Evidence That is Incompatible With an Accident Theory

[logicalgirl]

I had noticed these contradictions as well. One reports the skull the the north west of the log, the other reports it to the east. No big deal I guess. IMO

I don't believe the report says that - I believe it says it was north west of the log and east of the black canvas bag. This merely tells you in relation to the skull where the log was and where the canvas bag was, doesn't it?

 

[notthatsmart]

Here is the interview by Y Melich at the scene. RK clearly states he poked the bag and a skull dropped out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjRWRN3PfGU&feature=related

Yeah I know, but I believe by interview #3 he changes his story. IMO

 

[notthatsmart]

It is not MY scenario. It is documented as fact.
AS I keep reiterating, you should read Dr Garavaglia's post mortem report, it clearly states all of her findings regarding the skull, the tape holding the mandible in place, the roots intermingled with the hair mat. Dispute her findings if you wish, but they are what she saw and she was at the scene, you were not, she has the expertise which you do not. I do not believe she is lying about anything.

I am not understanding what you are saying. I have read those docs. What is it that you think I am disputing? From what I can tell, she is reporting the skull from the medical examiners office, not the field.

How can the hair mat be intermingled with roots if it fell out of the bag? Or are you saying it intermingled with roots while it was inside the bag? How would you know that? I am not disputing her findings at all, I am concerned that there are sleuthers mixing up reports from the scene with reports after transportation to the medical examiners office. Lets get the facts straight. MOO

 

[Harmony 2]

Alright, lets try to get this straight. You are saying the skull dropped out or rolled out. I am saying the Le interviewed him 3 times to get the right answer according to them.

Under your scenario, if the skull rolled out or dropped out, then the mat that was attached to the hair that was attached to the duck tape that was attached to the skull, must have grown roots through it in 2.6 seconds. I do not see how it is possible that the skull was ever in a bag because of the roots growing through the hair mat. Can't have it both ways. Was the hair adhered to the ground or not? What she saw or reported on was something that was in a paper bag that had been transferred. She did not report the skull from the crime scene. IMO

Ps I am all for your scenario, the skull being in the bag, just makes it more look like it was put there later. The Skull being out of the bag and adhered to the ground, makes it look like it was put there sooner.

If it is true that the skull came rolling out, then someone is lying about it being adhered to the ground with roots. IMO

NTS I have been looking for the statement about the roots growing into the hair mat and adhering it to the ground. This would help explain why the hair did not float away and why the duct tape remained in place (at least to me it would). What document states this... do you know?

 

[notthatsmart]

I don't believe the report says that - I believe it says it was north west of the log and east of the black canvas bag. This merely tells you in relation to the skull where the log was and where the canvas bag was, doesn't it?

directly west of the north west area of the log, is no where near the east of the log is it? Wait a sec, lets try to be logical here. Was that quote taken out of context? Does it actually say black canvas bag?

Logic tells me that north west is not east. IMO

 

[RR0004]

Sounds like Kb is wrong again. He never reported the skull came rolling out in his interviews with police. thanks

...and IIRC he even addressed the erroneous report in a police interview.

 

[notthatsmart]

Ya know, Not That Smart is a fiitting title for yourself, I am sure I will be banned buy you really are nothatsmart, same category as Wudge, if you really put forth some thoughts that had any credence or valueto this case, I and many others would feel differently..........do your research sweetheart before you put forth your idiotic statements.

Try to be nice. Attack the post not the poster. I promise to be nice to you.

 

[okiedokietoo]

The skull was inside the bag(s) and you do not know what position the skull was in before it tumbled out. When RK prodded the bag the skull fell out. That is documented if you care to look it up.

Read JoyPath post #332- 'Factoring in the issues of temperature in June,the musculature,ligamentous decomposition would have been rapid and the mandible should have 'dropped' quickly NO MATTER what position the body was entombed. Thus, an external mechanical means provided a support for the internal structures'.
The DUCT tape held the mandible in place.

Regarding whether other experts can challenge Dr Garavaglia's post mortem report as to the presence of duct tape holding the mandible - what are they going to dispute- that the skull was not found as she documented? She stated meticulously what she saw. It is what is is, no expert can come along and say anything different- photos document the position of the mandible and the duct tape holding it in place.

Thank You - Very Good Post - believe you are right, it is all documented

 

[RR0004]

Here is the interview by Y Melich at the scene. RK clearly states he poked the bag and a skull dropped out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjRWRN3PfGU&feature=related

...I believe it was an "excited utterance". Police did question him about this.

 

[suepitzl]

That post and most of the other posts by nothatsmart are IMO idiotic

 

[notthatsmart]

NTS I have been looking for the statement about the roots growing into the hair mat and adhering it to the ground. This would help explain why the hair did not float away and why the duct tape remained in place (at least to me it would). What document states this... do you know?

I was just using logic. If roots are growing through the mat, I would assume it was adhered to the ground. I can not make any sense out of a skull rolling out and ending up being attached to a hair mat with roots growing through it. Do you know if Steve Hanson (the person that removed the skull and body) ever made a report from the field? thanks

 

[RR0004]

That post and most of the other posts by nothatsmart are IMO idiotic

...and designed to provoke. Don't bite!

oxoxox

 

[magic-cat]

Alright, lets try to get this straight. You are saying the skull dropped out or rolled out. I am saying the Le interviewed him 3 times to get the right answer according to them.

Under your scenario, if the skull rolled out or dropped out, then the mat that was attached to the hair that was attached to the duck tape that was attached to the skull, must have grown roots through it in 2.6 seconds. I do not see how it is possible that the skull was ever in a bag because of the roots growing through the hair mat. Can't have it both ways. Was the hair adhered to the ground or not? What she saw or reported on was something that was in a paper bag that had been transferred. She did not report the skull from the crime scene. IMO

Ps I am all for your scenario, the skull being in the bag, just makes it more look like it was put there later. The Skull being out of the bag and adhered to the ground, makes it look like it was put there sooner.

If it is true that the skull came rolling out, then someone is lying about it being adhered to the ground with roots. IMO

It's all very simple really. The bags were in poor condition, NTS...they had been ravaged by time, water, winds, decomposing tissues and sadly animals. It could very well be that he barely picked up an edge of the bag and the skull "fell out", or so it seemed to him. This falling out process could have occurred a mere inch from the ground and still been described thus. As to the plants growing into and adhering in the hair...well there were tears and holes in the bags obviously, from the conditions I have described above. The skull and the hair mat could both have been "adhered to the ground" and still made a movement of falling when the bag which was under and apparently over them was disturbed. This falling process need not have been from a foot in the air...it could have happened immediately upon him tugging upwards on the bag.

 

[RR0004]

I was just using logic. If roots are growing through the mat, I would assume it was adhered to the ground. I can not make any sense out of a skull rolling out and ending up being attached to a hair mat with roots growing through it. Do you know if Steve Hanson (the person that removed the skull and body) ever made a report from the field? thanks

Why not?

 

[notthatsmart]

...I believe it was an "excited utterance". Police did question him about this.

Of course they kept questioning him about it because they knew it couldn't be true. I will look for the final interview where I believe he stated that he only lifted the bag and nothing fell out or rolled out.

 

[sleutherontheside]

Let's hop off the merry go round folks, and get back to productive discussion.

 

[magic-cat]

I was just using logic. If roots are growing through the mat, I would assume it was adhered to the ground. I can not make any sense out of a skull rolling out and ending up being attached to a hair mat with roots growing through it. Do you know if Steve Hanson (the person that removed the skull and body) ever made a report from the field? thanks

Even if the hair mat was adhered to the ground by roots, and it did have roots growing into it we know this, it still could have moved when he moved the bag. They were tiny roots and they were not made of cement...they could still move...and also tiny roots will just let loose...like pulling on a weed in a flower bed...they usually let right loose...

The simple explanation is usually the right one.

 

[RR0004]

Of course they kept questioning him about it because they knew it couldn't be true. I will look for the final interview where I believe he stated that he only lifted the bag and nothing fell out or rolled out.

This is old news. You don't have to convince me.

 

[logicalgirl]

I am not understanding what you are saying. I have read those docs. What is it that you think I am disputing? From what I can tell, she is reporting the skull from the medical examiners office, not the field.

How can the hair mat be intermingled with roots if it fell out of the bag? Or are you saying it intermingled with roots while it was inside the bag? How would you know that? I am not disputing her findings at all, I am concerned that there are sleuthers mixing up reports from the scene with reports after transportation to the medical examiners office. Lets get the facts straight. MOO

I'm wondering about this scenario. I wonder if when Roy Kronk moved the black bag, say to the left, the skull gave the appearance of moving, or rolling to the right when in fact it was adhered to the ground by the weeds,
It just gave the appearance of sliding or rolling out of the bag. It was actually the bag that moved.

Did I say that clearly enough for you to follow it? Sorry not trying to be smart - or that you need to agree, but could you follow what I DID say or was it just a jumble?

 

[RR0004]

Even if the hair mat was adhered to the ground by roots, and it did have roots growing into it we know this, it still could have moved when he moved the bag. They were tiny roots and they were not made of cement...they could still move...and also tiny roots will just let loose...like pulling on a weed in a flower bed...they usually let right loose...

The simple explanation is usually the right one.

Really!!