2010.11.30 DNA Due Back in 45 Days

[zoey]

It's great to watch all these old videos, TWA...thanks for all you do here!

Can I just say one word about Cindy? WTH is with those EYEBROWS?

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

ITA her daughters eyebrows are funky as well....sorry for off topic :innocent:

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

-----------
Live,I'm sure it is.I saw him recently on Truama,Life in the ER..Discovery Health.
:seeya:

Thanks Nore...:seeya:

O/T..I have my granddaughter at my side. She saw your avi and just started, Nanny, that's Brian singing peanut butter and jelly time...:floorlaugh:
Yes, my grandchildren call me 'nanny'...but not nanny in regards to ICA...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[LancelotLink]

Snipped

Sadly, a dying child with duct tape over their mouth.

Too true. and yet another example of how CA's ever running mouth speaks louder than she intended.

 

[nyvictoria]

TWA, I hadn't seen that video of Cindy on LKL before. You can always be counted on to link to relevant video. Thanks so much!!

 

[debbie0604]

It's great to watch all these old videos, TWA...thanks for all you do here!

Can I just say one word about Cindy? WTH is with those EYEBROWS?

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

OH NO YOU DIDN'T!!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: SEE YOU GOT ME STARTED!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: AND I TRY NOT TO LOOK!! :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh:

 

[wenwe4]

The state is only entitled to see the results or reports that the defense enters into evidence and plans to use at trial. Regardless of who is footing the bill. The defense has no obligation to reveal any evidence or scientific results that they receive that supports the prosecution. The prosecution has an obligation to hand over any and all evidence to the defense, including exculpitory evidence. The defense does not have this obligation in return. It is one of the weighted balances in the system that work to protect defendants rights to a fair and impartial trial.

Thank you for this Fae, does this mean that since there has been no further mention of the dna the defense has no plans to release it to the prosecution or the public? Would this mean that there could be 1) incriminating dna evidence or 2) no dna evidence at all? Otherwise, JB would be calling a media conference to announce the new findings that might exonerate his client.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

Thank you for this Fae, does this mean that since there has been no further mention of the dna the defense has no plans to release it to the prosecution or the public? Would this mean that there could be 1) incriminating dna evidence or 2) no dna evidence at all? Otherwise, JB would be calling a media conference to announce the new findings that might exonerate his client.

I dunno, he has yet to reveal had the "Aha moment" explanation he's been sitting on for 2 years.

 

[faefrost]

Thank you for this Fae, does this mean that since there has been no further mention of the dna the defense has no plans to release it to the prosecution or the public? Would this mean that there could be 1) incriminating dna evidence or 2) no dna evidence at all? Otherwise, JB would be calling a media conference to announce the new findings that might exonerate his client.

Basically. It would indicate that the DNA reports received back by the defense do not support their defense theories or what they will be arguing at trial. It does not mean that what is there is evidence against the defendant. But it could just as easily be no clear evidence found either way. In which case the defense team certainly does not want the prosecution digging through their expert reports looking for something to use against them.

I'm betting that either no viable dna evidence was recovered, or what evidence they did find was limited to the primary players in this saga, Caylee, KC and the A family, who would have come in contact with the tested objects on an everyday basis. In other words they did not find DNA from anyone such as RK, JG or some other mysterious scapegoat to use to spin things.

Ultimately the only conclusion we can draw from the missed deadline is that the defense does not plan on using that DNA evidence at trial. of course given the sloppy and haphazzard approach of thise defense team to deadlines and such, that may be completely untrue as well. The may be planning to use it, but assuming that it will be let in at the last minute for some absurd reason such as the mailman got lost.

 

[DaughterAlice]

I dunno, he has yet to reveal had the "Aha moment" explanation he's been sitting on for 2 years.

BBM

Why, I think you've just coined a useful little phrase!! Once the trial starts, we should all be on the lookout for that "Aha Moment." I'm afraid I might blink & miss it.

 

[LambChop]

BBM

Why, I think you've just coined a useful little phrase!! Once the trial starts, we should all be on the lookout for that "Aha Moment." I'm afraid I might blink & miss it.

I think we have had many, many "aha moments" here at WS. Unfortunately none of them were of benefit to Ms. Anthony. jmo :lamb:

 

[TinaD]

Basically. It would indicate that the DNA reports received back by the defense do not support their defense theories or what they will be arguing at trial. It does not mean that what is there is evidence against the defendant. But it could just as easily be no clear evidence found either way. In which case the defense team certainly does not want the prosecution digging through their expert reports looking for something to use against them.

I'm betting that either no viable dna evidence was recovered, or what evidence they did find was limited to the primary players in this saga, Caylee, KC and the A family, who would have come in contact with the tested objects on an everyday basis. In other words they did not find DNA from anyone such as RK, JG or some other mysterious scapegoat to use to spin things.

Ultimately the only conclusion we can draw from the missed deadline is that the defense does not plan on using that DNA evidence at trial. of course given the sloppy and haphazzard approach of thise defense team to deadlines and such, that may be completely untrue as well. The may be planning to use it, but assuming that it will be let in at the last minute for some absurd reason such as the mailman got lost.

BBM - or was thwarted by traffic.

 

[Searchfortruth]

I've been holding my breath that they don't come back with JG's DNA- remember ICA's out of the blue trip to his place for a non-necessary shower?
I would bet my paycheck that was her purpose...

I hope that it doesn't come back with JG's DNA either, I doubt it will.
Casey had to know that there was the possibility of someone else's DNA being on those shorts. I believe the most likely target would be Cindy or George, probably Cindy. Cindy had the most contact with Caylee's clothes, as she did much of the laundry, taking care of Caylee, etc..Casey is well aware of this. She can also say that Cindy had access to the trash bags, canvas bag, etc...This of course will never work because it was Casey's car that held the decomposing body, not to mention all of the other evidence that points to Casey only. The defense and Casey are desperate and will use any thing they can find to raise "reasonable doubt". The problem is that none of it is reasonable.

 

[miss plum]

BBM

Why, I think you've just coined a useful little phrase!! Once the trial starts, we should all be on the lookout for that "Aha Moment." I'm afraid I might blink & miss it.

During the trial we're more likely to see "uhhhh moments"and "duh moments" and ruh roh moments", and then post-verdict there will be a bounty of "waah moments".

 

[LolaMoon08]

Basically. It would indicate that the DNA reports received back by the defense do not support their defense theories or what they will be arguing at trial. It does not mean that what is there is evidence against the defendant. But it could just as easily be no clear evidence found either way. In which case the defense team certainly does not want the prosecution digging through their expert reports looking for something to use against them.

I'm betting that either no viable dna evidence was recovered, or what evidence they did find was limited to the primary players in this saga, Caylee, KC and the A family, who would have come in contact with the tested objects on an everyday basis. In other words they did not find DNA from anyone such as RK, JG or some other mysterious scapegoat to use to spin things.

Ultimately the only conclusion we can draw from the missed deadline is that the defense does not plan on using that DNA evidence at trial. of course given the sloppy and haphazzard approach of thise defense team to deadlines and such, that may be completely untrue as well. The may be planning to use it, but assuming that it will be let in at the last minute for some absurd reason such as the mailman got lost.

Didn't Judge Perry give the defense a stern talking to about deadlines earlier this month? Something like saying "deadlines are deadlines." I think you are correct that the defense does not plan to use the DNA results because they didn't find anything at all... or it simply all came back linking the evidence to the Anthony home.

 

[Aedrys]

Didn't Judge Perry give the defense a stern talking to about deadlines earlier this month? Something like saying "deadlines are deadlines." I think you are correct that the defense does not plan to use the DNA results because they didn't find anything at all... or it simply all came back linking the evidence to the Anthony home.

Or could they use it against another A? Say their DNA is there, so Casey didn't do it? Could they save this to use as an ambush against another A at trial, I wonder? We already know that Casey is throwing her whole family under the bus anyway. I just don't know if they could hold it back or have to file it if they intend to go against another family member.