2010.12.15 Dr Jane Bock Report & CV

[LolaMoon08]

(n) Sanctions.
(1) If, at any time during the course of the proceedings, it is brought to the attention of the court that a party has failed to comply with an applicable discovery rule or with an order issued pursuant to an applicable discov-ery rule, the court may order the party to comply with the discovery or inspection of materials not previously disclosed or produced, grant a continuance, grant a mistrial, prohibit the party from calling a witness not dis-closed or introducing in evidence the material not disclosed, or enter such other order as it deems just under the circumstances.

LOL... Oh Jose... do you really have to go to these extremes in order to get your girl the "mis-trial" you promised her?

Seriously, the Florida Bar can not turn the other way... he blatantly lied in open court. He lied to Judge Perry's face. He violated rules of discovery.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Post trail IMO.

 

[Kathy1964]

I'm not sure that this report was sent to JB in Sept. I think that is when she wrote it, but it was not sent to JB at that time. At the end of the report, note that it was notarized on 7 Dec 2010 in Colorado. I believe that is when she actually sent it.
I think that is not unusual for experts to hold back their reports until the attorney asks for it. A technique to avoid giving it to the opposition.

 

[nums24]

I'm not sure that this report was sent to JB in Sept. I think that is when she wrote it, but it was not sent to JB at that time. At the end of the report, note that it was notarized on 7 Dec 2010 in Colorado. I believe that is when she actually sent it.
I think that is not unusual for experts to hold back their reports until the attorney asks for it. A technique to avoid giving it to the opposition.

Notarized 4 days after deadline, hmmmm, last minute editing? It was still in violation of HHJP's order for the 12/3/2010 deadline, unprofessional posturing: http://www.ninthcircuit.org/news/Hi...tional Discovery & Other Dicovery Matters.pdf

 

[RR0004]

I'm not sure that this report was sent to JB in Sept. I think that is when she wrote it, but it was not sent to JB at that time. At the end of the report, note that it was notarized on 7 Dec 2010 in Colorado. I believe that is when she actually sent it.
I think that is not unusual for experts to hold back their reports until the attorney asks for it. A technique to avoid giving it to the opposition.

...except that it had been written, and had been notorized...prior to the hearing on December 10th...when he said in open court that none of his experts had written a report. Someone, correct me if I'm wrong.

ETA: or was the judge's wording "how many reports did the prosecution receive?" I don't remember off the top of my head.

 

[RR0004]

So the report...is there anything of substance here? It seems that she's reporting on reports.

 

[nums24]

...except that it had been written, and had been notorized...prior to the hearing on December 10th...when he said in open court that none of his experts had written a report. Someone, correct me if I'm wrong.

ETA: or was the judge's wording "how many reports did the prosecution receive?" I don't remember off the top of my head.

None of the defense team's 13 witnesses has generated a report, but one has filed an affidavit.

Ashton said all prosecution witnesses who have rendered opinions have also written reports.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...thony-friday-hearing-20101210,0,7978103.story

 

[krisskross]

...except that it had been written, and had been notorized...prior to the hearing on December 10th...when he said in open court that none of his experts had written a report. Someone, correct me if I'm wrong.

ETA: or was the judge's wording "how many reports did the prosecution receive?" I don't remember off the top of my head.

I think J Perry asked how many of your experts have authored reports and Baez repled ....NONE Ashton had already told the Judge he had received zero in relation to expert witnesses.

I guess he could pretend he didn't know Dr Bock had taken the trouble.:waitasec:

 

[Dignity4Victims]

Looking at Freeman's CV he is VERY focused on spinal and neck injuries.
Need to look at how that could play into Todd Mac as an accident reconstruction specialist.

Odd, isn't it, that 'accident reconstruction' would still point to Casey Anthony's guilt of child neglect as a best case scenario, yet the Defense is also denying that Caylee's body was put there by Casey, but instead, by someone else months later?

Uh, Baez, you can't have it both ways. Pick one and fly, boy, your props are sputtering.

 

[nums24]

I think J Perry asked how many of your experts have authored reports and Baez repled ....NONE Ashton had already told the Judge he had received zero in relation to expert witnesses.

I guess he could pretend he didn't know Dr Bock had taken the trouble.:waitasec:

It;s in one of these video reports I believe, I'm too tired to look though:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5892046&postcount=3901"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Media Links - *** NO DISCUSSIONS! ***[/ame]

 

[zoey]

Please Judge, stop the insanity! I sure hope JB finally gets a contempt charge! After watching his last interview after the hearing, I do believe he is upset he has to actually work!

YEPPERS...I am so tired of the whine "the State needs to roll up their sleeves to get the info, (wait for it :crazy just like the defense.....tire some---

 

[zoey]

Did Baez flat out lie to the court when he said that none of his experts had authored reports? :waitasec:

wouldn't be the firs and surely not the last...remember he also wasn't notified that the call was from the jail way back when --- heck I'm even sure that a thread could be made of lies that the defense has said....and it would probably run as long as the A's.....just sayin':angel:

 

[Intermezzo]

What does CV stand for ?

CV=Curriculum Vitae (Latin: course of my life)

In the United States and Canada, a curriculum vitae is used primarily in the medical profession and academic field.

A CV elaborates and is more detailed (including personal details) on education work history, publications, achievements etc... than a Résumé and a CV can be very long

 

[kaRN]

Did Baez flat out lie to the court when he said that none of his experts had authored reports? :waitasec:

Seems so and on tape. :furious: I knew he was lying anyway. His story to the judge was akin to telling the teacher your dog ate your homework. I'm so hoping he gets nailed and soon.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

12/1510-Response to States Motion on Clarification Of Expert Witnesses
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/SKMBT_C45210121512020.pdf

Above PDF is Baez' clarification to what the experts will testify to...

Seems Baez was less than truthful when he said his experts didn't prepare any reports...then BAM....here's a report filed

THANK YOU MM!

I do hope the court has taken notice of Baez' integrity/truthfulness...JMHO


Justice for Caylee

 

[kaRN]

....and then stupidly file a report with the old dates on it? Could he have not had the report resubmitted to himself by the expert with more recent dates on it and had it co-signed in order to avoid exposing himself (not that I want to give him tips on deception, but still)?

He could ask but they'd say no. H*ll he probably did ask when he asked them to falsify their records by saying there were none. Their records are legal documents all on their own however. They couldn't even ammend it and include a more recent date unless they noted in the record what had been ammended when and why.
I'm so glad it was JB lying about his experts and not his experts throwing all ethics and protocol out the window. I had completely lost faith in the medical community last week. This week I get to go back to knowing the unethical buffoon is JB.
I'm thinking about writing the Florida Bar about my disgust. I'm not sure what they'll do but I know I'd feel better.

 

[faefrost]

Looking at Freeman's CV he is VERY focused on spinal and neck injuries.
Need to look at how that could play into Todd Mac as an accident reconstruction specialist.

Sooo the duct tape was to hold her head back on after she had a little "accident"?:waitasec:

 

[kaRN]

12/1510-Response to States Motion on Clarification Of Expert Witnesses
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/SKMBT_C45210121512020.pdf

Above PDF is Baez' clarification to what the experts will testify to...

Seems Baez was less than truthful when he said his experts didn't prepare any reports...then BAM....here's a report filed

THANK YOU MM!

I do hope the court has taken notice of Baez' integrity/truthfulness...JMHO


Justice for Caylee

It will be interesting to see what they disagree with the SAO experts on. Most of his witnesses have that disclaimer attached that they will rebut unthruthfullness presented by the state. I also find it incredulous so much of his expert testimony would be left up to chance ie: I don't know what their specific testimony will be.
My guess is he won't be throwing in the expert wildcards if he doesn't in fact know what they'll say. They aren't Casey fans and they don't love her or think she's hot. They aren't about to look like idiots professionally to help ICA or any accused walk. They may actually tell the truth :dance:
Dr Eickenbloom for example. I'm glad he looked at pictures. I've seen pictures of the Vatican. It doesn't mean I can answer questions about the smells or sounds there and it doesn't turn me into an expert on Catholisizm (sp?). Just a person who can compare the picture to other pictures I've seen of similar architecture.
I would think forensic investigation should require all the senses and not just sight coupled with experience.
JMO

 

[JWG]

My first reading through leaves (pun intended :thumb me with the impression any rebuttal from Dr. Bock will be pretty weak, but I will need to re-read it and Hall's report a couple times to come to any conclusion. Her strongest argument might be that the leaf litter could have been a very recent accumulation, but then again when I read Hall's report I was left with that impression anyway, as "previous fall" to me meant the fall of 2008 (his report was written in February). He did not preclude the possibility that the leaves accumulated in late November, which is the fall.

Also, she says nothing about Hall's conclusion that the remains had to be completely skeletonized and disarticulated before roots could even begin to grow. She just argues that Hall cannot draw any specific conclusions about the rate of root growth. However, Hall in my opinion is not specific, as he gives what appears to me a pretty wide time range.

The real question for Ms. Bock would be whether, in her expert opinion, root growth to the extent found on the bag and remains could have occurred in anything less than the 58 days between Casey's jailing and the discovery of the remains. I kind of doubt she would. :snooty:

 

[kaRN]

Sooo the duct tape was to hold her head back on after she had a little "accident"?:waitasec:

Well the problem with that is it contradicts Dr Spitz who found no trauma or cause of death. ROFLMAO!!