913 users online (177 members and 736 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,004

    Will Computer Experts Cause for Appeal?

    I am confused about the mistrial that Jose Baez asked for today concerning the computer experts and those 2 different programs. One program showed one search for chloroform and 1 program showed 84 searches. Baez contends the program was really pointing to 84 searches to Myspace.

    Does anyone understand this and think that if there is some error in the experts tests or testimony that it could cause a mistrial and this whole case to be redone? I noticed LDB nor Ashton mentioned the 84 searches in their closing nor referred too much to chloroform. All I heard was Ashton state he hoped it was used to put Caylee out before she died. Anyone have any opinons on this?

  2. #2
    GeekyGirl's Avatar
    GeekyGirl is offline I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where I left my keys.
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by kathyn2 View Post
    I am confused about the mistrial that Jose Baez asked for today concerning the computer experts and those 2 different programs. One program showed one search for chloroform and 1 program showed 84 searches. Baez contends the program was really pointing to 84 searches to Myspace.

    Does anyone understand this and think that if there is some error in the experts tests or testimony that it could cause a mistrial and this whole case to be redone? I noticed LDB nor Ashton mentioned the 84 searches in their closing nor referred too much to chloroform. All I heard was Ashton state he hoped it was used to put Caylee out before she died. Anyone have any opinons on this?
    I think the state stayed away from it in closing for this very reason, but the jurors will notice it. I suspect that if they come back with first degree it will be based on the duct tape alone, not sure about the mistrial angle, but maybe it could be an appellate issue? We should probably ask the experts.
    Disclaimer:My posts are my opinion only, unless otherwise stated, and I reserve the right to change said given opinion at any point in time.

    Man has such a predilection for systems and abstract deductions that he is ready to distort the truth intentionally, he is ready to deny the evidence of his senses only to justify his logic-Fyodor Dostoyevsky

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    14
    It will be very interesting to hear from the jurors how much credence was given to the whole chloroform issue. I think it is not significant in terms of premeditation, and what evidence there is, is tainted / suspect. If the IT guy on the jury is savvy enough, they are gonna pick up on that the report is <modsnip>.
    Last edited by beach; 07-04-2011 at 09:08 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    370
    At this point, the only person who can declare this a mistrial is Judge Perry, and IMO he won't.

    It might become an appellate issue if ICA gets the DP.


    If she gets the DP, the most likely outcome to a successful appeal would be a reduction from DP to LWOP.

    If she doesn't get the DP, her appeals will go to the bottom of the pile.

    IMO, this doesn't rise to that level. I'm not too worried about it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6,096
    Yeah, what's the deal??? Can someone explain the problem??

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,232
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    Yeah, what's the deal??? Can someone explain the problem??
    Apparently the one computer search showed she only visited the chloroform site once. Baez claims that it showed she visited Myspace 84 times and not the page for chloroform.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by TotallyObsessed View Post
    Yeah, what's the deal??? Can someone explain the problem??
    The problem as I understand it is that the original forensics and report from the home computer conducted in 2008 showed a google search of "how to make chloroform" one time after having been to myspace 84 times. The report ran in June 2011 with a new software program showed "how to make chloroform" 84 times. In closing, JB stated and it was widely known that the producer of the new program could not get it to run correctly and it took several days to get straightened out and produce a report. The big issue is that the latter report was the only one entered into evidence. JB is saying why did the state not admit the original report into evidence?..obviously because the second one [which is more than likely false] paints the worse picture of his client. The other issue is that Sgt Singer testified to a report created by the vendor of the program - not something he created himself.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by kathyn2 View Post
    I am confused about the mistrial that Jose Baez asked for today concerning the computer experts and those 2 different programs. One program showed one search for chloroform and 1 program showed 84 searches. Baez contends the program was really pointing to 84 searches to Myspace.

    Does anyone understand this and think that if there is some error in the experts tests or testimony that it could cause a mistrial and this whole case to be redone? I noticed LDB nor Ashton mentioned the 84 searches in their closing nor referred too much to chloroform. All I heard was Ashton state he hoped it was used to put Caylee out before she died. Anyone have any opinons on this?
    I am concerned about this as well. I was confused after JB's closing, and thought there really is some inconsistency with this testimony. I would have thought that JA or LDB would have included something in the rebuttal, especially since this was really the only viable point for the DT, IMO. When they didn't offer a clarification today it gave me pause. I hope that it doesn't cause a mistrial or apellate issue.

  9. #9
    I can't see it causing a mistrial. I can see it causing issue on appeals. I am hoping that this is all covered by that portion of instructions that said that they could believe or dismiss the experts based on their judgment. I wish I knew for sure. Everything I have ever volunteered on was post conviction.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
    Posts
    17,235
    The only way there can be a mistrial at this point is if there is a problem within the jury or the jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    the Plains & Jordan-Hare stadium
    Posts
    17,235
    I edited the title of this from "cause for mistrial" to "cause for appeal". It is too late for a mistrial regarding any evidentiary issues.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    3,004
    Thanks Beach!! That makes alot more sense now.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Penn's woods
    Posts
    17,195
    IMHO yes we will see this raised in an appeal.

  14. #14
    The whole Chloroform part confuses me. I understand that it's VERY dangerous to make and the affects only last 15 minutes.

    What do you all think about it....did she make it, was it part of the murder, etc?

    Thanks
    ~*~ Justice for Caylee ~*~

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    5,831
    I think it will be an appellate issue for sure. Evn if there were a new trial, I don't believe any it would exhonerate ICA; she will receive yet another conviction because the State would simply abandon the chloroform issue (which was the weakest angle, in my view) and focus elsewhere. They will achieve a conviction in any case.

    The report never rang true. I have loads of IT experience (from my former position as an IT Admin), and it wasn't making the kind of sense it should have. So what, say I? Lots bigger fish in the sea for the State.

    ;cow:

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Magnotta files Appeal, Hearing for Appeal on Feb. 18th, 2015
    By No_Stone_Unturned in forum Luka Rocco Magnotta AKA Eric Newman
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 02-20-2015, 06:24 AM
  2. Where are the experts?
    By Nedthan Johns in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-11-2008, 06:28 PM
  3. Experts
    By Jayelles in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-25-2006, 06:21 PM