TTF14
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 15,937
- Reaction score
- 73,837
I expect experts on either side to show the court proof of their experiments. If the state says handprint, prove it’s a handprint. Defense says it was painted, show it can be painted. We’re long past “trust me, bro” as a source in this case. I expect everyone to have actual proof.
IMO A paintbrush could be used and also leave some type of hair in the bark that LE would find and then search for in search warrants.
IMO This expert was hired specifically to try to disprove the defense theory. He also said the sticks were used to hide the bodies but then admitted they only covered 3% of the bodies and it would have taken seconds to cover the bodies with all the leaves.
Expert opinions are not all or nothing. I found a lot of his testimony to make sense. There were a few offers that didn’t connect with me. We can take and leave parts of expert opinions if we believe some parts and not others.
MOO
Agree. And I find it really odd and sloppy that an expert doing an experiment didn't document it with video. If I were on the jury, I'd be wondering why, and would choose to give his testimony less (or no) weight because of it. Again, this isn't 1950. We have the technology. I wonder why he didn't record it. Absent recordings seem to be the theme of this entire investigation so maybe he thought it was a rule!
IMO MOO