swedie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 5,472
- Reaction score
- 279
]None of that evidence was definitive though.[/B] If there were not enough sperm cells to get enough DNA then the amount would have been extremely small. If he is having sex frequently, in the car for example, then his sperm cells are probably all over the place. Accidental overlap can't be ruled out, assuming the cells actually came from him and not some other person. If Mclintoc was the killer, then if she had previous sexual contact with someone else, the possibility exists for some of those cells to get mixed up with Tori's blood. The only way for her blood and his sperm to be co-mixed would be from vaginal tearing, but then you would expect there be to be a lot of evidence of him in the sample, not none. But apparently there wasn't any. So, lots of problems with that, I think that evidence is very weak.
Removal of the clothing might be taken as evidence of sexual assault, if in fact it had all been removed or if what remained showed evidence of tearing. So, the items removed were probably taken post mortem, I would think by McClintoc for her own purposes. You can't exlude the possibility that McClintoc was the one doing the assault, if it happened, either. The profile of what was left of the clothing IMO fit an action more consistent with what a female would do than what a male would do. If MR had raped her, and she was killed on site, she should have been naked, but she wasn't.
The *advertiser censored* on the computer means nothing, it certainly has no bearing on motive. Lots of people look at *advertiser censored*, and if they have downloaded it from usenet or a torrent site there is a certainty that whatever it is in going to be illegal in one way or another. Unless it was directly related to the case in some way it would have been excluded as prejudicial, warrant or no warrant.
So I think the evidence of sexual assault was weak. The conviction had more to do with the jury willing to interpolate a motive into the crime than any actual evidence. If he appeals against the conviction, that is what they will likely target, mostly because it is what will keep him in prison the longest.
Respectfully if you believe none of the evidence was definitive then what do you consider Tori's and MR's blood mixed together on his gym bag or the fact her blood and male sperm faction mixed was found in one tiny spot on the door molding? Yes the blood and sperm faction were mixed meaning they were NOT deposited there at different times; but together, this is fact and evidence. We can safely assume it was MR's sperm as we know TLM does not produce sperm nor did Tori. This most certainly proves rape. We do not know if he was having frequent sex in his car, but I would believe if he was, he had condoms also in his car and would have used them to ward off unwanted pregnancies or STI/STDs. IMHO I would assume most women he had sex with insisted he wear a condom. IIRC thorough testing was done on the interior of MR's car and yes his sperm was found in a few odd places. Respectfully I do not agree with what you stated above The only way for her blood and his sperm to be co-mixed would be from vaginal tearing. Tori could have suffered other bleeding injuries at the hands of MR prior to her death such as facial injuries and let's not forget the 16 broken ribs. It is still my belief MR cause life threatening injuries to Tori before she was kicked, stomped and bludgeoned with the hammer. This being the reason why MR threw her to the ground outside his car and TLM could hear the gurgling sounds coming from the motionless body of Tori. AND this also could have also been the reason why there was not a lot of his DNA/sperm evidence is because he was sexually frustrated with Tori's lack of cooperation during the sexual assault. The fact child *advertiser censored*, and abducting children were found on his laptop means a great deal IMHO. Especially when it was viewed/downloaded shortly before Tori's abduction, rape and murder. It goes to show his sexual deviance toward children. Maybe so a lot of people look at *advertiser censored*, but who looks at child *advertiser censored*; sick minded individuals such as MR who prey on the innocence of children IMHO. If you remember correctly, Tori was naked from the waist down which strongly goes to show sexual assault. What would be the purpose of MR removing her HM tshirt if you don't mind me asking? I for one cannot see the sexual gratification he would receive from removing her shirt. Why would TLM remove Tori's clothing from the waist down? Typically it is the male who is the sexual perp. I really have a hard time understanding your thought process in this post. Could you clarify please as to whether you believe MR was framed by TLM? I followed this case very closely from day one including the whole trial and I don't know where you got your information or facts. Possibly it's just all your opinion and if so please kindly clarify. TIA and all :moo:
The Crown contends Rafferty also downloaded "substantial" amounts of child *advertiser censored*, and there was evidence of snuff films movies depicting real killings on his laptop. A woman he met online alleged that he drugged, choked and raped her. A litany of past dates reported he had a penchant for sexual choking. Some even complained of his "disconcerting" behaviour toward their children.
The jury doesn't know that, either.
Superior Court Judge Thomas Heeney refused to allow evidence found on Rafferty's laptop and BlackBerry the searches, the evidence of child *advertiser censored* and a downloaded movie about Karla Homolka because the search violated Rafferty's charter rights.
Data fragments on Rafferty's laptop indicate he had been downloading child *advertiser censored* since 2005. The Hollywood movie "Gardens of the Night," about the abduction of a young, blond girl which deviates substantially from what allegedly happened to Tori after the abduction was downloaded 11 days before she disappeared. The movie "Karla," about Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, was downloaded two weeks later.
Investigators also said they found evidence on the laptop of videos "depicting 'how-to' instructions for child sexual assault," and evidence "of recent possession of 'snuff' films inclusive of one with a title suggestive of a child target."
Most of the videos depicted "a variety of graphic and coercive images of violent sexual abuse involving children between one and eighteen years of age," the Crown documents say.
The rape allegation, the way Rafferty acted toward the children of his girlfriends and other such evidence could be considered "bad character" evidence, which is generally inadmissible at trial. Rafferty himself enunciated the principle during his interrogation: "Just because I'm sleazy doesn't make me what I'm being accused of."
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/ca...ut-michael-raffertys-character-151021275.html
Kitty I believe this is the information you provided above, thank you and HTH.
Three different people had been using that computer, and proving that Mr. Rafferty had been accessing child *advertiser censored* would have been tough, particularly since his stepfather admitted to police he was an aficionado of legal (adult) *advertiser censored*.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...deo-found-on-raffertys-laptop/article4106393/