Syringe in bottle contained traces of chloroform

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is the link to the animal decomp:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adipocere

I dont remember someone saying it was deli meat. Is that on report? I saw Oscar mayer

The Oscar Meyer package was empty. The only other food products were empty velveeta foils that looked wiped clean.

No meat products were in the trash bag per OCSO e-mails to the body farm. Haskell's entomology report would have been a WHOLE lot different if there had been a meat product in Casey's trunk or the trash bag. But, the bottom line to the chloroform discussion is no meat means nothing in the trash bag broke down and produced any chloroform gas.
 
Hmmm...after reading this, maybe JB and AL are filing their motions because they want the SA to specify exactly what compounds are here based on the trace amounts. Even though LKB could perhaps get MB to help, why do your own work, when you can have the pros interpret their evidence for you? Just a teeny thought; JB has been awfully lazy about stuff.
 
As I have been searching to try and find out what most of this scientific discovery means I came across a website and I must say I am impressed with how this person has broken down some of the discovery in the Caylee Anthony case. I am not sure I can add the link since it's kind of a blog...but will share part of what I read. Nothing yet on the chloroform, but I did email her. She explains the Roles, DNA, and Other.

I had not taken the Roles into consideration, so there could be more documentation on these reports that would tell us how much of what was found and such... So, again maybe there is more discovery?

"Snip" From Vall
ROLES


First let us address the role of the FBI laboratory reports. They are to present the actual test results, trained observations, etc. They are to deal in fact and to make a call on certain findings/observations from an analytical viewpoint. They do not interpret the data they present past the physical evidence they have, but they log their expert observations in a scientific method so that experts in the given field (DNA, fiber analysis, etc.) can use their observations with confidence to render an interpretation. In other words, the lab reports tend to be “just the facts, ma’am” without extraneous considerations added. When you read the reports you will see this with consistency.
A good analogy of the roles of the laboratory personnel and the expert can be drawn by talking about having an X-ray, CT-scan or MRI. The laboratory technician performs the test, and can even record notes of observations they make during the test to pass onto the doctor who will be interpreting the results, but the technician does not render the interpretation


It should be further pointed out that at times the clinical laboratory specialist can turn out to be the same person who is the “expert” who testifies in the trial.

I guess the important point is even in that situation there are two roles – the analytical reporting of data/test results (role of lab specialist) and the expert interpretation of those results (expert witness).
 
I'm guilty...not of saying that I'm an "expert"...but of claiming to be a chemist by both profession and education. If it would help (and you'd like to verify) I would be more than happy to send you a copy of my college transcript (or any other documentation you'd like to see). Just thought I'd offer. :)
You are so sweet. That is entirely up to you. It would be wonderful so we could ask questions of you in that capacity, but revealing your identity to Tricia is 100% voluntary.

Like I said, my post was not meant to discredit you at all and I want to make sure you understand. but we have been burned by people saying they were an expert in an area only to find out they were full of s^&*&t.

So, I say it as a general disclaimer. :blowkiss:
 
I don't really care too much about the concentrations and amount of chloroform, although I would like to know.. makes it easier to form a mental image of what occurred..

BUT...first there were the computer searches for chloroform.. which I wrote of as kind of silly.. no telling what all a person might look at on the internet just because it crossed their mind, we all look at a lot of stuff while web surfing.... I wrote that off.. then there was the huge amount of chloroform gas in the trunk.. I thought that was due to C&G cleaning it with chloroform or some sort of cleaner like ammonia that can turn into chloroform if combined with bleach.. not a problem, but odd coincidence..

now the needle and gatorade bottle turn up with chloroform .. and this is one coincidence too many for me.
I know now that chloroform was a part of the murder, not just entirely sure how it was used, but the needle is a telling clue. One doesn't put chloroform in a syringe for any other reason than to inject it into something or someone.
 
I haven't been able to get through this whole thread (I've been trying... the kids are really wild today and needing mommy's attention!).

Is testosterone present in steroids that are used for people with breathing problems such as emphysema and athsma?

Hate to quote myself to bump my question, but I was hoping there was an easy answer to this.

I've had to inject myself with steroids for my athsma (in the past). I'm just wondering if it could have been taken from someone with breathing problems that has to take home injections... grandmother, grandfather?
 
For anyone who wants to take a look... on the following link at page 11578 (handwritten at bottom right) you can see that they analyzed Q238.1 with GC-MS. They used selective ion monitoring to look for ions of mass-to-charge ratios of 47, 83, and 85... which are the highest intensity peaks you'd expect to see when chloroform fragments...thats what the top three chromatographs show. Also, note that the chromatograph shows that chloroform eluted from the column at nearly the same retention time (about 5.04 min) regardless of which ion they selectively monitored for.
The fourth chart is the mass spectrum for the compound that eluted at that particular retention time. This IS the mass spectrum for chloroform. This is how it's proven that (whatever sample Q238.1 is) chloroform was present in the sample that they analyzed. I can explain what the mass-to-charge ratios mean, also if anyone is interested but it isn't crucial to understanding the data we're discussing.

Same applies for sample Q240.1 (again, don't have a list, so I'm not sure what it is) on page 11598.
I also forgot to post the link...oops.

http://http://www.cfnews13.com/uploadedFiles/11571-11670.pdf
 
You are so sweet. That is entirely up to you. It would be wonderful so we could ask questions of you in that capacity, but revealing your identity to Tricia is 100% voluntary.

Like I said, my post was not meant to discredit you at all and I want to make sure you understand. but we have been burned by people saying they were an expert in an area only to find out they were full of s^&*&t.

So, I say it as a general disclaimer. :blowkiss:

Not offended in the least and totally understand the disclaimer. I would rather provide my information/identity than have anyone doubt the accuracy of the information that I post. I'll send you whatever you need. :)
 
Does she have a 100% conviction rate?
I mean why even go to trial?

Our justice system is an adversarial one,so by nature, so it will be full legal arguments. If there was only one way to skin a cat and a charge was sufficient to prove guilt, no one would have to go to trial. prosecutors could just declare them guilty as charged and have a judge sign off.

The point is, we can all have an idea about guilt or innocence but unless we look at all the evidence including what the defense may have to offer, where the prosecution is weak, and information that is contrary to popular opinion we can't really have the full picture. This is the beauty of our justice system.


So, while I agree that the SA feels that she has a strong case and she may very well have, much can happen before a verdict and anticipating those things is interesting to me anyway. :)


JBean, sometimes, I wonder if my thoughts and posts are at all mentally illuminating. Much worse, at other times, I fear they won't make the slightest difference to anyone's thought process. However, every so often, I receive a PM or read a post such as yours that gives me heart.

Moving back on track, my question for all readers is: was Casey known to drink blue Gatorade?
 
But what if the goal wasn't to kill her, only to knock her out for a few hours, but something went wrong, resulting in death?

That would be much easier to believe if KC hadn't been so cheerfully unconcerned that Caylee had died instead of merely being knocked out. IMHO
 
For anyone who wants to take a look... on the following link at page 11578 (handwritten at bottom right) you can see that they analyzed Q238.1 with GC-MS. They used selective ion monitoring to look for ions of mass-to-charge ratios of 47, 83, and 85... which are the highest intensity peaks you'd expect to see when chloroform fragments...thats what the top three chromatographs show. Also, note that the chromatograph shows that chloroform eluted from the column at nearly the same retention time (about 5.04 min) regardless of which ion they selectively monitored for.
The fourth chart is the mass spectrum for the compound that eluted at that particular retention time. This IS the mass spectrum for chloroform. This is how it's proven that (whatever sample Q238.1 is) chloroform was present in the sample that they analyzed. I can explain what the mass-to-charge ratios mean, also if anyone is interested but it isn't crucial to understanding the data we're discussing.

Thank you. You rock!

Q238.1 is the bottle, btw.

Questions:
1. (1st BBM above) - so they did test specifically for chloroform. Would this be standard to do knowing that control was in a control solution?
2. (2nd BBM) - does the 5.04 retention rate tell us anything about the concetration? What does it tell us?
3. (3rd BBM) - again - how does this relate to the concentration of chloroform.

I think what we're asking is: Is there a concentration level that is above the norm of the control solutions used?
Can you tell what the concentration level is?

Thanks!
 
Like I said, take the discussion elsewhere and read the posts you are responding to more carefully. You will save yourself a lot of aggravation. :)

I'm not aggravated at all, but I will edit my post as apparently it is OT.

Thanks!
 
I disagree? I don't think they performed tests specifically looking for chloroform? I'm neither a scientist, nor a Law Enforcement agent, but I might think like one... and I have slept at a few Holiday Inns. :wink:

I would think that when definitive cause of death in a murder investigation is unknown and the burden is on the State to try to figure it out, then it is likely they instructed that the samples be analysed to determine all possible substances found? (Back to the whole 'mass spectrometer' CSI references.) I think they tested for many substances, discovered the testosterone, & chloroform was present.

Having said that, chloroform is used in many, many control and suspension solutions for forensic and environmental tests. This is why this is so fascinating. Isolating the controls from the results. In the control solutions (which is a norm range from which they can start with) I think they might have found chloroform ranges beyond the control ranges.

HTH

Within the docs they wrote/typed notes to the people they were sending the stuff to. In those notes it says that they question whether "chloroform" or other chemical was used in the murder. They ask the people who are testing to please keep this in mind when running tests. Also, next to the typed parts they added in several diffrent times to "check for chemical thought to have been used in death". They were very specificlly searching for chloroform or "other chemical used".
 
JBean, sometimes, I wonder if my thoughts and posts are at all mentally illuminating. Much worse, at other times, I fear they won't make the slightest difference to anyone's thought process. However, every so often, I receive a PM or read a post such as yours that gives me heart.

Moving back on track, my question for all readers is: was Casey known to drink blue Gatorade?


I read every single post you write on threads I participate in. Occassionally, you have challenged my thought processes. On the other hand, just as I might put some posters off when I am too vehement in my emotional response to Casey's crime, there are some posts when I almost forget the content, because frankly, I am thinking to myself, "Something really awful must have touched Wudge's life personally for such strong negative feelings to exist in regards to our justice system."

I like the prodding for evaluating evidence. I really do. I do sometimes get side-tracked by the feeling that some responses are driven by emotional bias, perhaps due to a personal experience that might cloud your objectivity, too? I fear that I can't alter your thought processes through some of the subjective opinion either.

Everyone's posts are illuminating, IMO.
 
Within the docs they wrote/typed notes to the people they were sending the stuff to. In those notes it says that they question whether "chloroform" or other chemical was used in the murder. They ask the people who are testing to please keep this in mind when running tests. Also, next to the typed parts they added in several diffrent times to "check for chemical thought to have been used in death". They were very specificlly searching for chloroform or "other chemical used".

Thanks, OLG. Good reminder to read all of the emails, too.
 
Thank you. You rock!

Q238.1 is the bottle, btw.

Questions:
1. (1st BBM above) - so they did test specifically for chloroform. Would this be standard to do knowing that control was in a control solution?2. (2nd BBM) - does the 5.04 retention rate tell us anything about the concetration? What does it tell us?
3. (3rd BBM) - again - how does this relate to the concentration of chloroform.

I think what we're asking is: Is there a concentration level that is above the norm of the control solutions used?
Can you tell what the concentration level is?

Thanks!
That is my question too ;)
 
Yes, they did. But when I looked at those pages it wasn't clear to me that it stated chloroform was in the bottle. There was a chart with some scientific graph or whatever. But, they also used controls with chloroform when testing.

The part of the docs that seems to sum up the results does not say there was chloroform. Be back in a sec with the link. . . BRB :)

Not sure if anyone answered the question yet. from hand written page #11526 (page 913 of 1765 from the pdf document from wftv.com)

Chloroform was in the bottle and the syringe.


http://www.wftv.com/pdf/21540603/detail.html
 
Hate to quote myself to bump my question, but I was hoping there was an easy answer to this.

I've had to inject myself with steroids for my athsma (in the past). I'm just wondering if it could have been taken from someone with breathing problems that has to take home injections... grandmother, grandfather?

Shalya, I could very well be off here but I think the type of steroid injections for asthma are usually some form of prednisone. The anabolic steroids that body builders use (and abuse) are entirely different. I think the chemical analysis would easily tell the two apart.

ETA: This article says that the author believes testosterone increases asthma. http://www.anthropogeny.com/T DHEA Asthma.htm
 
I think there's a lot more that hasn't been released. When I first learned of today's document dump, and the syringe, I immediately thought about a media report that was in the local media about a week or two after the announcement late last December that the remains found on December 11th were those of Caylee Anthony.

In that media report, it stated that many investigators working on the Anthony case believed Caylee was deceased but felt her death was accidental. It was reported that after Caylee's remains were found, every one of those investigators who had previously thought her death to be accidental had now concluded that Caylee's death was a homicide.

It became apparent that there was something at the scene where Caylee's remains were found that was definitive, something that made it readily apparent that Caylee's death was a homicide. There was a lot of speculation here on what sort of definitive evidence might have been found.

Likely by the end of December 2008/early January 2009, the investigators knew the results of the tests on contents of the Gatorade bottle and syringe. IF there were fingerprints on the Gatorade bottle and/or syringe, and IF there was DNA on the Gatorade bottle, that is now known too.

If any fingerprints other than Casey Anthony's, or DNA other than Casey Anthony's were found, there would have been another arrest in this case. But, there remains only one arrest, and one suspect, and that is Casey Anthony.

Resp bolded by me...

I really think the duct tape on Caylee's face was what made investigators veer sharply from accidental death to murder.
 
At first I was very worried about the possibility that the needle was taken from JG and used to frame him, however after more thinking...

1) If she was planning on framing JG, I feel like she would have thrown his name out there from the very beginning. Remember when LA said in his depo that when he asked if Zanny was JG KC cracked up and said "No way." I feel like if she was planning on framing him she would have said "You really need to look into him more." It seemed the only person she kept telling her family to look for was ZFG.

2) If JG was working as a cop at the time, don't they have them submit routine urine samples? Would he risk this?

3) It seems KC would have been more of relieved when the news broke that Caylee's body was found. That would mean the syringe was found (w/ JG's prints and DNA on it) and finally cops would be looking into him more than her (in her own little mind that is).

4) How STUPID would a person like JG have to be to dump a syringe with his prints on it at the same place he dumped the body? He was a cop with knowledge of crime scenes. KC was just an idiot. It seems way more likely that she would be the person to dump the "weapon" at the crime scene before he would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
1,119
Total visitors
1,226

Forum statistics

Threads
589,177
Messages
17,915,145
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top