succeeded in painting casey a liar but now they turn to the forensic evidence to try to convince a jury she s also a murderer. this part of the trial, evidence found in the trunk of casey s car, including an overwhelming odor that several witnesses testified smelled like a dead body. opened the trunk. i immediately smell ed it. samples of the truck s carpeting were stored in cabs to preserve the smell and sent to the lab for analysis. the prosecution is trying something very novel in this case, which is introducing evidence of a smell of death from the trunk of a car. dr. arpad vass, a senior researcher tested though samples. do you have an opinion whether it was a decomposing body in the trunk of that car? i can find no other plausible explanation other than that to explain all the results we found. now, that s going to be very
strategy was at the best when the defense lawyer was pointing out the evidence that wasn t there. the facts that we don t know about how the little girl died and no prosecution witness could say with certainty even with the duct tape they theorize was the murder weapon and placed over the nose and the mouth, and no prosecution witness could say with certainty that was true. and the same with the forensics when we talk about the hair that was found in the trunk of the car and when the defense was pointing out, why isn t there more there? i thought that was effective. some of the science, is on the outer limits of what has been admitted in court before in terms of the air samples taken from the trunk of the car that the prosecution expert witness dr. arpad vass said was consistent with the decomposition. that is when the defense was at the best and they had a lot to work with and this is not one of the cases that is overwhelming in terms of the forensics and this is stronger
human decomposition more extensively than anyone else, dr. arpad vass, 20 years she spent, the last ten specifically studying the odor of human decomposition. he told you when he opened that can, he jumped back and said i know exactly what it is. but we re not just relying on his nose, but on science, too. he examined the evidence, examined the odor. what s important about what he did with the odor is he actually took a piece of the carpet, separated it from the trunk so the odor he was getting had to come from the carpet itself, in other words, not some ambient odor from something that had been in the car before, but from
chloroform, bleach, you could throw the chemicals together, but it wouldn t smell like human decomposition because the smell is unique. he tested the odor, the carpet, one for inorganic, one for organ irk, and he tested the paper towels. everything he tested came back to one specific cause, that there was a dead body in the back of casey anthony s carr. the defense presented dr. furton who is experienced in this area, not as experienced as dr. vass, because dr. furton s area is in individual scents, the scents that you and i give off in life as individuals. some of the students study human
told you there were two cars. if you believe him, you have to believe that yuri melich, if you believe hip, you have to believe that the other witnesses were lying to you. michael vincent, the other csi person who said he smelled a dead body, mr. arpad vass, and we ll get into that later. cindy anthony said it because this was her third call and she wanted the police to get there quicker. simon burch who runs the police tow yard. now, you may recall that mr. burch didn t make his statement until nine days later, after it was broadcast all over the news