1061 users online (217 members and 844 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    364

    Snapping Turtle vs Human bites

    Is anyone around who knows right off hand if there is information from the defense (in pictures or documents) that compare the analysis of the bite marks on the boys from the original trial to the results that new/different experts determined?

    Also - there was reference to 'pig' hair found - were there supposedly pig bites also (?)

    Just wondering if anyone knows - I know i can go search callahans - but am involved in a discussion with someone about the bites, and wanted to find the info more quickly than i can search it out right now.

    TIA if anyone has any links

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970

    knife versus animal predation/C.Byers genitals

    I am confused by another thing (i am always confused by defence theories lol)

    On October 29, 2007 papers were filed in federal court by Damien Echols' defense lawyers seeking a retrial or his immediate release from prison. The filing cited DNA evidence linking Terry Hobbs (stepfather of one of the victims) to the crime scene, and new statements from Hobbs' now ex-wife. Also presented in the filing was new expert testimony that the alleged knife marks on the victims were the result of animal predation after the bodies had been dumped. This included the injuries to Byers' genitals.[4][45]

    but

    in PL 2,Brent Turvey explains to Stidham that those marks were indeed caused by a knife and that it was done(even how it was probably done) outta anger (probably wants to discount the thrill kill idea,pointing at punishment gone bad)....still,the defence expert agrees here that CB was hurt down there with a knife
    The rice is already cooked...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,350
    Brent Turvey is not a forensic pathologist and not qualified to diagnose whether wounds were inflicted with a knife. Personally I don't remember him doing anything as definite as diagnosing anyway, (although I'm willing to be proven wrong if you can link me to it). He just seems to have accepted the word of the Medical Examiner about Christopher's injuries, and advised the defense to consult a forensic odontologist about the possiblilty of human bite marks.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,350
    @news247 - I assume your debate is over at this stage, but if I'd seen your post in time I would have advised you to read through the various forensic pathologists' testimony at the Misskelley/Baldwin Rule 37 hearings. Dr Janice Ophoven is the one I would pay most attention to, as she is the only doctor on either side whose specialty is paediatric forensic pathology.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    I am not an expert but there must be a big difference between marks left when someone's p#$%^is CUT OFF (cause this is what castration means,no?a piece cut off,not just some cuts on it or around it ) and marks left by animals (which are probably bite marks).....
    don't tell me experts can't figure it out but it's annoying how both sides(pros and def) are interpreting it to fit their theory....
    The rice is already cooked...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,350
    Christopher Byers wasn't castrated, he was degloved. It might be better to read the forensic pathologists' own testimony, rather than my interpretation of it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    I will.
    Too much misinformation on so many sites about this case.
    The rice is already cooked...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    didn't the prosecution claim at some point that the mark on SB's face was left by a belt buckle?
    did they(or the defence) ever do any tests to see whether it matches the marks found on CB's behind?
    The rice is already cooked...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    I understand why the defence tried to prove it's a bite mark (easy to call some experts who claim it doesn't match the defendants)
    I would have sticked to the 'it's a belt buckle' scenario though cause this would have pointed to an angry parent (still does)
    The rice is already cooked...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    364
    Quote Originally Posted by Cappuccino View Post
    @news247 - I assume your debate is over at this stage, but if I'd seen your post in time I would have advised you to read through the various forensic pathologists' testimony at the Misskelley/Baldwin Rule 37 hearings. Dr Janice Ophoven is the one I would pay most attention to, as she is the only doctor on either side whose specialty is paediatric forensic pathology.

    thanks! will go back and read that - i thought the defense had new experts on this issue also though, or am i wrong?

    haha, they can hire me - i now know all about the turtles who live in w. memphis and how they feed and lure their dinner i can never get those hours back


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    364
    arguhhhh! now Ophoven is talking about dogs and rodents - where did the turtle stuff come from? and nothing that she saw indicated any knife wounds? and the one little boy didn't bleed out (b/c she saw signs of livor), and he didn't drown - so ... what? he just laid there waiting for the dogs and rats to kill him?

    this case just drives me crazy

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Cappuccino View Post
    Brent Turvey is not a forensic pathologist and not qualified to diagnose whether wounds were inflicted with a knife. Personally I don't remember him doing anything as definite as diagnosing anyway, (although I'm willing to be proven wrong if you can link me to it).
    Turvey was quite definitive about the castration and degloving being done with a knife in his statements starting at 33:52 in this copy of PL2:



    While at least from what I've seen Turvey didn't have any notable qualifications beyond his degrees, if what the autopsy photos show is anything close to what he described in PL2 then it seems highly unlikely that he was simply misinterpreting animal predation.
    Last edited by OkieGranny; 02-24-2016 at 03:28 PM. Reason: broken link

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    239
    You can read the autopsy reports at http://callahan.8k.com and the defense press conference is on youtube which has their experts giving their opions on the degloving. Starts in part 3:



    I have followed this case for probably about sixteen years and I am still not as knowledgable as some of the members here but imo Callahans is the site to go to to get the best info. All three PL movies are interesting to watch and if you get a chance watch West of Memphis.

    Quote Originally Posted by kyleb View Post
    Turvey was quite definitive about the castration and degloving being done with a knife in his statements starting at 33:52 in this copy of PL2:

    Paradise Lost 2: Revelations

    While at least from what I've seen Turvey didn't have any notable qualifications beyond his degrees, if what the autopsy photos show is anything close to what he described in PL2 then it seems highly unlikely that he was simply misinterpreting animal predation.
    Last edited by OkieGranny; 02-24-2016 at 03:28 PM. Reason: broken link
    "No, that is the correct word, biased ... " Juan Martinez

    "Actually my position is not to protect the family, my position is to protect the child who is deceased ..." Linda Drane Burdick

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    128
    I don't know why we all can't agree

    There were ferocious snapping turtle wounds as well as knifeage

    How do you spell knifeage?

    k n i f A ge?

    or

    k n i f e A g e?

    It's a noodle scratcher

  15. #15
    I've been told that there is a very graphic scene in West of Memphis that demonstrates how the turtle bites were made. Unfortunately, the movie hasn't been released as widely as it could have. Since it's a documentary, some venues (especially in smaller towns) are not going to pick it up. Eventually, however, it will be available on DVD. If you can see it, do so. I believe it will clear up many questions.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Suspect Bites Police Dog, Dog Bites Back
    By White Rain in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-08-2007, 05:09 AM
  2. Two headed turtle
    By Casshew in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-01-2005, 09:08 AM

Tags for this Thread