Crime Scene Animation by Websleuths Member grayhuze

Very god points! I'm clearly late to this thread, but I have followed this case very closely, almost obsessively! I have watched and rewatched the trial many times, contributed to discussions on FB, youtube and read every book I could get my hands on. I'm a big fan of Gray's work and admittedly have gone back and forth on what I believe about the sequence of events. Wizzy, are correct when you stated that everyone missed the "typo" in the ME's report. From my recollection, it was actually a juror question to Dr. Horn about the dura mater being intact. Horn looked back through his notes and admitted that the report did say the dura mater was intact, but claimed it was a typo as the bullet would have had to go through the dura mater...". I just read the documents that Geezee posted from '09 and the state did report that the shot was first in the sequence of the attack. I have struggled with reconciling what was said in court and what was said before the trial and let me tell you, the struggle is real! I really appreciate the debate/discussions because I learn so much and am challenged in my own beliefs, opinions, assumptions and my own personal bias. Thank you Gray for the challenge and for your very thorough and thoughtful hard work you put into your animations. I know it's not easy or pleasant to stick yourself out there with an unpopular belief and it takes courage to put your work and theories out there for public opinion. I've commented on a couple of your videos (Shellianne) and appreciate your feedback. Any who, my apologies for a long post. I signed up here in 2012, but just now started posting. I wish I had been active with you guys during the trial.

m
I'm going to chime in here, hope it is OK. JMOO- I am open-minded,( I am NOT emotionally attached, and I'm not cold hearted either) and at the same time, I agree with the verdict, Premeditation, murder 1. JA most probably will never see the light of day, unless the verdict is overturned on an appeal. Dr. Horn's typo is a big deal, you have to understand this. He is a professional, so, no excuse for him. I don't believe that he didn't go over his report, at least a couple of times, knowing the world would see this important piece of evidence. The prosecution read the report, the defense read that report, neither found this mistake to my knowledge. This mistake was found in court. Someone pointed out to me that the word NOT was in the report and shouldn't have been. I understand the point, that it could have happened. That isn't a typo. That is a big mistake. It changes the whole report. If this typo, as Dr. Horn says, was all there was, nothing else concerning this, then I would except it, no questions asked. Unfortunately, here is where you have to be open minded, we have to also look at Det. Flores in this subject. He has said the gunshot first several times, his TV interview along with his pre=trial testimony it all matches the report as is, in evidence. Det. Flores also uses the word WE, many times, who is WE? My opinion is, Dr. Horn is the person he talked to. I don't know how Dr. Horn could not remember this (conversations). With all these things together they add up to maybe a appeals issue, or someone examining this issue somewhere down the road. (sigh) That is why it is so important. Example: you have a biopsy, (in simple language) Using Dr. Horns word, typo: The cells tested were NOT cancerous. When the test report should have said: The cells tested were cancerous. Isn't that a big deal? Esp. if it's your report. JMOO it is something we should all think about if you are following this trial.
 
You know I believe you. Except, I think that's the back of her left foot. I think that because of how her pants are flowing, where the zipper and stripes on the pants are, and how you can see the bump of her left shoe at the heel protruding at the heel line of the shoe. I believe her left shoe print was found on the floor. It's also her left shoe print on the base of the shower. I see Travis' back quite clearly. That black thing? After all these years, it now looks like a house shoe!

In all seriousness, I think it's Travis' shadow. Look at your arrow and how that same white streak in it goes from the foot into the "black thing." Her right foot is probably on his right side and she's standing over him, kind of when his head between her legs. The left foot is mostly off the photo and you just see her heel. Her left foot is at an angle as depicted by the stripes and zipper on the pants.

Hey WM, really sorry for not having seen this post before now. I do agree what we're seeing is her left foot, turning towards the camera and moving towards (our) left and upwards and right, look at the curl to the left of the fold in the middle of the pant leg (1 circled in pic), that's her big toe with blood-covered toenail, the line is underneath her other toes. The lighter area in the center of "T's head" (2 in pic) is actually blur from her foot, I do not believe that is his head at all but really need to see the actual digital pic to pin down what it is. I think you're right about her direction facing the camera, I think the hair shadow on the floor-to-pant leg shows that (3 in pic). I am coming to believe the blood line is the neck slash but I really want to see the original pic, the one from the book (below and tilted to reflect the angle of the camera lying upside down on the shutter button) is better than what we had but still not good enough.

53216Bookrotatelabel.jpg
 
Very god points! I'm clearly late to this thread, but I have followed this case very closely, almost obsessively! I have watched and rewatched the trial many times, contributed to discussions on FB, youtube and read every book I could get my hands on. I'm a big fan of Gray's work and admittedly have gone back and forth on what I believe about the sequence of events. Wizzy, are correct when you stated that everyone missed the "typo" in the ME's report. From my recollection, it was actually a juror question to Dr. Horn about the dura mater being intact. Horn looked back through his notes and admitted that the report did say the dura mater was intact, but claimed it was a typo as the bullet would have had to go through the dura mater...". I just read the documents that Geezee posted from '09 and the state did report that the shot was first in the sequence of the attack. I have struggled with reconciling what was said in court and what was said before the trial and let me tell you, the struggle is real! I really appreciate the debate/discussions because I learn so much and am challenged in my own beliefs, opinions, assumptions and my own personal bias. Thank you Gray for the challenge and for your very thorough and thoughtful hard work you put into your animations. I know it's not easy or pleasant to stick yourself out there with an unpopular belief and it takes courage to put your work and theories out there for public opinion. I've commented on a couple of your videos (Shellianne) and appreciate your feedback. Any who, my apologies for a long post. I signed up here in 2012, but just now started posting. I wish I had been active with you guys during the trial.

m


Quoting myself in response as to why Wizzy and Greyhuze are wrong and that it really was a typo that wasn't caught until trial:
No, that's just it. You CANNOT sustain a gunshot wound to the brain and have the Dura Mater be intact. It's not anatomically possible. It covers the brain. The only possible explanation is that Dr. Horn didn't edit his report and catch that the word "not" was left out.
Old argument, but since you didn't comment on my last post- this poster didn't need to examine Travis's skull in person, because it wasn't anatomically possible for the bullet to pierce the skull and not damage the dura mater, therefore; it not only could but HAD to be a typo in Dr. Horn's report.
I studied brain anatomy and physiology for my Master's Degree. I know of what I speak.
 
Back when we had the Sequence of Events thread going a physician was posting on it and he stated that the report was done in 2 parts, one for specific wound discussion and one generalized, the dura mater on the whole (apart from the gunshot) was smooth and undamaged. I haven't reread the autopsy report in quite a while but that explanation long since cleared up any confusion I had about Horn's report and thought the typo business was just a red herring.
 
Before I go back to looking at any of the pics, I always promise myself if I discover anything new I'll keep it to myself as few others seem to be able to see what I can pull out and I truly don't want to be a pest. But I continually break my word to myself as whatever it is I've seen is too compelling to keep silent...and here we are again.

I opened one of the rotated pics and immediately saw a shadow over the 'head' I hadn't noticed in such detail before. I played with swapping colors to try and bring out more detail and I believe I can say with a good amount of confidence the 'head' is actually her foot. Since pics won't attach full size here any longer, click to enlarge, save and resize or zoom, I added arrows just below her toes, ghostly as the blur of them may be, you can clearly make out her toes and toe nails.

53216BkFootNotHead.jpg
 
Hey WM, really sorry for not having seen this post before now. I do agree what we're seeing is her left foot, turning towards the camera and moving towards (our) left and upwards and right, look at the curl to the left of the fold in the middle of the pant leg (1 circled in pic), that's her big toe with blood-covered toenail, the line is underneath her other toes. The lighter area in the center of "T's head" (2 in pic) is actually blur from her foot, I do not believe that is his head at all but really need to see the actual digital pic to pin down what it is. I think you're right about her direction facing the camera, I think the hair shadow on the floor-to-pant leg shows that (3 in pic). I am coming to believe the blood line is the neck slash but I really want to see the original pic, the one from the book (below and tilted to reflect the angle of the camera lying upside down on the shutter button) is better than what we had but still not good enough.

attachment.php

I've been away for awhile. I don't remember that version of that photo. Its much clearer than I recall. Was that from the second trial? Did they go over the evidence again like this?
 
Hiya SS, long time no see. :) That photo is from JM's book (the digital version), it is much clearer than what we had to work with from the trial but still would love to get ahold of the original digitals.
 
Thanks, geevee. Were there any other better photos than what we had?

Unfortunately no, in the book the final pic (5:33:32) wasn't even as clear as a few we were able to get from the trial videos (and those were very dark), but I figured out mostly what is in it (the light area near the right front are fingers, making the dark area to the left impossible to be T's back but could be his arm if one or more of the fingers belong to him). I'm still waiting to see if Beth Karas will decide those pics are important and attain and publish the originals, no word on that though.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
2,429
Total visitors
2,507

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,964
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top