Contact theSOPAbout theSOPSupport theSOPWritersEditorsManaging EditorsNewsblaze Authors Interviewed
theSOP logo
Published:June 20th, 2011 07:09 EST
dr werner spitz thumbnail

Casey Anthony Trial: Dr. Werner Spitz Eviscerates Prosecution`s Narrative of Events!

By John G. Kays

The prosecution`s assertion of the cause of death and even the manner of death of Caylee can be thrown out the window, after Dr. Werner Spitz`s testimony on Saturday.

Dr. Spitz eviscerated the official autopsy report of medical examiner Jan Garavaglia. And if that wasn`t enough, Spitz undermines the fundamental claim of duct tape as the murder weapon.

dr werner spitz

The harder that Jeff Ashton tried to discredit Dr. Spitz, just the opposite came about, the forensic pathologist with 60 years of experience, just got stronger and stronger.

His argument that the skull should have been opened and examined was shocking to me. I did not hear before that Dr. Garavaglia hadn`t performed this important step in the autopsy process.

One has to examine the skull to ascertain the cause of death. At one point, Dr. Spitz elaborated that discoloration of the interior skull bones is a sign that the person may have died of suffocation.

But the esteemed doctor didn`t see any signs of discoloration when he examined (and opened) the skull for himself. Ruling out suffocation as the cause of death puts the prosecution on balmy seas.

Even the manner of death is in question for Werner Spitz. Dr. Garavaglia based her claim of homicide as the manner of death for Caylee, was based largely on non-medical facts in the case.

Such things as 911 was not called immediately after the child went missing. Another point in her contention, is the way the remains were secreted away and dumped in the park, which has the earmarks of a crime.

But Spitz looked at only medical evidence. He could not rule out the possibility of accidental death. He conducted his own autopsy which completely disagrees with the supposed official one.

During a peak moment in his testimony on Saturday, when Ashton questions him whether it was protocol to open the skull, Spitz pipes in: "That tells me about a shoddy autopsy. Excuse me for the term, but you provoked it."

Yet another startling claim of Dr. Werner Spitz, is that it looks like the duct tape was applied after the skull had already decomposed of soft tissue. Why does he belief this?

One aspect of the proof is that no DNA was deposited (Caylee`s DNA) on the adhesive side of the duct tape. This has been puzzling me all along. The DNA should have been deeply imbedded in the duct tape.

Another part of the proof, is that the duct tape would have fallen away from the face after the skull skeletonized. On the other hand, if it was applied once the soft tissue was gone, this would explain why some of the tape was still attached to face of the remains.

This is perfectly logical to me! I wonder how the prosecution can weasel their way out of this one?

"It is my opinion that the duct tape was stuck on there after the skin deteriorated, after the skin decomposed."

Spitz then postulated that the perpetrator put the tape on to hold the lower jaw in place and to keep the skull intact. Almost an afterthought. As if to fool the cops. Done to disguise the real cause of death. No one will ever know.

Saturday`s proceedings puts an iron bar in the spokes of the prosecution`s bicycle. Reasonable doubt was easily planted in the minds of each and every member of the jury.

If we no longer know the manner of death, the cause of death, or its inducement (duct tape), then how can we convict Casey of first degree murder. We can`t.



Comment on this story, by emailing Judyth Piazza at comment@thesop.org  or join the SOP friend network with your Google, Yahoo, AOL, MSN or one ID account located on the front page of http://www.thesop.org
Subscribe to theSOP's Opinion feed.Subscribe to theSOP's Opinion audio podcast.
Subscribe to John G. Kays feed.Subscribe to theSOP's John G. Kays audio podcast.