Has the defense created reasonable doubt?

kimmera

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
308
Reaction score
0
A body does not begin to visibly decompose right away. I would tend to think if she could have said that it was conclusively applied prior to death she would have testified to that fact.

What 'reasonable' explanation would there be for placing duct tape on a dead, but not decomposed body? The jury only has to find 'reasonable' doubt to the state's case...not beyond ANY doubt. IMO, there is NO reasonable explanation to put duct tape on a dead baby's face, therefore by not providing any REASONABLE explanation for this, the jury, who are hopefully REASONABLE people, will not find that the defense has provided REASONABLE doubt to the state's case. Because they simply haven't...IMO.

Of course, we are all entitled to our opinions, and hopefully none of us will feel too silly coming back here when the jury makes it's REASONABLE decision, whatever the outcome is. :seeya:
 

gamom

New Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Messages
998
Reaction score
0
Not attempting to be confrontational at all, but what was it the State presented that proved Aggravated Child Abuse had occurred?? After all... that's a mighty big charge in itself. moo

IMO, the lack of the 9-1-1 call when your child is severly injured (found floating in the pool) screams child abuse at the very least neglect. If true, Caylee was found in the pool, she may have been able to be saved. Therefore, she died at the hands of her mother not protecting her. Someone mentioned something about her being in the pool so long it was clear she was dead, parapharsing...which is why KC did not call, that alone says KC was not watching her for hours. Definately child abuse/neglect. As a former foster parent, who has seen children taken away for many reasons, I can tell you abuse does not mean buises or physical harm. Severe neglect and lack of caring for a child falls into that category. At least in our state.
 

clayangel

Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
49
Reaction score
2
You do know that the jury is going to get evidence that was not actually discussed in the State's CIC?? An example off the top of my head is Casey's photobucket pictures. You know, like the one with the little girl looking up at a teddybear with the noose around it's neck? Saying something like "Why do people kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong" not verbatim of course. Something like that.


Really? I didnt know that. Are they marked as evidenceand given with no explanation? I diddnt think evidence could be handed to the jury without its being marked for evidence and let in by the judge?
 

ZsaZsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
11,027
Reaction score
15,227
What 'reasonable' explanation would there be for placing duct tape on a dead, but not decomposed body? The jury only has to find 'reasonable' doubt to the state's case...not beyond ANY doubt. IMO, there is NO reasonable explanation to put duct tape on a dead baby's face, therefore by not providing any REASONABLE explanation for this, the jury, who are hopefully REASONABLE people, will not find that the defense has provided REASONABLE doubt to the state's case. Because they simply haven't...IMO.

Of course, we are all entitled to our opinions, and hopefully none of us will feel too silly coming back here when the jury makes it's REASONABLE decision, whatever the outcome is. :seeya:

Florida's Supreme court has already held that claiming duct tape was placed on the mouth or eyes is after death not a logical or reasonable argument.
Florida vs Huck..
 

Nova24

New Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2011
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
0
I didn't know about the additional pics either. Interesting. Also, people here were bringing up Home Depot video. What is that about.
 

GeekyGirl

I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
714
Reaction score
1

I have a great deal of respect for Dr G, I think she's an outstanding ME and an amazing lady in general. But the facts I can draw from her testimony are: She said the manner of death of was homicide (Homicide is not equal to murder) and the cause of death is undetermined. I understand what you're saying regarding her speculations as to the cause of death possibly being the duct tape, but ultimately she says that she could not scientifically support it being listed as the COD, which leaves room for doubt. I find that to be reasonable, you do not, but we are each entitled to our own opinions. MOO
 

ZsaZsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
11,027
Reaction score
15,227
Not attempting to be confrontational at all, but what was it the State presented that proved Aggravated Child Abuse had occurred?? After all... that's a mighty big charge in itself. moo

Chloroform in her car.
Duct tape over the airways of her child, whose dead body decomposed in her car.
 

gamom

New Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Messages
998
Reaction score
0
And Dr G testified that she could not conclusively say that the tape was placed prior to death, which might give some jurors pause. MOO

Agree. If the cause of death was the tape for sure, Dr. G's report would have said that or she would have said suffocation, etc. The fact that she listed "unknown" leaves room for doubt.

Now, if Dr. G is beleived by the jury, KC is getting the murder or manslaughter conviction. Dr. G said "Homicide" which is death at the hands of another. (KC)
 

GeekyGirl

I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Florida's Supreme court has already held that claiming duct tape was placed on the mouth or eyes is after death not a logical or reasonable argument.
Florida vs Huck..

I've read the case. IMO the introduction of the "kidnapping" scenario by Casey opens the door to a possible staging attempt. Again, you are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine.
 

ZsaZsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
11,027
Reaction score
15,227
I've read the case. IMO the introduction of the "kidnapping" scenario by Casey opens the door to a possible staging attempt. Again, you are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine.

Kidnapping by ZFG? Or GA? Or RK? Which one is she claiming now?
 

GeekyGirl

I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Chloroform in her car.
Duct tape over the airways of her child, whose dead body decomposed in her car.

The single use of duct tape as a method designed to kill would probably not support aggravated child abuse/felony murder according to AZLawyer, but would more than likely be considered premeditated. There are those of us who are not convinced chloroform was involved. MOO
 

GeekyGirl

I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Kidnapping by ZFG? Or GA? Or RK? Which one is she claiming now?

Her initial story to LE was that Caylee was kidnapped by the imaginary ZFG, which suggests she may have considered using kidnapping as a way to cover up the death at one point, hence the staging.
 

ZsaZsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
11,027
Reaction score
15,227
The single use of duct tape as a method designed to kill would probably not support aggravated child abuse/felony murder according to AZLawyer, but would more than likely be considered premeditated. There are those of us who are not convinced chloroform was involved. MOO

Well you would have to discount Dr Vass' testimony in order to do that,so there's no point in discussing that further. We all heard what he said about the chloroform in ICA's car.
 

LongtimeMedic

Former Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
What 'reasonable' explanation would there be for placing duct tape on a dead, but not decomposed body?

RK said he moved the skull with his "meter reader stick" and lifted the bag of remains 4ft off the ground. Wherever that tape once was claimed to have been, can no longer be relied upon because of RK stating he disturbed the remains at the site prior to it being processed. Or, you have to throw out everything else RK said, because unless you believe only parts of what he said he did and found. He clearly blundered with that statement.

I would almost bet my PC that Baez disputes any and all of the scene evidence because of RK's testimony. jmoo
 

LongtimeMedic

Former Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
382
Reaction score
0
Chloroform in her car.
Duct tape over the airways of her child, whose dead body decomposed in her car.

Trace chloroform of unknown origin, and "Henkle" duct tape at the scene wouldn't make that leap for me. jmoo
 

GeekyGirl

I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
714
Reaction score
1
Well you would have to discount Dr Vass' testimony in order to do that,so there's no point in discussing that further. We all heard what he said about the chloroform in ICA's car.

He said there was a "shockingly high" level, but could not quantify it and his partner said that they would not speculate on long it had been there, or what the source of it was... MOO

Edited because I made a hasty generalization and I was wrong to do so.
 

Who_What_When

Trying to keep an open mind...
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
550
Reaction score
0
You do know that the jury is going to get evidence that was not actually discussed in the State's CIC?? An example off the top of my head is Casey's photobucket pictures. You know, like the one with the little girl looking up at a teddybear with the noose around it's neck? Saying something like "Why do people kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong" not verbatim of course. Something like that.


I didn't know this. Where did you hear that this is allowed?
 

ZsaZsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2009
Messages
11,027
Reaction score
15,227
RK said he moved the skull with his "meter reader stick" and lifted the bag of remains 4ft off the ground. Wherever that tape once was claimed to have been, can no longer be relied upon because of RK stating he disturbed the remains at the site prior to it being processed. Or, you have to throw out everything else RK said, because unless you believe only parts of what he said he did and found. He clearly blundered with that statement.

I would almost bet my PC that Baez disputes any and all of the scene evidence because of RK's testimony. jmoo

There is nothing to indicate he disrupted the duct tape. The eye socket is well above where the duct tape was placed... and that duct tape had been in place for several months despite being in a swamp and a tropical storm. It was not disrupted when they took the skull to the Medical Examiner, it was still attached to the scalp hair, and was keeping the mandible in its anatomical location.

Frankly after watching his pathetic performance it's clear that JB wouldn't know how to dispute his way out of a paper bag.
 

shadowraiths

LISK Liaison, Verified Forensic Psychology Special
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
2,876
Reaction score
137
Website
crimsonshadows.net
Her initial story to LE was that Caylee was kidnapped by the imaginary ZFG, which suggests she may have considered using kidnapping as a way to cover up the death at one point, hence the staging.
...or... how about a staged kidnapping in order to get money, and it went horribly wrong, resulting in Caylee's death. And the trauma resulting from the accidental death propelled Casey into the pre-rehearsed fantasy that Caylee had been really kidnapped. I know. Doubtful. However imho, it is no less far fetched than the theory that Kronk found Caylee's remains and kept them for six months until the reward increased.
 

Nova24

New Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2011
Messages
1,072
Reaction score
0
Geeky...would you find her guilty of lesser charges like Agg Man?
 
Top