Posted on 08/21/2002 10:03:52 AM PDT by wallcrawlr
I just heard this at noon.
ahhh, but the killer will, and so will your Damon (if those aren't mutually exclusive people). Bet you can celebrate that!
The reason that I have been given is that the transcripts do nothing to show the demeanor/intonation of the witness and other factors surrounding the testimony. Judges don't want juries obsessing over written material; they want all the circumstances surrounding testimony and all the other evidence considered as well.
Another reason is historical; transcripts didn't used to be ready by the time the jury started deliberations. That's not as true today with computerized transcription which tends to be done in the evening following testimony each day. Even computerized transciption needs to be analyzed and corrected by the court reporter, however. As with computer translations from foreign languages, not all the words come out right straight from the computer. The court reporter has to read through and make corrections.
I had lunch with a judge once and asked him all about this, and this is what he told me.
Actually, I think juries ought to get a transcript to take into the jury room.
I'll bet the parents are hoping for life. Life fades away quicker, you know. You don't have all those pesky activists continuing to search for the truth.
I bet Ott and Keyser are hoping for the same ...
Migration of larvae IS a whole area of concern in forensic entomology. Were there recently dead animals near the body when it was found? Even then, I don't think they are likely to migrate before completing their life cycle in their original food source. At any rate, the entomologists involved knew exactly what species they were dealing with, and the dissenting entomologist never brought up any possible migration of larvae that I know of. Or did he?
Neither do readbacks. I've been on a jury and have had testimony read back to us. The court reporter read it in a flat, monotone voice, never duplicating the tone or demeanor of the witness. I'm sure the court reporter didn't emulate Denise Kamal's body language duting readback :-)
Actually, I think juries ought to get a transcript to take into the jury room
I totally agree with you.
I was thinking all along that that would be the ONE downside to a conviction. Have you checked out the Smokey Backroom? OMG, it's a Chamber of Horrors over there! Nasty pictures, nasty tempers, nasty words, etc. They hate Kim's guts over there. They make the SoreLoserman crowd look positively calm and rational by comparison!! Have they set up a SaveDave Appeals Fund yet?
I am confident that the jury heard as much, or more, of the bug evidence, than you and I did. For all twelve of them, it apparently wasn't persuasive.
Now I can conclude several things. The jury is dumb, and you are smarter. Or vice versa. Or bug evidence isn't pure science. But for the jury, it wasn't the slam dunk the defense had promised, was it?
Yes--including Westerfield's prints in his own motor home. Those were conspicuously missing as well.
Take some time and smell the bleach!
Because the defense wanted the defendant to have a "speedy trial" which is his right.
...their original food source in the garbage container was very limited...just like desert conditions would naturally be.
I saw one adult fly carrying them and the rest were on the floor going in various directions!
I've seen the mealy bugs-fly do the same thing...just crawling though---big time!
I'm no expert, but from the little I have studied it, and from what I know about the insect world, I think it is an underuitlized and potentially VERY useful tool in forensics. I think it is every bit as useful as DNA evidence.
Just as in DNA evidence, the handling of the sample is crucial. A wrong identification of the exact species could really screw you up, for example. The body definitely IS affected by variables in the environment, but the variables that are important can be fairly reliably verified, I think. For instance, temperatures and RH are always taken into account in forensic entomology. I believe temperature is the most critical variable, by far. Of course, microclimates are very important. For instance, if a body is found in a barn, house, or greenhouse, temperatures from the local airport may not help you build a very accurate picture. If a body is found in the shade in the summer, the degree days can be adjusted by taking the temperatures at the point where the body was found, and comparing them to the local temperatures that are on record, wherever those are gathered.
BTW, forensic entomology, as you may know, more often than not does not involve murder cases. More common cases are civil suits involving wood-destroying organisms or pests of stored products.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.