Metro Detroit ME (Dr. Werner Spitz) Will Testify At Casey Trial

[technicalconfusion]

Where is the evidence that the tape was found secured/attached over her nose and mouth? If that is how it was found there would not have been any supposed need to show that animation. Tape could have gotten stuck to the hair from animal activity.

I haven't seen any pictures, but Caylees mandible was still attached to her skull when her body was found. Apparently this is unusual. Dr. Spitz says himself:

It is highly unlikely that both the skull and the mandible, which would have been disarticulated during decomposition, would roll back to an almost perfect anatomical position.

What do you suppose was holding her mandible in place? Animals? Bugs?

If you take a look at the picture of the duct tape after it was cut off of Caylee:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ony-crime-scene-photos,0,1630574.photogallery

Image 27 - it sure looks to me like it was wrapped around her skull.

 

[joypath]

A witnesses behavior in front of the jury is what counts in a court case, though. Her behavior was really inappropriate.

:twocents: Each person presenting information does so within his/her comfort zone. What one saw with the testimony of Jan was EXACTLY who she is after she sheds the mantel of "presenter of difficult to the lay person material". IMHO, the jury is looking for a witness who can relate to them, make them understand the material without treating them as dolts and testify with respect. When leaving the stand, it is acceptable to acknowledge the jury and the team for whom one has testified, a SMILE is regarded as a friendly & polite thank you. This is my opinion & observed experience.

 

[chicklet]

I hear what you are saying although I disagree. There was nothing on the duct tape because it was in water and exposed to the elements for months. There was nothing on the bags because they were in water and exposed to the elements for months - no fingerprints, no dna - and since Caylee was in the trash bags, there would have been dna etc on the bags originally but nothing because she was in water and exposed to the elements for months.

There wouldn't be fingerprints, but the adhesive on the tape would have absorbed body fluids during the decomposition process. If there was still adhesive visible from that heart sticker then there would have still been duct tape adhesive since duct tape is far more sturdy than a sticker is. If no dna evidence at all was found on the duct tape adhesive then there is not adequate proof that it was a murder weapon. This might not be an issue had the state not brought up the sticker adhesive outline, but since they brought that up it IS an issue.

 

[chicklet]

I haven't seen any pictures, but Caylees mandible was still attached to her skull when her body was found. Apparently this is unusual. Dr. Spitz says himself:



What do you suppose was holding her mandible in place? Animals? Bugs?

If you take a look at the picture of the duct tape after it was cut off of Caylee:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ony-crime-scene-photos,0,1630574.photogallery

Image 27 - it sure looks to me like it was wrapped around her skull.

I was under the impression that it was her hair that was stuck to the mandible and that was what kept it in place. I was also under the impression that the whole reason the state needed to show that animation was to show that the duct tape COULD have covered both the nose and mouth IF it were placed there, NOT that it actually was placed there. If that were where the duct tape was actually located then why would they need that animation at all?

 

[ebedeeb]

The reporter for this last night was reporting from Metro Airport...wasnt Spitz leaving last night for FL.? If he did the DT couldve started their case today.

I'll have to go back and sleuth it...it would show more dishonesty on the DT's part, if that wasnt already in question.

 

[technicalconfusion]

I was under the impression that it was her hair that was stuck to the mandible and that was what kept it in place. I was also under the impression that the whole reason the state needed to show that animation was to show that the duct tape COULD have covered both the nose and mouth IF it were placed there, NOT that it actually was placed there. If that were where the duct tape was actually located then why would they need that animation at all?

Hair is part of it. Go thru and read:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139737"]Dr. Gary Utz testimony (Medical Examiner) - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

I'm sure you can find a video of this MEs testimony.

I think the animation was more to support the SA theory than anything.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Where is the evidence that the tape was found secured/attached over her nose and mouth? If that is how it was found there would not have been any supposed need to show that animation. Tape could have gotten stuck to the hair from animal activity.

Have you looked at the photos of the duct tape, as it was removed?
So animals rearranged the duct tape to neatly form 3 stacked layers over her nose and mouth area? How did they arrange it so it was neatly under her mandible, holding it in place and stuck to the hair at the back of the head.
That is beyond implausible, its beyond any stretch of the imagination that it could happen that way.
The tape was not 'stuck' to the mandible, it was originally stuck to her skin and flesh and when that decomposed it stayed because it was under the mandible and around her head to the scalp hair.
The animation showed that one single piece could have covered her airways. She had three still in place.Deliberate and left no doubt as to premeditation.

 

[ZsaZsa]

There wouldn't be fingerprints, but the adhesive on the tape would have absorbed body fluids during the decomposition process. If there was still adhesive visible from that heart sticker then there would have still been duct tape adhesive since duct tape is far more sturdy than a sticker is. If no dna evidence at all was found on the duct tape adhesive then there is not adequate proof that it was a murder weapon. This might not be an issue had the state not brought up the sticker adhesive outline, but since they brought that up it IS an issue.

Not so. There was not even any of Caylee's DNA on it, and we know it was on her.

 

[Coley]

Defense Expert Report From Dr. Werner Spitz was due by 4 p.m on March 11, 2011 - was it turned in? Anyone know?

Not sure if you ever found your answer but yes according to the faxed report located (http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-na...conducted-2nd-autopsy-on-caylee-anthony-video) the date and time on the document was March 10th, 2011 at 19:18 (assuming the fax machine was set to the correct date and time).


Can someone please explain to me why would it be necessary to open up a skull that is completely skeletonized? There wouldn't be anything in it anymore to even inspect, correct?

 

[ZsaZsa]

Not sure if you ever found your answer but yes according to the faxed report located (http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-na...conducted-2nd-autopsy-on-caylee-anthony-video) the date and time on the document was March 10th, 2011 at 19:18 (assuming the fax machine was set to the correct date and time).


Can someone please explain to me why would it be necessary to open up a skull that is completely skeletonized? There wouldn't be anything in it anymore to even inspect, correct?

She would not need to. She turned it upside down and was able to inspect the interior perfectly well. I can only think Dr Spitz forgot that her skull was not attached to her spinal vertebrae. In an autopsy with an intact skeleton it is necessary to remove the roof of the skull to inspect and remove the contents.
If you remember when Dr G was asked if she opened the skull she bristled and said "Absolutely Not'. Why would she need to deface the child any further..

 

[1Chump]

I hear what you are saying although I disagree. There was nothing on the duct tape because it was in water and exposed to the elements for months. There was nothing on the bags because they were in water and exposed to the elements for months - no fingerprints, no dna - and since Caylee was in the trash bags, there would have been dna etc on the bags originally but nothing because she was in water and exposed to the elements for months.

Am I the only one who finds it strange that there is absolutely no evidence regarding the duct such as on it or on other items, when duct tape is specifically manufactured to be "water resistant." Yet a "sticker" left residue on the duct despite being subjected to the same elements.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Am I the only one who finds it strange that there is absolutely no evidence regarding the duct such as on it or on other items, when duct tape is specifically manufactured to be "water resistant." Yet a "sticker" left residue on the duct despite being subjected to the same elements.

The sticker had glue on it,maybe that was also water resistant.
Our fingerprints don't leave as much behind, some oils, dirt etc....? IMO

 

[1Chump]

The sticker had glue on it,maybe that was also water resistant.
Our fingerprints don't leave as much behind, some oils, dirt etc....? IMO

I'm not just talking about fingerprints with duct tape. The did not put in any evidence to show any residue anywhere from the duct tape.

Three or four years ago, I had a broken window on my truck that I covered with plastic and duct tape. I still have residue from that despite ice, snow, rain, WD-40, rubbing alcohol, steam, hot water, cold water, dish soap, peanut butter, etc. The tape did not always hold and had to be replaced. But the residue has survived all my attempts to remove it.

 

[TorisMom003]

What exactly was the duct tape on? From what I remember and I want I think, the duct tape was on Caylee's face, her skin, and in her hair. When Caylee decomposed and became a skeleton, there was no more face or skin for the duct tape residue to be on. Of course there was duct tape residue in her hair as the duct tape was still attached to her hair.

The example of a vehicle with duct tape on it really does not apply here. As I said above, there was nothing left that the duct tape was originally attached to other than Caylee's hair for residue to be found on.

MOO

 

[beeshie]

Am I the only one who finds it strange that there is absolutely no evidence regarding the duct such as on it or on other items, when duct tape is specifically manufactured to be "water resistant." Yet a "sticker" left residue on the duct despite being subjected to the same elements.

Frankly, I'm not convinced the sticker/cardboard is linked to Caylee or that there was heart-shaped residue on the duct tape. I just have a really hard time believing that the heart sticker was on the duct tape, came off, and then stuck to a piece of cardboard especially after being subjected to so many environmental elements. If I was on the jury, I would ignore the sticker.

 

[MsFacetious]

A witnesses behavior in front of the jury is what counts in a court case, though. Her behavior was really inappropriate.

I saw Dr G as in a bit of disbelief, at the comical nature of what had just happened. I was reacting quite the same way watching her.

Amazed that the cross examination she just underwent had really occurred in an actual court of law.

In real life... not in a Kindergarten class re-enactment... or in a law school class "how NOT to cross examine the state's ME."

:twocents: Each person presenting information does so within his/her comfort zone. What one saw with the testimony of Jan was EXACTLY who she is after she sheds the mantel of "presenter of difficult to the lay person material". IMHO, the jury is looking for a witness who can relate to them, make them understand the material without treating them as dolts and testify with respect. When leaving the stand, it is acceptable to acknowledge the jury and the team for whom one has testified, a SMILE is regarded as a friendly & polite thank you. This is my opinion & observed experience.

Absolutely. After the way Mason "cross examined" the few witnesses he did... I highly doubt their concern was Dr G smiling. If that was their concern, then they likely don't care about Casey's behavior either. We may end up with a not guilty verdict if they disregard all of her behavior.

I think they were also relieved that Dr G explained things so clearly. I don't think anyone saw Dr G as unprofessional.

If they saw her as unprofessional, then they certainly haven't been paying attention to the defense. :waitasec:

If the Dr. Spitz that testified at Spector's first trial shows up.. Jeff Ashton will wipe the floor with him before he knows what happened. I hope Jeff has studied Alan Jackson's brilliant cross. Mr. Ashton has the same amazing grasp of facts in this case as Mr. Jackson did in that one. I'm looking forward to it!

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/2007-07-26-2360251218_x.htm

"I came to the conclusion that my opinion as rendered was correct," he said. "... I would not say she committed suicide. I would say she shot herself."

Hey this is a Jose Baez-ism! :innocent:

Totally sounds like something he would say. :innocent:

 

[ziggy]

Where is the evidence that the tape was found secured/attached over her nose and mouth? If that is how it was found there would not have been any supposed need to show that animation. Tape could have gotten stuck to the hair from animal activity.

You know I really believe the jury will be able to determine that possibility is so minute and that the better explanation is that the duct tape was over the lower part of Caylee's face; she then decomposed, the hair mat slid back and there it remained.

The animation was to show that one piece of duct tape was sufficient to cover the nose AND mouth; three was to make sure she could never breath again. I have complete faith the jury will figure this out.

 

[ziggy]

By the way...the really big show will be the cross of Werner!!!! I think he's a <modsnip> hungry for some media attention once again - and if he brings up this opening the skull stuff, I want someone in the court room to tweet the jury's response. Would love to see the look on their faces. Regular folk can distinguish between fact and fiction and they ARE capable of logic for gosh sakes.

 

[chicklet]

Hair is part of it. Go thru and read:

Dr. Gary Utz testimony (Medical Examiner) - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

I'm sure you can find a video of this MEs testimony.

I think the animation was more to support the SA theory than anything.

A short while ago I found and read Dr. G's autopsy report. It really wasn't entirely clear, IMO exactly how the duct tape was placed. What WAS clear, however, was the fact that ZERO drugs (meaning NO chloroform whatsoever) was found in the toxicology report. That makes all chloroform tie ins completely irrelevant to the case. Caylee was NOT knocked out with chloroform according to the autopsy.

 

[chicklet]

You know I really believe the jury will be able to determine that possibility is so minute and that the better explanation is that the duct tape was over the lower part of Caylee's face; she then decomposed, the hair mat slid back and there it remained.

The animation was to show that one piece of duct tape was sufficient to cover the nose AND mouth; three was to make sure she could never breath again. I have complete faith the jury will figure this out.

Here is the problem with the claim that Caylee was killed by duct tape covering her mouth and nose...the tape would have fallen off and NOT been attached to the skull. I did get to look at the autopsy and the tape was actually attached to bone with the adhesive. It would have come loose if it had of been taped to flesh.