Casey Anthony update 26 June 2009 It’s not about Caylee

Received this from one of the people who post on the site. 

So often we “bloggers” have asked ourselves, where is the one family member, that ONE blood relative who will step forward and demand Justice for Caylee? There are hundreds of thousands of Americans who are demanding that justice, loud and clear. Yet her family seems to have a different agenda. One blogger took it upon herself to ask that question of a great uncle of Caylees’.

She made a call to Ohio and stated that our facts come directly from LE and she asked when is ONE family member going to take a stand for Caylee?

She was told “well Caylee died you know” and then she was told that “George and Cindy had spent several days recently in Ohio with family and had a really good time.” This was the week of the vigil-which not one family member attended.  Lee did do a drive by lookyloo. Yes we saw you Lee.

It appears that now that George and Cindy have the money, they are no longer the “poor bankrupt relations, but are being taken back into the “fold’.  Is the entire family going to unite in the ‘business” Cindy has begun? Are they all going to bask in the “fame and fortune ‘ gained by Caylees’ murder. They can even boast now that Casey is housed in the same wing as Billy Bob Thornton daughter, MY MY the lifestyle of the rich and famous.- all at the cost of a beautiful little child.  How proud they must be-the family that spends together. Or is that spins?

I thought Rick Pleasea might do the right thing at one time-but so far HE is keeping a low profile. I would like to challenge just ONE blood relative-please come stand with us-stand up and demand Justice for Caylee- can ONE of you do that?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh my goodness, all this about the autopsy report being released and the crying George did in court was all a show.  Not to mention that they had to go on National TV and put on a show for the world on the 16th of June about it being a year since they had seem her, blah, blah, blah!  Why am I not surprised?  And why did I know that they are all a show.

Advertisements

RECAP: Evidence Report Part 2 of 2

fbilabtop
Results of Examinations:
Comparison of geologic materials for the purposes of determining a common origin is accomplished by
using one or more analytical techniques.
These techniques can include:
Munsell color determination in a light box under day light conditions; the determination of
texture using stereobinocular and pétrographie microscopes; and the identification of components
present and their relative abundances using stereobinocular and pétrographie microscopes and
additional instrumental methods as needed. The actual tests performed are dependent on the
type(s) and quantity of the geologic material present, and the needs of the examination/analytical
requirements. The properties expressed are used as comparison criteria. When specimens are
indistinguishable in all their observed properties, the possibility that the compared specimens
originated from the same source cannot be eliminated.

Twenty-two pairs of footwear and a transport bag (Q249 through Q29,3) were
submitted for comparison of any soil present to soil recovered from the vicinity of the crime
scene (K15 though K30). The footwear was received packaged in pairs. Because of the
possibility of transfer between items packaged in contact with each other, the debris from each
pair of shoes was recovered to a single container and examined collectively. Each container of
debris from a pair of shoes is denoted with the specimen numbers of both shoes, for example,
Q249-Q250. Specimen Q253 contained a fragment of glass embedded in the sole of the shoe.
This glass fragment could not have been the result of transfer from specimen Q254 and is
denoted as debris from specimen Q253.

No geologic materials were recovered from specimens Q249-Q250, Q251-Q252, Q254, Q255-Q256,
Q257-Q258, Q259-Q260, Q263-Q264, Q265-Q266, Q267-Q268, Q271-Q272, Q273-Q274, Q279-Q280,
Q283-Q284, Q287-Q288, and Q291-Q292.
Debris containing geologic materials was recovered from specimens Q253, Q261-
Q262, Q269-Q270, Q275-Q276, Q277-Q278, Q281-Q282, Q285-Q286, Q289-Q290, and Q293.
These specimens were examined visually using a stereo binocular microscope. Specimens Q253,
Q261-Q262, Q281-Q282, Q285-Q286, Q289-Q290, and Q293 contain insufficient geologic
materials for meaningful comparison to the recovered soils from the crime scene (K16 through
K18 and K20 through K29). Specimens K15, K19, and K30 are principally composed of plant
materials, and contain insufficient geologic materials for comparison.

Soil and/or sediment recovered from specimens Q269-Q270, Q275-Q276, and Q277-
Q278 is different in color than the soils and debris from the crime scene (K15 through K30).
Additionally, abundant plant material is present in soils from the crime scene that is not present
in the soil and/or sediment recovered from specimens Q269-Q270, Q275-Q276, and Q277-Q278.

Accordingly, the soil and/or sediment recovered from specimens Q269-Q270, Q275-Q276, and
Q277-Q278 did not originate from the crime scene as represented by specimens K16 through
Kl 8 and K20 through K29.

The inability to associate specimens through a mineralogical examination does not
preclude that the item(s) could have been present at the area in question. Soil differs both across
the land and down the soil profile as a function of parent material, climate, biological activity,
geography, and time, yielding soil which is distinct from place to place and with depth below the
surface. These changes can occur abruptly or gradually. Therefore, the soil samples from a
specific location must be interpreted to represent only that site, and may not exemplify all soils in
the area or soil that may have been present in the past.

Botanical examinations are not currently being conducted in the Federal Bureau of
Investigation Laboratory. Universities and local extension services may be of some assistance in
the analysis of plant material.

Debris recovered from the trunk of a vehicle (Q26 through Q28), and debris recovered
from a shovel (Q46 and Q46.1) were submitted in an attempt to determine the provenance of any
soil present. There is insufficient soil present in the debris from inside the trunk and from the
trunk interior and fender well interior (Q27 and Q28, respectively), with which to undertake a
provenance study. Debris from the trunk (Q26) contains mineral grain with textural features of
widely differing environments. Although it is possible that these different environments were
once present in the same location across geologic time, this material probably represents an
accumulation of materials from different sources collected into the trunk over a period of time.
Because these materials are intimately mixed, no sources of these materials can be determined.
Multiple soils were recovered from the shovel and label on the shovel (Q46 and
Q46.1, respectively). This examination was discontinued after the discovery of the victim’s
body.

Remarks:
The results of other examinations will be the subject of separate reports. The
specimens will be returned to you under separate cover at the completion of the FBI Laboratory
examinations. The supporting documentation for the opinions and interpretations expressed in
this report is retained in the FBI Laboratory files.

For questions about the content of this report,
please contact Geologist/Forensic Examiner Maureen C. Bottrell at (703) 632-xxxx. For
questions regarding the status of the specimens, please contact Evidence Control Unit Request
Coordinator Erin Martin at (703) 632-xxxx.
Maureen C. Bottrell
Trace Evidence Unit
This report contains the opinions/interpretations of the examiner(s) who issued the report.

RECAP: More evidence Part 1 of 2

fbilabtop
REPORT OF EXAMINATION
To: Tampa :                                                             Date: March 4, 2009
Orlando RA
SA Nickolas B. Savage;                                       Case ID No.: 7A-TP-71176
TFO John Steven McElyea
                                                                                     Lab No.:-080805005 TO HM
                                                                                                        080911006 TO HM
                                                                                                         090115014 TO HM
Reference: Communications dated August 4, 2008, September 10, 2008, and January 22, 2008
Your No.:

Title: CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY – VICTIM
MISSING / ABDUCTED MINOR
ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Date specimens received: August 5, 2008, September 11, 2008, and January 15, 2009

The following specimens were received in the Trace Evidence Unit (mineralogy) on
August 6, 2008 under cover of communication dated August 4, 2008 and were assigned FBI
Laboratory number 080805005 TO HM:

ITEMS FROM VEHICLE – FLORIDA TAG # G63 XV
Q26 Debris from trunk (OCSO Item #1, Q-14)
Q27 Debris from inside trunk (OCSO Item #3, Q-l5)
Q28 Debris from trunk interior and fender well interior (OCSO Item #6, Q-l7)

The following specimens were received in the Trace Evidence Unit (mineralogy) on.
September 11, 2008 under cover of communication dated September 10, 2008 and were assigned
FBI Laboratory number 0809 Í1006 TO HM:
Q46 Shovel (OCSOItem#l,K-ll)
Q46.1 Label from Q46 shovel blade (OCSO Item # 1, K-11)

The following specimens were received in the Trace Evidence Unit (mineralogy) on
February 3, 2009 under cover of communication dated January 22, 2008 and were assigned FBI
Laboratory number 090115014 TO HM:
080805005 TO HM
080911006 TO HM
090115014 TO HM
Q249-Q250 Boots
Q251-Q292 Shoes (21 pairs of shoes)
Q293 Transport bag
K15 Debris from top layer of evidence marker H (H-60520, Item 1, Q142)
K16 Soil sample from second layer of evidence marker H (H-60520, Item 2, Q143)
K17 Soil sample from third layer of evidence marker H (H-60520, Item 3, Q144)
K18 Soil sample from fourth layer of evidence marker H (H-60520, Item 4, Q145)
K19 Debris from top layer of evidence marker I (H-60520, Item 5, Q146)
K20 Soil sample from second layer of evidence marker I (H-60520, Item 6, Q147)
K21 Soil sample from third layer of evidence marker I (H-60520, Item 7, Q148)
K22 Soil sample from fourth layer of evidence marker I (H-60520, Item 8, Q149) ;
K23 Soil sample from 150 feet south of the 0 point of lane (H-60523, Item 1, Q153) :
K24 Soil sample from evidence marker A (H-60499, Item 1, Q82)
K25 Soil sample from evidence marker B (H-60499, Item 2, Q83)
K26 Soil sample from evidence marker C (H-60499, Item 3, Q84)
K27 Soil sample from evidence marker D (H-60499, Item 4, Q85)
K28 Soil sample from evidence marker E (H-60499, Item 5, Q86)
K29 Soil sample from evidence marker F (H-60499, Item 6, Q87)
K30 Debris from evidence marker G (H-60499, Item 7, Q88)
The results of the trace evidence (mineralogy) examinations are included in the report.
(Report is the next post)

Casey Anthony update 25 June 2009

Diane Fanning the author of “Mommy’s little Girl” Casey Anthony and her Daughter Caylee’s Tragic Fate, claims she is NOT putting money in the Anthony’s pocket. Fanning also says that she did not pick the title of the book, but she does think it is a good title. She also states she is making a living writing books. She also states that there are stories and anecdotes that have never been published before and they are not earth shattering but she thinks it added another texture to the book. Fanning also says that she could not interview the Cindy and George for the book.

There are numerous names for this book: “The Xanax Babysitter”, “Lies, Lies and more Lies, the Casey Anthony saga”, “Casey Anthony, I waited 31 days”, “Casey Anthony, What can my next lie be”, “Casey Anthony, the victim of herself”, Casey, I’m not in control anymore”. Yes, there are numerous titles, these are just a few. Casey and the word daughter in the same line are not the “La Bella Vita”.  As for what is in the book, sorry I won’t buy it. I will stick to the facts that the state releases and hear the ending at the end of the trial. As for interviewing Cindy and George, you were probably better off not interviewing them, their lies have sky rocketed.  And who leaked the NON-earth shattering  texture to this book?

RECAP: Knife examination

fbilabtopREPORT OF EXAMINATION
To: Tampa                                                                                Date: March 19, 2009
Orlando RA
SA Nickolas B. Savage .                                                      Case ID No.: 7A-TP-71176 
                                                                                                     Lab No.: 090115014 TO MA

Reference: Communication dated January 22, 2009
Your No.:

Title: CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY – VICTIM
MISSING / ABDUCTED MINOR
ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Date specimens received: January 15, 2009

The following item was examined in the Chemistry Unit:
Q242 Knife (H-51975, Item #8, Q80)
The results of the requested adhesive comparison examinations are included in this report.

Results of Examinations:
The Q242 knife was examined for the presence of adhesive like the Q64 duct tape
previously examined under FBI Laboratory number 081213001 TO MA (report dated December
19, 2008). Minute amounts of clear, sticky materials were present on two areas of the Q242
blade; however, neither material is consistent with the Q64 duct tape adhesive. Although the
materials are too limited to fully characterize, they remain suitable for limited comparison
examinations should suspect sources be located.

The following analytical techniques were utilized in the examination of these items of
evidence: visual and microscopic examinations and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
(FT-IR).

Remarks:
Q242 is being retained at the FBI Laboratory. Its disposition will be the subject of a
separate communication.

For questions regarding the content of this report, please contact Forensic Examiner
Maureen J. Bradley at (703) 632-xxxx.

For questions regarding the status of the remaining forensic examinations, please
contact Request Coordinator Erin Martin at (703) 632-xxxx.

Maureen J. Bradley, Ph.D.
Chemistry Unit
This report contains the opinions/interpretations of the examiner(s) who issued the report.

RECAP: Hair Mass

fbilabtopREPORT OF EXAMINATION
To: Tampa                                                 Date: March 13, 2009
Orlando RA
SA Nickolas B. Savage                          CASE ID NO: 7A-TP-71176
TFO John Steven McElyea
                                                                      Lab No.: 090115014 TO NP
Reference: Communication dated January 22, 2009
Your No.:

Title: CAYLEE MARIE ANTHONY – VICTIM
MISSING / ABDUCTED MINOR
ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

Date specimens received: January 15, 2009
Specimens:

The following items were received in the Chemistry Unit:
ITEMS RESUBMITTED FROM FBI LABORATORY NUMBER 081213001 TO SN LF ABA
MQ NR MA HO

Q59-Q59.1 Hair Mass (IBI05, E4381283 & 1B107, E4381285)
This report contains the results of the toxicology examinations of item Q59.1.

Results of Examinations:
Alprazolam and clonazepam were not detected in the Q59.1 hair.

Additionally, the hair sample was screened for the following with negative results:
flunitrazepam, diazepam, midazolam, oxazepam, nordiazepam, triazolam, temazepam,
lorazepam and ketamine.

This testing was performed using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry.
The detection limits of this method are 2 picograms of drug per milligram of hair for alprazolam,
clonazepam, flunitrazepam, diazepam, nordiazepam, triazolam and temazepam and 5 picograms
of drug per milligram of hair for midazolam, oxazepam, lorazepam and ketamine.

Remarks:
The Q59.1 hair cuttings are allegedly those that were removed from the Q59 hair
mass by Dr. Bruce Goldberger for toxicology testing on December 18, 2008.

The Q59.1 hair sample was not tested for chloroform, as this examination is not
deemed probative by the FBI Laboratory’s Chemistry Unit. Testing of the Q59.1 hair sample was
focused on alprazolam, clonazepam and other benzodiazepines pursuant to communications
between Forensic Examiner Madeline A. Montgomery and Medical Examiner Jan Garavaglia on
December 17, 2008.

There is little research available on the amounts of drug expected to be found in hair
after limited dosing. Although the method used in this analysis allows for the detection of very
small amounts of the drugs listed, negative results should not be interpreted as proof that the
individual was not exposed to the drugs listed.

The disposition of the submitted items will be addressed in a separate communication.
For questions about the content of this report, please contact Forensic Examiner
Madeline A. Montgomery at (703) 632-xxxx.
For questions about the status of remaining forensic examinations, please contact
Request Coordinator Erin Martin at (703) 632-xxxx.

Madeline A. Montgomery
Chemistry Unit
This report contains the opinions/interpretations of the examiner(s) who issued the report.

Casey Anthony update 24 June 2009

Danny Knight, owner of the tattoo parlor where Casey got her LAST tattoo, Bella Vita, said that she was a regular customer. Casey stopped in the day she was going to pick up her friends from the airport, that were coming in from Puerto Rico. Yea, she fed Danny the story about she was suppose to go to Puerto Rico, but she was trying to save money so she could move out of her mother’s house……..

Read Danny’s LE’s Transcript

Of course KidFinders is letting out a press release:
This letter shall serve as clarification as to who Kid Finders Network is and exactly what they do. We will start with the Caylee Anthony case. We showed up after being contacted by a news reporter from Orlando asking us to help this family find their granddaughter on the second day. We were told that no organizations had stepped forward to help. READ the release.  (Yes it is old, but was just sent the link)  And lets not forget that their house should be up for auction on 26 June 2009.

And still we wait to see when the hearing for the fraud charges and the tattoo photo will happen.  I believe this is a good way to make the d-team get on the ball and get up to speed on the Murder trial!  Of course we all know the d-team won’t be ready anytime soon!