728 users online (88 members and 640 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 57 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 848
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,860
    I was wrong in my above statement. Her car was found a few days later, not 6 (according to the search warrant affidavit.) Still, he had been contacted several times by LE about Erin in that time frame in which her car was missing and he never said anything to anyone about being at her car the very morning she disappeared and knowing where it was. Innocent people don't do that.
    Where is James Perryman? http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...james+perryman

    "Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t goin’ away! ~ Elvis Presley


  2. #17
    77DarkHorse7 is offline I've Heard The Sound That Silence Makes...On A Breath Of Wind
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Knox View Post
    Aren't you overlooking the bigger point? He stated he saw Erin's car, checked the tires, did not see Erin, and left. LE questioned him several days before her car was found. Why wouldn't he say, nope haven't seen Erin, but her car is parked on the side of the road at ...
    If someone is being questioned by the police, and they make two mutually exclusive statements. That person is a liar. Why should anyone assume the second statement is more truthful than the first?

    In other words, why should we believe Chris was there just because he says he was?

    IF his statement about seeing Erin's car was a complete fabrication, then he didn't know where her car was, and wouldn't have been able to tell anyone about it.
    .....In praecedens fuit solum credendum.

    "Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value." - Paul Leland Kirk

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    13,031
    So what's your point then?

  4. #19
    77DarkHorse7 is offline I've Heard The Sound That Silence Makes...On A Breath Of Wind
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Knox View Post
    So what's your point then?
    My ultimate point is, if a piece of evidence is not credible on its own, it should not be used as evidence. Especially not to bootstrap other less-than-credible evidence.
    .....In praecedens fuit solum credendum.

    "Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value." - Paul Leland Kirk

  5. #20
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    13,031
    What piece of evidence is not credible and shouldn't used?
    You are the anchor to my soul, you won't let go ...

  6. #21
    77DarkHorse7 is offline I've Heard The Sound That Silence Makes...On A Breath Of Wind
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Knox View Post
    What piece of evidence is not credible and shouldn't used?
    In this case, any statements that Chris made to the police. He clearly lied to them on more than one occasion.
    .....In praecedens fuit solum credendum.

    "Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value." - Paul Leland Kirk

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,347
    Quote Originally Posted by 77DarkHorse7 View Post
    In this case, any statements that Chris made to the police. He clearly lied to them on more than one occasion.
    So if a suspect lies once, the cops should never believe any other things that say?
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,347
    Quote Originally Posted by 77DarkHorse7 View Post
    My ultimate point is, if a piece of evidence is not credible on its own, it should not be used as evidence. Especially not to bootstrap other less-than-credible evidence.

    Bootstrapping? So are you saying the cops are being fascist or are bullying him?
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn

  9. #24
    77DarkHorse7 is offline I've Heard The Sound That Silence Makes...On A Breath Of Wind
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by katydid23 View Post
    So if a suspect lies once, the cops should never believe any other things that say?
    Can they use their statement as an investigative tool? Absolutely. But it's useless as court testimony.
    .....In praecedens fuit solum credendum.

    "Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value." - Paul Leland Kirk

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    46,347
    Quote Originally Posted by 77DarkHorse7 View Post
    Can they use their statement as an investigative tool? Absolutely. But it's useless as court testimony.
    I have got to disagree.
    “Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,860
    Actually, it is only useless if the jury thinks it is and you aren't on the jury. Clearly it was admissible, as we know about it because it was played in court to the jury. Conversely, I find it very useful information in determining his guilt.
    Where is James Perryman? http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...james+perryman

    "Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t goin’ away! ~ Elvis Presley


  12. #27
    77DarkHorse7 is offline I've Heard The Sound That Silence Makes...On A Breath Of Wind
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    554
    Quote Originally Posted by Voice4theSilent View Post
    Actually, it is only useless if the jury thinks it is and you aren't on the jury. Clearly it was admissible, as we know about it because it was played in court to the jury. Conversely, I find it very useful information in determining his guilt.
    Inadmissible evidence gets put before juries routinely. Otherwise there wouldn't be appellate divisions.
    .....In praecedens fuit solum credendum.

    "Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value." - Paul Leland Kirk

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,860
    Just because he lied to LE about knowing Erin and changed his story doesn't make the interviews inadmissible in court.
    Where is James Perryman? http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...james+perryman

    "Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain’t goin’ away! ~ Elvis Presley


  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    7,298
    Quote Originally Posted by 77DarkHorse7 View Post
    If someone is being questioned by the police, and they make two mutually exclusive statements. That person is a liar. Why should anyone assume the second statement is more truthful than the first?

    In other words, why should we believe Chris was there just because he says he was?

    IF his statement about seeing Erin's car was a complete fabrication, then he didn't know where her car was, and wouldn't have been able to tell anyone about it.
    Lol.

    I could tell your posts from miles away 77DH7.

    You must be a riot at jury duty. Lols.

    Good day to you.
    You can fool some of the people some of the time; But guess what? The Bus Stops Here (Life No Parole/ Don't Pass Go: Don't Collect Your $200)

  15. #30
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    13,031
    Quote Originally Posted by 77DarkHorse7 View Post
    Can they use their statement as an investigative tool? Absolutely. But it's useless as court testimony.
    The State is showing he lies. His changing stories based on the evidence they reveal to him prove he is not innocent. He has not been framed Darkhorse, I hope you can deal with that truth.

    There are NO alternative theories, Jon did NOT kill Erin.
    You are the anchor to my soul, you won't let go ...

Page 2 of 57 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 52 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #10
    By OkieGranny in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1005
    Last Post: 08-25-2014, 11:04 PM
  2. GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #9
    By OkieGranny in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1063
    Last Post: 08-20-2014, 03:55 PM
  3. GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #7
    By OkieGranny in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1115
    Last Post: 08-05-2014, 03:48 PM
  4. GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #3
    By OkieGranny in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1035
    Last Post: 07-16-2014, 10:28 PM
  5. GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #1
    By OkieGranny in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 1018
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 12:13 AM

Tags for this Thread