Locard's Exchange Principle in relation to Caylee

JaneInOz

Former Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
2,522
Reaction score
46
I came across this today

Locard's Exchange Principle

and find it fascinating and I do believe this will be what will be the turning point. (for many people involved)

http://science.howstuffworks.com/locards-exchange-principle2.htm

There are plenty of sites you can google to look this up but in essence

Locard's Exchange Principle

Although Locard's exchange principle is generally understood as the phrase "with contact between two items, there will be an exchange," Edmond Locard never actually wrote down those words in the vast amount of material he produced, nor did he mention anything concerning a principle. Locard, however, did write the following:

"It is impossible for a criminal to act, especially considering the intensity of a crime, without leaving traces of this presence."

In other words, Locard believed that no matter where a criminal goes or what a criminal does, he will leave something at the scene of the crime. At the same time, he will also take something back with him. A criminal can leave all sorts of evidence, including fingerprints, footprints, hair, skin, blood, bodily fluids, pieces of clothing and more. By coming into contact with things at a crime scene, a criminal also takes part of that scene with him, whether it's dirt, hair or any other type of trace evidence.

So what do you believe was left at the scene ?
And what do you believe was taken from the scene of the crime ?
And where was it taken to ?
 
I'm guessing she left her fingerprints on that duct tape. And we've already seen the decomp evidence in the trunk, so that could be considered what she "took away"
 
I came across this today

Locard's Exchange Principle

and find it fascinating and I do believe this will be what will be the turning point. (for many people involved)

http://science.howstuffworks.com/locards-exchange-principle2.htm

There are plenty of sites you can google to look this up but in essence

Locard's Exchange Principle



So what do you believe was left at the scene ?
And what do you believe was taken from the scene of the crime ?
And where was it taken to ?



Hi Jane, I would say a plethra of e*idence was taken from the scene's of the crime, death and disposal.


We shall see, but in my mind it is what often happens, that the *ictim is gi*en God's grace to speak from the gra*e. I do belie*e that has happened with Caylee. And I say that with all sincerity. xoxox
 
Great post Jane, interesting Principle.

Here are a few more theories.

Fingerprints on/in the bag.
Trunk fibers on/in the bag.
Anything residual on the duct tape (fingerprints, KC hair)
KC hair in the bag.
All residuals linked only to KC and the A house, no foreign evidence that cannot be accounted for.
Evidence connecting KC found at TL's (soil, another Caylee hair, etc) since that is where she went immediately after Caylee's estimated time of death.
Soil at crime scene in car tire treads.
Evidence still on KC clothing.
 
DNA
finger prints
hair
fibers from Anthony home (mainly from blankets, bath towels or carpets)
dirt/sand
plant matter (maybe on floor board of car, bottom of boots, undercarriage of car)
Something most definitely on duct tape, or at least we hope (teeth marks if she bit the tape to cut it, fingerprints, dna from saliva, fibers, hair, etc.)



Great thread, Jane! I can't wait to read what all the wonderful and insightful people will post here.
 
Hi Jane, I would say a plethra of e*idence was taken from the scene's of the crime, death and disposal.


We shall see, but in my mind it is what often happens, that the *ictim is gi*en God's grace to speak from the gra*e. I do belie*e that has happened with Caylee. And I say that with all sincerity. xoxox


the problem with Locard's Exchange Principle in this case is ...kc is not a stranger and much of that trace evidence can be explained away by the familiarity. However, their is so much circumstancial evidence in this case that a conviction is almost certain.

ot: scandi, what happened to your "v" :confused:
 
Possibly:

carpet fibers from the A home
bedding/pillow from Caylee's room
pesticides/cleaners used in trunk of car
 
the problem with Locard's Exchange Principle in this case is ...kc is not a stranger and much of that trace evidence can be explained away by the familiarity. However, their is so much circumstancial evidence in this case that a conviction is almost certain.

ot: scandi, what happened to your "v" :confused:

That's why fingerprints on the duct tape will be so important.She would have to have direct contact and it can't be explained away.I can't wait to hear what LE got .
 
I think she left a load of "evidence" at the scene... I believe this is why LE immediately secured the house and got a search warrant, before little Caylee's body was even removed from the scene in the woods.
 
I came across this today

Locard's Exchange Principle

and find it fascinating and I do believe this will be what will be the turning point. (for many people involved)

http://science.howstuffworks.com/locards-exchange-principle2.htm

There are plenty of sites you can google to look this up but in essence

Locard's Exchange Principle



So what do you believe was left at the scene ?
And what do you believe was taken from the scene of the crime ?
And where was it taken to ?

jane found this interesting...immediately upon reading three answers came to mind:
1. left responsibilty (i.e., Caylee):furious::furious:
2. "freedom"
3. bars, tonEs and everywhere else so she could party like a rock star...
 
So what do you believe was left at the scene ?
-Casey's finger prints, hair, or other DNA on the duct tape
-Any kind of clothing or accessory (such as sun glasses or jewellery) of Casey's that has been "missing" since mid-June
-finger or foot prints, DNA or hair, on the ground, on tree trunks, or anywhere else close to Caylee's remains
-any material also found at the Anthony home, bedding material, plastic bags, tape etc...

And what do you believe was taken from the scene of the crime ?-
-Soil, dirt, flora etc from the location, on the soles of her shoes
-Same on her hair, under her finger nails and on her clothes, but she probably washed all that the same day or the day after...
-Particles on any item found in the car, apart from what was found in the trunk

And where was it taken to ?

-Anthony's house, the car, Tony's house, wherever else she put her shoes the next couple of days
 
Thanks for all the compliments :)

In regards to familiarity he has even covered that in regards to a example given on that above link Back in 1912 !!!


Dr. Locard tested out this principle during many of his investigations. In 1912, for instance, a Frenchwoman named Marie Latelle was found dead in her parents' home. Her boyfriend at the time, Emile Gourbin, was questioned by police, but he claimed he had been playing cards with some friends the night of the murder. After the friends were questioned, Gourbin appeared to be telling the truth.

When Locard looked at the corpse, however, he was led to believe otherwise. He first examined Latelle's body and found clear evidence that she was strangled to death. He then scraped underneath Gourbin's fingernails for skin cell samples and later viewed the results underneath a microscope. Very soon, Locard noticed a pink dust among the samples, which he figured to be ladies makeup.

Although makeup was popular around the time of the murder, it was by no means mass produced, and this was reason enough for Locard to search a little further. He eventually located a chemist who developed a custom powder for Latelle, and a match was made. Gourbin confessed the murder -- he had tricked his friends into believing his alibi by setting the clock in the game room ahead. Locard's exchange principle had worked.

In regards to Scandi's V it broke LOL

In my first post you will note that I said

"and find it fascinating and I do believe this will be what will be the turning point. (for many people involved)"

And then asked what was taken What was left etc

Ie not just referring to Casey's involvement but to anyone else that went there

:)
 
This may not relate to the actual crime scene. But I've always thought the dogs hit in the backyard either: from GA sitting the cans down and maybe washing them off as he made his way back to the shed. Or the possibility of toys and such being removed from the car and being placed back into the playhouse or sandbox.
 
So what do you believe was left at the scene ?
Hairs, fibres, items belonging to Caylee. Something else was there that caused them to run to the A home, I think it was something that belonged in the home, part of a set of something or perhaps something more personal related to the family.

And what do you believe was taken from the scene of the crime ?
Dirt and leaves. I don't know if that area was wet, as in puddles or standing water, if it was she would take away bacteria and microscopic critters in her shoes. If it was really wet there she could have rinsed out the exterior of the shoe and left evidence in the sole of the shoe. (Edited to clarify: Not the sole, that inside part, where the cushion is...kwim?)

And where was it taken to ?
The clothes she may have worn are probably long gone and in a landfill, if they were dirty. I don't think she got herself dirty (as in physical dirt) and probably figured there was no evidence because it wasn't visible to her. Stashed in the back of her closet, out of sight, out of mind.
 
I view this all as a three-way exchange. From the A's house to the car, from the car to the site where Caylee was left, from the scene back to the car and elsewhere. Tie all three together, you have a good forensics case.
 
I believe all of the above plus hair belonging to the Anthony's pets.
Excellent point... especially true, as I think I'm well groomed and go out into the day covered in white kitty fur, and doggie hairs! :confused: The stuff is hard to clean up, you never get rid of all of it and it's carried everywhere you go!
Yes dfinately pet hair from the Anthony pups will be found, among everything else. I just don't think 'the killer' is very smart!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
74
Guests online
867
Total visitors
941

Forum statistics

Threads
589,923
Messages
17,927,699
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top