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

Maple1 · Apr 6, 2012

Thanks for info on JW.
Does anyone think the $945 (or so) money in glove compartment was from selling drugs? Or I guess the cash labour business he offered.

Alison · Apr 6, 2012

dilbert said:
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

They may have not looked at the Ipod until a few days ago, however I do not see the relevence. To me it is not evidence per say, as much as a window into TLM's lifestyle.The song the defense played for the court was not even on the Ipod, thus throwing our a red herring fallacy, to try and confuse the jury. To me that is more harmful to their case, then the crown not looking at an Ipod until recently. This Ipod she had does not have video on it and can not record others so therefore I do not believe it was a priority piece to examine for the crown. Especially since she is not on trial IMHO.

dilbert · Apr 6, 2012

Alison said:
They may have not looked at the Ipod until a few days ago, however I do not see the relevence. To me it is not evidence per say, as much as a window into TLM's lifestyle.The song the defense played for the court was not even on the Ipod, thus throwing our a red herring fallacy, to try and confuse the jury. To me that is more harmful to their case, then the crown not looking at an Ipod until recently. This Ipod she had does not have video on it and can not record others so therefore I do not believe it was a priority piece to examine for the crown. Especially since she is not on trial IMHO.

One man's trash, another man's treasure, what is irrelevant to you may be relevant to others.

MOO

dilbert · Apr 6, 2012

Happy Easter everyone.

JayFriend · Apr 6, 2012

swedie said:
You brought up some really interesting question Kamille. If his car was his baby as some suggested, why would he do such a shoddy if not laughable job? For someone who was conscientious about latest fashions and wore designer clothes, it's mind boggling as to why he did what he did to his car, his baby. DS was over last night for supper and a visit and I was showing him the evidence pictures and he literally LOLed and shook his head. He said he could see a young teen doing something like this to an old beater, but couldn't understand the mentality of a 28 year old male doing that unless his brain was fried on drugs or he was trying to cover something up such as a crime. Also from what he could tell the hood scoop is not real, it's decoration. That was his opinion.

There must have been a good reason MR did this to his car. I believe it was to disguise the bright blue colour it was. I wonder if MR had tried to abduct another child or children in the blue car and came very close to getting them. Is it possible he was afraid those children may have reported him in his blue car? Therefore by painting it black, that would take him out of the picture? I IMHO believe MR was up to no good way before TLM came into the picture and MR was unsuccessful in his previous attempts. Just like the PB case. PB started raping and attacking women on his own long before KH came along. But then he met KH and he found someone who was willing to take it to another level. I thank God every day these two were caught before they sought out anymore victims. :moo:

[BBM]
To each his own. Maybe he thought it looked cool, or was going to when he was done with it. There's no accounting for taste. Wearing "designer clothes" is not indicative of good taste, just conformity. He may have been 28 at the time, but probably a teenager at heart from the drug use. JMO

Alison · Apr 6, 2012

ChaChaCha said:
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 I believe, was not saying you made mention of a plant, but she was referring to a post earlier where someone suggested that. Hope that helps.

Alison · Apr 6, 2012

dilbert said:
One man's trash, another man's treasure, what is irrelevant to you may be relevant to others.

MOO

I fail to see how the crown not examining the Ipod until recently means they made a mistake? Please enlighten me. I am not arguing I just think that at least they did review it, before it was brought into court.I also think that they had more important pieces of evidence to examine and review (such as forensics) before the case started. If I am the crown I am going to go over eveidence that I feel is most important to least important. However some evidence as you said may be more important to others than it is to me, but I would be more interested in what will put the nail in the coffin per say. Secondly TLM has admitted her part, we all know she is one sick, sick, person; however I do not think her Ipod would be the factor that could get MR off. Just my opinion.

JayFriend · Apr 6, 2012

brighidin said:
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. <snip>

Did we ever find out if MR did the scoop and "paint job" himself or bought the car that way and was going to fix it up (work in progress)? With his limited means and most of the cash flow going for pills, a 6-year-old car must have been out of his price range, unless he bought it cheap that way.

Hello_Kitty · Apr 6, 2012

Alison said:
They may have not looked at the Ipod until a few days ago, however I do not see the relevence. To me it is not evidence per say, as much as a window into TLM's lifestyle.The song the defense played for the court was not even on the Ipod, thus throwing our a red herring fallacy, to try and confuse the jury. To me that is more harmful to their case, then the crown not looking at an Ipod until recently. This Ipod she had does not have video on it and can not record others so therefore I do not believe it was a priority piece to examine for the crown. Especially since she is not on trial IMHO.

I agreed with your statement totally. I really don't know why people are jumping on a detail that they think makes the crown look imcompetant without thinking about what they are saying. It's obvious that the defense is trying to create smoke and mirrors, <modsnip>.

Alison · Apr 6, 2012

JayFriend said:
[BBM]
To each his own. Maybe he thought it looked cool, or was going to when he was done with it. There's no accounting for taste. Wearing "designer clothes" is not indicative of good taste, just conformity. He may have been 28 at the time, but probably a teenager at heart from the drug use. JMO

Also it may be one of those situations were you have a picture in your head about how nice a project you are working on will be, but once you start it becomes overwhelming and you realize you know nothing. Or when you finally complete it you realize it looks like poo! :butthead:

Bravo · Apr 6, 2012

Maple1 said:
Thanks for info on JW.
Does anyone think the $945 (or so) money in glove compartment was from selling drugs? Or I guess the cash labour business he offered.

Welcome Maple. Not sure but i would guess drugs????

brighidin · Apr 6, 2012

dilbert said:
One man's trash, another man's treasure, what is irrelevant to you may be relevant to others.

MOO

Wrong cliche. I think the one the defense is using here is "let's throw enough s*^* to the wall and see what sticks." Derstine is clinging to a necro song that isn't even on TLM's ipod. If that is his definition of treasure, well, good luck to his client.

imo

Alison · Apr 6, 2012

Where was the jury pulled from? London?

brighidin · Apr 6, 2012

JayFriend said:
Did we ever find out if MR did the scoop and "paint job" himself or bought the car that way and was going to fix it up (work in progress)? With his limited means and most of the cash flow going for pills, a 6-year-old car must have been out of his price range, unless he bought it cheap that way.

Limited means? He had almost a thousand bucks in a baggie in his glove compartment!

Gunner · Apr 6, 2012

I think I may be wrong.

Hello_Kitty · Apr 6, 2012

Alison said:
Where was the jury pulled from? London?

That's correct Alison

AbbeyR · Apr 6, 2012

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

JMO

I thought it looked like he was wearing one of the CSI type thin paper suits like the one the mannequin is wearing in this photo (hard to tell though!):

(Photo 16 here: http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/05/19599891.html )

All of those circled areas look promising for forensic evidence - has there been any news about the coat in the trial so far? I may have missed it.

Tahorn · Apr 6, 2012

AbbeyR said:
I thought it looked like he was wearing one of the CSI type thin paper suits like the one the mannequin is wearing in this photo (hard to tell though!):

(Photo 16 here: http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/05/19599891.html )

All of those circled areas look promising for forensic evidence - has there been any news about the coat in the trial so far? I may have missed it.

I believe the DNA results will be on Tuesday.

pattywack · Apr 6, 2012

matou said:
The labelling of the photos do not conclusively state that the shorts where found in her house at all. Interesting theory about a "plant" though. The police planting evidence or MR? I'm very interested. JMO The photos were easily accessible (made public) for anyone to compare and conclude that they are the same photos. JMO

I've reread all the tweets from the trial throughout March 12 to March 21st and I can find no reference to the shorts being found at TLM's house. I think the confusion comes from her describing and maybe id-ing the ones from his gym bag. I may have missed something.If anyone else finds it could they post it please.

Juris_Prudence · Apr 6, 2012

AbbeyR said:
I thought it looked like he was wearing one of the CSI type thin paper suits like the one the mannequin is wearing in this photo (hard to tell though!):

(Photo 16 here: http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/05/19599891.html )

All of those circled areas look promising for forensic evidence - has there been any news about the coat in the trial so far? I may have missed it.

Just an observation:
The mannequin is wearing a paper-ish white hoodie. Just like the one I believe MR is wearing in his mug shot. JMO.

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

Member

Active Member

Inactive

Inactive

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Meow Meow Meow Meow.

Active Member

Well-Known Member

remember me as a time of day

Active Member

remember me as a time of day

New Member

Meow Meow Meow Meow.

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Inactive

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics