Saturday testimony in the Casey Anthony trial brought plenty of fireworks inside the courtroom. Jose Baez's first witness was cut short when the prosecution objected to his testimony. It seems that Baez failed to share information with the prosecution prior to this witness taking the stand which is in clear violation of the court order in this case.
Judge Perry took control of the proceedings by warning both Baez and the prosecution that he is fully aware of the game playing that is going on with both sides. He further warned Baez that because of his intentional actions regarding his first witness of the day he is contemplating contempt charges against Baez once the trial has concluded.
Jose Baez is inexperienced and this shows. He also is slick and that fact doesn't go unnoticed by the Judge.
Jose Baez next called Dr. Werner Spitz to the stand. Dr. Spitz did the second autopsy on Caylee's remains. This man has participated in over 60,000 autopsies in his career that spans over 40 years. He has worked on high-profile cases and is well-respected. (how does an indigent young woman pay for these experts?)
Anyhow, Dr. Spitz's opinion is that the duct tape was placed on the body after death and was not the cause of death.
(this blows the prosecution's case - if you believe him,that is)
Dr. Spitz also contraindicated Dr.G's testimony that because of the circumstances surrounding Caylee's disappearance (no one reporting her missing, being found discarded like trash and duct tape found on the skull) that once could conclude this was a homicide.
In Dr.Spitz's opinion - since no cause of death can be concluded, this could have been an accident.
What do you think the jurors are thinking about this highly-educated, experienced forensic expert?
Maybe there is no medical scientific proof that shows how Caylee died but what about the circumstantial evidence?
Do you think the jury buys the defense's claims that Caylee drowned and her body was dumped by someone other than Casey? Does anyone really believe that Casey's lies about a mysterious (make-believe) nanny are just the delusions of a young woman so damaged from being a victim of sexual abuse that she is unable to tell the truth?
To me, this case just got very complicated. I agree with Dr.G that it may look like a homicide because of the duct tape on the skull.
Dr. Spitz also insists that there would be evidence on the duct tape. I disagree. The area was flooded, animals had ripped apart the remains, the duct tape was submerged, how could there be fingerprints?
He also said that he believes the scene was manipulated to look like a murder. Really? By whom? Ray Kronk the man who discovered Caylee's remains?
All I can say is that the defense team got themselves one helluva good expert in Dr.Spitz. His experience will make a jury question whether this was a murder at all. Does the jury have to buy the rest of the defense's story to acquit Casey?
As good as the prosecution is, they could not make Dr. Spitz look bad. Will this testimony be enough for Casey to walk free?
I also wonder if Cindy Anthony (who was in the courtroom) is thinking that maybe Casey didn't murder Caylee.
Yes. I am sorry but, she said she is there for the truth. Can this witness make Casey look innocent|?
Judge Perry took control of the proceedings by warning both Baez and the prosecution that he is fully aware of the game playing that is going on with both sides. He further warned Baez that because of his intentional actions regarding his first witness of the day he is contemplating contempt charges against Baez once the trial has concluded.
Jose Baez is inexperienced and this shows. He also is slick and that fact doesn't go unnoticed by the Judge.
Jose Baez next called Dr. Werner Spitz to the stand. Dr. Spitz did the second autopsy on Caylee's remains. This man has participated in over 60,000 autopsies in his career that spans over 40 years. He has worked on high-profile cases and is well-respected. (how does an indigent young woman pay for these experts?)
Anyhow, Dr. Spitz's opinion is that the duct tape was placed on the body after death and was not the cause of death.
(this blows the prosecution's case - if you believe him,that is)
Dr. Spitz also contraindicated Dr.G's testimony that because of the circumstances surrounding Caylee's disappearance (no one reporting her missing, being found discarded like trash and duct tape found on the skull) that once could conclude this was a homicide.
In Dr.Spitz's opinion - since no cause of death can be concluded, this could have been an accident.
What do you think the jurors are thinking about this highly-educated, experienced forensic expert?
Maybe there is no medical scientific proof that shows how Caylee died but what about the circumstantial evidence?
Do you think the jury buys the defense's claims that Caylee drowned and her body was dumped by someone other than Casey? Does anyone really believe that Casey's lies about a mysterious (make-believe) nanny are just the delusions of a young woman so damaged from being a victim of sexual abuse that she is unable to tell the truth?
To me, this case just got very complicated. I agree with Dr.G that it may look like a homicide because of the duct tape on the skull.
Dr. Spitz also insists that there would be evidence on the duct tape. I disagree. The area was flooded, animals had ripped apart the remains, the duct tape was submerged, how could there be fingerprints?
He also said that he believes the scene was manipulated to look like a murder. Really? By whom? Ray Kronk the man who discovered Caylee's remains?
All I can say is that the defense team got themselves one helluva good expert in Dr.Spitz. His experience will make a jury question whether this was a murder at all. Does the jury have to buy the rest of the defense's story to acquit Casey?
As good as the prosecution is, they could not make Dr. Spitz look bad. Will this testimony be enough for Casey to walk free?
I also wonder if Cindy Anthony (who was in the courtroom) is thinking that maybe Casey didn't murder Caylee.
Yes. I am sorry but, she said she is there for the truth. Can this witness make Casey look innocent|?
No comments:
Post a Comment