Long Easter Weekend Thread (Apr. 5, 6, 7, 8, & 9, 2012)

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
flipflop said:
Going by the evidence tag#, the shorts go inline with items removed from MR's house/car...they start in 7000's, TLM's are in the 2000's.

How would media get ahold of the MR pic at the time of TLM's evidence being shown.....im confused.
Click to expand...

The items were shown in court back in March, the media reported that they were found during the search of TLM's house, when they were actually found in MR's car. It's possible that because the shoes WERE found in TLM's house, they assumed the shorts and bag were too. Make sense?

MOO
 
Re:.the car: I don't think he was a ricer That is a shoddy, shoddy paint job and all the ricer cars I have seen are taken care of quite meticulously. Yes, they do some weird homemade "upgrade" but MRs car is a beater, plain and simple. It looks like he tried to make it uglier, not cooler. He also doesn't fit into the typical demographics. The paint job, imo, was done by a lazy person who doesn't know how to paint/ doesn't know about cars.

Re the shorts: Do any of you tweet? Text? It is incredibly difficult to text and or tweet in real time. What we are getting are fallible second hand interpretations (third hand, possibly, in the case of the articles written after court adjourns for the day.) A lot of the media types have made small errors that seem like a big deal to us, who are trying to figure things out based on tweets. if the media made a mistake, that does not mean that the crown did. The crown is not incompetent, although I can see how the defense or any MR supporters (generally speaking not aimed at anyone specifically) would want the Crown to mess up as that would greatly enhance his appeal chances. At the very least, I think its premature to try to catch the Crown in some sort of law clerk/noob mistake because a) the chances of that happening are slim to none and b) they just introduced this lot of evidence and clearly are going to go over it when court resumes next week.
 
Oldsoul2 said:
What I would like to know is why they haven't arrested BA for drug trafficking? It's illegal to sell personal scripts, guess they exchanged that for testimony that we haven't heard yet? Apparently CM had her own personal scripts as well. Wonder if MR was giving furniture pieces to them for CM's scripts? I find it bizarre to just meet TLM and than give them tables, chairs, lamps etc...maybe a chair ot two but all that furniture? Maybe MR knew his mother would feel bad for them and used that as an excuse to do his exchange. Lots of drug dealing and drug activity in this scenerio. Makes me wonder what else is going on, usually when there's drugs, there's trouble and people with lots of it. Oxycontin is big business apparently.
Click to expand...

IIRC MR and his mother DM took the furniture over to CM's while TLM was in custody on the other charge of probation violation. My gut tells me DM did not know of CM until MR told her about their neediness. Just a guess, DM probably bought new furniture and was going to get rid of her old stuff and MR knew CM and TLM where in need. I see MR doing these things for TLM and CM as a way to keep TLM quiet. As long as he was leading her to believe that he loved her cared about her and her mother, she would stay quiet. TLM felt in due time she would be released and her and MR could carry on as if nothing sinister ever happened. :moo:
 
Sailor Bug said:
Excessive drug usage for sure.

It's hard to believe that anyone can live with such high levels in their system.

Rafferty must have had a very high/built up or tolerance to opiates.

I wonder if he had ever experienced an overdose?
Click to expand...

A segment on Oxycontin abuse on the show Fifth Estate, one of the women who was addicted to Oxycontin did thirty (30) 80mg pills a day. That's alot!

Had he continued with the dosage he was on he probably would have started injecting (altho he appeared to be very conscious about his appearance, so maye he didn't want track marks where someone could notice)or going to a higher dosage, but a higher dosage of Oxy would probably cost alot more than injecting. 80mg of Oxy is probably about 30$ (if not more) a pill on the street.
 
matou said:
Doesn't say WHICH items were found in her home, only that items were found in her home i.e. the shoes. JMO

The images are identical and the tags are identical. The labels underneath are identical. Easily checked. So did she give these items back or did he take them?

slide 56 http://www.am980.ca/Other/McClintic.pdf

slide 54 http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/05/19599961.html
Click to expand...

If this is the media reporting sentence that we are dissecting for meaning:

McClintic testifed that Rafferty gave her his white Puma shoes, basketball shorts and t-shirt to change into, packed into a blue gym bag. Police found items matching those descriptions in McClintic's home when they executed a search warrant after her arrest (pictures 2 and 3).

We can now infer that:

"his white Puma shoes, basketball shorts and t-shirt"

are the "items".

items matching those descriptions in McClintic's home .... etc.

Grammatically, those is a reference to the aforementioned "items".

While the wording of the reporter's paragraph is awkward and easily misinterpreted, it now appears that it was both incorrect and misleading.

The press does tend to paraphrase & embelish on occasion - witness the differences between the tweets from the courtroom and the "fleshed out" final print articles.
 
dilbert said:
The items were shown in court back in March, the media reported that they were found during the search of TLM's house, when they were actually found in MR's car. It's possible that because the shoes WERE found in TLM's house, they assumed the shorts and bag were too. Make sense?

MOO
Click to expand...

I think so.....Shorts are found at MR's, shorts pic is 1st presented during TLM's evidence pics (because she states MR gave them to her to change into) Media takes this as they were found in her house. MR's evidence pics includes shorts as they were indeed found in his possession. Only one pair of shorts in found. Did I get it right?
 
flipflop said:
I think so.....Shorts are found at MR's, shorts pic is 1st presented during TLM's evidence pics (because she states MR gave them to her to change into) Media takes this as they were found in her house. MR's evidence pics includes shorts as they were indeed found in his possession. Only one pair of shorts in found. Did I get it right?
Click to expand...

LOL Yes :)
 
ChaChaCha said:
If this is the media reporting sentence that we are dissecting for meaning:

McClintic testifed that Rafferty gave her his white Puma shoes, basketball shorts and t-shirt to change into, packed into a blue gym bag. Police found items matching those descriptions in McClintic's home when they executed a search warrant after her arrest (pictures 2 and 3).

We can now infer that:

"his white Puma shoes, basketball shorts and t-shirt"

are the "items".

items matching those descriptions in McClintic's home .... etc.

Grammatically, those is a reference to the aforementioned "items".

While the wording of the reporter's paragraph is awkward and easily misinterpreted, it now appears that it was both incorrect and misleading.

The press does tend to paraphrase & embelish on occasion - witness the differences between the tweets from the courtroom and the "fleshed out" final print articles.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know and my response still qualifies as correct as well: items found matching those descriptions does not include ALL items matching those descriptions. My final answer to this. I think trying to accuse planting evidence is pretty incredible though. I don't believe it. JMO
 
flipflop said:
Going by the evidence tag#, the shorts go inline with items removed from MR's house/car...they start in 7000's, TLM's are in the 2000's.

How would media get ahold of the MR pic at the time of TLM's evidence being shown.....im confused.
Click to expand...

I would think the media got the pictures of the shorts because TLM was testifying about MR lending them to her. Good point about the numbering of the evidence tags!
 
matou said:
Yes, I know and my response still qualifies as correct as well: items found matching those descriptions does not include ALL items matching those descriptions. My final answer to this. I think trying to accuse planting evidence is pretty incredible though. I don't believe it. JMO
Click to expand...

Ouch! I never said a word about planting evidence, was merely interested in how a drafting error in a media article could easily mislead a casual reader.

I doubt very much that anyone planted anything.

JMO
 
matou said:
FWIW, I don't believe the media let anyone astray with any reporting r.e the shorts. It was never stated that those particular items were found at TLM's house, although the Puma shoes were in her closet as can be seen in the photo. Interesting that there was speculation that the Crown or police made mistakes in the tagging though. JMO
Click to expand...

I agree, just a misunderstanding with the media. I'm quite disturbed to hear that anyone would accuse the Crown or police of making mistakes though. What was it, 13,000 men searched for Tori, away from their families, many of them in obvious emotional distress over not being able to find the little darling, tirelessly working long hours day after day, and now there is to be suspicion that they screwed things up, planted evidence???? I find that to be very distressing. I am so appreciative of everything those officers did to bring Tori home to her Mommy and Daddy.
 
I'm pretty sure that this is the sweatshirt that MR is wearing in his mugshot:

562805216_o.jpg


6351225.bin

JMO
 
antiquegirl said:
I'm pretty sure that this is the sweatshirt that MR is wearing in his mugshot:

562805216_o.jpg


6351225.bin

JMO
Click to expand...

If I remember rightly one of them was wearing that sweatshirt the night they took Tori. I think LE was looking for it. It might have been the one he let TLM wear on the way home. IMO in his mug shot he's wearing one of those paper suits. I think it was testified to that LE took his clothes away from him. If you look closely at the hood you can see the elastic. And no I didn't use the magnifying glass this time snoofer.
 
flipflop said:
Going by the evidence tag#, the shorts go inline with items removed from MR's house/car...they start in 7000's, TLM's are in the 2000's.

How would media get ahold of the MR pic at the time of TLM's evidence being shown.....im confused.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the reports are there to lead anyone astray, simply a misunderstanding MOHO. My thought is the Crown showed the pictures of the white and green shorts to the jurors while TLM was on the stand, to show those were the shorts MR had in his gym bag, which he loaned to TLM right after Tori's murder. TLM was just identifying the shorts. The shorts were originally found in MR's bag when they took custody of his car. Not at TLM's house...reporters misunderstanding that's all. Obviously TLM gave them back to MR which leads me to believe that is what that note in MR's car was all about. MR left the note for TLM telling her to return his shorts/"pants" and he would give her oxys tomorrow. HTH and makes sense. :moo:
 
maxfactor said:
If I remember rightly one of them was wearing that sweatshirt the night they took Tori. I think LE was looking for it. It might have been the one he let TLM wear on the way home. IMO in his mug shot he's wearing one of those paper suits. I think it was testified to that LE took his clothes away from him. If you look closely at the hood you can see the elastic. And no I didn't use the magnifying glass this time snoofer.
Click to expand...

:floorlaugh: Magnifying glass.

Agreed Max, it's a paper type suicide suit and I remember a report stating they took his clothing. What he is wearing in his mug shot seems somewhat transparent, kwim.
 
maxfactor said:
I agree, just a misunderstanding with the media. I'm quite disturbed to hear that anyone would accuse the Crown or police of making mistakes though. What was it, 13,000 men searched for Tori, away from their families, many of them in obvious emotional distress over not being able to find the little darling, tirelessly working long hours day after day, and now there is to be suspicion that they screwed things up, planted evidence???? I find that to be very distressing. I am so appreciative of everything those officers did to bring Tori home to her Mommy and Daddy.
Click to expand...

A BIG mistake was made by the prosecution in the Casey Anthony trial, (the number of hits she made searching for chloroform was wrong) and LE in MR's case have already stated they didn't examine evidence until a few days ago, IMO, that didn't look too good, whether the info was relevant or not.

They're human, mistakes are made, it happens, not so shocking to me.

MOO
 
Maple1 said:
Thanks for link. Does anyone know who Joy Woods is. Photos of this are from 89-92?

My first post.
Click to expand...

Welcome Maple1,

JW was at the scene of the arrest. MR was getting into her car when the arrest took place. She is apparently a friend/gf.
 
Antiquegirl, I don't think he was wearing that sweatshirt in his mugshot, I have to agree with the others, he's wearing some type of jumpsuit because the police took his clothes upon arrest. It looks almost see-through - could you imagine? eek! That right there would prevent me from doing anything ilegal and getting arrested. lol

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 154 more.
Total: 3,549 (members: 155, guests: 3,394)

Online statistics

Members online
155
Guests online
3,394
Total visitors
3,549
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,270
Messages
17,966,479
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top