1290 users online (180 members and 1110 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 21 of 21
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wake Forest, NC
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    That's what makes the most sense to me as well. The child had blood on her pajamas (was not cleaned) and the officer, for whatever reason, missed it. Scientific tests trump observations. Meredith washed the pajamas before submitting them for tests, so other observations would have been consistent with the original observation ... with the problem being that the condition of the pajamas had changed between the observations.
    But it wasn't only the officers, Meredith and first responders who missed it. It was also the CCBI investigator who visibly looked carefully for it (after that day) and on the fleece shirt, there was none visible by eye. Special Agent Holly did however find evidence of blood. I can't think of any possible explanation other than them having been washed.

    (There were small areas visible on the pants and he swabbed those and they were positive for blood. It sounds like they were faded (washed?))

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wake Forest, NC
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by otto View Post
    That's what makes the most sense to me as well. The child had blood on her pajamas (was not cleaned) and the officer, for whatever reason, missed it. Scientific tests trump observations. Meredith washed the pajamas before submitting them for tests, so other observations would have been consistent with the original observation ... with the problem being that the condition of the pajamas had changed between the observations.
    If Meredith washed all of the pajamas, there's a problem. She was taken to Target that afternoon by LE. There she changed C.'s clothing and she gave the pajamas to the officer. Later, after getting the description of her clothing from Shelly, police asked MF, what happened to the t-shirt? It is missing. She then handed that to them, said it "somehow became separated" when she changed her so she didn't give it to police that day, she washed it and then gave it to them ---allegedly. Of course there is no way of knowing if it's the same t-shirt C was wearing that day.

    ETA: Just to be clear, the fleece shirt and the pajama pants were + for presence of blood (No visible blood evidence on fleece shirt, even after careful inspection)
    The t-shirt that MF gave LE two weeks later --- negative for presence of blood

    Note: If clothing has blood on it and it is washed, visibly it may look totally clean but phenolphthalein can still detect it's presence.
    Last edited by sunshine05; 06-18-2014 at 09:31 AM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    9,345
    Quote Originally Posted by oenophile View Post
    With all due respect, a LE officers observations are not on the same level as an expert witness doing a scientific test. A LE officers observation is NOT a substantiated fact simply because it is a LE officer that makes the observation. And it is not considered an "expert opinion".

    I agree that a jury decides what is credible and what is not. And I agree that a police officer's observations should, in general, be considered more credible than another eyewitnesses. BUT, LE officers seem to "magically" remember things that are convenient to their narrative. These observations gain credibility if they are included in the officer's original notes written at the time of the observation. But they are by no means established fact.
    I do believe LE do describe their level of education and training in law enforcement and the jury does view them as experts in law enforcement. As with all witness testimony, the jury decides who is credible and who is not.

    JMO

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    591
    Quote Originally Posted by MyBelle View Post
    I do believe LE do describe their level of education and training in law enforcement and the jury does view them as experts in law enforcement. As with all witness testimony, the jury decides who is credible and who is not.



    JMO

    I think we are close to agreement but not quite there.

    An "expert" in law enforcement can describe how law enforcement works and is more knowledgeable about how law enforcement works than a jury is. But that does not mean that either their observations or conclusions about an investigation qualify as expert testimony.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    9,345
    Quote Originally Posted by oenophile View Post
    I think we are close to agreement but not quite there.

    An "expert" in law enforcement can describe how law enforcement works and is more knowledgeable about how law enforcement works than a jury is. But that does not mean that either their observations or conclusions about an investigation qualify as expert testimony.
    Special Agent Holley is trained in law enforcement AND in the chemical testing used to detect blood.

    I have no idea why you are trying to debate it. If you don't want to believe his testimony that blood was not visible, okay but I believe him.

    JMO

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Wake Forest, NC
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by MyBelle View Post
    Special Agent Holley is trained in law enforcement AND in the chemical testing used to detect blood.

    I have no idea why you are trying to debate it. If you don't want to believe his testimony that blood was not visible, okay but I believe him.

    JMO
    Yes, and the items were held up in court and I didn't see blood at all on the fleece shirt. It should have had visible blood on it with the child having swiped blood all over the walls.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-04-2016, 04:46 PM
  2. CA CA - Colton, WhtFem 321UFCA, 45-55, GSW, flannel pajamas, Jun'87
    By Snufamonbobball in forum The Unidentified
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-26-2014, 11:46 AM
  3. WA - RSO Found In Woman's Bed In Her Pajamas
    By Filly in forum Crimes in the News
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 04:13 PM
  4. Scent Evidence ... Reliable Evidence Or Junk Science?
    By Wudge in forum General Information & Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-13-2009, 11:55 AM
  5. Pink Pajamas under the pillow
    By Toltec in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-27-2006, 03:47 PM

Tags for this Thread