About the knife...

Just to move this discussion to its own thread, as it seems to be seriously derailing another...

I have several issues with the serrated knife said to belong to Echols, and said to have been used to cause various circular wounds, issues above and beyond the lack of evidence it was ever present at the crime scene, or was the same one said to be owned by Echols.

Firstly, as I have previously pointed out, the wounds do not match the knife on all points. I won't repeat myself, there, except to say I'd expect all, or at least a vast majority, of marks on the bodies to match the teeth of a blade, if that blade is being held up as a weapon in a murder case.

Secondly, I cannot see how a convex compass could by blunt force create an x-shaped laceration on skin with minimal bruising, and also leave a ring from an edge lower on the knife than the compass, where both injuries are present and overlapping.

Thirdly - and using a knife I have lying around home which is not serrated but has a similar length handle and blade.. the physical logistics of holding a blade specifically in a position to strike with sufficient force to cause any kind of laceration doesn't add up all that well IMO.. For one, why not simply use the pointy end? For two, holding a knife that way is awkward, see point 1. Thirdly, if the compass had shattered on impact (in order to then leave compassless circular marks) would there not be bits of compass plastic or glass somewhere? If it didn't shatter, but simply popped out, would a killer think, in the heat of an attack, to pick it up? Perhaps, but it's a stretch..

If there are actually no knife wounds, as many experts have said, why would anyone take a whopping great knife to a murder, and then use the blunt end to bludgeon the victim, and scrape their skin? That's just a really peculiar usage for a large knife at a murder scene. And IMO, not very likely.

Also, and I am no expert in blunt force trauma so anyone who is is welcome to chime in on this -- but isn't the x-shaped wound on SB's head also very similar to wounds well documented as 'typical' to cross-head screwdrivers (like Phillips or Frearson..)?

Here's a few pics of typical neatly x-shaped wounds caused by screwdrivers:

http://sweet.laxallstars.com/files/2011/10/DSCN2540-600x448.jpg
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ec/9c/f5/ec9cf5d7d958069a443029e416f9fed4.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/78397778@N06/10797781644

Compare to:

http://www.documentingreality.com/f...is-three-crime-scene-photos-vlc-snap-sb07.png

The x is extremely neat and symmetrical, much more so than any laceration by a blunt object I've ever seen.

^ Here I am attempting alternate explanations for the x mark.. and wondering - if the knife butt didn't make those circular marks, what did?

Been awhile for me with some things, like those photos. Can someone link them if they can do it easily? Thanks much

Ausgirl said:

Firstly, as I have previously pointed out, the wounds do not match the knife on all points.

Click to expand...

And I as I previously pointed out, it's nonsensical to assume wounds had to be inflicted at the same instance, let alone with the same implement. Can we get your misconception to the contrary out of the way before moving on to your other points of contention?

Also, here's the other available photo of the wounds on Stevie Branch's head, and photos of the knife.

:aktion1:

kyleb said:

And I as I previously pointed out, it's nonsensical to assume wounds had to be inflicted at the same instance, let alone with the same implement. Can we get your misconception to the contrary out of the way before moving on to your other points of contention?

Also, here's the other available photo of the wounds on Stevie Branch's head, and photos of the knife.

Click to expand...

Will you agree to get your misconception that this knife was linked to these murders out of the way so we can move on? It is nonsensical to suggest this knife was used in this crime and further nonsensical to suggest that this knife was ever in the possession of any of the WM3. Plain and simple, with the state of the evidence as it now is, this knife has as much to do with this crime as who knows how many other knives.

Ausgirl said:

<respectfully snipped>

Why did nobody use the pointy end of the knife?

etc

Click to expand...

This point was always a problem for me, even when I thought JMB was guilty! If you take a knife with you to a murder, why use it to scrape the victims?!

Of great interest is that peculiar "X" shape. First, as to the possibility of it being from a screwdriver, screwdriver markings are more like a "+" than an "X." IOW, the two marks are at right angles. I'm of the opinion that the thing that caused that mark has not yet been put forth. I'm not sure what it is, but nothing I've seen so far seems to meet the bill.

I've thought, CR, that it -could- be two separate wounds crossing each other. But the X just seems very neat (the actual X, not including damage to tissue around it) for such a coincidence, the actual wound being very small also.

Anyway, I have seen it suggested that the X mark is somehow caused by the butt end of the knife, and I just don't think that's so, for reasons already stated.

Ausgirl said:

I have no misconception.

Click to expand...

We all have misconceptions, and one can't rightly get over them while taking offense to efforts to help in that regard. So, starting off with a simple misconception here, you've suggested "The x is extremely neat and symmetrical" comparable to "typical neatly x-shaped wounds caused by screwdrivers", but note how lines between the corners of the wounds (as shown in blue) compare to neat and symmetrical x (as shown in green):



So, before moving on to your other points of contention, can we agree that the wound does not posses the symmetry you've described?

Ausgirl said:

I've thought, CR, that it -could- be two separate wounds crossing each other. But the X just seems very neat (the actual X, not including damage to tissue around it) for such a coincidence, the actual wound being very small also.

Anyway, I have seen it suggested that the X mark is somehow caused by the butt end of the knife, and I just don't think that's so, for reasons already stated.

Click to expand...

I don't believe for one minute that the "X" wound was made by the butt end of a knife. I'm not sure what made the "X" but I am sure that it wasn't a knife or a screwdriver. If the "X" wound is actually associated with the apparent bite mark on the brow, it could have been made by something in the mouth of the biter.

However, the "X" wound could be totally unrelated to the apparent bite mark and only coincidentally in the center of it. I just wish that the wmpd or the Arkansas State Police or someone would properly investigate all of the information in this case instead of trying to sweep it under the rug as Ellington has, despite his promise to do otherwise. Then maybe the truth would be revealed and justice could be done in this sad case.

Awesomesauce! So we can knock 'screwdriver' off the possible causes list. Nice work, kyleb! You're quite right about the X being more of an X-shape than a + shape.

I passed the image through a couple of filters, to see if that would help with maybe detecting wound edges and such - and came up with this (badly coloured in bit, by me):



Which actually looks like two crescent-ish shapes back to back, rather than a crossover - but that might just be the filter messin' with my head. Still, it does look like proving kyleb's assertation that it's not symmetrical.

Here's another look, through a less drastic filter, just upping the contrast a bit:



I think the shape is pretty apparent there, too.

ANYways - screwdriver's out! Any suggestions, looking at the shapes in these images? Keeping in mind that the actual marks are very small indeed.

And I agree, CR, I wish this crime had been fine tooth combed, right from the moment the boys were reported missing... But if wishes were fishes, eh? I'd be living in SeaWorld.

That wound is beginning to look like a backwards K - like a strikeout looking!

I have heard a nail being mentioned before, I believe they don't have a symmetrical shape at the tip.

A nail is another good possibility. Weren't a bunch of rusty nails found at the scene? Maybe one of them punctured Steven's brow.

All WAS but maybe there was an old piece of wood from an old tree house or the like that was laying on the ground with the tip exposed and as you said, Steve fell or was pushed over and it punctured his brow. Again just WAS.

Could it have been caused by being punched by a person wearing a ring? Years ago, I went to a party wearing a two finger ring with my name on it. Some drunk jackass asked me if I punched him, would it say my name backwards on his his forehead. I said I didn't think so, because when i made a fist, the ring didn't lay flat. Instead it formed a small point. He begged me to punch him hard in the forehead as "an experiment". I refused at first, but he kept on about it and kept asking me to punch him. He must have asked at least a dozen times. Finally, I relented. Afterward, it didn't leave my name backward on his forehead, but it did leave a little bloody hole, for which he thanked me. People blow my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

kyleb, I just realised that neither of your colourful x's overlap the X I was talking about.. but it brought us to a good place, so - awesome. What I was, from a distance, seeing as a small, neat x in the midst of the wound, was actually a different shape altogether when viewed more closely.

Really, being an irregular shape after all, it could have been caused by the sharp end of a random stick.. not very helpful, but it has all put the screwdriver (and, I hope, the butt of the knife) soundly to bed.

I think a nail, or even a bit of jewellery, are just as likely candidates, at this point.

Snap a somewhat circular stick in half and you'll be left left with all kinds of extrusions with all kinds of shapes.

Ausgirl said:

I think a nail, or even a bit of jewellery, are just as likely candidates, at this point.

Click to expand...

Anything sharp along the lines of a nail or such would leave the wound more pronounced in the middle, but the x is fairly consistent throughout and hence obviously a blunt force abrasion. Paid, the person behind the manhole nonsense, apparently understood this and was on the right track regarding these wounds years ago:



Can anyone name something which is not a watch face, but very similar to one?

Is this item concave, or convex?

As a regular poster on the BB, I know for a fact that Paid has since revised his original belief of the "X" as the center of a circular object. That's what intelligent people do as new information comes into evidence.