Evidence subject to Frye - *UPDATED* 2011.05.09 (ATTN: ALL ORDERS IN!)

[shotzie]

RH sometime gets full of himself an seems to back the Defense alot..I know he is a Defense Attorney, but he has slammed Baez in the past..He seems to be on a teetle totter .
Personally I rather read AZ Lawyer or Hinky Meter she is very knowledgeable an easy to understand..
I believe in the End, Casey is going down all the way..

There is NO reasonable doubt if you are a common sense person..PLZ Juror's no engineers..(spector trial) grrr

 

[cloud9]

RH sometime gets full of himself an seems to back the Defense alot..I know he is a Defense Attorney, but he has slammed Baez in the past..He seems to be on a teetle totter .
Personally I rather read AZ Lawyer or Hinky Meter she is very knowledgeable an easy to understand..
I believe in the End, Casey is going down all the way..

There is NO reasonable doubt if you are a common sense person..PLZ Juror's no engineers..(spector trial) grrr

Well said! I agree.

 

[Oakley]

I wonder: if Dr Vass is engaging in 'junk science' (as RH purports,) why then would the FBI back and finance this? What am I missing here? While I don't agree with RH, I respect that he conceded that Valhall is of the opinion that Dr Vass' work IS peer reviewed. We shall see.

 

[LolaMoon08]

I'll be able to watch the hearings, but I don't know how much I will be able to contribute to posting because I was completely lost on the defenses expert witnesses reports/depositions? I really don't understand Logan? I am unsure about what he is disputing?

Can anyone help me understand?

 

[ZsaZsa]

I wonder: if Dr Vass is engaging in 'junk science' (as RH purports,) why then would the FBI back and finance this? What am I missing here? While I don't agree with RH, I respect that he conceded that Valhall is of the opinion that Dr Vass' work IS peer reviewed. We shall see.

What rubbish RH writes at times. You can certainly see why he disabled the comment section.
I wonder how Alexander Fleming's discovery of Penicillium mold would have stacked up to peer reviews. He worked in a state of organized chaos; but for that fact we would not have had antibiotics when we did, as it was a culture plate left lying around for weeks that provided the answer to the treatment of bacterial infection -oh and once published his discovery was largely laughed at or ignored by his peers.
He also naturally had a great financial interest in his work, as we all do.

 

[ynotdivein]

RH did not disable the comments section after all. You can access it on the links bar displayed right under the headline for his latest article. (Said ynot while choking down some crow feathers.)

 

[Oakley]

What rubbish RH writes at times. You can certainly see why he disabled the comment section.
I wonder how Alexander Fleming's discovery of Penicillium mold would have stacked up to peer reviews. He worked in a state of organized chaos; but for that fact we would not have had antibiotics when we did, as it was a culture plate left lying around for weeks that provided the answer to the treatment of bacterial infection -oh and once published his discovery was largely laughed at or ignored by his peers.
He also naturally had a great financial interest in his work, as we all do.

Hi Zsa Zsa, actually the comments are there (at the top of the article.) But yes, I am puzzled when RH seems to pander to the defense. I know he is a defense attorney but ....

 

[Turnadot]

I don't think RH panders to the defence. His blog posts about this case have been pretty balanced, imo, and he's made no secret what he thinks of Baez.

 

[snowbun]

Nums24's posting in Today's News - No Discussion

Richard Hornsby has contributed to the Frye Hearings....

Can I have some Fryes with that Clandestine Grave Detector?

Mar 22nd, 2011
by Richard Hornsby.

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/

Lucky for him he appears to have left off the Comments Section. :waitasec:

I think for Hornsby to ask the question:
“If nobody but Dr. Vass has access to his database, how can anybody in the scientific community determine if the methods and principles he relied upon in compiling the database were generally accepted?”
Hornsby is assuming the “methods and principles” Dr.Vass relied upon are hidden within the database. But how can anyone make that assumption if no one has access to his database? Alright I accept it as his opinion. Mine is different.
My opinion is that the database is simply that, the database….with data only, not the methods and principles. I also think Dr. Vass will be able to explain his methods and principles used as scientifically sound.
JMO

 

[Oakley]

I'll be able to watch the hearings, but I don't know how much I will be able to contribute to posting because I was completely lost on the defenses expert witnesses reports/depositions? I really don't understand Logan? I am unsure about what he is disputing?

Can anyone help me understand?

Wish I could help you out, LolaMoon, but I am right next to you in my understanding (or lack therof.) I believe it was Faefrost who pointed out that Dr Logan actually helped the state's case by acknowledging the inordinate amount of chloroform that was present.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I have been following the Nancy Cooper trial all day every day and just popped in here. Can someone pretty please tell me if the televised hearing are going forward tomorrow? I saw the docket update on the news thread.

**Cancellation of what?


Thank you!!!!

 

[snowbun]

I have been following the Nancy Cooper trial all day every day and just popped in here. Can someone pretty please tell me if the televised hearing are going forward tomorrow? I saw the docket update on the news thread.

**Cancellation of what?


Thank you!!!!

Sorry I can't answer your question. I too am confused. All I know is today the 8:30 time for a hearing tomorrow came and left. I want to believe the 9am scheduled time is still on...but I don't know.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Thank you, snowbun! Maybe someone can enlighten us both!

:seeya:

ETA: snowbun, apparently it was an emergency motion hearing scheduled for 8:30 in the morning that was cancelled. It was a motion for a protection order to keep Yuri Melich from having to sit at the court house on an 'on call' basis. Baez had subpoenaed Yuri Melich for the entire time of the hearings.

The Frye hearing will go on as scheduled from what I can understand.

GEEZ!!!

 

[ynotdivein]

AFAIK, the 8:30 is off but the 9 am stands. http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/default.aspx Clerk's docket shows cancellation of 8:30 a.m. hearing, so all you Left Coasters can sleep in a bit and set the coffee pot to be ready for 6 a.m. rather than 5:30....

 

[LancelotLink]

I wonder: if Dr Vass is engaging in 'junk science' (as RH purports,) why then would the FBI back and finance this? What am I missing here? While I don't agree with RH, I respect that he conceded that Valhall is of the opinion that Dr Vass' work IS peer reviewed. We shall see.

I enjoy RH's sense of humor immensely! I like his stick, sting and move brand of humor.
However, his assertion that the work by Dr. Vass and his compounds had not been peer reviewed made me sit up and take notice. What?? I read on, hoping for evidence of this, a quote from Dr. Vass, something...
Oddly, I found no evidence in his blog. Perhaps he knows something I don't.
Years ago, I audited Dr. Bass's class on Forensic Anthropology, and came away with a healthy respect for this corner of the scientific world, but I digress..
Of course the work done by Dr. Vass has been peer reviewed. The very idea that his work on detectable compounds has not been reviewed by his peers is laughable.
See American Academy of Forensic Science 2002
Colorado
page 205

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdo...852CC99?doi=10.1.1.110.7203&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Postmortem Interval Decomposition Chemistry of Human Remains:
A New Methodology For Determining the Postmortem Interval

States this research project is to present to the forensic community a novel and accurate methodology of determining the postmortem interval.
It also states in this research project, he used 18 subjects.

Here's another, where he lists several compounds found. Not so secret...
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/231197.pdf

Anyway, I do love RH's sense of humor.

 

[LancelotLink]

RH did not disable the comments section after all. You can access it on the links bar displayed right under the headline for his latest article. (Said ynot while choking down some crow feathers.)

Save me a wing. The week is young...

 

[darnudes]

I don't think RH panders to the defence. His blog posts about this case have been pretty balanced, imo, and he's made no secret what he thinks of Baez.

Agreed - shame he never got a chance to take the case, would love to see Richard in action.

 

[Turnadot]

I don't understand why there's a Frye hearing at all; it's so silly. Who cares whether Burger King, or McDonald's is better.

 

[LancelotLink]

Agreed - shame he never got a chance to take the case, would love to see Richard in action.

Wouldn't that have been something?! Has anyone ever asked him what he would do to tackle this case?

 

[darnudes]

There is a marked difference, imo, in viewing photos, seeing a bed, place of death, etc and smelling human decomp. It lingers and lingers and lingers in your nose for a long time - sometimes hours or a full day, but can be more, depending. It can, as I have witnessed, made people physically ill and they couldn't eat for days and when they did eat again, they could "taste" the decomp.

ETA: Of course I realise that my personal opinion, that the jurors should not smell the car, is formed by my own ethics. Others may feel the jury should smell the car, that it's important for them to.

To each their own.

Would not an image stay with you for a long time? I know many jurors who have become ill just from looking at videos/pictures of crime scenes, including lawyers who have fainted - the Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom trial comes to mind. Personally, I don't see the difference and I'm not sure why one method to present evidence is more ethical than another. Not saying you have no right to your opinion, I guess I don't understand your reasoning.