at large. you have chemistry slash chloroform, how many times was that place visited? according to the history, 84 times. the website is www.fci.slash chemistry slash chloroform.htm. how many times does it show that website was visited? once, sir. i would like to show you state s evidence 166. what is this item. it is the report from cash back. and the report from cash back shows that it was visited how many times? eighty four. there s a difference between the two, is there not? that is correct. what was your initial
reaction when you heard the verdict? i m never surprised at injure verdicts. the verdict could have gone either way. there was enough evidence to infer that she may have killed the baby, the duct tape. you had to draw inferences. but there were also enough gaps in the evidence that a reasonable injure could conclude there was a reasonable doubt. injures are not computers. you can t predict the outcome by quantifying the evidence. that s the american system. and that was yesterday on huckabee s show. you saw the computer discrepancy, the state saying there were 84 searches and jose baez said there was only one search and it lasted three minutes but also you had the smell evidence, you had the other forensic type evidence that baez called fantasy, and the jury may have believed him. was it really, in the words of the defense counsel, junk science?
this? how can they come forward with this evidence, this junk, that doesn t even work? it s blood money. plant it on caylee s grave. he comes up with this chloroform in their opening statement and then they don t know what to believe and cindy doesn t tell the truth. justice for caylee. will caylee s law work? kimberly? i think if it helps in even saving one child s life then it s the right thing to have on the books. i don t think it will be abused. prosecutors will use their discretion. good parents won t be prosecuted. bad parents like casey anthony will. if it protects a child, then we should have it. 24 hours? twenty four hours, i think that s reasonable. twenty four hours would have made all the difference in the
our panel debates. the jurors in the casey anthony murder trial says prosecutors did not match the scientific evidence to the crime. that s exactly what forensic expert dr. michael baden and larry told us week ago, he couldn t find a cause of death. absolutely. when you look at the evidence, take away the anger and emotion and hostility that could have tainted the jury, just look at the evidence they made the right decision, chloroform, duct tape as murder weapons. never used before to kill a child in this country. handed a cold bones case with neither dna, finger prints, eyewitnesses nor a confession from casey anthony, florida prosecutors pulled out all the stops to buttress their circumstantial case using novel and controversy alexandra styronens and unorthodox testimony. they will ask you to see things that aren t there and they will ask you to imagine
he may be a good researcher, but he presented evidence that has no forensic validity. and what about the fact that no dna was found? there was no human tissue of any kind on that duct tape, was there? nothing that i could identify. doctor, you pointed out when we spoke to you, the duct tape didn t have any dna evidence. it didn t have dna, but it had fibers on it. clothing fibers which were never examined by the fbi or the prosecutor to see where the fibers came from. as far as the child being suffocated with a never-before used form of chloroform and duct tape, did the prosecution overreach by asserting their theory was fact? they said we got the accidental drowning in the pool. we couldn t get the floor form and the duct tape. how could you come to a guilty decision when you don t