Damiens anti depressant can CAUSE delusions....

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[112885]

112885 Posts in 8614 Topics by 4618 Members
Latest Member: garrymoore

[Tricky8oy]

Gday Em

I'm simply implying that medication is way too much of a stretch to even try to understand why Echols (may have or did, still not convinced yet) committed this crime.

As for agreeing with Farm, well Farm takes a page right out of Orwell's book. I don't agree but you can't argue with someone so one-sided. That's not to say that he doesn't have good points but it also says that you can't argue. Its best not to for he only (as i said earlier in this post) reads what he wants between selected lines.

If Damien is guilty I'm sure it had nothing to do with medication because (as i said before) it would have taken a simple insanity plee as well as a lawsuit against the drug company and this site would be called HMO is a hoax

anyway i do enjoy discussing this case ( that is not to say i get off on it, considering the circumstances) on an intellectual level as I'm sure Farm does too. This case brings up high emotions and if it seems that i wail on Farm (or anyone else for that matter) it's because i like to feed on knowledge, and to try to get a clearer picture of how, what, when, where and why.

Does this answer your question

I understand if it doesn't lol

[Farm]

The DNA the Echols referred to on the Larry King show.

Yes, "a hair that matched Hobbs which was found tied in a knot of Moore's ligature."

First off, it wasn't found tied in a knot, it was just recovered from a lace 16 years ago.

Second, there is nothing to indicate it wasn't his son's shoelace, because the victims weren't bound with their own laces.

Third, it wasn't a match at all, it just included him - among hundreds of other WM residents alone.

And last but not least - instead of using the hair Hobbs gave police back in 94 for their reference sample, they chose to use cigarette butts that a Defense investigator collected from Hobb's home, so there's nothing to indicate that the hair was even compared to Hobb's DNA in the first place.

But other than that.......

I don't agree but you can't argue with someone so one-sided.

You can if you know what you're talking about.

You just don't.

Its best not to for he only (as i said earlier in this post) reads what he wants between selected lines.

Has it never occured to you that you simply don't have an argument?

Here it is in a nutshell, as arrogant as it may sound... You can discuss with me, you can question me, and you can disagree with me.

But you are simply in no position to debate me, because you just don't have the knowledge on this particular topic.

[Tricky8oy]

Is that right, OK

Then please explain to me why ( and i know this question is gonna make me sound like a leg humper) the DNA from the crime scene did not (as far as i know) match the WM3 in any way?

Do not accuse me of having no knowledge of this case, I've been following it since before i joined this site.

Yes, "a hair that matched Hobbs which was found tied in a knot of another victim's shoelace."

First off, it wasn't found tied in a knot, it was just recovered from a lace 16 years ago.

So does that mean that this hair belongs to Hobbs or Jacoby? If so, I'm not disputing that and as I've said before "secondary transfer"

As for not being bound in their own shoelaces then why does all the (independent) literature I've read as well as the coroners report say that is was. Next thing you'll tell me is that they were sodomized even though the coroner dismissed that scenario.

FFS give me something tangible rather try to insult me.

[Farm]

Is that right

Yes, it is.

Then please explain to me why ( and i know this question is gonna make me sound like a leg humper) the DNA from the crime scene did not (as far as i know) match the WM3 in any way?

Well, first off, there was little DNA collected.

Second, of what was collected, little tested.

Third, of what was tested, little yeilded usable results.

And fourth, two of the foreign alleles were consistent with the convicts.

So does that mean that this hair belongs to Hobbs or Jacoby?

It means there is no way to say it "belonged" to either of them.

As for not being bound in their own shoelaces then why does all the (independent) literature I've read as well as the coroners report say that is was.

Because you are a dishonest person - the coroners report says no such thing.

In fact, one of the victims was tied with one white lace, and one black.

Pretty safe to assume they wern't both his laces, huh?

Next thing you'll tell me is that they were sodomized even though the coroner dismissed that scenario.

Let me help you, Kent Hale was the Coroner, Frank Peretti was the medical examiner.

So the Coroner never even offered an opinion on the matter.

Second, Peretti didn't dissmiss anything, he testified that he would have expected to find rectal tearing had they been sodomized, but that there can be penetration without it.

FFS give me something tangible rather try to insult me.

When you stop presenting silly clueless shit as fact, I will stop insulting you.

You want to ask me legetimate questions, then do it.

[emmaline]

As for not being bound in their own shoelaces then why does all the (independent) literature I've read as well as the coroners report say that is was. Next thing you'll tell me is that they were sodomized even though the coroner dismissed that scenario.

The 3 boys WERE tied with the 3 boys' laces, but they weren't tied up with their OWN laces (i.e. Stevie may have been tied with Christopher's laces etc.)

Then please explain to me why ( and i know this question is gonna make me sound like a leg humper) the DNA from the crime scene did not (as far as i know) match the WM3 in any way?

Not all of the hairs recovered from the scene have been tested, so there's no way of definitively saying there wasn't any DNA from the 3 left behind.

So does that mean that this hair belongs to Hobbs or Jacoby?

The hair found on the lace matched the mtDNA of a cigarette butt found in Hobbs' home. So there's no way of knowing who smoked that cigarette, plus they could only match mtDNA which isn't individual to one person.

[Farm]

Trick8oy has informed me via inbox that he's had enough.

I'm just far too rude and abrasive.

[emmaline]

Oh 

Tricky, I hope you don't give up that easily - you get used to Farm after a while hahaha.

[Farm]

He's been here for two years.

His warm welcome pass has expired.

In that amount of time he should have accidentally learned more than he has.

[emmaline]

Oh I thought he was a newbie...

[Farm]

Nah, just another "Hey everybody watch - Farm ain't so tough" dweeb.

My tolerance decreases with every birthday.

[Kanga]

My tolerance decreases with every birthday.

In very small increments.


Obviously.

[DogIsYourName]

Well, first off, there was little DNA collected.
Second, of what was collected, little tested.
Third, of what was tested, little yeilded usable results.
And fourth, two of the foreign alleles were consistent with the convicts.

I think this is the most valuable thing in the thread.  Can anyone refute it?  Can you show that the non-tested items were insignificant?  Can you show that the foreign alleles were not consistent with the convicts, or that they are somehow less significant than the foreign allele that the defense consistantly includes in the briefs?

[addict]

I'm not sure what other foreign alleles were found and where.  I will look into it further, however, since it's a good question.

There is no way to show non-tested items are insignificant, unless they are tested at some point or unless there is some way to determine why they weren't tested to begin with.  There were items sent to Bode (e.g. - some of the hairs found on Chris) that were not tested.  I have yet to find any explanation of why that is.

[Farm]

In other words, you have absolutely nothing to add.

[addict]

Ha!  I guess not.