discovery. How do you know this? Because of the leaf litter. Do you have any opinion of the vegetation found in Casey's car compared to the leaves found at the site? Yes. Objection. Did you read a report by Dr. Hall of the leaves under the car driven by Casey? Yes, he described vegetation under the car, bits and leaves from a Camphor tree. Where there any Camphor trees found at the site? Not one. Did you review a report by Dr Hall done in Feb, 2009? Yes. Does the field of botany train botanists to estimate how long a root has been alive, solely by the measurement of the root? Objection side bar..... side bar over....Sustained. When you look at photos can you tell us how old the roots are? No, because I don't know which roots those plants are from. They differ greatly. What causes different root growth rate? Water, minerals, environmental factors. If you would try to determine how fast a root grew, what would you do? You would have to know which plant the root came from and a time space experiment. You would keep track of that with a ruler, a notebook. You would watch it grow over time? Yes. Jeff is up......... Your from Colorado? Yes. Most of your work has been done in Colorado? No. How much work have you done in Florida? It was part of my research for my Ph.d thesis in 1966. What was your actual work in Florida in the 60's? Fresh water Hyacinths up and down Florida in different areas. What else have you done in Florida. I studied the food habits of a tortoise from 1980 through 1990. Did you live in Florida then? My parents lived here. Any other botany in Florida? Yes, I was friends with a botanist in Florida and I have used field guides to become familiar with plants in Florida. Was that for prep in this case or in general? Just in general. Anything else in Florida? No. Most of your work has been studying grasses? Yes, here and in South America. You would agree that different areas of America have different botany? Yes. You visited the area where this body was found? I did. You would agree this area is basically a swampy area? It is characterized as a swamp hardwood. Part of the plants there are upland plants and they are not wet. It is not under water all the time but frequently? I don't know what you mean by frequent. Most of the plants need to be wet or under water? Yes. Your statements that you believe this body could of been there as little as two weeks, is that based on looking at all the botanical matter? You have looked at the roots growing through the hair mat? Could they have grown there in 2 weeks? Yes. The roots growing through the laundry bag? That could of been 2 weeks growing in Dec? Yes. Did you see roots growing through the bones? Yes. Are you saying that the root growth through the bones could of happened in 2 weeks in Dec? I don't know about bones. You have never dealt with a decomposing skeleton with root growth? Yes. I have had skeletons that have been in place for several years, sometimes yes and no is not so easy. Have you examined a skeleton with roots growing in the skeleton? Yes. Do you recall your depot in Feb 2011? He is reading to her from the depot. She answered no to have seen roots growing through bones. She says that is just for teaching, she had been to a crime scene, a 10 year old skeleton, she did see roots, she should of qualified about that. Jeff says that did not occur to you that day and now it does? Yes. Your experience with roots growing through bones is extremely limited? Yes. You said that leaf litter is built up on the skull to the bottom of the eyes? Yes, perhaps, I don't know when leaves were removed. Showing her a photo of the skull. Do you agree that the skull is buried in leaf litter up to the ear or the nose area? I see one leaf on top of the skull. I am not asking about that. I am talking about around the skull. Do you see the leaf litter up around the area around the nose? I see something but it may be humus. Whatever it is, it is that high? OK. Do you believe this could pile up in this form in just 2 weeks? Yes. Showing her another photo of the skull with the leaf litter around it, collected with it. Would you agree that this reflects leaves of different stages of decomp, some green, some brown, some yellow? Yes. Is that a reflection of decomp? Yes, it is also a reflection of when they fell from trees and the chlorophyll level. Some fall bright green, some fall yellow. Do you believe this could happen in just 2 weeks in Dec? She won't answer, she is qualifying it. Some of these leaves were off trees longer than 2 weeks, the skull has been there longer than 2 weeks, would you agree? Yes. What are you basing your estimate on if not the leaf litter? The fact that the litter displayed up there on the big photo in Feb 2009, all the leaf litter that was there was accumulated on ground that was scraped bare by the 15th of December. Are you aware of leaf fall rates in Florida? Yes. So what your saying is based, because of what is in this picture of 6 weeks of leaf fall litter? Yes. Witness is stepping down to large photo. What you are seeing here is bare ground and not covered by leaves. What area do you feel is covered with leaves? The amount of leaf litter is greater in this photo than the amount of leaf litter around the skull? It could be the same as. So your position is the leaf litter here is the same as the leaf litter going up to the jaw line or the nose? Yes. Did you measure the leaf litter? No. Did you? You don't get to ask me questions. This was a densely overgrown area with vines overhead. This photo is not the same? No. The area where the body was found, there was nothing impeding the body? Why is there no leaf litter on the right side of the photo compared to the left? Is that right? Yes, at that moment in time. Why is that? I can think of several reasons, people trampling around, it was a frequently visited spot by looky loo's, wind action, animals, etc. Leaf fall rates depend on many things. It is important in comparing this photo to the remains scene to compare apples to apples, where was the skull? Right in here. But you don't know for sure? Her photographer knew where the remains were located. Your impression is the skull was located where? She points to a general area and says around here. The bottom line is that you are not prepared to render any opinion to where Caylee's body was found? I thought I had rendered one. Can you render an opinion of when these remains were left there? A couple of weeks before. Do you recall in your depot you could not render an opinion? I don't remember what you asked before or after that but If I said it I must of meant it how it was rendered. (WHAT? I don't have a clue what she is saying) We were discussing Colorado at the time but now I know why I said that. I don't know exactly when it was placed there but it was approx 2 weeks. You are not of the opinion it was there for only 2 weeks? It is possible. It is also possible it was there longer than 2 weeks? Yes. Jeff is done..... Simms is up........ Dr Bock you were asked about how long you studied plants in Florida and you said it was a semi-tropical area where the body was found? Yes. How long have you studied plants in semi-tropical areas? 30 years. If a bone fragment has a hole in it can a root grow in it? No. OK if a bag has a hole in it can a root grow in it? It depends. Did you see the log removed by the skull? I was curious about that log, was it turned over. Did you get any information about what was around that log? CSI Welch said it took 2 people to move it, so I think it was heavy. Was there anything written down about plant growth around the log? No, I could of used, humus and root growth about the log. Witness is standing down. She is drawing humus and leaf litter. She is describing humus and leaf layer for the jury. It starts out soil then becomes organic with leaves and leaf litter. The leaves decay and become part of the humus. The photos were taken that day the remains were found, was it wet? Sustained. When you looked at the photos of the remains prior to them being removed. Sustained. If you have an item and you place it on leaf litter and the are is very wet and the leaf litter is very wet, can it sink? Of course. Witness is resuming witness stand. Simms is done. Jeff is up.......... Dr is it your testimony that the skull sank in leaf litter? I don't know, it could of sank or been pushed. Or it could of been awhile there and been buried? Yes. Where you aware that one of the bones was buried in 4 inches of muck? No. Would it indicate that this bone was there longer than 2 weeks? A dog could of buried it or a Coyote, I don't know if you have those here or not. Jeff says no we don't have those here, we have lots of different things but not those. Witness is excused. (Oh my, now a dog buried the skull, yes it does get crazier). Taking a special recess for the jury of 20 minutes, attorneys get 15 for some matter to be taken up. 10:40am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 12:42:20 PM 11:00am Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session. The jury is not present in the court. The judge is reviewing an instruction to be read to the jury. Did Dr. Eikelenbloom provide an affidavit? Yes. This is the instruction I will give. All expert witnesses were to provide reports giving all opinions and were due prior to the trial, this report was not provided till June 21, 2011. Baez is objecting...... The judge says he needs the witness to come in. Defense witness Is Dr. Eikelenbloom. Judge asks, when were you first contacted by the defense? July 2010. Where you ever informed that you were required to produce a report giving your opinions? No, not except for the affidavits. Where you ever informed of the following court order that you must give. Judge reads off the things that should of been complied with and asks him if he was ever informed of that order of the court? No. You do not live in the continental US? No. How were you communicating with the defense? By phone, email and Skype. Were you ever requested or asked to reduce your opinions in a written report in the format I just outlined? No. Who was the principal person of the defense you were in contact? Mr Baez. From May 2011 till up till todays date, were you ever asked to make a report including all your opinions? Last Sat, I talked to Mr Baez and we went to the DA and was refused to give a depot, then I wrote a report. How many times have you communicated with members of the defense team? I am not sure, I had contact then lost contact and lost track of the case. Were you readily available to be contacted by the defense team? Yes. You didn't disappear during that time period? No. Baez is up................. Is this the first time you were asked to write a report on a case that had certain perimeters? Yes, by an investigative judge. That would be on things you have done? Could be both. The contact with your company on Jan 2011, that was done with your wife and Ms Medina? Yes. The info came from Ms Medina and then to your wife and then you? Yes. What you ended up doing is what your wife told you? Yes. What you in turn ended up doing was turning in an affidavit? Yes. That you had done some work in this case? Yes. Were you ever told to exclude or add things to your report? No. You never spoke to Ms Medina that a report needed to be done? That was told to you by your wife? No, I don't recall. We were very busy at that time. The questions and the opinions that you raised and formulated on Sat, they were first broached on Sat, correct? Yes. These are not opinions that you held before and were going to testify to? Yes. On Friday I made a power point demonstration, explaining touch DNA and PCR. They were just to explain DNA. After our talk on Sat, you were now asked to take a depot at the SA Office. We had an appt at the SA Office and were refused entrance by Jeff Ashton. Was he polite? No, he was some kind of rude. After that occurred were you instructed by Ms Medina to write a report? Yes. Then you emailed it to me on Sat night? Jeff is up......... Is there anything you wrote Sat that you could not have written prior? If asked I could of written a report. Did he give you any new info on Sat? Yes, it was new to me because I did not follow the case. I needed guidance from him. Did he give you any new reports any factual info you did not have before. Yes, crime scene info and reports from the FBI on Friday. What new FBI reports were given on Friday? I got a whole folder. What was new? I asked for more reports after I got the subpoena. Judge is talking, citing case law. McDuffy V State, 2007 decision of the Fl Supreme Court. Talks about the court's order and it being changed to new language, outlining the need for the expert to put his opinions in writing. This discovery violation was willful, it should of been clearly communicated to the expert. It was a substantial violation, not trivial. It has had a prejudicial effect on the prosecution's case. Should he totally exclude his DNA testimony? The court can not make that determination in this short period of time. It is an extreme remedy, the court has decided to do the following: The court will not allow the expert to testify about the DNA on decomposition fluid. The court will give the defense until next week by Sat to file for a motion for Frye Hearing. On the next Thurs after court and the attorneys have had dinner they will determine if it is a Frye matter. This is a remedy short of exclusion but he will not permit this testimony at this time. Baez is up..... Today we were handed by the State of Florida......Jp interrupts him, OK, we will take that up at noon on your lunch hour but we have a jury sitting in there. Jeff said something I couldn't hear and we are waiting for something. They are now bringing in the jury, 11:35am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 01:00:12 PM 11:35am, Tues, June 21,2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Warning: This is not a trancript or verbatim and I had a hard time understanding the witness. Defense witness is Richard Eikelenboom. The judge is reading the instruction to the jury about this expert not writing a report following the court's order in a timely manner. You may consider this fact while hearing his testimony. Baez is up........... The witness is a DNA expert from the Netherlands. He is explaining his history with DNA. He became involved with trace recovery DNA profiling. He has had an education in biochemistry, all about DNA. He has been working as a DNA scientist for 20 years. He worked for the Netherlands Forensic Institute for 13 years. He joined his wifes company in 2005. Jeff is doing a voir dire of the witness....... The highest degree you have achieved is an engineer's degree? Yes. You did not specialize in DNA? No, I chose Luminol but I found out that it did contain DNA, can't understand him. You did not do DNA testing for that institute, did you? He is not answering the question. Not DNA or extraction? No. You were not certified by that lab for DNA? No. You did not actually perform DNA analysis? I did something that wasn't actually that. You and your wife opened a business and appointed you as head of DNA. We object to him being an expert in this field. Baez up......... Did you learn about DNA? He is answering but I can't understand him, he thinks he knows DNA but doesn't seem sure how. He was an expert in the Netherlands. Do they require certain proficiency testing? Yes. What is proficiency testing? We get a blind sample and then we get a reference sample then we report DNA on those results not knowing if you were right, then they send it back and show you if you were right. We always met the criteria. I can't understand most of his answers and he never answers the question, he just goes in circles. He does a lot of something with DNA. lol. How did you become involved with cases in the US? Sustained. You were contacted for a case from the US? Sustained. Side bar.....side bar over. Have you ever been contacted in the US for a case? Yes, three times. Where did you receive your training in DNA analysis? Lots of places lots of training. Was this accredited training? I don't know. Did you have experience in all phases of DNA? In the Netherlands the department became so big, I went from trace DNA to something. You have testified 70 times for DNA analysis in the Netherlands and 3 times in the US? Yes. Baez asks that he be declared an expert, Jeff objects. He is made an expert by the judge. (I still don't know what he is an expert in, lol) Jury is excused for lunch. Witness is excused for lunch. Baez is up with a matter........ We were given some discovery today by the state, it appears that many of the documents are something that just came up, except for one CD disk. These are items from the Anthony home. They were not turned over to us in time. In reviewing this, I also noticed some photos of some internet searches for shot girls. I find this interesting because of Mr.George's questioning if Casey had something to do with what the shot girls wore. The state has had this report for 3 years and it was just given to us. We object to these computer items, as they are not relevant and want a Richardson hearing on this. Linda is up.......... The first items were given last week about an inmate that had contact with Ms Anthony in the OC Jail. A citizen called the SA's Office. The witness is April Whalen, she was in an adjacent cell. Her child had drowned in a swimming pool. When I verified that Ms. Whalen's son had died in a pool drowning I verified whether Mr Baez was told of this. The computer matter was something Mr Baez has had for 3 years. I would only use them if Mr Baez brought up June 16, 2008. There is a lot of computer activity on that day. I may use this for rebuttal or not hold it for rebuttal. Judge......... This info was provided you about April Whalen when? This weekend. You delivered it to the defense as soon as you could? Yes. The last item is just a redacted version or demonstrative aid that you have already given to the defense? Yes, over 2 years ago, it is information from the hard drive from June 16, 2008. They would like to use items on the computer to avoid a exclusion like with the power point. Do you plan on having Ms Whalen testify? Not at this point, maybe at rebuttal. We are continuing to get emails and phone calls from concerned citizens. If it turns out to be something relevant we could, it depends. On items 1 - 6 this is not a discovery violation. The state has a continuing duty to provide info that comes to them. Moving to item 7. Baez............. They have us a copy of the hard drive, that is the same as giving us lots of phone books and picking out just one. Getting back to your order again, they should of layed out certain exact information. All we had was hours of activity on that day, not who was on, who was home, what page this came up, etc........there is so much data, it now appears the state has decided to focus in on some evidence, that they had before the trial even started. In addition to that when we retain someone, we retain them to go over the state's report and asked them to focus on that info. They then withdrew their computer expert from their witness list. They had this info for almost 3 years. Ms Drane's response is that we had the hard drive so therefore we had this info, there is too much info. What does this disk contain? It contains all the information on the desktop, June 16th, 2008. Mr Baez opening statement refers to the morning of June 16th includes information that this negates. The judge asks them if you got all the info? They gave us a copy of the hard drive which contains billions of data. As it pertains to my opening statement, I said the time was unknown, this cannot directly rebut this. The judge says it seems to me as an outsider looking in that June 16, 2008 was the last time the victim was seen by her grandparents. The 16th was a day of great importance and a so called time line of activities of how the family spent their day on the 16th and whether or not any activities took place on the 16th of june, the 15th of June, the 17th of June would of been at least the minimum of what your expert would of looked at. You did have a computer expert? Yes. All this info came off the hard drive? Yes. If it was provided to you, you could of done searches on the hard drive and it was not denied access to the defense. You chose the days to look at and how could it be the State of Florida's fault if you were given the hard drive and you knew the relevant dates? Baez says the issue here is that we were given computer evidence after we have withdrawn our computer expert. If the court is going to allow this, we need to have our experts look at this. The judge says they can look at this but it is not new evidence. Baez says he disagrees but he will argue that at a later time. The judge says you are free to do that, see you at 1:30. So that means that nothing the state just gave the defense is considered new evidence nor does it violate the court's order. Court is in lunch recess until 1:30pm Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 03:22:45 PM 1:30pm Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is in the courtroom. Defense witness is Richard Eikelenboom. Judge is telling the jury they will only be working till noon tomorrow, the reason for that is the judge has a long standing commitment at 1pm. It is for the state trial budget. The meeting is very important for the well meaning of his circuit. Baez is up.......... Baez is pleasing the court. What is touch DNA? You have all kinds of DNA this is DNA that is mostly transferred by the hands. Different factors increase and decrease a chance for a DNA profile. He has a power point demonstration he is now going to present. This is not in evidence it is for demonstrative purposes only. (I can barely understand him, please bear with me). He is showing the demonstration now, it is showing skin cells, next slide shows the top layer of cells that contain no nucleus. it contains no DNA material. If you look lower you can see square bricks, that contain skin cells. If you go low enough in the skin you can find the nucleus. If you apply more force as in violent crime the chance of getting DNA increases. With blood, saliva, semen there are presumptive tests for that. There is no test for skin cells. You can try to use alternate light source and use orange goggles, semen, saliva and blood will test very well, sweat will test less well. If they see sweat, that can be an indication that skin cells may have been left. If you don't have sweat, you can take a working hypotheses, to see where touch DNA may be likely. Like in a violent rape and a shirt is torn apart you may find skin cells there. With skin cells there is far less chance of getting any DNA from them. The lab forms a work hypothesis and tries to obtain skin cells from that. There are 3 types of contact, wearing clothing, force of grip, contact during touching. He is explaining force touch DNA from a violent act. Some people shed more skin cells, there are good shedders and bad shedders, lol. If you have a bad shedder the chance of getting touch DNA is not very good. Sticky material, will help collect DNA. Baez asks about a piece of duct tape for example. What type of pressure would be used to apply duct tape? Sustained. Have you ever recovered DNA from duct tape? Yes. Can you ever get touch DNA from the non-sticky side. Depends, if they used force to stretch it out to tear it. The sticky side is the best location to collect DNA. Given the hypothesis that the sticky side of duct tape was applied to someones face, what would you expect to find? There are many cases that the tape was fit for DNA. What type of cell material would you expect to see if it was placed on the face? The mouth would have skin cells. Given the scenario and the facts of this case have you formed an opinion, do you have an opinion that the duct tape would of been applied with force, on and on talking about tearing it off. If you had duct tape placed over someone's face and mouth and that person died and that body was in an outdoor area, would you expect to find DNA on that tape? Depends, if it is bad conditions the DNA would break down but the skin artifacts that are very sensitive you could find touch DNA. Why do you have that opinion? We have DNA investigation on the chromosomes and we see if they differ, we amplify the DNA small locations and we then have millions of copies. We can tell from one cell a DNA profile. Were you made aware that two partial profiles were on this duct tape? Specifically the Q64 duct tape, one on the sticky side and one on the non sticky side. If their is a profile of DNA from contamination would it cover up DNA left on the tape? It was not a very high amount left with contamination but it could have covered up a low amount of DNA. Do you have an opinion of this? Sustained. Going to the sticky side, are you aware there was a 17 allele located at 6 marker? Yes, he is explaining an allele but I can't understand him. He is showing in his presentation of different peaks of the sex chromosome. There was a 17 at the sex marker. You can get more info from this. Do you have an opinion if this is human DNA? I would say it is caused by human DNA. Have you ever been able to extract DNA from maggots or flies? Yes. How is that done? The maggots feed on a human they eat material that can contain Human DNA. They can obtain a human DNA from the maggots. Would chloroform degrade DNA? Not always, sometimes it is used to extract DNA. It can degrade it but not always. Jeff is up....... Do you have a Ph.d? No. You are a student of experts in touch DNA? No, they are not experts in touch DNA. He is under their teachings trying to learn touch DNA. You and your wife started your business? Yes, with a third. Your lab is in a converted barn? Yes. You made it into a lab? Yes and it is accredited. In 2008 you decided to expand your business to the US because there is more DNA work here than in Holland. The exposure that your company will get in this case will help your business? I am not sure, we have already many cases, we don't even need a lot of attention. Your business is not opened in the US yet? No. It would be nice to have a lot of work in the US? We have too much work, we are trying to downscale it. The money would be nice from a lot of cases? No, we don't always get money, we do free cases. We can't get a lot of DNA scientists, so we don't want to grow too much. Are there a lot of labs that do what you do? I know of some, one in New York and one in Colorado. There are labs in the US that can do what you do? No, they can't do what we do? We started very early on low copy DNA, we are the ones that had that. The US didn't do low company numbers. Did you invent the process of low copy DNA? No. Where was it started? The United Kingdom. Do you use a particular kit? No, we can use every DNA kit. You buy those from an American company? Yes. PCR is a part of replication of DNA, normally it is 22 runs. You make hundreds of thousands of copies. What is there in that process that any lab can't do? In the 90's the technique had a lot of problems, later one after you got it first admitted in a court of law. It got more complicated because there was no saliva, semen or blood so we knew there was contact so we went to find contact DNA. He has used this in the Netherlands in cold cases and high profile cases. So the only thing you do different is you run more copies? No, the problem is finding the DNA, so in 2000 we realized that the finding of it was the most important thing. They use cuttings of the samples and put them in tubes and extract DNA from there. Didn't answer his question, trying to get him to answer and he agrees with him, it is low copy number. Have you ever tested a tiny fruit fly for DNA? No. The tests that you said were successful was an insect ate DNA and it was not digested yet. He then says he doesn't know what he is talking about, lol. Jeff asks him if it has to do with the recency of the eating of the DNA before it break downs. So even if you could obtain DNA from a fruit fly and it was a month later, the DNA would not be available? Yes. Have you ever done published items about DNA? No. What is the number one enemy of DNA? Hot wet environment. That would be destructive to DNA? Yes. If you placed a piece of duct tape on a persons skins and rip it off you would get DNA but if it is dead cells up against the tape it would have no DNA. You would agree with me that duct tape that was placed on a victim in a swampy, trash dump and sits there for 6 months and every bit of skin is decomposed off the body the chance of getting DNA off that tape would be extremely remote? Depends on different circumstance, you may not lose all of it. You may or may not lose all DNA. When you test a bone for DNA you do not swab the bone? No. Because you do not expect to find any DNA on the outside of the bone because it decomposes? The outside of the bones is degraded so we use a sample of the bone. While you agree that is not impossible you agree that it is unlikely? Yes. If DNA contaminated possible touch DNA, the only thing the 17 allele would mask is another 17 allele? It would only mask another low side 17? Totally confused now. I think he is agreeing with Jeff. It would not mask a full profile. Did you ask to retest this tape, this piece of tape? We mentioned that we could test this piece of tape. Are you aware that this piece of tape was sent for testing at the request of the defense? No. Baez is up..... You were asked about your lab in a barn. Your lab is known as the Crime farm(barn). Yes. Have you had any previous exposure prior to this case? Objection..sidebar...sidebar over. I want to talk about the exposure you have had prior to this case? The first was the exoneration case. A police officer came to the Netherlands to help free Mr Masters from prison. We came over and worked on the case, without being paid, they did contact DNA in this case, the evidence went to the Netherlands and we obtained a DNA profile and it exonerated Mr Masters, which was a miscarriage of justice. You were made famous for that? That was for a 20 year old case with clothing outdoors, after 20 years you were able to solve this case? Yes. Have you received other exposure? Because of this case we have received other cases. We assisted them in their cases. So this case is not the first high profile case you have ever worked? No. There are more kits avail for low copy DNA? Yes. The mini-filer kit would of been helpful in this case. He is going on and on about touch DNA, he has totally lost me. Have you found DNA profiles that you have found in water and heat? Showing slides, 3 different kinds of evidence exposed to elements. They were able to get touch DNA from these items. The conditions don't help but they don't preclude finding touch DNA. You were willing and able to do testing in this case and you were going to do it pro bono? Yes. The only reason you did not do testing in the case is that the prosecution objected to it? Objection...sidebar....sidebar over. Taking afternoon hour till 3:20pm Judge talking........ Objection is sustained in the sense that you can question him in the aspect that Mr Ashton asked him about. The piece of duct tape that was on the mouth. Give me an example of the judicial notice you want me to take? If given at the last minute he is gonna err on the side of not allowing it. Those cases are all over the board. This is not a very easy legal decision to decipher, some things are left best, unsaid. Recess till 3:20pm Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 05:31:27 PM 3:20pm Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session, jury is in courtroom. Defense witness Richard Eikelenboom. Baez is up........ The 17 allele was found at the 6th marker? Yes. The 17 allele was human DNA? Yes. If someone doesn't have 17 in your profile then you could not have donated the 17? Yes, because it is not in your profile. Jeff is up......... Asking about the beginning of DNA, it used a substantial amount of blood or semen. This new kind needs a smaller amount of DNA? Yes. The smaller amount of DNA, the harder that it is to relate it to the crime scene? Yes. The fear of contamination is much greater? Correct. Jeff went to the Big Pad. If you tested the tape you might have found nothing? Yes. That would not be inconsistent that would not say that it was not placed on the child prior to decomp? Yes. The other option is that you would of found Caylee's DNA on the tape? Yes. The third option is that there would be an unknown DNA that is not related to the crime? We would try to see if it was related. What if it was unknown due to low copy DNA? It would be very difficult, we would have to test it against all the people involved in the investigation and the people involved in the crime scene. If you can exclude the investigators it becomes more likely that it is crime located. You could never really know where this low copy number came from? It is more common. What if the lab tech had touched his wife and transfered her touch DNA? That can happen. The problem with low copy number DNA is that it could be contaminated or you don't know where it came from. Jeff wants him to pull up the slide with the 3 items of evidence that tested positive for touch DNA. Was the top left with a skeleton? No, was the next? No. Was the next? No. None of these 3 were associated with fully skeletonized remains? No. Baez up...... Based on what you do, it has no bearing on whether these were skeltonized remains? No. It could have problems but the condition of the items is more relevant than the condition of the body. Mr Ashtons 3 scenarios, leave out a 4th important scenario, doesn't it? Yes. The fact that the duct tape was place around the mouth and nose in the first place? Yes. Mr Ashton asked you about contamination and how it works. If the DNA matches the suspect, you don't ever go into court and say you just can't ever know? No, we just give the evidence and the judge and jury decide. The evidence is either there or it's not? Yes. There is either DNA or there is not? Yes. Jeff is up......... Are you telling this jury that the likelihood of this tape touching decomposing flesh would still have DNA? No, it does make a difference if it's in contact with decomposing flesh. Witness is excused. 3:45 Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 06:07:56 PM 3:45pm Tues, June 21, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Next witness is Det. Yuri Melich. Baez is up....... You are the lead detective in this case? Yes. You have served several search warrants on the Anthony home? Yes. Did you find any papers dealing with chloroform in the Anthony home? No printouts? No. No containers? No. No rags? No. No products using to make chloroform? No. Any receipts for items to make chloroform? No. Any science kits? No. On the 2nd search of the Anthony home did you find any of the above previously mentioned? Where you looking for that? I don't know. If I showed you the warrant would that assist you? Yes. Baez is approaching with the search warrant. Search warrant of Dec 11, 2008. Did you look for any of these items in the search warrant? Yes, we did. Showing Yuri the next search warrant, Dec 20, 2011, did you look for these items in that search warrant? No, sir. The reason for that would of been? We had already looked for them in the first search. Is that because you did such a thorough job? I don't know. If you had come into contact with a chemistry kit you would of taken it? We would of done it legally. Did you ever find any items to do with chloroform in the Anthony home? No. Linda is up............. When you first looked for items did you know about the chloroform results in the trunk. No, we did not. Was Ms Anthony out on bail between that time? Yes. Baez is up.......... You can get a search warrant when someone is out on bail? Yes. After you got the info from the lab on chloroform you waited how long till the next search warrant? Months. When you searched the home did you find any items of chloroform? No. Melich says all that time we were looking for a live child. After Oct 14, 2008 you were no longer looking for a live child? No, because she was charged with murder. You didn't go back looking for chloroform till Dec 11, 2008? Yes. Witness is excused. Next witness is Marcus Wise. He is a research scientist at Oakridge Natl. Lab in Tennessee. He has worked for Oakridge for 27 years. He has published articles on analytical chemistry 15-20 times. He has lectured and given presentations on the topic. This is the first time he has ever testified in court. The judge has made him an expert witness in analytical chemistry. He solves chemistry problems. He works in a research laboratory. The difference in a forensic lab and a research lab is he runs experiments. He doesn't usually handle evidence items. Is the other difference in the labs, protocols? Sustained. As a scientist you are aware of different types of labs? Yes. One of the things you are aware of in a forensic lab they usually have more rigid standards? He has not worked in a forensic lab. Are you aware of the protocols of a forensic lab? No. You do not have rigid protocols? We have varied and different methods. You are not using protocols, steps written down? We have a routine part of our job it is not written down, it is just like driving a car. You do not have proficiency examinations? No. Do you have quality control? No, not routine procedure. Are there any protocols in place in your lab to prevent contamination? We run instrument standards. If you have an item your gonna test, there are no protocols in place for contamination? How would it become contaminated? I don't know what you mean. I am aware of major sources of contamination that can occur. Is there anything that you have in place in your lab that could indicate contamination before it reaches your instruments? No. You were given items in this case, what did you do? Dr. Vass asked me to run instrument testing on these items. He left me a key but he wasn't there that day. They were on his desk or file cabinet. One was in a bag one was in a can. I used a MSGS to see what was in the sample. It is a qualitative analysis not a quantitative analysis. The items you were asked to test, did you advise Dr Vass that the analysis would not mean anything in this case? No, we were looking for what we found. It showed a high peak? Yes. It showed a high read out? Yes. It shows a series of peaks and they have a relative height of peaks. In the sample where we found chloroform it was not qualified, it would of been a meaningless number. We did a quantitative analysis. Chloroform is a volatile gas and it evaporates, the rate at which it decreases depends on factors. If a trunk is closed, that would slow down the volatility? No. If we would of made a qualitative analysis of the carpet, it would of just been a snap shot in time and would not represent the whole carpet. So they did a quantitative analysis. It could of been much greater, they could not have back calculated. Is the reason you did not check is that you did not know the history? You would of had to of known the temperature, how long it was there, the amount there originally could of been much higher than the amount we found. You were given air samples from the trunk of the car. When you tested that air, there was virtually nothing there. Yes because those bags diffuse out and it was not surprising that no chloroform showed up. The piece of carpet from a point source, was in a metal can. When Dr Vass was out of town, I put in a syringe in the can and found chloroform. Subsequent to that they concentrated the sample, they took that carpet sample from the can and put it in a clean bag and put into an incubator held at 95 degrees, after 2 days, they analyzed it again. They again saw chloroform as the major peak. The instrument you used is highly sensitive? Yes. My instruments are very sensitive, 2 parts to one million parts per air. You purchased standards of chloroform? Yes. You did not use those. Yes, quantitative analysis would be meaningless. They got a series of peaks, with the help of their computer they identified the compound with a library search and found it to be tentatively chloroform and then compared it to the bought sample. Baez gave him notes, handwritten by the witness in the lab. He wrote in his notes that the triple sorbent trap was reasonably clean. Baez asks him if he didn't make sure it was absolutely clean. He is asking him more questions about the notes that I do not understand. Why is there a Benzine peak? I don't know. He is asking him about his notes, it is just comments he made, very hard to understand. Sidebar....sidebar is over. Taking a 7 minute stretch break. 4:35pm Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 21, 2011, 06:20:08 PM 4:45pm break is over, jury is present. Witness Marcus Wise is still on the stand. Baez is up......... He is showing the witness his hand-written notes. He is writing about purging water off the trap. He explains it to the jury. The water vapor had stuck to the chemical sponge in the trap. It is very complicated, I don't have a clue. What happens is that a little bit of the water will get into a loop and small ice crystals can form, so they heat it up and they remove them. Why are you writing that down? Just to make note of it because it is a qualitative analysis. It did not do anything to the test. You had another chemist there to verify your work was done? This is the way we often encounter triple sorbent traps. My questions is that you had another chemist there to verify your work? Dr Vass was aware of what was run here. Is Dr Vass a chemist? No, he is a scientist with lots of experience with triple sorbent traps. Is he a chemist? If you consider on the job training and his experience. Were you hired as on the job or were you hired as a chemist with a PhD. I was hired as a chemist. Did you know the last time Dr Vass had a class in chemistry? I could not tell you, I just know how experienced he is. You are very close with Dr. Vass? Sustained. Do you have anything negative to say about Dr Vass? No. Can you answer my question now, did you have another chemist with you? No. You had a freeze up with this experiment? Yes, what I just explained to you. Baez is referring him to another note that the sample froze up again? Yes. On this page you said that the trap appeared to be clean? Right. That is for the standards? Right. What are you doing here in your notes? I was gonna run a blank and realized I had not run a computer something. You caught yourself in the middle of an error? Yes. Because of the kind of lab you run you did not have set controls, you had to catch your own error? Yes. Baez is pointing out more hand written notes by the witness. He caught himself in another error and fixed it. You did not have protocols to catch this mistake? Did Dr. Vass catch this or did you? I caught this. Did you catch another error on the standards? Did you change something in the middle of your process? Yes the item smelled really bad so I changed it so I couldn't smell it in my lab. I changed it voluntarily to keep my lab from smelling up. It changed nothing with that sample. It smelled bad I tried to get it in the machinery as quick as possible. It effected nothing. You had to make adjustments in the middle of the run? Yes, because it was heavy and sticky, so I made adjustments. Next note did you have an issue that messed up this run? Yes, it was a closed valve. Did you catch your error yourself there. It was the same standard. Did you continue to have problems? Yes. Did your instrument break down during these tests? It did not break down, it looked like the loop on the front was dirty, trouble shooting was done. Do you have any quality control methods. Yes, we determine if the retention time is the same. Is there any method of quality control besides you? I am the one that runs them, along with Dr Vass. Dr Vass is not a chemist is he sir? Dr Vass is very qualified, he is not a chemist. Baez is approaching the witness with other tests he ran. He shows him a document asked him if he authored it? Yes. Have you ever issued a protocol saying that samples should not be collected close to gasoline? Yes, this was for soil samples. The reason for this is to prevent contamination? Sustained. Why do you have that protocol? When collecting soil samples, you want to collect them in as pristine an environment as you can. Sustained, sustained..sidebar...sidebar over. Is that the document for soil samples? Yes. Do your protocols recommend that your samples be taken away from trash? Soil samples sustained. Sustained. When running samples do you recommend the areas be free of trash? Depends, sometimes it is collected in a trash heap. If you are collecting a sample in a car trunk do you recommend that it be away from trash and debris? Sustained. He keeps asking about a false positive reading and they are all sustained. SUSTAINED OVER AND OVER AND OVER. Judge says move on. Do you recommend that samples not be stored by gasoline? Yes, that would be good. Are you aware of trash being in the vehicle? I am now. When requesting these samples did you request a non stain portion of the carpet? I did not request samples at all. You tested a piece of carpet that was stained? Yes. So did you say that I want to compare this to a non stained piece? I did not request any samples, I have made it clear. What did you compare them to then sir? A carpet sample collected from another car. From a junkyard in Tennessee? I don't know. Are you not a co-author of the report in this case? Yes. Does the report indicate where these carpet samples were located at? Yes, some kind of a junkyard or tow yard, I know nothing about it. Initially when I asked you, you said you didn't know they were from a junkyard? I didn't know anything about where they were collected from. You made an addition to this report is that these chemicals could also be found in other sources? I could not identify any source, just the peak. Are you aware that air samples were taken six weeks after the carpet samples were given to you? No, what kind of samples? Triple sorbent traps? Yes. Are you aware these were taken 6 weeks after the car liner was removed? Would the air be the same in the forensic bay garage 6 weeks later? I have no idea. I have no way of knowing how the air would change over a period time, regarding the garage or the trash. Is there anyway of knowing that? No. Approaching witness with notes of witness. He wants to move them into evidence and Jeff objects, they have been changed. Not allowed into evidence. Baez wrote on them, lol. He wanted to redact them but the judge said no. Jeff is up............. You have tested air samples in your line of work? Yes. Have you worked with Dr Vass in this line of work? Yes. What kind of samples have you done in your career? Every kind you can think of. The biggest peak you found in the carpet sample was for chloroform? Yes. You also saw peaks indicating gas fumes? Yes. The peak for chloroform was greater than the peak for gas? Yes. You were not surprised to find gas in the trunk of a car? No. The amount of chloroform surprised you? Yes, it seemed very unusual to me. It is a cancer causing agent and you don't normally find it in the trunk of a car. I can not tell you where it came from other than the trunk of the car. You didn't find how much chloroform was there but you found out it was an abundance? Yes, it was detectable at levels higher than one part per million. When you ran the concentrated sample was it similar? Yes. Did you do research on the chloroform to find out if it was a car related product? It was very abundant and Dr Vass and I sat down one night and talked about why such a high amount of chloroform would be in the trunk of the car. I wasn't able to find why it was there, it was not exhaustive research, it was just a wondering why it was in the trunk. It is generally accepted in the scientific community that polymers can trap chloroform? Yes. The carpet could trap it because it has a carbon base. You also said you didn't do a quantitative evaluation you could never relate it back to a certain point? Yes, too many variables. That piece of carpet you had could of been the most stained or the least stained? Yes, I had no idea of any of it. Chloroform doesn't increase it decreases? Yes, we found that out by putting it in a clean bag. It was in the carpet, it was associated with the carpet. The chloroform was in the carpet. When you said the air blank was mostly clean, were you running room air? Yes. Is any air in any room completely devoid of compounds? No. The various issues that were noted in your lab notes was just for a complete record? Yes, so others can know exactly what happened? Yes, we write down everything. Did anything extraordinary happen while running these samples? No. When you tested the air from six weeks later, it was the best you could get? Yes. You can't go back in time and get a sample? No. Mr Baez has asked you at length about Dr Vass, how long have you worked with Dr Vass? 12 -13 years. Do you both work on things together? Yes, all the time. He is a major contributor to instruments and one of the things I enjoy about Dr Vass is he always wants to learn. Has that been his method of learning over the period of time you have worked with him? Yes. Baez is up...... You worked with Dr Vass on the Labrador? Yes. It is patented? No it is not. We are required to tell the lab about all inventions and we would get a minimal royalty. This project you had on this case, you billed it to the Labrador project? All the samples we run are very valuable for the lab. Did you bill this case to the Labrador project? It is very likely as it fits within the scope of that project. What are some of the requirements you have to generate income to the lab? We do funded research projects. Labrador is one of those research projects? Yes. Your job requires you to get grants? Yes. The Labrador is work based on Dr Vass? No, it is a product I designed and in a very broad sense it detects all chemicals in human decomp. Is the fact that it was in the case make it more apt for people to buy something that came from this case? No, it would have to have it own validation and testing, nothing in this case would make anyone buy one. How many times has the Labrador been mentioned because of this case? The Labrador had nothing to do with this case. It wasn't even built yet, I had no crystal ball to see before this case that the Labrador would have anything to do with this. This is the first time you tested a carpet sample? I don't recall, if it did I can't remember. You can't say what you would find in a carpet sample? No. One of the other carpet samples you tested from a junkyard had some chloroform in it? A small amount, just above baseline. What your research is, that you googled some items? Yes, it was not exhaustive. You spent about an hour googling items? I don't know. You would not base anything on that limited amount of googling? I can not tell you where that came from, I would not even try to tell you. Did you find anything in your googling? I did not do an exhaustive study. Jeff is up........ The Labrador was designed for the military and they would not pay any royalties? That is correct. Baez is up...... Are you saying that if this Labrador is produced and sold that you or your lab would not generate any money? As far as I know the government gets free use. So if it is sold to LE in Florida you would not get any money? I do not know. Witness is excused, Judge is dismissing the jury till tomorrow at 9am. Please remember you need to be here at 8:30am, at 9:00am the jury will walk through those doors to hear testimony. Court is in recess till 8:30 for attorneys. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 22, 2011, 10:26:08 AM 9:00am Wed, June 22, 2011 Court is in session, the jury is not present. Court and attorneys are at sidebar before court begins. Jury is being returned. Defense witness is Maureen Bottrell. Baez is up......... Works for the FBI as a Geologist Forensic Examiner. Takes soil analysis. Has lots of education and has lectured and taught her subject. Deals with soils and minerals and glass, rocks, gem stones and cements. She has testified 40 times in Federal and State Courts. She has been declared an expert witness in geology. She had items sent to her in this case, she examined them for geological evidence. Baez is referring her to her report of March 2009. She received items from Casey's car. Debris from the trunk and around the car, and the shovel from Brian Burner. She also received 22 pairs of shoes from the Anthony home. She also received soil samples from evidence markers from the remains site off Suburban. The soil samples received were after the top layer was removed. 2 samples from the car were insufficient and the rest were mixed samples and she couldn't do a good study. With the shovel, the testing was stopped because the body was found. They were looking at the shovel to determine where the body may have been buried. They never tested the shovel again. The shoes either had no material on them or was very limited. 3 pairs of the shoes were tested and were different from the crime remains scene. She also tested a transport bag, which is the bag the shoes came in and it had insufficient material in it to be tested. Jeff is up......... Did you determine the shoes you did examine were never at Suburban Drive? No. There are many reasons she gave for this, they could of been at the scene and she would not of found it on the shoes. She could not find the presence or absence of evidence to say that Casey was either at or not at Suburban Drive. Baez is up......... You cannot say that Casey was at Suburban Drive? No, I cannot. I would have to speculate to say whether or not she was at the scene compared to the evidence found on her shoes. Witness is excused. 9:20am, next defense witness is Madeline Montgomery. Baez is up...... She is a Forensic Toxicologist for the FBI in Quantico, VA. She had lots of education and training. She analyzes blood, urine and hair for drugs and poisons. She has published peer reviewed papers. She has testified in court 11 times. She is declared an expert witness in Forensic Chemistry and Toxicology. She received the hair mat belonging to Caylee Marie Anthony. She tested the hair by first breaking off part of the hair and making it into dust then into solvent and then tested that in a instrument and tested for Xanax and Klonopin, she was asked to test for those. The tests for those 2 drugs were negative. She also tested for those again and 9 other drugs in the same family, Valium, roofies, Ketamine and others. All the results were negative. She used a new technique that was 10 times more powerful than the normal test. She tested for no other items. She doesn't know how much exposure to these drugs it would take for it to show up in the hair. Jeff is up......... The negative result is forensically meaningless? It means I didn't find the drug and it didn't show up. It could of been given and not show up in the hair? Yes. If someone were exposed to something and died immediately it would not of shown up in the hair? No, it would not. You can not test for chloroform can you? No, I can not. You could not test the hair to see if this child drowned? No. Baez is up.......... What other meaningless kind of work do you do at the FBI. I don't believe any of my work is meaningless. You had a sample you did a test and the results came back negative? Yes. Witness is excused. 9:40am Next defense witness is Dr. Michael Sigman. Mason is up......... He is a faculty member at the University of Central Florida. He is a forensic scientist. He has a PhD and lots of other education. He worked at Oakridge Natl. Lab he knew Dr. Arpad Vass at Oakridge. He has 64 peer reviewed publications. He has lectured over 40 times. He is declared an expert in the field of chemistry He became involved in this case July 2008, he was asked to take air samples from the trunk of the Pontiac Sun Fire. Dr Vass was not available to take those samples, so he was asked to go to the OC Sheriff's Office and take samples. He called Dr Vass and asked him what kind of samples he wanted him to use. They discussed using a tedlar bag, it is a plastic bag, it is commonly used for collecting air samples. He and his associate Doug Clark went to OC Sheriff's Vehicle bay and took air samples from the Pontiac. They used a syringe to pull air from the trunk an inch, extracted the air and placed it into the tedlar bag. He took 2 samples into 2 tedlar bags. He left both samples in custody with the OC Sheriff's Dept. The large bag was sent to Dr Vass and the smaller bag was sent to the Central Florida University, where they tested it. They used a an oven like machine called the massed spectrometer. The first test found trace amounts of volatile components, similar to what you would find in gasoline. They did another test and found more concentrations of gasoline. They were not able to do any quantitative analysis. They were able to identify from the second sample, components from gasoline. They knew they could use a different method that would work better. On July 22, 2008 they returned to the OC Sheriff's bay and took new tests. They took them to the Natl Center for Forensic Science. On July 23, 2008 they took more samples that were left for periods of hours. The results of all samples, was primarily that of gasoline and chloroform and others. They were not subjected to quantitative analysis. Tetrachoralethylene was also found, it is normally found in dry cleaning materials and spot removers. Chloroform is a solvent that is used in degreasing applications and is formed in natural settings with bleach and other materials found in decomposition as well. He has not done decomposition studies on human remains but Dr Vass and others have found these and other compounds are found in human decomp. Dr. Stethalopoulous has also found these compounds in decomposing bodies, 11 were in common with Dr. Vass. Do you have an opinion now whether or not there was human remains in that trunk? There were 3 compounds found at low levels, based solely on our tests, I can not say that human remains were in that trunk. I was aware that garbage was found in the trunk. How many air samples did you take? 6, 2 tedlar bags, and 4 others. All of those samples was the primary finding gasoline? Could be attributed to gasoline. The solid phase contained the other 3 compounds. Mason is done..... Jeff asks to take a 15 minute recess before he begins.... Court is in recess till 10:25. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 22, 2011, 10:58:33 AM 10:30 Wed, June 22, 2011 Court is in session. Starts with a sidebar...sidebar over. Judge returns the jury. Defense witness is Michael Sigman. Jeff is up........ You took your air samples July 21, 2008? Yes. You opened the trunk and drew out the air sample? Yes, we opened the trunk about an inch and inserted an 8 inch needle. You did not look in the trunk and see that the liner and the spare tire cover had been removed? No, I did not. Took a tiny amount of air and injected into a tedlar bag and a CSI from OC Sheriff's office brought it to his university. Dr Vass wanted you to use a triple sorbent trap but he didn't have any. Correct. The two methods you used is still not as good as a triple sorbent trap? Yes. Even with the methods you were able to use and even with the trunk liner and the spare tire cover gone, you were able to find chloroform and 2 other substance that are consistent with the research that are out there that compare to human decomposition. You said that chloroform can come from a reaction from bleach and certain other substance? That comes from people that swims in pools? Yes. Hazardous amounts or minor amounts. Very minor amounts, not hazardous amounts. Would there have to be other compounds there to form chloroform. He said a lot but he is basically saying yes, I think, lol. The reaction if that would occur would create more than just chloroform if it occurred? Yes. Can chlorine gas be caused by a bathing suit be thrown in the trunk of the car. No it would become something else or dissipate. Did you find anything in your sample that this chlorine came from pool chlorine or chlorine bleach? There is nothing in our research to suggest that, we simply know they are there, we do not know there source. You do not study human decomp? No. Did you detect an odor coming from the trunk? Yes I did. Mason is up......... You found these slight traces of chloroform in only 2 samples. No sir it was found in 3 samples. You don't know the source from any of those compounds? No. The main thing that was there was gasoline? Yes. You provided this to the sheriff's department 3 years ago? Yes. Jeff is up............ Based on where you took the test were you surprised to find gasoline? No. Witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 22, 2011, 12:37:09 PM 10:50am Wed, June 22, 2011 Next witness is Susan Mears CSI. Baez is up.... She is employed by the OC Sheriff's Office. Baez is showing her items collected at Suburban Drive. The first item is a red Disney bag with a Gatorade bottle inside of the bag a syringe inside of the bottle. This item was found 7 inches away from the skull. Witness is excused. Next witness is Michael Rickenbach FBI. He has already been declared an expert witness. Baez is up....... Baez is approaching the witness with a copy of his report, he is talking about a Disney bag with a bottle in it and a syringe with a needle, inside the bottle. Jeff is objecting, item's not in evidence. Objection sustained. Sidebar...sidebar is over. Baez is telling him to look at his report of July 2008. Baez is showing him a copy. Did you receive certain items from this case? Yes. What are those items? A car seat and a steering wheel cover. What were you asked to test these items for? Chloroform. Why were you asked to test the steering wheel cover? I don't know. You found no chloroform on the child seat? No. I did not analyze the whole items, just cuttings. Were you given another item to test for chloroform? Baez is placing an item into evidence. It is a doll. Was it checked for chloroform? Yes and it did not test for chloroform. Jeff is up......... As to the test of the doll, wasn't there a presence of chloroform? Yes, in very small amounts but I had a co-worker who brought in another doll like it and it also tested for very small amounts of chloroform. Sidebar...sidebar over. We found chloroform in the first doll so we got a control doll and found chloroform in it. This control doll was not an exact match? No. Baez is up......... Your co-worker had a doll with chloroform? No, I would not say that. The technique uses heat and it was a such a small amount I could not say it was present in either doll. Sidebar...sidebar is over. You also dealt with a Gatorade bottle and the item's inside of it. There was an unknown liquid and a syringe with a needle inside of the bottle. He shows him a photo of the Gatorade bottle. What was inside of it? The liquid in the bottle was a murky liquid with a cleaning product and testosterone. There was liquid in the syringe there was the same testosterone found. What did you use to test these items? Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and time of flight mass spectrometry. There were very low levels of chloroform but he did not report them out. Jeff is up...... You did not report out the chloroform in the report, just like the doll, is was such a small amount. Your identification of the cleaning product was from your testing? Yes. Witness is excused. Next witness is Karen Lowe FBI. She has already been declared an expert in hair and fiber analysis. Baez is up......... Baez is asking her about a report. She tested items of clothing from Casey's closet. They were tested for decomposition and none were found. Hair was found, that is common. Her report of Oct 15, 2008 is next. Next item is debris coming from a trash box coming from the vehicle, they were tested for decomp and none was found. Next item is a hair recovered from the trunk liner and tested for decomp and none was found. Nov 6, 2009 report the items came from the car. 4 items of debris, no hair had decomp. June 25, 2009 report....sidebar...sidebar over. This report covers, items from the trash bag from the vehicle. Count the items and tell the jury what the results were. There were 12 items, they were checked for decomp and none were found. The next items were from the ME's Office. She examined any fibers that were found from the remains scene and checked them against the trunk of the car. There were no fibers matching. Then you received some items from the residence? Yes. I was asked to do a fabric examination from a piece of duct tape from the crime scene and a piece of duct tape from the residence. She said they did not come from the same source. Did you receive some vacuum's from the residence? Yes. I then received some items from the ME's Office. I examined hairs from the hair mass and compared it to items from items coming from the ME's office. The items you received from the scene, what did you do with that? I compared them to the hair mat. Did you find any hair that was dissimilar? Yes, one. That hair that you found, did you then pull hair from CSI to eliminate them? Sidebar...sidebar over. 11:45am, Taking a 5-10 minute break without the jury present. Jeff and Baez are talking about a report. Judge is asking if they have come to an agreement? They say yes. The jury is returned. Same witness is still on the stand. You found an unidentified Caucasian hair on collection paper from the scene? Yes. That prompted you to do an investigation of individuals at the scene, refers her to her report. Who was tested? Robin Maynard, Christine Mankiewicz, Melissa Cardiello, Sara Carebello, Kelly Wood, Geraldo Bloise and Jennifer Welch. Baez says this is by stipulation not a complete list of who was at the scene. The hair was not identified to be any of the ones tested. It was dissimilar to Casey and Caylee also. Were there any other items that you received that you inspected? Yes, items from the scene, the car and the Anthony home. She compared them to the hair mass. They were not similar. You issued 9 different reports? Yes. How many hairs did you find that did not have decomp? I don't know. You only found one decomp hair? Correct. From the residence and the vehicle. That includes the clothing items that came from Casey's closet that you tested? Yes. Jeff is up........ The one hair that you can't account for came from collection paper? Correct. The hair that you found that had decomp was found in the car trunk? Yes. You don't know the period during the time where Casey Anthony was living away from the residence? I don't. Baez is up...... If you were given items from where Casey Anthony was living during that time would you have tested them? Yes. You were given none? No. The judge is dismissing the jury for the day. It is a short day. Hours will be extended on Saturday. The judge wants to know an idea of when the defense will be done with their defense? Baez said they are not required to give that professional courtesy. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 23, 2011, 10:32:36 AM 9:00 Thur, June 23, 2011 Court is session. First defense witness is Susan Mears. Baez is up........... Baez pleased the court and Ms Drane. He is talking to the witness about the Disney bag, the bottle and the syringe with needle. Baez is introducing all 3 into evidence. Witness is excused. Defense witness is Stephen Shaw. Baez is up....... The witness is again excepted as an expert in Trace Evidence. He works for the FBI. Baez is showing him photos of hairs. These are hairs used in a study. They are antemortem hairs. Baez is moving these photos into evidence. Sidebar....sidebar over. You had many, many hairs in this study? Over 600 hairs from living individuals. What was the purpose of your study? It was from a thesis at John J. College, about hairs from living and hairs with postmortem banding. The person who suggest this was the person who was doing their Master's thesis? Yes. You wanted to expand upon that? Yes, I did. The FBI testified about a postmortem banding exhibit. Baez is showing the jury a big poster of the exhibit for banding. Baez is pointing out a hair on the exhibit that is one of the hairs that was initially determined to be postmortem banding, they later changed their mind. Another examiner had a different opinion and when they conferred they determined it was not postmortem banding. What knowledge did the individuals have of why they were doing this study? They knew it was a test, they didn't know if there were any postmortem hairs at all. They both identified all the postmortem hairs, one identified one as a postmortem hair but after conferring they identified it as antemortem. Another hair was identified as postmortem first and later identified it as antemortem. Baez asks them if the banding looks the same, the witness says to him it looks different. Next is another hair from a living person, stored in potting soil, there is apparent changes in it. Next is another hair from a living person buried in potting soil for 100 days, there are apparent changes to it. Next is a photo from a living person, submerged in water for 17 days, there is some apparent changes. Is there any other ongoing studies at the FBI from living individuals? No. How many studies are you aware of of hair from living individuals? 3, it is an ongoing research item. Now going to his report of Jan 21, 2009. Can you tell us what you were asked to do in this report? I reported on hair and fibers that were in the hair mass, debris from skull and the duct tape. What were your findings? There were no hairs suitable for microscopic comparisons on the duct tape, there were head hairs on the duct tape they were consistent with hairs in the hair mat. You also found some textile fibers on the duct tape, did you do any tests on them? No. Jeff is up........ The items Mr Baez showed you, those were a small number of items that you studied. You did hair decomposed in hairs studied in cars and car trunks. No hairs Mr Baez showed you were those hairs were they? No. The witness is going to show his power point study on the hairs. He is explaining the power point, showing hairs before and after there exposure. There is apparent changes in the hair but it is not a decomp band. The hairs are put in many situations for differing periods of time. No changes at all in some of the antemortem hairs. Hairs stored in the trunk of a car for 202 days had no apparent changes. The car was parked in direct sunlight, when there was sunny days for 7 months and no changes. He is going through the slides, some do have some changes but they would not be considered postmortem bandings. Insects effected hair roots in the hairs put outdoor. The hair roots in some of Caylee's hair mat were also destroyed by insects. For most postmortem banding, you should have the root mostly intact and the banding above that, it takes some training and the microscope to see postmortem banding. You are looking for an opaque band above the root? Without a microscope it is hard to fully appreciate postmortem root banding. Some of these hairs did show some decomposition from conditions but never had decomp root banding. He is showing one of the hairs that were initially thought to be root banding by one of his other analysts, who later upon further testing, said it was not. The next one is the other one that was at first called root banding and later decided it was not. They do appear to have banding but under a microscope you can really tell that is is not postmortem root banding. Now showing postmortem root banding and how apparent it is. Did you have any hairs antemortem that were stored in a car that showed any signs of postmortem banding? No. Baez is up......... Mr. Shaw the hairs you tested in the trunk of a car, did you put them in garbage? No. Did you test any hairs in garbage? All of the hairs taken from living people in your power point had the number of days, right? Right. But all the hairs from postmortem people did not have the number of days? They were not listed on the slides. He is looking at his report. Every slide you have from a live person has the exact days and every slide you have from a dead person does not have how many days? Correct. He is asking about a slide and the witness is saying it was 3 months. These were in Tennessee in the Winter time? They are completely different than Florida in the summertime? Yes. The outside conditions are completely different? Yes. Next hair was 1 month old, Tennessee in the winter time. Different temps? Yes. Next one store inside a house for 1 month. Did they have heating? I don't know. Was it also in Tennessee in the winter time? Yes. Next one was out doors in a trunk, in Tennessee in the winter time for a month. Next one was stored in a house for 2 weeks, he doesn't know the temp. All were in different environmental conditions from this case? They were all Tennessee in the winter time. Did your findings show that you got different reactions to different environmental conditions? Yes. There is no way you can replicate the hair in this case? No. Do you as a scientist, one day to be able to look at a hair and tell it is from a dead person? I can do that now, it takes experience and it is well established now. I do hope to do further studies. You cannot say that right now a hair came from a dead person? Yes. Wouldn't you like to know for sure one day, if a hair came from a dead person? We can already do that. We want to learn more about postmortem banding. You would like to learn more about what environmental indicators say about postmortem banding? Sure, you want to find out everything. This is well established through you and this thesis? No, we deal with this routinely, we see postmortem banding often. We have cases throughout different environments that I have yet to identify as postmortem banding. Jeff is up........... The studies that you based your opinions on are not just from Tennessee? Correct. They are from many places, many environments and receiving cases all over the world? Yes. To this point the only thing that has pointed to postmortem root banding is a dead body? Correct. The witness is excused. Judge recess court for a special 20 min break. 10:20am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 23, 2011, 12:22:03 PM 10:40am Thurs, June 23, 2011 Court is in session. Next defense witness is Dr. Barry Logan. Sims is up..... He is a forensic toxicologist and analytical chemist. He has lots of education from Scotland and then the University of Tennessee. He graduated with honors. He is a Board Certified Toxicologist. He has practiced forensic toxicology for 27 years. He has a background in GCMS, utilizing the instruments involved. He does cryro trapping. He now works for MNS Labs, one of the largest labs in all 50 states. On and on and on.............MAKE HIM AN EXPERT!!! lol. Jeff tried to object to this waste of time but it was over-ruled. Objection by Jeff....side bar...side bar over. He is made an expert witness in analytical toxicology, forensic toxicology and accreditation of labs.....oops Jeff objects and is going to voir dire on some of it. Jeff is up...... When is the last time you did analytical chemistry other than toxicology? All the time. Outside of toxicology what do you do with chemistry? The analysis of drugs in evidence is toxicology but I am also in charge of the chemistry part of the lab. Drug evidence. Your work is limited to toxicology or supervising others looking for drugs? Analytical chemistry is a very broad field? Yes. Your area is limited to toxicology? Yes. Your last experience with cryro trapping was as a graduate student over 20 years ago? Yes. You are not an expert in all areas of forensic science? Correct. Jeff is objecting to him being made a expert witness in anything other than an forensic toxicology. Sims is up.... What did you do in regards to chemistry with all other fields? He thinks he did something with all of them, lol, I don't have a clue. He will only be admitted as a witness in forensic toxicology. Sims is up......... You use a GCMS to examine evidence in this case? Yes, I tested items in this case. He read articles about this case. Have you reviewed the article of 2008 by Dr. Vass? I have. Sims is going to use Baez's Big Pad. Side bar...side bar is over. The juror's have been in court for 40 minutes and haven't heard a word of testimony. Sims is up..... What is the difference between a research lab and a forensic lab? Forensic labs do things for legal reasons but do some research, research labs do only research that may or may not be used in science. Do you have any evidence that Oakridge Natl Lab has been certified and accredited? No. What is a validation test in a lab? When a lab develops a new test, before they apply it to evidence they must decide if it is established in science and not get false positives. She is asking about reports he has reviewed, he is referring to his records. I was provided with lab notes from Dr Wise and Dr Vass and some additional materials that were tested and evaluated using the methods. I looked at a forensic report from OC Sheriff's Office, the report was authored by Dr. Wise, Dr Vass and Dr Martin. I also reviewed the reports of Dr Wise and Dr Vass. What did the notes say? They told when they got a problem with a test. As a result of your review of their reports, have you reached a conclusion to their experiment that resulted in their report. Sustained. When you reviewed their bench notes...Objection...side bar...sidebar over. Can you tell me please if there were established, published protocols for the testing done at Oakridge? There was none. If a test is conducted without established protocols what can happen? If you don't have written protocols, it could cause problems, false positives, not being able to replicate it....it is critical for a reliable for a scientific test......Objection by Jeff. Sustained. Side bar.....sidebar over...... After you reviewed the samples that were tested did you find any examples of what steps were taken to prevent contamination? I didn't find any. He saw no evidence of quality assurance that was relevant to the analysis. He is explaining quality assurance. You just don't want to mess it up, lol. Sustained, sustained. Were proper controls discussed in their material? No. What is a control? Sustained. In toxicology do you use controls? Sustained. When you reviewed the reports and the records, did you have any opinions in regard to specifically the bench notes as they discuss the manner in which the samples were performed? He didn't follow the question, lol. Was there anything in the bench notes that cause you concern? Sustained. What is your understanding of the blank samples in the bench notes? Sustained. Can you define what a blank sample is, in your field? A blank sample is known not to contain the chemical you are trying to test. What happens if a blank sample is run and the computer is not changed? Sidebar....sidebar over. Can you tell me what the effect of running a sample and not changing the machine? You won't get a reliable sample. Sustained, motion to strike granted. What is the result of running a blank sample and the chemical is shown there what happened? There is a problem and contamination may have happened. What is the reason for running blank samples? To rule out false positives. What is the significance of a closed valve, destroying or messing up a run? He doesn't know. When you reviewed the reports did you see any issues with the valves being closed? Yes, I saw that in the notes, it failed the test and gave a wrong result. Sustained. When you reviewed the notes in this case, did you notice that any of the techniques were changed in the middle of the experiment? Yes, they were changed during the weeks the tests were taken. Sustained. What does that mean to you? Sustained. When you run a standard to make sure the machine is reading the standard, is it done the same day you run the sample? Yes. Why is that? To make sure that you get the right result. Did that occur? There were notes that said the tests were done and the standards run weeks later. Have you had an occasion to run tests where there are fatty acids? Yes, they show up a lot. How many times did you see fatty acid in your testings? Thousands of times. Have you engaged in testing were oleic acid and other acids occurred? Yes. Are you aware of what items can contain these acids? They occur in plant material, food products, dairy products, meat products, cheese, butter, milk. If you were to test an item that contained these fatty acids on a paper towel, as a toxicologist what would you expect to see? You would conclude those fatty acids were present in the paper towel. Which include cheese? Yes. The percentage of which fatty acid may occur more? Sustained. Have you conducted any research in regards to fatty acid ratios in pizza? I have. Sustained. Sidebar....sidebar over. The judge is recessing them for lunch till 1:30pm. Whew!!!!! Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 23, 2011, 02:48:20 PM 1:30pm Thurs, June 23, 2011 Court is in session. Warning: This is not a transcript or verbatim, they were going very fast and it was hard to keep up, got as much as I could without adding anything I wasn't sure of. Defense witness is Barry Logan. Sims is up.......... Where were the 4 fatty acids found? They were found on a paper towel. Jeff is up.......... Your not saying that all 3 of these fatty acids are found in combination with vegetables? Yes, in palm oil. Is there a difference in the carbon molecules in fatty acids than are in adipocere? There are some that are present in both. There are some that are 4 to 10 carbons long and then some in adipocere are 18 carbons long? There is a mixture. Are there things found in milk, cheese and butter that are not found in adipocere? It is not unusual for there to be special challenges using MC-GS? Yes, I agree with that. Are there situations that scientists are faced with things not in protocols? They should make new protocols for that procedure. The principles for human decomposition tests are published? Not all of the information is in the published information. A blank is a sample of room air which is run through a machine to find if there is anything in the room air? Yes. What should a scientist do who happens to find something in the test? You stop it and run it again. When a scientist is faced with a human error as simple as shutting a valve, he should shut the valve and start over. In the bench notes you read, that is precisely what is done? Yes. Then they ran it again and reported those results? Yes. Sims is up........... You were asked about challenges, what did you understand the word challenges to mean? Something about the way something was being tested. You were asked about protocols with regards to decomp odors, are there published protocols on how to collect air from a trunk of a car? No. Are there published protocols on how to collect carpet from the trunk of a car? No. Based on everything you reviewed including the 2008 report you saw, can you reproduce this experiment performed by Dr Wise or Dr Vass? No. Why is that? There is nothing written down for me to make sure I am doing the test the same way. Jeff is up........... Your lab could not do this test if you wanted to, could you? We could do this test. Jeff is showing him multiple items of evidence and asking him if he ever saw any of those before? Sidebar...sidebar over. Brief legal matter, Judge Perry excused the jurors. 1:50pm Jeff and the judge are talking about case law. Judge suggests one and Jeff tells him he is looking for Overton V State. He found it, a Florida case, 2001. He is now looking up the one the judge suggested. The judge is reading Overton. The judge wants Jeff to read Hayes. Judge agrees to hear arguments. Jeff is up.......... By the defense asking this question about him questioning the witness about doing tests on the carpet samples. He says that the defense has kicked open the door. The judge says that Overton says that one test was done and why they didn't do a second test. Jeff says, the reason for that is the defense in there direct exam saw the existence of the spermicide. The defense conducted a test on the sheet and found that it could have been washed. They recommended more testing and the state was allowed that they only tested one spot and the defense prohibited them from doing so. The defense has opened the door because this witness has just said they can reproduce the same result. Hayes helps Overton that the defense is placing a burden on themselves. Because they asked if they could reproduce these results. My question should be allowable now. Sims is up...... None of this case law stands for what I have asked the witness. There is nothing to the nature of what I asked the witness. This would not open the door and we move to strike the comment and ask for curative instructions. Could you replicate this experiment he said no, because he wasn't sure what was done by Dr. Vass and Dr. Wise. Judge says The Florida Supreme Court addressed burden shifting which shifts the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense. He reads from the law about testing of various pieces of evidence, found at the scene of a murder on cross exam the state had never requested a test of the blood stain. The apparent goal of the line of question was to cast doubt on the state to test the blood correctly. The judge then asked if the defense had performed any tests on the blood stains but they had been done before for blood. They found the prosecutors comments were prejudicial in a decision, the state had erred. It is well settled that due process must explain every piece of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt but the defense has no such obligation. It would show the defendant had to prove his own case. Clearly the defendant had no such obligation. In the states argument of Overton, they suggested that the trial court erred when the prosecution made statements about testing. Misleading arguments showed that the defense was hiding something and they granted a mistrial. Based upon the evidence at trial, the defendant produced one sample for evidence for testing and the state did not ask for a second test. The defenses objection is sustained that it would violate due process by shifting the burden of proof to the defense. Earlier before we recessed for lunch, I asked the defense to read the case Cuban V State, dealing with attacking the validity of another expert's opinion. This witness has not been qualified as an expert in the area of air sample analysis, if you recall the Frye hearing. What I said he was not qualified to produce an opinion on that because he only read 2 articles. He is qualified as a forensic toxicologist and has some limited knowledge of analytical chemistry. I would tread very lightly in this area, because while you did not open the door, it looks like you were ready to crack it open. Mr Ashton looked like he was ready to run a Mac truck through that door. You can not use that burden to use as a shield and then use it as a club for the state. At this point, that line of questioning dealing with the cans is sustained to somebody opening the doors. Sims is up.......... Jeff went up to the witness and lined up the evidence in the manner he did it, we would like a curative statement. The judge says, you didn't object to it then, all it would do is send a replay to the jury. He can say the last question was sustained. She wants the evidence removed off of the witness stand. Judge says he can do that. Mason is up......... He asks for an instruction on the burden of proof. The judge is asking for the last question from the court reporter. Jeff is up...... He said that no curative is necessary because he didn't ask him to test the carpet, just asked if he could. Judge says..... A curative instruction may have to be given in due precaution. Jeff is up......... He is asking the witness: Could you take this carpet sample and put it in a tedlar bag and heat it and extract the chemicals and then use a MC-GS for cryo trapping and do the test the same way it was done? No. What would keep you from running it? I am not sure, I would have to review his article. The judge says....... This whole area is liking walking on quick sand. To the defense: When you are trying to impeach an expert you can not do it with another experts opinion, you have to do it with another experts conclusion. You do not have this. That is the problem with this whole line of questioning. Both sides read the following case Network Publications a 2000 decision of the Court of Appeals. 2:25 The judge is taking a 10 minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 23, 2011, 06:29:02 PM 2:40 Thurs, June 23, 2011 Court is in session. Warning: This is not a transcript or verbatim. At sidebar...side bar is over. Jury has not been brought back in yet. The judge is at the bench writing and looking at a monitor. Judge reads the curative statement he is going to read to the jury, no one objects to it. The Jury is brought back in. The judge reads: It is a well settled process of law that it is the burden of the State to proof every piece of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense has no duty to prove anything. (something like that). Jeff is up........... You haven't done any work in this area since you got your PhD? No. Witness is excused. Defense next witness is Jennifer Welch. Baez is up......... You are the CSI of the remains site? Yes. Over 300 items were collected? Yes. Where there any socks or shoes collected from Caylee Marie Anthony? No, socks are shoes were found. Would your opinion then be that Caylee was wearing no socks or shoes? Sustained. Witness is excused. Next witness is Cindy Anthony. Baez is up....... You use the computer at your home? The desk top computer? Yes. Who used the computer? Anyone, anyone that was at the house, even friends of Casey. Did you do any search of the word chloroform? Yes. Tell me about that. I started looking up chlorophyll for my dogs that were getting sick on bamboo. That took me to chloroform. How could you get those mixed up? Chlorophyll had some chloroform mentioned and it took me there. Why did you know that you looked this up in March? I was looking up hand sanitizer and that made me look up rubbing alcohol and other items. Did you look up things to do with injuries? Yes, my friend was in a car accident and someone asked me to look these up. I had to look at home because at Gentiva I couldn't look those up. You mentioned work, your work schedule shows that you were working? It could of been an error if my supervisor filled out my time card. Could your work schedule time be off? Yes, I was salaried and not allowed to show more than 8 hours of work each day. We were instructed never to show more than 8 hours a day. My normal day was 9 hours a day so I would always have over time. Baez showing her evidence. He is showing her a photo of the trunk of the Sun Fire. Where was it purchased? On West Colonial one of the dealerships out there. Who purchased the car? George and I did. Who drove the car? Mainly Lee and he drove it till 2005 when he got his Mustang. After that it was passed along to Casey? Pretty much, we had a Corolla too and Casey and George drove both. Can you see a stain in the trunk of that car? Have you seen that stain before? Yes, when we bought the car. This stain was there when you bought the car? Yes, there were a few lil stains in the trunk of the car. When you sprayed Fe breeze on July 15, 2008 did you see anything else in the trunk of the car? Yes, the outline of a gas can. Would it by a cylinder gas can? Yes. He shows her the round, red, gas can in evidence and she says that looks like the outline she saw. Linda is up.......... Is it your testimony that despite what your work records show, you were home between 1-2pm? Yes, I know I was home, I went home early a couple of days. You work 7:30 - 5:00? Yes, then my hours got extended to 8:30 - 5:30. So it is possible that you were home that day, you think it is possible that you were home between 2:16 and 2:28pm on March 18? Were you or weren't you? If I could look at my work computer I could tell you that. You haven't looked at your work computer in 3 years? I haven't been back? Could you go back and look now? No. They wouldn't let you? No, they would but I had a password and my emails would be lost by now. We had several passwords and I had a password that only I had. I also had a password to my emails and no one was allowed to get in my email but me. They expire in 30 days. Does your company back up your emails? I don't know if they would have them 3 years later, they could only hold so much. Do you have knowledge that your employer backed up emails? It depends, we were in 40 states, there were many Gentiva sites we were just one. There was lots and lots and lots of emails. OMG OMG OMG. I am in shock!!!!!! You were aware that the searches were of interest in Aug of 2008, correct? No, I found out in Sept 2008 by Yuri Melich. You did not tell them that you made those searches? I told you that I made those searches. You told me that you made a search for chlorophyll, you told me you made me no searches for chloroform? Do you recall not making searches for chloroform and how to make chloroform? You don't have to look up how to make it, you just have to look up chloroform. You just said that you put chlorophyll and it gave you chloroform? Did you type into the search bar on google How to Make Chloroform? I don't recall typing that, I typed chloroform. Did you search for neck breaking? I may have about a skate boarder. Are you recalling this now because of another change in your medication? No, my memory is better than it was then. Did you look up shovel? No. Did you look up Acetone, alcohol, peroxide, etc etc? Yes. Do you remember this now because of the change in your medication? No, I looked up those things because I needed to. What did you search for those on? I don't know. What browser did you use? I don't know, I just went on and used it. There are only two profiles on your computer, did you know that? No. There are one for you and one for Casey, did you enter a password? No, we did not have a password. Did you look up how to make weapons out of household items? No. Did you look up chloroform habit? No. Were you on drug library.org. Sci spot.com? Were you on that website 84 times? I don't know. Did you do 84 searches for chlorophyll? I didn't but I do not know what my computer does. Did you have a My Space acct or a Face book acct in 2008? No. Linda is showing her a picture of the stain. Where was the stain when you purchased the car? Up near the top section. Baez is up............ The password protection is on your work computer? Yes. There is no password on your desktop computer? No. I would just get on or ask Casey if I could just get on for a minute. Is this testimony about chlorophyll anything new? No, I told them that I searched for chlorophyll. Witness is excused. Next witness is Sandra Osburne. Baez is up......... You are a detective and also a computer expert? He asked that she be declared an expert witness in computer forensics. Who followed you in today? Sustained. You were the first person to see the Anthony's computer? The HP Desktop? Yes. You were asked to look for the key word chloroform? Yes. After you found a hit for chloroform what did you do? I noted that it was a deleted history file and gave it to another detective. Did you do then a program called Net.analysis? Yes. Is it a competing software than Cacheback? We use both for different things. They both find the history is deleted? Yes. What do you do then, do you put it on a spreadsheet? I don't change the data, I just view it differently. You then give it to the detectives and then the prosecutor's office? Yes. He is showing her an item of evidence. Do you know what that disk is ma'am? No and that is not my handwriting. Do you have the item that you we requested you bring? I did not have the item, I turned it over to Sgt. Stenger. Baez is showing her the spread out sheet. Is that a report you prepared? No, Sgt Stenger worked on this. Did your report say that you prepared this spreadsheet? He is referring her to her report. Are you referring to the middle paragraph? Yes that is the portion of the deleted Fire Fox history that I reported and exported to him. Does that list the internet history? It indicates the deleted Firefox history and I exported it out to a thumb drive. What does it say it displays? It says in column format, URL's, etc etc. He is asking her to look at the Excel spreadsheet. Is that the one you did? No, that is not the one I exported out. Other than it being spread out so you can read it, is it a fair and accurate record of that spreadsheet. Linda is objecting that this is not the one she prepared. Sustained. He is going to show her the original that was turned over to defense and see if she recognizes that. Does this appear to be the Excel spreadsheet that you prepared? No, this is something Sgt. Stenger did. Your report says you did, does it not? No, I created the spread sheet and gave it to Sgt Stenger, that is his work. Linda is up......... The HP computer had a password? Correct. The owner had a password of rico2003 set in May of 2008? Yes. Baez is up......... You wouldn't have to use a password to use the computer would you? Depends on if you log out or it hibernates etc..etc. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 23, 2011, 06:31:14 PM 3:35pm Thurs, June 23, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is in the courtroom. Next witness is Kevin Stenger. You are a computer forensic examiner and a Sgt for OC? Baez wants him to be declared an expert witness again. He is. You first used Net.analysis and then Cacheback? I don't know who did the recovery, I am aware of the search but I did not do it. Do you see the print out on the screen, are you familiar with this document? I am. Is it a fair and accurate record of the analysis at the time it was done? Yes. Linda is asking if he has the whole document? Baez wants to ask him about the month of March 2008. Side bar...side bar over. 3:45pm Court is in a 10 minute recess. 3:55 Sidebar without court reporter. Sidebar over.....4:02 Linda is asking the judge about documents and he said for them to look them over and come to an agreement. He doesn't want the jury brought in, just to be sent out again. 4:10pm Jury is brought in the courtroom. Defense witness is Kevin Stenger. Baez is up............ Have you had the opportunity to review the document? Yes. Linda wants only the relevant portions of the document introduced, once the relevance has been established. He is to use only the untabbed pages, he is now taking out the untabbed pages. What is this? This is a report of the deleted computer history done with Net analysis. You met Mr Bradley after you completed this report? Yes. What did you ask him? I asked him if he could use his program to figure out how to change the time because of daylight savings time. Because of that half would be correct and half incorrect. The only issue you were having is daylight savings time? Yes. Did Cacheback find more files than the other software did? I don't know. How long did it take him to use it? I don't know. Sustained. Baez is approaching the witness. Wants him to look at March 24, 2008 at a specific time. He found it. What is the website there? Scispot.com. What is this item? How many times was it visited? 1. It is this report from Cacheback, how many times does it say this website was visited? 84 Does it show whether the website was typed in? Yes My space was visited 84 times on the net.analysis. Is My Space even listed on the Cacheback report? No, sir not at that time. He is publishing that page to the jury. What you just testified to is that on Net.analysis, the Scispot was visited 1 time and the My Space was visited 84 times? Correct. Baez is showing the witness a new document. Do you see a particular entry? I do? That is one day earlier on March 20, 2008, that is My Space typed in how many times? 83. You understand that 83 comes before 84? Yes. Now go to March 19, 2008. Do you see where it was typed? Yes. That is where it was typed in the browser? Yes and how many times does it show it was visited? 82. Baez is pointing out March 13. Do you see an entry that was typed for My Space 81 times? Do you see any of these items on the Cacheback report? You wouldn't it was only for March 21, 2008. You can't see the natural progression that goes 81, 81, 82,84? Yes. That is just two row downs from the other entry? What was the reason Net.analysis came up with more INTERNET history than the Cacheback did? The reports are different. You prepared the report for this jury? Yes sir. You did not testify to this report to the jury? No sir. You prepared this report also, a Cache back report for March 17, 2008. You did not testify to this report, Mr Bradley did? Yes. Linda is up........ How is that you prepared a Cachback generated report, did you have that software? Yes. How did you prepare that? The information that went into the report was nothing you worked on? The program itself generated this information. Why did you have Mr Bradley examine the data? I thought he could help me with the problems I was having. Do you see displayed on this page any of the Google searches that were conducted on March 21, 2008? 8 rows above. Were the Google searches for How to make chloroform? Yes, it is right above the My Space entry. How did that happen? It includes every word that you typed in. Would it appear that way if someone was searching for Chlorophyll? No, it would not. What can you do on Net.Analysis? You compare the dates to see if they are accurate or not. Do you have confidence that the dates and times on this Net.Analysis were correct or would you Cacheback be more accurate. I can't speak to how they were interpreted because I did not write the code. What on this displays the date and time this internet history was made? He is showing her the column it would be, she is showing it on the monitor. Even in the net.analysis the My Space entry and the search for chloroform are seconds apart. Yes Baez is up.......... The visits for chloroform that were on the net.analysis report shows that those were the very first time those websites were visited, show one time? All of these websites were visited once on net.analysis? Yes. Can you tell how long anyone was looking at chloroform before moving on? 3 minutes. Your Cacheback that doesn't show the My Space entries was purchased after you used the Net.analysis? You need to get your cash back. Sustained. Linda is up........ Even though they were done in a 3 minute time doesn't mean that a person wasn't opening other tabs at the same time? Correct. It tells us nothing about how long that person was reading what was on the web page or they printed it for subsequent reading? No. Baez................. This tab stuff is pure speculation, you don't know that? Yes. You are an LE did anyone inform you they found pages that were printed out on chloroform? I wasn't told that. Witness is excused. 4:50pm The judge is excusing the jury for the day. He is going to go over legal matters. Jeff talking about Nick Savage and Karen Martin. They have no first hand knowledge of anything, he wants a proffer to see that they have nothing to say. The judge says they are going to testify to hearsay. Jeff says that Karen Martin only receives evidence, she would have to testify to something that someone told her, which would be interesting. Mason says, this is a strange way to go about this, tell them what is coming. They are from the FBI and they will testify to what they did in the case. Jeff is worried that they want testimony about George's paternity test. Mason says that an FBI agent has memorialized in detail about emails saying that we will just say we did not take the pictures. The integrity of this case is challenged. The judge wants to hear the proffer. Mason says let's go for it. Defense witness is FBI Agent Nick Savage for proffer, the jury is not in the courtroom. Mason is up...... Are you the lead FBI agent in the case of Caylee Anthony? Yes, i was the missing children's coordinator and the violent crimes coordinator. Where you in a meeting with prosecutes whether of not duct tape could of covered the nose and mouth of this child? Objection work product. Sustained. After the meeting did you try to find some photos for the prosecution? I would of coordinated with Karen Allen who was with the lab. Did you make a request for photos at the ME's office with scales. Possible yes. Do you remember requesting of Karen Lowe or Karen Martin of scale sizes of the duct tape? Yes. Do you recall the reason for those photos? I asked because I didn't think they had been taken up to that point. Mason is approaching Nick with an email, do you recognize it? Yes. The first time I saw it was with your office. Nick says that is the first time he has seen that email. Jeff sees nothing to argue yet. The witness is excused. Next witness is Erin Martin, FBI request coordinator. Mason is up. Do you remember sending an email to Karen Lowe? No, he is showing it to her. Yes, she did send it. It says, Hey Karen, I did not decide to give the report to Nick and that there were no photos. I do not understand why the ME's did not take photos when it was on the skull. Did you have any other else to do with this part of the case? No. Judge wants to take up Agent Savage first, what does it prove or disprove? Mason says, if there is or is not a murder weapon? Mr Ashton tried to make this tape a murder weapon. He told Nick Savage to find photos of the tape on the skull with a scale. He said we will just tell them we don't have the photos. Should it have been potential Brady material? They tried to create something? Jeff is up.......... This is not relevant to the case and should be excluded. Mason is up........ They want the widths of the duct tape with scale and tape. They were asked to redo the photos with a scale. The response of the email, is I decided not to give the measurements to Nick Savage. This attacks the whole system. Judge says, relevant evidence is tending to prove or disprove a material fact. Ms Anthony has been charged with a 7 count indictment, he lists them....the court after hearing the testimony of Mr Savage does not have any material issues nor does it go to impeachment. If this was evidence of trying to fabricate evidence this would be prosecutorial misconduct. This evidence does not go to any material issues, they are purely collateral issues, therefore the objection in regards to the testimony for Agent Nick Savage will be sustained. Next argument, unless it is the same and then I would use the same argument. Mason is talking about the super imposition. With the tape over the skull over the child's head, they didn't have it, they didn't have the scales in the photos. Jeff is up....... The defense has known for 3 years that no scales were used in the ME's Office of the 3 pieces of duct tape. Judge says that it goes to no material fact and it does not go to what was proffered. Again the evidence does not meet the relative test of proffer. Court is in recess till 8:30 for attorneys, 9:00 for jury. 5:20pm Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 24, 2011, 12:27:45 PM 9:00am Fri, June 24, 2011 Court is in session. Baez is asking for 3 minutes to mark things. First defense witness is Cindy Anthony. Jury is present. Baez is up........ Baez is pleasing the court and Ms Drane. I want to talk to you about the shorts Caylee was found in. You have seen a photo of those shorts and they no longer fit her? I testified the last time I saw her she was in 3T. You took a video of her in those shorts, did you not? Yes. Sidebar....sidebar over...Ms Anthony you have had a chance to review this video? He is approaching the witness with the video. Is the video a fair and accurate representation of Caylee's size in early 2007? Showing the video to the jury. Ms Anthony how much had Caylee grown since this video was taken? She had grown quite a bit. How do you know this video was taken in early 2007, because of the date stamp and the skirt I was wearing that day and it is out of date. He is showing her photos. Showing her the picture at the wedding, where Casey was over 7 months pregnant. Objection. Jose is going to proffer relevancy at sidebar...sidebar over. Objection on relevancy sustained. Now showing her a different photo. What is that a picture of? Our backyard swimming pool with the ladder connected. Showing it to the jury. Does this ladder disconnect? Yes, she is showing how to unhinge the ladder and it comes off. Showing her another photo, it shows where they put the ladder after they take it off. Published to the jury. It shows the ladder down and at the side of the pool. Showing her another photo of the pool with the ladder off. Showing it to the jury. Shows her the next photo, it is of Caylee walking up the ladder and I am behind her, holding her. Objection...sidebar..sidebar over. Showing Cindy a photo. When was this photo taken? The summer of 2007? The photo is published to the jury, it shows Cindy helping Caylee up the ladder to the pool. How much are you supporting her? My hands are on her but just a light touch. Did she become better at climbing in? Yes, she could actually climb in herself. Showing her another picture. It is a photo of Caylee still climbing the ladder with Cindy helping. Showing to the jury. Next photo is of the same day, where she climbs to the top of the ladder with Cindy behind her. Showing it to the jury. He is showing her another photo, it is showing Cindy going around Caylee at the top of the ladder and get in the pool before her and receive her. Showing it to the jury. It shows Caylee on the first step inside of the pool. Did she get anxious to get in the pool and often times want to get in first? For the most part, she would sit and wait for us but as she got older she was a lot more anxious and would try to get in but we always had a life jacket on her. How often did she go swimming before June 2008? She swam 3 to 4 times a week, always with a life vest on. When you were on vacation in June, how often did Caylee go swimming? Every day. He is showing Cindy another photo. It is Cindy entering the pool and holding on to Caylee as she came into the pool. Showing it to the jury. Were you trying to get in the pool and Caylee was trying to swim off? Did you take many precautions with Caylee about the pool, what did you do? We use to have a pool box right next to the pool and once Caylee was a toddler we moved that. So she could not use the deck box to climb up to the pool. We took the ladder off if we weren't swimming, we told Caylee she was not allowed to swim by herself. They did teach her how to go up and down the ladder for safety. We kept the life vest in the back patio. Did this vest fit her a year later? No, we bought her another one, she grew out of the first one and then the second one. These photos were taken after the video we showed the jury and she had outgrown 2 life vests? Yes. Showing her another video, it is a photo of Caylee at the sliding glass door at the living room going into the screen patio. Showing it to the jury. Shows Caylee opening the door from the living room to the screen patio. Last time you saw Caylee was she bigger? About an inch taller, maybe a lil bit taller. Did Caylee ever leave the house barefoot? No, I am 99 percent sure, we put shoes on her to go out. The sliding glass door had nothing to preclude it being opened? No, we didn't put one in. Could Caylee open doors fairly easy at her age? Yes, she could. On June 16th, 2008 did you notice the pool ladder was up? Yes. Was that highly unusual to see that? Yes, so much that I called George and asked him about it, I also noticed the side gate opened. Did you tell anyone at work about it? Debbie Bennett or Charles. Would you have told Debbie Polisano? We had cubicles so you could hear everything anyone said. During this time period of June 16th of 2008, were you having any marital problems? Sustained. Sidebar....sidebar over. The judge is taking a special morning recess for 20 minutes. 10:05am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 24, 2011, 12:29:16 PM 10:30am Fri, June 24, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is not present. Judge is speaking...... The judge says he has reviewed the Mattel (?) case, dealing with the issue of theory of defense. Exactly Mr Baez, your theory of defense was this was an accidental drowning, that your client's behavior subsequent was caused by long term sexual abuse at the hands of her father and brother? Correct? Among other things. Among other things like what? That is the only thing you said that is in your opening statement. I have reviewed all of these things. In Mattel (?) case the witness that was to predicate the case was ill and the state reneged on their promise. As long as the relevance is an issue. What is your theory of defense? You can not use your theory of defense to get anything and everything in. I can only base what you have said is what you said in opening statements. If your theory of defense is ever changing, then somebody needs to tell it to me. LOL YES THE JUDGE SAID THAT!!! Sidebar....Sidebar over. 10:50am. Cindy Anthony resumed the witness stand. Returning the jury. Baez is up........ On July 16th, 2008 did you advise Yuri Melich about the ladder being left up on the pool? Yes. Was that within 24 hours of calling the police? Yes. How many times have you informed LE that Caylee drowned in the pool? Sustained. Sidebar...sidebar over. Linda is up........... Linda says even after Caylee was missing, you maintained her bedroom? Correct? You kept all her clothes in her drawers and you kept her presents because she had a birthday? Yes. You would have garage sales and get rid of Caylee's outgrown clothes? Yes. Or you would keep them in plastic bags to keep them for later. Was Caylee potty trained? Mostly she was, she wore panties unless we were going out. When did she make the step from diapers to pull ups? Sometime in 2008. Showing Cindy a picture, was Caylee wearing a diaper, a pull up or underwear? It looks like a pull up or a diaper, it doesn't look like panties. You see something coming out of the back of the shorts? It is your assertion she was wearing those short in April 2007. Those pictures were taken in 2007. So Caylee was still wearing diapers. Linda is showing her a lot of photos. Do you do the laundry at the house? Myself or George, sometimes Casey. Who bought Caylee's clothing? Mostly me and Casey. Did you do a lot of shopping at Target? Yes and they have a Circa brand? Yes. Showing tags on clothing photos. She recognizes everyone but one. What do you recognize the other items to be? Mostly tops and one pairs of shorts from Caylee. Where were they from? Caylee's room. Where they there in Caylee's room in July 2008 until they were seized by LE? I believe so. So what size clothing did you have in Caylee's drawers? 2T's and 3T's as well. Like many children, Caylee began to thin out as she got older? Yes. That began with Caylee at one or two and as she became more mobile at the age of 3? Yes. So that would mean that clothing items would last more than a year, because she was growing taller? Yes. Those shorts that we saw at the remains scene were shorts kept in your house? Yes. When was the last time you saw them before June 16, 2008? Were those shorts kept at your house? Those particular shorts, I hadn't saw Caylee wear for a long time. Were those items that were kept at your house? You mean everyday, there was some items not kept at home everyday. Was that because they were kept in a backpack or a diaper bag? Yes. They were sometimes kept in a diaper bag or backpack and you saw it placed in a car? Yes. You had a change of clothes with you? Yes. Do you have any recollection you may have seen those shorts in the photo? Those weren't shorts that I dressed Caylee in and that outfit was not my favorite outfit. Unless Casey had them in, I didn't see her in them. I don't recall seeing Caylee in those shorts after 2007. That video was taken at your house? Yes. So the shorts were kept at your house? Yes but I can't say they were there everyday. Could Caylee ever move or manipulate that ladder on her own? No. How heavy is that sliding glass door? You have to put a pretty good force to open it up. Though Caylee was almost 3 when you saw her the last time, she was a very compliant child, that would listen to you? Yes. She followed the rules about going outside or climbing the pool? Yes. How deep is the pool? It goes up to 4 feet but we don't fill it up all the way, so less than ft. Can an adult reach objects in the pool, unless you were at the edge of the pool? No. Could you retrieve objects without getting wet? No. You wouldn't leave Caylee alone at your home. Absolutely not. You talked about the ladder being left on the pool and the side gate being open? Yes. Caylee could not open that gate? No way. The date of that ladder incident, you have testified that it was the week before the gas can incident? Yes. Now you say it was the 16th? Yes, now that I looked back on it, I remember when it was. You say you called George? Yes. What phone did you call him on? I called him on his work phone or his cell phone. Did you leave a message that day or did you speak to him. I don't remember, I just know that we communicated. You say as well that as it relates to dates you have made errors in your initial sworn statement, you said that she was first missing had an error. Yes. You said that the last time you saw her was the week before Father's day and the video made you remember the correct day. You told people at work about the ladder incident and the gas can incident? Yes. Are you sure you were at work on June 16, 2008? Yes. Your time card reflects that you were at work on June 16, 2008? I don't remember I haven't seen that since June 2008. Have you located the entry the week ending the 20th? Yes. Shows you were at work on June 16, 2008. Did you work June 17th? Yes. Everyday that week? Yes. That time card accurately reports your June vacation? Yes it does. Your daughter Casey was home between Aug and Oct 2008? Sustained. You showed us photos of Caylee getting in and out of the pool, did your daughter tell you that there was an accident in the pool? No. She continued to assert that the child was kidnapped by a baby-sitter? That is correct. Baez is up........... Baez is showing Cindy photo's. Those are just photos of tags, correct? That's true on all but one. Are those all pretty much knit tight garments? All but one. That one you showed me is of jean material? No, like a cotton. The shorts Caylee was found in was a jean fabric. No like a cotton. Does Caylee grow out of clothing a lot faster if it is not knit? Yes. You have kept lots of Caylee's clothing? Yes. Where did you keep it? We had 3 locations. Caylee's clothing that she had outgrown was kept around the house? Correct. You hadn't seen Caylee wearing the shorts at the remains site for months? Yes. Did you go looking for clothing that didn't fit Caylee anymore. I would at times go through her drawers, if she got new clothes for presents. If I put items on her and it was too tight I would put it on her dresser or leave it in the drawer. Unless you would wash these shorts you wouldn't see them on a consistent basis? Yes. Caylee was a child, a toddler? Yes. As to her being obedient, did you treat her or discipline her like she was in the military? No. So she ran and played like any other toddler? Depending on her surroundings. Linda is up....... The fabric in the shorts is it the same as the one we see in that photo? Yes, it is similar. One that is a sturdy cotton that would not have give? Yes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 24, 2011, 12:30:25 PM 11:35 Fri, June 24, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is present. Lee Anthony is the defense witness. Baez is up.......... Did you at one time own the Sun Fire? Yes. When? Early 2000 to 2005. Showing him a photo of the car. Showing him the trunk of the Sun Fire. When you owned this car was their a stain in this car? There was a few, I remember there being 3, outside of the tire cover. He is pointing out the stains. Were they there when you purchased the car? Yes. Did you have an occasion to stain the car? I'm sure I may have, I don't remember making those 3 stains, I just remember seeing them. Showing him a close up of the trunk with markers placed. Lee is showing where the stains were. He is circling the 2 stains he sees and the other one is off the photo. How long were those stains there? The whole time I owned the car. They were there when you opened the car? Yes. Can you tell us when the first time you noticed your sister was pregnant? Objection. Side bar...sidebar over. Can you tell us when you noticed your sister was pregnant? Early 2008. What happened when you first saw Caylee showing? I was waiting for her to get out of the bathroom, I could see her mid-section and it was showing. It struck me as odd because prior to that I hadn't noticed it. What did you do? I made a comment like, excuse me what the Hell is that? She waved me off. Then a couple days later, I asked my mom if Casey was pregnant? Objection. Sidebar....sidebar over. Mr Anthony you asked your mother if Casey was pregnant? Yes, a day or two later. When did you next discuss that Casey was pregnant? She picked me up at the airport and she was showing more, it was brutally honest that she was pregnant. Was it discussed at this point did you discuss it with your mother? Sustained. Was there an occasion where your sister picked you up at the airport? Yes. Was she showing then? Yes, she obviously looked more pregnant. Where there any discussions since you first confronted your mother about the pregnancy? We never spoke about it again, until just a few days before Caylee was born. Are you saying that the time it was ever said that Casey was pregnant was just a few days before Caylee was born? Yes. Did you go to the hospital to see your sister when Caylee was born? No Why? I was hurt and didn't want to be there, regrettably. Sustained, sustained, sustained. Mr Anthony can you tell us why you were angry and who you were angry with? Lee is crying. He was very angry at his mom and angry at his sister, for not including him and didn't find it important enough to tell me, especially after I had already asked. I didn't want to believe it. What do you mean they didn't want to include you? Sustained. Sustained. Sustained. Were there other reasons why you were angry? No. No further questions. Judge is recessing for lunch until 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 24, 2011, 12:31:31 PM Hi Monkeys, OK, I am out for the day and for tommorrow. Can't wait for grandkids to get here. So many hugs to all of you. I will watch when I can. I never stop praying for justice. ::MonkeyKiss:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 10:50:36 AM 9:40 Mon, June 27, 2011 Court is in session. The judge is speaking....... On Sat the defense filed a motion for competency to proceed. Casey needed to be examined by 3 psychologist. The court appointed, Dr. Daniel Treshler, Dr. Harry McClaren and Dr. Ryan Hall. They all examined the defendant over the weekend. Both sides will stipulate to the reports of the doctors and the Judge says that she is competent to stand trial and court will proceed. State and defense have reviewed Dr Furton's deposition. The judge is filing the motion's for competency and the motion to appoint experts. Jury is coming in. First defense witness is Det. Yuri Melich. Baez is up.......... Baez is pleasing the court and Ms. Drane. Not Jeff. Mr Melich misspoke on Friday and he says he was thinking of a different set of cell phone records. Roy Kronk first called LE in 2008. The time period for Mr Kronk starts in Aug and ends in Dec? Yes. He found the body? Yes. You did not get any of his phone records for that time period? Yes. Mr Kronk lives in St. Cloud and he lives a significant distance from the remains site? Yes. Kronk also works in a different area not close to the remains site? Yes. You could of used his cell phone records to see if Mr Kronk was in that area in August and you could also find out in Sept, when he did not have the route, that did not have Suburban Dr? I don't know when he had or didn't have other than Aug and Dec. These cell phone records could give you information if he was in the vicinity of the remains site when he was not working? Depends. Is this the first time you have misspoken to this jury or any jury? I had something wrong. So the only time that you misinformed the jury was Friday? You are suggesting that I misspoke on purpose and I did not. You testified that you had George's cell phone records for June and July? I found out later that we did have those. Do you have those with you? No. Would it have told you his cell phone movement? Yes, but I had no reason to. You subpoenaed quite a bit of other people's cell phone right? Yes, not just me but the investigation. Amy huzienga, Jesse Grund, Tony Lazzaro, Diane Taylor, Chris Stuts,John Chatt, Ronald Westinburger, Gina Prentiss, Jamie Realander, Britney Shiver, etc? Yes, they were trying to identify the people that were on Casey's cell phone. You got all the cell phone records but you did not get the cell phone records for Roy Kronk? No, we didn't see any reason why we should. You didn't confiscate Roy Kronk's computer? No. You did get Joy Wray's computer? Yes. She took photos of the remains scene, she also said she knew George Bush? Yes. You also Baker Acted her? I didn't but I know that she has been Baker Acted. But you didn't try to get Roy Kronk's computer? No. You got Ricardo Moralez's computer? Yes. This was after you found out that he sold pictures to the Globe? Yes. Did you get emails from Joe Jordan? Yes. When did you turn that email over to the prosecution or defense? May I see that email you are talking about? Baez is getting the email. Baez is showing Yuri the email. Did you only turn this email over after the defense had found Mr Jordan? I don't recall. You conducted 2 search warrants on the Anthony home? Yes. In the first you had some knowledge of what was found on Suburban Drive? That had a Winnie the Pooh blanket? Yes. You have to leave a copy of the search warrant and a copy of the items taken? Yes. Did you do that? Yes. The first one would of said that you took anything Winnie the Pooh? Yes, it should of been there. Did you talk to the Anthony's about anything with regard to the search warrant? I don't remember. Did you tell the Anthony's about anything you found on scene? I don't remember. I don't recall a conversation with the Anthony's about any items. You would of put that in your report? I don't put anything that isn't pertinent in my reports. Did you deploy the cadaver dogs on George Anthony's Car? No. Cindy Anthony's car? Did it ever come up that Casey may have driven Cindy's car at one point? Yes, that came up from George Anthony. Did you later find out that didn't happen? We got the E-pass info and it did not happen when he said it did. Did you ask him for the records and he did not give them to you? Yes, I got them from E-pass, that is the most reliable way. Did you ever deploy a cadaver dog in the Anthony home? No. You had 2 dogs out there? Yes. Showing Yuri a big photo. It is a map of the Anthony home and the remains site. Is that fair and accurate? Yes. Linda is checking the photo, has no objections conditionally. Yuri is going to the easel with the big map photo. Baez is asking Yuri about the photo. Yuri is circling the area the remains were found and initialing it and circling the Anthony home and initialing it. Casey was arrested on July 16, 2008 and was out on bond in late Aug and early Sept? Yes. She was under house arrest? Yes. There were give or take 5 to 10 media trucks outside of her home? Yes. She was only allowed to go to the jail and her attorney's office? Yes. She was followed by the media wherever she went? I don't know if they followed her every time. Since the indictment of Oct 2008, Casey has been in Jail? Yes. Linda is up.......... The email that was referenced sent right after the body was recovered? Yes. The office was also getting many tips they had to wade through? Yes. Did you ever receive a report that Cindy or George's car smelled as if it had a dead body in it? No. The phone records that you subpoenaed of Casey's friends, did they also focus on the critical time frame of June and July 2008? Yes. Casey's phone records were also subpoenaed for the critical time period, June and July 2008? Yes. You were trying to find any record of the nanny? Yes. Even doing all that you were not able to locate either the nanny or Juliette Lewis, Jeffry Hopkins and Raquel Farrel? Yes. Baez is up......... You told Ms Burdick you were pretty busy with the remains site but this person said in the email he had direct info of th......sustained. Mr Jordan was not a new person to you? I had emails from him before. He was helping you out and putting you in contact with people? A lot of people were telling us to do things and try to tell us how to do our job. Do you recall him telling you about Rick Pleasea blogging? I don't know who did that. You never got any information about Cindy or George's car smelling, did you get any information that they had garbage in their car for 3 weeks. No. You were present when Dep Forgey did the actual inspection of the Pontiac Sun Fire? Yes. Baez is showing him a large drawing that Yuri drew at a previous hearing. He had drawn a example of the forensic bay garage and Ms Anthony's car. You had only drawn one car? Yes and then you asked me to put in a second car. Was there only one car that Dep Forgey used his cadaver dog on? Yes. Witness is excused, subject to recall. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 10:51:58 AM 10:25am Mon, June 27, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Defense witness if Michael Vincent. Baez is up....... Baez is showing him a drawing the witness made at a previous hearing of the forensic bay and Ms Anthony's car? Yes. Did you testify that there was only one car inspected by Dep Forgey and his cadaver dog? Yes. Witness is excused subject to recall. Defense next witness is Geraldo Bloise. Baez is up.......... Showing him a drawing the witness made of the forensic bay and Ms Anthony's car. Is that fair and accurate? Yes. The dog was only deployed on one car that day? Yes. Linda is up........ Is it fair to say that your focus on that day was the Pontiac Sun fire? Yes. Baez is up........ Your job is to focus on the details, down to the very minute details? Yes. Witness is excused, subject to recall. 10:30am Court is in recess for 15 minutes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 12:45:26 PM 10:50am Mon, June 27, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Defense witness is Dep Jason Forgey. Baez is up.......... Dep Forgey is a canine handler, for OC Sheriff's Office. Baez is showing him a drawing that the witness drew at a previous hearing, Mar 24, 2011. That depicts the forensic bay garage and Ms Anthony's car and another car? Yes, it is a rough drawing. You drew that there was 2 cars that you deployed your dog Geris on? Yes, I believe it was a blue car. It was a unknown car? Yes. You started with the unknown car? Yes. Is there anyone that saw you deploy your dog on the second car? Yes, my canine supervisor and Geraldo Bloise and Michael Vincent. Is this the first time you have ever mentioned that your supervisor was present? No sir, I mentioned it in my deposition and my report. So these are the people that can say that you did two cars? Yes. One of the reasons why is that you wanted your dog to do two cars, is to not have your dog please you? I wanted to make sure my dog's mindset was working properly. It has nothing to do with your training that says to do more than one car? No training is different, you usually don't just have one car to inspect. You don't have an opportunity in the real world to have the car your inspecting near other cars. You could of asked them to move it near other cars? I don't know, it was evidence, it is possible. There was another car already near it. Linda is up......... Regardless whether or not there was 1, 2 or 100 cars, you knew that the Pontiac Sun Fire was the car in question? Yes. Witness is excused, subject to recall. Next defense witness is Dr Kenneth Furton. Baez is up.......... He is a professor of chemistry and bio-chemistry at the University of Florida, employed for 23 years there. He has lots of education. His area of expertise is chemistry, separating and identifying and quantifying chemicals. He has focused on forensic studies. He has studied human decomposition. Since 2003, his research group has been looking at the chemicals given off a person has died. His students have published work. He works with the students on their papers. He has received grants to fund his research lab, it has been mostly for live human scent but has also done decomp scent in the last few years. There is no instrument currently designed for human remains. Have you ever testified as an expert witness in the area of decomp? No. Have you ever testified as an expert witness in forensics? Yes. Do you have any patents? Yes, one for the identification of humans from the chemicals they give off. Going on and on.........Just make him an expert. Baez wants to make him an expert in human decomp and forensics. Jeff objects to human decomp. Jeff is doing voir dire on him. Your studies are done by your students? By my students and myself. That study does not use whole human cadavers it just used canine training aids. Other than studying the compounds given off by training aids and another given off by human corpses, do you have any other expertise in stages of decomp? Just as it relates to the volatiles in stages of decomp. Jeff says he agrees to him being a decomp expert but only on the chemicals. Dr Furton is declared an expert witness in chemistry and human odor analysis. What items did you receive and review in this case? All the reports, the photos, the expert witness reports from Oakridge, all depositions from others involved in the case. Were you specifically asked to look at the work done at the Oakridge Lab? Yes. Did you look at Dr. Sigmund's report? Yes. Was it the first report you read? Yes. Then a month later the prelim report came from Dr Vass? Yes. Have you also reviewed different studies of human decomp? Yes. Is it your opinion that there is a distinct odor given off by human bodies? No, a valid method to identify chemicals in human remains at this time. Witness is going to give a power point demonstration. Showing how the GC-MS works, with animation. The sample goes through the machine and comes out with a written report, called a chromatogram. They use a known standard that you buy from a chemical company. Does it tell you how much of a chemical is there? No, you can get a relative amount but just an idea. You need to run a calibration curve with a standard and check the peak responses. That is called quantification. Unless you do that, you don't know how much of a chemical is there? That is right. It will just give you a relative amount not an exact amount. He is now showing the chemicals a living person gives off. Different people give off different chemicals, each person has a unique pattern of chemicals. Your able to see which chemicals are the most common and some unique chemicals that living people give off. Shows 6 deceased individuals, they look more similar to each other than living humans. Showing a table of the 20 most common chemicals in deceased people. They also did this for other decomposing animals, to measure the difference. There is quite a bit of overlap between decomposing animals and humans. Witness is going to the easel. Looking at a chart. Witness is explaining the tables on the chart. Trying to separate different chemical compounds. Refining the list to 8 different studies of human remains. He includes the papers done by Dr Vass. Jeff objects, sidebar...sidebar is over. The methodology in these studies is different by Dr Vass? Yes. They have bodies in different locations, some buried, some above ground? Yes. These are the chemicals that Dr Vass found in his studies. They try to find the compounds similar in all studies. What are these percentages? In the 8 studies these are the general agreement with the volatile compounds. There is more disagreement than agreement. Only 4 chemicals on this chart are found in all studies. Witness is going back to witness stand. Next slide shows a photo of the contents of the trash bag found in the trunk and laid out on a table. They were looking at decomp events due to food products. Did you find out that fatty acids were in the paper towels? Yes. Where can you find these acids? Everywhere, milk fat, cheese, human body fat, animal fat. Do you have an opinion whether these fatty acids are unique to human decomp? No, they certainly aren't and there is no technique to determine if they are from human decomp. Next slide shows an example of what could of been in the trash, Salami package. Did you see a quantitative analysis for chloroform by Oakridge? No. Why would it be important to do that? You have to use a calibration curve, using a standard to get some measurement of the chemical. Where can you find chloroform? Everywhere, it is very common in household products like bleach. Jeff objects......sidebar....sidebar over. You can find chloroform in cleaning products? Yes, in many many products even in drinking water but it is in very high levels in cleaning products. Which products in your home can contain chloroform? What can it be found in? Drinking water, house hold foods, soft drinks. Jeff objects...sidebar...sidebar over. Judge is recessing for lunch till 1:45 for the jury and the rest at 1:30pm. They have a legal matter to take up. The judge is asking Jeff about case law dealing with an expert testifying to hearsay. Court is now in recess for lunch. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 04:01:11 PM 1:30am Mon, June 27, 2011. Court is in session. Jury is not present. Judge is talking to Baez about an expert giving inadmissible hearsay. Baez says that is not the case. Jeff says that under case law, this expert only found his information on the internet. Jeff says a witness cannot testify to his expert opinion, unless it is part of his research. He went into things that contained chloroform and that is hearsay. The judge says, I won't have a proffer but if it comes out in his testimony that it is hearsay, his testimony can be stricken and not allowed. Baez says he said that sidebar the correct interpretation of Lynn is that all info comes from text book or the internet, it is all hearsay. All data is not hearsay. Judge says, he can get info in ways of chemical analysis but it has to be his experience with him. Not an internet search, if that is the sole basis of my knowledge, that is where your run into a Lynn problem. I don't know what he is going to say, or the basis of what he is gonna say. You don't need an expert to read the internet. Judge says he is not requiring a proffer, he wants the jury brought in the court when he told them they would be, in 6 minutes. The judge told Baez to go out and confer with his witness about what he can and cannot testify to. Baez left the courtroom to confer with his witness. Baez is up Dr Furton has resumed the witness stand for a short proffer. Baez asks him what his knowledge is of chloroform? He said his basic knowledge over the years and his research. At the Frye Hearing you referred to a World Health Organization, what is that? It is a report on chloroform and what it can be found in. It is a peer reviewed article. How long have you been using the GC-MS? 25 years. How many times have you seen chloroform come up? At many and various times. Did you do any other research on chloroform in products? Yes, I did internet searches for scholars in chloroform. Are they reasonably qualified to help an expert come to an opinion? Depends where it comes from and if it is peer reviewed. You have been instructed not to use these recent internet searches in your testimony? Yes. Jeff is up......... Have you ever done any research of chloroform in household products? No. It's presence in household products is from the internet, not any research you have done? Correct. Lynn says he can give an opinion but he cannot tell the jury what he has read. It is a violation of Lynn. Just because you read it somewhere doesn't make it expert testimony. Some of his opinion may be inadmissible as to hearsay and a violation of Lynn. Jeff is reading what Lynn means and says that this witness can not testify on hearsay to this jury. Baez is up...... I thought this is what we agreed to after lunch. This is the way chemists get their information. He isn't saying I heard it at the bowling alley and now I am telling you about it. He is not to bolster his opinions, you made a ruling and this expert's opinions are just that. We are going around in circles. The judge says the Dr can give his opinion but not say where he got his knowledge. If he is asked about it by the prosecution, he can then say where he got it. 1:55pm Jury is being brought in the courtroom. The defense witness is Dr. Furton. Baez is up......... You were explaining to the jury which common products in? The most common is household bleach. It is in fatty type of materials, butter, oils, cheese things of that nature. You can find it in chlorinated drinking water. The GC-MS, would it pick up chloroform in these common products and drinking water? Yes. Do you have an opinion after looking at the 5 chemical compounds that Dr Vass said was the make-up human decomp? Yes, my opinion is that they are not unique to human decomp. They are reported in urban waste, trash bins, they are known not to be unique in human decomp. Jeff is up........ Have you ever examined the spare tire cover? Jeff is showing him the spare tire cover. This is the spare tire cover? Yes. Do you see any bleach stains on that? No. The chemical reactions that make chloroform don't happen in a vacuum. The active ingredient in bleach would reflect some bleach being spilled on it? Yes. You don't have any idea if a coincidental reaction to bleach cause chloroform and what else is created? Where there any articles you read on this. I never read any articles on that. Your research in this area is only that chloroform could be created not how it can. What are you relying on to tell this jury that bleach and organic material can create chloroform? I am not involved in trying to come up with an interpretation to how it happened, just that it did. I am not saying they had to come from bleach. Each one of those cases, some other source would be needed to produce chloroform? I didn't do studies on that. Did the chloroform being purposely mixed and given to a child to it being accidentally made? That is correct. Isn't chloroform a carcinogen? It is present in cheese? Yes, it is scary. It is in very small amounts, parts per billion. More fatty materials like cheeses and butters and pasta products would have low parts per million of chloroform. Is there a limit of what can be in these products? Yes, in low parts per billion. In water, it is in low ranges? Yes, parts per billion or even lower. Jeff is pulling up the witness power point demonstration. Jeff is on slide #3, showing the chart from living and deceased humans. This shows the odor signature shows that we all smell different more than we are alive, when we are dead? Yes. Your point is that we haven't found the significant compounds in human decomp? Yes. Next slide, your student performed this study for a project, just this year? Yes. The student went to the morgue for the bodies and used a dust buster to collect the compounds. The collection medium is inferior to the triple sorbent trap? Yes. The triple sorbent trap is more likely to gather more compounds than the instrument your student used? Yes, the triple sorbent trap would better collect samples in smaller amounts. In this case your student, held the device over the mid section of the deceased for one minute? Yes. She did not do air samples of the morgue? No. There is going to be compounds in a morgue that are going to always be there? Yes. There were more odors found in the morgue than the crematorium? Yes. Next slide. This study of animal meat is processed meat? Rotted meat? Yes, unprepared food and allowed to decompose. These show that human and non human are very different? Yes. Next slide. You testified on direct that each one of these studies was slightly different. Which one was the most longitudinal? The Vass studies. Dr Vass is the only study that looked at this with longitudinal research? Yes. Which used the triple sorbent trap? Dr Vass and the Greek Dr. Is that the best method? It is one of the methods, I don't know if it is he best method. How many of your students studies used whole bodies and not body parts? None, Dr Vass and the Greek Dr. The other ones were items used in canine training aids...blood, adipose tissue, bone, placenta, human derived material not the whole body. These studies bear out that studies that look at whole decomposing bodies give you many more compounds? No, it doesn't find more compounds. You did not find that they found larger compounds? Yes, they did probably because they were using the triple sorbent traps. Dr Vass is the only one that used longitudinal data and triple sorbent traps? The Greek doctor used triple sorbent traps. He didn't do this study over a period of time? No. Do compounds change over a period of time? Yes. Of all of these studies how many of them are done in an air deprived environment? The Vass studies. The fact that Dr Vass found a larger number of compounds is because he was looking at it in another way. I don't know that, a body buried deep could be different than one on the surface. The more information the better? Yes. You state the chemical analysis of the odor is not good enough to establish human decom, you can say that they were able to eliminate odors. Can you tell us, can all 4 of the fatty acids found in the trunk of the car? Yes, by a dead human body in the trunk of a car with other additional chemicals. What other chemicals would you have to have? Those studies I would disregard to the chloroform found. In Dr Vass's study he did not run standards and I believe he saw based on the mass spectrum. Do you know have question about his 2008 paper was done thoroughly and properly? If you want to call it that, he did not run standards. Jeff is referring him to his depot and approaching the witness. He is having him read part of his depot. Is it true that in reference to those same studies in your depot that and I quote "I am not saying the study was not done properly or thoroughly?" Yes. Have you changed your opinions? No, I am not saying the work did not have merit, just other things needed to be done. In the study that was published recently you used the spectral library to find your results? Yes, we didn't do the standards. You still published the results? Yes. What can explain other than a decomposing human body? A combination of things, consumer products as well as a decomp event that doesn't have to be of human decomp. The other five volatiles he relied on because they overlapped with gasoline? Yes. There is nothing else to explain anything other than a dead human body? It could be a dead human body plus other decomposing organic material. The peer reviewed literature says that chloroform is a part of decomp? Yes. I would have to rely on the only two papers that did that analysis. OK, I AM TOTALLY LOST HERE, LOL. Do you recall giving a new depot this last Sat? Yes I do. Jeff is referring him to it. On Sat I asked you the following question: "Basically the presence of a human body in the trunk of that car could explain all of those findings, could be"? Yes. Now that is not what your saying? You said they could all be explained by a decomposing body? You said yes, are you saying now something different? No, there were other things in the trunk that could of caused the odor, like the gas. You did say that a decomposing body alone could cause the odor? Yes, it could be. Can you tell the jury another single event, other than a decomposing body? It could be a non-decomp event, or household products or gasoline in the trunk could combine and produce a similar signature. Did you find anything in the trunk that could cause this odor? Yes, in the trash bag, could of been in the salami package, the cheese, etc...that is just speculation, there are no peer reviewed articles on this. You do agree that something was decomposing in this car? Yes. What is there in the trunk that can account for all the findings of the Oakridge Natl Lab? First is the salami package, are you aware the package was empty? Yes, there were just traces. You would have to say even a small amount would be unable to produce a substantial odor? Yes. Next the Velveeta, do you know how much Velveeta is milk? Milk is in Velveeta but not a lot of cheese. If the Velveeta package was wet or dry would it give off odors? Less odor if it was dry. Showing him evidence items. Jeff is opening the first piece of trash evidence. He is showing him a box of Velveeta and broccoli and asking him if it would produce odor? No, not dry. Next item, it contains no food product. Would you expect it to give off odor of decomp? If it was wet and gave off fluid. There is no organic matter in this to rot? It would not be visible to the naked eye. Jeff is opening next item, do you see any food product? No, just a soiled box. This would not tend to give off the decomp odor that Oakridge found? Depends on the state it was in. Next item is foil wrapper with cheese residue on the inside. Jeff wants to pass it around to the jury. Baez objects, saying it is altered, it is over ruled but then Baez asks for sidebar.....sidebar over. Not sure if the jury inspected it or not. You would agree with me that there is not significant organic material in that trash to cause the decomp odor? No, I would not agree with that. I am just speculating, we don't know enough about the back ground materials and the source of the stain. We have gone through the only things in the trash and what was in that trash bag was not the source of the odor in the car? Would it leave a smell in the vehicle 2 years after it was removed? That would be highly unlikely. You have worked with canines and decomp? You would agree that the substance we just discuss that a well trained, humans remains detection dog would not alert on? Sustained. Jeff reserves right to recall him. Baez is up....... Did you see a bleach stain on this carpet? No. Why didn't you go to Iran and get that paper on chloroform? I didn't know what study he was referring to. I only relied on the articles that I had at my disposal. The ones you used to rely on were ones recognized in the US? I used peer reviewed articles. The Iranian wasn't? I don't know. Baez is showing him the chart on living and deceased people. These compounds that you site here, are they any of the ones that Dr Vass sited? No they are not, these are compounds in our study and they are different than Dr Vass's findings. Mr Ashton talked about the longitudinal studies, he means a long period of time, all the stages of human decomp. Would a odor of buried remains for over a year assist you in rendering an opinion in this case? Objection...sidebar...sidebar over. Dr Furton, in your opinion would a body that has been buried for over a year help you with your opinion in this case? I would have to look at the whole body of analysis, it is known that buried remains will vary with above ground remains. Chemicals will differ. Are you aware that Caylee Marie was last seen on June 16th, 2008 and the car was left at the Amscot on June 27th? Yes. Dr Vass's report did not include this time period? Not that I reviewed. Do you have an opinion that human decomp is a unique event? There was quite a bit of testimony about what else could count for these chemicals being in the trunk? Yes. Would that include the bag of garbage found in the trunk? Could they account for the compounds reported in this study? Yes. Do you know what the chemical composition of the trunk was before the trash was in there? No. Would you need to know this? Yes. Showing him the trash bag pics, one wet, one after drying. Do you see any difference between the two photos? Yes, the garbage has been removed and spread out. You have not seen any photos of the items before they were put in the dry room and that could of had items in the packages removed? No. The trash appears to be pretty clean? Sustained. 3:15pm Judge is taking a 15 minute afternoon recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 04:35:44 PM 3:40pm Monday, June 28, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is being returned to court. Dr Furton is still on the witness stand. Baez is up..... Baez is approaching the witness and showing him some items from the trash. Do you see what appears to be chewing tobacco spit? It looks like it, I would take your word on it. The tobacco spit is no longer in the can? I didn't see it in there. You see this box of Velveeta, is there purple staining? Yes, it looks like dried residue. Do you see any maggots or puparia there? Objection, overruled. Do you see any insect activity there? Yes. The Velveeta cheese containers have what appeared to be fingerprint dust? Sustained. That trash when it was collected, would smell a lot less stronger after it had been in a dry room for 3 years? Yes. Has science been able to find the decomp compounds of human remains? Not yet. If a particular odor is coming from a decomp event? Yes. If the odor is removed the odor would go with it. If you removed the trash bag, the odor would go with the bag? If the bag was leaking, some of the odor could of stayed but the majority of the odor would mostly be gone with the removal of the trash bag. Did you see any reports that LE or anyone said that the odor of decomp was coming from that trash bag? No. Witness is excused. Subject to recall. 3:50 pm Next defense witness is Sgt John Allen. Anne Finnel is up........ Were you the supervising Sgt in this case? Yes, I was. She is handing him items. They are 2 video tapes from James Hoover when they interviewed him on Dec 18, 2008. The other tape is James Hoover and his attorney on Jan 7, 2009. You have reviewed all 3 of those tapes? Yes. What format are those tapes in? Where they transfered to Cd's? Yes. Are those transferred identical to the tapes you received? They are copies of copies. Some of the Cd's have issues with them. One was taped over, one had color problems. Linda is up. James Hoover is connected with a man named Dominic Casey? Yes he was. Did you know Mr Casey was hired by the defense? Yes. He was not employed by anyone again till he became employed with George and Cindy Anthony. Dominic Casey was not paid by Baez and had a falling out with Baez and then went to work for George and Cindy Anthony? Dominic Casey was looking for a live Caylee for many months and the nanny? Yes. Mr Hoover came to your attention that he was going to sell the tapes to the national enquirer. You had testified that 2 video tapes were turned over on 12-18-2008? Yes. Did you receive another tape from Mr Hoover at a different point in time? Yes. Did Mr Hoover ask you all for money? No, he complained.....sustained. Finnell up.......... Dominic Casey was working for the Baez Law firm, when did he stop working for them? Oct 1, 2008. Mr Casey then began working for George and Cindy Anthony in October 2008. You received that information from Mr Casey, you had no personal knowledge of that? No. Witness is excused. Next defense witness is James Hoover. Baez is up.......... What is your occupation? Licensed Private Investigator. How did you get involved in this case? As a private citizen. How does a private citizen get involved in this case? Did you become a PI for George and Cindy Anthony? End of July, first of August, 2008. How did you do that? I just went to the Anthony home and met George Anthony and asked to help them. What did you do to help. I helped with crowd control, a body guard. Did you assist them in following up any tips? Yes. Did you do this with Dominic Casey? Yes. Did you know that Dominic Casey was working a short time with the defense, then there was a falling out and he went to work for George and Cindy? Yes. You then worked as a team? Yes. Did you follow up tips with him? Only one tip. What did you do that day to follow up that tip. He asked me to come to his office. We left his office and went to Suburban Dr. We were scheduled to go to a meet and greet with George and Cindy but a detour came up. They went to Suburban Drive to look for Caylee. Was she supposed to be standing there? No, she was supposed to be in the wooded area, deceased. Baez is showing witness evidence. These are copies of the tapes he had taken on Suburban Drive. Do you recognize those items in evidence? Looks like one of the tapes I turned over, checks next one, says it is also one of the tapes he turned over. You had the opportunity to review these tapes? I saw a little bit of one, the first 20 seconds of it. Baez wants to publish it the judge calls for sidebar.....sidebar over. Brief legal matter, the judge is excusing the jury. 4:15pm Judge is leaving the courtroom and tells Baez he knows what to do with the Court Reporter. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 06:31:16 PM 4:30 pm Mon, June 27, 2011 Court is in session, they jury is not present. Court is back after a brief recess. The attorneys are watching the Hoover videos out of the jury's presence. Judge is back at the bench, having the jury returned. Defense witness is James Hoover. Baez is up......... This tape was video taped, one month before Caylee's remains were found? Yes. Did Mr Casey know that you were taping? Yes. Showing the first tape, were you aware eventually where Caylee's remains were found? Yes, sir. Can you identify the general vicinity? Baez is stopping the tape. Can you identify the wooded area where Caylee's remains were found? Yes sir. He is indicating on the screen where the remains were eventually found. Objection. On Dec 11, 2008, did you see on news reports where Caylee's remains were found. Objection. Sustained. Where in this area did you search? We walked the length of Suburban Dr, we were looking for 3 pavers. There is a wooden privacy fence here? Yes. Did you search from the fence all the way over? Not quite to the fence, to the first pole there. Showing the video. You can see Dom Casey searching in the woods and standing in the street. Next location is an abandoned house, Dom Casey is going through black plastic bags. Why are you looking in black plastic bags? For Caylee's remains. Dom is still looking at the abandoned house site, now he is trowling through dirt and removing wood. Digging for a black plastic bag that is partially visible in soil. Lifting a paver. Looking at another plastic bag. Seeing concrete pavers. Lifting up a discarded blanket. What kind of blanket? I'm not sure, a small blanket. Next video is of the next day Nov 16, 2008. Is this your car? Yes. How far away from the wooden fence are you now? I went by poles, I was on the 3rd pole down. Side bar....sidebar over. Baez is having an item of evidence marked, published to the jury. It is an overview of Suburban Dr. Can you show the jury where you parked the second day? Hoover marked it, also for the first day. From where you parked, how far are you from the wooden fence? 75 ft - 100 ft tops. Plays video. Dominic is walking into the woods. He says, here it is right here. He saw a paver. Did you see that fallen tree that was right there? I see the pavers, now I see the fallen tree. Did you search around that area? Yes, it is right there on the video. Talking about 3 cinder blocks being right there. They are talking about 3 more cinder blocks over there. Still searching..now Dominic is using a metal probe. What is Mr Casey doing with that probe? Looking for buried remains. They are now back at the abandoned house looking at cinder blocks. Dominic is using the metal probe. Is that the end of the video? Yes. Baez is having Hoover where on the map he parked that second day. Hoover marked it, placed his name and dated it. Publishing it for the jury. Shows where he marked the car the second day. Did you report to George and Cindy Anthony what you did or did not find there? No, not at the time. Baez is showing him another big map pic of the remains site and the abandoned house with a pond behind it. You went to both of these locations one month before Caylee was found? Yes sir. After you found out Dec 11, 2008 where Caylee was found, did you notify LE of these tapes? No, not at that time, I thought I had taped my son's parade over it. Did you attempt to sell it? He was told by a famous bounty hunter this may be worth something. The Anthony's trusted you? Yes. You tried to sell some evidence in this case? No. Dominic Casey was going to supply photos to be sold. You actually tried to sell this video to Fox News. Why? Everyone was broke, I was broke, Dominic was broke. I was going to give the money to the Anthony family, if I sold anything. You didn't think it might be more valuable to LE? The photos? No. Did you think that the video should be shown to LE rather than sell? I thought the tape was recorded over. You gave this video to LE? Yes. To John Allen, Yuri Melich and Nick Savage. Did you lie to them about the video? No. You tried selling this video before you gave it to LE? No because I thought this video has been taped over. You didn't give them this video, you gave them another video, purporting to be this video. None of those two videos you have LE the first time was this video? No but it has some of it on it. What were you wanting for it? I did not contact anybody. How much did you try to sell this video for? There was never a price. Did you ever try to sell this video for 50k? A person told me this was worth 200k. Did you make any money off of this video? No. Linda is up....... As it relates to this video, you were trying to hold out for the highest bidder? No. You had 2 other videos, one with bad color one taped over with a Christmas parade. You told LE this? It wasn't taped over but you still had it, didn't you? I believed it had been taped over, then in Dec, I found it. I immediately called an attorney who called LE. You tried to get John Allen and Nick Savage to talk to some strange woman who was on Suburban Dr? She followed me down to Nick Savage and John Allen, that is when you turned over these worthless tapes. You were trying to sell the two worthless tapes to Fox news? No, listen carefully. I thought I had taped over it. A certain party told me it could be worth some money until somebody told me it could be brought back. When I found the tape, I called Mr Baez then an attorney then LE. You did find out that people were secretly taping the Anthony family? No. You were trying to capitalize on your relationship with these individuals? No, you are so wrong. So when you went to this location on Nov 16, 2008, you were secretly taping Dom Casey? No. You were sitting in this car and this car was parked where? Near Suburban and Hopespring, that is where you see Dom right outside of the car. Linda is publishing the map of the remains area for the jury. This marking that you made here, was the second day, where were you parked the first day? Do you see the intersection of Hopespring and Suburban? No, ok now I do. The first day we parked near Suburban and Hopespring. He was walking along the roadway, I filmed him and the film had a lot of off color to it, so I changed film and Dom had moved, so I backed up to him. That is when Dominic is in the woods. Where is he in the woods? About right here, this isn't an exact science. Was he talking on the phone? Yes. Mark where Mr Casey was the first time when he was talking on the phone. Hoover marked it. Did you return again that day? Yes, we went to the Anthony house and came back to Suburban. We were looking for 3 pavers, it was in the same area. Was that where you were during the taping? Maybe a lil further down. You said you parked at the 3rd light pole on the second day? Yes. The third light pole from what location? Where are you counting the poles from? There are five poles. You were parked at the 3rd pole on the 2nd day? Yes. We went closer to Hopespring that day. We went into the woods right in front of the car. During the taping, you said something about a blanket or a towel? Was it in fact a bathmat? Did you hear Mr Casey say it was a bathmat? No. Do you know to this day where Caylee's remains were found? No. Did you see a red Disney bag? No. Did you see several fallen trees or logs? Yes. I saw a sign. Did you see a green and white umbrella? No. What you did encounter when you went into the wood, was water? No, ma'am. We went to the meet and great and we weren't muddy or dirty. You saw water on the 2nd day? Yes ma'am. Did you get wet on day 2? Shoes got soggy it was kind of marshy. Where you there in Oct 2008? No. Sep? No. Aug? No. July 2008? No. Baez is up........ You never gave me that video? No. You never tried to sell me that video? No. You and I had nothing to do with this video? Yes sir. What in the world were you doing in that area one month before Caylee Marie was found? Looking for Caylee Marie. Witness is excused subject to recall. Sidebar......sidebar over. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 07:34:30 PM 5:30pm Mon, June 27, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Defense witness is Dominic Casey. Finnell is up........... He is a PI, licensed in the state of Florida since March of 2008. On Oct 1, 2008 were you employed by George and Cindy Anthony? You were previously employed by the Baez Law firm? Yes. The times overlapped. What were you doing for the Anthony's? Following up on tips and security work. What were you doing for them? There were protesters at the home and they would congregate. The protesters started coming Sept 2008. The protesters were until the end of October 2008. In connection with providing the security aspect, did it cause you to park your car on Suburban Dr? Yes. Why? When I would leave the Anthony home, I would exit Chickasaw Rd, then drive back to Suburban and sit and park in the even some of the protesters thought I had left and came back to cause a problem. Did you do this every evening? Most evenings. Finnell is approaching the witness with a photo of the general vicinity of Suburban Dr? Yes. Does it show where you would park your car? Yes. He is putting a A on the area he parked on those evenings and an arrow to show which direction he was facing. In the same time you were there, did you also see other persons in that area? Yes. Who? Going East to the school, there would be a deputy sheriff's car and one or two media vehicles. Showing a photo to the witness it is a map of Suburban Dr and the location of his car, when he parked, he pointed toward Hopespring. The media and LE were they between your parked car and Hopespring? The LE were further behind and the media would park anywhere. When you parked did you have your car on or off? Off with windows down? Did you notice any odors out of the ordinary? No. Near the end of Oct 2008 did you facilitate sending a teddy bear to Luke Phillips? I acquired an address from Luke Philips and gave the address to Cindy and asked her to mail something of Caylee's to Luke Philips. It was a teddy bear. Was it returned to Cindy? I don't know. Did you receive a package for Cindy Anthony? Yes but it was addressed to me. Did Cindy come to your office? I don't remember, I think we met halfway. I had a sealed box and took it to Cindy Anthony. Cindy opened the box and I could see Teddy. When was the bear returned to Cindy? Around the end of Oct. After Casey was indicted and back in jail? Yes, the request for an article was way after Casey was sent back to jail, a couple three weeks after. Who is Luke Phillips? He is a person who contacted the family in July 2008 to offer help, he represented physics. He is not employed as a physic but he works with people with psychic abilities. On Nov 15, 2008 did you go with James Hoover to Suburban Dr? Yes I did. Who is James Hoover? He was a volunteer, who arrived at the Anthony home to provide security. Did he work for you? No. On Nov 15, 2008 who were you talking to on a cell phone on Suburban Dr? Jeanette Lucas, who is a physic. Did you go into the woods that day? Yes, I did. Finnell is showing him another photo. He is showing where he went the first time on Nov 15, 2008. Who's car did you go in? Mr Hoover's car. What were you looking for? I received a call from Jeanette Lucas early that am and as a result of that went to Suburban Dr. What were you looking for? The possible location of Caylee Marie Anthony. What did you do the first time you went there? We pulled up, I got out of the car, started heading toward the school, in the middle of the road. I told James Hoover to stay in the car. He then walked away from the car so Hoover could not hear him and he called Jeanette Lucas. Did you enter the woods? Yes. He is showing where he entered into the woods. How far did you go into the woods initially? 20 - 25 feet. How long did you spend there initially? There was an opening and I walked in there, I was in there probably less than five minutes. I came walking out and noticed that Mr Hoover with his arm down, video taping. I had no idea he was and didn't ask him to. I said what in the so and so are you doing with a video camera? Hoover said he was recording it for Dominic's file. Dominic then came out of the woods and found another opening into the woods. Did you go into that area of the woods? Yes. How far? 20 to 25 feet from the edge of the curb, the property went down and it was white sandy with 2 to 3 inches of water. It appeared as if the water ran from West to East, you could see it flowing. The 2nd time he was in the woods 10 minutes. What were you looking for? 3 white paver stones. Where you looking for garbage bags? No. Did you see garbage bags? Yes. How long did you stay in that area? 10 minutes then I came out of the woods and into the car and then over to the abandoned house. Why did you go to the vacant house? When I came up out of the woods, I talked to Jeanette Lucas and she told me to go to the abandoned house. He is marking where that is on the map. How long did you stay at the abandoned house looking? 10 - 12 minutes. I was looking for 3 paver stones. We see you cutting opening garbage bags, why? To see what was inside of them. From the abandoned house we went to a hotel by the airport and took them to a meet and greet hosted by Cindy and George Anthony. On the next day Nov 16, 2008, did you go back to Suburban Dr? Yes. Why? To prove a physic wrong. Where did you park the second day? He is marking it on the map, within the same vicinity. Were you expanding your search? No, went through the same openings and just looked to see if I missed anything. Did you see any remains of Caylee Marie Anthony? No. How much times the 2nd day were you looking for Caylee? 12 - 15 minutes, Mr Hoover was with him again and video taping with his approval. You had a probe? Yes, I brought a probe because the ground was soft and silty sand. I didn't want to stick my hands in there. I used the probe in certain areas to see if it touched anything. Did you find anything? No. Did you go back to the abandoned house and probe there as well? Yes, ma'am. Did you go back to Suburban Dr a 3rd time? Yes. Was Mr Hoover with you? No. When did you do that? Nov 18 or 19, 2008. Why did you go back? Relief. What did you do? I parked my car and then walked East then West. Then I walked back to my car and drove off. What were you looking for? I was walking in the street. I was just looking all around and feeling happy that I found nothing. Were there any other openings that you saw but did not search? Possibly. At any time when you were in the woods did you see or handle any evidence in this case? Not to my knowledge. Did you see any bags or debris that contained human remains? My goodness no. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 27, 2011, 07:37:35 PM 6:10pm Mon, June 27, 2008 Court is in Session. Defense witness is Dominic Casey. Frank George is up...... You worked first for the Baez Law Firm and then the Anthony's? Yes. Did you have contact with Casey Anthony? Yes. Sidebar...sidebar over. Judge called for a short break. 6:30pm Jury is returned to courtroom. Dominic Casey is still on the witness stand. Frank George is up....... You went to work for George and Cindy Anthony but you still had regular contact with Mr Baez? Yes. On Nov 15, 2008 the first time you went to Suburban Dr was because of a psychic Jeanette Lucas. How would you describe Mrs Anthony's mood during that time? Traumatized, distraught. George was also traumatized and distraught? Absolutely. I went to Suburban Dr at the direction of Jeanette Lucas, that was the sole purpose of me going there. There was no other purpose. Cindy didn't send you there? No. George didn't send you there? No. Mr George is showing him a photo of Suburban Dr. He is asking him to show where he went on Nov 15, 2008. Dominic is showing him approx. where Hoover parked. He is marking where he believes he walked into the woods. Did you come out of the woods the same way you went in on Nov 15, 2008. He went in 20 to 25 feet from the edge of the asphalt. Did you ever say you went in 30, 40 even 50 feet into the woods? That is quite possible. New photo is up of Suburban Dr. He is making a new marking he is more comfortable with, where he went into the woods for the first time. Is this the trip where you saw a broken toilet bowl? It was on both days. He saw numerous black trash bags, sitting on the ground, like people just dumped yard trash. He cut a few of thing. He also found a green colored bathmat. You didn't see a red Disney bag? No. This trip into the woods was not an exhaustive search? No. Were you on the phone the entire time? Not the entire time, there were pauses between calls. You then went to the abandoned house? Yes. On Nov 15, 2008 there was ankle deep water, because there is a six foot drop off. You could see a flow of water but there were spots with less water. Did you ever dig on your hands and knees through the muck? No, sir. Showing the witness a the same photo but a new copy to mark on. The 2nd day, Nov 16, 2008, mark where Mr Hoover parked. Where you on the phone with Jeanette Lucas on this date? I believe so, that was 3 years ago, yes, yes I was. Did you go on Jeanette Lucas's behest? After you left the woods did you get in contact with Jeanette Lucas? No, I got in contact with Luke Phillips. He is having him mark where he went into the woods on Nov 16, 2008. He exited the same way he entered it. He is marking his path of travel in the woods. Did you still see water on the ground? Yes. Did you take anything with you on this day? Yes, a probe and a trowel. Did you use the trowel in the woods? I don't think so. Was Mr Hoover walking with you in the woods? He was behind me about 10 feet. Were you aware that he was taping you? I forbid him to use audio and he was to hand the video to me. I found out today that there was audio with that video. He is marking the maps with so many X's and O's and circles and squares, I am totally lost, lol. Red pen, blue pen.......Yikes!!!! You indicated that after this 2nd visit, you went a 3rd time and walked the street and back to your car? Yes. You never left the street on that day? No, sir. 7:05pm Ann Finnell is up........ Ann shows him a photo and asks if that was the first entry or the 2nd entry? There are so many maps marked in so many ways, I can't keep up, lol. You keep using the word estimation, why is that? I didn't have a tape measure and it is 3 years later. Has anyone like LE sat down with you and asked you where you went on these trips? The State Attorney's office did. When was that? March 2011. Sidebar......sidebar over. Mr Casey, this even that you just said that occurred in March 2011, that was a normal discovery deposition? There was a court reporter there? Yes. Prior to that, did anyone with OC Sheriff's office ask you to map out or detail where you had been Nov 15, 16, 2008? No. Did you take a tape measure with you when you went out there? No. Did you make mental notes of landmarks? Yes and I took still photos. Would you agree the videotape is the accurate representation of where you went those days? Yes. The maps you marked today in court, are just your best guesses 3 years later? Yes. The witness is excused. The judge is excusing the jurors for the day. No additional matters to be taken up. He is reminding them of the newly filed motion by Ms Finnell. They can do it Wed or Thurs after trial. Court is in recess till 8:30am for attorneys and 9:00am for jurors, tomorrow. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 28, 2011, 10:40:44 AM 9:00am Tues, June 28, 2011 Court is in session. Attorneys all at sidebar before court even starts today. Sidebar over. Jury is returned to court. Defense witness is Joseph Jordan. Mason is up........ Lives in Central Florida, he searched with TES in July, Aug, Sep 2008 for Caylee. He became a team leader. *Interesting note, He use to be on the Scared Monkey Forum*. Mason is showing the witness a map of the remains site. He is showing him the area he searched on Suburban Drive. Witness does not remember how many separate times he searched there. When you went out there to search this was part of TES? Yes. Did you lead the team? Not every time. When you led the team, how many people were on the team? More than 10. Do you remember an area you searched with your team? Showing where they parked and then where they searched. They went into an entry way, path into the woods. On your first search, you and how many others went up further up the path? Approximately 5, myself, Lauri Creed and others, they had been briefed how to do the search. They went in about 5 feet because there was standing water, they found a cooler and a pink baby blanket. He marked those items on his activity report and turned it over to TES. Did LE collect the baby blanket you found? I don't know. We also went left on the Chick-a-saw Trail. The only area on Suburban on the first day I marked. The second visit, I had a dog handler with me, it was the same day, we checked the baby blanket and the cooler. I brought 2 dog handles into the area with me. One was a cadaver dog? I don't know. Did you think it was a cadaver dog? Sustained. Did you tell any LE that you were there with a police officer from Panama City with a cadaver dog? Yes, sir. Did the police officer from Panama City with a cadaver dog, conduct a search in your presence? I just had him sniff those two articles. Did the 2nd dog participate in that area? Just to sniff those two articles of interest. Were you ever taken back out there to show where the remains were found? I did go out and was pointed out where the remains were found, went with Red Churchill. It was about 45 ft from where he had searched. Mason is using the ubiquitous tape measure again, the witness is standing down for the silly exercise. How about the 3rd time you went out there sir? I don't recall exactly how many times I went out to that location. I don't even know if there was a 3rd time at that location. Do you remember when the remains were found? I don't know the exact date but I know Dec. Did you send an email to Det Melich and Det John Allen on Dec 13, 2008? Yes but I don't remember what it says. I conveyed that I was in the area where the remains were located. Did you say you had two qualified dogs with you? Yes. Did you say that you thought the remains had been moved to that location after you had searched there? Yes. How many people were searching that specific area? It wasn't that specific area, it was from the fence to the pathway. I had about 5 people with me. Other than those, how many other people did you see there? No one else from TES or otherwise along that area. Do you remember being placed under oath and providing a taped interview, with Linda, Cpl Edwards, Sgt Allen? Yes. Cpl Edwards asked you if there were 100 plus people that turned out to search that area? No, I don't remember that. Mason reads the testimony. Does that help your memory? I only had 5 people with me. There were not 100 people there when I searched. Did you know where the Anthony home was? Yes. Where there a lot of media trucks there? Yes, around the house, yes, sir. Do you have any idea what was done in response to the email you sent out on Dec 13, 2008? No sir. Linda is up........... You said you searched with TES, that was in late Aug or early Sep? Yes. Before that you had begun to email OC Sheriff's Office before that about individuals they should have some contact with to help find Caylee. You did this to help find Caylee. When you volunteered to search with TES you had to keep paperwork especially as a team leader? Yes. You had a space on that paper to indicate a result on that paperwork what you found or items of interest? Yes. It was your responsibility to get de-briefed by TES after the search? Yes, ma'am. Linda is showing him his TES paperwork. He says that is what he filled out. At that point you took very detailed notes? Yes. Linda is publishing it to the jury as a demonstrative aid. Showing page 1 of 5, TES Field Team Activity Report. Shows assignment he had that day, there are maps attached. In describe search efforts, he wrote, searched church on Chick-a-saw and behind Hidden Oaks School. Says he had 2 dogs with him that were not fresh. Danny Iverson told me that his dog was not fresh when he checked those two articles. Anything non-highlighted on the map were not searched. Did you make notes of humerus bones? Yes, I checked them out and they were not human bones. He wrote when waters recedes, need to be re-searched. He had a concern about snakes and trampling remains. It was signed and dated on that day he searched. The last page of the report, do you see the highlighted areas on this map? Yes. What did you mean when you highlighted that areas? I wanted them to know exactly where we searched. I also noted items of interest but it was not thoroughly searched. Is this where you found a cooler and a baby blanket? You wrote cleared by dogs? Yes. Is that a Gap bag and mound and toys? Yes. Does this show as far away from Suburban that you got into the woods? Yes. Your testimony is that you couldn't get very far into the woods because of deep water? Yes. These searches were done before Caylee's remains were found? Yes. When you emailed the detectives, you did not know that you had not searched where Caylee's remains were found? I made a mistake. Mason is up...... Did you tell us a lil while ago, that Mr. Churchill showed you exactly where her remains were found? Yes. When you went back out there did you see the blue tents and all the media? No they were gone, I sent the email on Dec 13, 2008, they weren't there when I went back. Did you think that you had been at that area? I had made a mistake. Was the water clear there? Yes. Do you have any reasons to alter your testimony about where you searched? No, sir. Were you threatened with felony prosecution? I talked to my counsel and according to my 5th amendment rights.......objection..sidebar..sidebar over. Witness is told to step down for a moment and step outside. Jury is removed from courtroom. Linda is up......... The objection that I had was because Mr Mason knew what he was going to ask the witness was going to illicit his 5th amendment right. Mason is saying something, I can barely hear, about the witness breaking the law and not to break the law. Mason goes to the interview with Mr Jordan and Cpl Edwards. The witness made a recording, breaking the law and was told not to break another law by deleting it. The witness says if it is not to your benefit, then you will go after me. He was threatened with felony prosecution and then given immunity. I did not ask him if he was going to take the 5th. I did not expect him to take the 5th amendment. When Linda gave him immunity, he no longer needed his 5th amendment right. Linda says there is no change in his testimony on Nov 5, 2009 and prior point of time and subsequent time. The issue is Mr Mason knew that if he asked him about the illegally recorded conversation that the witness would use his 5th amendment right. Mason says in the email, he told the detectives that the body was moved. Mr Churchill then told him where the body ws found and he said he was further East. Mason says he didn't ask him to take his 5th amendment right, he volunteered that. Linda says that the witness made a mistake and told Mr Mason that and told the jury that he made a mistake. Mason is trying to illicit something he can't, which is trying to allege misconduct on someone else's part other than the witness. Mason says, he did not ask him a single question about invoking his 5th amendment right, I can impeach him. Judge asks if both sides are aware of the case David V Alaska? Judge says that the crime the witness could of been charged with is an illegal recording of a telephone call. Linda says he was given use immunity for that. It is a 3rd degree felony, it has a 3 year statue of limitations. The proper procedure would of been to proffer that testimony without the presence of the jury. It is wrong to say that the witness is granted use immunity. It is up to the state to go into what he was given use immunity, it was not a dastardly crime, he recorded a call without permission. Mr Mason what is your plan now? He wants to question the witness. Linda wants the last part stricken about his 5th amendment right. Linda is talking to Mason and Baez at the defense table. Judge is asking about the witnesses deposition. Linda is pointing out where in the deposition the 5th amendment right came up. Depot of Feb 3, 2011. Judge asks if Mr Jordan was served by the prosecution or the defense to give testimony today? He was served by the defense. Judge says, the question was asked by Mr Mason. Sir, were you threatened with felony prosecution? Mr Jordan was not skilled to say yes or no and did a knee jerk reaction and invoked his 5th amendment right. The judge is asking Mr Jordan's attorney if his client was given use immunity in this case by the state? Not to testify today but for the illegaly recorded phone call. The judge is going to instruct the jury to disregard the statement about his 5th amendment right. The judge is sending Joe Jordan's attorney to talk to his client. The judge puts court in recess for 15 minutes. 10:15am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 28, 2011, 01:26:50 PM 10:35am Tues, June 28, 2011 Court is in session. Jurors are not present. Returning the defense witness Joseph Jordan and his attorney, Mr. McClellan. Judge asks Mr McClellan if he has spoken with his client, he says yes. Mason asks for sidebar...sidebar over. Jury is returned to court. Defense witness is Joseph Jordan. Judge is saying, the following 2 questions have been withdrawn and you must disregard the response. Mr Jordan did you alter your testimony? Were you charged with felony prosecution? The answer was the witness giving his 5th amendment right. Mr Jordan is excused. Next defense witness is George Anthony. Baez is up......... Do you know a woman by Krystal Holloway? Yes by that name and another name? What name? River Cruise. How do you know her? She volunteered at our sites and helping find our grand daughter. How was she to help you do that? By working at the command center. Did she become more than a friend, did you have a romance with her or intimate relations with her? No, that is very funny to me. Did she ever loan you money? No. Did you ever go to her house? Yes, and I can explain that. Did you know you had to go past a guard? Yes, he had to go through a security gate and went to her property and her condo. He went there the first time because she related to me that she had a brain tumor and was dying. As a good guy, I felt she needed comforting and she was giving to us so I thought I would show her compassion. Did you go at night or day? Always day. Were you supposed to be working when you went to see her? Sidebar...sidebar is over. When you visited her, were you supposed to be at work? I didn't have an exact schedule and my employer was lenient on hours. Your testimony to this jury is that you had no romantic feelings for her, you just went to console her? Yes, she explained to me and my wife that she was sick. Did your wife ever go to her home? No. Did you ever tell Krystal Holloway that it was an accident that snowballed out of control? I never said that, I never confided in any volunteer such a private matter. If I was asked by LE or you, I answered honestly. Did you ever tell Krystal Holloway that it was an accident that snowballed out of control? Never did. Did you ever send her a test message that you needed her in your life? Yes. I sent her that test message, I needed a lot of people in my life. Did you ever send her another letter? Yes, on one occasion, it was to cheer her up, I don't see anything wrong with that. Did you ever tell her at anytime not to say anything about your affair with her? Objection, overruled. I never had a romantic affair with Krystal Holloway, or River Cruise and she has a very questionable past, she has been charged with breaking and entering and other crimes. Did you ever tell her not to say anything about your affair? No, I never had an affair with her. How many times did you speak with Ms Holloway on the phone? I knew her as River Cruise and I don't know how many times I spoke to her on the phone. Did you ever speak to her late at night? I don't believe i did. Jeff is up....... When was it that you met this lady? At our command center on Goldenrod in mid October 2008. After Caylee's remains were found, your friendship with her ended? Yes. Did you ever tell River Cruize that you grabbed your daughter by the throat and told her I know you did something to Caylee, where is Caylee? No, I never did that. Next witness is Cindy Anthony. Baez is up......... Did you ever instruct Dominic Casey and Jim Hoover to go search off Suburban Dr? No. Did you ever tell them to video that? No. Did you tell Yuri Melich that you had people search Suburban Rd? No, I don't recall. Did you tell him that you had blankets missing? I told him that I had a blanket missing. The first time they searched did they leave a copy of what they were searching for or what they took? No. Did you get that info on the search on Dec 11th? Yes, our attorney got that. You were aware they were looking for Winnie the Pooh blanket? I don't know, I thought stickers. Did you ever tell Lee Anthony about sending Dominic to search in that area? No, I had no argument with Lee about that because I had no knowledge of that. You never had an argument with Lee, when he asked you why you were looking for a dead Caylee? No. Witness is excused. Next defense witness is Lee Anthony. Baez is up......... Mr Anthony did you ever have an argument or discussion with your mother about sending Dominic to search Suburban Dr? Sustained. Did you go to your parent's home? Yes. Did your mother tell you that she sent Dominic to Suburban Dr with a video camera? Yes, she told me she did that because she got a physic tip. Was it before you went back to work? I don't know. When did you go back to work? In October. Did this cause an argument with your mother over this? On my part, because this was the first time anyone said they were looking for a deceased Casey. Frank George is up....... You had this conversation prior to October? Yes, it fueled my decision to go back to work. You knew before Dominic Casey actually went to Suburban? Yes, if that is the only time he did it. Baez is up......... What do you mean fueled your decision to go back to work? It made me decide to go back to work, I was very angry that my mom decided to do that without keeping me in the loop. I couldn't believe that they thought Caylee was no longer with us and I did not want to consider that at that time. I decided to go back to work and use my energy across the board. Frank George is up....... You were convinced of the lies your sister had told you? Yes and no. Next defense witness is Yuri Melich. Baez is up........ Dec 20, 2008 search warrant on the Anthony home. Did Cindy tell you she had people walk that area a month ago and nothing was in that area? I remember something like that. He is looking at his report. She did make that comment and it was in front of me and Cpl Edwards. She stated that she had people walk in the area where the body was discovered a month ago and nothing was in that area. Witness is excused, subject to recall. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 28, 2011, 01:28:38 PM 11:25am Tues, June 28, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Next defense witness is Roy Kronk. Mason is up...... How were you employed in the summer months of 2008? A meter reader. He read water meters. He was assigned his route the night before, it always changed. In Aug 2008, did you have an occasion to read meters by Hopespring Dr? Yes. Were you aware of the Anthony's house? No sir. Did you read all the meters on Hopespring Dr and Suburban? Yes. Was anyone with you? No, I started alone and then two of my co workers joined me. Do you remember that date Aug 11, 2008? Yes. What do you remember about that date? A dead rattlesnake. Mr Kronk on Aug 11, 2008 did you stop your vehicle on Suburban Dr and go into the woods to relieve yourself? Yes. Was that a normal thing to do? We had no bathrooms, so you just went some where private and did it. Prior to that day were you aware of the saga of Caylee Anthony? Yes. Did you watch it on news? No. Did your room mate whatch news about it? Yes. Did you discuss it with him? Not very often. Where you aware were the Anthony home was, when you stopped to relieve yourself? No sir. Did you go into the woods? As long as it took me to relieve myself and go out. Did you look in the woods at that time and what did you see? I saw an object that appeared strange to me. Did you see a bag? No. Did you lift a bag? No. Did you see a small human skull? I was never closer than 30 feet but I did see an object that looked like that. Did you tell anyone that? No, we found a dead rattlesnake and that took up most of the day. Did you tell your co worker Mr Dean that you had seen a skull. Did Mr Dean come to where you were? No. Did Mr Dean step on a dead rattle snake? No. Did Mr Dean get a shovel from his truck and pick up a dead rattlesnake? Yes. Did you tell him that you saw a skull? I told him that I saw an object that looked like a skull. What did you do next? We went to the office and showed everyone the dead rattlesnake. Did you then go home and report what might of been a skull? Yes. Did you speak to someone? I called OC Sheriffs Office and they told me to call Crime line. I told them that I saw an object that looked like a skull. Did you tell them that you found in close to the Anthony residence? No sir. Did anyone from LE come to talk to you about that? No. The next day did you work? Yes. Did you call anyone that day about the skull? No. You went back to work as usual? Yes. On Aug 13, 2008 did you call about a skull? Yes, I was told an officer would meet me out there, 2 met me out there. Did they ask you to show us where this skull is? No, sir. What did you do then? We never went into the woods and I just pointed in the area where I thought I had seen it. On Aug 11, 2008 you called 911? No. I called OC Sheriff's Office not 911. Did you call an non emergency line? Yes. Did you tell them that you had a route that included the Anthony's home? Yes sir. So you did know where the Anthony's lived? I didn't know that when I took the route. Did you tell them that you found a gray bag and you said, I am not saying it is Caylee or anything like that? Yes. Did you tell them it was Suburban Dr, by a fallen tree, something white and a grey bag? Yes. Was that the truth? Yes but I was never closer than 30 feet, I told them as best I could that day. You told them a gray bag, a fallen tree and what appeared to be a skull? Yes, sir. On the next day you called again, Aug 12, 2008. Yes sir. You told them I had to take a you know and I went down there and there was a suspicious bag like a pool liner and I didn't touch it? Yes. Did you tell the operator there was a tree that looked like it had been cut and there was a white board? Yes. Did you tell them there was something round and white underneath it? I don't remember sir. Did you draw a map for LE as to where you had been? Yes, sir. Did you draw in the privacy fence? I don't remember sir. Mason is approaching the witness. Did you draw this map? Yes sir. Is that a fair and accurate representation of what you drew 3 years ago? Yes sir. Mason shows him a document 12-17-08, it is the map he drew, Mason is showing it to the jury. Mr Kronk you see where you labeled this fence here? Yes sir. You drew right off the end of that an area, what are you seeing there? The water, the tree and what he believes what he saw. Can you show me where the tree with the board is? Kronk shows him. Kronk shows him the bag. Kronk shows him the white round object. All of this is done on a telestrator for the jury. Do you know how far from the edge of the road that find you made was? No, sir. Can you see the edge of the road as you drew it? Yes, sir. On the 13th of Aug 2008, neither of these deputies went with you to that spot? I never took them to that spot, sir. You were in that area on Aug 11th and 13th, 2008 did you smell anything peculiar? No sir. Did you in anyway lift the bag? No, sir. When you went into that area, had the thought crossed your mind that you were looking for Caylee? What date? Aug 11th, 2008? I never went back into the woods on that date. Did you tell either of the deputies that you found a bag that may have bones in it? No, sir. Did you tell Dep Richard Caine, that you think the bag had bones in it? I told him that I saw what appeared to be a skull. Did you tell him that you saw a bag with bones in it? No, sir. On Aug 11, 2008 was the bag on dry land? Sir, on that date, I never went into the woods, I saw it from the veil of the trees. Was the ground dry or under water on Aug 11, 2008? It was dry. At the time you were in those woods, were you aware that there was a reward offered for finding Caylee? I believe so. Did you know it was 250k? I believe so. Were you aware that right around the corner there was a whole lot of media trucks? Yes sir. Did you tell them that you found a bag of bones? I never told anyone that I found a bag of bones. Did you ever tell anyone that you found a skull? I never said that I found a skull, I said that I saw something that appeared to be that. Who did you tell? My room-mate. Did you tell any of the media trucks? No sir. Did you tell anyone that you saw a white object that appeared to be sticking out of a bag? Yes sir. Do you recall your depot where Linda was present, Baez was present and Medina was present, I was present and your attorney was present? Yes. Do you believe the bag you saw in Aug is the bag you saw in Dec? Yes sir. I was told that it looked like what I saw. Did you try to get your co workers to look at the skull? Yes, I told them that but then they saw a dead snake and everything became about the snake. In your depot did you say that you tried to get the two guys to look at it and they were too busy playing with a dead snake? Yes, sir. Judge is recessing court till 1:30pm for the lunch break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 28, 2011, 01:29:52 PM Hi monkeys, I am out for the day, will be up and typing tomorrow morning. Justice for Caylee. ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 09:06:32 AM 8:30am Wed June 29, 2011 Court is in Session Ann Finnell is on the phone line with a Motion to Reconsider. She is citing Case law recently made in a Florida Supreme Court. She is asking for a remedy of a mistrial. Mason, Baez and Simms are not present. Casey is agreeing with Ms Finnell. This is against the fact that jurors get to pick which aggravates exist and if there is a majority needed for the death penalty. Jeff is up citing law about this death penalty case that was recently in news. Judge is citing law. Citing a Ring issue. Ring V Arizona was brought up again and again and executions were held. All of the cases he is reading right in front of Casey and they were all executed. The court will reserve ruling on the mistrial unless such an issue is brought up in this case. I didn't understand most of this but looks like it doesn't even apply to this case, at least not yet and not until it goes to Death Penalty Sentencing phase. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 09:07:44 AM Good Morning Monkeys ::MonkeyKiss:: Not sure what I just typed but have been awake minutes, lol. It was very hard to understand, it was all case law. All I really heard was Judge Perry saying they were EXECUTED over and over again. No defense team around her and Casey acting as her own defense listening to execution after execution being carried out must of been quite a waking up experience. ::MonkeyEek:: ::boxingcasey2:: ::boxingcasey2:: ::boxingcasey2:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 10:41:22 AM 9:00am Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. First defense witness is Cindy Anthony. Baez is pleasing the court and Ms Drane, not Jeff..... Did you your son Lee go into Casey's room at night? No. Were you ever made aware of your son going into Casey's room at night? Sustained. Sidebar....sidebar over. Do you recall testifying 6 months ago that Caylee was still alive, were you testifying truthfully at that time? Yes, there was a part of me that still believe she was. You held a memorial service for her and had her remains cremated, despite all of that? On Aug 14, 2008 you went to visit your daughter at jail, did you see a video tape and explain to your daughter that George had blown up at the media? Yes. You expressed that to your daughter? Yes. You expressed that this was a new theory, the latest story is that Caylee drowned in the pool? It wasn't a new theory it was the media's thought on that day. A month earlier you told the LE that the ladder was attached to the pool? Yes. Cindy says it wasn't the latest story with LE it was what was relayed in the media. After you told Casey that George had blown up at the media, Casey had said she had heard? Casey could of heard it already and known it. You had made LE aware of the pool incident. Sustained. Linda is up.... You recall when you related what the media said about the pool drowning your daughter's comment was surprise, suprise.... When you came into the jail that day you were already upset because the media was asking you if Caylee drowned in the pool? Yes. Next Defense witness is George Anthony. Baez is up..... Baez is refreshing his memory with a statement. Do you remember making that statement? Sir, you are asking about my LE experience and that is taken out context by you. Your statement is in smelling decomp in woods...objection....sidebar..sidebar over. Did you tell the LE that you had smelled decomp in the woods before? Yes. Did you tell them that you smelled human decomp in a house before? Yes. Did you tell them that you smelled decomp in a car before? Yes. Did you ever go to the remains site? I was given a stuffed animal and told it was found at the end of the street, I walked down to Suburban but not in the woods. Did you go into another wooded area? Yes to find a place for our Kid Finder's tent. You were gonna put up a Kid Finder's Tent in the woods? It was next to a busy road. On July 16, 2008, the first night LE came to your home, you pulled Yuri Melich aside and told him of the car smelling? Yes. I asked about that and an Amber alert, I was hysterical and upset and was doing anything to find answers. After Yuri got back with Casey, did you go to his car and tell him that something happened to Caylee and Casey is lying? Yes. He demanded answers from Yuri. He did say that something happened to Caylee and Casey was lying, 2 plus 2 equals 4 and Casey is lying. I was running on pure emotions, I was upset and falling apart. You made the statement that you smelled that car and you smelled human decomp? I am 100 percent positive. You told them that Casey lives on the edge? Yes, my daughter does live on the edge. On July 24, 2008, did you tell LE that your daughter takes things as far as she can take them? Yes. In fact throughout that whole interview you kept talking about nothing but negative things about your daughter? Apparently I did, I was cooperating with LE to find my grand daughter. The next day you went to see your daughter in jail and said nothing negative to her? No, I was trying to keep her happy and up beat to get answers from her, the fact she was in jail and we needed answers about our grand daughter. Did you say negative things to LE and up beat things to your daughter? Yes. I tried to cooperate with LE but I also had a daughter in jail as a father concerned for his grand daughter. Were you undercover for LE? No. She wanted to get bonded out and you wouldn't put your house up as collateral? Objection..sidebar..sidebar over. Sustained. You said that you were 100 percent sure that you smelled human decomp in that car? Yes, I am not going to lie about that. Did you take a depot Aug 5, 2009? Yes. Same oath you took today? Question: Did you believe the smell was human decomp? Not human decomp, I knew it was decomp there, It took my breath away it really did, it took my breath away. I remember opening the driver's door and it wouldn't start and I said maybe it is out of gas. The attendant said, it really stinks here..George says let me stop you for a second. Did it come into your mind that the decomp might come from your daughter or grand daughter. I said ya the smell is bad, it's a lil bit tough. I saw my grand daughters car seat and the car was messy. As I went to the back of the car I prayed please don't let it be my daughter or my grand daughter, etc, etc. The attendant got rid of the pizza bag and said this is your smell, it had maggots in it. the attendant threw it out. George says he could smell it 3 feet away, it smelled like human decomposition. When you relive it over and over again you remember what happened. It was not the garbage that was in it, it was human decomposition. Neither my daughter or my daughter were in that trunk and I am grateful for that. George says that he smelled human decomposition. In my knowledge in LE, he knew it was human decomp. You then called 911 then and there? No. Then you went to work, did you not? Sir, after I knew it wasn't my daughter or my grand daughter, i was relieved, I was also concerned. I know exactly what I did, I have tried to be honest with everyone. Mr Anthony when you made the statement in your depot you were on a media blitz? Did you go on multiple media outlets and advocate the innocence of your daughter? I did not want to believe that my daughter could take the life of my grand daughter. In Jan 2009, you attempted to commit suicide? Yes, sir, I did. You even left a suicide note and you expressed some guilt? Sustained. George may really be crying, hard to tell, Casey is stone faced, like he is just another person up there. Were you hospitalized shortly after? Yes. Did you then make more media appearances? I think so. Were you advocating the innocence of your daughter? I don't know. Were you on 48 hours and were you paid 25k for that appearance. Mr Baez what we have gotten out of the media appearances and any money we did it for Caylee and for other missing kids. I did everything I could possibly do to tell them what Caylee meant to me and everyone in my family. Was the focus on Caylee or Casey? Unfortunately, the focus would turn on Casey. Did you make an appearance on the Early Show? I don't know. All of these appearances stopped when the charges of abuse came up? That was started by you sir. 10:05am Court is taking a 15 minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 03:38:47 PM 10:25am Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is present. George is back on the witness stand. Baez is up...... You were questioned by the prosecutor about molesting your daughter? When? The first day of trial? I would never do anything like that to my daughter. You would never admit to molesting your daughter? I would never do anything to harm my daughter in that way? Only in that way? Do you remember when we referenced you the first time bout the gas cans? I have been asked about those gas cans many times. Baez shows him the red, round gas can, that is your gas can? Yes. On June 24, 2008 that gas can was missing and you called the LE and reported that gas can was stolen? Yes this and another can. Is that the only time you had called the LE about your gas cans missing? Yes. You had knowledge that your daughter had used your gas cans before? Yes. You recall that there was a gas can shown in your depot that did not have duct tape on it when you gave it to the police? I don't think I said that. The very first time the LE took those gas cans Aug 1, 2008, did that can have duct tape on it when you gave it to them? I don't know, I didn't touch it, I opened the shed and they took it. On Aug 5, 2009 did you state, "OK, when they took it did it have duct tape over the vent, did you answer, No, it had no duct tape over that vent." Were you confronted with a photo of that gas can with duct tape over the vent? Shows him the photo? Did you take the duct tape and put it on and take it off? No, I did not do that. When LE took this from your home that piece of duct tape was not on the can? Your answer was it was not on the can, it was not on the can. When you gave this depot did that gas can have duct tape on it? According to this photo it did. It was taken more than once. Are you trying to say now that you were shown a diff photo of that gas can? I believe I was. Baez is showing him his depot, in the back of that are the exhibits, do you see that? George says he sees alot of them. Do you see the tabs? Every photo is on those tabs, can you search through and see if there are any other gas cans? It only shows this red, round gas can. So according to your depot either the LE planted the duct tape your you were lying in your depot. Sustained. When you had this alleged argument with your daughter over this gas can, did the can have duct tape on it? The day that my daughter said here are your fing gas cans, this can did not have anything covering the vent, did I later put duct tape on it, I may have, I am just trying to tell the truth. Sidebar...sidebar over. When Casey gave you the gas cans on June 24, 2008, the can did not have duct tape on it? True. When the LE took it from you it did not have duct tape on it? I don't know if it had duct tape when the LE got the gas can out of the shed. I will say it did not. Did you testify that it did not in your depot? Baez is reading George's depot to him. When they took it on Aug 1st, it did not have duct tape on it and when they returned it to me, it did have duct tape on it, do you remember that now? I do now. Jeff is up......... On Aug 5, 2009 you still believed that your grand daughter was killed by someone and it did not happen in the custody of your daughter? Yes. In that depo you and I sparred in much the same way you sparred with Mr Baez today? Yes. You were upset that your daughter was being accused of murder? Yes. When you were giving this statement, did you ever tell the LE that you thought your daughter murdered your grand daughter? I didn't believe that at that time, no. You learned in Dec 2008 the remains of Caylee were found? Correct. What effect did that have on you? A deep hurt inside, tears, a whole gamut, a breakdown inside of me and seeing what my wife and son were going through. Up until that day did you hope Caylee was still alive? Yes, up until the day we were told it was Caylee. George is openly sobbing. Casey is stone faced. On Jan 22, 2009 you went and got a gun didn't you? Sidebar....George got down from the witness stand and is being comforted by his attorney. Sidebar over. Jury has been taken out of the court. Jeff just said that George bought the gun to force people to admit what happened to Caylee and then take his own life. It shows that this man did not know who killed Caylee and the suicide note should come in. All of this is mentioned in the suicide note. Jeff is handing out case law concerning this. The judge and defense are reading the material now. The judge is saying that he has reviewed the suicide note and the case law. He is asking Baez what his response is, Baez says hearsay. Jeff says that a suicide note can be admissible. It contains nothing about his guilt toward his daughter or his grand daughter. It shows nothing the defense has accused him of in this case. There are specific statements in his suicide note that George knew nothing about what happened to Caylee or who had killed her, he cites law. Baez says..... Mr Ashton is presenting a self serving rule to exception. What is the purpose of this? To say he is innocent because he took heart medication and a six pack of beer? Judge asks.... Baez you asked Mr Anthony if he attempted to commit suicide? Yes. What was your purpose in that question? It is a fact in this case, how genuine an attempt it was, who knows, was it an outcry or an attempt for emotion? Just because he took blood pressure pills and drank beer does not mean that he was trying to take his own life. Judge adds......... Was he trying to commit suicide because he was so guilty about molesting his daughter and what he had done? Looks as though the defense has made Mr Anthony's state of mind an issue. Judge says Mr Baez opened the door and Mr Ashton is trying to walk through it. Mr Baez earlier questioning of Mr Anthony is rebutted in this suicide note that he inferred to the jury. It should be submitted in it's entirety. Judge asks when Jeff wants to enter this note, now or in rebuttal? He says his rebuttal. The judge thinks the defense has opened the door but he really wants to contemplate and read a few more cases in this area. It is fair game on cross of Mr Anthony, concerning the suicide that was brought up on direct by the defense. Judge gives a 5 minute break. 11:25am. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 03:40:59 PM 11:35am Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is not present. Proffer by Jeff Ashton of George Anthony. Why did you go get a gun? I wanted to make people tell me what happened to Caylee? You wanted to force them to tell you what happened to Caylee? Yes. What happened then? They found out that he had a firearm in his home in violation of Casey's house arrest. You went to a hotel to take your life? Yes and I still have those intentions almost everyday. Did you put pen to paper and write down, why you wanted to take your life? Yes. Jeff is showing him his suicide note. Is that a true and accurate statement of your thoughts and intentions of that day? Yes. Did you also send messages to people to tell them what you were gonna do? I sent messages to my mother my father, my family. I wanted to go be with Caylee because I felt like I failed her. Did LE stop you from taking your life? Yes, if it wasn't for LE, I would not be here today. In that note, did you express some of the unanswered questions in your mind about what happened to Caylee? Yes, I wrote it over many hours and my penman ship got worse. Baez says the gun is not relative and on and on........ Jeff says this is direct rebuttal about the fate of his grand daughter. Baez doesn't know what he is talking about. Jeff says he counts on the court's recollection then. Baez says he asked him about decomp, his behavior at first, his media appearances, abuse, duct tape and the gas can. Jeff says that Baez was not specific and suicide was brought up. The judge says the suicide of George was brought out by Baez. The fact that the gun had a relationship with all of that....the court will permit this line of questioning. You can mark and identify the suicide note but it can not come in until your rebuttal. The court will take this in advisement and look at the issue. 11:45am Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 03:44:25 PM 11:45am Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Defense witness is George Anthony. Jeff is up.......... Did you purchase a firearm? Yes. What was your purpose in buying this firearm? I wanted to confront Casey's friends to tell me what happened to my grand daughter. Before you could do that, LE found out that you had a gun and advised you that it violated a court order because Casey was on bond? Yes. Did they take the gun? Yes. On Jan 22, 2009, 6 weeks after the remains were found did you travel to Daytona Beach to take your own life? Yes. Why? I don't know why I picked that day. It is very hard even up till today it is hard for me to accept that Caylee is gone and I wanted to be with Caylee. I called my son and my wife and sent messages to my father and mother. I just thought that this was the day I should do it and go be with Caylee. Did you put pen to paper? Yes, I wrote this letter to my wife Cindy. That I did not want to be in this world anymore. Did you include things about Caylee? I never really looked it over and it was written over a period of time and I had been drinking. You wanted Cindy to know why you would be dead when she read the letter? Yes. This is your 8 page suicide letter that you wrote to your wife and family? Yes. But for LE you would not be here today, would you? No. Jeff is done. Baez is up..... Do you need a break? No. Mr Ashton questioned you about sparring with him in the depot? That had even Mr Ashton questioning your truthfulness? Did he remind you of your oath? Yes. That sparring was to pin you down about the gas cans and the duct tape? There was some conversations we had about that, there was talk about a lot of things. You were sparring with Mr Ashton about the duct tape and the gas cans? Maybe if you consider going back and forth, sparring. Mr Ashton called my questioning you as sparring, would you? Yes, I would. When you got the gun, your daughter was out on bond, people explained the rules to you on house arrest and you were given a list on what could be in the house and what could not be? Yes. You knew that you could not have a firearm in that house? Correct. If they found a firearm in that house they would take Casey right back to jail? Yes. Prior to Casey being out of jail you never went to buy a gun did you? No, I didn't. This attempted suicide you had, you went out and bought a six pack of beer? I don't know how much, I don't remember? It was beer? Yes. The pills were blood pressure medication? So you had beer and blood pressure medication? I had a lot of pills with me. All of this was subsequent to two search warrants being served on your home? On Dec 11, 2008, LE went through a lot of your things? They went through everything. I am talking about your car? Yes. You know that car was not in the search warrant? Right the whole house was upside down. They went through everything not just Casey's stuff. They took the duct tape on that gas can? I don't know what they took. When you came back from the Larry King show and went back home did you ever see that gas can at your home again? Our house was in shambles it was turned upside down. You came back and you didn't go home you went to the Ritz Carlton and you stayed there for a couple of days? Yes. Then you were there for the 2nd search warrant? Yes. You didn't see that gas can on that day? I don't know there were over 70 items taken. They are going fast and it isn't making much sense, I got as much as I could, lol. Court is in recess for lunch till 1:30pm. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 03:47:55 PM 2:00pm Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is present, they returned a half hour late from a special lunch. Defense witness George Anthony has returned to the witness stand. Baez is up...... On Dec 20, 2008, they did a 2nd search warrant on your home and you got confrontational with the LE? Yes. You were asked to step outside? Yes. You told Sgt Allen, take your fing minions and get out of my house? Sustained. They then confiscated further materials from your home? Yes. In Dec 2008 the SA subpoenaed your fingerprints? Yes. You did not provide them voluntarily? Yes. That is also when the video of Dominic Casey and Jim Hoover searching Suburban surfaced? Yes. In Jan 2009 did you go to Dominic Casey and ask him what he was doing in the woods? I didn't know anything about a video being shot until it was released. Did you ask Dominic Casey what he was doing in the woods? No. They just told you that your grand daughter was found near where Dominic Casey searched and you never asked him why he searched there? No. Was the pressure getting to you? From the beginning I had always cooperated with LE even you sir. All of that cooperation ended on Dec 20, 2008 when you asked sheriffs to leave your home? That was a tumultuous time in our life....All that cooperation ended when you told LE to leave your home? I was upset that day. From there on out you stopped cooperating with them when you found out you were being investigated? Yes. You were calling everybody to let them know you were gonna commit suicide? Yes, I did. You even called me? Yes, if I did. After your alleged suicide attempt you left for Putnam County to be on TV? No sir. How long before you went and made media appearances? Sustained. It was not an alleged attempt George said, he tried to take his life. Baez is done.... Jeff is up........ You were on Larry King in CA, the reason for that appearance was about missing children? Yes. Did you learn remains were found before you left CA or when you arrived? Just before we boarded the plane. You were whisked to the Ritz Carlton Hotel? Yes. You did not arrange that, someone made those arrangements for you? Yes. Did you and Cindy have any time alone? Just on the plane and in the car leaving the airport, we were falling apart. Were you with Mr Baez, at the Ritz Carlton that night? Yes. (This is added by me, crab puffs had by all and I believe Baez got there late and ordered a steak, lol) Sidebar......sidebar over. Mr Anthony during this entire period were you cooperating with LE and Mr Baez? Yes, I was taking any help I could get. It was Dec 19, 2008, you expressed the anger toward LE, the day after you found out Caylee was dead? Yes. Baez is up......... You were taken by a car to the Ritz Carlton? Yes. Who paid for you to stay at the Ritz Carlton for 3 days? Sustained. Did you have to do anything for that 3 day stay? No. Were you ever on Good Morning American? No, I don't believe so. Witness is excused. Next defense witness is Brandon Sparks. Baez is up....... He is active duty US Coast Guard. He goes out to sea for 3 to 4 months at a time. Roy Kronk is his biological father, they have been estranged since he was 8 years old. In the summer of 2008, he reached out and made contact with his father. They began to speak with each other from June to Feb 2009. He was based out of Myrtle Creek in 2008. He was having cell phone contact with Roy Kronk. Did your father state to you that he knew something about this case? Yes, he told me he knew where the remains were. He told me in Nov 2008, I thought it was far fetched. When he found out that his father found them on Dec 11, 2008, I asked him why he did not get it before, why did he wait this long? Judge is telling the jury of a stipulation of a cellular log. These are your phone records? Yes. Did your father ever mention that he found Caylee's skull? Yes. Are you sure it was in November? Yes, it was around Thanksgiving. Do you hold any ill will against your father? No Sir. Did you at that time? No, sir. Linda is up......... In 2008 you were living in Virginia Beach? Yes, however it wasn't until 2009 that you made a statement in this case? Yes ma'am. About a phone call in this case? Yes, ma'am. She is showing him the phone records and asking him to identify calls made to Roy Kronk. The phone number for your father starts with 757? When you got in contact with your father, you did not tell your mother? No. In fact, you kept that from your mother? Yes, ma'am. Which of these calls in 2008 was the call your father told you about skull? You can't find it? No. Not until your mom and your sister told you about it. You signed a statement typed for you by someone else? Yes. When you had this statement typed for you that is when you remembered this call was in November? Yes. Mr Kronk also told you he was going to be on TV that day? Yes. You realize your father did not appear on TV until Dec 19, 2008? Yes. Baez is up......... Where you questioned by LE or someone else? Mr Mortimer Smith. He works for the defense. You never spoke to a Det. Melich. Did you know anything about this case before 2008? No, not until Dec 11, 2008. From June to Dec 2009 how much contact did you have with your father? It was almost 3 calls a week. On Dec 11, 2008 when your father called you, was that when you realized how significant what he told you in Nov 2008 was? Linda is up..... Your father didn't tell you that he took this skull from the scene? No. He told you that he called LE about the skull? He told you to look for him on TV? Yes. Baez is up........ Did your father tell you he was going to be rich and famous? Yes. Witness is excused. Next witness is Roy Kronk. Baez is up....... After you made your discovery you waited in your truck? Yes sir. Then you were asked to make a statement? Yes. Eventually detectives got there and spoke to you? Yes. You then gave an official recorded statement? I don't remember. Baez is showing him the statement. Did they tell you they were gonna be recording the statement? Yes. You wanted to be truthful? Yes. Do you recall telling them on 2 occasions that you did not touch anything? Yes. I touched it with my meter stick, is that physical contact? You did not say that you put your meter pole in the eye socket? Yes, that is what I just said. There is no sticking your meter reader pole in the eye socket in here is there? No. Do you recall later telling them the skull dropped out of the bag? Yes. When you were asked that question you never said that you called 4 times about it in the past? I told them I called Crime-line. Who did you tell that you called Crime-line in Aug? The first officer that appeared on the scene. Did he tell you to keep your mouth shut? He asked me not to mention it but not to keep my mouth shut. Were you at an internal investigations meeting for the OC Sheriff's Office? Yes. After you made the statement that the skull had dropped out of the bag, it was then you changed your story? No. You changed your story on Dec 17, 2008? I had already changed my mind about what happened long before that. Why did you change your story? After I had a chance to calm down and go through the events in my mind, I realized I had made a mistake. On both the statements on Dec 11th, 2008 you never mentioned that you stuck your meter pole in the eye socket? No. Lots of questions all sustained. Baez basically got in that Kronk did 7 statement without saying he put his meter pole in the eye socket of the skull. (Sorry, they had me so confused, I got as much as I could). Taking a special recess for 20 minutes. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 05:49:47 PM 3:30pm Wed, June 29, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Next defense witness is Dep Edward Turso. Baez is up........ Were you the first officer responding to the call Dec 11, 2008? Yes. Did Roy Kronk ever tell you that he called Crime Line? No. Therefore, you never told him to keep quiet about it? No. Witness is excused. Next Witness is Det Yuri Melich. Baez is up..... As the lead investigator in this case did you show up at the remains scene on Dec 11, 2008? Yes. Did you speak to Mr Kronk? Yes. How long did you speak with him? 10 min. Roy Kronk had already given a written statement. Did he ever tell you that he called prior? No. Did you find out in Dec 2008 that he called crime line in Aug? Yes. Did you then have to go back and clarify with him about a skull rolling out of a bag? Objection. Did you want to find out if the skull rolled out or dropped out of the bag? I wanted to clarify it. Is that when he changed his mind? I would have to refer to the transcript to see what he said. Showing Det Melich the transcript. On Dec 17, 2008 was the first time you found out that Roy Kronk had called previously? Yes. Witness is excused, free for the day lol (gallery laughed) Next defense witness is Dr. Syliva Karioth. Sims is up..... She has been at Florida State for 40 years. 2 master degrees and a Ph.D. I can't figure out what she does...some kind of nursing that acts like a doctor but isn't a doctor. She teaches stuff and she learns stuff and its just a big fat mess. Jeff is objecting and JP is telling her to answer the questions. She is going off again, don't have a clue. She is now teaching in London, lol. She is a Certified Traumatalogist. I knew she had to be certified, lol. I give up, sorry. You would have to hear her to believe it. Jeff is objecting and JP is telling her to hush and answer questions. She doesn't charge anyone anything and she sees everyone from firemen to dog trainers. She writes Chicken Soup Books. Jeff just keeps objecting and I still don't know what she is an expert in. Now Jeff is up and he is trying to figure out what she is. They are taking a sidebar to figure out what she is. She has testified about grief in 12 cases, six criminal, six civil and one maritime, lol. Have you ever been qualified to testify on grief if you never interviewed the person involved? Yes. Jeff objects to the witness but the judge just qualified her as an expert in grief and trauma. Sims is up..... She said no one suffers grief the same way. It is a plethora of differences. Jeff objects to facts that don't involve this case. Sidebar and I am going to post this before I lose it from laughing so hard. ::piggy:: 4:20pm Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 05:50:42 PM We just had a short power failure and I lost what I had typed. Don't worry, it was all the grief lady and nothing she said made sense. I typed everything I could understand but I am sure it still wouldn't of made much sense. I can't believe the judge allowed this testimony. ::MonkeyNoNo:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 29, 2011, 05:51:37 PM 5:15pm Wed June 29, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is back in courtroom. Defense witness is Dr. Syliva Karioth. She has been declared an expert in grief and trauma. Jeff is up...... Denial is a coping mechanism for things other than grief isn't it? Can be. In fact it is documented that many people use suppression in ways to deal with guilt? Guilt and shame, especially if they come from an environment of denial, they go right back to denial. In fact when that happens, people take that event and put it in a box and go as if this thing never happened? Yes. You can compartmentalize a unspeakable act and put it in a box and go on as if nothing happened? That falls more in a psychiatric diagnosis. That would be out of your expertise? Yes if it isn't grief, trauma or loss. Guilt can come from a truly horrible act or a minor act? Yes. Even that type of guilt you can compartmentalize it? That is one way to look at it, another way to look at it as an attempt to stay afloat. It depends on how they are raised and what is expected of them. People have an amazing ability to rationalize the things they do? We all do. You can convince yourself that is is best for everybody when it is not? They may have magical thinking. I had a mother who lost a child and the first rain storm she called and said that he had never been in a rainstorm alone before. I took blankets and an umbrella and went to her and sat outside with her. That is magical thinking. I have many folks who do and ask for things that are very unusual. You would agree the bond between mother and child is very hard to break? I don't think it breaks. The witness is excused. 5:30pm The judge is recessing the jury for the day. Attorneys are at a sidebar...sidebar is over. Judge is asking Baez when they will wrap up their case and he said tomorrow. The judge then says the state needs to have some witnesses lined up for the afternoon for rebuttal and a charge conference on Sat and then closing will be Sat or he will ask the jury if they want to come and hear closing arguments on Sunday. The judge tells everyone not to make any plans for Sunday or Monday. Court is in recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 12:47:05 PM 8:54am Thurs, June 30, 2011 Court is in session. Edit-fix date MB Ms Sims has a scheduling question for the judge before trial starts. They all went to sidebar without the court reporter. Baez is talking about Gentiva records they got from the State. He can't understand why he got it now, it is still a discovery violation. He says they waited to late to get it to him and they knew about it the whole time. He might want a continuance to depose these people. He wants to subpoena other records for days they know she wasn't at work and it showed she was still there. It would show someone else could clock in for her. The judge says you have all night tonight till midnight to depose people and you knew what Cindy was going to testify to. He said it is logical that if someone is going to testify to A then B is going to follow. They will do a Richardson hearing to see if there were any discovery violations. Judge says it is time for court now. 9:00am The jury is being returned to court. The first defense witness is Krystal Holloway. Baez is up........ Are you known by any other names? Yes, River Cruz. She met George Anthony at a tent when his grand daughter was missing. How often did you go to the tent? Every day. Did you develop a relationship with Mr Anthony? Yes. Was this an intimate relationship? Yes. How many times did he go to your home? About 10 -12 times. Sidebar...sidebar over. Did there ever come an occasion when you had a heart to heart conversation with Mr Anthony? Yes. What happened? He said that it was an accident that snowballed out of control, his eyes filled with tears. Was this before Caylee's remains were found? Yes, around Thanksgiving. She didn't ask him any questions about it. I had told him that she didn't look like Casey was someone who could hurt her child and that is when he said that. The last time she was with him was at a balloon memorial for Caylee. When the Anthony's held their memorial for Caylee were you still in a relationship with Mr Anthony? Yes. Did you go to LE to tell them about the accident that snowballed out of control? Did you go to LE? No, they came to me. The LE came to her house and asked her if she had an affair with George, they showed her texts. They asked her for any documentation, she gave them her phone and the letters he had written her. He is showing her a photo of a text message. The date is Tues Dec 16, Just thinking about you, I need you in my life. How did the relationship end? He was suppose to come over to her house after the balloon memorial but he didn't show up, she thought if she was good enough to sleep with she was good enough for him to show up when he said he was going to. Her sister found her crying and that was the end of the relationship. Is there a guard gate at your residence? Yes. After the LE found you, was your name exposed to the media? Yes. Sidebar.....sidebar over. When the LE first asked you about the affair did you deny it? Yes. Why? Because I felt he would get in trouble and I thought the media would find out about it and I was embarrassed and I was in a relationship at the time. She was in a relationship the whole time she saw George. She eventually told the LE the truth about the affair, that was after being confronted with all the info. Prior to the LE finding you and your name was released, did you sell your story to a tabloid magazine? No. The gentleman that did an interview, told me I could tell my story in full, so I did it, I did get paid for it, so did my sister. Are you here testifying truthfully today? Yes. Jeff is up......... Ms Cruz at the time you inserted yourselves in the Anthony's lives they were already celebrities? Yes. You sought them out? Yes. How much money did you get for selling your story? 4 thousand dollars. You chose the National Enquirer? Yes, because the National Enquirer was the one place she could tell her story in a fair and honest way. The story is much, much better if you are having an affair with George? I did have an affair. You do not agree that this story is better if your sleeping with George? That is not true. You say that George also sent you letters? Yes. Jeff is showing her one of the letters, George sent her. Sidebar talking about the letter.....sidebar over. Miss Cruz in early Jan 2008, you received a letter from George about his attempt to leave messages with your daughter and your husband and security? Yes sir. Were you in a relationship then? Yes. Did you do anything to make George think this could be your husband? Yes. Did he send you a letter that was from both he and his wife? Yes, he did. The day he sent this letter was 5 days after the remains were found? Yes, sir. You gave a statement to LE under oath and swore if the info you gave were going to be true? Yes sir. You gave a statement to LE Feb 2010. that you were not having a romantic affair with George? Yes. When is the first time you changed that statement? My sister went to the media with it and I told the LE the truth. My sister went to the media with the story that I had an affair and then I told the LE the truth. How did contact with the media change your story about the affair? You lied to the LE? Yes, I did lie. I changed my story in the same week, that I first talked to the LE. When did you first talk about giving the story to the National Enquirer? The week after I told the LE that I did not have an affair. It gets very confusing, Jeff is asking one question and she is answering another one. Sidebar...sidebar over...Jeff says, what George says was, I really believe it was an accident and Casey tried to cover it up and it snowballed from there? Jeff is having her read the statement. He didn't tell you that he was present when this accident occurred. No. I never said he said anything else. He never said that he knew it and he never said that Casey said it? Your right. Was there another incident that he relayed to you about the death of Caylee? Did he tell you that he threw his daughter up against the wall and choked her? Sustained. Sidebar.....sidebar over. Baez is up....... The statement that Mr Ashton read to you saying that, he believed it was an accident, do you remember that? Yes. That statement was taken out of context? Yes. Baez is approaching the witness. Before you said that he said what? That IT WAS an accident that snowballed out of control. This was a statement he made, while he was still out making media appearances after he told you this? Yes. After he told you that Caylee was dead he was still making media appearances? Yes. Were you still having a relationship with Mr Anthony when her remains where found? Yes. How long was it that you kept quiet about this affair? 2 years. I never went to anybody, they came to my door. Who did? The LE. Why did you go the National Enquirer? I didn't want it to be edited and the guy told me he would let me tell my story in full. The media said I have a criminal background and I do not. I wanted the truth to be known. Jeff is up......... Kyrstal is crying. Jeff is having her read out loud. She is reading her statement to LE. "He said I really believed it was an accident and it just went wrong, Casey? No verbal response" Baez says it is not being read in context your honor they went to the bench. Jeff is having her read again. "Did he tell you what he thought happened to the child, its alright take your time, he said it was an accident that went wrong and it snowballed, you know how you tell a small lie and it goes wrong, what type of accident? he was sitting on a couch and I was sitting on the floor and he I really believe it was an accident that went wrong and she tried to cover it up. Did he say that this was an accident or he believed it was an accident, he just said that it was an accident that went wrong" Sorry I didn't get all of that, she was reading fast. Jeff is saying, George was telling you that he did not have any first hand knowledge of what happened to his grand daughter? Correct. Baez is up...... You made a statement that Casey told him, that he knew that it was an accident that snowballed out of control? What you conveyed to the Le. All sustained. Did you tell the LE that he knew it was an accident that snowballed out of control? Yes. Jeff is up......... In the statement, you said that he didn't say that he like, he knew? Yes. Baez is up......... Sidebar.....sidebar is over. Sidebar again..........judge is recessing for a short break. Jury is leaving the room. Judge is talking, he wants this cleared up now. He let them go ahead and use the facilities, lol. They better get back quick the judge does not look very happy. 10:20am judge just left the courtroom. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 12:48:21 PM 10:25am Thurs, June 30, 2011 Court is in session, jury is not present. Edit-fix date. MB Jeff wants an instruction read to the jury about Krystal's testimony, Baez does not agree with that. The judge is giving them case law on prior inconsistent statements. The statement she gave was a statement to LE, is that not correct? Yes. Jeff is arguing about what the instruction should say. He wants the jury to know right now that Krystal's inconsistent statement needs to be known to the jury right now. Jeff says this is the only thing the jury has heard about an accident. Baez said all Mr Ashton says is bla bla bla bla. Judge is reading a case law that was reversed because the state used an inconsistent statement. Judge is saying that what she said Mr Anthony said is not a substantive statement are you? Baez says no, it is to impeach George Anthony. Jeff says this statement is not just to impeach George Anthony, it is put before the jury in hopes that they will take it for more than what it is supposed to be. He does not want the jury to use this information in an improper way. Baez says the instruction will make the jury feel the court feels in one way or another. To go on and allow to make argument in the instruction would be wrong. He said it is surplusage. lol is that a word? Baez want the instruction to be short and simple with no jabs in it. The judge says it is evident that an instruction needs to be given and we have two trained attorneys that can't agree, how can we expect a jury to understand this? The judge is reading a case law. Dudley V State a 1989 decision by the Florida Supreme Court and another case law the court will give the following instruction: "The testimony concerning the statements of George Anthony testified to by this witness Krystal Holloway can be used only to impeach the testimony by George Anthony and for no other purpose. This can not be used to determine the way the victim died and you are not to use that testimony to determine the defendant's guilt or innocence". Baez is arguing about this instruction, he says George lied and he wants the jury to use that in the guilt of Casey Anthony. That instruction diminishes what that witness said. This instruction takes it a step further, it basically tells the jury to disregard all of her testimony. The two sentences that are added put us in a worse position. Judge is reading case law. He tells Baez that his instruction is the right one and will let the jury believe what they want to believe of Mr Anthony. Even the attorneys can't agree on what this should be. Even I will be graded on this instruction but I will give it as I just read it. He is going to bring Krystal back in to excuse her in front of the jury and then read them the instruction on her testimony. 10:45am Jury is returned to the courtroom. Defense witness is Krystal Holloway. Witness is excused. Judge is now reading the jury the instruction on her testimony. "The testimony concerning the statements of George Anthony testified to by this witness Krystal Holloway can be used only to impeach the testimony by George Anthony and for no other purpose. This can not be used to determine the way the victim died and you are not to use that testimony to determine the defendant's guilt or innocence". Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 12:49:40 PM 10:50am Thurs, June 30, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Edit-fix date.MB Next defense witness is Dominic Casey. Baez is up...... Baez is showing the witness a photo and an email. Is that an email you sent on Nov 15, 2008? Yes. Does it fairly and accurately depict the areas that you searched? It would be fair but not specific. Is that a Google map? Yes. Luke sent me this map and asked me to point on the map where I searched on Suburban Dr. This map was prepared in Nov of 2008? Yes. Where you had searched was much fresher in your mind in Nov 2008 than it is now? Yes. When did you go out to Suburban drive? Nov 15, 2008 you sent this email marking where you searched that day? Yes. Everything you testified to in this case so far is further in time than what you said in your email on Nov 15, 2008. Baez is showing the jury a blown up version of the first map that Dominic marked about his search of Nov 15, 2008. Frank George is up....... When you marked that map on Nov 15, 2008, you weren't being precise? No, it was a general area. The defense also showed you a blow up and you said where you searched was closer to the bend in the road. The one he marked is more accurate than the blown up one. Dominic says he walked into the woods in an open area and walked maybe 30-40 feet. These pen marks are not precise they are just general. Baez is up........ Baez is showing him the blow up of the map he marked on Nov 15, 2008. Baez is asking him if that is the only place in Orlando that he searched? Yes. Witness is excused. Baez is publishing a video with a stipulation read to the jury. It is a news video of the command center, manned by George Anthony. It is to be considered true. Publishing the video to the jury. It shows a poster that was hung up with the Henkle duct tape at the command center tent. Next defense witness is George Anthony. Baez is up........ Did you just see the video and the duct tape that was there? Yes. That was your duct tape? I don't know, it could of been someone else's duct tape. Did anyone bring any duct tape? I don't know. Was that a Publix that you were at? Yes. How many Publix did you go to? 2. So not 50? Do you know which Publix that was taken at? No. At that location did anyone else bring Henkle brand duct tape to the command center? I have no idea. When you came from Ohio, that is the same place Henkle brand duct tape is made at? I have no idea. When you lived in Ohio did you have a dog named Mandy? Objection. Sidebar.....sidebar is over. Did you have a dog named Mandy in Ohio? Yes. Did there come a time when the dog died? Yes. Did you pick the dog up at a vet? Yes. Was the dog wrapped in a blanket? I don't know. Was the dog in a plastic bag? I don't know. Did you have a dog named Bo? Yes. When did Bo pass away? 15 years ago? Was Bo buried in a plastic bag with duct tape? I don't know. Did you have a cat named Penny? Yes. Was Penny buried in a bag with duct tape? I don't know. How about Ginger? I don't know. How about Misty? I didn't have a pet named Misty. When Caylee was found did you tell LE, that was the way you used to bury your pets? Ya. Sidebar.....sidebar is over. Jeff is up......... Have you ever taken a dead pet and thrown it in a swamp? No sir. Witness is excused. Next defense witness is Cindy Anthony. Baez is up.......... Did you have a dog named Mandy in Ohio? Yes. Casey was a toddler when Mandy died. How was she wrapped, when she came back from the vet after being put down? I brought a blanket, her baby blanket. I was holding Mandy in a blanket when she died. She received her back wrapped in the blanket and black plastic with packing tape? Duct tape? No. Did you have a dog named Bo? Yes, he was taken to a vet by George and Casey and he died on the table. He was buried in the backyard, Lee was in first grade and Casey was 4. Was the dog buried in black plastic and tape? Yes, that is the way he came from the vet. Did you have any other pets that were buried? None that the vets had secured like that. What did you use to bury them? We used a towel and a favorite toy with one of the dogs then a couple of garbage bags then clear plastic tape. Did you ever tell me you used duct tape? Sustained. Linda is up......... You did not euthanize your pets with chloroform? No. Did you put duct tape on their faces? No. Did two of your pets die close together? Yes. Casey was a senior in high school? Yes. George and I wrapped the dogs in bags and sealed it with tape. Why did you do this? It was something we did for a period of years. We even had a headstone for one of the dogs, a lil marker. Was Casey present when the dogs were buried? She was present at one of them and with Bo, she was not present with Mandy. I buried Mandy by myself. When she was a a senior in high school she was aware of the way you did the burials in the yard? Yes. Baez is up......... The tape was used to seal the bags? We taped them in thirds so they would be compact and no air was in. Witness is excused. Next witness is Lee Anthony. Baez is up........ Were you present when Mandy passed away? 3 or 4? When was the first time you remember your family having to bury a pet? I don't remember being present for Bo, or Ginger but I knew they were buried. I buried one pet with plastic bags and duct tape. The only other pet was my grandmothers pet. My grandmothers pet was given to us in a black plastic garbage bag with clear tape. Who was in charge of burying your family pets? My parents. Witness is excused. Judge is recessing for lunch till 1:30pm today. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 02:41:52 PM 1:30pm Thurs June 30, 2011 Court is in session. Warning: This is not a transcript or verbatim. Everyone was talking over each other and I tried to single them out as I could. Mason is talking.... Your honor before we broke there was information about the records of Cindy Anthony's work records and we need to hold a Richardson's hearing on that...sidebar without court reporter....sidebar over. Judge is asking if Mr Baez has anymore witnesses? No, sir. Judge is asking Casey if she wants to testify and that it is her decision alone to decide not to testify. She has had ample time to discuss this matter with her attorneys and no one has forced her not to testify. It is her decision to not testify and it is given freely. Casey Anthony understands all of this and she does not want to testify. Jury is returned to courtroom. Baez is talking..... He has a stipulation he would like entered into the records: The attached documents are true and correct records of Shurtape Business. He is offering it into evidence. THE DEFENSE RESTS!!!!!!!!! 1:40pm The jury has been excused for legal reasons. Judge asks if the state intends to give rebuttal testimony? Linda says yes and it will take less than a day. Judge says there has been some concerns raised about some of the state's discovery and Mr Mason will be handling that. Mason is up.......... Yesterday we got work records for Cindy Anthony to attempt to impeach her testimony on the times she testified that she made the computer entries regarding chloroform. We are objecting to this based on a clear discovery violation. Ms Anthony's testimony was not new, nor a surprise for the state. They had this information since July 2009, they knew since then that Cindy said she made those computer searches. They subpoena records now to impeach her. We are now prejudiced by this and want that to be sanctioned by that not be allowed in their rebuttal. Linda is up......... She says that she has only a one page item that she wants to introduce. We have only asked for documents for specific days. We have received emails in regards to our inquiries. The Excell spreadsheet looks longer than it is, it is just the log entries of Cindy Anthony's computer terminal and Cindy's work activity. It is correct for Mr Mason to say that Cindy said she did searches for chlorophyll but not what she testified to. She testified that Gentiva would have her work records. The defense should know because of their continued discovery violations that exclusion is a final remedy. We have only had a short time to react to Cindy Anthony's testimony to the jury. The state acted as quickly as possible to get the necessary documents and advised the defense as soon as they knew. Mason is up......... You have said this is not to be a trial by ambush, the state had this information 2 years ago. Since I joined this case last year, we have taken lots of depos. In Cindy Anthony's depot, she clearly testified about the chlorophyll and the search. The state should not sit back and allow Ms Anthony to testify about such an important thing and to then tell the jury that she testified falsely. We think the state should be told, No, you don't get to do that. You must not reward the state and support the prejudice in a capital murder case such as this. Allowing Ms Sims in a lunch hour to look at those documents is not fair. I ask you to not prejudice the defense with this clear discovery violation. Judge is asking if Cindy ever said she was not working when she was clocked in? Linda said we spent most of the time talking about her searches. She only said that she made a search for chlorophyll because her dogs were acting lethargic and she wanted to find out if bamboo was the cause for them to be ill. Baez says that Cindy did say she may have searched for chloroform, it went on to mention other areas....that he is looking for. Judge is asking Linda when she asked for the records and notified the defense right away but she had not received any documents and she would let them know when she got them. Judge said, did the state know what Ms Anthony was going to testify about? We did not know she was going to testify that she was going to say that she was not at work when it said that she was. Baez says that Cindy said that she did say in her depot that she may have looked up chloroform and she did look up alcohol and peroxide in that time period. Judge asks if the defense was aware that Cindy would say despite what the records at work would say they would be meaningless? Baez says yes, we were both aware of that. How far she went into it, I do not know, it was Linda's depot to handle. What prejudice would the defense suffer other than her being impeached? Baez says we would be severely punished because it would look like we were knowingly lying to the jury. There is no remedy to this other than exclusion. Cindy could plead the 5th amendment. The judge says if that she does that all of her testimony will be stricken and the jury told to disregard it. Baez said we are at the end of our case we have rested it and we do not want the stigma of false testimony on our case. Judge says unless someone tells you they are going to get up and lie, that is when counsel gets into trouble. Counsel can only count on witness to tell the truth. They could go South or shade their testimony. Baez says I agree with that but with discovery violations, should the state have known this 2 years ago. Linda says, the inquiry is was it willful and intentful. Cindy tried to follow her testimony with emails and passwords and on and on and we followed up on it. We are not saying that the defense knew this or that it would come up, we did not know this either. It did just come up. The head guy from Gentiva is here to report. Baez said we would need our computer experts to look at their computer records. The state just dropped this on us and the timing is way too late. Judge says before Cindy took the stand, did you know that she was gonna say that she was at home and not at work? Yes, they were in evidence. Her work records do show her at work, she said she is not. Judge says to Baez, where you aware that the records of work were meaningless. Yes, Sir. The rest of the testimony was what Linda got Cindy to testify to. The judge asks if the work records introduced were they computer generated? Linda says yes. Was there any indications for someone to look at those records to see if anyone tampered or monkeyed with those records? No, sir and we actually agreed to a stipulation to that. Baez says that they thought there was always an explanation that Cindy could give to why it said she was at home when it said she was at work. The state decided to go get more info and introduce this new discovery. Judge is asking for anything else? NO. Judge decides this is NOT A DISCOVERY VIOLATION!!!!!!!! As soon as the state knew, they gave it to the defense. Trials are supposed to be about the truth and the jury is supposed to hear the truth and the jury is to hear the truth and then speak the truth. I will like in any trial to give an instruction to give or not give anyone's testimony the same weight or no weight. Now I need to decide how long to give the defense to look at this. From what both sides have done in this trial is stipulated to records already. Both sides know the penalty for fabrication of records if proved at any point of time is subject to being throw out if their is a verdict of guilty. I understand this man from Gentiva is under a time pressure but I am going to give Ms Sims time to talk to this gentleman. I will make him miss his doctors appointment if necessary. Everyone knew this was coming based on Ms Anthony's testimony. As an officer of the court consistent with the oath you have taken how much time do you need Ms Sims? I am not really sure, maybe an hour or so with the first individual and then there is another individual. Linda says there is not really two people to talk to, one is just the person that compiled the records and got them from where they were stored. The only time difference is that they are in Central time. Why does this man need to be in Atlanta tomorrow? If the appointment is 7:45am, couldn't he make his appointment later? 2:20 Judge says court is at ease. (not sure what that means) Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 05:29:29 PM 2:30pm Thurs, June 30, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is not in the courtroom. Jeff says that the first witness is going to be Michael Vincent and they are going to want him to smell the can the carpet is in and testify to what it smells like. Jeff says that the jury may to want to smell the evidence. One or two of the jurors smelled the evidence already passed around to them. We are going to ask a witness to smell the can and let the jury know what he is smelling. It is rebutting that some of the defense experts said that there was no smell or is smelled like trash. Dr Furton testified that the smell was in the trash and not the car. He says that the defense continually tried to get the jury to think that the smell was coming from trash. The judge says that on the state's side they have had numerous people testify that it smelled like decomposition. What does this rebut? Jeff says what are we going to do if the jury asks to smell the can themselves? Baez brings up a case and Jeff says that case is only one juror trying to explain what he knew. If this jury decides they want to pop that can of evidence, why couldn't they? Then it would be up to what each one of them smells. Jeff is giving the judge examples of jurors using their olfactory senses. To eliminate this coming up the state wants to bring in Michael Vincent to smell the can and tell them his expert opinion. Baez is saying that this is not what the judge told the state to do. They were to find case law supporting this smelling of this can. What if jury number one knows what decomposition smells like and jury number seven does not? This would significantly prejudice at this point. We knew about this problem at jury selection and now the state is trying again to see if the judge has changed his mind? Baez said under the Fairbanks case the defense had opened the door, that is not the case here. Judge says that he found a Texas case that said the following, the question is not a new one, it has been a problem a great deal of times and it has caused a reversal a great deal of times. This was with jurors tasting whiskey. This is the case the judge told them about in jury selection. Judge is citing more cases. There are 2 cases in the state of Florida that deal with this issue. He is talking about those cases, he is referring to them as jury experimentation. In this case if the jury is allowed to go back and smell a can, what are they supposed to be smelling? Are we asking them to be witnesses? Are they to determine if it is trash or the scent of a decomposing body, in jury selection someone did say they had smelled the odor. I can't remember if one of those jurors are on this jury. How would the defense be able to cross examine that juror? What if one has experience and says that's it, that is the odor of decomp. That would violate Ms Anthony's 6th amendments right to confront that juror or cross examine that juror. The court will make the ruling that piece of evidence will not go back to the jury, I am aware that I am to allow all evidence to go back but judges are not potted plants. I will not allow any smell tests by any jurors. There has been ample testimony to whether there is cutting edge science or voodoo science depending on which side you are on. There have been many experts that have testified to what they smelled. Mr Vincent will not be allowed to testify to the smell in the can. Judge is taking a five minute break. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 05:31:39 PM I am recapping, I have tried everything to read that note but can't just want to let you all know ahead of time. I am sure we will get to read it later. ::MonkeyKiss:: Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on June 30, 2011, 05:32:48 PM 3:00pm Thurs, June 30, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. First state rebuttal witness is Alina Burroughs. Linda is up........ She is a CSI for OC Sheriff's office. They are talking about photos of clothing taken from the drawers in the Anthony home. They entered the photos into evidence. The witness is excused. Linda is entering drawings done by Dominic Casey into evidence. Linda is entering into evidence items from Joseph Jordan, the defense objects, they are at sidebar.....sidebar is over, it is modified and now introduced. Jeff is up........ He is entering into evidence, George Anthony's 8 page suicide letter. It will now be published on the doc camera and the jury can read it at their leisure and in detail. George's suicide note is now being published in court but I cannot read it at all, it is too small for me to read. That is all the testimony the state has for today. They will be ready tomorrow morning. The judge is telling the jury they will hopefully conclude the case tomorrow and they will hear closings on Saturday. He will then instruct them on the law and give them the case to deliberate on. He has excused the jury for the day. The court is at ease again (not sure what that means) people are walking around and they are waiting for something. Mathew Bartlet 28 years old is at the podium, the judge is asking him if he sees what is on the photo? He says that he is extending his middle finger. The judge says what does that symbol mean? The F word. Who was that meant for? Mr. Ashton. The court was in session at that time. Can you see this sign, can you read and write? Did you read this sign? I have read that. Did the court deputy tell you about the rules this morning? Yes. Was there anything about this you did not understand? No, sir. Can you tell this court, why you should not be held in contempt of court? With posted signage and with what the court deputies tell you in court. You gestured to Mr Ashton the F word in open court, why should I not hold you in contempt of court? I do not know why I did it. Why did you do that to Mr Ashton? What did he do to deserve the middle finger? It was just some stupid thing. Was the jury in here? Yes, they were. Do you know what would of happened if some of the jurors would of seen you do that? No. Sir, would you care to give any excuse or mitigating circumstance before opposing this sentence? I am just sorry. Have you ever been convicted of anything involving dishonesty? No. Where do you work? At TGIF at the Milenia, he is a server. He is saying he is sorry again. The judge said that the state has spent a great deal of money and does he know his actions could of jeopardized all of the work done in this case? Yes sir. I have the deputies tell everyone in the gallery every day of the rules of proper decorum. You are adjudged guilty of direct criminal contempt. He is sentenced to six days in the County jail and a 400 dollar fine. He has six months to pay. He was just put into handcuffs by the deputy. Sir, you have a right to appeal, if you cannot afford the service of an attorney the court will appoint an attorney to represent you. He is appealing his verdict. How much do you make a year? 14grand. He owns nothing in excess of 4 thousand dollars. He is being taken to OC Jail. The judge is making a photo copy of the sign for this matter. Baez is asking the judge if he can serve a subpoena to the Gentiva guy that is going to testify for the state. The judge says they can. Frank George said that the guy from Gentiva said that he can't get the records for the defense till next Thursday due to the 3 day weekend. The judge said it is what it is and court is recessed until tomorrow morning. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on July 01, 2011, 09:31:06 AM 8:53am Fri, July 1, 2011 Court is in session. Jury is not present. Warning: This is not a transcript or verbatim. They were all upset and were talking over each other, I got as much as I could get without adding anything. Judge says I understand that you have some issues to be brought up early Mr Baez? Baez is talking about having a stipulation with Gentiva. They knew about her being salaried and what she was going to testify to. Gentiva was deposed yesterday and Ms Sims said she asked to talk to the state computer experts and they haven't talked to her. He also said that computer experts Osbourne and Stenger have new expert opinions they are going to give and they are not in reports. There is also someone waiting to testify outside that doesn't have a report. That there is someone else coming to testify without a report. Baez says, lol, that they have lived up to there end and they expect the state to do so too. Linda is up.......... Ms Anthony said during her testimony other things that were not in her depot and she has had them checked out. She has informed Mr Baez of what the computer witness said, it is in rebuttal to Ms Anthony's testimony. The experts say that Ms Anthony did no key word searches and she did not engage in a remote log in. Baez is up.......... This task they would have to do would take 2 days worth of work, we would of like to of been able to have our expert go in and look at this work. We don't know what software they used, or how they did this. They could of placed us on notice but they didn't they waited till our case was closed. I told the state yesterday that this is not what the discovery order said and this is not fair. Not fair, not fair. I need to see what there expert opinions are in a report and then have my experts look in to it. Here was the big issue that I got into trouble with, new opinions that are not in trouble with. The court was firm on this all along. Jeff is saying that Dr Goldburger will state that there is nothing in the sediment that was washed in the brain cavity. Dr Spitz said you had to open a skull for it to be protocol. There is nothing in Caylee's skull to indicate the brain dust that Dr Spitz talked about. Baez is up........ He is saying there experts are not forensic pathologists and should not be allowed to testify about what is protocol in an autopsy. Baez wants the rules to be the same for each side. He is getting very upset about being ambushed. Jeff is up......... He is saying that this is not a surprise that opening the skull being protocol was wrong. Baez is wrong on this matter. Baez is up....... Dr Warren can not talk about organic matter in the skull, he is a toxicologist. Judge says the bottom line Mr Baez says that I will give you the balance of this morning to take a depot but we will be here tomorrow and Sunday. Baez says he wants their testimony to be excluded. Both sides asked for tomorrow off to prepare closings but we will work tomorrow and back her Sunday and Monday and Tuesday and Wednesday. You are saying your surprised and I will allow you to take a depot. I want to read these reports and find out that is in the report. Jeff says it is in the report. Baez says just the brain washes are in the report. The expert is saying that there is NO BRAIN MATTER from decomp, not that it is. Judge is tired of this and just wants a copy of the report. Jeff is mad and raised his voice when Baez said he admitted there are expert opinions that are not in the report. Judge is mad now and says this better not be an imaginary problem, these jurors are ready to return to their homes. Judge says we are in recess, subject to recall. While Baez takes depositions. Judge brings up a matter about Dr Rodriguez and tells them to be ready to work later this evening. The judge said he doesn't care what you all do folk's in reply to Jeff asking if they can work tandem to Baez taking depots. Court is in recess and the Judge walked out very upset. 9:17am Court is in recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on July 01, 2011, 06:35:16 PM 1:35pm Friday July 1, 2011 Court is in session. Baez says he has a potential objection that may arise with the first witness. If he is going to testify to reports that he did not compile, we are going to have a problem with that. Judge said if they are business records they are coming in, he is establishing a hearsay exception due to them being business records. The jury is being returned to the courtroom. State rebuttal witness is John Camperlengo. Linda is up...... He is general counsel and he is chief compliance officer for the Gentiva Company. There are numerous regulations they must comply with. Most of their documents are patient files and they maintain computer files for various company records. They have a 10 year retention period for most documents. Documents are maintained in Kansas, a security officer maintains those records. Gentiva has servers for email but most is maintained in Kansas. It is kept in the time zone of central time zone. Gentiva compiles emails received by employees and emails deleted by employees. They have a very easy retrieval system. Emails are backed up and maintained off site. There is a record of all of this and it required by the HIPPA laws, it is a very tight system. Do you know if Gentiva holds documentation of what is happening at particular work stations? Yes. Records maintained under a specific user? Yes, everyone has a unique log in and a record is maintained of that persons data. Linda asks him about clocking in? They use a system called Unity and a time stamp is made and recorded. Do you know of Cynthia M. Anthony was an employee of Gentiva in Florida in March 2008? Yes sir, I was called by the OC Sheriff's office in July 2008 and was asked about her records. Linda is telling the judge that there is a stipulation to be read: In 2008 Cindy Anthony was an employee of Gentiva and these are her records, they are to be considered true and accurate. Linda is introducing a document into evidence. She shows it to the witness and asks him is that the profile of Cindy Anthony? He says yes. Does the employee profile say what Ms Anthony's profile was? Yes. CMANTHON. Is this the list of the emails she sent and received in March 17-21st 2008? Yes. Linda is entering documents into evidence. She is showing them to the witness. Are those the deleted, received, sent emails of Cindy Anthony the week of March 17-21st, 2008? He says these are the records from those days. We have done this many times before. Linda says those are emails so they are the pretty standard Outlook form of emails? Yes. As custodian of records for Gentiva did you ask for the log and log out records for Cindy Anthony for the week of March 17, 2008? Yes, I did it was part of the subpoena request. This is the log in information. Was it kept in the conduct of Gentiva Business? Yes. She is publishing it for the jury during the witnesses testimony. Can you see the document on your screen? Yes I can. He is telling what he is showing. It tells where it was located and what it means, it shows that Cindy logged in March 17, 2008. She was going back and forth between different applications. He is saying that it designates whether it was a laptop or a desktop and which terminal. The same terminal was used the entire week. User CMANTHON was at a user station from March 17, 2008, they are talking about different times, I am confused here, I think it will all make sense soon. If you are active it stays on it,keeps you logged in. The activity is the same for March 18,19,20. The user logged off at a different time on the 21. I am kinda lost here they are going fast and giving different times. She is showing him a new document an Excel spreadsheet. Linda is publishing it to the jury. The witness says this is a general report of the user CMANTHON all of the info for that user of the week March 17, 2008 -March 21, 2008. He is explaining the document it is in central time. It shows her work station and the log in times and log out times for CMANTHON, it has the job number, the record number and the Gentiva number. He is explaining how it shows how Cindy's work activity shows up. They just keep adding records they don't change records. He is explain Cindy's activities the day of 3-17-08. The business records of CMANTHON was working on 3-17-08 till I think they said 4pm Eastern time. I am not sure of the time here unless they say it again. On 3-21-08 CMANTHON was working all afternoon till 4:06pm Eastern time. This time I am sure of. He is talking about record keeping laws they have and that over-time was compliant. Linda says based on these records does it show that CMANTHON on 3-17-08 was using the system between 1:41Eastern time to 3:00pm Eastern time. Does it also show that CMANTHON on 3-21-08 was working between 2 and 3pmEST? Yes, that is correct. Baez is up........ Where Cindy Anthony's records subpoenaed from you in 2008? No, I wasn't working then. Is this the first time you have been called to impeach Cindy Anthony? Yes, objection, wants a sidebar judge says no. Witness is excused. Next witness is Deborah Polisano. Frank George is up....... Where did you work in July 2008? Gentiva in Winter Park, Florida. She ran the office. She supervised 20 -25 plus field staff. Do you know Cindy? Yes. Were you here supervisor? Yes. What were your responsibilities for her? Her job performance and evaluations. What was Cindy's job? She had a team of field staff and she was responsible for the clinical aspects and that team, it was an office job. Did she have to leave the office to perform this job? No. Was she an hourly or salaried employee? Salaried. Did they have to log in and out of work? Yes. How much time was allowed for lunch? A hour or half an hour. Would they have to log out of the computer if they went to pick up something at the drug store? No, the computer would shut down. How did you log in? Put in your user and your password. You mentioned about an auto log off what is that? If your system is up and running what is the period of time would it be inactive before the computer would shut down? 15 min, then they would have to relog in. Was Cindy a capable employee that would work hard? Yes. Would she take a 3 hour lunch? No. Who would have to do their job? I would. Back then would you characterize yourself as a tough boss? No. But you expected people to do their jobs? Yes. Can anyone use their work station? You would have to put in your user ID. The computer would reflect who would be putting in that information. It was a HIPPA compliance issue. Did Cindy during March of 2008 have the capability of working at home or a laptop computer? No. Could she log on to her Gentiva account from anywhere else? No. Would it be possible for you to fix Cindy's log-in for a 4 hour period? Theoretically but I wouldn't. He is publishing a document. Do you recognize this is a Time Card Report? Yes. Let's talk about 3-14-08 what is PTO? Paid time off. On 3-17-08 that she arrived at 8am and signed off 10 hours later? Yes. On 3-21-08 it says she also worked a 10 hour day? Yes. She is explaining how the time cards work and then she approves it and it goes to payroll. Being a salaried employee means that sometimes you work more than 40 hours per week? Yes. Do you get comp time? If she is home and supposed to be at work, what would happen? That would be against the company policy and the law. Is there a Bank of America close by to Gentiva? Yes, right down the block. Baez is up..... Employees are allowed to do errands during the middle of the day? Yes. Did they show you a Bank of America receipt? No. Did they show you a receipt where she should of been at work? No. When you say running errands, what about a Dr. appt, would you have to do all of their jobs? No. Cindy Anthony had to go to a tow yard? Yes. How long was she gone? Objection not the same time period. How many hours was she gone for the tow yard? Probably 2 hours at the most. What time was she gone from? Late afternoon. Have you reviewed her records for July 15, 2008? No. She was working on her computer before she left and she worked on it after she came back. There was quite a big discussion about the car that day and Cindy did not want to leave? Yes. Frank George is up..... If you had to do an employees work you would do their work with your own password? Yes, on my own computer. Witness is excused. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on July 01, 2011, 06:37:42 PM 2:50pm Fri, July 1, 2011 Court is in session, jury is present. Next rebuttal witness is Bruce Goldberger. Jeff is up........ The witness is a Professor and has lots of education. He is a forensic toxicologist. He tests body fluids for volatile compounds or substances. He is in contact with the ME. He was contacted by Dr Garavaglia in 2008 and traveled to Orlando to take samples from Caylee's remains. He took pieces of bone and bone marrow, hair, matted hair and saline washes. Sidebar.....sidebar over. Strands of hair and soil from matted hair. Where all tested for volatile compounds? Some not all. How did you collect the wash from the skull? They sealed the sutures of the skull and added saline and then shook it and then poured into tubes, they did that twice. They ran an analysis of the washes and there was no decomposition of the brain in the washes. Baez is up...... Did you say that you collected something from the femur? Objection......the judge said he opened the door and you get to go through it. Sidebar.....sidebar over. Dr Goldberger, you collected bone marrow? Objection. Sustained. When you did the saline wash you did a crude type method while doing so? It is what it is, it is the best way to get out what's inside. When referring to products of decomposition you are talking about a couple of compounds not DNA? You are not a DNA analyst? No, I am not. Sustained. Did you send them for any further testing? No, I sent them to the ME in Orlando. Witness is excused, he slipped on the way down from the stand and said he was ok on the way out. Next witness is Dr. Michael Warren. Jeff is up............ He is a Director of Anthropology of Florida University. Are you aware of any protocol of opening a skull in a human skeleton? No. It is not considered best practice to open a skull. Is there a reason not to open it? It is not necessary. There is an opening already and there is no compelling interest and the negatives of doing that is the next expert can't review the skull undamaged and he finds it invasive to further damage the human remains. He is explaining the hole in the bottom of the skull. There is a way to examine the skull with an instrument through the hole. They have a number of human skulls and they have none sawed open? Yes. Is there any concern in sawing a child's skull? Yes, they are more fragile and you can create fracture's in the child's skull. Jeff is showing the blow up of Caylee's skull and the fracture made by Dr Spitz when he sawed open Caylee's skull. Yes, that fracture was not there before and the sawing from Dr. Spitz caused it. Does anyone recommend opening a skull? No. Are you aware of the documents in human rights cases, genocide, etc of opening skulls? Yes, it is not allowed. Baez is up.......... You are the witness that did the video? Sustained. You are not a MD? No. You can't testify intelligently what a forensic pathologist would do? No, I am talking about what someone would do with a skull with is a an anthropology case. You are testifying about what a skilled doctor did in this case, Dr. Spitz? Yes. You are talking about human rights papers and protocols? Yes. Are you aware of the protocols in the ME autopsy protocols? Why do you look inside the big hole of the skull? You look for defects and staining. Like the stain that can be left by strangulation? Stains can be seen that way. You testified about a skeletal examination? Sustained. Side bar....sidebar over. Sustained. Did you review the 23 page autopsy report by Dr. G? No. How about the report by Dr Goldberger? No. Witness is excused. 3:20pm taking a 15 minute recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on July 01, 2011, 06:40:08 PM 3:45pm Fri, July 1, 2011. Court is in session. Jury is being brought into the courtroom. Next witness is Sgt Kevin Stenger. Linda is up........ He is a computer forensic examiner for the OC Sheriff's office. He has already testified twice in this case. She is talking about the deleted history file they examined of March 2008. He performed an analysis of certain words. She is showing him an item in a plastic envelope. It is a disc he created from the two software programs he used. She wants to admit it into evidence but Baez is talking to her about it. She wants it entered and Baez has objections but he can't give the judge what he wants and the judge let's it in. Baez wants sidebar...sidebar over. You were asked to do key word searches on that deleted internet history? Yes. What were those key words? Chlorophyll, neck breaking, hand sanitizer, bamboo. He is explaining how the key word searches are done. Linda is showing the jury the report of what the witness is testifying to. He is showing her how to do a key word search, they then search the entire spreadsheet. You were asked to search for chlorophyll that can be done with just the first 5 letters and still get it. She is asking him if this is a search for chlorophyll and he says no it is a search for a chloroform habit. Sidebar...sidebar is over....Using the chlor pulls up any references to chlorophyll, however you wanted to find it? No ma'am. Would this work in the same way for the other software? Yes. You were asked to look for hand sanitizer? Did you find sanitizer in any of these documents? No. You said you searched for the word neck, did you find anything? I found neck-break and found neck in conjunction with other terms? Can you tell this was a pop-up that happened during a browsing? No, this was a Google search for the word neck breaking. This is not a pop up it is a human entering the words neck and break in the Google search. When you searched for chlorophyll you said there were no hits in the key word searches? Yes ma'am. You said you were asked to search for bamboo? Yes. Did you find any searches for bamboo? No. Did you find any access to a Gentiva website? No. There were no searches for Gentiva. Did you use other computer forensic methods to make sure that these words were not there? Yes, he searched other ways and nothing was found. He then took the raw file and repeated the searches and could find nothing and then repeated it one more time with a very old tool called a Hex editor and could find nothing. Did you find some reference with anything to do with dogs? One day, someone searched for fleas. Baez is up..... What is Yahoo.com? It is a domain. I could find out the news? Yes. I could get a map? Yes. I could find out my horoscope? Yes. I could find a drug store? Yes. So Yahoo can not tell me what is going on? He lost me. Yahoo is not a word? What? All you were looking at is the domain addresses for one month? Yes sir. Unless the website had bamboo or chlorophyll you would never get a hit? With this neck breaking stuff you are aware no one's neck was broken in this case? Yes, objection. Baez is not making sense, I am really typing what he is saying or trying to. After neck breaking the next site is martial arts? Yes. That is visited how long after the search, that would of come up on the search page and the user would of had to click a link on that site. You can't say what is on a web page unless you actually visited it? Yes. You weren't asked to do these searches until after Mrs Anthony testified? Yes. You did this to impeach her? Yes. You did not look up alcohol or peroxide? No. Because you already knew they were there? Yes. I swear this is what he said, lol. Witness is excused. Next witness is Det Sandra Osborne. Linda is up....... Witness is a computer forensic expert that has already testified in this case. You were asked to look up certain things in this case. What search terms were you asked to look for? Chlorophyll, hand sanitizer and bamboo. What did you do to make sure that chlorophyll was not misspelled? She used any word with Chloro, she let it run all day and night. She did find it in the Microsoft dictionary that comes with the computer. She never found it other than that. She never found any searches for hand sanitizer. She found searches for bamboo rugs, lamps, panda bears, etc..etc. Did you ever find any reference to bamboo leaves as a poisonous substance? No. Did you find any reference to the Gentiva Website? Yes. Did you find any remote log-in to Gentiva? No. Baez is up....... When something is deleted it goes into unallocated space? Yes. When something is deleted it can be overwritten? No, it makes a new place for it on the hard drive, it still resides there till a bigger file over rides it. So put it into English when things get deleted they get overwritten and it is never recoverable again? Yes it can be. It is hard to tell what is overwritten but data is available until it is overwritten. Linda is up....... Is this why sometimes in unallocated space you will have fragments of a chat? Yes. And when something has been partially overwritten that is obvious to you because it is fragmented? Yes. Witness is excused. Linda is admitting items into evidence. Next witness is Det. Yuri Melich. Linda is up...... She is approaching the witness with the documents that were just introduced. She handed a document to Yuri, it is the home phone records for the Anthony home on Hopespring. The phone number in 2008 was 479-????. What is the next item? George's cell phone records. What is the next item? Cindy Anthony cell phone records in 2008. Gives number. Did you examine those documents to see if there were any calls from the Anthony home or Cindy's cell phone to George's cell phone during the week of June 16, 2008? Yes, there were none. Baez is up........ Sir, you do know that is not the only cell phone that George had? No. You were not made aware by George that he had multiple cell phones? No. You were not made aware by Cindy that he had multiple phones? No. You were not made aware by Krystal Holloway? No. Baez is showing him the records that show George had a company cell phone. Sustained..sustained. Baez can't ask a single question and now he has gone to Mason with it. Where you ever aware that all the Anthony's had (Blue)?? cell phones? Not sure what he said. It is sustained and the witness is excused. Judge asks Linda if there are anymore witnesses and she says no the state is done with their rebuttal. 1:35pm. All attorneys went to sidebar, did Yuri go to sidebar? Video went down. Wow, video is back up. Judge says you are not going to put Ms Anthony on? Mason says no. Judge says let's get this jury out of here then. They brought the jury back in, not sure when the jury went out, the video went down or I didn't hear it. The judge says: Ladies and Gentlemen we are now done with the evidence in this case and you may be excused. Mason is up...... We are renewing our motions for mistrial especially for the super-imposition video. Denied. We also did a Ring Motion with Ann Finnel. Judge is reserving that. Mason wants to add an argument that there is just as much a reason for accidental death as there is for this fantasy death of the defense, chloroform this week, this the next week. There is plenty of evidence of an accident. There is no evidence of any murder, not where she died, how she died or anything else. There is no evidence of pre-meditation, there is no evidence of a felony murder, unless you want to stack things on each other about torture, we want an acquittal. All they have proven is that Miss Casey Anthony has lied and that she was a good mother and the child is dead. All they show is a myriad of evidence that says so what? So what? There was maybe chloroform, maybe duct tape, no DNA. No evidence that this duct tape was placed on this child's face. There is only media hype for chloroform. The smell of the car was all crazy and body farm Dr Vass only found gasoline, it is all confusion. Was there chloroform in the car, who knows? Was the child killed with chloroform? No. The jury should not have to take the burden to guess at this. It should be your burden judge, you are used to burdens. I urge you to move for acquittal. Linda is up....... Mr Mason is speaking to factual arguments and it needs to go before a jury. The case needs to go to the jury. You need to deny the motion for acquittal. Motion for acquittal is denied. Mason says that he is getting ready for instructions and the state is telling the judge they will get to him tomorrow with what they requested. Closing arguments will be Sunday at 9am. Court is in recess. Title: Re: MAGIC EYES RECAPS Post by: MuffyBee on July 03, 2011, 09:41:58 AM Good morning monkeys, I am not going to recap closing statements. I want to be able to watch as they are given. I am sure we will all see them over and over again. I am very emotional today and don't think I can type and watch at the same time. Praying for Justice for Caylee. ::MonkeyAngel:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: ::justice2NJ:: |