803 users online (119 members and 684 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 24 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 348
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    459

    Evidence

    I'm looking at this case (again ) and I'm wondering, if there was to be a new investigation, what would the actual evidence be? Is there anything concrete at all? (Except the Hobbs hair that can easily be dismissed with secondary transferring, unfortunately), what concrete evidence do we have?
    I'm not counting on confessions or hearsay or something similar, because those can be easily ruled out.
    IMHO there's nothing that could bring those 3 little boys justice: (
    ůman differs from the animal by the fact that he is a killer; he the only primate that kills and tortures members of his own species without any reason, either biological or economic, and who feels satisfaction in doing so.
    Erich Fromm (Anatomy of Human Destructiveness)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    789
    Thanks for starting this thread Aynia ! The compelling reason behind why people want this case reopened and examined properly is because any evidence that did not fit into the "satanic" element and couldn't be twisted towards convicting the WM3 was dismissed.

    I truly believe if all of the evidence is looked at with fresh eyes, it will lead to the true murderer. I really do believe this so again thank you for starting this thread! Reopening the case and having all of the evidence examined properly will lead to true justice for Michael, Stevie and Chris. JMO
    "Every thought you produce, anything you say, any action you do, it bears your signature."
    - Thich Nhat Hanh

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by zencompass View Post
    I truly believe if all of the evidence is looked at with fresh eyes, it will lead to the true murderer. I really do believe this so again thank you for starting this thread! Reopening the case and having all of the evidence examined properly will lead to true justice for Michael, Stevie and Chris. JMO
    You make a good point zencompass. IMO, the prosecution should run new tests on all the hairs found on the crime scene, force TH to give a hair sample, compare that hair sample with the hairs on the crime scene and if they match, they should arrest him and put him on trial. So far, all we know is that there is a minuscule difference between TH's mtDNA and the mtDNA of the hair found on MM's ligature. But let's not forget that these tests were done about a decade ago. Since then, I assume the world of DNA testing has greatly improved. A new test would be more accurate. According to jivepuppy, there are two other hairs very similar to the hair on MM's ligature (the hair found on the tree trunk and a dyed hair found on the morgue sheet covering SB). A new test might reveal that these hairs belong to the same source..

    About other evidence in this case: fibers from one of the black shoe laces used to tie up the victims were microscopically similar to fibers found on one of TH's knives: http://callahan.8k.com/pdf/microtrace_report_092509.pdf

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    789
    Thanks lethalmatthew! I wanted to say that the depth and detail of the information you are analyzing and posting is brilliant on all of the WM threads. I always look forward to reading your posts as I learn something new or you show how you've looked at something from another angle.
    "Every thought you produce, anything you say, any action you do, it bears your signature."
    - Thich Nhat Hanh

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    477

    bite mark

    Quote Originally Posted by zencompass View Post
    Thanks lethalmatthew! I wanted to say that the depth and detail of the information you are analyzing and posting is brilliant on all of the WM threads. I always look forward to reading your posts as I learn something new or you show how you've looked at something from another angle.
    I can think of no possible reason a bite mark would be on the stepsons face/forehead that matches the stepfather partial denture and surrounding teeth unless done in violence. All potential bite marks should be examined with that partial. And any other of the victims s should be examined for bites matching the partial.

    Also reexamine the items locked in that box with it. That 1986 penny necklace belonged to someone and I posited one of the victims was in possession of it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    789
    Hey Justiceseeker35! Thank you so much!

    There is more substantive reasoning (as in all of your posts!) in what you just posted than should ever be necessary to reopen a case.

    This is what has me so bewildered - the incredibly stubborn pushback from authorities refusing to even discuss reopening this particular case. Hopefully the May 5 2015 rally will get some momentum going again. I do know that more discussions about reopening the case are appearing more often here and there online so there is great public interest to have this reopened. Hopefully the pressure will build to force someone's hand to do a proper investigation which, I agree with you, should have been done in the first place.

    That locked box alone is a "smoking gun".

    But the bite mark - that is amazingly incriminating. I just can't get over it. I really can't.
    "Every thought you produce, anything you say, any action you do, it bears your signature."
    - Thich Nhat Hanh

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by zencompass View Post
    Thanks lethalmatthew! I wanted to say that the depth and detail of the information you are analyzing and posting is brilliant on all of the WM threads. I always look forward to reading your posts as I learn something new or you show how you've looked at something from another angle.
    Thank you very much zencompass! I really appreciate it
    The penny found in TH's locked box was actually from 1984. All the three victims were born in 1984, coincidence? I sure hope that the Moores and JMB have been able to look at that penny to see if it belonged to their son. If it did indeed belong to CB or MM (Pam didn't recognize it), than I wish TH's attorney good luck in coming up with an explanation for why that penny ended up in TH's locked box.
    The bite mark is very interesting. Does anyone know if dental records can be obtained by the prosecution? Or does that fall under the physician-patient privilege rule? If it can be determined that TH had that partial denture back in May 1993, and was missing his right natural tooth, than that would be another piece of very incriminating evidence. Mark Cowart said in his bitemark-video that the individual who made that bite mark was probably missing his right natural tooth, and that the left natural tooth made a bigger cut than the three front teeth, which were probably fake (belonging to the partial denture).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by Lethalmatthew View Post
    Thank you very much zencompass! I really appreciate it
    The penny found in TH's locked box was actually from 1984. All the three victims were born in 1984, coincidence? I sure hope that the Moores and JMB have been able to look at that penny to see if it belonged to their son. If it did indeed belong to CB or MM (Pam didn't recognize it), than I wish TH's attorney good luck in coming up with an explanation for why that penny ended up in TH's locked box.
    The bite mark is very interesting. Does anyone know if dental records can be obtained by the prosecution? Or does that fall under the physician-patient privilege rule? If it can be determined that TH had that partial denture back in May 1993, and was missing his right natural tooth, than that would be another piece of very incriminating evidence. Mark Cowart said in his bitemark-video that the individual who made that bite mark was probably missing his right natural tooth, and that the left natural tooth made a bigger cut than the three front teeth, which were probably fake (belonging to the partial denture).
    Yeah I got the year wrong. It was all three victims birth year. That's the kind of thing that really chills you, because you know its important. Why was it in a lock box, why was the marble in the box why was the partial in the box. Why was SB's pocket knife in TH's knife collection.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    789
    From the 2009 declaration of Pamela Hobbs: BBM is mine

    "65. Terry also had a strong fireproof lockbox which he locked and kept at the top of our closet. On one occasion in 2004, a boy Jo Lynn was dating pried open the box. The only thing in the box was Terry's partial denture, a little bitty necklace that had a 1984 penny on it, and a marble. Jo Lynn and I discussed why Terry would lock up a partial denture. The only explanation we could come up with was that he did not want anyone to compare his dental imprint to what some people believed were bite marks on certain victims of the Murders"

    I have a strong suspicion that as JMB had a jewelry shop and made jewelry that he could have made this necklace. Perhaps to commemorate his adoption of CB. In an interview with Leeza Gibbons, JMB states that he even let CB make jewelry with him. This could have been one of the items they made together.

    A possible reason why JMB hasn't spoken up about this necklace could be that he was protecting TH as JMB didn't care about his stepson either as evidenced in how he treated him. Maybe JMB knew of TH's involvement or maybe JMB just didn't care as he was acting as if CB was more of a liability to him, especially since CB's mother was voicing her concern that CB had been sexually abused. Now the necklace could have been a gift from any of the grandparents or parents. As JusticeSeeker35 and Lethalmatthew posit, this question needs to be asked of all of the relatives. JMO
    Last edited by zencompass; 04-26-2015 at 02:32 PM.
    "Every thought you produce, anything you say, any action you do, it bears your signature."
    - Thich Nhat Hanh

  10. #10
    Yes, the case needs to be reopened. I sincerely doubt that those wishing to reopen the case are going to make everything they have public - until the case is reopened. The bite mark, IMO, is very interesting. I just wish it weren't "out there" as it could destroy its evidentiary value. May 5th can't come quickly enough!

    BTW, I disagree about JMB. I believe he cared for CB very much. OTOH, IMO, TH was jealous of SB and the attention PH gave to him and the time she spent with him. TH believed (IMO) that the time PH spent with SB was time that she didn't spend with him (TH).

    I think that most of the evidence that has been made public has been discussed, but we may find out more on May 5th. At the very least, the bite mark and potential hair evidence against TH are more than was ever presented against D, J and J! They were convicted on circumstantial evidence and the good ol' "Satanic panic" motive.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    147
    I don't think that JMB tried to cover for TH. Remember, he accused TH of committing the murders on the day that the WM3 were released. I have read some things about JMB's abuse of CB and if these accusations are true, than he lost all my sympathy. Giving him three licks for skateboarding on the road is one thing, beating the crap out of him for leaving a toy on the stairs (as a neighbor claimed) is another. Just to be clear, I don't think that JMB was the murderer, and I believe he was genuinely grief-stricken after the murders, but I'm not sure if he was a good stepfather.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Lethalmatthew View Post
    I don't think that JMB tried to cover for TH. Remember, he accused TH of committing the murders on the day that the WM3 were released. I have read some things about JMB's abuse of CB and if these accusations are true, than he lost all my sympathy. Giving him three licks for skateboarding on the road is one thing, beating the crap out of him for leaving a toy on the stairs (as a neighbor claimed) is another. Just to be clear, I don't think that JMB was the murderer, and I believe he was genuinely grief-stricken after the murders, but I'm not sure if he was a good stepfather.
    Just to be clear, JMB actually adopted CB, so he was an adoptive father, not a stepfather. A lot of the allegations of abuse against him came out after the first documentary was released. A lot more came out after his wife died. IMO, it's very possible that these allegations are simply people seeking their "15 minutes" so to speak. The neighbor story mentioned is an example, IMO.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    789
    I still have a strong suspicion that JMB made the 1984 penny chain to commemorate his adoption of CB. JMB did have a history of domestic violence and I don't think that stopped when he married Melissa and adopted CB. I agree that the significance of the 1984 penny on the chain is significant and that it is very important to discover which boy this belonged to. PH didn't recognize it and the other families did not comment on it after PH made her declaration in 2009 so which boy did own this chain? I believe that it belonged to CB but for some reason JMB is not commenting on it. Since he made jewelry and he has stated that he let CB help him, it makes sense that perhaps they made this penny on a chain together. No one else has claimed it and I agree with other posters that it is extremely important that we find out who this belonged to. JMO

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    477
    Quote Originally Posted by zencompass View Post
    I still have a strong suspicion that JMB made the 1984 penny chain to commemorate his adoption of CB. JMB did have a history of domestic violence and I don't think that stopped when he married Melissa and adopted CB. I agree that the significance of the 1984 penny on the chain is significant and that it is very important to discover which boy this belonged to. PH didn't recognize it and the other families did not comment on it after PH made her declaration in 2009 so which boy did own this chain? I believe that it belonged to CB but for some reason JMB is not commenting on it. Since he made jewelry and he has stated that he let CB help him, it makes sense that perhaps they made this penny on a chain together. No one else has claimed it and I agree with other posters that it is extremely important that we find out who this belonged to. JMO
    I don't know the jeweler angle is a really good one but I still think the necklace is the kind of thing a Mom would buy her son. JMB didn't marry MB until 1987 and no one is real clear when exactly CB was adopted. I still believe that MB is the only one who can ID that necklace.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Justiceseeker35 View Post
    I don't know the jeweler angle is a really good one but I still think the necklace is the kind of thing a Mom would buy her son. JMB didn't marry MB until 1987 and no one is real clear when exactly CB was adopted. I still believe that MB is the only one who can ID that necklace.
    According to the adoption paper reproduced in Untying the Knot, the final adoption decree was issued on February 20, 1991. It is on page 142 in the illustrations section.

Page 1 of 24 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast