i am still here but its hard posting, my computer has slowed down as son is on his xbox live and i have the live feed on. My old computer not taking the strain well 
Casey,s bedroom very tidy , i noticed.............
Good afternoon everyone.
I think both Jeff and the Judge are making it plain to the jury just what a plonker Baez is. This whole testimony is a waste of time IMO.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I think both Jeff and the Judge are making it plain to the jury just what a plonker Baez is. This whole testimony is a waste of time IMO.
I agree. If as we believe she chloroformed her, then there won't be any blood 
As we understand according to the State's evidence, she was bagged in black refuse sacks therefore, the biological material would have been in those not necessarily the car.
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
Serology unless I'm also mistaken, is usually only performed to determine if someone has had an infection because it detects antibodies in the serum of the cells???? usually to determine things such as lupus and seronegative arthritis
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I think both Jeff and the Judge are making it plain to the jury just what a plonker Baez is. This whole testimony is a waste of time IMO.
I agree. If as we believe she chloroformed her, then there won't be any blood As we understand according to the State's evidence, she was bagged in black refuse sacks therefore, the biological material would have been in those not necessarily the car.
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Good afternoon everyone.
Afternoon Yogi 
I was wondering when the easel was gonna come out. My god he's making an utter fool of himself - incompetency simply oozes out of him!
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
Originally Posted by Yogi19:
Good afternoon everyone.
Afternoon Yogi
Hi Ev, I've been reading back to catch up.
This woman is boring me TBH - I don't think the jury will be taking this in - if Baez is hoping to make a point with this - I think he's on a sticky wicket.
Originally Posted by machel:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I was wondering when the easel was gonna come out. My god he's making an utter fool of himself - incompetency simply oozes out of him!
perhaps this is her defence - mistrial because lawyer is too stupid to understand/defend her
If she is found guilty, she could certainly lodge an appeal, based on the lack of competency of her legal team.
If there is touch DNA on the shovel surely the guy who owns the shovel would have his DNA on it? There was no DNA found - where is he going?
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
I meant to say what's he trying to say here rather than prove 
I don't think he's doing a very good job of eliciting reasonable doubt in the minds of any of the jury - but he might send them to sleep
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
I meant to say what's he trying to say here rather than prove
I don't think he's doing a very good job of eliciting reasonable doubt in the minds of any of the jury - but he might send them to sleep
Juror number 6 has nodded off through the whole of the trial so far, on and off
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I think both Jeff and the Judge are making it plain to the jury just what a plonker Baez is. This whole testimony is a waste of time IMO.
I agree. If as we believe she chloroformed her, then there won't be any blood As we understand according to the State's evidence, she was bagged in black refuse sacks therefore, the biological material would have been in those not necessarily the car.
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
True, the defense don`t have to prove anything but after their opening statement they`re going to have to. They stupidly put the ball in their own court.
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
I don't think he's doing a very good job of eliciting reasonable doubt in the minds of any of the jury - but he might send them to sleep
Juror number 6 has nodded off through the whole of the trial so far, on and off
Mistrial 
Oh dear JP is a tad angry with both Bozo and Mr Ashton 
Originally Posted by Scotty:
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
True,the defense don`t have to prove anything but after their opening statement they`re going to have to. They stupidly put the ball in their own court.
that's the point Bill Schaeffer (sp) on WFTV keeps making 
I iz playing with pretty colours 
Baez is so tiring, he takes such a long way round for a shortcut! Why does he take so long making a point 
I was quite excited about today................but zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I was quite excited about today................but zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
You have probably been like me rushing around to get settled for this bore fest , oh this board again, i am sure he thinks the jury are children that wont understand unless he writes everything down 
looks like Casey is about to drop off!
Is this relevant?
The prosecution certainly got the best of the experts - they managed to make even the most boring subjects interesting. Bring back Dr Vass and the bug guy!
Baez asks if jurors can raise their hands if they don't understand. Judge Perry says no. #CaseyAnthony -jfell
I`m cringeing for him.
I'm a bit lost - what item is she talking about now?
Originally Posted by Scotty:
Baez asks if jurors can raise their hands if they don't understand. Judge Perry says no. #CaseyAnthony -jfell
I`m cringeing for him.
It just appears to be him that doesnt understand !
I'm bored by this testimony and by Bozo's questioning of this witness.
Which DNA sample is she referring?
Looks like he's best line of defence is to plead contamination
Originally Posted by Scotty:
Originally Posted by Ev (Peachy):
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I think both Jeff and the Judge are making it plain to the jury just what a plonker Baez is. This whole testimony is a waste of time IMO.
I agree. If as we believe she chloroformed her, then there won't be any blood As we understand according to the State's evidence, she was bagged in black refuse sacks therefore, the biological material would have been in those not necessarily the car.
What is he trying to prove here - that the absence of blood means Casey didn't kill her child?
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
True, the defense don`t have to prove anything but after their opening statement they`re going to have to. They stupidly put the ball in their own court.
But that's as it stands, they don't need to prove anything. The Jury know this. I also think the prosecution have left a lot of questions unanswered. Like Roy Kronk for example not coming to the stand, and from a Jurors point of view, they should want to know everything.
I also think the defense are not doing the best job, far from it up to now, but if there is any sort of reasonable doubt and i think there is, and we will see what the jury think in time.
I think she's talking duct tape!
Originally Posted by Pengy:
Originally Posted by Scotty:
The defense don't need to prove anything, its only the prosecution that has to do that. The defense just need one of the jury to say there is a slight reasonable doubt in any area.
True,the defense don`t have to prove anything but after their opening statement they`re going to have to. They stupidly put the ball in their own court.
that's the point Bill Schaeffer (sp) on WFTV keeps making
I iz playing with pretty colours
I`m bestest pals with Bill.
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
I think she's talking duct tape!
I switched off
If what she's just said is true that someone contaminated it by not wearing gloves that's a big norty from them
OMG .............SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN BUMBLING BOFOON!
Originally Posted by Roxan:
The prosecution didnt bring Kronk to the stand, and also a couple of other witnesses, to try to force defence to get Casey to testify, since they were going to bring evidence into the case that cant be raised by defence unless by Casey or else it will be heresay.
Having said that I also think this is a very hard case for the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt.
From a jurors point of view, they would want him on he stand, and im sure they would want to see her on as well. But i gather the defense are bringing him in anyway?
Originally Posted by Roxan:
The prosecution didnt bring Kronk to the stand, and also a couple of other witnesses, to try to force defence to get Casey to testify, since they were going to bring evidence into the case that cant be raised by defence unless by Casey or else it will be heresay.
interesting Roxan
Just take your time he says 
Is WFTV playing up for anyone else?
Originally Posted by Soozy Woo:
Is WFTV playing up for anyone else?
I do find there are gaps in the transmission but I like it the best. I know cnn does a good broadcast and WESH but they don't have Bill Shaeffer's expertise which is why I stay with WFTV
members of the jury please disregard the testimony of the witness on the last object 