Dr G Medical Examiner

[hannahsnana]

No, because shes basing it all on the duct tape, and if a mother panicked and staged a scene, its not homicide. Its weird and not normal, but neither is Casey and there are more than enough for instances to back that up. jmo

Maybe you forgot the Dr. said that the tape was placed pre-mortem.

 

[katydid23]

No, because shes basing it all on the duct tape, and if a mother panicked and staged a scene, its not homicide. Its weird and not normal, but neither is Casey and there are more than enough for instances to back that up. jmo

No, she was not basing it ALL on the duct tape. She used THREE main elements that she said were red flags.
1. The 'accident' was not reported and no one called for Emergency Medical help.
2. The body was hidden and placed in a container.[ garbage bags]
3. There was duct tape wrapped around the face.

And show me 'more than enough instances' where an accidental death included duct tape around the face.

 

[Hot Dogs]

Maybe you forgot the Dr. said that the tape was placed pre-mortem.

She did? I think she did not.

 

[RANCH]

She did? I think she did not.

She said that there is no reason for someone to place duct tape on a dead child.

 

[miss plum]

No, because shes basing it all on the duct tape, and if a mother panicked and staged a scene, its not homicide. Its weird and not normal, but neither is Casey and there are more than enough for instances to back that up. jmo

According to the defense there were two adults present when Caylee died, so however once-in-a-trillion abnormal KC is, it still doesn't explain why GA wouldn't seek help, or vice-versa.

Besides, the defense are blaming everything on GA and RK so why are they even arguing about this, when according them their client didn't put the duct tape on Caylee?

It's impossible to go along with the DT without suspending logic; all their ideas end in a cul-de-sac and when you drive out there is JB in his traffic warden vest giving you new bad directions.

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

No, because shes basing it all on the duct tape, and if a mother panicked and staged a scene, its not homicide. Its weird and not normal, but neither is Casey and there are more than enough for instances to back that up. jmo

Ah, but we have many friends and family members who have testified on the stand that Casey was a loving and caring mother. That Caylee and Casey shared an amazing wonderful bond. A loving and caring mother certainly would panic.. but, that mother would panic to do everything she could to save her child.

Casey didn't report the accident because there was no accident to report. And if there was, she had ample opportunity to report it. Not wait 6 months till there was absolutely no proof left that their baby drowned. Casey hid Caylee because she had something to hide. And it wasn't a drowning or molestation by her father. JMO and all that jazz.

 

[biggirl]

No, she was not basing it ALL on the duct tape. She used THREE main elements that she said were red flags.
1. The 'accident' was not reported and no one called for Emergency Medical help.
2. The body was hidden and placed in a container.[ garbage bags]
3. There was duct tape wrapped around the face.

And show me 'more than enough instances' where an accidental death included duct tape around the face.

You are "absolutely" correct plus she said she was not reported "missing" for 31 days.

 

[Linda7NJ]

She did? I think she did not.

She said there would be no reason to place duct tape on a deceased child.

drowning victims are reported 100% of the time to 911. No matter how "stiff" they are.

 

[hannahsnana]

According to the defense there were two adults present when Caylee died, so however once-in-a-trillion abnormal KC is, it still doesn't explain why GA wouldn't seek help, or vice-versa.

Besides, the defense are blaming everything on GA and RK so why are they even arguing about this, when according them their client didn't put the duct tape on Caylee?

It's impossible to go along with the DT without suspending logic; all their ideas end in a cul-de-sac and when you drive out there is JB in his traffic warden vest giving you new bad directions.

LOVE your analogy.

 

[Hot Dogs]

She said there would be no reason to place duct tape on a deceased child.

drowning victims are reported 100% of the time to 911. No matter how "stiff" they are.

I watched her testimony and understand what she is talking about. But she could not say that the tape was applied before death because she does not know that with certainty. Saying that there is no good reason to put the tape on after death is not the same thing as saying it could not have been put on after death. That's all I'm trying to clarify.

In her written report she states that the tape was applied before decomposition. She doesn't say it was before death. If she had forensic medical certainty that it was applied before death she could have written that in her report. But she didn't.

 

[strawberry]

She did? I think she did not.

I think she said it in the autopsy report.

 

[Hot Dogs]

I think she said it in the autopsy report.

No. The autopsy report (medical examiner's report) specifically says the duct tape was placed prior to decomposition.

 

[strawberry]

I watched her testimony and understand what she is talking about. But she could not say that the tape was applied before death because she does not know that with certainty. Saying that there is no good reason to put the tape on after death is not the same thing as saying it could not have been put on after death. That's all I'm trying to clarify.

In her written report she states that the tape was applied before decomposition. She doesn't say it was before death. If she had forensic medical certainty that it was applied before death she could have written that in her report. But she didn't.

See Page 3 (pdf page 2), last sentence in the paragraph starting "The circumstances of death"

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/7494800/Autopsy-report-Caylee-Anthony

 

[Quiche]

There is an interesting dichotomy.

Dr. Garavalia characterized a "normal parent" who would always call 911 if they found that their child had accidentally drowned. She says this is always the case. The situation with Caylee raised three red flags that pointed to homicide and that is what she concluded in spite of the cause of death being uncertain.

On the other hand, many people would characterize Casey as being an abnormal parent and quite out of the ordinary. I think many could imagine Casey finding an accidentally drowned Caylee and then not calling 911. A call to paramedics means that she loves her daughter, wants to try to save her life, and wants her around for the rest of her life. But again, many could instead imagine her packaging up Caylee with duct tape, dumping her in nearby woods and saying that an imaginary nanny has her and won't give her back. When the body is found, blame is supposed to go on the nanny who obviously applied the duct tape.

Her defense claims that George found a drowned Caylee, then KC grabbed her and cried. Then something about Roy Kronk, but absolutely NOTHING about a nanny. They are not claiming a missing child, nor a kidnapped child, they are claiming a devoted grandfather and ex police officer covered an accidental death. KC's innocent of everything, don't you know...

The DT blew it, ignored every bit of evidence amassed in almost three years, and went with another KC folly. mo

 

[Hot Dogs]

Further, in her report she specifically states that this was a homicide but the cause of death is undetermined. The same report states that the duct tape would have covered the mouth and nose. Now, that would kill a child wouldn't it? They can't breathe and die. Wouldn't the cause of death then be asphyxiation by way of duct tape? But she doesn't say that because she cannot say it with certainty. She cannot be certain that the tape was applied before death and/or that the tape caused death. If she could say that with certainty it would have been in her report.

I just think this is all interesting. I don't mean any harm and don't think she is lying or anything.

 

[Hot Dogs]

See Page 3 (pdf page 2), last sentence in the paragraph starting "The circumstances of death"

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/7494800/Autopsy-report-Caylee-Anthony

Right, I've read that and it is where I'm getting my information. It doesn't contradict what I'm saying - it supports what I'm saying.

 

[strawberry]

Further, in her report she specifically states that this was a homicide but the cause of death is undetermined. The same report states that the duct tape would have covered the mouth and nose. Now, that would kill a child wouldn't it? They can't breathe and die. Wouldn't the cause of death then be asphyxiation by way of duct tape? But she doesn't say that because she cannot say it with certainty. She cannot be certain that the tape was applied before death and/or that the tape caused death. If she could say that with certainty it would have been in her report.

I just think this is all interesting. I don't mean any harm and don't think she is lying or anything.

I don't see where it says it was over the mouth and nose, or would have covered it. It says over the anterior portion of the lower skull, the mandible and part of the maxilla.

 

[megsy]

<snip>

On the other hand, many people would characterize Casey as being an abnormal parent and quite out of the ordinary. I think many could imagine Casey finding an accidentally drowned Caylee and then not calling 911. A call to paramedics means that she loves her daughter, wants to try to save her life, and wants her around for the rest of her life. But again, many could instead imagine her packaging up Caylee with duct tape, dumping her in nearby woods and saying that an imaginary nanny has her and won't give her back. When the body is found, blame is supposed to go on the nanny who obviously applied the duct tape.

You are positively correct. Too bad the defense went with "her grandfather didn't call 911". It really was a bonehead move on their part dragging GA into this.

 

[strawberry]

No. The autopsy report (medical examiner's report) specifically says the duct tape was placed prior to decomposition.

You're right..prior to decomposition, not premortem.

 

[Quiche]

Further, in her report she specifically states that this was a homicide but the cause of death is undetermined. The same report states that the duct tape would have covered the mouth and nose. Now, that would kill a child wouldn't it? They can't breathe and die. Wouldn't the cause of death then be asphyxiation by way of duct tape? But she doesn't say that because she cannot say it with certainty. She cannot be certain that the tape was applied before death and/or that the tape caused death. If she could say that with certainty it would have been in her report.

I just think this is all interesting. I don't mean any harm and don't think she is lying or anything.

That's because any number of things could have killed her: Chloroform, duct tape over the airways, being put in a plastic bag... it's a crap shoot, but it's all murder. jmo