[connectthedots]

Am I the only one that is confused by this earliest date/latest date thing?

This is only because Dusek is trying to confuse the jury with tedious questioning. During the direct examination by Feldman, Faulkner stated that based on the fly maggot/larva evidence, the latest date the body could have been placed at the scene was 10-12 days before it was discovered.

Based on the lack of beetle larva, Faulkner stated that the body could not have been placed there within a time-frame that could implicate DW a having disposed of the body. The body, based on the beetle evidence, was placed there well after DW's movements were being tracked.

Dusek is merely trying to raise scenarios that would strectch out the time-frame in which the beetles started their activity back to 2/4-5. I really don't think his efforts will work. Feldman should have a very easy time getting the jury back on track, assuming the jury is even giving any credence to Dusek in the first place.

[Freedom2specul8]

Dusek handled this appropriately by having him explain how bugs handle mummified bodies. Bugs reject dry bods.

[Freedom2specul8]

plus the jury gets to look at transcripts to clear up confusion

[Politicalmom]

He also stated that the body could have been there longer, but none of the indications of that were present. Which, to me, means it wasn't.

[Freedom2specul8]

or notes I mean

[cyncooper]

This is only because Dusek is trying to confuse the jury with tedious questioning.

This has been the complaint on several witnesses Dusek has cross examined. I think he is bringing out excellent points in his questions and I do not see any rambling whatsoever. Just goes to show how perceptions can differ.

[Henrietta]

Faulkner stated that based on the fly maggot/larva evidence, the latest date the body could have been placed at the scene was 10-12 days before it was discovered.

But the latest date seems kind of meaningless, since it could have been put there before the 16th, an indeterminable time before the 16th. This means that it could have been there on the 16th, or it could have been there on the 2nd, right? So I don't see how this testimony help DW at all. It just means that the body wasn't dumped after the 16th-18th of Feb.

But what about before this? And what about after he got home but before the cops started surveiling him? It seems like the Bug Guy's testimony still leaves these times in question.

[NatureGirl]

If Faulkner had information that would have placed that body on Dehesa on 2/2-2/4, the prosecution would have put him on the stand. It would have been "the nail in the coffin", so to speak. They didn't want to use his testimony.

I think it was most telling that Faulkner was so puzzled by the bug activity/lack of bugs that he found, that he had to call the ME and ask if the body had been contained somehow.