Holly Bobo found deceased, discussion thread *Arrests* #6

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
jggordo said:
As a survivor of rape I can tell you there is no such thing as a "simple" rape. Considering Holly was at a place against her will, how could it be?

In my case the rape took 43 minutes. Each and every minute (at knifepoint) you do not know whether you will live or die. The minutes seem like days. I got through it by watching the clock next to my bed. In my case I survived, Holly did not. This Judge, IMO has to have enough knowledge of the crime to know it was everything but "simple". I believe the justice system has made too many deals and reduced too many charges that contributed to this tragedy. There are many that should be ashamed and exposed to this kind of "simple" Justice.

JMO's
Click to expand...

My heart goes out to you, jggordo..... Thank you for your willingness to share your story. I am so happy you are a survivor!
 
shefner said:
Justice for Holly.....that's all.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's a desire held by everyone here.

The question we all have is, how can we be sure that the ones who did this are the ones who get hung for it? If the wrong guys get hung, the bad guys get away. That's why, while I'm not reticent about seeing the perps who did it getting hung, I'm incredibly averse to a focus on and conviction based on weak/shoddy evidence wrongly construed, for lack of good and proper evidence.

Hopefully when we get to trial there will be clear and compelling evidence on display, rather than trumped up charges against "the usual suspects" using coerced "confessions." To this point, all we have for proof is "LE said so."
 
SteveS said:
I'm sure that's a desire held by everyone here.

The question we all have is, how can we be sure that the ones who did this are the ones who get hung for it? If the wrong guys get hung, the bad guys get away. That's why, while I'm not reticent about seeing the perps who did it getting hung, I'm incredibly averse to a focus on and conviction based on weak/shoddy evidence wrongly construed, for lack of good and proper evidence.

Hopefully when we get to trial there will be clear and compelling evidence on display, rather than trumped up charges against "the usual suspects" using coerced "confessions." To this point, all we have for proof is "LE said so."
Click to expand...

To bad we don't hang thugs who commit these kinds of crimes.
I agree with you, and by the way, always enjoy reading your well written thoughts on things!
 
I think where there's smoke there is usually fire. I know that the A Train has been talked about in certain circles since early on, which makes you wonder what took so long for them to be investigated.

I'm praying they have the right guys.
 
shefner said:
I think where there's smoke there is usually fire. I know that the A Train has been talked about in certain circles since early on, which makes you wonder what took so long for them to be investigated.

I'm praying they have the right guys.
Click to expand...

I've never put much stock in the Topix Rumor Mill full of unverified tales assuming these must be the guys. So maybe that's why I'm not as willing as some to blindly accept the continuous stream of unsupported claims by LE while we continue to have a lack of known evidence.

I'm hopeful. But I'm not closing my eyes to the reality that we ain't seen nuttin' yet.

And frankly, I really don't have a vested interest. That is to say, I really don't care if it's THESE guys. I just want them to hang the guys that did it (after first shooting them, gutting them, and cutting their ding-dongs off), whoever they may be.
 
SteveS said:
I've never put much stock in the Topix Rumor Mill full of unverified tales assuming these must be the guys. So maybe that's why I'm not as willing as some to blindly accept the continuous stream of unsupported claims by LE while we continue to have a lack of known evidence.

I'm hopeful. But I'm not closing my eyes to the reality that we ain't seen nuttin' yet.

And frankly, I really don't have a vested interest. That is to say, I really don't care if it's THESE guys. I just want them to hang the guys that did it (after first shooting them, gutting them, and cutting their ding-dongs off), whoever they may be.
Click to expand...

Well yes, on that much we agree completely....whoever did it should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
 
My opinions only, no facts here:

As this case develops, keep in mind the subject of skin-cell DNA, or more recently called- "touch DNA". This article at http://www.ryanforensicdna.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Touch_DNA_article.5151606.pdf will bring you up-to-date. DNA testing is almost too sensitive now to be fully reliable as evidence. Have you ever thought about how many individuals' DNA could be located in your home, using current methods? The number of individuals could range from hundreds to more than a thousand. Think about those who lived in your home before you occupied it. How about DNA transferred twice or thrice before it reached your home? Think about every utility worker. Think about every piece of mail that was ever in your home. Every piece of used furniture you ever bought. Every book. A strong wind storm that blew much dust into your home. And on and on.

Remember this post if the current suspects in the Holly Bobo case are ever brought to trial. DNA testing has moved far beyond sampling a bloody glove hidden under a suspect's bed. It now is so sensitive that it can almost guarantee some sort of hoped-for result. It is increasingly important for competent jurors to consider the CONTEXT of a damning DNA sample. If the DNA evidence is from a proven murder weapon that has fingerprints, it may be OK. If the DNA evidence is from some random location AND is touch-DNA, remain skeptical. Remember, somewhere out there is a rug that contains DNA evidence of a capital murder, and it may be for sale in a second-hand store! Don't buy this rug! Use your Star Trek tricorder to scan its entire history of DNA before you purchase it. Otherwise, you may have the hoosegow in your future!

Having said this, how can an astute criminal take advantage of this extreme analytical precision for DNA? Remove the daily sweepings from a Barber Shop AND a Pet Groomer AND a Shopping Mall (out of their respective dumpsters), and spread these around your pre-planned crime scene. This would deluge any traces of your DNA and it could cost tens of millions of dollars to analyze all of the DNA! You see- DNA is increasingly becoming less relevant than fingerprints (unless you can extract DNA from the print), because a fingerprint is only spread to a crime scene in one manner and DNA can be spread to a crime scene in a zillion manners.

I have to laugh when I see a TV crime show where the investigators spray "Luminol" on the carpet to prove that a crime has occurred (the inference is that Luminol reacts only to blood). Luminol is activated by the presence of iron, copper, or other metal ions (see http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/kboudrea/demos/luminol/luminol.htm). When you examine compounds that contain iron, copper, or other metals, you are basically examining a panoply of compounds historically spilled or purposefully used on the carpet, from blood to paints to cleaning products! In my opinion, Luminol evidence should only be used when it detects an area from which blood-DNA is also confirmed to exist.

For a big laugh, take a black-light source (in the dark) and have a good look at the historical stains in your carpets. Assuming that your black-light frequency is correct, it will look like thousands of crimes have occurred in your home! I demonstrated this principle to my kids when they were little and they had a huge laugh about it. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Yardbirds marshalled into the Pokey who are not laughing about such subjects.

Sleuth On!
 
Well, motions hearings for ZA and JA are supposed to be this Thursday. I remember early on the judge stated that he wanted one of them to be at every hearing, after his attorney waived his right to appear.

Odd that the discovery deadline came and went without a peep from anyone.

If anyone has updates on the Oct 30 motion hearings, I'm sure we'd all love to hear them.
 
Mercurydime said:
Well, motions hearings for ZA and JA are supposed to be this Thursday. I remember early on the judge stated that he wanted one of them to be at every hearing, after his attorney waived his right to appear.

Odd that the discovery deadline came and when without a peep from anyone.

If anyone has updates on the Oct 30 motion hearings, I'm sure we'd all love to hear them.
Click to expand...



:seeya: Hi Mercury!

I cannot find anything on the October 30 Motion Hearings, which date and hearing is on the original Scheduling Order for ZA and JA.

And yes, nothing about the discovery -- not a peep -- not even from the defense attorneys.

IF I see something for Thursday, I will post !
 
Mr. Noatak said:
My opinions only, no facts here:

As this case develops, keep in mind the subject of skin-cell DNA, or more recently called- "touch DNA". This article at http://www.ryanforensicdna.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Touch_DNA_article.5151606.pdf will bring you up-to-date. DNA testing is almost too sensitive now to be fully reliable as evidence. Have you ever thought about how many individuals' DNA could be located in your home, using current methods? The number of individuals could range from hundreds to more than a thousand. Think about those who lived in your home before you occupied it. How about DNA transferred twice or thrice before it reached your home? Think about every utility worker. Think about every piece of mail that was ever in your home. Every piece of used furniture you ever bought. Every book. A strong wind storm that blew much dust into your home. And on and on.

Remember this post if the current suspects in the Holly Bobo case are ever brought to trial. DNA testing has moved far beyond sampling a bloody glove hidden under a suspect's bed. It now is so sensitive that it can almost guarantee some sort of hoped-for result. It is increasingly important for competent jurors to consider the CONTEXT of a damning DNA sample. If the DNA evidence is from a proven murder weapon that has fingerprints, it may be OK. If the DNA evidence is from some random location AND is touch-DNA, remain skeptical. Remember, somewhere out there is a rug that contains DNA evidence of a capital murder, and it may be for sale in a second-hand store! Don't buy this rug! Use your Star Trek tricorder to scan its entire history of DNA before you purchase it. Otherwise, you may have the hoosegow in your future!

Having said this, how can an astute criminal take advantage of this extreme analytical precision for DNA? Remove the daily sweepings from a Barber Shop AND a Pet Groomer AND a Shopping Mall (out of their respective dumpsters), and spread these around your pre-planned crime scene. This would deluge any traces of your DNA and it could cost tens of millions of dollars to analyze all of the DNA! You see- DNA is increasingly becoming less relevant than fingerprints (unless you can extract DNA from the print), because a fingerprint is only spread to a crime scene in one manner and DNA can be spread to a crime scene in a zillion manners.

I have to laugh when I see a TV crime show where the investigators spray "Luminol" on the carpet to prove that a crime has occurred (the inference is that Luminol reacts only to blood). Luminol is activated by the presence of iron, copper, or other metal ions (see http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/kboudrea/demos/luminol/luminol.htm). When you examine compounds that contain iron, copper, or other metals, you are basically examining a panoply of compounds historically spilled or purposefully used on the carpet, from blood to paints to cleaning products! In my opinion, Luminol evidence should only be used when it detects an area from which blood-DNA is also confirmed to exist.

For a big laugh, take a black-light source (in the dark) and have a good look at the historical stains in your carpets. Assuming that your black-light frequency is correct, it will look like thousands of crimes have occurred in your home! I demonstrated this principle to my kids when they were little and they had a huge laugh about it. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Yardbirds marshalled into the Pokey who are not laughing about such subjects.

Sleuth On!
Click to expand...

Since LE has not saw fit to tell us whether or not any useful DNA was found at either the Adams property or from under the Bobo's carport, some will assume some DNA was found and others will assume no DNA was found. IF any of Holly's DNA was found at the Adams property, IMO, that would be a big red flag because there would have been no logical reason for Holly to willingly have been at that house. There would have been no logical explanation why DNA could have been transferred there by anyone who had been in physical contact with Holly.
 
dog.gone.cute said:
And yes, nothing about the discovery -- not a peep -- not even from the defense attorneys.
Click to expand...

That should be of no surprise. Assuming the discovery process has been and continues to be taking place as it's supposed to, I can't imagine any reason why the topic would bear mentioning in court or in any other venue. When done as required, it's quite routine, and there's nothing to tell.
 
pearl said:
Since LE has not saw fit to tell us whether or not any useful DNA was found at either the Adams property or from under the Bobo's carport, some will assume some DNA was found and others will assume no DNA was found. IF any of Holly's DNA was found at the Adams property, IMO, that would be a big red flag because there would have been no logical reason for Holly to willingly have been at that house. There would have been no logical explanation why DNA could have been transferred there by anyone who had been in physical contact with Holly.
Click to expand...

My opinions only, no facts here:

I tend to agree with you for the reason that Juries are easily, if not universally bamboozled by DNA evidence. The day is soon coming when a smart Defense attorney is going to have an expert witness explain to a Jury about the reasonable doubts behind non-contextual touch-DNA evidence.

What I mean by non-contextual is (non-blood) touch-DNA that is found in a situation that cannot be independently corroborated as associated with the crime. A suspect's touch-DNA on tossed evidence (proven to be carried by Holly on the morning of the abduction) in the Holly Bobo case HAS strong context. In contrast, Hollys touch-DNA in one of the suspects' vehicles is non-contextual UNLESS you have independent corroboration that this particular vehicle was used for the kidnapping and/or other transport of the victim after the initial crime. Here is a another example- pretend that Holly's touch-DNA is found on the carpet in the main suspect's house. In order for this to have context, you need a witness who will testify that he saw Holly in that house. This latter example may sound incorrect, but remember, you may have independent witnesses testify that Holly WAS NEVER in that house. Unless the Prosecution has a witness who testifies that Holly WAS in that house, this could lead sensible Jurors to wonder if the touch-DNA represents accidental transfer (or even DNA lab cross-contamination!).

In writing a novel, one might create this situation: a murderer wearing gloves removes a distinctive and unique ring from his victim's finger and sells it at a local pawn shop. The owner of the shop examines it closely, buys the ring, and puts it in his display case. The next day, an ex-con walks in and buys the ring for his druggie girlfriend. An informant quickly notices the girl wearing this ring and recognizes it from the nightly news report. The police immediately reclaim the ring and find that it contains touch-DNA from the pawn shop owner, the ex-con, and the druggie girlfriend. This is non-contextual DNA because there is no way the police can independently corroborate that any of these three people were at the crime scene.

I am not claiming that the Prosecution cannot get a conviction with non-contextual touch-DNA evidence in the Holly Bobo case. For the time-being, they probably can.

In my opinion, one of the best Prosecution bets for touch-DNA with strong context in this case is the lunch bag, i.e. the Gooch Road evidence. Also, if the mythical duct tape exists, it might contain a partial fingerprint.

It will be an important gain for the Defense, if they can get a change of trial venue to a big city.

Sleuth On!
 
SteveS said:
That should be of no surprise. Assuming the discovery process has been and continues to be taking place as it's supposed to, I can't imagine any reason why the topic would bear mentioning in court or in any other venue. When done as required, it's quite routine, and there's nothing to tell.
Click to expand...


Hi Steve,

Yes, NO surprise ...

BUT, I was hoping that one of the defense attorneys -- who likes the "limelight" and likes "media attention" -- would say "something" !
 
Commenting on the above that began:
Mr. Noatak said:
My opinions only, no facts here:

I tend to agree with you for the reason that Juries are easily, if not universally bamboozled by DNA evidence.....................................
Click to expand...

Reminds me of all the back-and-forth discussions that took place in the Amanda Knox threads....
 
OldSteve said:
Commenting on the above that began:

Reminds me of all the back-and-forth discussions that took place in the Amanda Knox threads....
Click to expand...


:seeya: Yes, good point.

Now making an analogy here :innocent: and not to go off topic: in Knox's case, there was OTHER overwhelming evidence of her guilt. Yes, there was dna and yes, there was a huge dispute about the dna results -- but the jury in that case did NOT rely ONLY on the DNA.

Now in Holly's case, I think that there is much more than just dna evidence, especially since you have 2 of the A's that have talked !

:moo:
 
:seeya: Always enjoy reading what you say dog.gone.cute. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't those who talked back-tracked about what they said?
 
OldSteve said:
:seeya: Always enjoy reading what you say dog.gone.cute. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't those who talked back-tracked about what they said?
Click to expand...

As far as what's been reported, the only actual backtracking would be that Dylan Adams pleaded not guilty to raping HB after he supposedly admitted to a TBI agent that he did.

Shayne Austin, the other talker, was given an immunity agreement on the condition that he give LE the location of HB's body. Apparently, (we don't know all the facts) he was unable to do so, which resulted in revocation of the immunity deal.

The DA who left office a few months ago was said to have informed SA's attorney that charges would be filed in light of the broken agreement, but mysteriously, that has yet to materialize.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 96 more.
Total: 3,515 (members: 97, guests: 3,418)

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
3,418
Total visitors
3,515
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,199
Messages
18,168,878
Members
232,132
Latest member
davidandrew32
Back
Top