<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[blood spatter evidence - Philip D. Cave]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://www.court-martial.com/blog/tags/blood-spatter-evidence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://www.court-martial.com/blog/tags/blood-spatter-evidence/</link>
        <description><![CDATA[Philip D. Cave's Website]]></description>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2026 16:45:09 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        
        <language>en-us</language>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Blood spatter expert]]></title>
                <link>https://www.court-martial.com/blog/blood-spatter-expert/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.court-martial.com/blog/blood-spatter-expert/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Philip D. Cave]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:16:32 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Experts]]></category>
                
                
                    <category><![CDATA[blood spatter evidence]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[court-martial]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[expert assistance]]></category>
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>CAAF has decided United States v. Lloyd, in a 3-2 decision. The majority determined that the defense had not sufficiently shown the need for a blood spatter expert. Chief Judge Effron writing for himself and Judge Baker dissented. I see this as a fact based decision and not stating any new law.</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[

<p>CAAF has decided <em><a href="https://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/opinions/2009SepTerm/09-0755.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">United States v. Lloyd</a></em>, in a 3-2 decision.  The majority determined that the defense had not sufficiently shown the need for a blood spatter expert.  Chief Judge Effron writing for himself and Judge Baker dissented.  I see this as a fact based decision and not stating any new law.</p>


]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>