Tag Archive: Dr. Tim Huntington


Before the April 15th hearing there were two mental health experts added to the defense witness list but subsequently nixed. Why won’t Baez use them? Although Defense attorney Jose Baez tried to convince the judge that the state didn’t have the right to examine Casey, because the mental health experts would only be testifying about behavioral science, Prosecutor Jeff Ashton said the state would have the right to examine her and would have broad freedom in doing so. Of course this isn’t a viable option for any defense attorney so the defense gave up on the entire idea. Now it doesn’t look likely that the PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome) will come into trial as we all thought.

Later in the 48 Hour segment, George Anthony’s name was mentioned as possibly being the perpetrator. Am I now to believe that he’ll be thrown under the bus, perhaps? When asked for corroboration, George Anthony’s attorney responded “no comment”.
In late March of 2011, two protesters who watched George Anthony push one of them during a 2008 protest outside the family home were added to the defense witness list. It was speculated by many that these women were going to support the theory that PTSD was a possible strategy for the defense team. More speculators added they would prove George Anthony, Casey’s father had a bad temper and this is why his daughter was afraid to tell anyone what happened to Caylee.

As for tonight’s 48 Hours Special “Only Casey Knows” I think they did a reasonably good job. For the frightened Casey Haters who thought it was going to be ALL about Casey Anthony’s innocence, obviously they were wrong. In my opinion, it was 70% Pro-State of Florida but with a surprise twist, 30% of the program was beneficial to the Defense. How gauche!

From the beginning I realized that the focus of this program had much to do with the overly zealous media in the Anthony case which led to the revelation that there actually wasn’t a change of venue. Wow, is this true! Judge Belvin Perry’s bizarre idea of a change of venue is a joke. In an authentic change of venue, the defendant and her attorneys are relocated to a different county to be heard by unbiased jurors, in Judge Perry’s unprecedented version, he’s bringing the hopefully unbiased jurors to the defendant. Why? Because of money but nobody thought about money when they decided to charge a suspect with 1st degree murder with the death penalty without a lick of forensic evidence or a confession. Ex-Prosecutor Paula Bondi had the unmitigated gall to assert “money is never an object when trying a murder case”, yet money is an object if it means giving a fair trial to the most publicized, vilified suspect America has seen in over 15 years. I think on that fact alone this case has a definite chance for appeal.

Dr. Tim Huntington, an assistant professor at Concordia University, Nebraska, and a board-certified entomologist I feel will be powerful expert witness. He said the smell from the trunk was not that of a dead body but more like a bag of garbage. And of course, Dr. Kathi Reich, consultant for the televised series “Bones” will bring strong testimony as well.

At the beginning of the program when reliving the horror show of those God awful protesters with their children wearing signs, people screaming obscenities it reminded me how huge of a turning point this was for me. When Nancy Grace played the video of the protesting and mob-like mentality and how Casey was vilified by the City of Orlando and how the media had tried and convicted Casey within 5 days of when the story broke, I thought, LE must have undisputed hard evidence for this mob to denigrate the entire Anthony family in such a manner.

This must be an “open and shut” case. Of course, now looking at the evidence, I assumed wrong. Perhaps the defense will use the two newly added female protesters from the witness list to open the door to the abomination that took place in front of the Anthony home. Maybe this will have the same affect on the jurors as it did on me. Maybe they’ll keep their minds open, scrutinize any and all evidence and listen more carefully to testimony. I think it’s safe to say most good jurors want undeniable hard evidence in any 1st degree murder case and when they don’t see it, they’ll vote for acquittal.

Finally, in the last 15 minutes of the segment Richard Gabriel weighed in with his mock jury panel. Richard Gabriel is the President of Decision Analysis since 1985 and a leader in the field of jury research, jury selection, and litigation communication in nearly a thousand trials has offered his services pro bono to the defense.
In the mock jury which I was surprised to learn were from Orange County had voted 9 to 3 to acquit Anthony of 1st degree murder after 4 hours of Richard Gabriel’s reading of the evidence. Honestly I’m not sure that 12 people can digest in 4 hours what a real jury panel will hear in 6 weeks but it is encouraging. Also I think Richard Gabriel proved what most of us here at theJBMission already knew, charging Casey Anthony with 1st degree murder along with death penalty pending was a costly mistake by the State of Florida because when asked this mock panel voted 8 to 4 guilty if it were a lesser charge.

The “Only Casey Knows” 48 Hour Mystery Special ended on the note that if Judge Belvin Perry wished he could decide on a lesser charge. I’m not too happy with that idea being Judge Perry hasn’t been exactly fair to the defense team so I don’t think he deserves a do-over.

Lastly, to my lack of dismay, it looks like the count down to Casey’s Day of Reckoning will have to be reset. The ticking is off key and the tock needs to be adjusted. According to “48 Hours Mystery”, the trial will start on May 17th not the 9th as Judge Perry had hoped. Isn’t it funny how everyone speculates?

Disclaimer:

After writing this article I was made aware that there is only “one” protester who made it to defense witness list. As to not have to rewrite the article, I’m going to let it stand because it is part of my opinion that the defense should use more of the protesters if possible. I think the protesters proved that LE willingly allowed this spectacle to take place in order to taint potential Orange county jurors and not to question the evidence that is put before them.

If this one protester isn’t willing to take the stand hopefully the other one will attest to the debauchery that took place because I think the protesters unknowingly served a purpose for Casey Anthony. Sources:
http://www.wftv.com/news/27554969/detail.html

http://www.decisionanalysisinc.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=55%3Arichard-gabriel&catid=39%3Aconsultant-profiles&Itemid=55

Advertisements

DR. JANE H. BOCK (Expert)
University of Colorado
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Dept.
Boulder, Colorado 80309

1. Dr. Bock curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 1.
2. Dr Bock’s field of expertise or medical specialty is Forensic Botany.
3. If Dr Bock were called to testify, her specific subject area will be Forensic Botany.
4. The substance of the facts which Dr Bock would be called to testify, would depend on the following:

• Whether the State calls Dr. Hall as an expert witness.
• Whether Dr Hall’s opinions are approved by this court as being based on scientific principles (Frye
challenge)
• Whether Dr Hall can effectively survive cross examination.

If this Court should allow Dr Hall to testify, Dr Bock would be called to rebut his findings dealing with the recovery site and his conclusions based on viewing photographs of the recovery site.
5. A summary of Dr Bock’s testimony can be obtained from viewing her affidavit as listed under exhibit 2. She would rebut Dr Hall’s where he claims that he can determine the growth rate of roots, when he doesn’t even know the type of plant and without having viewed the root and seeing them from un-scaled photographs.

DR. SCOTT FAIRGRIEVE (Expert)
Chair, Department of Forensic Science
Laurentian University
935 Ramsey Lake Road
F-323A, Third Floor, Science 2 Bldg.

Sudbury ON P3E 2C6

1. Dr Fairgrieve’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 3.
2. Dr Fairgrieve’s field of expertise or medical specialty is forensic anthropology.
3. If Dr Fairgrieve were called to testify his specific subject area will be that involving cadaver dogs.
4. If Dr Fairgrieve were called to testify would depend on the following:
• Will this Court for the first time in the history of this state admit testimony concerning cadaver dog “alerts” as substantive testimony.
• Will this Court allow a canine to testify, via a dog handler, given Miss Anthony’s 6th amendment rights to confront her accusers and despite the fact that all “alerts” in this case are unrecorded, and resulted in negative results for human remains?

The substance of Dr Fairgrieve’s testimony would depend on the above and to rebut the testimony of the cadaver dog handlers in this case.
5. Of course a dog cannot testify. In the event that the State attempts this unusual tactic, a summary of Dr Fairgrieve’s testimony is that cadaver dogs are a tool and nothing more, absent the finding of human remains in their searchers, very little can be ascertained from such alerts.

DR. HENRY LEE (Expert)
University of New Haven
Forensic Science Program
300 Orange Avenue
West Haven, Ct 05616

1. Dr Lee’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 4.
2. Dr Lee’s field of expertise is Criminalistics.
3. If Dr Lee were called to testify, the subjects that he will render opinions on are crime scene analysis, collection and preservation as well as recovery.
4. Dr Lee inspected the Pontiac Sunfire driven by Miss Anthony. Dr Lee also inspected the recovery site photographs and also inspected the recovery site.
5. If Dr Lee were called to testify, the substance of the facts that he would be expected to testify would be to rebut any false claims raised by CSI investigators in this case. Until that occurs it is difficult to give a complete summary of his opinions and the grounds for those opinions.

DR. WERNER SPITZ (Expert)
23001 Greater Mack
St. Clair Shores, Michigan 48080-1996

1. Dr Spitz’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 5.
2. Dr Spitz’s field of expertise is forensic pathology.
3. If Dr Spitz were called to testify, the subject that he would render opinions on are his autopsy findings and those of Dr Garavaglia.
4. The substance of the facts that Dr Spitz will testify is that on December 24, 2008, he conducted a second autopsy on the decedent and found no signs of trauma and could not find a cause of death.
5. The summary of Dr Spitz’s testimony would relate to the condition of Caylee Marie Anthony’s remains and her cause of death.

DR. KATHY REICHS
1818 Craigmore Drive
Charlotte, NC 28226
1. Dr Reichs’ curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 6.
2. Dr Reichs’ field of expertise is forensic anthropology.
3. If Dr Reichs were called to testify, the subjects that she will render opinions on are forensic anthropology.
4. Dr. Reichs completed a full anthropological exam on Caylee Marie Anthony, she found no signs of antemortem trauma to Caylee Marie Anthony’s remains.
5. If Dr Reichs would be called to testify, the substance of the facts that she would be expected to testify to would be to rebut any false claims raised by the State’s forensic anthropologists. Until that occurs it is difficult to give a complete summary of her opinions and the grounds for those opinions.

DR. TIM HUNTINGTON (Expert)
Asst. Prof. of Biology
Concordia University, Nebraska
800 N. Columbia Ave.
Seward, NE 68434

1. Dr Huntington’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 7.
2. Dr Huntington’s field of expertise is forensic entomology.
3. If Dr Huntington were called to testify, the subject matter that he would render opinions to testify, the subject matter that he would render opinions on are forensic entomology.
4. The substance of the facts that Huntington would testify to are to rebut the claims made by Dr Haskill in his report and any testimony that he may provide in that regard. The only exceptions that Dr Huntington does agree with are the insect identification (including coffin flies) and he agrees with Dr Haskill that Caylee Marie Anthony’s body decomposed at another location and NOT the recovery site.
5. Dr Huntington’s opinions will agree with Dr Haskill that there were NO coffin flies found in the trunk of the Pontiac Sunfire, and that based on the insect activity her remains decomposed at another location. If Dr Huntington were called to testify, he would rebut any other claims that were not based on any scientific explanations.

DR. KENNETH FURTON (Expert)
University Medical & Forensic Consultants, Inc.
10130 Northlake Boulevard, Suite 214
West Palm Beach, Florida 33412

1. Dr Furton’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 8.
2. Dr Furton’s field of expertise is forensic chemistry.
3. If Dr Furton were called to testify the subject matter that he would render opinions on are forensic chemistry.
4. If Dr Furton were called to testify, the substance of facts that he would testify to would relate to the cadaver dog “alerts.” And those opinions rendered by the Oakridge laboratories.
5. The substance of Dr Furton’s testimony would if the were called to testify to are that the cadaver dog is a tool, not a witness. He will be able to testify about the procedures and limitations of cadaver dogs, as well as the odors of decomposition and the limitations in sound scientific principles currently used in decompositional odors.

DR. BARRY LOGAN (Expert)
National Medical Services, Inc.
3701 Welsh Road
Post Office Box 433A
Willow Grove, PA 19090

1. Dr Logan’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 9.
2. Dr Logan’s field of expertise is forensic chemistry.
3. If Dr Logan were called to testify the subject matter that he would testify to is forensic chemistry.
4. If Dr Logan were called to testify would depend on the Court admitting for the first time in any State air samples tested by Oakridge Laboratories.
5. The summary of Dr Logan’s testimony is that he disagrees with the methodology employed by Oakridge laboratories in their “Forensic Report.” That the science employed is not recognized in the scientific community.

DR. JOHN LEESON (Expert)
1208 Wolverine Trail
Winter Springs, FL 32708

1. Dr Leeson’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 10.
2. Dr Leeson’s field of expertise is digital forensics.
3. If Dr Leeson were called to testify the subject matter that he would testify to is digital forensics.
4. Dr Leeson has reviewed the reports issued by State experts Sandra Cawn and Kevin Stenger.
5. If Dr Leeson would be called to testify, the substance of the facts that he would be expected to testify to would be to rebut any false claims raised by the State’s forensic computer experts. Until that occurs it is difficult to give a complete summary of his opinions and the grounds for those opinions.

DR. WILLIAM RODRIGUEZ (Expert)
16465 Old Frederick Rd.
Mt. Airy, MD 21771

1. Dr Rodriguez’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 11.
2. Dr Rodriguez’s field of expertise is forensic anthropology with an emphasis in taphonomy.
3. If Dr Rodriguez were called to testify the subject matter that he would testify to would be forensic taphonomy.
4. Dr Rodriguez has reviewed all reports dealing with the remains of Caylee Marie Anthony and those specifically discussing decomposition.
5. If Dr Rodriguez would be called to testify, the substance of the facts that he would be expected to testify to would be to rebut any false claims raised by the State’s forensic experts dealing taphonomy. Until that occurs it is difficult to give a complete summary of his opinions and the grounds for those opinions.

RICHARD EIKELENBOOM (Expert)
Poppeswegje 36, 8077 RT Hulshorst
The Netherlands

1. Richard Eikelenboom’s CV is attached as exhibit 12.
2. Mr. Eikelenboom’s field of expertise is DNA, crime scene analysis and trace recovery.
3. If Mr. Eikelenboom were called to testify, he would testify in the areas of DNA, crime scene analysis and trace recovery.
4. Mr. Eikelenboom has reviewed all of the reports and photographs taken at the recovery site and has personally inspected many of the items.
5. If Mr. Eikelenboom would be called to testify, the substance of the facts that he would be expected to testify to would be to rebut any false claims raised by the State’s forensic experts dealing with DNA, crime scene analysis or trace recovery. Until that occurs it is difficult to give a complete summary of his opinions and the grounds for those opinions.

DR. MICHAEL FREEMAN
1. Dr Freeman’s curriculum vitae is attached as exhibit 13.
2. Dr Freeman’s field of expertise is that of a forensic Epidemiologist.
3. If Dr Freeman were called to testify, he would testify in the area of forensic epidemiology.
4. Dr Freeman is still in the early stages of consultation, the defense has notified the State of this, he was listed in an abundance of caution to meet the deadlines set by this court. No further information can be provided at this time.

http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/SKMBT_C45210121512020.pdf

 

Certificate of Service:
This is a copy of the above and foregoing that has been furnished to the Office of the State Attorney, 415 North Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801 on December 14, 2010 by facsimile, then later via the WWW and finally …

Transcribed by theJBmission.wordpress.com ~

Court documents filed on Tuesday show that the defense experts will have a second chance to examine what is being referred to as key evidence. The lone hair and coffin flies found in Casey Anthony’s trunk will be re-examined by Dr. Tim Huntington. He is one of the experts for the defense team who first reviewed the evidence in July at the Orlando County Sheriff’s Office. Huntington said this is the second step in the process.
As expected in the agreement, defense lawyers agreed to waive any claims about the chain of custody during the process of transport or examinations. If any evidence is damaged or destroyed, the State will still be allowed to present the testimony of their experts to the jury.
Considering the value and friability of the lone hair, I can understand the State’s concern. This is key to their claim that Caylee was in Casey’s car trunk and she drove the car with Caylee’s body in the trunk for an undetermined amount of days.
I don’t have a huge problem with the “lone hair” being found but what concerns me is that the jury has to believe that Casey did such a good job at cleaning the trunk, that only one hair was left behind when there were in fact several other hairs that were found that didn’t belong to Caylee or Casey. What are the chances that Casey was able to remove all but one of Caylee’s hairs since the trunk is said to have been thoroughly cleaned? When I think of one hair, I think it’s more likely a clothing transfer than a dead body physically being in the trunk. For instance the person who was either very near the body or had contact with the body may have picked up a hair on their clothing which found it’s way to the trunk; raises the next question; who besides Casey came near her trunk? It doesn’t exactly rule her out but it doesn’t rule out anyone else who opened her trunk either. I’m thinking this as a way to explain why there isn’t any DNA in the trunk along with this lone death-banded hair. As far as the testing itself, I’ve read there’s usually more than one hair to compare when they do an analysis.

For the amount of days Caylee was in the trunk, I suspect the State experts will calculate this by the unknown odor which the State claims is human decomposition. It’s been reported through documents from the Tennessee Body Farm, the odor value is 2.6 days. This may be hard for the State to prove because this science is still in its early stage and has never been used as evidence in a court of law. I would expect the State experts will use the coffin fly development as a gauge because they may have more value.

In another development, defense attorney Cheney Mason says the duct tape was not placed over Caylee’s mouth as it’s been claimed. I was shocked by this statement.
Of course, the investigators, Dr. Garavaglia and Roy Kronk disagree. They say yes, the duct tape was clearly found over Caylee’s mouth when her remains were found on Suburban Drive. There are photographs taken of the body to prove their statement. I imagine they will still contend the duct tape was the murder weapon which I still find peculiar too.
True, Dr. Garavaglia does explain the duct tape placement in her autopsy report but does not specify Caylee’s exact cause of death. She says homicide due to circumstances. In this report she also noted that there were “no visible signs of soft tissue” on the duct tape which could indicate no skin cells. I think this is impossible when it’s duct tape. Duct tape has been known to preserve fingerprints for years even underwater in some murder cases. Duct tape is a forensic scientist’s favorite type of evidence to examine.
Attorney Richard Hornsby of WESH did make this statement. He said, “you expect some soft tissue” beneath or stuck to the tape. He added that this finding may give Anthony some wiggle room. I don’t believe he thinks this will exonerate Casey Anthony, but possibly be grounds to lessen the charge. In my perspective, if the State can’t prove a murder was committed then they should have charged her with something possibly, easier to prove, felony child neglect. I wonder if the State loses, will they be able to later try her on another offense.

WESH:
http://www.wesh.com/news/25368899/detail.html

http://www.wesh.com/news/25243814/detail.html

The Neighborhood

telling the story from every vantage point

flywithnate.com/

Create A Tailor-Made Lifestyle

lamac66

Just another WordPress.com site

Globe Drifting

Global issues, travel, photography & fashion. Drifting across the globe; the world is my oyster, my oyster through a lens.

Disrupted Physician

The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

that all men are created equal

The JB Mission

Caylee Anthony, Casey Anthony, Casey Anthony Trial, Trayvon Martin, Crime

catoutloud

thinking outloud with feedback!

WordPress.com

WordPress.com is the best place for your personal blog or business site.