Plot: Everyone at the Jeffersonian tries to uncover forensic evidence to help elicit a conviction in the trial of the Gravedigger.
Quote 1: “I don’t need you to kill people for me, I just need you to buy me a sweater like a normal dad!”
Quote 2: “This case was a root canal!”
The Gravedigger trial is underway and the crew must deal with such mundane court procedure like the rules of evidence, which is something that doesn’t work to their advantage.
An uttered clue that sounds like a challenge to Bones leads to the discovery of a missing body and the evidence contained within that solves a lot of problems.
Not a bad episode overall, although the new evidence that is found seems a little far-fetched. Will it sway a jury, though?
Yeah, just a little far fetched.
I liked it though. It’s also the first one I’ve watched in a bit where I caught all the dialogue - the small one likes to chatter through important parts.
Court Procedure note regarding the audio tape that was “unfiltered” (for lack of a better word):
Angela introduces as evidence the audio recording, and answers questions on it.
It is refuted by the accused who introduces a recording where the voice sounds like Angela instead, stating that an expert she knows created it from the same source materials.
First problem: the expert isn’t there to be questioned by the prosecution.
Second problem: no objection made in regard to the introduction of evidence that has not been disclosed.
Third Problem: Judge doesn’t throw this “evidence” out, nor does he instruct the Jury to disregard this “evidence” (as if they could anyway, and this could likely have made the whole matter wind up as a mistrial).
It’s one thing to go through all the evidentiary problems in the beginning, but to let this fly in the script? Go figure…
Add to that the fact taht the Gravedigger’s resonable doubt over the audio could be eliminated by having a second expert witness run an independent analysis of the audio. Also, call her expert witness and have him testify as to what he found before he altered the result.
Besides, I seriously doubt that any such manipulation could produce a clear copy of Angela’s voice. Yes, I know that the show takes some considerable scientific liberties, but this one really took the forensic cake.
Consider this. The Gravedigger just happened to dial a Salt Lake City phone number that happened to be the GPS coordinates at which the boy’s body were found. That alone should have removed all reasonable doubt.
The spouted some gibberish about how the number could have been placed in her file by mistake, or how one of the officers assigned to her case was from Salt Lake City. However, the odds of this number accidentally appearing in her file, of all people, are pretty darned slim. As for the copy being from SLC – of what possible relevance is that? Again, the fact that this happened to her, of all people, is what makes a coincidence improbable.
Another thing – since the jury knew nothing about how she tried to kill the people testifying against her, why didn’t they address her accusations that she was being set up?
I half-expected the jury to acquit her. She managed to put the forensic evidence in doubt, and I didn’t hear anyone suggest her motive for the murder of the little boy. I might have voted for acquittal, except for the fact that she never provided a reason why the experts would lie about the evidence.
Well, she did say that Brennan and Hodgins had been traumatized and were desperately trying to give themselves closure.
Under other circumstances, I can see how that might make for an adequate defense. It doesn’t even begin to explain the telephone number/GPS coordinates, though. I’d also argue that it doesn’t provide adequate reason to accuse Angela of doctoring the voice records either.
By falsely accusing someone of murder? Maybe I missed something.
Now this – this is one of those things that a jury might totally disregard because they don’t understand how it could happen that way. I was totally lost on that point myself.
That was her defense, though I don’t think she stated it so baldly. Basically, she said that they were jumping to the wrong conclusions.
The problem was that there was too much additional evidence pointing to her. Even if we disregard the previously excluded evidence (excluded due to an illegal warrant), you still had Angela’s vocal reconstruction, the DNA evidence, and the telephone number/GPS coords. Her defense hinged on the claim that both the voice reconstruction and the DNA evidence were spurious, but that’s really a stretch IMO.
I’d still wonder about her motive, if I was a juror. But yeah, the evidence adds up, and a juror would have to believe that the investigators were out to get her for some unexplained reason.
Is she just a psychopath? Why did she go after those three? I didn’t see the episode(s) where that happened.
Based on the first grave-digger episode, the one with the twin boys, one has to assume so. They mentioned then that almost everyone paid the random and got their loved ones back, but two families hadn’t. One of those families was the twins’ and I assume that the other was this boy’s.
It’s not showing here until tonight. That’s not fair!
