Quote:
Originally Posted by justinsain
I'm not an expert on duct tape but perhaps the rolls of tape are manufactured in recorded lots in a certain amount. Like roll 1-100 is lot 1. Rolls 101-200 is lot 2. What if the lot number is recorded and printed on the inside cardboard the duct tape rolls around.
What if there is just enough chemical difference between the brands of duct tapes manufactured that you could tell which company made what roll. There just might be enough differentiation one could determine what roll of tape a single piece came from.
I seem to remember them talking about it back when they were actually collecting the evidence and they remarked about the specific perforations on the item ( can't recall if it was the tape or the garbage bag ) that MATCHED the item found at the house with the item found with the body. If they were different it would EXCLUDE the evidence but because it matches it helps bolster the prosecution's case.
As for the stickers and blanket, of course the child lived in the home and that just shows that someone that had access to the home took the child, wrapped her in the blanket from the home, wrapped duct tape that matches the duct tape found at the home around her face and then placed a sticker that matches a page of stickers found at the home.
So one has to think did a stranger sneak into the house, find a roll of duct tape ( I never can find mine when I need it  ) kill the child, wrap her in a blanket, place a sticker on her head then go find a garbage bag to carry the body out and then place it in the woods.
Of course that doesn't explain why the trunk of Casey's car smelled like a dead body or why she didn't report her child missing for 30 some days or why she has lied about everything from being employed at Disney to having a Nanny nobody including her family had ever met.
Did a stranger do it or did someone with normal access to the house do it.
It's all about building the case with evidence and the process of elimination and as long as the prosecution doesn't try to make her put on a glove I think this case is a slam dunk  |
Don't give me "what if/perhaps scenarios". That shit ain't facts.
Just tell me how they
did match the duct tape.
I have a roll of duct tape and just looked at it and there is no lot number on the
tape itself. And even with a lot number, Walmart gets the whole box and every
cheap MoFo on my block got a roll from the same lot.
Hey, I think she is guilty. I just don't like people presenting half-assed detective
theories which actually fail every test when done by impartial people.
No matter what kind of matching you do, the child's decomposed skin should be
on the duct tape. Can't get around it. Live skin would leave DNA and dead skin
would stick to the adhesive and it would take 10 years of rain to wash it off.
Don't present juries with things that they can see is just bullshit because they
will consider that the entire case is just bullshit.
Kind of like "the glove" not fitting and not having his DNA even though he owned
them for years and wore them during a violent murder where he cut his finger.
The fucking glove could have been worn by someone who helped him.
But instead of that theory, the jury kept getting bullshit that he had the glove on.
Clearly that just wasn't true.
Impartial people smelled that bullshit.
Skip the bullshit and focus on things that prove something beyond a reasonable doubt.
I reasonably doubt that this chick had some "exclusive duct tape".
The pics of her partying are more damaging than the duct tape.