Compassionate Reader
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2010
- Messages
- 2,357
- Reaction score
- 114
Remember, I'm a retired mathematics teacher. Sometimes I get all bound up in these mathematical things. Sorry. I meant no disrespect.
What is important to me about the mtDNA is that I am of the understanding that none of TH's relatives lived in West Memphis and that's why there's the greater possibility that the hair could only belong to TH. JMO
Murderers have been convicted of far less evidence than what is pointing to T.H. JMO
This case needs to be reopened so that the evidence can be examined properly and with fresh eyes! JMO
Terry Hobbs confirmed that the only relatives on the night of May 5th and the next day were Pam's parents. No relatives of Terry's searched or were even in West Memphis then.
This is why the mtDNA found on the hair matching T.H. is so crucial because it also lines up with him being at the last known place where the children were as evidenced by witnesses who saw and heard him calling to the boys. That possibility, coupled with the possibility of secondary transfer, cements my disbelief in a way.
This evidence coupled with T.H.'s violent behaviour assaulting P.H., shooting her brother and assaulting a neighbour is extremely strong evidence against T.H. And these are only the violent assaults that we know of. Usually an individual who has violent tendencies acts out on them quite frequently unfortunately. JMO
I didn't realized that... now the hair is definitely interesting!!!! Ty so much for that info, puts everything in another perspective!If the lace that was used to bind MM turns out to be a 60" lace cut in two, it must be presumed that this lace came from the perp. As far as I am informed, this was the binding where the said hair was found.
Regarding what I would consider evidence... I would like to see some hard physical evidence, like DNA. However, I'm not gonna beat around the bush here, I believe the perp was most likely someone who knew the boys as is often the case with crimes like these. Now, TH is very high up on my list even though I'm far from 100% convinced and not too keen on pointing fingers - I like to keep an open mind. However, because of that, a lot of DNA evidence could be explained away as secondary transfer. I find it highly unlikely, but what I think doesn't really matter. So it would really be of utmost importance to test any and all possible DNA found on the bodies. The WM3 have already been ruled out by DNA testing - who else could be ruled out?! Just test EVERYTHING. Identify all DNA present.
Sadly, all that testing might not be possible, and that's where slightly more circumstantial things, such as the lock box, come in to play.
Furthermore, there is the existence of patterned injuries all over this victim's face that could be bite marks. Since the ME may have missed this crucial evidence, other areas of his body may show bite mark evidence as well. The autopsy photos of this victim supplied to this examiner were not of sufficient quality to make an absolute determination of any kind, and would require a thorough examination by a qualified forensic odontologist for an informed, conclusive analysis. [note: Dr. Thomas David, board certified forensic odontologist, has confirmed the wound as a human adult bitemark and excluded Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley as the offender using bite impressions obtained from the men in prison] Bite mark evidence is very important in any criminal case because it demonstrates behavior and lends itself to individuation. It can reveal to an examiner who committed the act, because bite marks can be as unique as fingerprints. And, once established, it also reveals the act itself; biting
Battered children most often have randomly placed bite marks on the cheeks, back, and sides. However, bite marks on battered children have also been found on the abdomen, scrotum, and buttocks. In child cases, biting seems to be done in a rapid, random, and enraged manner leaving tissue laceration, diffuse areas, and poor detail, as opposed to sexually associated bite marks, usually inflicted in a slow and sadistic manner and resulting in excellent detail.
Note: According to Dr. Lowell Levine (as detailed Practical Homicide Investigation), there are two general but distinct types of bite mark patterns.
1) Those which are inflicted slowly, which leave a central ecchymotic area or 'suck mark,' and a radiating linear abrasion patter surrounding the central area resembling a sunburst. The type is most often found in sexually oriented homicides;
2) Those which resemble a tooth mark pattern. This is an attack or defensive bite mark and is seen most often in the battered-child type of homicide.
The bite marks in this case appear to be, in the majority, of the nature and quality described above in the Battered Child Homicide.
Based on this evidence, and the location of the disposal site, and the victimology, and the other injuries inflicted on the victims, it is the opinion of this examiner that this case represents a battered child or child-custodial homicide. To a greater extent the parents, and to a lesser extent the guardians, relatives and anyone else who was allowed frequent, trusted access to these children should be thoroughly investigated as suspects in this case.