Gee, when you are building a case with circumstantial evidence. You go piece by piece to show how they fit. The prosecution did this.
Yeah, like the junk science chloroform sniffer which hasn’t been peer reviewed or proven effective. Of course they didn’t think about the fact that any laundry detergent that includes any chlorine molecules will produce chloroform molecules when introduced to moisture and heat. They didn’t think that the sniffer would scream chloroform when the dishwasher is opened and steam escapes because many dish detergents contain chlorine which when…well, you get the picture. How about many laundry softener products that produce chloroform when in contact with moisture and heat?
Then they simply forgot to analyze the garbage found in the trunk to make sure that any of the items in that trash might not produce a like odor to decaying flesh when rotting. Oh, and they didn’t count on seven other people near the car that didn’t smell anything like rotting flesh.
And surely we shouldn’t blame the lack of forensic evidence on the officer who refused to get his shoes dirty when told of the skull weeks prior.
Of course then they tied it all neatly together by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee was indeed murdered rather then the victim of some sort of accident.
Yep, they tied it all in a neat package that the jury just decided to totally ignore.
It all fits so neatly together doesn't it?
Do I really have to include the sarc tag?