Pitbull said the Prosecutor is clairvoyant. I love it! And the ME meets with the Prosecution instead of the defense about the slides, he had all along.......right!!!!!!! He knows he looks so bad and his $250,000.00 is on the line.
Rabbit Hole he heard Jeff Ashton LOL
If he really was alseep I could see him being groggy and out of it till the reality of the issue hit him, on the other hand those injuries sounded bad all layers of skin had those hemmorages and you dont bleed after death, you get hicky/hemmorages from pumping blood once the heart stops the blood starts pooling everywhere and in fact there should be a pool of blood at or near the head physics is where i thought this testimony would come in, gosh I want to see the pics! gosh darn it!
Judge is kinda hot though...
In any other case if the defense attorney accused the ME of fabricating evidence I would have been appauled however with this case and the way its been handled, idk, I'm not so offended.
Just thought I would throw this out here to kind of get what the prosecution has done before they close. From listening to the testimony so far this is some of what I have learned. I admit I can be completely off the wall, but I am thinking this is what I have heard. Please feel free to correct any of my mistakes.
There were deep muscle injuries inside her neck from the front of her neck to the spine and too deep to be caused by trying to insert the breathing tube. The bruising caused bleeding. The pinkish color froth on the floor and wherever was the mixture of the blood and liquid that came up from her throat. Her throat had to be suctioned in the ER because of the blood build up in it before the breathing tube could be placed in her throat.
The only damage to her heart was a 3mm scar if not that size a very teeny tiny scar in her heart between the chambers. This was not a new scar. Also there was a little patch of cells (can't remember their name) that can be found in all hearts just like the little scar. The little cells are like an army going on patrol looking for infection.
The defense wants to say there was scarring all over the heart which would be consistent with heart damage and congestive heart failure, but there was really no evidence of it according to the ME. Her heart was normal except for the little scar and little patch of cells.
If she fell forward from the toilet and hit her neck on the magazine basket the pressure of the contact from the basket to her throat would not be great enough to cause death. Also her forehead or nose would hit the basket before her throat. There probably would be some facial injury from the fall, but there wasn't any.
There are marks on the outside of her neck front and I think on the back of neck. One picture I saw they looked like claw marks on the front of her neck.
Now if there is no heart damage and she has no illness, but does have injuries that are consistent with strangulation how did she die? There was just her, her husband and two children at home. Do we know what goes on behind close doors?
I think it really does come down to the forensic pathology evidence - was she strangled, or was there a natural explanation for her death? The defense has damaged the credibility of the State's ME already, and they have Baden lined up as their witness.
If the defense can't cast doubt on the strangulation theory then there is really only one person who could have done it. If they can offer evidence that her injuries are all consistent with a natural death I think the jury will have to acquit.
I pointed out an example of something I witnesses in which the woman really could have died.
I also saw a woman fall and break 9 bones in her face from a standing position , people who have seizures often die from falls and it takes very little constant pressure to cause death. See the choking game for examples of this.
I think the prosecutions unwillingsness to consider the reality about the amount of pressure needed for death is harming them. They needed to show the amount of force needed for the injuries and they are not seeming to do that yet.
I know the jury must be thinking that most certainly could cut off someones air supply. They might not be thinking it caused those injuries . That would make them question why the prosecution believes this so strongly or that the prosecution is misleading in its case. JMO.
The seizure movement you describe are not accurate to most cases and there are different types of seizures. some people may only ever have one seizure during their life time while others are plagued with reoccuring unpredictable seizures that prevent them enjoying the quailty of life most people take for granted.
This is my first post on websleuths. I have been actively watching the Adam Kaufman trial and am respectfully in quite a different view from many on here.
In my eyes, he is clearly guilty. I do not know how one can explain the deep deep bruising on the front, back, and sides of the neck. When combined with Mr. Kaufmans conflicting stories, I simply cannot see reasonable doubt.
I do realize that the police work was far from perfect. That being said, when one obtains top tier lawyers, their will always be a plethora of things to attack. Their are 1000 different elements to a crime scene, an investigation, reports, medical examiner testing, etc, etc, etc, and great lawyers will always hone in on and empasize the mistakes ( or things that appear that could be mistakes). I can assure you that no investigation is perfect from start to finish.
Although Mr. Millian is an excellent attorney, aren't people seeing alot of this as bluster, talking louder than the prosecution, and just picking on things that aren't even really there?? Or is it only I that is seeing this?? Although the defense team is clearly the more experienced/ dynamic attorneys, is this a reason to acquit a man that seems pretty clearly guilty? I dont know, just my 2 cents.
I would appreciate others thoughts on whether it appears Mr. Millian is grasping at straws that aren't there and is just trying to create a doubt by great lawyering?