Conner's Gestational Age

[attorneywan2be]

Conner's gestational age at the time of Laci's disappearance:

32 weeks and 6 days on December 23rd---> 33 weeks on Dec 24th..

Dr. Edraki's testimony.. a doctor from the clinic that Laci used to go to..

David Harris: So the actual, if you were to go through and calculate it for that last entry on 12-23, if we use that gestational age, the wheel that we're talking about, that would have actually been 32-6?
Tina Edraki: 32 weeks and six days. And then if you look at her fundal height, where that 33 is, that's when we measure the uterus and that corresponds to her 32 and six, because usually the centimeters go along with how many weeks you are, if you are an average size person, which she was.

Conner's gestational age when his body was found:

1- 9 months

The Medical Examiner testified that Conner was a full term baby, his estimated gestational age 9 months

Mark Geragos: Okay. Now, the, one of the other things that you mentioned was, let's see, that you figured that there would be other tests to determine, you had estimated Conner as nine months, or as, a full-term infant, correct?
Brian Peterson: Correct.

2- 35 weeks to 36 weeks

Dr. Alison Galloway, a prosecution witness, testified that based on the average measurements of Conner's bones, she estimated his gestational age between 35 weeks and 36 weeks..however, she adjusted it by a margin of error of 2 weeks plus or minus .. 33 weeks to 38 weeks..

The medical examiner's testimony about Galloway's report:

Brian Peterson: Well, she gives the actual measurement of the bone, and then I believe what she's listing is reference ranges from the references that she used.
Mark Geragos: Okay. The one, the first one, when she measured the humerus bone, the right humerus bone, it was, the range for the age of the baby was 36 to 38 weeks?
Brian Peterson: That's the first table.
Mark Geragos: And the second one was 35.6 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Correct.
Mark Geragos: When she, when she measured the right femur, the first table was that the baby was 36 to 38 weeks?
Brian Peterson: It is.
Mark Geragos: And that the, on the other table it was 35.1 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Correct.
Mark Geragos: And when she measured the right tibia, she got 36 to 38 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Yes.
Mark Geragos: And 36.3 weeks on the other scale, correct?
Brian Peterson: Correct.
Mark Geragos: When she measured, is it the parietal?
Brian Peterson: Parietal.
Mark Geragos: Parietal, the right parietal, the cord height, she got that the baby was 40 weeks, according to the schedule?
Brian Peterson: Yes.
Mark Geragos: And when she did the perimeter height, she got 34 weeks?
Brian Peterson: She did.
Mark Geragos: When she did the cord width, she was at 34, the baby was at 34 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Yes.
Mark Geragos: The perimeter width, 36 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Correct.
Mark Geragos: Cord height, 38 to 40 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Around the frontal.
Mark Geragos: The right frontal bone. A separate bone?
Brian Peterson: Yes.
Mark Geragos: And perimeter height, 34 to 36 weeks?
Brian Peterson: Yes.
Mark Geragos: Cord width 36 to 38 weeks; is that correct?
Brian Peterson: That's correct.
Mark Geragos: And perimeter width, 34 to 36 weeks, correct?
Brian Peterson: Correct.
Mark Geragos: Okay. The lowest on any of these charts that she compared the baby, the measurements to, the absolute youngest that she has, and it's only on one, two, three, four of the measurements, is 34 weeks, correct?
Brian Peterson: That's correct.
Mark Geragos: And the average is roughly 36 to 38 weeks; is it not?
Brian Peterson: Let me see. She, she states a number of age ranges in her report, and it looks to me that her ultimate conclusion is listed as 33 to 38 weeks. I'm not sure if she drew an arithmetic average, or anything.
Mark Geragos: Okay. There's no measurement that she compares to here on her appendix where the baby's age was 33 weeks, is there?
Brian Peterson: Not in this table. She refers to in her report, though, with different racial groups.
Mark Geragos: Okay. Specifically there's a number, looks like one, two, three, four, five, six, six of the one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, six of the eleven measurements go as high as 38 or 40 weeks; isn't that correct?
Brian Peterson: They do.
Mark Geragos: Okay. And that would be, she was called in for her expertise on estimating age; isn't that correct?
Brian Peterson: Yes, it was
-------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Galloway's testimony:

Mark Geragos: So if I understand correctly, when you actual did the measurements the baby came back at all three measurements a -- between 35 to 36. And then when you came to your conclusion, what you did is, you put a two-week window or kind of a cushion on either side of the 35 to 36?
Alison Galloway: That's actually the protocol for the study.
Mark Geragos: So am I correct, you went this -- 35 to 36 on the measurements?
Alison Galloway: Yes.
Mark Geragos: Put two weeks on 36 to get you to 38, put two weeks on the 35 to get you to 33?
Alison Galloway: That's correct.

Conclusion: we have the following set of facts:

• Conner was 33 weeks when Laci disappeared
  
• Conner was 40 weeks when he was found, that's according to the medical examiner
  
• The measurements of 6 out of 11 of his bones put his age as high as 38 to 40 weeks...that's according to Dr. Galloway
  
• The average measurements of his bones put his age between 35 and 36 weeks..that's according to Dr. Galloway

Is it reasonable to infer that Conner was older than 35 weeks when he was found..at least 2 weeks older than when Laci disappeared? Yes

Your thoughts?

[accordn2me]

Ummmm, it is clear to me 33 - 40 weeks was an estimated range of the baby's age. The doctors used different tables and got different estimates for the same measurements. Sadly, that's all we will ever have is an estimate of how old Conner was when he died. I doubt there will ever be a credible doctor that will take the stand and give you even within a week how old Conner was.

Likewise, it was an estimate as to Conner's gestational age at Laci's last doctor visit. That's why they stated a range.

You can keep repeating your assertion of these definite ages for Conner. I'm afraid you are not going to find a doctor to back you up with anything more than an estimated range of age.

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by attorneywan2be

Conner's gestational age at the time of Laci's disappearance:

Your thoughts?

Didn't Greggory DeVore also testify for the State as to his estimate of Conner's gestational age? I think his testimony would also be germaine to this thread. ( as would the testimony of Dr March..?)
My thoughts on this have always been that gestational age can only be estimated, and that it is quite common for an EDC determined from ultrasound or LMP to be off by 2 weeks in either direction. I realize Dr Devore testified that the early ultrasound is the gold standard ( I agree with him on this), and he seemed quite comfortable with his testimony as to his opinion of Conner's precise gestational age. I'll defer to all the experts on this, although I did not find Dr March's testimony to be based on credible evidence. ( it seemed like conjecture to me) I think it's entirely possible Conner could have been 35 weeks "old" when Scott murdered Laci ( on 12/23 or 12/24). JMO

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

MN has analysed Devore's testimony in detail and found it to be junk science. .

Who is "MN"? TIA.

[Anne2719]

When I was pregnant with my first baby, the doctor told me she was going to weigh 8-9 pounds. She weighed in at 6.5 pounds at birth, but with a great big giant head. [She does look normal now, but imagine giving birth to a basketball.] Oh, and my due date changed depending on which doctor I saw on any given visit.

[TuscanDreams]

It is so sad that we are discussing the gestational age of this infant. He'd be about 3 years old right now, wouldn't he?

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by TuscanDreams

It is so sad that we are discussing the gestational age of this infant. He'd be about 3 years old right now, wouldn't he?

I agree, TuscanDreams, when I reflect on how precious a three year old is, I feel very sad, It was reported Judge Delucchi's voice wavered with emotion when he referred to Conner at formal sentencing, ( "Baby Conner was not even allowed to take a breath on this earth") It is all so very sad.

[packy]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Actually there was no proof he wasn't born alive; however when I think of the hell that Laci went through, trapped in the hands of low life criminal scum and drug users for over 2 months and wondering when the hell the cops would come and rescue her, I am appalled by the suffering she must have endured. And the MPD refused to search for her claiming that Tracy was "too dangerous". "Protect and Serve" -- yeah, right.

Some California sentences.

Jerry Dewayne Williams, sentenced to 25 years to life for the theft of a slice of pepperoni pizza (later reduced to a mere 6 years).

Leandro Andrade, sentenced to 50 years to life in prison for shoplifting nine children's videotapes from two K-Marts to finance drug purchases. Total value was $153.54. Cost of his incarceration will run about $2.5 million. He will be eligible for only the most minimal form of parole at best, so this is really a life sentence.

I'm told that in Florida a kid aged 15 did 14 months for walking into a closed laundromat and taking $1.40 in pennies and 3 six-month-old candy bars. The laundromat had been closed and boarded up since the last hurricane. The boards fell down and he went in and took the items from a candy machine.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Donald Glen Pearce, 44, sentenced to 180 days in Stanislaus County Jail for his part in the $60,000 burglary of the Medina home opposite the Peterson home at the time of Laci's abduction. This included the theft of guns!

Steven Wayne Todd, 35, a three strike offender, sentenced to 8 years and 8 months in prison for that burglary and two other burglary counts from a separate incident.

Makes you think, doesn't it? Why such special treatment for these two?

Is it true that they arranged for a heat-sensing helicopter to fly over the compound in Tracy, and after hovering over the area, it detected heat in several buildings but they didn't check it out? But then it was too dangerous of course. Yeah. Unbelievable if true.

[packy]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

They had a tip that a pregnant woman was being held in Tracy and was being abused. Considering other cases of abduction (such as Colleen Stan) I think it is reasonable to believe it was possible. It is ironic that workmen went into the same area and demolished all of the buildings there and bulldozed them. So it's safe for workmen but not the police?

The workmen survived? Amazing.

This from CTV news has always made me wonder since it was never followed through.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/090704_ctv.html

"They have a pregnant woman in there and he states he recognizes her as Laci," a dispatcher wrote in a report dated Jan. 10, 2003.

Modesto police officer Eric Beffa, assigned the same day to follow up on the lead, testified that he and another officer drove around the specified part of Tracy in a fruitless search for two white houses in front of a storage container.

"We were unable to locate anything similar to what was described in the tip," Beffa told jurors.

Mears, who knew the area better, agreed to show the Modesto officers several locations that were consistent with the tip. He testified that about 10 minutes after they set out, however, the Modesto officers abruptly left, saying they had been called back to their department to pursue other leads."

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Distaso's bullying may have impressed the jury but Dr March's testimony was far more compelling than that of Devore who had to jump from book to book and table to table to come up with a 'theory' which was opposed by every other witness in the trial. Devore's theory has never been peer reviewed, is not in general use (or any use), and thus fails Daubert.

Yep, you are so right, the jury may have been impressed by Distaso's cross examinination, but actually, the jury was very much impressed by Harris' total destruction of Dr. Marsh, err, Dr.(Cut me some slack) March.

As for a peer review, though not needed, it would not had hurt any.

There was never a Daubert motion in this case. Had there been one, MN would surely have it out for everyone to see. If you have the info for a Daubert motion in this case, post it.

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

I can believe it.

Examiner: Is your name Scott Lee Peterson?
Donald Glen Pearce: No.
Examiner: He's telling the truth.
Brocchini: Will you swear under oath that you burgled the Medina house on the 27th?
Donald Glen Pearce: Yes.
Brocchini: Do I have a deal for you!

Examiner: Is your name Scott Lee Peterson?
Steven Wayne Todd: No.
Examiner: He's telling the truth.
Brocchini: Will you swear under oath that you burgled the Medina house on the 27th?
Steven Wayne Todd: Yes.
Brocchini: Do I have a deal for you too!


Yep, passed with flying colors.

Knowing how the system works, DRISP should have asked for the same deal.

[Wearing A Halo]

Originally Posted by TopGunner

Marelene Newell is uneducated, unexperienced, and untrained in ALL of these areas, so why not just post links to Big Bird?

But, Marlene does stay at a Holiday Inn Express!

[LionRun]

Originally Posted by Anne2719

When I was pregnant with my first baby, the doctor told me she was going to weigh 8-9 pounds. She weighed in at 6.5 pounds at birth, but with a great big giant head. [She does look normal now, but imagine giving birth to a basketball.] Oh, and my due date changed depending on which doctor I saw on any given visit.

LOL Anne. Must have been a very adorable basketball, albeit.

During the time when I was pregnant with my daughter I moved from New Jersey to New York to Texas, and I had 4 different OBGYN's. Each doctor predicted a different due date for my daughter's birth, and each was different. I had due dates ranging from 1/2 to 2/16. The range is more than 6 weeks.

I have known of other women who's due dates were off by as much as a month. This includes only full term babies.

Lion

[Beebee]

Since this thread is about Conner-- I have a question about Conner.

Would his body float?

[Beebee]

More on Conner:

NBC News' chief legal corresponsdent Dan Abrams broke the story on Thursday, reading portions of the report on MSNBC.
The coroner's report indicates that 1 ½ loops of plastic tape were found around Connor Peterson's neck. In addition, the report also said a "significant cut" was found on the baby's body, which the report said was made after he died. In addition, a half-centimeter of umbilical cord was found protruding from the body. The findings appear to indicate that Connor Peterson may have been born, rather than expelled from Laci Peterson's body after it was dumped in the water near Richmond, Calif., as the prosecution is expected to claim.
The report indicates that not only was the baby born, but that someone had contact with it to loop the tape around its neck and place the large cut or tear extending from the fetus' right shoulder to its abdomen, which exposed internal organs. The report did not indicate that any of the baby's organs had been removed.
Abrams conducted an interview by telephone with forensic pathologist Dr. Werner Spitz, a forensic expert not involved in the case, who called the findings "very significant." Spitz said that the coroner's report indicated that the unbilical cord was likely cut, because it would have been very difficult to tear, although Spitz said it could also have been "bitten."
Abrams emphasized that it is still possible that the tape around the baby's neck could have gotten there accidentally, after the baby was expelled from his mother, but Spitz called that premise unlikely.
"Of all the places to have the tape around the neck ... not the arm, not the leg, but the neck, with the skin tight around it, and the whole circumstance of this ... to consider that as a coincidence would be inaccurate to start off reasoning on that premise," Spitz said.
Abrams also interviewed well-known forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht, who said the cuts found on the baby's body were consistent with the child having been removed from the mother's womb via an incision, rather than expelled from the body due to decomposition of the uterus, although Wecht said that he could not come to a definitive conclusion without seeing the report himself. Wecht also said the report's findings were extremely significant.
Scott Peterson's defense team has claimed that Laci may have been the victim of a Satanic cult, which cut the baby out of her body and performed some sort of ritual on it. The defense claims were made before the coroner's report -- the second to be released in the case -- was released.
The defense has had the report for approximately a week, but it was unclear why the information on the baby was only released Thursday. NBC News sources indicated it was leaked to the media by the defense team.
There have been two sets of coroner's reports released. First, a 25-page report was released that found the cause of Laci Peterson's death to be inconclusive. The defense complained that it never received the entire first report, which was sealed this month. Thursday's report is a follow-up, focusing on Connor Peterson.
The Satanic cult theory was widely dismissed, but this new evidence could boost the defense claim. Criminal defense attorney Brian Wice said that while the defense is not required to prove its theory in the case, the report could help attorney Mark Geragos and his team create reasonable doubt with the jury.
Scott Peterson, 30, has pleaded not guilty to murdering his wife and unborn son. The remains of the 27-year-old pregnant substitute teacher and the infant were found on the shore of San Francisco Bay last month.
'Dynamite Evidence'
Wecht, whose name became familiar to Americans during the O.J. Simpson murder trial, in which he testified as a defense expert, told Abrams that the fact that searchers who found the body were able to identify it as a male is also extremely significant. "The smaller the body mass, the faster the process of decomposition will be," said Wecht, pointing out that the baby was spotted near San Francisco Bay a day before Laci Peterson's body was found, and that "non-medical personnel" immediately identified it as male. The coroner's report also indicated that the baby was clearly male, and that the genitals and anus were intact.
"When the baby was found, they immediately identified the sex -- they said it was a male baby," said Wecht. "If that is true, I find it extremely hard to believe the baby was floating around the bay for three months. The anus and external genetalia would not have remained in tact for three months."
The prosecution contends that Scott Peterson dumped the bodies in the bay shortly after Christmas Eve. The bodies were found in April.
Wecht said he found it "absolutely amazing" that the baby could have been floating in the bay for three months with the anus and external genitals remaining intact. "I find that hard to square," he said.
The coroner's report indicates that the baby's internal organs were "markedly decomposed," but that external organs and the anus were identifiable.
Detectives have indicated that it is possible the bodies of Connor and Laci were wrapped in some sort of plastic sheeting prior to being deposited in the bay.
Still, Wecht said the new information "could be an incredibly fortuitous post mortem artifact. If it turns out to be true, I think this is dynamite evidence for Scott Peterson."
http://www.nbc6.net/news/2235749/detail.html

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Insulting other people won't impress me.

I agree Jim Jones. Insulting people doesn't impress anyone. In fact, quite the opposite.

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Marlene Newell : The People v. Scott Peterson
See Time of Death for an analysis of the date of death of Conner.

Thanks for answering. I don't consider Newell a scientific expert, her "analysis" doesn't interest me.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Then you show me a better analysis of Devore's theory. Show me where it has been subjected to scientific testing and is widely accepted in the medical community.

Remember, except for Devore, every witness, prosecution and defense, all said he was a full term baby.

Show me an expert that refuted it in court for the defense.

[JustMyOpinion]

Article reporting March's testimony:
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/102104_ctv.html
SNIP:REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — A defense medical expert testified Thursday that Scott Peterson's unborn son lived at least five days after the Christmas Eve disappearance of his pregnant wife, Laci.

But the witness's conclusion — a finding that held the potential to exonerate the fertilizer salesman — was severely undercut when he admitted his assessment relied on personal notions of "realistic" behavior by women at baby showers.

The obstetrician, Dr. Charles March, told jurors at Peterson's capital trial that he decided Dec. 29, 2002, was the earliest possible date of death for the child in part because of the timing of a phone call Laci Peterson made to inform a close friend she was pregnant.

The 27-year-old called her childhood friend Renee Tomlinson on June 9, 2002, the day after Peterson had thrown a baby shower for Tomlinson.

March, a Los Angeles infertility specialist, said he assumed that because Laci Peterson never mentioned her pregnancy at the shower, she must have taken a home pregnancy test the following day, found she was pregnant and immediately told her friend.

He also admitted to jurors that his calculations assume that she took the test on the first possible day a pregnancy could have been detected.

Confronted about the factual basis for the assumptions by prosecutor Dave Harris, March conceded that none of the victim's medical records refer to a home pregnancy test and that Renee Tomlinson never mentioned one when she testified in June about the conversation.

Still, March insisted that based on his 30 years of experience treating female patients, his assumptions were valid.

"I mean, women talk all the time," he said. "The chances that a woman hosting a baby shower would not announce on the day of a shower that she was pregnant and have everybody rejoice in two pregnancies — that's not realistic at all."

As he spoke, two female jurors looked quizzically at the doctor and one turned away from him.

March said the size of the child's remains when compared to the date of conception indicated he may have lived until early- or mid-January.

In his opening statement, defense attorney Mark Geragos promised jurors the baby was born alive.

Peterson was under near-constant surveillance after he reported his wife's disappearance to police, so testimony that the baby did not die with its mother on Dec. 23 or Dec. 24 would clear the defendant.

Under further questioning from Geragos, March said that even without the pregnancy test assumption, an ultrasound of the child in September pointed to a later date of death. That scan showed the fetus was smaller — and perhaps younger — than a nurse practitioner had expected when she set a Feb. 10 due date during a July ultrasounds.

The doctor who performed the scan noted that Feb. 16 was a more likely date of delivery, but did not officially revise the birth date.

Two of Laci Peterson's doctors and another expert have testified that the earlier ultrasounds are more accurate, but March said the July scan wasn't taken at the ideal time and the five measurements taken in September all indicated the fetus was younger.

Many jurors appeared frustrated with March as Harris grilled him about his conclusions.

The doctor repeatedly gave long-winded explanations rather than direct answers to the prosecutor's questions. When Harris pointed out that some dates in his report were off by two days, March appeared annoyed and reminded the prosecutor of a mistake in the report of his fetal medicine expert, Dr. Greggory Devore.

"Sir, it was an error by two days," March said. "I would like everybody to cut me the two-day slack Dr. Devore was cut."

A few jurors chuckled and others shook their heads.

At the defense table, Scott Peterson appeared to be paying careful attention to the witness. Behind him in the front row of the gallery, his mother and sister whispered and passed notes to Geragos through a junior associate.

After conferencing with the associate, Geragos asked March if he knew that Peterson's mother, Jackie, had told police about a pregnancy test on June 9. March said he did not know about it, but it would bolster his findings.

Former San Francisco prosecutor Jim Hammer, who was in court for March's testimony, said March did not appear to persuade jurors and may have even cost the defense some of its credibility.

"This was supposed to be one of the high points and this one sunk. If he had succeeded, it would've been like the glove in the O.J. Simpson case," he said. "The danger is not just that he's neutralized. It's that some jurors might start wondering why he is putting on an expert who is stretching the truth or twisting the facts."

March took the stand on the fourth day of the defense's case.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/102104_ctv.html

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Why shouldn't he get the same consideration as Devore? Oh, that's right. The jury hated Scott and didn't care about any evidence anyway.

He was only trying to extend Conner's date of death by FOUR DAYS. Not anywhere close to the March 15th date that you opine. Doesn't that make him not credible and uninformed in your eyes?

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

To refute the irrefutable, the State employed Dr. Devore. Devore used a methodology that has never been subjected to peer review and favored a single measurement to the exclusion of 16 other measurements. Devore's favored study, that done by Jeanty, does not prove that Conner died during the critical time period -- 8:30 p.m. December 23 --> 10:08 a.m. December 24. For 3 out of the 4 measurements taken by Dr. Yip during the second ultrasound, Jeanty produces younger gestational ages than the standard Yip used. For the most critical measurement, the biparietal diameter, Jeanty produces a younger gestational age than the standard Yip used. Devore distorted the data by ignoring the 95% that does not produce the necessary results. That is junk science.

During the cross-examination of Dr. Charles March, David Harris asked this pointed question:

David Harris: So you would agree that Dr. Galloway is in a far better position to give an opinion about her estimate of bones and the date of the death based on her examination than you are?

>>>>

David Harris: So, to go back to my question, would you agree that she's far more qualified to give an anthropologic opinion than you are?

~~Trial Testimony~~

But it is the State that resolutely refused to accept Dr. Galloway's opinion, because it clearly exonerates Scott Peterson. Adding one week to the 32w recorded on Laci's medical chart on December 23, 2002 results in a death date no earlier than December 30, 2002.

What we have in a nutshell are three experts employing credible scientific procedures to determine Conner's gestational age:

Dr. Yip, Laci's physician, who performed a routine 2nd ultrasound on September 24 that yielded younger than expected gestational ages and adjusted Laci's due date accordingly.

Dr. Tow-Der, Laci's examining physician, who recorded 32w on December 23, 2002, based on Laci's pre-natal examination and other information on her medical chart.

Dr. Alison Galloway, who took 11 different measurements, used two different reference sources, and applied one standard deviation to the favored reference source to conclude that Conner was 33 to 38 weeks old when he died.

And the results fully exonerate Scott Peterson.

Is this expert going to testify if Scott gets a new trial? Will any expert support these claims in a new trial? People can type away all day on their keyboards making their own testimony and theories, but Scott needs the real deal.

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by enlightenme

He was only trying to extend Conner's date of death by FOUR DAYS. Not anywhere close to the March 15th date that you opine. Doesn't that make him not credible and uninformed in your eyes?

I didn't find Dr March credible because in part, he was testifying based on facts not in evidence ( citing his belief about what Laci would have done & said and when) I agree he was attempting to extend Conner's date of death, but even his testimony did not put gestational age out of the range of that which Galloway ( forensic anthropologist) cited in her testimony for the State.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Dr March refuted it absolutely. Shame on Geragos and Delucchi for letting Distaso bully him as he did.

I knew I should have said credible expert.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Dr March: Credible as all get out.
Dr Devore: Blowing smoke like a '57 Chevy with bad rings.

Says who?

*sigh* guess I'll have to go read for myself.....

[accordn2me]

Okaaaaaaaaaaay.......I think I'm going to have some fruit salad now. And read the other Dr's testimony.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

You can download the full trial record from http://www.scottisinnocent.com/ and read it (you need MS Word or the free Word reader). But you need to apply the same cynicism to the prosecution and their witnesses as you do to the defense.

I found it, thank you. So far, Dr. D is as solid as a rock. Do you have something specifically you'd like me to pay attention to?

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

See Time of Death and see if you can pick holes in it.

I haven't even made it a quarter of the way down the page and this statement right here is false:

"Devore thus proved that Conner died between the critical time period: 8:30 p.m. December 23 --> 10:08 a.m. December 24"

Like all other experts, no like all of the other credible experts, Devore gave an estimated range of likely days Conner died on. He explained and defended his chosen method of determining his estimated range in a logical, intelligent manner.

I appreciate you trying to help me understand where you are coming from here. However, if you really want to place a lot of weight (no pun intended) on the information, it needs to come directly from the trial transcripts.

[Anne2719]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Dr March: Credible as all get out.
Dr Devore: Blowing smoke like a '57 Chevy with bad rings.

In your opinion.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Can you find any peer reviews of his method? And if he put any possibility of Conner's time of death past the time Scott reported the crime Scott must be given the benefit of the doubt.

I see your straw man, Jim Jones. It wasn't Devore's method....he chose another doctor's peer-reviewed method of determining gestational age. The defense didn't offer an expert to refute Devore. GIVE UP ON MARCH! Describing him is probably how the term March Madness was coined.

What's a duck say?

[Anne2719]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Every single expert or witness said that Conner was full term - except one who invented a system to 'prove' he might not have been. I'd believe a pyramidologist before I believe that.

He is in prison because the jury was too lazy to analyze the evidence and voted based on hatred.

In your opinion.

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by accordn2me

I found it, thank you. So far, Dr. D is as solid as a rock. Do you have something specifically you'd like me to pay attention to?

Hi Accordn2me!! I hate to break our roll - but actually Dr. D is not solid as a rock. Dr. D used Conner's femur measurement to establish that Conner was in the 50th percentile. The problem with that is Dr. Jeanty (who's table he used to determine that the femur of 64mm = 33 weeks gestation) writes that using only one long bone in the latter half of the pregnancy will not yield mathematically valid results. The four long bones - humerus, tibia, ulna and femur - should all be measured and the average taken to derive gestational age. Devore did not do that.

http://www.jultrasoundmed.org/cgi/co...bstract/3/2/75

For some reason that link won't work when I post it here - but this is exactly what it says:
JOURNAL ARTICLE


Estimation of gestational age from measurements of fetal long bones
P. Jeanty, F. Rodesch, D. Delbeke and J. E. Dumont


The general practice of using fetal long bone growth charts to derive gestational age does not yield mathematically valid results. The authors tried to calculate gestational age from the lengths of long bones (femur, humerus, tibia, ulna) from 12 to 40 weeks of gestation. The combined use of the four bones allows a good estimation of gestational age that may be useful should the biparietal diameter measurement be unreliable, unobtainable, or abnormal.




Furthermore, Jeanty also writes that in the first half of the pregnancy, the two standards for determining gestational age are: the crown-rump length, maximum accuracy 7 to 9 weeks and the biparietal diameter, maximum accuracy 12 to 20 weeks. We know that Laci had an ultrasound at 20 weeks and Conner's bpd was 45 mm. (Sorry but I can't find the testimony to this right now).

According to Jeanty's chart - at 20 weeks with a bpd of 45 mm or 4.5 cm - Conner would have been in the 5th percentile - not the 50th:



http://hostingprod.com/@fetalanomalies.org/BPD.html

Conners gestational age, based on his femur measurement alone in the 5th percentile would have made him older than 33 weeks. More like 36 weeks.

IMO, it appears that Devore chose the only measurement that fit into his 50 percentile/33 weeks gestation theory - and ran with it.

[accordn2me]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Every single expert or witness said that Conner was full term....

Jim Jones. Do you really believe that? Do you believe every single expert or witness testified before the jury that Conner was full term? You see, I've been reading the testimony. So far, not one of the experts (credible) has said Conner was full-term and left it at that. Now we are back to the estimated range bit again. I would like to help you, Jim Jones. Do you want help? If not, OK. I'll go play with the Straw man.

[accordn2me]

DEVORE: Okay. The concepts, if we look at growth, I'm going to start here, draw a line this way. Call this forty -- this represents forty weeks. This is going to represent the day of the last menstrual period. Call it the LMP. Two weeks after the last menstrual period. This is why people get confused all the time. Conception occurred. So conception occurs here. The age of the fetus, from the time estimate, conception occurs until birth, is 38 weeks. But obstetricians speak in terms of forty weeks from the last menstrual period. So you take the age of the actual fetus thirty-five weeks, and add two weeks to that, and you have forty weeks. And so the biggest question that always comes up clinically is, when did conception occur? And if a patient doesn't know their last menstrual period, it's uncertain, or she appears later in pregnancy, we don't know this. But when we have a first trimester ultrasound that we have in this case, we can say that's within one day of what we would expect from the last menstrual period. Plus the fact Laci Peterson had, by the records, regular periods at 28 days. Been off birth control pills for almost two years. So it really locks it in. So we now say we now know how old this fetus is. We know approximately within a couple of days when conception occurred also. So then what happens is, we look at the growth of the fetus. We have a growth like this. This is called the 50th percentile. That is where most -- where half of the population grows, along a particular line. Now what do, we mean by distribution, if we draw a line like this, we have a distribution curve. And 50th would be here, and the 5th and 95th down here. Which simply means that most of the patients fall within this range with people in the outlying areas. So what we do, we now then have this curve that goes like this. As you can see, that as pregnancy continues, the range also increases a bit. Okay? So if we look at this point in time right here, say this is twenty weeks right here for example, we would put on this curve a distribution. And so we know how old it is. Therefore, we have to ask the question, the bone length that was measured on -- I think I said 16th -- July 16th, what date did I use here? Excuse me. On July the 16th we have a bone measurement. And we use an equation that said that bone measurement was equal to the 50th percentile. That's called an equation by Jeanty, this reference in my report to you. And from that measurement, okay, that's -- you are 32 millimeters equals 20 weeks, I think, and I put down two days. And by that date the fetus was 20 weeks and one day. So it's within one day of each other. So I use this equation, said, okay, I now know where I am in the 50th percentile. Now, let's take that same equation and say, if I have a bone measurement of a certain length later in the pregnancy at the time of the death, how old would that fetus be, and at what date would that be equivalent to? Okay? So what I did, after -- I have to refer to my notes here. I used that equation. And then if I take and look at the three measurements I made, 64 millimeters, 64.7 millimeters, and 65 millimeters, and the average of 64.5, millimeters, I said what would those measurements be equal to, assuming that Conner grew along a curve like he was supposed to. There is no pathology that was present that would cause it to change its growth. The date of death would be predicted to be the following: For 64 millimeters, December 21st; for 64.7, December 23rd; for 65, December 24th. For the average, December 23rd.

DEVORE: Well, what came out is what I mention, I have listed on the right-hand side corner. For the measurements that I made, using the equation that I used in my report to you, would be December 21st, December 23rd, 24th, and the average December 23rd. And that would be for my measurements from the ultrasound that I did of the bone.

HARRIS: Now, does that kind of get -- I guess trying to ask if it was done a different way in terms of weeks and days as well.

DEVORE: Yes, it was done -- for example, like 33 weeks, what I have, for example, I have the first measurements -- maybe I can write that up there so it would be easier to see, perhaps. What I'm going to do, I'm going to -- this is on the left-hand corner. The measurements, the corresponding age in weeks, and the corresponding date that the bone stopped growing if we used these calculations. So 64 is equal to 32.8 from the equation. Remember, I have to take .8 times days of the week, is equal to 32 weeks and six days, which is equal to December 21st. So I will just go through this for each of these. Excuse me. 64.7 equals 33.15, equals 33 weeks and one day, which equals, I think, December 23rd. I apologize for my handwriting. Doctor's writing. It could be better. Okay. 65 equals 33.28, which equals 33 weeks two days, which equals December 24th. And the average is 64.5, which equals 33.06, which equals 33 weeks one day, which equals December 23rd.

JUDGE: Those are the estimated dates of death, right?

DEVORE: Yes. Dates of death, yes.

[accordn2me]

HARRIS: Now, when we talk about the 32 weeks six days, 33 weeks one day, 33 weeks two days, to go through that. When you start from that estimated date of conception, how do we calculate that first day in terms of where we end up on the calendar?

DEVORE: What we do, we use the day of the last menstrual period. Remember I said, here we have a last menstrual period. So that was on May the -- on May the 6th. So that would be Day 1. And then conception occurred two weeks later, based upon the crown-rump information that we have, that I believe that would represent the conception. So we close in as our reference point. So conception occurred here. But the days counted from the last menstrual period, all the gestational ages, 33 weeks and one day, those are called menstrual dates. They are from the last menstrual period. The actual age of the fetus is two weeks less than that, from the time it was conceived from the last menstrual period.

HARRIS: This is how you calculated, when I say menstrual age of 33 weeks and one day?

DEVORE: That's from this last menstrual period date.

HARRIS: The dates that are used by obstetricians, do they use that gestational age that you are referring to?

DEVORE: Yes. The gestational age that -- they use different terms. They will use gestational age as from the last menstrual period, menstrual age, last menstrual period. And sometimes they use conception age when they do in vitro fertilization in the office. We talked about the best term is to call it menstrual age or gestational age. But we're talking -- we know that the two weeks are taken into account here from the period to when the ovulation occurred, when conception occurred.

HARRIS: When we refer to that first trimester ultrasound, that has a plus or minus of three days?

DEVORE: Three days.

HARRIS: Plus or minus with conception?

DEVORE: Certainly there could be a -- conception can be plus or minus two days for when the sperm and the egg get together.

HARRIS: In terms of following this graph out, because there is slight -- or what would be the term that you would use in terms of the conception?

DEVORE: Well, you know, unless, I guess, you are there, you never know. What you really know is, is if you -- let me say it a different way. People have done studies, for example, tell you about a study where they have taken patients with in vitro fertilization, okay? They have said I know when you conceived. I put the egg and sperm together, and they then placed it in the patient. So they know then when it happened. They have done studies. They looked, for example, at the femur length, okay? Now from the point of conception, when they take those -- they do the in vitro fertilization, they measure the fetus, they know exactly when it happened. They look, for example, at the growth of the femur lengths. And the date that this exam was done for the second trimester, the expected age of the fetus using that type of an approach is 20 weeks. It's within 24 hours of what we said it is based upon the information that we have. So looking at in vitro patients, and then you know exactly when they conceived. You are there when it happened. The equation they produce comes up to 20 weeks. At this time we showed her exam by 24 hours. So that's why we feel confident about this being the age at the time this exam was done.

HARRIS: Then, again, with the first trimester, just to go back through this. There is a range of about plus or minus three days?

DEVORE: Yes. That's the range.

HARRIS: So those dates right there, you have the 21st, the 23rd and the 24th, with that range of plus or minus three days?

DEVORE: Yes. I think that would be fair to say, yes.

[accordn2me]

Bring it on, TAI! I love an intelligent debator.

With the range that Devore gave, I don't see what the problem is. He easily, but lengthily, explained how he arrived at his conclusions. He never wavered about how he came to reach the conclusions. I don't see how anyone came to conclude that any of the experts, except Dr. March, were pinned down to a definite day, since they all gave ranges, used terms like plus, minus, allowing for, etc.

[Beebee]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Every single expert or witness said that Conner was full term - except one who invented a system to 'prove' he might not have been. I'd believe a pyramidologist before I believe that.

He is in prison because the jury was too lazy to analyze the evidence and voted based on hatred.

I fully agree.

With the exception of Jackson, I think the rest of them couldn't wait to grab their 15 minutes of fame and a book deal after they pleased the masses. They were brainwashed to believe they were doing the right thing long before they sat through trial, imo.

[JustMyOpinion]

Originally Posted by Beebee

I fully agree.

With the exception of Jackson, I think the rest of them couldn't wait to grab their 15 minutes of fame and a book deal after they pleased the masses. They were brainwashed to believe they were doing the right thing long before they sat through trial, imo.

I see no evidence that all of the jurors were brainwashed prior to trial ( there was Hovery voir dire that did not show "brainwashing", and during selection Defense didn't even utilize all of their challenges) The seven jurors who eventually collaborated on a book didn't appear to "grab" a deal, either, IMO. ( book was not published until recently). There's nothing I've heard from the jurors who have spoken which indicates they felt a need to "please the masses", could you provide link to a statement from any of them which you believe conveys this need? TIA

[thinkaboutit]

Originally Posted by accordn2me

Bring it on, TAI! I love an intelligent debator.

With the range that Devore gave, I don't see what the problem is. He easily, but lengthily, explained how he arrived at his conclusions. He never wavered about how he came to reach the conclusions. I don't see how anyone came to conclude that any of the experts, except Dr. March, were pinned down to a definite day, since they all gave ranges, used terms like plus, minus, allowing for, etc.

Thanks for the compliment - same to you!!

The biggest problem I have with Devore's method is:

He only used the measurements of the femur to determine Conner's percentile.

Devore's testimony:

And we use an equation that said that bone measurement was equal to the 50th percentile. That's called an equation by Jeanty, this reference in my report to you

According to Jeanty this would not give an accurate age/percentile. Devore had access to all of Conner's bones. I question why he did not measure all of them and take the average.

Since calculations based on the femur alone are not reliable - I disagree that Conner was in the 50th percentile. I think it's possible he was a small baby and older than Devore claimed. Devore should not have disregarded the ultrasound at 20 weeks when determining the percentile. If Conner was in the 5th percentile - that would have made the range more like 34 - 38 weeks.

[enlightenme]

Originally Posted by Beebee

I fully agree.

With the exception of Jackson, I think the rest of them couldn't wait to grab their 15 minutes of fame and a book deal after they pleased the masses. They were brainwashed to believe they were doing the right thing long before they sat through trial, imo.

People are not as easily "brainwashed" as you would like to believe. We still haven't heard from ALL of the jurors. I believe 7 of them collaborated on the "We, The Jury" book. 5 have never spoken at all, I don't think. Jackson vamoosed and hasn't been heard from since the trial.

I would think if he was sure of Scott's innocence, he would be speaking to every media outlet he could about the "terrible injustice" that was done. Either that or he really has no backbone at all!

Most attorneys, both prosecution and defense say that they respect the jury process and think that jurors try very hard to be fair and follow the law. Because you do not like the outcome of this trial, you assume 12 people, who gave up a fair chunk of their normal lives, are haters, liars, lazy, brainwashed, etc.

The jurors and the public do not like Scott because the evidence proved he's guilty of murdering two innocents. We're supposed to feel sorry for him? Not!

[accordn2me]

The key words here are estimate & range. oh yeah....in my opinion... Devore used at least two different estimates to come up with his range. All of the other experts (never mind March) used more than one accepted method of arriving at their estimated range. IIRC, Devore's estimated range was narrower than the others. He explained why that was, how he arrived there, and why he thought his was the most accurate. The defense did not offer a credible expert to refute him. Like the other credible expert's estimated ranges, Devore's, though narrower, still included a time frame that was after Laci was reported missing.