spitz did.don't remember that. and i showed him the photograph where the skull was fractured and he didn't seem to remember. i would submit to you that bed upon what you have heard in this case that dr. spitz's claim that the autopsy was done improperly is not credible. the other issue that they disagree on is this issue of the supposed -- this was sort of my shorthand term -- but brain dust or brain residue. he referd to it as like dust -- in the skull. he says that there was this residue in the skull that he could tell by looking at it was remnants of the decomposition of caylee's brain. and because of the position that he could tell that the skull was on its side. he acknowledged he took a sample of it that he doesn't know if it's been tested or not. so we brought in dr. goldburger from the university of florida who washed the inside of the skull, tested it, and told you that there is no decomposition product inside that skull. so he did the test that dr. spitz said he didn't do, that he coul

werner spitz. and dr. spitz did a full autopsy. they can say all they want. and if dr. spitz had not found anything that would have been a different story. but he did. he found actual physical evidence, physical proof that caylee's remains were not found and were not -- did not tee decompose in the manner in or mr. kronkte or plagiarism tried to tell you they were. the photos were not indicative of how caylee decomposed and what position she was in. this is the physical proof. the is a man tick semantics ofr brain matter, the man that has 6000

spitz's job, which is to determine anything involving the cause of death. julie: so if you're saying they can't obviously perform an autopsy on organs and the only remains of her was the skull, why is it that they would overlook that, and is that something that the defense will use in their favor? >> i think the defense is using it in its favor. julie: but is it going to work? >> it goes to guilt or innocence of casey as -- i'm not commenting upon, but i'm saying normally the skull would be removed, there was material in there, in the skull that dr. spitz found. >> julie: the toxicologist did a cranial wash and found nothing. >> that's also bizarre. what they should have taken was the material in the skull and tested -- or the toxicology receives it and tests it, instead, they didn't take any of the material. it's like not taking the brain but taking a washing of the brain and whatever is in there. and that is just improper, the toxicologist does what's sent to him, he does his job, but the pathologist should have sent the material that was in the skull to

secondly, spitz' finding was due to the brain matter or dust that he spitz found, that proved that thedy was moved, so these prosecution experts are going to say whatever findings spitz saw in the brain matter, it was ill relevant and meant nothing, so you cannot deduce -- that's a big point. >> and what about this? the internet searches for the chloroform. we know cindy had testified for the defense she did those searches, but the prosecution is saying not so fast. is this all about timing and whether or not they can say she was really in the house at this time? >> two issues here. one, the police experts are going to testify in reviewing the records and searches done on cindy's computer. she never searched chlorophyll. now, they come in with that testimony, that's going to completely blow up cindy's credibility and i think they're going to do that today. and secondly, there are going to be experts to come in from her employment to say that not only was she at work the day she said she was home making these searches, but she was unable to remotely logon to do those searches, so we kno

spitz didn't find it. the only one who found it was an anthropologist who spoke well out of turn, who's never before been allowed to testify as to a cause of death. >> gregg: well, the defense always tries to create some sort of nefarious character or two or more to try to contribute to the creation of reasonable doubt. this would appear, roy cronk, to be their sort of bogeyman in this case. >> maybe they were right. it's possible the defense is ever right? >> yeah, as a former attorney, occasional occasionally. we're going to take a break and when we come back george anthony took center stage yet again this week. there were a lot of tears and a lot of accusations. we're going to show to you in a moment. . >> my name is paul gravely from petersburg, virginia at camp shelby, mississippi trying to go to afghanistan. happy 4th of j you will and a shout out to wife stephanie and my son elijah. i love you very much. every day you live with the pain of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis could be another day

now, the -- but what about the -- what about mark spitz? remember him?as a very hairy dude. >> he had a mustache in 1972. right. lots of body hair. he was just so much better than everybody, he just said, "the heck with it, i'll swim in a be

spitz told you somebody came along later and took the skull and taped it. in opening statement defense counsel told you that person was roy kronk. they both got this rare kind of du tape. roy kronk who has no connection to the anthony family other than reading their meter once. he had never been in their garage and has no idea what kind of duct tape they have. so which is it? who put the duct tape there? counsel has argued to you that the crime scene was staged. could i have state's exhibit 82 published for the jury, please. this is a photograph of the scene out there on suburban drive as it was found on december 11 of 2008 before anything was disturbed. this is in fits pristine form. -- this is in its pristine form. the only thing that is staged in this scene is mother nature herself. this scene is covered in leaf litter. there is a 2 to 3-inch pile of leaf litter. there are vines literally growing over everything in this scene. there are vines you will see in photographs growing through everything in this scene. this scene cities staged by mother nature a

we may see warner spitz who we just saw casey anthony pop up in this. >> really? >> not really.hink we'll see a substantial acquittal. specialists, lots of doctors, lots of advice... and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information. everyone works as a team. and i only need to talk to one person about her care. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. ♪ sing polly wolly doodle all the day ♪ ♪ hah >>> i'll be back in one hour with ways you can save money. financial expert karen lee has five

warner spitz testifies that the duct tape couldn't have played a role on caylee's death because it was it had already decomposed. >> if duct tape were attached to the body on the face, there would have been dna on the face. >> no explanation as to why someone would locate a skeleton in the woods, get duct tape out, and then leave. that's a really curious question. >> the defense doesn't answer that question, but instead tries to raise suspicion about the utility worker who found caylee's remains, roy kraung. >> that was a horrific thing for me to find. >> the defense has long pinned its hope for reasonable doubts on what they believe is his dubious story. >> roy krnon notifies the authorities that he knows where caylee's remains are in august. they are not found. >> i originally called -- >> he then notifies the authorities. he knows where they are in november, an officer shows up, they aren't found. then in december he walks into the woods and he finds the remains again. >> the defense suggests could kronk have moved or tampered with caylee's remains? prosecution quickly brings the fo

warner spitz. that is world class forensic patholo pathology. that's where they can -- points of reasonable douse, that's all they have in the defense. that's it. >> except in his testimony, he simply said, this was a terrible -- one of the things he said is this was a terrible autopsy. and still no cause of death for this little 2-year-old girl. >> yeah, fred, that's the big thing. baez will get up there and say, you know what, ladies and gentlemen? the state's own medical examiner said that caylee was not killed, could not stay, that caylee was killed by duct tape. that caylee was killed by chloroform, there was no trauma to her bones. so there's no neck-breaking. that's a red herring. don't get confused by that. this is a premeditated, first-degree murder case. and all we know is that caylee was not an anchor to casey. casey was a loving and tender mother because that's the only testimony during the course of this case. the state has failed to prove motive. they don't have to. but in a first-degree murder case, they have to. and they threw it

spitz suggested, what i would submit to you, based on the evidence, the nonsensical proposition that someone came along, took the skull, took it home and put tape on it. ladies and gentlemen, you can't have it both ways. either george anthony is the person that put the tape on, which we know is not true, or roy kronk is the one that put the tape on. you can't do both. it's one or the other. either somebody put the tape on that child before the child decomposed, or they didn't. the arguments made by the defense in this case i would submit require you to suspend your common sense, to leave in pinellas county everything you know about how people think and act and why they do what they do. it's a trip down a rabbit hole into a bizarre world where men who love their granddaughters find them drown and do nothing, where men who love their granddaughters take an accident, a completely innocent act, and make it look like a murder for no reason. a world where a man who buries his pets will take the granddaughter who was the love of his life and throw her in a swamp. this is the world that the

spitz' opinion.was brought in by the defense, that the autopsy made on caylee's body was shoddy. so that's what happened yesterday. >> indeed it is. thank you so much. >>> the other big legal story, former imf chief is enjoying new freedom. now, khan still faces sex assault charges, but he's not on house arrest anymore after prosecutors revealed his accuser had not told the entire truth. good morning, ron. first of all, any sightings? do we know where he is right now? >> no, we don't. there are several dozen reporters, forecasters out here. there have been people here all night and the conventional wisdom seems to be he's still in there, however, that seems unlikely if you're given freedom after being holed up for many weeks. there were some reports of him out to dinner last night on the upper east side. some thought he might have been up to the hamptons, but we don't know. the bottom line as you said is that he still does face very serious charges of sexual assault. problem of course is that we're l

spitz said, and that the examination was perfectly well done. >> with regard to tomorrow, as we look ahead, the closing arguments, what can we expect there? >> yesterday we had a window into perhaps where the defense might be walking into. we know that defense attorney cheney mason says -- and he holds is true -- that in this case there is as much evidence to prove that kalely's death was an accident as to prove that she was murdered by her mother, so perhaps they will walk along those lines, and the burden of proof lies on the prosecution, not the defense. we will hear strong arguments from both sides. again, it's the prosecution who has to explain what happened. >> okay. lila luciano, we'll talk you about wu again. thank you. >> you won't want to mission a moment of a closing argument. we will bring you live continuous coverage of the proceedings and provide expert analysis right here on msnbc subpoenaed sunday for you. sfwlirchlgts the holiday weekend is no vacations at all. this morning michelle bachmann kicks off a three-day bus tour in iowa where she declared her candidacy offi

we may even see warner spitz who we just saw in casey anthony pop up in this. free-for-all in italy. i think we're going to be a substantial reduction or acquittal. >> ain't going to happen. >> there are lots of starts and stops with this case and this appellate process. in general, this appellate process is completely different, it seems, richard, than the appellate process here in the states. there, there's a trial all over again, the reintroduction of evidence all over again. it's not like a panel of judges like here in the states. >> i've never seen anything like this, fred. it's amazing. they have a trial. they introduce evidence and a ruling is made. and now they get to have a second trial to further attack the evidence. i don't know. i disagree with aye ri. i think she's going to do a substantial amount of prison time on this case. there was evidence that convicted her. >> let's move on to the drew peterson case, former police officer who allegedly killed his third wife. he doesn't want a lifetime movie to go forward. and this with -- oh, darn. i've forg

i mean, we may even see werner spitz who we saw in casey anthony pop up on this. >> really? is a free for all in italy. not really, but i think we're going to see a substantial reduction or acquittal. >> all right, avery, richard, catch our legal guys every saturday noon eastern. you never know what they're going to say or how they see it. >>> straight ahead, the big fat truth about your favorite guilty pleasures and restaurant calle counts. but i did. they said i couldn't fight above my weight class. but i did. they said i couldn't get elected to congress. but i did. ♪ sometimes when we touch ha ha! millions of hits! [ male announcer ] flick, stack, and move between active apps seamlessly. only on the new hp touchpad with webos. >>> all right, planning on going out to dinner tonight? if you are counting calories, you need to listen up. researchers at tuft's university say they were shocked at how inaccurate the calorie count information was on a restaurant website. the story from senior medical correspondent elizabeth cohen. >> reporter: lori is on a secret mission and it h

spitz was fantastic and they didn't believe the forensics and the sniffer machine used for the firsthistory of courts. they didn't believe the body was there. they have no explanation how the body got to the swamp. they don't care. they don't believe it was casey. there was an accident and someone disposed of the body. >> i have to ask you guys. we have been covering this for weeks. how did you get this wrong? this is exactly the opposite of what you had anticipated. >> absolutely. you know why? the 12 people sitting in the box are human beings. they are funny animals. we can sit on the outside and guess all day long, but it depends on who you pick and put in that box. no matter what you predict -- had i been on the jury we would still be in there duking it out. we would be hanging that jury. there's no way i would say you get to go free. you are the last person seen with your baby, dead in a swamp, less than a quarter mile where you live in clothes you had access to. >> holly -- >> we cannot retry this. >> holly, you are too close to nanty grace. you're too close. listen, it was a p

and the other rebuttal witness is a forensic expert, who will testify that the defense expert werner spitz a shoddy autopsy, and never tested little caylee's remains, to see whether or not it was possible that she drowned, they would rebut him. again, baez says, wait, are these guys, first of all, qualified to rebut my expert, and, second of all, what will they say and the judge locked in and he was going to make today an easy day, give them off on saturday and then, gregg, have closing arguments on sunday. so, now, the off day tomorrow, saturday, looks like it will be still action-packed, in that courtroom, the attorneys for both sides, defense and prosecution, will not have a lot of time to prepare for what promises to be the climactic, dramatic closing arguments that sum up both sides' cases but that will happen on sunday, and that means the jury will probably be deliberating on the fourth of july, my birthday... have 100 people at my house, and i'm here. but, i believe that then we will have a verdict, sometime after tuesday morning, the 5th. gregg: geraldo, i want you to whi in on wha

spitz suggested what i would submit to you is based upon the evidence, the nonsensical proposition, someone came along, took the skull, took it home and put tape on it. well, ladies and gentlemen, you can't have it both ways. either george anthony is the person that put the tape on which we know is not true or roy cronk is the one that put the tape on. you can't do both! it's one or the other. either somebody put the tape on that child before the child decomposed or they didn't. the arguments made by the defense in this case i would submit require you to suspend your common sense. to leave in penelis county everything you know about how people think and act and why they do what they do. it is a trip down the rabbit hole into a bizarre world where men who love their granddaughters find them drowned and do nothing. where men who love their granddaughters take an accident, a completely innocent act and make it look like a murder for no reason. a world where a man who buries his pets will take the granddaughter who was the love of his life and throw her in a swamp. this is the world that the de