Clarification of Expert Witnesses WARNING!! snippy

New Posts

Mrs G Norris said:
Here is Jose Baez' response for clarification of expert witnesses.....I am detecting a ton of attitude here....what is he THINKING!!!??

http://www.cfnews13.com/static/artic...0121512020.pdf
Click to expand...

Me too! What a lot of nothing ... Jose has not given anything to the state that Ashton was not already aware of and IMO is definitely NOT what he was told to do !! Although it's not really surprising, it should be interesting to hear Jose try to defend his "compliance" with the judge's order ... Judge Perry was pretty clear !!

Just as a refresher:
Judge Perry: "It is here by ordered by this court where experts have not prepared reports or examination of their test, on reports on their examinations of tests both the State and the defense are required to provide the following and you will receive this in writing.
The expert’s curriculum vita, a qualification’s of expert,
the expert’s field of expertise on medical specialty,
a statement of the specific subjects upon which the expert will testify and offer opinions,
the substance of the facts to which the expert is expected to testify and last but not least a summary of the experts opinion and grounds for each opinion."

This doesn't even come close to reciprocal discovery ... you know, the kind of discovery the state has been turning over for the past two years ... jeeze
Not only is Jose refusing to comply with the order as it was plainly laid out and NOT his own "interpretation" of it, but he filed this TODAY at 10 AM ... guess he "interpreted" Judge Perry's order to file it by NOON TUESDAY to mean whenever the hell he felt like it!

:mad:
 
So does JB think the cadaver dogs heard GA and CA when they said the trunk smelled like it had a dead body in it? When you find a body you usually don't need the dogs to identify it as a body. I agree they are a tool pretty much what the experts use in their line of work to come to conclusions. I'm confused. Why would the experts argue about the dogs?
 
Holy attitude, Batman!

Am I the only one who was disappointed JB didn't break out his box of Crayolas for this?

:crazy:
 
LambChop said:
So does JB think the cadaver dogs heard GA and CA when they said the trunk smelled like it had a dead body in it? When you find a body you usually don't need the dogs to identify it as a body. I agree they are a tool pretty much what the experts use in their line of work to come to conclusions. I'm confused. Why would the experts argue about the dogs?
Click to expand...


Yeah, I'd have to say it's pretty ridiculous that JB is suggesting since the dogs can't be "cross-examined" they shouldn't be allowed in. It's common sense what the cadaver dogs do and what it means when they do what they do. What, is his next move going to be to say that the coffin flies shouldn't be allowed in because they can't be questioned? Or maybe the smell of death not allowed since it wasn't "bottled up" that first day? This gives us a pretty clear view into what his defense is going to be.
 
This:

Screenshot2010-12-16at114449AM.png
 
am I reading JB wrong? In 4 (b) of Fairgrieve, is he suggesting that since the dogs alerted on the trunk, yard, etc and NO BODY was found in any of those places, that they're obviously not reliable? He uses casey's right to confront her accuser (the dog) and "the fact that the alerts resulted in negative results for human remains".

Is he for real?
 
What an absolute "unusual person". I can't even believe he put that in a Court pleading.

Asinine.
 
So it's pretty much confirmed. They have no defense, no alibi, etc. It's simply going to be an attempt to gimmick their way to a not guilty verdict by crafty use of counter-experts. Shameful.

Is he really arguing that since dogs are a "tool" they shouldn't be allowed to be used?? This is so poorly written and lacking in any type of critical thinking, I don't even know how to interpret it.
 
LambChop said:
So does JB think the cadaver dogs heard GA and CA when they said the trunk smelled like it had a dead body in it? When you find a body you usually don't need the dogs to identify it as a body. I agree they are a tool pretty much what the experts use in their line of work to come to conclusions. I'm confused. Why would the experts argue about the dogs?
Click to expand...

I agree that the JB's tone is unprofessional. I guess I am almost immune to it. Sadly, I just expect it now.

That said, while researching Dr. Fairgrieve, reviewing comments JB has made in other hearings and now, this - it is abundantly clear that JB is gonna do everything he can to exclude the cadaver dog alerts. He is really fighting this one. He does not want jurors to hear about the K-9 alerts on the Pontiac.

This one is going to be interesting to watch. I've been researching it a bit and was surprised to learn how often cadaver dog alerts are excluded. That in no way means these will be...that is yet to be determined. There are several good links posted throughout the thread on Scott Fairgrieve thread linked here.
 
Duh Baez, they'll be interviewing the dog handlers, not the dogs.
And your expert that you're using to examine them isn't even a canine expert himself!

WTF?
 
Mrs G Norris said:
This:

Screenshot2010-12-16at114449AM.png
Click to expand...

well yes in the absence of a body cadaver dogs are not 100% certain... BUT THEY FOUND THE BODY!!!! So you can't declare a person dead on the basis of cadaver dog hits. But once you have the body and are certain that the death did in fact occur, the dogs are much more reliable at determining where the body has been.
 
Soju said:
am I reading JB wrong? In 4 (b) of Fairgrieve, is he suggesting that since the dogs alerted on the trunk, yard, etc and NO BODY was found in any of those places, that they're obviously not reliable? He uses casey's right to confront her accuser (the dog) and "the fact that the alerts resulted in negative results for human remains".

Is he for real?
Click to expand...

He thinks he is but boy oh boy is he in for a rude awakening! This infuriates me to NO ends!! This baby (Caylee) Just like my brother in my siggy, needs Justice. We as Caylee's FAMILY, since she apparently had none NEED Justice!!
I am sick to death of JB, and I think he is ruining his own career, what little he had. Sorry to rant guys but sometimes Lady Justice just makes me want to cry . :(
 
Forensic anthropology is the application of the science of physical anthropology and human osteology (the study of the human skeleton) in a legal setting, most often in criminal cases where the victim's remains are in the advanced stages of decomposition.

What does this have to do with negating cadaver dog findings?

I'm simply baffled with JB's B.S!
 
JSR said:
What an absolute "unusual person". I can't even believe he put that in a Court pleading.

Asinine.
Click to expand...

BBM

Sure you can. :angel:

You are a brilliant paralegal and you have read enough of the crud he has previously filed. I know you can believe it. haha!
 
The cadaver dogs are but one "indicator" that something was very wrong.

Considered alone, they certainly can NOT prove a "dead body". Anyone can argue that they may not be relied on as "proof" of death.

BUT...

when the canine alerts are combined with 31 days, gas chromotography, zero cooperation from family, duct tape, and other pieces of "circumstantial" evidence, they support a theory.

Short of video, a case like this is as strong as the sum of its parts. IMO, the sum has not been tallied yet. But it's looking pretty high.

JB wants to get as much thrown out as possible in order to reduce the "sum".

JMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 186 more.
Total: 1,654 (members: 187, guests: 1,467)

Online statistics

Members online
187
Guests online
1,467
Total visitors
1,654
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,802
Messages
17,959,116
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top