Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Debunking the Myth That the Prosecution Hid Info About Casey Anthony's Chloroform Searches. Computer Forensic Testimony

Debunking the Myth That the Prosecution Hid Info About Casey Anthony's Chloroform Searches. Computer Forensic Testimony

Ratings: (0)|Views: 2,681|Likes:
Published by Robert Frank
The prosecution provided the jury with evidence from both the Net Analysis and CacheBack programs.
The prosecution provided the jury with evidence from both the Net Analysis and CacheBack programs.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Robert Frank on Oct 08, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/22/2012

 
Computer Forensic Testimony in the Casey Anthony Trial Regarding DifferencesBetween the Findings of the Net Analysis & CacheBack Software
No one ever testified that there were 84
 searches
for "chloroform." What was testified to at trial was that awebsite, SCI-SPOT.com was visited by someone looking for information about chloroform; CacheBack reported 84 while Net Analysis reported 1. There is a page on that website related to chloroform, and that isthe page that was visited on that website.The testimony about the searches conducted on the Anthony home computer was given on the followingdates by the following experts and can be found at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/61471988/Casey-Anthony-Trial-COMPUTER-EXPERT-Testimony-Unofficial-Transcript-Osborne-Stenger-Bradley .Links to video of the testimony referred to can be found in the text. Time stamps for the testimony referredto are included in the text.
June 8th & 9th. Day 24. Mr. John Bradly, CEO of SiQUEST.
 
page 3-22
http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-video-day-24-in-casey-anthony-murder-trial-pt/vCZhg/ 25:55 John BRADLEY: "This appears to be a result of a search for chloroform, through GOOGLE, andthen, or just a search for the word chloroform, and this is a result that was then generated by selecting oneof the results."
Bradley is talking about ONE search for "chloroform," not 84 searches.
 =========================================================================
page 3-35
http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-video-day-24-in-casey-anthony-murder-trial-pt/vCZSR/ 26:03 John BRADLEY: "There's a chloroform search at 3:16 and 13 seconds at SCI-SPOT.COM." Andtwo entries afterwards is a GOOGLE.COM search for chloroform."
Bradley is talking about ONE search at SCI-SPOT.com and ONE Google search for chloroform, not84 searches.
 =======================================================================
page 3-52
http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-video-day-25-in-casey-anthony-murder-trial-pt/vCZRJ/ 16:34 Jose BAEZ: "And, as far as what you saw, in this internet history, all that you have testified to, allthat you can testify to, are the actual URL links that you have viewed as a result of the work you did.?"16:51 John BRADLEY: "That's correct.17:00 Jose BAEZ: "Which do include 84 URL visits to the SCI-SPOT.COM."17:04 John BRADLEY: "I should explain that a history keeps track of how many times you visit in theform of a counter. You would not expect to find 84 separate instances of a URL or a web record. Eachrecord maintains its own counter. Um, does that answer the question."
 
17:31 John BRADLEY: "It only maintains the last visit time stamp, so, there could be a number of times aparticular web site was visited, and it only maintains the last time it was visited, and increments the counterfor each time it's visited."17:44 Jose BAEZ: "And each time the page refreshes?"17:46 John BRADLEY: "That is correct."17:47 Jose BAEZ: "It would bring up, it would hit again, right?"17:48 John BRADLEY: "Yes, that's correct."17:49 Jose BAEZ: "And you don't know how often this page refreshes itself, do you sir?"17:53 John BRADLEY: "I could speculate.17:57 Jose BAEZ: "We don't want you to speculate. You can't testify to that, can you sir?"18:00 John BRADLEY: "That's correct."18:02 Jose BAEZ: "And, that would, of course, depend on the page itself and what is set up by the web site,correct?"18:09 John BRADLEY: "That is correct."
Here, clearly, Bradley tells Baez in this exchange that the registered 84 visits to SCI-SPOT.com couldbe the result of the webpage refreshing itself, which is a parameter that is set by the websiteconstruction
 .
=======================================================================
 June 23rd. Day 37. OCSO Sgt. Kevin Stenger.page 5-7 to 5-8
http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-video-day-37-in-casey-anthony-murder-trial-pt/vCcTn/ 00:30 Jose BAEZ: "Sir, I'd like to ask you to, I'd like to direct your attention to March 21st, 2008, at 14:16hours and 34 seconds. Let me know when you find that."00:50 Kevin STENGER: "I found that, sir."00:51 Jose BAEZ: "Ok. And that is, what is the web site that is addressed with 34 seconds, there?"00:59 Kevin STENGER: "The web site is WWW.SCI-SPOT.COM/chemistries/chloroform.htm."01:10 Jose BAEZ: "And how many times does it show that that web site was visited?"01:14 Kevin STENGER: "1, sir.01:15 Jose BAEZ: "Now, I'd like to show you State's Evidence 166."
 
01:32 Jose BAEZ: "I'd like to direct your attention to the same web site at 15:16 hours and 13 seconds."01:41 Kevin STENGER: "Yes, sir."01:42 Jose BAEZ: "How many times does it show on the, well actually, what is this here?"01:46 Kevin STENGER: "This item is the report for CACHEBACK."01:51 Jose BAEZ: "And the report from CACHEBACK shows that it was visited how many times?"01:54 Kevin STENGER: "84."01:56 Jose BAEZ: "So there's a difference between the two softwares, is there not?"02:00 Kevin STENGER: "That is correct."
It is ABUNDANTLY clear here that Stenger tells the jury about the difference in the number of visitsto SCI-SPOT.com found by the Net Analysis and Cache Back programs. Stenger testifies that the NetAnalysis program found one visit to SCI-SPOT.com while the CacheBack program found 84.
 ============================================================================
pages 5-9
 05:20 Jose BAEZ: "So, Sergeant Stenger, what you just testified to was that the chemistry, the SCI-SPOTwas visited once, for chloroform, according to the NET ANALYSIS report, correct?"05:34 Kevin STENGER: "That is correct."
This exchange is pretty unambiguous. Stenger said that he testified that the Net Analysis softwareshowed ONE visit to SCI-SPOT. com, not 84 visits.
=========================================================================
 It is also pointed out in the testimony that the Net Analysis software found 84 visits to MySpace while finding only one to SCI-SPOT.com, which is more believable than the other way around. It is clear that theCache Back software had problems in parsing the information correctly while the Net Analysis softwaredid not. Regardless, the prosecution did not try to hide any evidence about the internet searches for chloroform. They presented the jury with the evidence gleaned from BOTH programs and did not hideanything from them. As finders of fact, it was the jury's job to decide which one was the most accurate.
Some have said that the prosecution should have informed the jury about the errors in
Bradley’s CacheBack 
 software. The first problem with this is that no one knows what the prosecution knew about this and when they knewit. Bradley testified in court regarding the results his CacheBack program because the OCSO detectives wereconfused by the results of his software, and they recruited the author of the software to testify to those results.Another problem is that when Bradley testified to the 84 visits to SCI-
SPOT.com in the prosecution’s case in chief,
all those who defend Casey Anthony said that he was not credible because he was trying to make money off his
software by testifying in this case, and that came directly from Baez’
s cross examination of Bradley; now, when he
says something they agree with, they quickly dropped their old criticism of Bradley’s bi
as. Furthermore, Bradley haspublicly stated that he was not implying that the prosecution told him to lie as a previous statement on his part some

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->