FlossyMay
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2016
- Messages
- 3,220
- Reaction score
- 21,076
I agree he would have had marks and scratches on his face and body. I do recall from the interview he did that he had a mark on his neck, I couldn’t work out if it was just a scratch or a bite mark. Because of that mark I think she did fight back, perhaps she was asleep when he first attacked her but she woke up and tried to defend herself.True. If someone was so enraged that she was strangling a child, and the person who created that rage, interrupted a killing spree, I could see violent, deep scratches on the face, arms, hands, of the interrupter, CW.
CW had no marks, or deep scratches on his face, arms, only a small minor blemish on his hand. SW had no opportunity to fight back, he killed her when she was asleep.
SW had some long nails, she would have been able to do some serious damage if she had the opportunity to fight back.
To lend credibility to his own story, she would have scratched him badly, IMO. he had both hands around her neck, (unless he claims to have used just one hand) and she was free to flail around and inflict damage on him for upwards from a minute, according to the estimates posted here on how long it takes to strangle an adult human. She had to have been ambushed, asleep, or drugged for him to murder her without any scratches on his own body.True. If someone was so enraged that she was strangling a child, and the person who created that rage, interrupted a killing spree, I could see violent, deep scratches on the face, arms, hands, of the interrupter, CW.
CW had no marks, or deep scratches on his face, arms, only a small minor blemish on his hand. SW had no opportunity to fight back, he killed her when she was asleep.
SW had some long nails, she would have been able to do some serious damage if she had the opportunity to fight back.
Adorable, I know it’s been asked countless times but why the babies ??!!
As I've said before; IF his story were true and she was in a rage, adrenaline would be pumping. Likewise with him. When he appeared adrenaline would increase, triggering "fight or flight". We know she didn't flee, but there is no evidence of a fight. There was no screaming/yelling/discord heard, no visible wounds on him, no torn clothing, broken furniture, nothing! She had long, acrylic nails and she was a fighter. He was fit and strong. Peak emotions, peak adrenaline. But, no evidence. Any way you look at his story, there are holes you can drive a truck through!To lend credibility to his own story, she would have scratched him badly, IMO. he had both hands around her neck, (unless he claims to have used just one hand) and she was free to flail around and inflict damage on him for upwards from a minute, according to the estimates posted here on how long it takes to strangle an adult human. She had to have been ambushed, asleep, or drugged for him to murder her without any scratches on his own body.
Only if he was dumb enough to leave that kind of trail. JmoThe autopsy results should be the least of the defense concerns. Because its obvious that his Internet searches will probably show that he has been contemplating murdering her for a decent amount of time. Jmo
Only if he was dumb enough to leave that kind of trail. Jmo
I'm not sure about that either, but thought someone had said the date of birth may have been a factor. One school may have allowed students turning five at a later time. For example, the deadline at one may be August and another may be October. Not sure if that was ever clarified, though. When was the child's date of birth? That may explain it.I apologize because I don't know how to insert a quote from a previous thread and I can't find it. I'm still not understanding a statement from one of the VI's regarding the reason for switching schools. Did I miss the answer to that?
Colorado303I apologize because I don't know how to insert a quote from a previous thread and I can't find it. I'm still not understanding a statement from one of the VI's regarding the reason for switching schools. Did I miss the answer to that?
I think one had a later registration date or better age requirement or something which would have allowed them to sign up that week or something. IdkI apologize because I don't know how to insert a quote from a previous thread and I can't find it. I'm still not understanding a statement from one of the VI's regarding the reason for switching schools. Did I miss the answer to that?
No, “we” don’t need to give credence to anything, it is up to us individually to decide for ourselves how much credence to give anyone’s views. We can take it or leave it, as long as we are respectful.
Without knowing how a person relates to a case means I can’t make a determination, it’s as simple as that. Otherwise you’re saying if Jackie Peterson was posting on Laci’s thread, I’d be obligated to give her views credence.
Thank you PrimeSuspect. It appears the reason for switching schools is not just about the age/birth date. Adding IMOColorado303
Trust me, you really don’t want me to answer this.
IIRC, Bella's date of birth is 17 of December, 2013I'm not sure about that either, but thought someone had said the date of birth may have been a factor. One school may have allowed students turning five at a later time. For example, the deadline at one may be August and another may be October. Not sure if that was ever clarified, though. When was the child's date of birth? That may explain it.