REVISIT Autopsy Report - Location/Decompostion of Caylee's Clothes

[debbie0604]

Not sure where to put this, because it is actually in one of the other reports, but would both the Captains of the Brain Trust take a look & comment on this post brought over from another thread?

Posted by Macushla

Could you delve into the clothed/unclothed theory at time of placement a bit?

I think that this means that there was some "light colored fabric" (it doesn't state specifically what color whether it's pink as in her shirt - or not) on the right anterior (which is the front side) of her scapula (which is the shoulder) and the proximal anterior (front side) of her right humerus (which is her arm). It could be the blanket or remnants of it. The report didn't specifically state which "fabric" it was.

 

[debbie0604]

I think that Caylee was wearing clothes when she died and was placed in the woods. I think that the statement that KC made "they haven't found her clothes yet" was stated because GA gave a different description of clothes that Caylee was wearing as opposed to what they actually found her in. KC knew that what GA described was not really what Caylee was wearing.

Why would she have Caylee placed in a bag and then throw her clothes in with her? Doesn't really make sense. I think she murdered her in rage and then put her in a bag fully dressed (training pants and all). The reason the report reads as if there were "fabric material" is because of degeneration due to months of being in the elements, and decomposition. JMO

 

[azwriter]

I don't know, just reading that Caylee's bones or body parts were scattered around, possibly by animals draging parts of her away, just makes me cringe. My only hope and wish is that Casey is made to read this report of the ultimate damage done to her daughter's dead body.
I find myself, after reading all of this, even more disgusted with Casey.
jmo

 

[ecs5298]

<respectfully snipped>

I think she murdered her in rage and then put her in a bag fully dressed (training pants and all). The reason the report reads as if there were "fabric material" is because of degeneration due to months of being in the elements, and decomposition. JMO

**apologizing for the graphic content**

Just remember, though, that the animals had dragged away the portions of the remains and those parts still had flesh on them to eat so it would have been very early on after the body was dumped. The clothes wouldn't have disintegrated yet and would have been dragged off to Area's F and H if they were on the body. I do believe she was still in the pull-up since pieces of it were found in the same area as the pelvis and femurs.

 

[memorylane01]

would it be unreasonable to think that she changed her clothes for some reason? this leads me back to the drowning scenario. would make more sense to have dry clothes on her before she put the baby in the trunk. i also have pondered the chance that it did not happen at the anthony house.

 

[Marina2]

**apologizing for the graphic content**

Just remember, though, that the animals had dragged away the portions of the remains and those parts still had flesh on them to eat so it would have been very early on after the body was dumped. The clothes wouldn't have disintegrated yet and would have been dragged off to Area's F and H if they were on the body. I do believe she was still in the pull-up since pieces of it were found in the same area as the pelvis and femurs.

A r. humerus and r. scapula were found with the bags in area A. They were noted to have remnants of light-colored fabric on them. I think this is a good indication that she was wearing a shirt since the r. upper arm and shoulder blade had this fabric on it.

The animal activity may have happened at the bags for a period of time before anything was dragged away. This could include tearing or scratching away of the fabric of the shirt in order to expose the torso.

Since there were bones left in the bags after the torso was dragged away it's apparent that some disarticulation had already occurred prior to scattering. If the body was in the bags (or in area A) long enough for disarticulation to occur before the torso was taken away, it's logical to assume that fabric could deteriorate in this amount of time as well.

 

[Dutchie Treat]

would it be unreasonable to think that she changed her clothes for some reason? this leads me back to the drowning scenario. would make more sense to have dry clothes on her before she put the baby in the trunk. i also have pondered the chance that it did not happen at the anthony house.

Maybe Caylee urinated when she died and the shorts got wet? And KC thought it was gross and took them off?

The other thing I was pondering that may give the defense an angle is that someone who "took" Caylee removed her clothing. A male? Abuse? Perhaps pointing the finger at someone else?

Just throwing out some other scenarios.

 

[doobiedoo52]

It didn't sound like there was much in that garbage bag from Tony's. I suppose at first glance, with flies buzzing in it, the pizza was blamed as being the only food item that might attract flies. The paper towels were probably not even considered as a source of the smell by GA & the impound guy. I would guess the decomp on them dried clear and did not stand out. My guess is GA told CA the only thing in there that could have made it stink was the old pizza and it (pardon the pun) mushroomed from there.

 

[Hollys G-mom]

It is not just you. It is a very odd thing to say when your child is missing. I just wish I quite understood WHAT she means by that.:waitasec:

It's my belief that what she was trying to say is this: If my child were kidnapped, I would expect the 1st thing the nappers would do is change his/her clothes. What is the 1st thing LE asks the parents of a missing child? "What were they wearing when you saw him/her last?" So...if following that thought process (whether she was faking it or not) she would expect LE to find her clothes but not Caylee. Also she's young, it's not unusual for someone in thier 20s to say something that sounds stupid to someone older & more experienced. Or anyone for that matter.

 

[debbie0604]

**apologizing for the graphic content**

Just remember, though, that the animals had dragged away the portions of the remains and those parts still had flesh on them to eat so it would have been very early on after the body was dumped. The clothes wouldn't have disintegrated yet and would have been dragged off to Area's F and H if they were on the body. I do believe she was still in the pull-up since pieces of it were found in the same area as the pelvis and femurs.

I agree with you 100%. I just couldn't bring myself to describe "that part" about the animals. Thank you for doing so. You are absolutely right.

When I read those reports, I try to think in a clinical frame of mind, but it becomes very difficult when I get to "that part". "That part" makes me very angry. It makes me wonder how the jury is going to make it going through these documents?

 

[watcher9]

Good question, it seems weird that a shirt would have disintegrated even partially, in only 6 months.....I wouldn't think that would be the case unless it were exposed to very acidic or alkaline material (far ends of the pH spectrum).

It could have been torn by an animal, and dogs do chew on and swallow material (been to the vet for that one!), dunno.

Is it possible that KC put something like lime on Caylee's body so it could "disappear" and the smell would be gone? Then she, thinking the body was gone, would have made the statement of not even finding Caylee's clothes.
Could the shirt have disintegrated from that? Could the floods have washed away all the evidence of any lime?
Remembering back to the grand jury, could GA have mentioned some lime fertilizer was missing or spilled in the garage?

 

[justthinkin]

If Caylee had been wearing the shirt, the shirt would have been dragged away with the torso/spinal column and found with the thoracic vertebrae not in the bag. I think the shirt was in the bag, not on the body. Same thing with the shorts. The dispersal reports show that the femurs and pelvis were dragged away while still attached to each other. If the shorts were on the body, they would have been found with the femurs and pelvis instead of in the bag. The flesh would have decomposed away long before the clothing would have rotted off.

Why KC disrobed Caylee is anyone's guess.

Perhaps it was because she pulled a dead Caylee from the swimming pool. I'm not talking accidental here, but drowned on purpose. I thought too, KC may have applied the tape just after pulling her from the water to keep caylee from coughing up the water on the chance Caylee wasn't quite as dead as KC hoped. If Caylee was only unconscious & managed to cough, if she expelled the water from her lungs she would be alive and KC would have to deal with it all over again. But if Caylee tried to cough & her mouth and nose were taped that would've prevented the water from escaping, and Caylee from being able to catch a breath.

Drowning Caylee is the only thing that explains to me why a dead Caylee was in the backyard. If she wasn't drowned, and instead was killed in the house or the car trunk, then it seems like extra steps for KC to haul her out to the back & have to move her yet again.

Has there been any mention of a swimming suit in with Caylee's clothes in the bag or a missing swimming suit for her?

 

[tweety933]

One of the most disturbing things to me is that the words "BIG trouble comes in small packages" were found with Caylee's remains. How evil is THAT? What does that message mean? COLDBLOODED & CRUEL

I've seen similar things, like when a murderer writes a nasty gram in lipstick on a mirror at the crime scene, WTH. Would that be an aggravating circumstance that would warrant the DP?

 

[smart blonde]

I could be wrong, but I believe it was a t-shirt that was found with Caylee's remains that had the saying "Big Trouble Comes Small".

I don't think it was a message left by Caylee's killer (in my opinion that is Casey), I think that was the 'saying' on the t-shirt. Quite possibly the very shirt little Caylee was wearing when she was murdered.

But, still, I agree... the irony of those words on the t-shirt are quite disturbing to me, as well.

 

[MissJames]

I think it was one of the bounty hunters that worked for LP.

But it was LP who reported it on NG.Not the BH who heard it.

 

[headndownstream]

If Caylee had been wearing the shirt, the shirt would have been dragged away with the torso/spinal column and found with the thoracic vertebrae not in the bag. I think the shirt was in the bag, not on the body. Same thing with the shorts. The dispersal reports show that the femurs and pelvis were dragged away while still attached to each other. If the shorts were on the body, they would have been found with the femurs and pelvis instead of in the bag. The flesh would have decomposed away long before the clothing would have rotted off.

Why KC disrobed Caylee is anyone's guess.

Hmm, and KC's statement "they haven't even found her clothes yet" might indicate she knew the clothes weren't on her. Anyone?

 

[kaRN]

Hi! GA's description did not include that, only that she had on a pink shirt, blue denim skirt, white tennis shoes ~ essentially nothing that was found with her remains. I would think if he had actually seen this particular shirt his description would've been even more detailed than it was. MOO

I wonder if when George is on the stand, he could remember Cindy's exact outfit she wore that day to court including accessories. My guess is he won't be able to. I guess my point is that I'm a little suspect of George's memory to start.

 

[kaRN]

I don't know, just reading that Caylee's bones or body parts were scattered around, possibly by animals draging parts of her away, just makes me cringe. My only hope and wish is that Casey is made to read this report of the ultimate damage done to her daughter's dead body.
I find myself, after reading all of this, even more disgusted with Casey.
jmo

In court she won't have anybody protecting her from her deed. Caylees autopsy photos will be displayed prominently. The fragments of fabric will be there in the courtroom and passed between jurors.
If watching video of KC watching the news will harden a prospective jury pool to her guilt, just imagine what a display the actual jury will get when she is facing evidence in a courtroom.

 

[comomx3]

Brilliant statement! That's exactly what will happen in court. The jury will see KC completely void of emotion when they show different pieces of evidence. Even KC can not fake emotion day after day.

 

[MissJames]

I wonder if when George is on the stand, he could remember Cindy's exact outfit she wore that day to court including accessories. My guess is he won't be able to. I guess my point is that I'm a little suspect of George's memory to start.

Dang,you're good! :clap::clap::clap:
They should ask that! And what was he wearing?