Jaiddie
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2016
- Messages
- 527
- Reaction score
- 59
It actually was testified that there were heavy rains in some of those days and that could've been how the bones were moved around in the pit. The same person testified that pictures of the bones in the pit wouldn't have even been good. She explained it as due to the discoloration, pictures wouldn't have been clear. In fact some pieces that weren't even bones were brought into her. The fragments didn't look like bones.
Seems this entire post is an opinion because I haven't seen it said anywhere that the bones weren't important evidence. Who exactly is "they" in reference to why they didn't call the coroner, because they knew they had goofed when planting???
Are we now accusing all the investigators of being in on the planting as well?
This is getting absurd.
They were being sarcastic....means the bones were "unimportant" because they were the only "evidence" that were not photographed at the crime scene following proper protocol. If you remember, when the key was first "seen" by Lenk and Colburn, they made it a point that no one touch it because it was an "IMPORTANT" discovery. Yet they just treat the actual victim (her bones, anyway) with such obvious disregard that they don't bother to get the coroner or a forensic specialist ON SITE to examine and remove them, they just shovel and sift her into boxes with NO pics to corroborate their discovery of the bones. And we are just supposed to take their word for it?? Mmmkay.
*** The quotation's around key words here is because my opinion on all the prosecution's "evidence" is that it is not credible.