Actually some wounds which appear to be stab wounds
in Kyleb's opinion are
shown in PL2. Granted, those wounds don't have any defining characteristics to them which demonstrate a notable constancy with the survival knife
that has no connection to this case like the wounds I addressed previously do
in Kyleb's opinion, but there's nothing about them which rightly rules out the possibility that they were inflicted with that knife either
or just about any other knife out there, making it meaningless as to proof of guilt.
No, I do my best to avoid such ridiculous leaps in logic.
I've seen some pretty courageous leaps. Heck, insinuating that the survival knife was the actual knife used in these crimes is a pretty courageous leap.
Yet that's not rightly what I've insisted here, and I'd much prefer to see you acknowledge what I actually have said rather than resorting to attempts to argue around it.
Is there any chance you'd invite Paid over here to discuss the matter, seeing as how registration on the Blackboard is closed?
The vast difference between my comment suggesting what could be done now which "would go a long way toward taking the wind out of the sails those of you who've gotten so worked up over a hair" and the assertion of "how the investigation should have been run from day 1" is not a matter of opinion, but rather one of fact.
And here I thought we agreed on something, namely that they should start their investigation(now or on day 1) with those closest to the victims. My guess is you forgot that that would include Hobbs and now try to deflect with personal attacks.If ever gain the respect for rational discourse to start respecting such facts, please get back to me.
And there are those personal attacks.
It takes serious tunnel vision to persist in ignoring the fact that a wide variety of other people were investigated as documented throughout the records on Callahan, with notable example's mentioned in the last section of
this letter from Fogleman which we've discussed previously.
Writing down a name/tip, doing nothing with it and then post-arrest writing up a memo saying "cleared" does not constitute an investigation. Were some looked into? Sure. Were many looked into with the purpose of clearing them because it got in the way of their pre-conceived theory? Absolutely. Were there more that went unchecked than checked? 100% yes.
Not necessarily in that order, and the abrasions under the brow ridge aren't consistent with the knife being scrapped across it but rather pressed into it, and note the other semicircles around cheek in the wider angle shot. As for the wound in the center of the semicircle on the forehead, the knife apparently came with a compass in the hilt which might've been responsible for that.
Damn. It would suck to be put to death on evidence that "might've" been accurateAs for the scraping, it's certainly unusual, but so is murdering a group young children, and people who do the latter can't rightly be excluding from doing other unusual things.
How about you address what I have said about the knife rather than demanding statistics from me which I've never even made any pretensions of having? Is that too much to ask?
Bob and weave. The point was valid and then deflected.
No, that's jumbled mess of an argument is your own making, apparently loosely based on what I've said here.
Perhaps. But more importantly, is the comparison even done with proper respect to scale? Absent a picture of the dentures with a measuring device to serve as a frame of reference it's impossible to rightly say one way or another.