Sniff tests, hair decomp, really so conclusive? Fence sitters thread

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
librarian_mama said:
As someone who has smelled a rotting corpse, I can verify that it smells NOTHING like animal, food, or plant decomp. AT ALL.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, since other species seem to smell the same more or less as far as I know. Do you think it was maybe just because of the size of the body?
 
I imagine we'll be seeing lots of discussion by experts on both sides on this if this ever goes to court.
Click to expand...

Science doesn't lie. You can't fake science. I don't believe in a lot of things, but I do believe in science.
 
jbar said:
I have wondered this through out this case... so animal decomp smells different than human decomp? We had a rat/mouse die under our deck and omg the smell was horrible. Very particular, and disgusting. Kind of "beachy" or fishy smell - but not. Is human decomp different?
Click to expand...

It is COMPLETELY different. I have never in my life smelled anything like it--nothing like an animal at all. Very, very distinctive. A woman committed suicide in a next door apt. and the body sat there for a few days. My aunt's apt. was completely awash in the odor.
 
Seagull, I am a scientific girl myself. You show me dna from hair with a ring that indicates a deceased person and I believe the person is dead. dna doesn't lie. Tonite LE is saying dna says it's caylee's hair and it is from a deceased Caylee. I wish it was different but my intelligence and scientific mind say it isn't so. DNA isn't hocus pocus to me.
 
librarian_mama said:
There has been no reporting of exactly what was tested.
Click to expand...

Right, that's my point. But then the media has reported over and over that whatever it is, it means Caylee was dead in the trunk. I haven't seen any evidence reported yet that takes me to that conclusion. So I'm still hopeful that she is alive. I mean, I would expect for some DNA of Caylee's to be found in the trunk in a normal situation. It will be interesting to see what tests were performed and how conclusive they really are.
 
seagull65 said:
Also, I've been surprised at the way the catch phrase "pathological liar" has been used so widely on TV in describing Casey, without any medical or psychiatric testing having been performed, just ascribing these terms to Casey and it becoming accepted as fact.

I think there could be lots of possible reasons for the strange lack of cooperation and the strange misinformation provided by Casey to authorities. I think she could be in shock, could have had a trauma, could be recovering from drug usage or could even have been drugged, could have a seizure disorder or dissociative disorder, or it could be an innocent but out of control compulsive lying problem, or it could be for some other reason and none of these. But does not have necessarily to be "pathological lying/narcissistic personality". If it were that, wouldn't she make the lies make more sense, if you know what I mean?

So that's what I'm starting this thread for, for anyone who is still considering all the possibilities in this case equally.
So far, there's just the sniff tests and hair linked to Caylee, right? And the stain (in the trunk), still unidentified basically? But hair can get in a trunk on any blanket, toy, jacket, brush or whatever, that gets put there. And then it decomposes. Just ordinary hair that got there innocently, it decomposes just like a body would or any organic matter would. The same with various biological stains.

As far as the dog sniff tests go, I love dogs, and I know they have amazing senses, including their sense of smell, and they are very perceptive animals. I would love to believe like the media and popular culture that dogs are some kind of litmus test to tell us where a human corpse has been. But the two dogs signalled somewhat differently in the grandparents' backyard, right? So, what does that say in itself? They both were interested in the backseat area and trunk of the car. But what if Caylee and Casey had slept or lived in the car at some point in between friends returning from out of town, what if they'd spent a lot of time eating and being in the car, including diapers or whatever, sleeping in the car, hair brushing in the car, food in the car, whatever. What if dog sniff tests are really not that scientific, despite dogs' many wonderful qualities and the fact they do have pretty decent noses? Is any "sniff test" really that reliable? I'm not sure that all experts would say they are (whether dog or machine "sniff test".) I'd love to hear if anyone here knows, I know a lot of you all do know a lot!

For one thing, I know that dogs find the scent of different living people to be extremely different, we don't all smell the same to them at all, that's precisely how dogs can "track" where an individual has gone. We don't have one "human" smell. So how would the smell of humans be all one category when decomposing, you know? This so-called "human decomposition" smell that they love to keep repeating in the media. To dogs' noses, wouldn't we be more likely to smell different? Would body fluids or hair innocently deposited in a car which are then decomposing in the heat for some time smell different to a dog than a dead body having been there? To the human nose, I understand that decomposition (whether animal or human) has more or less the same characteristic scent, doesn't it? I know I've smelled it in the case of animals and it's an unmistakable smell, and I can't say that it was different between a squirrel or bird or raccoon or hermit crab. I've even known of an animal with a kind of gangrenous injury that had quite a bit of the decomposition smell even though it was alive. Could a dog's nose be misled by rotting pizza or other food deposits or other innocent decomposing stains or substances, decomposing sausage or chicken or cheese or whatever else might be on a pizza (all of those decomposing animal proteins)? Where is the actual proof of the scientific reliability and validity of cadaver dogs. Is it admissable as evidence in other developed countries?

In short, I'm still hopeful this little girl may be alive. I know her mother may or may not be troubled, immature, or disorganized (or it may only look that way knowing what we know so far), but I have not seen any motive for her mother to harm her, she didn't have a history of doing so and if Casey had actually wanted free of the child she could easily have left the child with her parents and just taken off. In the police interviews, all of the friends/acquaintances interviewed, even the one she'd stolen money from, said they could not imagine Casey harming Caylee and that her behavior toward Caylee had always been affectionate and normal and that there had always been a normal degree of caring about the child.

While I consider it possible that the child has died, I think there are still lots of possibilities in this case, and I think the authorities should be investigating everyone in Casey's social and on-off work circle, from anyone at the club to friends or acquaintances she stayed with and friends of those friends, because someone may hold the key to finding Caylee. I've followed a good part of the research done by websleuthers here on some of these avenues, and it's always so interesting and impressive. Anyway, here's a fence-sitter's thread, the one for the people who think the authorities should still be investigating EVERY avenue.... I didn't see another fence-sitters thread or one along these lines, if there is, please clue me in and I'll remove this one! Everyone's input very welcome here.
Click to expand...


Um...could you tell us what an "innocent lying problem" would be? A pathalogical liar is not really a DSM-IV classification, it describes a person who lies about everything, especially things they don't "need to" (like to protect themselves from consequences).
 
jbar said:
I have wondered this through out this case... so animal decomp smells different than human decomp? We had a rat/mouse die under our deck and omg the smell was horrible. Very particular, and disgusting. Kind of "beachy" or fishy smell - but not. Is human decomp different?
Click to expand...

The dead rat/mouse under your deck does not even come close.
 
krimekat said:
Sgt. John Allen with the Orange County Sheriff’s Department confirmed . . . [t]here was a dead body in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car, and that body was Caylee.

UPDATED: 8:50 pm EDT August 31, 2008: http://www.wftv.com/news/17340180/detail.html
Click to expand...

I'll continue to sit on the fence til I hear it from his mouth himself. Not trusting reporters on this one. I want to believe there is still a chance.
 
seagull65 said:
Right, that's my point. But then the media has reported over and over that whatever it is, it means Caylee was dead in the trunk. I haven't seen any evidence reported yet that takes me to that conclusion. So I'm still hopeful that she is alive. I mean, I would expect for some DNA of Caylee's to be found in the trunk in a normal situation. It will be interesting to see what tests were performed and how conclusive they really are.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious why in the world you think that A. The FBI is not an accurate source for information and B. It is so difficult to determine rather basic scientific information such as the difference in dead vs. live human tissue, and DNA identification?
 
Whose mouth? Like do you mean on video? You think a reporter would misquote/lie about what LE said or did not say when the nation is watching?
 
It's called DNA. Every single person's DNA is different. The accuracy of DNA testis is like 99.99999% The hair was tested for DNA and came back as Caylee's. Not only as Caylee's but a dead Caylee.

However, to truly judge someone guilty I would have to hear all the evidence in a court of law. At this point we are all speculating but from the dna of a dead caylee, a corpse in the trunk, casey never coming forth with info her daughter was missing ever, everything being a lie out of her mouth, I would say she killed her daughter. Either thru extreme neglect or on purpose. But to actually judge a case I would have to hear the whole case in a court of law.

AutomaticAuttie said:
How can they even tell if that is Caylee's hair?
Click to expand...
 
librarian_mama said:
I'm just curious why in the world you think that A. The FBI is not an accurate source for information and B. It is so difficult to determine rather basic scientific information such as the difference in dead vs. live human tissue, and DNA identification?
Click to expand...

I think she is saying exactly what I say. Where is the briefing?? Why have we not been told. So why believe it until we hear it from the pd themself. I'm with you Seagul!
 
However, to truly judge someone guilty I would have to hear all the evidence in a court of law.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Caylee is dead, that is proven. Who killed her is still an unknown quantity.
 
So why believe it until we hear it from the pd themself.
Click to expand...

A direct quote from a lead investigator on the case, is hearing it from the PD themselves. This is not a leak or unnamed source "close to the case".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 87 more.
Total: 2,853 (members: 88, guests: 2,765)

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
2,765
Total visitors
2,853
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,493
Messages
17,969,836
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top