ORLANDO, Fla. – Day 24 of the Casey Anthony murder trial extended to nearly 6 p.m. as lead defense attorney Jose Baez tried to get a research chemist to discredit a colleague who had testified for the state.
The defense called Dr. Marcus Wise, a research scientist at Oak Ridge National Laboratory specializing in analytical chemistry.
Recommended Videos
Wise?s questioning became increasingly heated as Baez question research methods used at the laboratory.
Wise is a colleague of Dr. Arpad Vass, who was called as a state witness to testify about the smell of human decomposition and high levels of chloroform found in air samples taken from the trunk of Anthony?s car.
Baez questioned Wise about Vass? qualifications, as well as whether the researchers or laboratory would benefit financially if technology they created to detect decomposition in air samples was successfully used in court.
Wise said the device, called a labrador, was designed for use by law enforcement and the military, and he would earn no royalties from its use. He said the labrador was only in the development phase when the Oakridge National Laboratory was performing tests on samples in the Anthony case.
Wise testified that the presence of chloroform in Anthony's trunk is unusual and he could not confirm it was the product of common products.
Anthony's murder trial resumed Tuesday morning with a forensic botanist being called to the stand a day after the judge abruptly called for an early recess.
Day 24 began with attorneys from both sides arguing whether a defense witness would be able to testify about DNA in the case. Judge Belvin Perry ruled that the witness would not be able to testify about the DNA of decomposition fluid in the trunk of Anthony's car. Perry, however, said he would be willing to hold a hearing later and revisit the issue.
The defense, for the first time since Saturday, then called a witness to testify. Jennifer Welch, an Orange County sheriff's crime scene investigator, was called back to the stand and questioned by defense attorney Dorothy Clay Sims.
"Did you take photographs of the scene (where Caylee's body was found in 2008) after the vegetation had been cleared?" Clay Sims asked.
"Yes," said Welch, identifying a photo of the cleared scene.
Some photos were placed into evidence and shown to the jury before the witness was cross-examined by state prosecutor Jeff Ashton, who asked Welch if she could identify exactly where the remains were based on one of the photos.
Welch said she could not without looking at her library of photographs of the scene.
After being asked about catalog numbers of the photos during re-direct by Clay Sims, Welch was excused.
The defense then called Dr. Jane Bock, a forensic botanist, to the stand.
"I have looked at photographs taken by the medical examiner and the Sheriff's Office crime scene investigators and visited the recovery area and read documents about the case," Bock said.
Bock told jurors that she believed the roots could have grown through the bones, skull and a laundry bag in two weeks. Prosecutors have said Caylee's remains had been in the woods near the Anthony family home since the summer of 2008.
While pointing to a photograph in front of the jury, Ashton asked Bock if she measured the amount of "leaf litter" in a certain area.
"No. Did anyone else?" Bock said.
"The neat thing about this is that you don't get to ask me any questions," Ashton joked.
Ashton pointed out that Bock said in her deposition that she couldn't say when Caylee's remains were placed in the woods. Bock then admitted that it's possible that Caylee's remains were in the woods for more than two weeks.
Ashton also said that Caylee's hip bone was found buried in 4 inches of muck, implying that Caylee's skull was likely in the woods for longer than two weeks. Bock suggested a dog or another animal could have buried the hip bone.
The defense then called DNA expert Dr. Richard Eikelenboom.
Ashton said Eikelenboom originally only submitted a half-page summary of his findings that contained no significant opinion, but now wants to present two written pages and 45 PowerPoint slides to jurors, which Ashton says is a clear violation of Perry's court order for all expert witnesses to submit detailed reports.
Eikelenboom told Perry he was not told he needed to render an opinion in his reports.
After hearing from Ashton and Baez, Perry decided that by not informing Eikelenboom that he needed to report his findings with a complete statement of opinions for the state, the defense's discovery violation was willful.
Perry ruled that Eikelenboom could not testify about DNA analysis of decompositional fluid found in the trunk of Anthony?s car until a Frye hearing on the matter is held to decide what scientific evidence is acceptable. Perry said the hearing will be held next week.
Perry informed the jury that Eikelenboom had stipulations for what topics he could testify about.
Eikelenboom said he performs trace DNA recovery. The prosecution objected to Eikelenboom being considered an expert, but Perry allowed it.
Baez asked Eikelenboom if duct tape were placed on human skin, if skin cells would be found on the sticky side. Eikelenboom said yes, and went on to say even in damp, summer conditions, he would expect some DNA to be found on the sticky side of the tape if it had been placed on skin.
Eikelenboom said chloroform can be used to extract DNA and would not degrade DNA.
During cross-examination, Eikelenboom said heat and moisture have a detrimental effect on DNA. He also said he did not ask for tape found on Caylee's skull to be retested for DNA. FBI experts testified that the only identifiable DNA found on the tape was that of an FBI lab tech who had handled the tape previously.
Another sample of DNA was found on the sticky side of the tape, but it was so degraded that it could not be positively identified.
The defense is trying to prove that the duct tape found on Caylee's skull was placed there after her body decomposed, not while the toddler was still alive or just after she died.
OSCO lead investigator Yuri Melich was then called by the defense.
Melich was one of the first law enforcement officials to question Casey Anthony regarding Caylee?s disappearance.
Melich testified that no chloroform or products used to make chloroform were found in the Anthony home when it was searched in August 2008 or again in December 2008.
After sending the jury to lunch, the Baez said he was just handed computer evidence from the state, which he thought violated the discovery order.
The state said it gave all the information from the Anthony family computer to Baez two years ago, but Baez argued there was too much information and he did not know what to focus on. Perry noted that the obvious important days in the case were June 15 through 17, and it was up to the defense to look at the important dates.
The state could use the computer evidence to rebut claims Baez made in opening statements.
The state said instant messages send from the computer negate the defense's theory that Caylee died the morning of June 16, 2008. Someone using Casey Anthony's screen name had a conversation via instant messaging at 8 a.m.
Court is expected to recess early Wednesday due to a prior commitment for Perry.
On Monday, Perry called a recess before 11 a.m., with the jury never having been seated in the courtroom. The recess followed a half-hour argument by attorneys about evidence disclosure.
Attorneys for both sides argued over what prosecutors said was a failure by defense lawyers to disclose all the material an upcoming witness intended to testify to. The defense said the state was engaging in legal maneuvering. Perry lectured them for wasting the court's time.
Anthony, 25, is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her 2-year-old daughter. She faces a possible death sentence if convicted. She has pleaded not guilty.
Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.