Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #193

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's her blood isn't it? How else is it going to get there unless the killer painted it on there. But a blood splatter expert said it did not look like it was painted. It looked like a natural transference of blood.

I will go with the expert at this point.
A video would be good to see, how a clean "F" is produced with wet fingers on a surface unintentionally (simulating holding and sliding down a tree).
I remember the original "F" being relatively clean like written with finger paint. For that, a slight break between the horizontal and vertical lines would be necessary, I think. One go wouldn't produce the clear image.

I'm not interested in what the "F" stands for or not, but rather in the technique, how it came about.

I'm now also waiting for the expert, doubting the expertise in advance. ;)
 

I don’t even see a “F” until the next photo which shows what the defense were/is claiming.
 

I don’t even see a “F” until the next photo which shows what the defense were/is claiming.
I also don't see it. No idea, where I saw a clear "F", but I swear, I saw it somewhere. Hallucinations? :oops:
 
The blood spatter expert was aided by technology as I recall. Which lit up microscopic blood. He was also aided by clues from the crime scene as a whole. Separate pools of blood. Blood on LG's leg which implied position and dynamism. She was moving as she was being killed.

Her blood tells the harrowing truth.

JMO
 
The blood spatter expert was aided by technology as I recall. Which lit up microscopic blood. He was also aided by clues from the crime scene as a whole. Separate pools of blood. Blood on LG's leg which implied position and dynamism. She was moving as she was being killed.

Her blood tells the harrowing truth.

JMO


Yes and these people don’t have an agenda unlike the D team. The Science tells them everything they need to know.

IMO
 
We still don't know the totality of her description. I do not believe there will be anything inaccurate about her full testimony when it comes time for her to take the stand. It's been just another bit of manipulated spin by the DT, IMO
On the other hand, the state will have had plenty of time to prep her. But for his confessions, which I'm eager to learn more about the circumstances under which he gave them, I'd have SERIOUS issues with this case. AMOO
 
We still don't know the totality of her description. I do not believe there will be anything inaccurate about her full testimony when it comes time for her to take the stand. It's been just another bit of manipulated spin by the DT, IMO

The Judge literally ruled there was no misrepresentation.
 
On the other hand, the state will have had plenty of time to prep her. But for his confessions, which I'm eager to learn more about the circumstances under which he gave them, I'd have SERIOUS issues with this case. AMOO
We don't know everything the State has yet, gag order is being obeyed, by them anyway.
 
This is a local tv station report, from their website. Video on this page shows searchers in the water. The creek easily could have, and I believe was, crossed by the killer and the girls.

 
I think this is an overlooked point.

This state expert doesn't have the goal to convict anyone in particular.
So how do they decide on an expert to use as a witness? I imagine they do a consult and find someone who will say their theory is correct or who offers them clarity on what this or that may have meant or what happened at the scene. I believe they’re paid to provide their testimony / expert opinion, are they not? For their time, travel, etc? I would like to ask the State how many people they met with to ask about the blood spatter / F and how they decided on this guy over anyone else? Were there other experts who didn’t conclude that this was a handprint made by a dying girl? Any of their experts consulted think it was a rune etc?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The hearing is not an actual trial. He will have much more time to go in depth with his testimony then. He probably does have video evidence but there was no time in the hearing for anything like that.

All we heard was a preview of what his testimony will be. IMO

He explained very clearly why there was no finger or palm prints on the bark of a tree. It is impossible to pick up on bumpy, grooved surfaces like that.

I feel very confident that he did not record this experiment. My opinion only. We'll find out for sure when we can finally read the transcripts and not go by others' relaying to us what they want us to hear.

IMO MOO
 

I don’t even see a “F” until the next photo which shows what the defense were/is claiming.
major-delphi-murders-update-cops-852519458.jpg

Major Delphi Murders update as cops investigate 'crime scene photos leak'

me either. just a faint smear of blood. It's a HUGE stretch for someone to say that is a purposeful anything. JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
98
Guests online
1,975
Total visitors
2,073

Forum statistics

Threads
605,420
Messages
18,186,809
Members
233,355
Latest member
frankiterranova
Back
Top