snips from the motion:
"There is no question based upon the evidence and the case law that the GC-MS is able to analyze and determine the chemical composition of the gases (air samples) thet were captured in these studies as a result of human decomposition. Forensic science has recognized for over forty years the ability of the GC-MS to do just what was done by Dr. Vass - the separation and analysis of complex mixtures of volatile organic and inorganic compounds."
(The science is reliable and accepted)
"Thus, Dr. Vass, based upon his background, training and experience could offer opinion testimony concerning the odor he smelled emanating from the sealed container."
(The nose knows)
"In Berry v. CSX Trans,., Inc., 709 S0 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), the court held, under Frye and its Florida progeny, when an expert's opinion is well founded and based upon generally accepted scientific principles and methodology, it is not necessary the expert's opinion be genrally accepted as well. It found that alleged defects in the studies upon which the expert relied go to the weight, rather than the admissibility, of the studies, which is to be considered by the fact finder. The court held "the fact that the experts have all derived their opinions from the same generally-accepted methodology..., but simply diagree upon how to interpret the scientifically (and legally) reliable data, is not a valid reason for excluding the ... experts' opinion altogether." ID. at 571. The court noted "Frye allows opposite opinion testimony from experts relying upon the same generally accepted scientific principles and methodologies" Id. at 567 The court concluded " if there are weaknesses or technical deficiencies in the published epidemiological studies supporting the . . . experts' opinions . . ., those perceived deficiencies are appropriate matters upon which to examine and cross examine the experts at trial and, then, for consideration by the fact finder"
". . . the disagreement between the experts is best resolved by the trier of fact, the jury."
I always had faith that the judge would rule this way. The GC-MS is accepted and reliable and the rest is pure opinion. There is no better an expert to help the jury understand decomposition than Dr. Vass and he will be allowed to testifiy. The defense conceded their entire Frye argument when they stipulated that the GC-MS would not be argued as accepted and reliable and they didn't even know it. WTG, DT!!
