2011.06.22 TRIAL Day Twenty-five (Morning Session)

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JB sounds so reluctant when he says "any REdirect? on those issues?"
 
Rallihanna said:
My guess- she ran cleaning fluid thru the syringe to wipe out the chloroform.
Click to expand...

I'll bet that Disney bag was always in the trunk to medicate Caylee with something. If the ICA's parents saw it, perfect! It's a Disney bag they can't see inside! When she disposed of the body, she didn't need the bag anymore since Caylee was dead. Tossed it!
 
Jury coming back (11:52)

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF KAREN LOWE BY JB - continued

Unidentified hair (Q-107) on collection paper from the scene.

She then referred to her 3/30/10 report.

Other individuals tested - Robin Maynard, Christine Mankiewicz, Melissa Cardiello, Sarah Coervel, Kelly Wood, Gerardo Bloise and Jenny Welch.

Stipulation that this is not a complete list of people at the scene.

She was able to exclude these people and ICA and Caylee.

Currently the hair is unidentified.

6/25/09 report.

Any found in the items from the scene were compared to the hair mass and none were consistent.

9 reports - Number of hairs inspected that did not have signs of apparent decomp? She said that there could be hundreds of hairs.

Only one had signs of apparent decomp.

No further questions.

CROSS EXAMINATION BY JA

The 107 hair, it came from collection paper from some item but she doesn't know what relation it had to the scene.

The hair with apparent decomp was reported as being found in the car trunk.

She does not know (7-15 - 7/16) where ICA was living.

No further questions.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY JB

If she had been given items from where ICA was living those 30 days, she would have examined them. She was never given anything.

Witness is excused.
 
Okay so if the unknown hair was not on Caylee or the bag she was in it's a non-issue to me.

One of the trash dumpers may have shed some hair or something.
 
Did Jeff just want to make sure she is done and excused....yes she is.
 
JSR said:
So, does anyone still think the DT is even going to launch an attack on Kronk in their CIC?? Or call GA to the stand for that matter.

Seems I see a shift in defense. They seem to be highlighting what the State DIDN'T find in the evidence. Huge shift from what they claimed in OS.
Click to expand...

Yes............the defense so far has been experts and trying to undermine the state's presentation.

BUT............JB's opening statement is out there, lurking in the background. Even though the jury can't consider opening statements as evidence in their deliberations, they will wonder what that was all about.
 
FaerieB said:
Sorry it's taken so long to respond. I had to track down the photos again. There was a needle. (see attachments)
Click to expand...


Now aint that something...this gauge sized needle would be found in a home health care facility, or if someone was using it to administer a suspect substance
 


items from scene were not suitable for comparison or dissimilar to hair mass...issued 9 different reports....excluding hair mass Q-59 from Caylee...how many hairs you inspected? not number that she count....many items had hairs - hundreds of hairs only one....objet overrule - from different locations, home, car, residence....includes kc's entire closet - object not in evidence - id'd from kc's closet


cross - JA
one hair #107 from colletion paper from some item don't know what item....don't know ...hair found with apparant decomp came from kc car trunk - identified....during 6/16 to 7/16 where kc was living @ house where clothes collected..don't know...

redirect on those issues?

Jb -if you would have been given items from where kc was living ...if they were given to me I could...never given any? no sir

witness excuse?

JA - excused without provisions or requirements- subject to recall - return back home.

concludes presentation today....he has an obligation - see you in morning...extend working hours on Saturday



 
tehcloser said:
He didn't clear up the duct tape.............hmmmmmmmmmm.
Click to expand...

I'm concerned about this. The witness described the difference in makeup between the horizontal or vertical fibers only. Earlier I had thought the difference was due to erosion by elements. But that would be an overall change, not only in horizontal or vertical fibers. This doesn't look good. moo
 
It's a good thing the jury has the afternoon off so they can grab some Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz's after that riveting testimony. JB is a master of trial strategy. LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 70 more.
Total: 3,593 (members: 71, guests: 3,522)

Online statistics

Members online
71
Guests online
3,522
Total visitors
3,593
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,663
Messages
17,957,252
Members
228,584
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top