Hey, you'd do the same, I'm sure.
Hey do you know what a bacta-tank is?
Yep.
Looking at the video I posted, it doesn't seem to me that Lou Smit was squirming like a snake.
I can't not see what my eyes see.
It also doesn't seem to me that he left any forensic evidence behind in that exercise.
1) Just because he didn't doesn't mean someone else wouldn't have.
2) He's skinny and not wearing any winter clothes.
3) He'd studied that window a hundred ways. Did the intruder have a chance to do that?
For example, it doesn't seem to show any disturbance out of the ordinary.
Maybe you didn't notice him dragging his hindquarters across it. That would have left a significant disturbance of the dirt, leaves and what-not in that window well. Except there wasn't anything like that.
The crime scene photos of the basement shows that window opened.
I know that. Trouble is, it had been broken for quite a while. Also, he claims the intruder placed the suitcase under the window to get out. Problem is, Fleet White says he's the one who put it there. Also, where are the handprints from getting out?
You got sold a lemon, voynich. Don't let it bother you; so did I.
2- It's too bad they didn't use bloodhounds.
Yeah, it is.
3- I recall reading that both it and the cord appeared to be cut on both ends. So if it was cut off, then presumably it remains missing.
I meant that the rest of it may not have necessarily been in the house. My brother thinks that BR had that around to practice knots on. But he's hit-and-miss with this case.
So as to not lose ourselves in too wide a field, let's focus on Darth Smit's experiment, a 30-second demonstration starting at 10 seconds.
Good idea.
What kind of evidence would you expect to find in Lou Smit's experiment as a result of Lou Smit?
That's easy: scattered dirt all over the floor under the window, foot prints in the window well, fibers scuffed off by the edges.
And the leaves at the bottom of the storm window would not necessarily show any signs of activity. If you have leaves that can be easily blown, they can re-arrange themselves before and after entry.
I live in the Northeastern US, voynich. I'm quite familiar with the patterns of fallen leaves in wells and drains. And I know what I'm talking about.
Given this took 30 seconds, starting at 10 seconds, it's not necessarily the case that fiber evidence would be found. If he were wearing gloves, he would not have left behind fingerprints.
Those are all some big ifs. Fool me once, and all that.
Frame @ 38 seconds show crime scene photo of the window wide open. Given Smit hopped down, there would not necessarily be scuff marks on the wall.
Except that he said the scuff mark was proof of an intruder. Make up his mind.
Based on the above demonstration, what evidence would have to be there?
I already said.
If you took a group of RDI sith team detectives, a day after Lou Smit's demonstration, what must they find that would show that Lou Smit had been there the day before?
Well, aside from the things I named above, footprints from his shoes.
Would such evidence show Lou Smit was there yesterday specifically or show that any time in the remote past, someone may have been there?
I would say yes.
It was funnier when Richard Pryor did it...