Wednesday, June 8, 2011

K-9 BONES ALERTS IN ANTHONY BACKYARD & ANTHONY HOME COMPUTER SEARCHES FOR CHLOROFORM

Today was another big day in the Casey Anthony murder trial.  We heard from a K-9 dog handler who alerted to a dead body next to Caylee's playhouse.  We also heard from three computer forensics experts, who testified to finding Chloroform searches (84 of them) in the deleted section of the Anthony home computer.  Jose Baez did his best to poke holes in their testimonies during his cross-examinations, but it was definitely a tough day for the defense.

FIRST WITNESS - BONES, THE SUPER K-9 CADAVER DOG'S HANDLER, DEPUTY KRISTIN BREWER

As the Casey Anthony murder trial resumed this morning at 9am (est), the first witness on the stand was Deputy Kristin Brewer.  Deputy Brewer is the police officer who handles Bones, the second police K-9 cadaver dog that searched the backyard of Casey Anthony's home.  Deputy Brewer has a lot of experience and training, and she trained K-9s as a hobby prior to getting official police training.

BONES' TRAINING AS CADAVER DOG

Deputy Brewer explained how Bones was trained as a cadaver dog.  He was trained on human blood, human bones, human tissue, placenta, semen, and teeth.  During various trainings, Bones always performed well and found all intended targets.  He also trained at a water seminar, where all intended targets were placed in water.  For the water seminar, trainers put the dogs out on a boat, and all of the human remain targets were placed in the water.  Some were on top of the water and some were submerged.  During this seminar, Bones found all the targets and had no false alerts or misses.  Bones was also trained to avoid distractors such as toys, dog treats, food and animal remains.  Bones has never given Deputy Brewer any problems when around other dogs or food.  Bones also trained in an advanced training seminar in 2009,  that consisted of buried and hanging aids (human body parts).

Bones' final training alert is the SIT position, and his reward is a tennis ball.  He is never rewarded with food.  Bones' record of finding human remains is spotless.

BONES, OUT IN THE FIELD

One of several examples of Bones' spotless record was described by Deputy Brewer.  It happened in 2005 when Bones was called out to a location.  He searched the area but he did not alert.  Concerned that Bones may have missed something, the area was dug anyways, and a dead animal was found.  There were several other times that Bones went out to areas, which were subsequently dug or searched anyways, and again, only dead animals/dogs were found.  No human remains were ever found in areas that Bones searched and did not alert to.  (Good dog).

Example 1: Bones was called out to find a human body in the water.  He went out into the water, searched and alerted to an area in the water.  Divers found a submerged body at his alerted location.

Example 2: Bones was taken to a landfill.  He alerted to a comforter which was later identified as being used during the birth of a baby.  The baby was later found discarded in a trash can.

Example 3: Bones was brought out to an orchard to search for possible human remains.  He alerted to an area in an orchard, at which point the police dug up the area and found the two bodies that had been buried for two years.

Deputy Brewer testified that Bones gets called to search "quite often".  Since she has worked with Bones for so long, she's been able to identify various queues that Bones gives her, indicating that he's found (or is finding) human remains.  His tail will fluff up, he will pick his head up to try to find where the indicator is, will try to paw the surface of an area to get a better scent of something, and sometimes he will not come back to her right away because he's so into trying to find something and is close to it.

BONES IS CALLED IN TO SEARCH THE ANTHONY'S BACKYARD

Deputy Brewer testified as to being called out and arriving at the Anthony home at 8:00pm on July 17, 2008. When she arrived, the other K9 officer, Deputy Forgery, met with her and informed her that the search area was the Anthony backyard.  The only information that Forgery gave her about the scene was that he had already run a search with his dog in the area.

BONES SEARCHES THE ANTHONY'S BACKYARD

Deputy Brewer explained the events surrounding her investigation with Bones of the Anthony backyard.  Referring to July 17, 2008, she said: "We walked back to the backyard, with Bones on lead.  As we went through the gate, which if you're looking at the residence would be on the left side of the residence, we went through the gate. The entire backyard was fenced in. Just past the gate, I put Bones' search collar on, which is a heavier collar and an indication to him that we're going to search. I took him off-lead and gave him his command to do his search of the area. He immediately did a quick search of the yard. He went around where there's a swimming pool, and he went back towards the screened-in porch. He checked a couple corners of the area. His nose was down. He spent approximately three-four minutes  searching in the backyard. I saw that there was an area of interest that he kept going back to, and sniffing pretty hard. He finally came back to that same area, after making another lap of the yard, and gave a final trained indication in one location in the backyard."

Prosecutor Drane-Burdick (P): What indication was given?
Deputy Brewer (D): He sat.
(P): This is the trained final alert that you described earlier?
(D): Yes.

(P):  Do you recall where in the yard you got the trained final alert from Bones?
(D):  Yes.

(Linda Drane-Burdick published a photo of for the jury)

Drane-Burdick: Sergeant Brewer, does the photograph displayed in 43 in evidence (Caylee's playhouse) show the area that you were just describing as the location of the trained final alert from Bones?
(D):  Yes Ma'am.
(P):  The monitor in front of you is a tele-illustrator.  Can you indicate to the members of the jury where you got the trained final alert?
(Deputy Brewer circled the grass in front, and a little to the left, of Caylee's playhouse in the Anthony's backyard. It's the same area as where K9 Geris' handler, Deputy Forgery, had indicated yesterday that Geris hit on).

Drane-Burdick: What happens after you get the trained final alert?
I hooked Bones up, spoke to Deputy Forgery who indicated to me at the time that his dog had alerted, been within probably 6-8 feet from where Bones' alert was.
Do you return the next day?
Yes Ma'am.
When you returned the next day, had it become apparent to you that the surface had been disturbed in some fashion?
Yes.
What did you see?
There was a lot of dirt, mulch, papers, there were several crime scene units in the backyard working, changed the landscape quite a bit.
So it's your understanding that members on the Orange County Sheriff's office had been disturbing the dirt?
Yes, they were present upon my arrival.
Did you run Bones through the same process on that date?
Yes ma'am.
And what result did you receive then?
No alerts.
Do you have some opinion as to why that occurred on day two?
Whatever he was alerting to could have been moved, or destroyed or disapated because of all of the work that had been done. Or they may just have not dug enough to find what may have been below of the surface.

Thank you, I have no more questions of the witness.

JOSE BAEZ CROSS-EXAMINATION K-9 BONES' HANDLER

(Jose struts up to the podium and says hello to everyone; the judge, prosecutor Drane-Burdick, the jury and Deputy Brewer)

Jose: Uh, before we get in to what you did in this case, I want to ask you something so that we can kinda  clear, ah, clarify something for the jury.  The alerts that a, that a cadaver dog does, they're not, you don't give individual commands to find, find me some bones, correct, or find me decomp fluid, or find me blood, correct?
That's correct.
And it's just one command?
Right.
When you deploy the dog, and many times, well actually let me rephrase that. A dog can alert on fluid or something decomposing from a live person, could they not?
Yes, if it's out of the body.
Anything out of the body, that is now decomposing, even though the person's alive, the dog can alert?
Yes.
So if I have a, if I'm a block, a drop of blood from a fingernail or something comes out, that blood begins to decompose and the dog can alert to that?
That's correct.
In fact, when you are trained to deploy dogs on vehicles for training, your training tells you not to use old cars because you don't know the history of those cars, right?
We try to use something, an unknown source, no that's not self-contaminated... (Jose starts to talk over her).
Jose: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off.
Deputy: We try to use something that we know may not have...
Jose: Right, something that you know the history of, because you don't know if this car's been in an accident. You don't know if somebody cut their finger or had any bleeding in any location?
Deputy: Correct
Jose: And you don't know, if, um,  someone bled on a rag and that was thrown into the trunk or something like that.
Deputy: Right.
Jose: So there's any number of scenarios that makes the dog more of a tool as opposed to a conclusive indicator of human decomposition, especially when you don't have a body.
Deputy: Right. He's trained to find the strongest source, whatever it might be.
...

END OF QUESTIONING; DEPUTY BREWER EXCUSED

FORENSICS COMPUTER EXPERT, SANDRA OSBORNE

Next up was a lady who walked up to the witness stand, carrying a big accordian folder.  This witness was identified as Sandra Osborne, Computer Examiner for the Orange County Sheriff's department. Detective Osborne has worked there for 21 years.

Sandra Osborne started her career as a patrol officer, then went to Investigations, then Crime Scene Investigations, Sex Crimes, Child Abuse, did a short stint in Homicide and now she works as a Computer Examiner.  She has a college business degree from Columbia college, over 700 hours of computer examiner forensics training and holds two computer forensics examiner certifications.  She has testified before as an expert witness in the area of forensic computer analysis.

Linda Drane-Burdick: Do you have a title? Shall I refer to you as Detective?
Osborne: Detective is fine.
Burdick: Detective Osborne, as a result of your position, in the forensics unit in the Orange County Sheriff's office, did you receive several items in connection with the disappearance of Caylee Marie Anthony?
Osborne: I did.
Did the first item that you received consist of a cell phone purported to belong to Casey Marie Anthony?
Yes.
May I approach?
Judge: You may.
(Linda showed an thick, sealed envelope to the defense, and gave it to the detective on the stand. It was an envelope that contained a Nokia cell phone that the detective analyzed.  The phone was received into evidence).

Drane-Burdick: Are there forensic applications that can be utilized to retrieve data and information from a cell phone such as the one you received as belonging to Miss Anthony?
Osborne: Yes ma'am, there are.
What are those processes that are available?
The processes I use most often, and the one I used in this investigation, is a hardware tool called a Cellbrite.
Is that one, that is recognized as premiere in the field, able to give reliable data to an examiner such as yourself?
It is.
What sort of information can be retrieved using Cellbrite?
I can retrieve a contact list, I can retrieve text messages, sometimes call history, incoming calls, outgoing calls, picture files, video files, audio files, voice messages, whatever the phone offers.
Is your ability to do all of those things hampered by the phone itself in any way?
Sometimes it is, yes
How about anything to do with the service provider to the phone. Does that affect your ability to extract data?
It can. There are several ways to extract data from the cell phone which can be hampered. The manufacturer of the phone itself could not allow that information to be pulled out, if you will, by a third party tool. Sometimes the data port on the phone, where you plug the phone in to charge it, or transfer data from it, could be disabled by the carrier. Sometimes our software is just not engineered to gather that information from that particular make and model of phone. So there are several different ways that we may be hampered and would not be able to retrieve all of the data available on the phone.

Does Cellbrite update their software, or whatever program that they provide to law enforcement agencies, over time?
Periodically we do get updates from Cellbrite, yes.
When you received this phone, was it for the purpose of attempting to determine whether or not an individual of the name of Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez could be located?
Yes it was.
What information, if any, were you able to obtain from that phone through the initial tool that you had mentioned?
The initial data extracted from that Nokia phone was simply the contact list and several music files.
Do you have an opinion why that was the only information that was retrieved from that phone?
I believe that at that time, the limitations of my Cellbrite hardware device that I was using, to extract the data, was not capable of fully extracting the data on that phone.
What is a SIM card?
It's a unique identifier, that little chip card that goes in the back of some cellular phones, that allows the phone to connect to the network

ANY MESSAGES FROM ZENAIDA FERNANDEZ-GONZALEZ IN CASEY'S PHONE?

Drane-Burdick: Were you able, from that limited information that CellBrite would provide you at that time, to locate any information about a Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez?

Osborne: I didn't notice any, but it's not my function necessarily to examine data from the cell phone. I'm not always advised on what's relevant to the investigation at the time. I didn't see any, but I would have handed the data I extracted to detectives and let them cypher through it.
---

CASEY'S COMPUTERS

Osborne: The serial number of the (Casey's laptop) computer is CND6430RKH.
Burdick: Did you receive a desktop computer as well?
Yes, meaning a floor model that sits on the floor in the home, yes I did.
Do you recall, or do the records of the Orange County Sheriff reflect the serial number of the desktop you received?
I have that information.
Can you provide that please.
The serial number of the HP home computer was MXM4100HYL.
Who did you receive that computer from?
Miss Awilda McBride, who was in the Missing Persons unit at that time.
Did you note the date and time that you received that item?
I did.
Can you tell us?
I received that item on July 17th at approximately 1:30 in the afternoon.
How about the laptop? Do you have records of the date and time you received that item?
I received the laptop from Detective Beasley on July 16th, 2008 at approximately 8pm in the evening.
Did you receive any cameras?
I did.
What kind?
I received a Poloroid T-730 digital camera on the 17th of July 2008. I received a Nikon Coolpix camera on July 21st, 2008.
Are there forensics applications that you can use to determine the contents of a camera or do you just scroll through it like I would?
I use a forensics tool to examine cameras.
And what tool was used to examine the Nikon Coolpix?
I used a forensics software tool called Encase made by Guidance Software.
And what information does Encase provide off of a digital camera?
What I did, I did not actually plug in the Nikon camera into the Encase. I pulled the SD flashcard from the camera, which actually stores all of the files.  So I would have plugged the SD card into an adapter and used the Encase to view the contents of the card.
And were you able to view the contents of that card?
I was.
Were you able to locate any video files of Caylee Anthony?
Yes.
Using that tool, were you able to determine the date that the video files were generated?
Yes.
And tell the members of the jury what you found.
The dates of the files that I found from the Nikon Coolpix camera were June 15, 2008.
Did you review the video?
Yes I did.
Is this video appear to have been taken at a nursing facility?
It appeared to be, yes.
How do you know that the date and time on that video is accurate as to when the image was captured?
Most of the digital cameras today will record or embed inside of each video file, or digital file that it takes, information about itself. It will embed in that file information such as the make and model of the camera that took that picture, the date and the time setting on that the camera was set to at the time the picture was taken. It may embed information, if it's a more sophisticated device, the GPS coordinates where the camera was actually located when the picture was taken. It might give you information about the shutter speed or the lighting conditions, or something of that sort, on a very, very nice camera. The information on this Nikon Coolpix camera gave me information about itself that it's was a Nikon Coolpix, and it gave me the model of the camera, and it gave me the date and the time setting that the camera was set to at the time that picture was taken.
When you received that camera, in July of 2008, July 21st, did you make an assessment as to whether or not the date and time settings were correct at that point?
What I did was I compared the date and time on the camera with the current date and time at the moment I had the camera in my hand, the current date and time according to my clock in my office at the time I had it, was July 21st at 10:54 in  the morning, and the setting in the clock in the camera itself was the same date at 10:56 in the morning, so it was about a two minute difference.
The laptop that you described for us, having received from Detective Beasley, what condition was it in when it was provided to you, meaning was it on, was it off, what is it that you were initially evaluating when you received that item?
I believe that that laptop was off... (looking through her papers)... I don't recall if that item was powered off when I received it.
Does that make a difference to you?
As far as retrieving data from it? No, if a laptop is brought to me and it's still powered on, I'll remove the battery and power down the machine and note the date and time.  I will document the condition of the machine, if it's running, as to say what applications are running, is it connected to the Internet at the time, is there a Word doc open, something to that effect.  I'll document the condition of the machine at the time before I power it down, and I'll make a note of the date and time before I power it down.
When you are performing an investigation on any item of evidence, but particularly a computer, whether that be a laptop or a desktop, is it your methodology to make sure it is off before any attempt to retrieve data is undertaken?
In a lab setting, yes, I'll power the machine off and then I'll remove the hard drive from the machine.

---
WriteBlocker, what does it do?
It places the evidence hard drive in a read-only mode, and then I can read from the drive, copy the evidence from it, put the original hard drive evidence away and I won't work from the original hard drive,  I'll work from my copy instead.
What happens to the original hard drive?
I put it back into evidence.
Has the Orange County Sheriff's office retained the hard drive from the HP that we've been talking about to date?
No, I believe that we've returned it back to the family.
Before it's returned, prior to WriteBlocker, what do you do to ensure that you have access to the data as it existed at the time you took possession of the computer?
Those evidence files that Encase creates, when I make a copy of the original hard drive evidence, are stored both on a server and I stored them on a separate hard drive that I have with me in court today, so they are preserved.
You had talked about that you don't necessarily evaluate the data that is retrieved from an electronic device.
From a cell phone specifically. I do extensive exams on computer evidence, but with a cell phone, because there's limited data usually, I'll just hand that over to the investigators and let them go through it and see what they think is important.
But as far as the computer is concerned, you do engage in a process of evaluating the data that is extracted from the hard drive?
Yes, that's correct.

MID-MORNING RECESS CALLED BY JUDGE PERRY

COURT IS NOW BACK IN SESSION

Burdick: Detective Osborne, I believe we ended by talking about your evaluating information that was preserved and extracted from the computer.
Osborne: That's right
Burdick: What type of information does Encase provide?
Osborne: When you look at a hard drive, a complete view, it's called a physical view of a hard drive, it shows you every Bit on a hard drive, every Bit of information that's there, every Bit of information that's ever been there that is stored on the hard drive, so I can see what the user sees, in allocated space.  I can see system files that the operating system uses to operate itself.  I can see the file system on the hard drive that's stored that's used by the operating system.  I can also see the deleted areas, called unallocated space.
Burdick: On the HP in particular, before or perhaps during the process of your evaluation with Encase, do you record the date and time that is on the computer when you receive it?
Yes.
How is that done?
That is done by booting the computer into an area called the BIOS.  Once I remove the hard drive from the computer I'll power it on.  There's a function key that will get me into that system area, and I can access the system clock and get the current date and time that it is set to.
And did you do that with the HP?
I did.
Can you give us the data you were able to obtain as it relates to the date and time.
The actual date and time that I conducted that was July 18th, 2008 at 12:13pm. The system clock setting was July 18, 2008 at 12:13pm, so it was right on the money.

Burdick: What sort of software was loaded on that computer?
Osborne: Microsoft Windows XP is the operating system that was loaded there, Microsoft Internet Explorer was loaded as an application to access the Internet, Mozilla Firefox is also another method of getting onto the Internet, it's another browser; Microsoft applications for creating Excel spreadsheets, Word documents, things like that,  Facebook, MySpace had been accessed and loaded into the user areas. AIM, AOL, peer-to-peer, social networking sites were also loaded on; Yahoo Messenger was also included and many others that I don't recall and didn't record.
Burdick: The Microsoft XP program, was that what was loaded onto the computer at time of purchase? Can you tell that?
Osborne: Um, if it's been overwritten, I could not tell that, but it appears that the computer was purchased and came with the HP computer, but if it was over written I would not be able to tell that. The XP, Windows XP, that was loaded and being used on the HP computer, was installed on that computer in 2005, so it had been used in that computer for quite a while.

(Additional questions about what hardware comes with the computer, and browsers were discussed, but too boring to transcribe it all).

Osborne: The HP computer had two User Icons.  One was called "Owner" and the other User was called "Casey".

COMPUTER SEARCHES

Detective Osborne found several Google web searches on the morning July 16, 2008 for "ZENAIDA FERNANDEZ-GONZALEZ"; some searches included a specific age range of 22-29 years of age, and some with Jacksonville and Orlando, Florida.  Prior to July 16th, Detective Osborne testified that there were NO searches made for Zenaida Fernandez-Gonzalez, nothing that had anything to do with ZENAIDA.

Detective Osborne testified that during her examination of the history of the Anthony home computer, she saw that the computer was on and running quite a bit of the time, but the users didn't do much office work. She didn't find many documents, except she found several resumes from George Anthony.  There were no wills or testaments, no school homework, but she found a lot of Internet History. She was able to see 4 1/2 years of history on this computer (she said with a smile), meaning that the Anthony's had not cleared their Internet history (which came as a surprise to her as well as subsequent forensic computer experts).

Burdick: Once you clear that cache, what happens to that informtiton? Does it disappear?
Osborne: No, it gets allocated to space called unallocated or deleted space.  And unless it is overwritten, it resides on the hard drive.
So how long can something stay in unallocated space?
It depends (she went through a number of scenarios), sometimes it can stay for years.
If you have this free space, unallocated space, and it has written over, can you ever retrieve data that has been written over it?
No.

KEYWORD SEARCHES FOUND ON ANTHONY HOME COMPUTER

(Re: the HP desktop computer, Drane-Burdick asked):  Was any user account password protected?
Osborne:  Only one, the OWNER account was password protected, required a log-on password.
Q: Were you able to determine what that password was from your evaluation of the unit itself?
A: Yes I was.
Q:  What was it?
A:  RICO23 (Note: During this time, Casey was dating Ricardo Morales, so it's been assumed by some that the password was short for Ricardo - aka RICO)

Q:  Were you able to determine when that password was set?
A:  Yes, it was set (she had to go through all her papers, but she could not find the date in her stack.  She believed it was earlier in 2008, but was searching her papers to verify that it was in March 2008. Unable to locate that date, she said that she was fairly certain that it was March 2008).

Q:  The Internet history on the HP, how do you evaluate that?
A:  That's a complicated question... (and she went through how she evaluated history with Encase & NetAnalysis, and another forensics tool, that look at History and Cookie files).
Q:  Can you tell which user, Owner or Casey, is making an Internet search?
A:  Yes (she went into detail of how she can make the difference, saying the temporary Internet files will tell which User Account is making the search, but cannot tell which user is sitting at the computer).
Q:  What if a file is deleted, will the record of the deleted file tell you which User Account it was who made the search?
A:  NO, that information is no longer available.

Q:  Were you asked by Detective Yuri Melich to do a keyword search for Chloroform or any alternate spellings of it?
A:  Yes, in late August 2008.
Q:  How was that keyword search performed?
A:  (Osborne explained how she put the word "Chloroform" into Encase, both correct and incorrect spellings of it, and got keyword hits on all spellings of Chloroform).
Q: Was there a particular location on the computer, where you were able to tell the keyword search hits occurred?
A: Yes.
Q: Where was that?
A: The keywords appeared in unallocated or deleted space on the hard drive. (Someone deleted those particular search history records from the computer).

Q: Were you able to view any information in the deleted space?
A: Yes.
Q: What can you see?
A: Because it's in deleted space, and because it searched using Mozilla Firefox, we were able to get the complete Internet history on Chloroform, right from the beginning.  They got a complete unallocated space that had been deleted.  Sometimes, when you delete a file, especially a large file, will be overwritten, but this did not happen in this case. We were able to retrieve an entire record on the Chloroform hits.  We found a complete internet history record on Chloroform, spelled correctly or not.  I was able to locate the language and recognized it as an Internet file. I looked around to see if it was Internet Explorer, but since I was not that familiar, I could not determine that, so I found the search hit and turned it over to my sergeant.

RICARDO MORALES' COMPUTER WAS ALSO SEIZED BY DETECTIVES

Osborne was also asked to find any pictures of Caylee by detectives, especially with a pink tee-shirt. She  found one that was taken at Ricardo Morales' apartment.  She located this photograph by searching all the graphic files.  She testified that the camera that was used to take that photograph was set to January 28, 2008, but she did not have the camera to do any kind of analysis.  This photograph was of Casey with Caylee. Caylee was wearing a pink t-shirt (that read on it: "Big trouble comes in small packages") and she has a bruise under her eye.  Another photograph, also found on Ricardo's computer was of Casey with Caylee, also wearing that same pink shirt.  In this photograph, Casey is holding a black electric guitar, and both she and Caylee are sitting on a couch. The date that the camera was set to for that photograph was March 19, 2008.  It was also found on Ricardo's computer. Osborne testified that she could tell that the photograph was taken by a Canon Powershot SD870.

JOSE BAEZ CROSS-EXAMINED OSBORNE

Jose: To clear up user profiles on the HP computer, that doesn't mean that only two people were using this computer, correct?
Osborne: Correct.
And in fact, there are various searches on both profiles, are there not? Various searches?
Internet searches?
Yes.
I would assume so, yes, I found searches.
And, the, there could be multiple users using one profile, correct?
Correct.
And a password only means something if 1) that person has not told anyone else what the password is, right?
Correct.
Jose: And 2) the computer is turned off after that password is utilized. The computer activity is done.
Osborne: Ok?
Jose: Alright, is that a yes?
Osborne: Yes.
Jose: So, if I have a password protected area, which is the owner portion, the owner profile, not Casey's profile, if I'm using the owner profile and I've logged in and the computer stays on and it goes to sleep or whatever, I don't have to relog the password, right?
Osborne: It depends on the setting on the computer.  If the computer hibernates or sleeps or in some form or fashion resets itself, the password can be set to reset itself after a minute or 30 minutes or 5 hours or all day, it depends on the setting on the computer.
But you don't know, or can't testify as to any of that information, can you?
I didn't ascertain that on this computer, no sir.
So, um, as far as you know, someone could use, type in the password, leave it on and anyone else could come use the computer and not have to enter the password.
As far as I know, that's correct.
And you mentioned that you had found, done a keyword search for chloroform, is that correct?
That's correct.
That, do you have the date and time that that was run?
I believe that was around August the 20th, I don't know that I did the exact date, but it was around August 20th in 2008.
But do you have the date and time that you believe the searches were run?
That would be incorporated in the temporary Internet file history which I did not examine. My sergeant examined that, so I can't testify to that.
So you have no information on that?
Not that I'm prepared to testify to.
Understood.
And at, what we were talking about as far as the camera was concerned, you never saw the camera.
Which camera
The camera, I'm sorry, the camera of the photos that we showed to the jury just recently
The Canon Powershot?
Yes.
I did not see that camera, no.
Ok and you don't know if the time settings were correct.
No.
In fact, you don't know if this person even bothered setting the time when they purchased the camera.
I do not.
Many people are a little, many people find setting the time on, like, VCRs and cameras somewhat difficult, do they not?
OBJECTION
SUSTAINED
Jose: If you know Ma'am.
Judge Perry: SUSTAINED, NEXT QUESTION
Jose: Does every camera that you, uh, inspect and every computer have the same exact time setting?
Osborne: No.
Now, it was you who inspected Ricardo Morales' computer?
Yes.
And you were asked to run searches for Chloroform on Ricardo Morales' computer, were you not?
Yes.
And you indicated that there were also no photographs of chloroform on his computer.
Correct, my report specifically says that I found no web pages or pictures referencing chloroform on that computer.
(Jose grabs a photograph from the defense table and showed it to the jury, identifying it as "Defense Exhibit 1", which shows a man and woman with a caption above them saying "Win her over with chloroform").

Jose: Are you familiar with this photograph?
Osborne: I'm sorry, you asked if I've recognized this picture?
Yes.
I've seen it yes.
Are you aware that this was posted on Ricardo Morales' MySpace account?
No I'm not.
And, I know that you can only see one portion of it, can you read it to the record what it says.
Win her over with chloroform.
What does it indicate to you?
OBJECTION
SUSTAINED

Jose: What do you see in the photograph?
Osborne: What's depicted in the photograph is a couple, a man and a woman, the woman is sitting in a chair apparantly dining, in a black evening gown.  A man is looking over her chair, with a white cloth in his hand, reaching around her shoulder.
Jose: And if Ricardo Morales posted this on his MySpace, that would have been from another computer that you did not examine.
Osborne: I have no idea.
Jose: Well if you did not find this photograph on the computer that you examined, does that mean that it's deleted or, how.. how can you explain that?
Osborne: Just because...
Jose: Let me finish the question first.  Can you explain to us, cuz I may not be aware of how this photograph wouldn't show up on your inspection if he posted this on his MySpace.
Osborne: There are several reasons why this would not appear on his computer, or I did not find it on his computer if he posted it on MySpace. There are multiple ways that you can post on MySpace.  One of the most common ways would be on someone else's computer, or from a phone, or from some other access other than the computer that I'm examining.  Just because I did not find this particular photograph on his computer, at the time I examined it, does not mean that it was never there. It just means that it was not there at the time I was examining it. So, if it was deleted and overwritten, then I would not have found it.

Jose: So it could have been deleted in the allocated space.... and overwritten?
Osborne: And over written, if I did not find it.
And that could be pretty much with any of the computer searches that you did dealing with the unallocated space, correct?
Correct.

END OF JOSE'S CROSS-EXAMINATION

LUNCH RECESS CALLED

NEXT WITNESS, COMPUTER EXPERT'S SUPERVISOR, SGT. KEVIN STENGER

As this witness took the stand, he testified to all of his training, years of experience with the Orange County Sheriff's office, and his teachings of classes.  He's presented classes as a guest lecturer and was a subject matter teacher at the University of Central Florida. In the past, he's testified in both state and federal courts as an expert in computer forensics, and was accepted as an expert witness in computer analysis.  He works at the Orange County Sheriff's office and supervised Sharon Osborne's work in the Casey Anthony case.  His role was to review Det. Osborne's work, referred as peer review, and would assist her if she had any problems.

CHLOROFORM SEARCHES

Burdick: Once you were made aware of that search (chloroform), did you take an active role to preserve the information found as a result of the keyword search.
Stenger: I did. Det. Osborne observed a "search hit" for the word "chloroform" on the computer and asked my assistance in identifying in what context that word appeared. She knew it was an Internet search, but she was unfamiliar in the structure of what it was in. This particular keyword search was in unallocated space.
Burdick: What is that?
Stenger: When you delete a file, it is not necessarily gone. The best analogy I have for you as to what unallocated space is a library.  Many people use different types of analogies, but the library is probably the easiest. Hopefully most of you (Detective Stenger is looking at and speaking directly to the jury members) remember back in the days when they had card catalogs. You used to go and look up the name of your book in the card catalog.  You would then find where that book was stored on the shelf.  Computers use something similar. In order for the computer to find the file, it has to essentially look up the name of that file before it can go to the hard drive and locate it. What happens when something becomes unallocated, is that that card, that entry, essentially gets destroyed and there is no longer any reference to where that particular file is on the hard drive. However that data out there, is still there. That book is still on the shelf.  So, the information was still out there. I recognized what type of file that was from the structure, as an Internet history record from Mozilla Firefox. It was an old version of Firefox.  It is an old version of Mozilla, in what's called a "Mork" database, and yes supposedly the developer was a fan of the television show (Mork and Mindy).
Burdick: So, what is Mozilla Firefox?
Stenger: It is an Internet history browsers. I'm sure that most everybody is familiar with Internet Explorer. Mozilla Firefox is another type of Internet browser.
Do have knowledge as to whether or not this Internet history browser automatically deletes files from its history? Does it clear history on its own, or is that done manually by a user?
I am not aware that it clears records automatically.  It's possible, I would imagine to set it to do so, but normally it does not do it automatically.
If not done automatically, is there some size limit after which some action is taken by the program?
There could be a size limit.  If there is for that version, I am not aware of it.
In absence of an automatic deletion by the program, how would someone get rid of their Internet search history?
There are options in most Internet search programs to delete your Internet history.  A user can normally select those at any time to dump their history records.
But as you indicated, even if you manually delete your history, it's still somewhere on your hard drive.
Until such time as that area of the hard drive is used again, or that file, that information will still be out there.
Do you have information as to whether or not Mozilla Firefox would store the name of the user profile in the Internet history file?
Mozilla Firefox does not store the user name.
....

(The Sergent also explained how he used an Internet History Tool, called Cacheback (sounds like Cashback), to show the Internet history records more easily, from March 4, 2008 - March 21, 2008).

CACHEBACK (INTERNET HISTORY TOOL)

Drane-Burdick: Using the tool Cacheback, what information is provided by Cacheback that was not available from any other tool?
Stenger: Primarily the single largest difference was its ability to show me the dates and times correctly regardless as to how I set my computer. So instead of one half always being one hour off, I got all the records to display correctly no matter if they were standard time or daylight savings time.
Did you also make any request of Mr. Bradley, the individual from Cacheback, to review the data file that you had carved out of the hard drive?
I provided Mr. Bradley with a copy of the file that I had extracted and he subsequently examined it and provided me with a statement as to his findings.
Were you able to filter informaiton out of the history from 3/4 - 3/21?
I did. I created two reports for I believe March 17th and March 21st.
And why were those dates filtered out?
Those dates contained information relating to Chloroform searches as well as other searches that were done on the Internet on Mozilla Firefox.

(Linda Drane-Burdick entered in the reports that the Sgt. Stenger generated using the Cacheback program, on March 17 and March 21, 2008, into evidence).

JOSE BAEZ CROSS-EXAMINES SGT. STENGER

(Jose Baez started questioning Sgt. Stenger by questions that stressed how short the time periods were when searches for chloroform were made).
...(Picking up on testimony)...
Sgt. Stenger (mid-sentence): 24348
Jose: So we're talking about a period of seven seconds that a person is looking at, or, that the screen is showing something dealing with chloroform and then goes onto something else
Sgt. Uh, no sir. If you go to something like CNN.com, you might notice, or any other large commercial web page, you might notice that there are advertisements running all over that page. What your Internet history can record is the fact that a lot of these ads are coming from other web sites and the history record is downloading that commercial or that advertisement from another site.  So even though you haven't navigated off of that page, your computer has obtained the information from that website and placed it in the record.
Jose (a bit shaken): Of course, you b-b-brought this out from the un, reconstructed this from the unallocated space to make certain of that, right?
Sgt: Well the history record comes from the unallocated space.
Jose: But you can also extract that page and reconstruct it, can you not?
Sgt: Under some circumstances you can, but under this circumstance we could not.
So you don't know what the screen was showing
There is no way that I can know what that screen was showing
So it's possible that this person, whomever it was, that is looking at the chloroform, seven seconds later they were looking at something else?
I would have to say from the address that they did not go to another web site; that that was simply an ad that appeared on the screen.

Jose: At 1:43:59, we see it going to another address.
Sgt. Stenger: Yes sir.
Ok, and, what address would that be?
At 43:51, it's going to MySpace.
Excuse me, sorry about that, you're right. Um...so, at the very least, we're talking about, or at the most, we're talking about ten seconds someone was looking at that.
Yes sir.
So, someone is looking at a screen that says, that mentions chloroform and then ten seconds later they're on MySpace.
Somebody did a specific search for chloroform and then went to MySpace.
Are you aware of... Defense Evidence 1A? May I approach?
Judge: You may.
Jose: Have you seen that photo? (WIN HER OVER WITH CHLOROFORM photo shown again)
Yes sir.
And what is your understanding that that photo is?
Uh, I've seen the photo.
Are you aware that that photo was on Ricardo Morales' MySpace page?
Yes sir.

That's all I have, thank you.

PROSECUTION REDIRECT

Drane-Burdick: Why is it that you cannot reconstruct the page that is appearing in the deleted or unallocated spack?
Stenger: When you go online, you're surfing through the Internet. What happens when you go to a particular website, where you went is recorded in a history record, as what we are discussing here. All of that material is displayed on your screen. The web page picture, any movies that are on it, sound are all placed in a separate area, that's often referred to as the Cache or temporary Internet file, and is dropped into these folders so your computer can rebuild what you're seeing on your screen. The difference being is that where you went is being kept in one place, and the contents of what you saw is kept in another. What you're seeing can be very complex.  It can have a number of different files in order to display what you are looking at. And when you delete that information, I may be able to recover the history, but chances are I may not be able to find all the records, and all the files, that go into actually re-producing that web page as you saw it on that day.
Burdick: To your knowledge, is the Cacheback program able to rebuild that?
Stenger: Cacheback can rebuild web pages, but only from what is called unallocated space. In other words, the books are all on the shelf, it can find all those files and folders, it can rebuild that for you. The program cannot extract all those files and folders from unallocated space. And if of course, if they were overwritten, it couldn't recover them anyway.
That's all the follow-up I have

JOSE BAEZ RE-CROSS-EXAMINES SGT. STENGER

Jose: Since you can't reconstruct the unallocated space or pages, you don't know if some of these searches are from blogs or websites that, other than recognizable ones, you don't know the authors of these websites, do you?
Stenger: From the history line, you can look at it and tell where that keyword search was run from. In the one that you were discussing sir, it was run from Google, and it was a search for chloroform.
Baez: My question to you though, talking about the searches, when you when you, since you can't reconstruct the pages, you don't know what was actually written there.
Stenger: I can't tell you what was displayed on that page when it came up.
And you said "Can't", is that correct?
I cannot.
Thank you sir. I have no more questions.

END OF JOSE'S RE-CROSS
Sergeant is EXCUSED.

COMPUTER FORENSICS SOFTWARE DESIGNER FOR CACHEBACK TAKES THE STAND (MR. BRADLEY)

Mr. Bradley is the owner of the software company that designed Cacheback.  He was a former police officer and is now a software designer who produces computer software for computer forensics.  He testified as to his background as a police officer, and how he became owner of his own software company that produces software for law enforcement, specifically Cacheback.  While he was still a police officer, he taught forensics science courses.  He developed a forensics science course for a college and instructed in that. He is also a guest speaker for forensics seminars.  He taught Internet forensics for two years.  He also taught forensics in Orlando in 2009, at the University of Central Florida, where he met Sgt. Stenger.  Sgt. Stenger asked him to look at a data file that was part of the Casey Anthony murder investigation.  After explaining his background and education, he was entered in as an Expert Witness.

HOW MR. BRADLEY, DEVELOPER OF CACHEBACK, GOT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE

Mr. Bradley testified that he was asked by Sgt. Stenger about keyword searches on Chloroform.  What he found interesting about this for him was that the information that he found in the unallocated space, was that the information was all intact.  He copied the data into his own laptop and reviewed the file.  He conducted a cursory review, from a visual perspective, and he was able to locate keyword Chloroform in that information.

Burdick: What was the size of the data file that was retrieved from the unallocated space?
Bradley: I recall the file being 3.2 megabytes, or 3.2 million bytes. A byte would be equivalent to a character.
Burdick: Were you able to draw any conclusions from the data as to its size?
Bradley: The conclusion, or my belief at that time, was that based on the size of the file, and the fact that it was recovered from unallocated space, a level of inactivity, in some fashion, must have taken place for that information to not have been overwritten.  Now I'll qualify that by saying that other factors come into play about when data in unallocated space is actually overwritten varies from the use of the computer by users or user, the size of the hard drive and the number of applications that are being used and how much disk space is currently allocated to the operating system. Based on that information, I was impressed to find it was actually recoverable.
Is there any way, given the information that was provided to you, to tell when that Internet history record was deleted?
I can't say when it was deleted.
Do you know if Mozilla Firefox has any automatic deletion of its Internet history once it reaches a certain size or a certain date?
The browser will not delete an entire history when it reaches a threshold. That version of Mozilla Firefox browser did not come with any automated or pre-default privacy mode either.
From your answer, can we conclude that the history would have had to have been deleted manually?
Yes.
Once you did your preliminary review of the information provided to you, what was your next step?
My next step was to, within the development environment of the software I happen to have on my workstation, run it through an enormous number of tests to try to figure out what the issues were that it couldn't be originally parsed or decoded. Over the course of the next three days, I actually spent a lot of time looking at very small piece of information at a time to see what were the characters that I needed to deal with to try to decode it.  And essentially, I spent a lot of time trying to understand how this was different from anything else, and worked around it from a development perspective to decode it.
After spending that period of time with the information, were you able to parse or decode it?
Yes, I was.
And how were you able to do that?
I was able to write or improve the functions within the software to deal with some anomalies that were present in this file and run it through a number of repeated tests to make sure it was parsed.  I was able to corroborate the work that I had done, using a third party reliable software to account to how many markers I should be finding.
...

Drane-Burdick: What information is being imparted by the Cacheback software:
Bradley: .... that Google was accessed on the 17th of March, 2008 at 2:43pm daylight savings time.
(He then explained how Google works using keywords for Internet searches.  His Cacheback software shows how many times Google was accessed and it shows what searches were made and at what times).
Results came up with a Cacheback report like: "Search - Google - Chloroform (requested keyword) HLEN (=Home language English).  Q = Query and the ? = Chloroform".

He saw that one Google search showed that the user had typed in an incorrect spelling of Chloroform (I.e., Chloraform), and when Google came back with a suggestion of "Do you mean Chloroform" (with the correct spelling), the user clicked on that (the correct spelling) to perform additional searches.

(Note: Casey is in the courtroom watching with great interest).

(Bradley explained that the report that Cacheback produces will sort first by timestamp and then second by the URL.  Linda Drane-Burdick went through the Cacheback report , that was run on the Anthony home computer with him, and the jury, line by line.)

(Note: This testimony got really in depth with computer searches. He talked about how DoubleClick, a tracking software company, is notorious for tracking user Internet searches.  He found DoubleClick on the Anthony home computer.  Because it was on their computer, it slowed down some Internet searches by a couple of seconds, because Doubleclick is so taxing to computers. He also saw a lot of cookies on their computer).

A bookmarked URL found was Photobucket.com.

Looking at the computer's history, he could tell that what query results that were found.  He testified as to what searches ended up with Wikipedia results on March 21, 2008 starting at 2:47pm.

Searches done on March 21, 2008 were the following:
"Alcohol"
"Death"
"Self Defense"
"RPSD"
"Hand to hand combat"
"Head Injuries"
"Head Injury"
"Middle Meningeal Artery"
"Ruptured Spleen"
"Chest Trauma"
"Internal Bleeding"
"Chloroform"
"Inhalation"
"Peroxide"
"Hydrogen Peroxide"
"How to make Chloraform"
"How to make Chloroform" (Correct spelling"
"Chloroformhabit"
"Chloro2"

(He also saw that Facebook was accessed eight times, MySpace was accessed, as well as Photobucket).

(On 3/21/2008 at 15:16:13, Mr. Bradley didn't see any Google search.  There was user generated activity on www.sci-spot.com/chemistry/chloroform.htm.

Another "genuine search" found in the Anthony home computer history resulted in "Neck breaking"

(Looking at Baez and Casey at the defense table, they appeared worried during this testimony, especially Casey.  She keeps whispering to Jose, as he listened and watched the computer monitor in front of him. One possible reason for concern could be because this expert kept intertwining Chloroform, Head Trauma, Death with MySpace, Facebook and Photobucket entries.  These were all accessed within minutes of each other, with Neck Breaking and Facebook ending his report).

BAEZ CROSS-EXAMINES EXPERT

(Baez brought up his computer and notes to the podium).

Jose:  I, trying to put a lot of what you have into context, and I want to go over it with you and forgive me if I'm a bit repetitive as to what Ms. Drane Burdick covered with you. Um, let's start off with the, actually you had ah, been approached by Sergeant Stenger because he was using your software and there was a bug in it.
Bradley: I would say there was an issue with the way it managed Firefox 2's history.
Jose: He couldn't get it to work correctly.
Bradley: The software functioned correctly in the state at which it was at the time, dealing with Firefox 2 history. In this particular case, it was an extraordinary circumstance. Extraordinary version of the history.
Jose: But my question to you sir is that he approached you because he could not get your software to work, correct?
Bradley: He stated that he could get it to work so far.
....
(Jose went on to accuse Mr. Bradley of being in this case to make money)
...
Jose: And it's something you developed.
Bradley: Yes.
Jose: And I were to go to your website, would there be any advertisements of you testifying in this case?
Bradley:  There's a link on the Homepage that I put up a few weeks ago in regards to a specific and single article that referenced my name and the software and I only put it up recently as a subtle way for people to see how Cacheback might have been used.  In so far as to support, or sorry to explain your reference to the word "concern", Firefox 2 is long ago depreciated and at the time it was in transition to version 3, and most people were already adopting version 3. So it was a vendor's choice as to where to go back and recode against a soon-to-be obsolete version.
Jose: So if I go to your website, right under the name Cacheback 3, is there a section there that says "Number one choice for Internet Search Investigations"?
Bradley: Yes
And right below that is the article that you posted about your participation in this case?
Yes.
And do you consider that advertising?
Of course it's advertising, but it's subtle. It's been two years now and I haven't sent a single promotional anything to promote any involvement in this case.  The only reason why I put that particular item up is because Sgt. Stenger sent me an email to indicate "Hey, you might be coming down here after all, and your picture's here, it's talking about you. It's a small something to support the validity of the software for those who are looking.
It certainly doesn't hurt the validity of your product?
No, it doesn't hurt.  But I'm not overwhelmed with phone calls and it's been up there a few weeks.  The purpose wasn't to make money off of it. The purpose was simply to support those who were deciding is this a valid tool, recognized in the industry, and certainly in this case, it was.  It was a small item to put up there.
Jose: AND that you're the number one choice for forensic investigation.
Bradley: That terminology has been up there prior to that.
Jose: Now sir, in pulling these up, uh, the first search on March 17, 2008 for chloroform, how long is the user on that website before another website comes up?
Bradley: I'm at a disadvantage, can I have the information to look it up please.
(Jose gives him the documentation)

Jose: So you got seven seconds and you got one second. Correct?
Bradley: According to the history, yes.
Jose: Now..
Bradley: I should explain something before we go further, I know where you're going with this question, with seconds and time lapse.
Jose: I don't want you, I want you to just answer my question.  You feel you need to explain...

Drane-Burdick: Objection
Judge: Sustained.  You may finish your answer

Bradley: Thank you your honor. The purpose of my role is to decode the history.  By reviewing the timestamps that were decoded, we have the history. Now certainly, the checks and balances from a forensics' perspective is to take the results, and if they raise questions such as a one second disparity, how is humanly possible to get a result and then go on to something else, and how is that done. Based on the clues left behind in the beginning of the chronology, one might try to replicate that, using an experiment or a series of experiments.  Those were not requested, nor did I do them.
Jose: I totally understand
Bradley: I can't speak to why there might be one second discrepancy between two visits.
Jose: No one's asking you to. And uh, Mr. Bradley, I totally understand, I'm just trying to get the facts of what you got in this.
Bradley: Ok.
Jose: Now sir, the, subsequent to that one second, there are some other Wikipedia searches for Peroxide, things like that. And then someone types in at 2:58 exactly what?
Bradley: At 2:58:38:? It's a reference to Wikipedia and it's a consistent search definition for "Self Defense".
Jose: So maybe someone typed it in or somehow the screen ended up with Self Defense on Wikipedia.
Bradley: Well, I had gone so far as to prepare for today and I've actually visited Wikipedia's website and my own common knowledge of Wikipedia is that it tends to underscore keywords within documents. So as you're going through, it's just as easy to click on an item and stay within the Wikipedia website and low and behold you have a new item registered.

Jose: And for those jury members who are not familiar with Wikipedia (Jose explains how Wikipedia works).

(Jose went on to ask Bradley if the Investigators asked him about, or stated that these items were of interest for this case: Hand-to-hand combat, Head injuries, Meningeal artery, Ruptured Spleen, Chest trauma, Internal bleeding, Hypobulemia.   Bradley's answer: No sir. Then after that were entries of Facebook).

(Jose then questioned Mr. Bradley about the time spent on Chloroform, Drug Library.com, etc. stressing that only mere seconds that were spent on those pages.  Jose's questions were very confusing to Mr. Bradley, and me. Then Jose asked him about a search that appeared to be the longest, lasting over two minutes, which was for "Chloroform habit", which was supposedly it's a blog about someone using chloroform in the 1800s.  Then Jose went back to asking if Self-Defense was something that investigators told him was important to this case.  Prior to Neck Breaking, there was a search on Self Defense for Women).

Jose: Re: Making weapons out of household products, after that there's an entry for Blogger.com?
Bradley: I think that we're referencing two different report
Jose: "Ok, I'll just move further along".
Jose: Do you see entry for MorningNews.org
Bradley: Yes.
Jose: And what is that exactly?
Bradley: The URL states the morning news.org/archives/opinions/kevinfaningshomesecuritybasics
Jose: So, do you know what that site's about?
Bradley: No.
Jose: And the next one is?
Bradley: Starts with Blogger.com
Jose: Correct.  Does that reference prepare for Zombie invasions?

(Jose kept going through searches which are not relevant to this case.  Jose also suggested that the search "Shovel" could have been for a movie "Shovel").

Baez: You were hired in 2009?
Bradley: I was not hired
Baez: You were consulted in 2009.
Bradley: Yes
And that was only a few months after this case came about.
Apparently so.
Baez:  A lot of these websites would have still have been active at the time, so that you could actually go to the links and give a clear understanding what was on these sites
Bradley: I don't have any knowledge as to when the computer was seized, but if it was any time within reason of the dates that we're looking at today, I would agree with that.
Jose: So, wouldn't the better evidence be looking at household weapons, funny household weapons, making chloroform, things like that, wouldn't the better evidence be, to show a jury, the actual page as opposed to a link?
OBJECTION!
SUSTAINED!
Jose: The link only gives you so much information, doesn't it sir?
Bradley: Yes.
Jose: And in fact, the link doesn't tell you anything that was on that website
Bradley: That's correct
Jose: And in fact, these websites, as some indicate jokes
Bradley: Yes.
And some could be having to do with self-defense
Yes
And some could be with Kung-Foo
Yes
And some could be having to do with chemistry
yes
some with medical facts....
...
Bradley:  Many people in my experience have used multiple browsers, we're talking about Firefox all by itself.
Jose: I understand. So what you're saying, someone could be looking at multiple browsers and that would actually lessen the time that we're talking about.
Yes
And we're talking about just a little over 3 minutes
Yes
....

(Court Observer: Jurors look restless and none of them are taking notes).
(My observation: Even though Jose is still talking, I am no longer listening cuz he's just talking in circles about the same thing and it's giving me a headache.

REDIRECT

(Linda Drane-Burdick addressed all of Jose's pokings into this Mr. Bradley's testimony, from the criticism of his software failing (It was not failing, but Casey's computer had an old version of Firefox) and the short times that occurred after searches was because that's all it took to bring up results in Google and to choose which website that you want to look at, etc.)

One last important point that Prosecuting Attorney made was that there were 84 searches for Chloroform on the Anthony home computer).

I'm DONE!  Good night.

(Note: Newscasters have noted that these computer searches are especially damning to Casey because the computer forensic experts have all noted that the computer searches on the Anthony home computer were made in March 2008, and slowed down as Casey started spending more time at Ricardo Morales' apartment and then Tony Lazzaro's, suggesting that she was probably the person who performed these searches.)

Post-Note:  Famed addiction specialist, Dr. Drew, revealed that he recently spoke with George Anthony's ex-wife in Ohio.  Speaking about their conversation, Dr. Drew said that although she spoke very kindly of George, that he's a great guy, she said that he has a known lying problem.  She believes that George's "lying gene" was passed onto Casey.  She also believes that Casey is involved with Caylee's murder, but Dr. Drew would not disclose the ex-wife's theory about the case.

17 comments:

  1. Thank you for posting these for us!!! I Just got back from vacation so it is nice being able to read what was going on at the trial!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thіs is a reallу gοoԁ
    tip especially tο thοѕe new to thе blogospheгe.
    Brief but very precisе infо… Thankѕ fοr sharіng thiѕ one.
    A muѕt reаd poѕt!
    Here is my page ... cheap loans

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello mates, nicе paragraph аnd pleasаnt
    аrgumentѕ commеnted at thiѕ plаce, I am
    in faсt enϳoying bу theѕe.
    Look into my webpage ; payday loans

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's awesome designed for me to have a web site, which is beneficial designed for my know-how. thanks admin
    Also see my website :: payday loans online

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hellо to all, how is all, ӏ think every one is getting mоre from thіs ωeb site, and your views aгe gooԁ
    in support of new ρeoρle.
    Here is my web blog :: Cash Loans

    ReplyDelete
  6. I hаve been surfing online morе than 4 hours today,
    yet I never fоund anу interesting article like
    yours. It is pгettу worth enough for me.
    Persοnally, if all web oωners and blоggers made good contеnt as уοu dіd, the net will be a lot mοre usеful than
    ever before.
    my webpage: loans for bad credit

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sаνed as a favoгite, I loνe уour wеb
    sitе!
    My web site :: loans for bad credit

    ReplyDelete
  8. Woω, this aгtіcle іѕ fastidious,
    my youngeг sister is analyzing such things, thus
    I am going to tell hеr.
    Also visit my page : how to stop snoring

    ReplyDelete
  9. Heуa i аm foг thе primary time hегe.
    І came acrοss this board and I to find Ιt trulу helpful & it
    helped me оut a lot. I hope tο offer ѕomething back аnd aid otherѕ lіke you aided me.
    Also visit my blog post :: Payday Loans

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hі, Neat post. Thеге is a ρroblem wіth
    your website іn web ехplorer,
    might check this? IE nonеtheless iѕ the marκet
    chіef and a large еlement of ρeoplе will omit your
    excellent writіng becausе of thіs ρroblеm.


    Feel free to surf to my blog ρoѕt - bucket trucks
    Feel free to visit my web blog :: bucket trucks

    ReplyDelete
  11. Heуa i'm for the first time here. I found this board and I find It really useful & it helped me out a lot. I hope to give something back and help others like you helped me.
    My webpage - loans for bad credit

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hеllo it's me, I am also visiting this web site daily, this web site is really fastidious and the users are in fact sharing pleasant thoughts.
    Look at my page - 1 month loan

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hello There. I found your blοg using msn. This is
    аn extгemely wеll written агtiсle.

    I will mаκe sure to bookmark it аnd сome
    bacκ to read more οf youг useful іnformation.

    Thanκs for thе pоst. I'll certainly comeback.

    Visit my web site ... bad credit loans

    ReplyDelete
  14. Undeniably believe that which уou stateԁ. Your favοrіte гeason appеareԁ to be at the net the
    sіmρleѕt thing tο take into aсcоunt of.
    I saу to уou, I ceгtаinly get
    iгked while folκs thinκ аbout concerns that they ρlainly dо not recognise
    about. You managed to hit thе nail upon the top aѕ smartly as ԁefineԁ out
    thе entire thing wіthout having ѕide effeсt , otheг
    folks coulԁ take a ѕignal. Will probably be agаіn to get more.
    Thankѕ

    Review my weblog; bad credit payday loans
    my webpage > bad credit payday loans

    ReplyDelete
  15. Plеase lеt me κnow іf you're looking for a article author for your blog. You have some really great articles and I believe I would be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I'd гeally like to ωгite ѕοme material for yоur blog in exchange for a link bаck to
    mine. Pleaѕe ѕend me аn е-mail if іnteгested.

    Kudos!

    my web page; diet

    ReplyDelete
  16. Really when somеοne doesn't know then its up to other people that they will help, so here it occurs.

    Also visit my weblog: payday loan

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hі, аftеr reading this аmazing paragrаph i am as ωell
    happy to share my know-hοw here ωith
    mаtes.

    Also vіsit my site ... how to make money buying and selling cars

    ReplyDelete