[jebartle]

Where was the DNA on the tape after the body skeletonized....This tape was supposedly (according to Dr. Spitz) applied by medical examiner or CSI....Also in order to apply this tape, they would have had to lift the skull and mandible....Where are these prints? If any prints were to be found it would have been those because this altering was done AFTER the body skeletonized..We all know that the medical examiners team always wore gloves, why can't we assume that whoever placed the body there to begin with, also wore gloves..Last point, the tape had to have been there for an extended period of time because it was also decomposing..(1)Skull cap removal WAS NOT part of a pathology protocol...I agree Casey deserves "Due Process" BUT Dr. Spitz's qualifications (which are extensive) does not change the evidence found! Believe me, this witnesses lack of credability on the stand were NOT lost by the jury!(They were smirking)...I respect your opinion but not your assesment!

Originally Posted by PennBF

I can't believe the number of people who believe the Doctor today was not effective.
In my opinion he was an outstanding witness for the defense. His qualifications were beyond reproach, he did not allow the State to beat him down and get him off of his position nor impeach his testimony. In short he was a terrific witness for the defense. Some significant points he made were, (a) the State did a "shoddy" job of an autospy, (b) the state moved the hair thereby altering the crime scene and evidence, (c) you cannot determine what was the matter or cause of death, (d) No DNA on Tape,
(e) head was moved, etc.etc. This is coming from a Pathlogist who worked on the Kennedy Assasination, King Assasination, Testified before Congress, worked on OJ Case, worked on Spector case, was one of 2 who founded the Body Farm in Tenn, Administered or taught over 60,000 autopsies, is Professor at 2 Universities, and many more..in fact too many to put down.
It is pretty clear that some have a limited knowledge as to how a witness is to handle himself, avoid being sucked into the confrontation which the State tried to do today, allow time to think the Q and A out, be direct and render
the expert opinions so the jury can understand them. He was terrific. As regards his "slow talk"..It was not because he was lacking in memory, god knows it would be great if we all had his memory at his age. He was clearly thinking through his response's and as they always want you to do he was being "crisp".
I believe that some have already convicted Casey, have not heard all of the evidence and are attacking anyone who testify's to truth and fact. That is not only unfair to the defendent but contray to the American system of justice.