Evidence: The Clothes

Glenn101 · Jul 14, 2014

I am following Sunshine05's lead in trying to get some of the actual evidence in the case out in their own threads. It is hard wading back through all of the previous threads to find discussions about different areas.

The shoes seem to be a major issue with some of the posters as evidence that Jason was the murderer owing to the prints of what could be one of three different Hush Puppy brand shoes, size twelve. The contention seems to be that Hush Puppies are fairly rare brand and those prints at the scene are almost as good a a fingerprint. I don't agree with that assessment. Hush Puppies are a popular casual shoe style which saw a big revival in the nineties and are still very popular today. Wolverine reported a total of 108.8 million dollars in sales of Hush Puppies worldwide in the first three quarters of 2004, although sales in the U.S. were down somewhat because the Hush Puppy brand was going to a more expensive line to appeal to the younger generation.
http://www.getfilings.com/comp/k0000110471.html

For the hush puppy shoes to be pointing to Jason it would have to be shown that the three different models were a rarity, which I do not think has been shown, or maybe even attempted to be shown.

Several posters have asked "where are the shoes at"? That is a good question, which the LE needs to answer, no Jason. The contents of Jason's suitcase were not inventoried when Jason's SUV was seized. I recall reading that a pair of slip on shoes were later found in the SUV that LE missed. The entire lot was evidently returned to Jason and at least some of the items were stored in a mini-storage building in Brevard. Not inventorying the contents of the suitcase was another investigative breakdown by the LE and releasing that suitcase broke the chain of custody, if there ever was one.

As a juror, I would put the responsibility for finding the smoking gun onto the LE. That is the way the law works, or is supposed to work. It evidently did not do so in this case.

There also have been some that have suggested that Jason maybe cut off the toes of Franklin shoes so that he could get his feet inside them. Shoes which he cunningly bought with cash so as not to leave a digital trail via a credit or debit card. So, if he was so brilliant that he bought a pair of Franklin shoes in order to throw off the investigators, why would he not also buy another pair of slip on shoes in the same manner, that fit him and that could not be traced to him? According to the logic of those who promote the Franklin purchase, Jason understood that shoes can be traced by forensic means. It would make sense that he would buy two pairs of untraceable shoes to wear to the crime scene instead of a pair that could be traced to him.

Glenn

citygirl · Jul 14, 2014

Glenn101 said:
I am following Sunshine05's lead in trying to get some of the actual evidence in the case out in their own threads. It is hard wading back through all of the previous threads to find discussions about different areas.

The shoes seem to be a major issue with some of the posters as evidence that Jason was the murderer owing to the prints of what could be one of three different Hush Puppy brand shoes, size twelve. The contention seems to be that Hush Puppies are fairly rare brand and those prints at the scene are almost as good a a fingerprint. I don't agree with that assessment. Hush Puppies are a popular casual shoe style which saw a big revival in the nineties and are still very popular today. Wolverine reported a total of 108.8 million dollars in sales of Hush Puppies worldwide in the first three quarters of 2004, although sales in the U.S. were down somewhat because the Hush Puppy brand was going to a more expensive line to appeal to the younger generation.
http://www.getfilings.com/comp/k0000110471.html

For the hush puppy shoes to be pointing to Jason it would have to be shown that the three different models were a rarity, which I do not think has been shown, or maybe even attempted to be shown.

Several posters have asked "where are the shoes at"? That is a good question, which the LE needs to answer, no Jason. The contents of Jason's suitcase were not inventoried when Jason's SUV was seized. I recall reading that a pair of slip on shoes were later found in the SUV that LE missed. The entire lot was evidently returned to Jason and at least some of the items were stored in a mini-storage building in Brevard. Not inventorying the contents of the suitcase was another investigative breakdown by the LE and releasing that suitcase broke the chain of custody, if there ever was one.

As a juror, I would put the responsibility for finding the smoking gun onto the LE. That is the way the law works, or is supposed to work. It evidently did not do so in this case.

There also have been some that have suggested that Jason maybe cut off the toes of Franklin shoes so that he could get his feet inside them. Shoes which he cunningly bought with cash so as not to leave a digital trail via a credit or debit card. So, if he was so brilliant that he bought a pair of Franklin shoes in order to throw off the investigators, why would he not also buy another pair of slip on shoes in the same manner, that fit him and that could not be traced to him? According to the logic of those who promote the Franklin purchase, Jason understood that shoes can be traced by forensic means. It would make sense that he would buy two pairs of untraceable shoes to wear to the crime scene instead of a pair that could be traced to him.

Glenn

The Franklins will always remain a mystery to me. I find it curious that the Franklin print was clearly defined in blood, seen by the naked eye. The Hushpuppy print needed to be enhanced. One can draw their own conclusions from that. This was in Andy Parker's testimony (CCBI).

I just listened to Tom Riha's testimony. He claims that only 200 pairs of brown, size 12, Hushpuppy orbitals were made specifically for DSW, with that out sole. They don't know which shoes went to specific DSW stores.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9765981/

Begins @ about the 10.15 mark.

Glenn101 · Jul 14, 2014

citygirl said:
The Franklins will always remain a mystery to me. I find it curious that the Franklin print was clearly defined in blood, seen by the naked eye. The Hushpuppy print needed to be enhanced. One can draw their own conclusions from that. This was in Andy Parker's testimony (CCBI).

I just listened to Tom Riha's testimony. He claims that only 200 pairs of brown, size 12, Hushpuppy orbitals were made specifically for DSW, with that out sole. They don't know which shoes went to specific DSW stores.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9765981/

Begins @ about the 10.15 mark.

The orbitals were one of three types of Hush Puppies that that generally matched the out sole pattern. After watching the video , I cannot understand why the Hush Puppy sole had to be enhanced either.

Glenn

JusticeFever · Jul 14, 2014

The clothes do not concern me at all, for all we know Jason could have been wearing the shirt/sweater under whatever he had on when he arrived back in Raleigh.

Plus, if Becky Holt really really really wanted to know where they were, she would have asked him on the stand.... I am sure he had an answer.....

I hope he takes the stand in Trial 3...(if there is one)

Glenn101 · Jul 20, 2014

I have listened Tom Riha's retrial testimony concerning the Hush Puppy shoes. In addition to the Sealy, Belleville, and Orbital variants, all with the same out sole design, there was an additional unnamed variant that was produced for only one season. The Belleville and Sealy lines were more upscale models sold to smaller independent retailers mostly in the U.S. No numbers were produced for those lines of shoes. So posters have said that there were only 195 pairs of size twelve Orbitals produced for DSW. There were 195 pairs of brown leather size 12 Orbitals produced for DSW. I do not understand why the DA made such a point of that. There is no dispute that Json purchased a pair of brown, size 12 Orbital's from DSW. However, that model came in brown leather, black leather, and suede variants. Neither the DA nor the defense asked how many of all styles of size 12 Orbitals were produced for DSW. I think that the defense missed a big one there. They need to have Riha come up with that information as well as information on just how well the Sealy and Bellville lines sold during their tenures.

I am going to do a bit more research, but I am wondering why the image that the LE produced in their search warrant for the shoes did not show any tread design. The image just showed a smooth sole. I am uploading a pic of the LE image and one of that Tom Riha showed during his testimony. A very distinctive sole pattern can be noticed. And, it does not seem that one can determine what color of shoe or what model shoe from the out sole image.

Glenn

citygirl · Jul 20, 2014

Glenn101 said:
I have listened Tom Riha's retrial testimony concerning the Hush Puppy shoes. In addition to the Sealy, Belleville, and Orbital variants, all with the same out sole design, there was an additional unnamed variant that was produced for only one season. The Belleville and Sealy lines were more upscale models sold to smaller independent retailers mostly in the U.S. No numbers were produced for those lines of shoes. So posters have said that there were only 195 pairs of size twelve Orbitals produced for DSW. There were 195 pairs of brown leather size 12 Orbitals produced for DSW. I do not understand why the DA made such a point of that. There is no dispute that Json purchased a pair of brown, size 12 Orbital's from DSW. However, that model came in brown leather, black leather, and suede variants. Neither the DA nor the defense asked how many of all styles of size 12 Orbitals were produced for DSW. I think that the defense missed a big one there. They need to have Riha come up with that information as well as information on just how well the Sealy and Bellville lines sold during their tenures.

I am going to do a bit more research, but I am wondering why the image that the LE produced in their search warrant for the shoes did not show any tread design. The image just showed a smooth sole. I am uploading a pic of the LE image and one of that Tom Riha showed during his testimony. A very distinctive sole pattern can be noticed. And, it does not seem that one can determine what color of shoe or what model shoe from the out sole image.

Glenn

It's up to you but I wouldn't waste my time. He was wearing brown Hushpuppies. He purchased brown Hushpuppies from DSW. Size 12. Then they went missing.

MyBelle · Jul 21, 2014

citygirl said:
It's up to you but I wouldn't waste my time. He was wearing brown Hushpuppies. He purchased brown Hushpuppies from DSW. Size 12. Then they went missing.

You keep citing facts and then not linking them. Where is the proof brown Hushpuppies were ever produced at trial and they were worn by the murderer?

Glenn101 · Jul 21, 2014

Originally Posted by citygirl said:
It's up to you but I wouldn't waste my time. He was wearing brown Hushpuppies. He purchased brown Hushpuppies from DSW. Size 12. Then they went missing.

MyBelle said:
You keep citing facts and then not linking them. Where is the proof brown Hushpuppies were ever produced at trial and they were worn by the murderer?

Citygirl is quoting "facts not in evidence". Jason was wearing a pair of slip on shoes in a picture taken as he was walking down the 1st floor hallway in the HI. Tom Riha could not identify them as Hush Puppy Orbitals, but was pressed by the DA to say that they were not inconsistent with those shoes. Again, I think that the defense dropped the ball there and should have asked Tom how many other types of shoes that they were not inconsistent with.

I would again like to point out the illogic of the prosecution theory concerning the shoes in general. The theory is that Jason purchased a pair of Franklin athletic shoes using cashthat were too small for him to throw investigators off the trail.
However, if one subscribes to that theory, that Jason was smart enough and informed enough on the state of the art of shoe identification from show prints and did make that purchase, why would he not buy another pair of shoes using cash, that were different from anything he owned to further throw the LE off the scent???

To listen to some, Jason was fiendishly clever in the ways where evidence points away from him as the perpetrator and utterly stupid when it comes to things that pooint towards him. All of this is without the slightest shred of evidence to back them up. And that is how we get wrongful convictions.

Glenn

citygirl · Jul 21, 2014

Glenn101 said:
Citygirl is quoting "facts not in evidence". Jason was wearing a pair of slip on shoes in a picture taken as he was walking down the 1st floor hallway in the HI. Tom Riha could not identify them as Hush Puppy Orbitals, but was pressed by the DA to say that they were not inconsistent with those shoes. Again, I think that the defense dropped the ball there and should have asked Tom how many other types of shoes that they were not inconsistent with.

I would again like to point out the illogic of the prosecution theory concerning the shoes in general. The theory is that Jason purchased a pair of Franklin athletic shoes using cashthat were too small for him to throw investigators off the trail.
However, if one subscribes to that theory, that Jason was smart enough and informed enough on the state of the art of shoe identification from show prints and did make that purchase, why would he not buy another pair of shoes using cash, that were different from anything he owned to further throw the LE off the scent???

To listen to some, Jason was fiendishly clever in the ways where evidence points away from him as the perpetrator and utterly stupid when it comes to things that pooint towards him. All of this is without the slightest shred of evidence to back them up. And that is how we get wrongful convictions.

Glenn

BBM. I watched both trials and never heard it stated that he paid cash for the Franklin shoes in preparation for murdering his wife. That just didn't happen that I recall. And where did I quote facts that were not in evidence? They explained quite clearly that they didn't have the original shoes. The defendant had a receipt from DSW. DSW commissioned roughly 200 pairs of brown, leather , size 12 Hushpuppies. The defendant claims that his wife must have given them to Goodwill. MOO.

Glenn101 · Jul 21, 2014

citygirl said:
BBM. I watched both trials and never heard it stated that he paid cash for the Franklin shoes in preparation for murdering his wife. That just didn't happen that I recall. And where did I quote facts that were not in evidence? They explained quite clearly that they didn't have the original shoes. The defendant had a receipt from DSW. DSW commissioned roughly 200 pairs of brown, leather , size 12 Hushpuppies. The defendant claims that his wife must have given them to Goodwill. MOO.

Thanks for the information on the Franklin shoes, as to it not being a prosecution theory that he paid cash for them. That is a theory I have seen floating around that he had bought size ten Franklin shoes to throw off the investigators.
I need to ask for a clarification from you that "He was wearing brown Hushpuppies. " in post number 6. I too it to mean that Jason was wearing brown HushPuppies on the night of the murder. If you meant that he had purchased and wore HushPuppies some time in the past and they went missing, you would be correct. If you meant that Jason was wearing HushPuppies on the night of the murder, well, that has not been established as a fact. Not even close. It has only been established that Jason was wearing slip on shoes.

So, there were two people at the crime scene then. Is that what you are advocating???

Glenn

citygirl · Jul 21, 2014

Glenn101 said:
Thanks for the information on the Franklin shoes, as to it not being a prosecution theory that he paid cash for them. That is a theory I have seen floating around that he had bought size ten Franklin shoes to throw off the investigators.
I need to ask for a clarification from you that "He was wearing brown Hushpuppies. " in post number 6. I too it to mean that Jason was wearing brown HushPuppies on the night of the murder. If you meant that he had purchased and wore HushPuppies some time in the past and they went missing, you would be correct. If you meant that Jason was wearing HushPuppies on the night of the murder, well, that has not been established as a fact. Not even close. It has only been established that Jason was wearing slip on shoes.

So, there were two people at the crime scene then. Is that what you are advocating???

Glenn

I have stated before I have no clue about the size 10 shoe print. It's a mystery to me.
IMO, he was wearing the Hushpuppies in the video at the Hampton Inn and at the Cracker Barrel restaurant.
I hesitate to mention the Cracker Barrel because I don't have a link, know that I saw it, don't want to look for it and fear being burned at the stake if I don't supply it.

Take it for what it's worth.
The key thing for me is that the defendant owned a pair of those specific Hushpuppies, LE has the sales receipt, and he couldn't produce the shoes. Common sense tells me there is a problem with that. Then (shudder) he blamed it on his dead wife. On the stand. It was HER fault. Cringe worthy. MOO.

Glenn101 · Jul 22, 2014

citygirl said:
I have stated before I have no clue about the size 10 shoe print. It's a mystery to me.
IMO, he was wearing the Hushpuppies in the video at the Hampton Inn and at the Cracker Barrel restaurant.
I hesitate to mention the Cracker Barrel because I don't have a link, know that I saw it, don't want to look for it and fear being burned at the stake if I don't supply it. Take it for what it's worth.
The key thing for me is that the defendant owned a pair of those specific Hushpuppies, LE has the sales receipt, and he couldn't produce the shoes. Common sense tells me there is a problem with that. Then (shudder) he blamed it on his dead wife. On the stand. It was HER fault. Cringe worthy. MOO.

Thanks for clarifying that it is your opinion and not an established fact that Jason was wearing the HushPuppies on the night of the murder. The HushPuppy representative, who could tell just from looking at the image the LE sent him that it was from one of what turns out to have been four lines of HushPuppies, could not identify the shoes that Jason was wearing from the photographs he was shown. The best he could say was that they were not inconsistent with a pair. Actually, those were the words of the DA and Tom just assented to those words. However, the same could be said for any number of similarly styled shoes.

And the companion Franklin shoes for which you have no clue. The simplest explanation is that there were two people in that room during the murder. Barring further evidence, that is the best explanation anyone can offer.

Glenn

Evidence: The Clothes

New Posts

Glenn101

New Member

citygirl

Well-Known Member

Glenn101

New Member

JusticeFever

Well-Known Member

Glenn101

New Member

Attachments

citygirl

Well-Known Member

MyBelle

Well-Known Member

Glenn101

New Member

citygirl

Well-Known Member

Glenn101

New Member

citygirl

Well-Known Member

Glenn101

New Member

DNASolves

Members online

Online statistics

Forum statistics