From the FRYE pan into the FYRE? Part I

Next month, two motions filed by the defense will be heard by Judge Perry. Because they are very important Frye issues, and of extreme importance to the defense, this post will focus on the motion about chloroform evidence. It will be in two parts.

PART I - The Frye Pan

Casey’s defense recently filed two Frye motions. The date reflects when they were filed with the Clerk of Courts. Both are stamped 12/30/2010.

MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FRYE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE (CHLOROFORM)

and

MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE (Plant or root growth evidence)

The state filed motions to strike, but today, I will just focus on the issue over chloroform. The other motions (defense and state) will come later, because in this particular one, there is much to discern, including a few errors. I will get to them, but first of all, what, exactly, is a Frye motion/hearing? Frye motions are generally held in limine, which means they are made before a trial starts. The judge then decides whether certain evidence may or may not be introduced to the jury. The Frye standard is a test to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence in legal proceedings. This standard comes from the case Frye v. United States (293 F. 1013 (DC Cir 1923) District of Columbia Circuit Court in 1923. Frye v. U.S. was a groundbreaking case that argued the admissibility of polygraph tests as evidence in a trial. Today, it’s designed to prevent both sides from unfairly exploiting expert testimony. Its intent is to assure that expert evidence is reliable.

In its motion, the defense cites Florida Statutes 90.401, 90.402 and 90.403, Amendments 5 and 14 of the U.S. Constitution, and Article 1, Section 9 of the Florida Constitution. Let’s take a look:

• 90.401 Definition of relevant evidence. — Relevant evidence is evidence tending to prove or disprove a material fact.
• 90.402  Admissibility of relevant evidence. — All relevant evidence is admissible, except as provided by law.
• 90.403  Exclusion on grounds of prejudice or confusion. — Relevant evidence is inadmissible if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of issues, misleading the jury, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. This section shall not be construed to mean that evidence of the existence of available third-party benefits is inadmissible.
• Amendment V — No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
• Amendment XIV — All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
• Article 1, Section 9 — Due process.—No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against oneself.

The first two Florida Statutes, I would imagine, were cited by the defense for the purpose of propping up the third, which questions the admissibility of evidence that may prejudice or confuse the jury. In the case of this motion, it’s chloroform evidence found in the trunk of Casey’s car the defense is questioning, specifically carpet and air samples.

After the preliminary introduction of the motion, the defense moved on to FACTS about the case:

FACTS

1. Miss Anthony is charged with First Degree Murder. The State of Florida has announced it’s [sic] intent to seek the ultimate penalty of death.
2. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted tests on carpet samples and air samples taken from a vehicle (Pontiac Sunfire) driven by Miss Anthony at or near the time of the disappearance of her daughter Caylee Anthony.
3. Dr. Arvad Vass reported in his preliminary and final reports that there were unusually high levels of chloroform found on the carpet samples taken from the Pontiac Sunfire.
4. Dr. Vass additionally states that the levels of chloroform are much higher than normally found in decompositional events.
5. This information prompted investigators to search the Anthony family computer for searches of chloroform, which yielded positive results for “chloroform” and “how to make chloroform.” The hysteria begins.

Before I delve too deeply into the motion, remember the defense cited the above as FACTS, not assumptions or speculations made by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Where it completely strayed from the truth is the final statement of fact, “The hysteria begins.” From there, it turned into a giant smoke screen. The defense went into, well, a defense mode, which is what is expected.

FACTS PART II: UNCOVERING THE FRAUD

In FACTS PART II: UNCOVERING THE FRAUD, law enforcement was accused of intentionally leaking information to the local and national media prior to “any official reports through the natural course of discovery.” I will acknowledge learning of the death smell from the news sometime in August of 2008, so there may be some merit to this particular aspect of the complaint. However, this information would have been released anyway, so it was not, by any means, an attempt to “either satisfy their own vanity or poison any potential jury pool” as the defense stated. Today, it’s two-and-a-half years later, and a fair jury will be seated in May come hell or high water.

What puzzles me at this point of the motion is how the defense contradicts itself. In FACTS PART II, they wrote that they traveled to Tennessee and took depositions from Dr. Arpad Vass and Dr. Marcus Wise. Both testified that the tests on the carpet sample were “qualitative” and not “quantitative.” One way to simplify this is to say it’s the motion in the ocean, not the size of the ship; but at the same time, no one is going to sail around the world in a canoe. That’s not to say flat out that the SS Casey is sinking, but it’s definitely listing. The smokesreen in this example comes from the statements that, “It should be noted that the Oak Ridge National Laboratory also took carpet samples from two Pontiac Sunfires… [and] one of the sample cars they tested ALSO had chloroform in the sample,” and “Dr. Vass, who is the author of the ORNL report is NOT a forensic chemist.” In my opinion, one not need be a forensic chemist to analyze chemical breakdowns. Dr. Vass could readily make analytical conclusions from tests of all kinds, and my guess would be that plenty of them have nothing to do with crime. Industrial spies, for example, have been tackling the secret recipe of KFC chicken and McDonald’s Special Sauce for years and years. That’s not forensics, but it takes real life chemists to break into the “Da Vinci Codes” of restaurant chain trade secrets. Who knows, maybe Dr. Vass could find out what’s really in Taco Bell’s beef. Now, that’s something that matters. Of course, it’s a civil matter, not criminal.

In the motion, the defense noted that the FBI Chemistry Unit in Quantico, Virginia, had tested four samples of the carpet and two of the four were “consistent with chloroform.” Dr. Michael Richenbach, Ph.D, told the defense during his deposition that “consistent with” means that the presumptive test results were positive, but the conclusive tests were not. Aside from all of the scientific mumbo jumbo, of which I will spare you the boredom, the point being made by the defense is, in a nutshell, that the results from ORNL and the FBI were different. Therefore, the results should be tossed out. In my opinion, the most consistent point to be made about this case to date has been the consistency of the two presiding judges, and ultimately, Judge Perry will leave it up to both sides to argue and let the jury take it from there. Laws around the country not only protect cross examinations, they encourage them, and this case is no different. The defense will have ample opportunity to shred the state’s evidence to pieces.

Here’s another interesting smokescreen, but I do not think the State, nor the judge, will fall for it. The motion makes it clear that “the other items tested by the FBI for chloroform (baby doll, steering wheel cover, and child car seat) all yielded negative results.” True, but the cab of Casey’s vehicle was separated from the trunk by a back seat. How much seepage should there have been? Police officers have been trained for years to detect the odor of marijuana in a car, and I’m talking about fresh, not smoked. It does have a pungent odor unlike anything else. While standing by the driver’s door, window down, would the officer smell it if it was tucked away in the trunk? No, probably not, but the nervousness of the occupants would be a sure sign that something’s not right. How much chloroform would it take to be overwhelming? I mean, it’s not even close to the smell of decomposition. Talk about pungent odors.

COMPUTER SEARCHES

Law enforcement ascertained that someone inside of the Anthony home searched for chloroform and chloroform recipes three months prior to Caylee’s disappearance. This is why it’s so important for the defense to crush this evidence, along with the air and carpet samples. This is highly incriminating. The defense wrote:

• Any forensic computer examiner including the ones in this case (Sandra Cawn and Kevin Stenger) will testify that you can never determine who ran what searches on a computer, especially when the computer is NOT password protected.

Okay, in and of itself, that may be true, but more about that in a couple of seconds. Incidentally, Cawn and Stenger work for OCSO and I think they know a thing or two about  computer forensics.

• The computer in question was in a “guest bedroom” and all family members not only had access to the computer, but also testified that they used the computer as well as guests who visited their home.
• Law enforcement cannot ascertain whether Miss Anthony was even home at the time the searches [were] run much less on the computer.

Now, had Judge Perry been born in the 19th century, the defense might be able to pull the wool over his eyes, but he wasn’t; nor was he born yesterday. Yes, of course the computer could have been accessed by anyone, but it is inside the Anthony home, and it’s a desktop, not a portable laptop, which could be moved around the house. By utilizing something simple, like a process of elimination, investigators can sift through a myriad of things, including time sheets. March 21, 2008, was a Friday - a work day. What time of day did the searches occur? I’ll bet you OCSO knows. If Cindy, George and Lee were not inside the house, it incriminates Casey, and with no other source, like a friend who has yet to come forward, her ship is really listing.

Here’s something the defense wrote that struck me as peculiar:

• The Oak Ridge National Laboratories (Some reports erroneously called them “body farm” perhaps for more shock appeal) reported unusually high amounts of chloroform in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car.

What I would like to do is take to task the remark about erroneously calling ORNL a Body Farm for more shock appeal. In my opinion, the defense is trying to directly infer that the term Body Farm was something new and never used before. I assure you, that is not the truth. I can tell you I heard about the Body Farm long before I heard about the Anthony case and, as a matter of fact, thanks to my Gainesville friend, nika1, I am in the possession of a book titled, BEYOND THE BODY FARM, written by Dr. Bill Bass and Jon Jefferson. So what, you say? Yes, so what. The book was published in 2007, a year before Casey’s defense knew who she was. Jefferson & Bass (as Jefferson Bass) have written four novels about the Body Farm. The first one, Carved in Bone, was released in January 2006. In 2003, Bass & Jefferson released their first scientific book about it, Death’s Acre. To go further back in time, crime writer Patricia Cornwell published The Body Farm in 1994. She drew her inspiration from Dr. Bass and his work. As a matter of fact, he is recognized as the father of the Body Farm, long before Jose Baez was practicing law.

Why did I title this post From the Frye pan into the Fyre, you ask? Even the prosecution misspells…

MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNRELIABLE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FYRE (CHLOROFORM)

In the second part of this article about chloroform evidence admission, I will delve into the scientific and legal aspects:

PART II - The FYRE

This information prompted investigators to search the Anthony family computer [duh?] for searches of chloroform, which yielded positive results for “chloroform” and “how to make chloroform.” The hysteria begins.

Comments

[Dave Knechel]

Laura - Actually, I said the defense posited the notion that the searches could have been performed by anyone. In turn, I believe the state can prove through time cards that the only person home at the time was Casey. Yes, that also includes any electronic trails that would explain times of day. This means on the Internet and cell phone pings. I think the searches will be an important part of the evidence against her, although the defense can counter with "a search does not a murderer make," and there's no solid proof that chloroform was actually used. That's why I'll get more into the legal part next time.

In order to be charged with a capital murder, premeditation is part of the equation, but premeditation itself is vague in the sense that something simple and short could be called the same thing. For example, if Casey went out to the garage to find the duct tape, returned with it and sealed her daughter's air passages, premeditation took place the moment she decided to do what she did. She could have readily put the tape back down and not used it. How much time passed? A minute or so? That's still premeditation.

[Dave Knechel]

Hello, SALUKI, and welcome! I believe the defense missed the deadline, but the judge must rule on it. If the defense asked the court for an extension, they may be OK. Still, would the judge deny them their list? He would have to weigh the ramifications because it could trigger an appeal later on. Thank you for asking.

[Laurali]

Thanks Dave. I did not mean to take your comment out of context. It just got me thinking why not use those pesky pings from Casey's best friend, her cell phone. I agree with you about premeditation. 3months seems like "true" planning where as imo 1 minute = that idiot snapped and took it out on her precious little one. Again jmo. However the law is pretty clear on premeditation. If you had to go get your "weapon" than you basically planned it. Isn't that what you just said? LOL. BBL I would hate to wear out my welcome. :)

[Dave Knechel]

No problem, Laura, I guess I may have been vague because I think time cards for G, C & L will prove that they did not search. That leaves one person with too much time on her hands. The rest of the evidence would just back up the evidence of who did it.

Yes, that's what I said, returning with the tape and using it proves premeditation. She could have put the roll down.

Time to run a few errands. BBL, too.

[ecossie possie]

Thank you for informative post Dave,,,Will you attend the next court hearings?

[Dave Knechel]

Hello there, ecossie possie! Thank you very much. Yes, I do plan on attending, Lord willing and the creek don't rise.

[Karen C.]

Everything the State is bringing in forensically is recognized by the Courts and has been for a long time now, save for the decomp gases in the trunk (whatever that's called), but DNA was new once too. It amazes me that Jose didn't know about the Body farm- I mean my jaw has dropped at that! Doesn't Cheney look at this stuff Baez writes before he puts it out there? Apparently not- he should make an effort to do so. Really, I'm embarrassed for him- my 12 yo son knows about that just from scrolling through the TV Guide screen.

What they could use is a Body Farm in a Northern state too, with Northern bugs, snow, frozen ground conditions, etc.

[Karen C.]

Oh, Dave, great post, BTW. Good, hard work, and look at the comments after. The soft/hard Kill- I'm in agreement the Defense shouldn't be trying too hard to rid themselves of the chloroform. And, yeah, "chlorophyll" search DOES NOT readily bring up "chloroform"- nah eh.

The Defense still does not have a defense- breathtaking!

[Dave Knechel]

Hi, Karen - I think it was Mason who wrote the motions for the Frye issues, not Baez. The ORNL is in Tennessee, so it gets northern bugs and snow, but still, certain bugs thrive during certain times of the year, in Florida and elsewhere, so there will be a time line for that, too.

Thank you for the compliment. No doubt, the best thing to come out of this post is the comments, especially the one about hard/soft kill. Very chilling.

[B-Man]

Dave,

Diana about the 3rd or 4th post mentions Cindy doing a Google Search and i thought of a stand-up routine by Daniel Tosh regarding Google. Granted Chloroform is not funny but hopefully you see what my thought was when it was Googled.

Please enjoy the post and i hope no one take offense. The following is a quote from Daniel Tosh's 2007 Completely Serious Tour

"I hate you, Google. You've caused a lot of problems in my relationship. I share a computer with my girlfriend and she would look up anything. "I'm going to look up apples today." She just hits 'A.' It's "Asian ass porn" instantly. Google is, like, "I'll take it from here. I know exactly what you're looking up... Well, every time you hit 'A,' it's 'Asian ass porn.'" Google! All I ask is that you let her type three letters before you jump to such a bold conclusion. It's bad enough that I'm clearing my history every three hours and changing my passwords. I'm trying to have an honest relationship, and you are f*#king my shit up!

With the above humor i thought what could be the arguement of Chloroform being readily available on Google other than the fact someone Googled it specifically? There is no argument to pass off why, it cant be concluded as a mistake so the only way around it is to exclude the investigatng results of the trunk space and the "Body Farms" (HBO did a very cool special with this and its worth your time if you have any of course you'd probably have to view it on line cause it was a few years ago when i saw it) research. If these can be excluded then the Computer Chlorofrom research can be excluded.

[nan11]

Dave: If someone would have told me a while back that I would spend any amount of time reading through trial motions, I would never have believed them. But here I sit, totally consumed with just that very thing. :lol:

Anyway, after pursuing the first motion on chloroform that you mentioned, I came across the following on page 2: “9. On December 11, 2009, while arguing against a defense motion, assistant state attorney Jeffrey Ashton gave a mock closing argument describing the States theory of their case while arguing in favour of the death penalty. Mr. Ashton knowing full and well that the abovementioned reports were false, carefully chose his words and did not mention chloroform instead he argued that Caylee was either “physically or chemically restrained.” He continued to argue that if chemically restrained her killer prepared “some substance” in advance. Mr. Ashton had knowledge of all of the forensic evidence in the case never contributed to the fraud, but allowed the deception to continue.”

Now, since Mr. Baez brought this up, I’ll add a link to a clip done by WESH that highlights Mr. Ashton’s argument: Caylee Marie Anthony's Day In Court-December 11, 2009

Also, I would like to mention that one of the reasons Mr. Ashton made this statement was in rebuttal to an equally powerful statement made at a previous hearing by Mr. Todd Macaluso. As a member of the defense at that time, he strongly argued that Caylee’s body had been placed in the woods during the time that Ms. Anthony had been jailed. It would be IMHOO, that Mr. Baez would have known ‘full and well at that time’ that any reports regarding this were false. Further, Mr. Macaluso left Mr. Ashton with no choice but to respond.

Jeff Ashton rocked that day; and Caylee Marie gave a tiny nod from above. She’s waiting.

[Mary Jo]

Prosecutor Wants Baez Held In Contempt Of Court Casey Anthony Attorney Missed Deadline, State Claims

[B-Man]

Dave,

i wonder if my theory of long ago may make more sense now with the discussions of chloroform? A few months ago i suggested that Caylee was killed the night of the 15th. What i couldnt do was show how it would be plausible that KC would've been able to put 3 strips of Duct Tape on the mouth and nose (unknown if it really happened that way i just speculate it did) of Caylee without Caylee trying to peel the tape off. There was no idication that her arms were secured with anything which is still accpetable in my own theory while i play armchair detective. If KC administered enough sleeping agent (beit Chloroform or Benadryl) Caylee would've been unresponsibe anyways...she'd be in a deep sleep and still breathing and once the duct tape was placed Caylee wouldnt have fought it she was already unresponsive and would've been incapacitated and unable to peel the tape off.

Because there are no reports of Benadry being used and the Google searches for Choloroform (CA indicating she Google Cholorophill???? WTF, Cholorophill may explain the greeness of the grass but would not get the dog sick, they eat grass to subdue the bellyaches plus iron is what, if anything, would've made the dog sick???JMO) So with the defense trying to exclude the chloroform from the trunk but arguing the admissibility of the searches seems to show more merit than anything??

[Marsha from NY]

Dave Great post as usual. Have been really busy and spent today looking over all your recent posts. Keep up the good work. This is getting more and more confusing but at the same time clearer and clearer. Casey is in deep trouble.

[Dave Knechel]

B-Man - I was out most of the day, but in your first comment, you mentioned Google. All I can say is that now, when I type in the word bald, all of the entries deal with hair, or lack of it. That's great for a change.

I know that a lot of people believe George was lying about that Monday morning and seeing Casey and Caylee leave. I happen to believe him and I'll tell you why. It has nothing to do with whether he told the truth or lied - not in the traditional sense. Two things come to mind and both deal with the human psyche. One, if my daughter and grandchild leave one morning, that's not so much of a big deal. It's just like every other weekday morning, right? But if a few days go by and no Casey or Caylee, I'd start to miss them and wonder. As time goes on, the thing that's left is the memory of when I last set my eyes on them. That's how I would remember the moment, and it would be a happy time. Two, and it wasn't so much about what George DID see, it was more about what he didn't. The Monday - Friday routine in that household was that George would see his daughter and granddaughter off most mornings; a "have a nice day" sort of thing. That's the routine, and I don't think anyone would argue that point, and remember, because this is very important, when he offered his story in the beginning, he was telling the truth as he remembered it. OK, here's the catch - Had Casey walked out of that house that morning without Caylee, George most certainly would have remembered it because it broke the routine, and he would have not only questioned it, he most assuredly would have remembered it because it was a very odd thing and he never saw Caylee again, since Sunday evening before he went to bed.

If you read the official State and Court documents, they both cite June 16 as the last day she was seen alive. I feel it is because of the reasons I just explained. Could it have been the 15th? Sure, but that's not the official line, and I'm partial to the State of Florida's opinion.

As for the chlorophyll, I think the defense will lose the Frye hearing because the test has been utilized in courts and is accepted. To think anyone could get chloroform and chlorophyll mixed up, especially from a nurse, it's just plain stupid.

[B-Man]

Dave,

your right, believe it or not i meant the 16th not the 15th. I was over zelous and my mind is playing tricks on me...too much LDS in the 60's (Star Trek humor). Either way i knew i was off when i submitted it. But like you said, i would tend to believe GA's recollection of events if only because he is a detail oriented type person (i only suspect this because of his day's in law enfocement and i would think it'd carry over?) and when a routine is broken there would've been some sort of emptyness so i could see him remembering the date specifically.

[Dave Knechel]

And you want to know something, nan11? You do an excellent job of cataloging everything. You should be a legal assistant, and I mean that.

I was sitting less about 10 feet away from Ashton when he raised his voice with those words. It was a stunning moment and very powerful. As Richard Hornsby said on the WESH video, the State showed its hand. It's got nothing to hide. Here it is, prove us wrong.

Until the trial begins, that's going to be the shot we all heard.

Thanks for all your help. Time to eat.

[Dave Knechel]

Thank you, Marsha. I figured you must be busy because you've been rather quiet. Busy is a good thing, but it's always such a pleasure when you stop by. I know exactly what you mean by more confusing, yet clearer. I face it every day. Yes, Caseey is in it very, very deep.

[Dave Knechel]

B-Man - I understand there are a lot of people who believe it was the 15th, and it may well have been, but there's nothing that backs it up. I would think the State would be all over it if it had that as a scenario.

Jeopardy.

[SnoopySleuth]

Dave~~Nan11 is MY legal assistant and I gave her a lovely office where she is in complete control. I am willing to share Nan11 but she is mine!!

I have not changed my mind that Caylee was murdered just prior to midnight on June 15th. She may have lived for a short time into June 16th.

I do not believe that Cindy googled chlorophyll whatsoever. I also do not believe that Caylee was drugged with chloroform or that Casey made any. I think the high levels of chloroform came from the Fabreze that Cindy used to try and mask the odor after she cleaned out the trunk.

Now I am off to decorate Nan11's office and give her a huge raise in pay!! ta ta until later....

[Dave Knechel]

Nan? I promise I won't tell Snoopy if you promise, too.

[Feathers]

Great article, Dave! I can't wait for the hearing.

Snoopy, we're in full agreement. Cindy couldn't spell the word, let alone Google it! I do have one question though, regarding George. Was he working during the time of the computer search for chloroform? I seem to recall that he was out of work for a while. He was new at the job he was working when Caylee went missing, wasn't he?

Nan, you're near as incredible as Snoopy! Thank you. :-)

[Dave Knechel]

Thank you, Feathers. I am planning on writing a quick one tomorrow.

[Feathers]

Thanks, Dave. I look forward to reading it. Because our household has increased by 4 I don't have much time to comment these days. Hopefully things will slow down a bit before the trial. If they don't, I'm running away to some nice quiet hotel room and calling myself sequestered.

Have a nice evening, Dave.

[New Puppy]

I will have to think more about the statement "returning for the tape and then using it, proves premeditation" How is that so conclusive if Caylee had died in someway before the tape was used to seal the orifices. Legal or not, I do not believe premeditation is a few seconds before the act, I believe anyone can snap a few seconds before hurting or killing someone. There also is that to hurt badly does not mean "intention to actually kill " when one looses control. It could, but not necessarily. I am only going on the thought of proof of death, the prosecution needs to prove application of tape was cause of death. Could say more but no need to get into trouble. jmo

[Dave Knechel]

Thank you, Feathers. If you manage to make it up here for any hearings or the trial, I'd love to meet you.

[Dave Knechel]

Hello there, New Puppy - I was just about ready to nod off, but I want to respond to your question about premeditation.

In Florida, District Court of Appeal of Florida, Justice Douglas Wallace presiding, preferred these words in Berube v State:

"Premeditation is the essential element which distinguishes first-degree murder from second-degree murder.

"Premeditation is defined as more than a mere intent to kill; it is a fully formed conscious purpose to kill.

"This purpose to kill may be formed a moment before the act but must exist for a sufficient length of time to permit reflection as to the nature of the act to be committed and the probable result of that act."

The key thought here is reflection. At its shortest point, going to the garage and returning with the tape is premeditation, but the defense will argue that there's no proof the tape is what caused Caylee's death. The jury will decide, but throughout it all, whatever length of time it was, Casey had time to reflect. The fact remains that the child is dead and by all signs, it does not look anything like an accident. No matter how she died, it was premeditated according to the State of Florida, by their own rules. Here's more:

Florida Statute 782.04(1)(a) defines First Degree Premeditated Murder. Before you can find the defendant guilty of First Degree Premeditated Murder, the government must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.
2. The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).
3. There was a premeditated killing of (victim).

An “act” includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.

“Killing with premeditation” is killing after consciously deciding to do so. The decision must be present in the mind at the time of the killing. The law does not fix the exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to kill and the killing. The period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the defendant. The premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the killing.

[B-Man]

You know Snoop i always, always forget that CA used Febreez to cover up the smell but shy of her just pouring it out i find it hard to believe that in its spray form would she of contributed to the concentration of Chlorofil found??? I'm no scientist, better yet if anything I'm barely an armchair detective(ha-ha) Granted the foundation of this case is to find who is responsible but, IMO, a lot of people just want to know how it was done, not that its needed to prove murder. I think, as a collective, we will try and try until the truth comes out to determine how her mother killed her daughter and didnt care...how much longer would she've carried the lie if it were'nt for her mother demanding to see Caylle?

IMO, the tape plays a crucial role and how it was placed and its intent, i am not sure how to interpret the Chlorofil searches. Many people just speculate that she saw the poster or the home page of her lates lay statiing "win her over with Chloroform" but who knows...it sounds logical. Its not an easy drug to come by and even harder to produce at your home but hey, people can make Meth in the back of the car so why not???

somehow Caylee was incapacitated, 3 strips of tape across the mouth (not wrapped around right?) that tells me the tape was placed while she was essentially comotose...drugged for lack of a better term?? I've heard some people, if not here on other Blogs, mention the placement of the tape was to keep in body fluids as KC drove around, i think NOT. Caylee was placed in a laundry bag for that reason and, IMO, she borrowed the shovel specifically to lift Caylee up and place her in the bag.

I guess in the end we, if not just Me will speculate till i'm blue in the face. to me its like the song that gets stuck in your head, you know who it is but you cant think of the name, you'll stay awake all night until you remember who it is and until you speak the name you'll never fall asleep...am i the only one with this problem:-)

[New Puppy]

Dave, I made a comment thanking you, etc. after B-Man. It doesn't show that it was received. So thank you again, I clicked on Create Post and it showed then dissappeared. Several have done so
also.

[SnoopySleuth]

B-Man, Dr G said that the duct tape was applied before decomposition and I agree with her 100%. Duct tape will not adhere very well to wet surfaces. The duct tape went right into the hairline so she used fairly long strips of it. A child could not rip off duct tape even if she was fighting for her life. The Henkel rare duct tape really bonds to a surface more so than the other cheaper brands.

I do not think that Casey had the mentality to make chloroform. That is dangerous stuff to work with and you have to know what you are doing. The searches on the puter were for chloroform and how to make it. I don't think Cindy even searched for chlorophyll... This is JMO after reading and studying certain evidence.

Quite a few cleaning products contain chloroform. Cindy could have sprayed enough Fabreze so it penetrated into the lining of the trunk.

[Feathers]

Oh I'm going to manage,it Dave! You can bet your boots on it! :-)

[B-Man]

New Puppy: if no one has answered you i will :-), when you create a post and post it there is a second step you must complete which will populate once you select "post it"; its in place so that spammers cant post on the website :-)

Snoopy: Thank you for replying back. I agree that the brand of duct tape was not easily peeled off however even a child woul've attempted...wouldnt you think??

As for CA spraying large quantities of Febreeze I suspect she believed that she if she erraticated the smell from the trunk, keep in mind her knowledge of the smell of decomp as well as GA statements, she could overlook the possibilities that the smell in the trunk of the car didnt belong to KC so when she grabbed the container of Febreeze it was her attempt to deny (do you kinda see what my brain is trying to say :-)??) I think morally CA broke and her emotions are in disrepair as well as her alliances with her daughter.

Some how the defense is going to have to explain the searches on the computer. Chloroform. neck breaking, shovels. My favorite is the latter??? why would someone Google shovel?? i dont recall what exactly was Google about the shovel, do you?

[nan11]

B-Man: You say (not wrapped around right?). Well, here is the length for each of the three pieces of duct tape removed from the skull: Piece 1: (Q62) 9.5" X 2"; Piece 2: (Q63) 7.5" X 2"; and Piece 3: (Q64) 9" X 2". The arerage height of a skull belonging to a child of Caylee's age is about 6" high, probably the diameter would be less.

There was also another piece of tape (Q104) 8.5" X 2", found away from the skull. Something to think about, isn't it?

[Dave Knechel]

New Puppy - I was busy writing a new post, so I missed your comment. Something didn't work because there's no dangling comments anywhere. I don't know what happened.

[SnoopySleuth]

B-Man~~ I believe the word shovel can be connected to computers and not a shovel used for digging in the ground. I forget now exactly what the term "shovel" means re using a computer. Neck breaking can be associated to pole dancing.

[B-Man]

Snoop...really:-) Pole Dancing??? You're funny-ha-ha

[Sarah]

Where's PART II????