The Shoe Lace Bindings

[primitivefuture]

With apologies to Userid - I'm afraid I won't be able to make good on the above promises because it seems that the BB has closed down and their contents haven't been archived.

What happened to the blackboard anyway? I've never posted on it, but I've read tons of threads over there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Compassionate Reader]

What happened to the blackboard anyway? I've never posted on it, but I've read tons of threads over there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO, the BB got too close to the truth for "someone," We're not sure if it was sabotage or just plain hacking, but we're working on it!

 

[missy_g]

I didn't read all of this thread but I have been thinking about this case somewhat over the past few weeks.

The hair evidence in the shoelace tie has always got to me because I have a dog. Yes, I have a 13 pound dog that sheds worse than any other dog I have ever come across in my entire life. I can wash him every night and pull out mounds of hair and fill grocery store bags...

Anyway, I don't think I have EVER found one of his hairs embedded in my shoe strings. I have found them laying on my clothes or maybe in my purse, but I haven't ever found one embedded in the weavings of my shoe strings, and since I am female, I own A LOT of shoes.

I know that my findings on myself aren't really significant, but it has always made me question the transfer theory.

 

[Graznik]

Talking about the hair(s)... I too question the transfer theory. Mainly because if it was all innocent transfer, why is it that it's only mtDNA matching that of Hobbs' and especially Jacoby that decided to rock up at the crimescene is such a damning way?! You know, if it's all so simple. Why ain't there nothing matching the mothers or the fathers?!
Obviously a lot of DNA evidence was washed away. But IIRC there were several hairs, some of them from animals, present and a lot of it was tested? None of it came back matching Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley. I had a quick look at Callahans, but I couldn't locate any reports on this. Are they available?

 

[kyleb]

Anyway, I don't think I have EVER found one of his hairs embedded in my shoe strings.

Have you ever found any documentation which says the hair which is consistent with Hobbs' mtDNA was actually embedded in the shoelace? I've scoured the evidence for such and asked many people, but have yet to find anything of the sort.

why is it that it's only mtDNA matching that of Hobbs' and especially Jacoby that decided to rock up at the crimescene is such a damning way?!

The mtDNA results don't actually match either of them, Hobbs' and Jackoby's mtDNA reference samples are just close enough that they can't be excluded as the sources of the respective hairs in evidence, showing one point of difference in both cases. Also, there's plenty of mtDNA in evidence which inherently matches the mothers as mothers share the same mtDNA profiles as their children. and there might be other mtDNA results wich match or at least aren't inconsistent with the other fathers too, but nobody's bothered to get reference samples from them so it's impossible to say one way or another on that. And there's also a couple of hairs which only show two points of difference from Baldwin and Echols respectively, the latter being the same hair that's one point of difference from Jacoby, and I've yet to find a good reason for those results being disregarded. Anyway, most of the DNA results can be found under Bode Technology, aside from the Jacoby sample testing which was only done by Serological Research Institute.

 

[Graznik]

I believe it was found not embedded in the shoelace itself, but in the knot that tied the shoelaces. But don't quote me on that.

Well, the mtDNA shows that it's from someone within the same maternal line as Hobbs and Jacoby respectively?! I.e. someone that shares a maternal ancestor. I believe someone on here did a very good calculation in regards to likelyhood of it being someone elses. It's not very high.
If it's like you say about Echols and Baldwin you've answered your own question there. It's a closer match to someone else.

Thank you for the links to the results. I shall have a closer look at them.

 

[kyleb]

Well, the mtDNA shows that it's from someone within the same maternal line as Hobbs and Jacoby respectively?!

Best I've been able to tell people of other maternal lines with very similar mtDNA profiles can't be excluded either. Granted, I'm far from an expert on the topic of mtDNA, but I've yet to find anyone who is explain otherwise.

I believe someone on here did a very good calculation in regards to likelyhood of it being someone elses. It's not very high.

Thomas Fedor, the forensic serologist at Echols' 2007 press conference, estimated 1.5% of the population for hair from the shoelace and 7% for the one from the tree stump. That's around 1 in 67 people and 1 in 14 people respectively, and again I've yet to find any reason Baldwin and Echols rightly can be excluded as members of those respective portions of our population.

As for the notion a hair was actually in a knot, I've seen it claimed many times but never any actual documentation to corroborate such claims. Also worth noting in the documentation is that there were a variety of hairs recovered from the laces, three of which weren't tested and two which Hobbs has been excluded as the source of.

 

[Ausgirl]

I'm still kind of dubious on the transport thing. While the video demonstrates it -can- be done, in different conditions than RHH and with only one victim, I tend at this time to think it was either for display (sicko pervy stuff) or for keeping the limbs from floating up and giving away the crime scene.

I mean, the killer -had to- know the ditch would be searched sooner or later. But I think he needed time to cover his tracks/get away from WM so the longer it took to find them, the better for him.

 

[EntreNous]

Where was these series of videos used at? I don't remember this happening during any hearing or were they just used for the supporter's website?

When I go to Callahans link above it's an indexed listing and seems rather odd that it's not included in the normal website.

Does anyone know why?

iirc, this was an experiment conducted by a sleuther. i seem to recall her posting here but that's been quite some time ago. back when i first became a member here. i think i remember a conversation with her in which she stated she was getting burned out on the case as there were some posters who didn't exactly play well with others and made it hard for any kind of civil discussion or sleuthing. nothing like it is here now. we may disagree but we get along. the awesome mods here had their hands full for a while. i used to post a lot more myself, but then folks have come in who are simply amazing and brilliant and you find you learn so much more from reading, rather than posting.

 

[EntreNous]

i'm still stuck on the idea that the boys perhaps didn't drown in the water they were discovered in. the hobb's pool had developed a leak and became, essentially a murky, watery garbage dump by the spring of that year. could something have happened in the house and their bodies have been placed in the pool until a more feasible time arose in which to transport them?
i just find it hard to see the boys discovering hobbs in the woods with whomever when neighbors attest to seeing the boys with TH outside the house around 6:30, especially since TH had amanda with him that night.
anyone want to take a swing at this possibility?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

i'm still stuck on the idea that the boys perhaps didn't drown in the water they were discovered in. the hobb's pool had developed a leak and became, essentially a murky, watery garbage dump by the spring of that year. could something have happened in the house and their bodies have been placed in the pool until a more feasible time arose in which to transport them?
i just find it hard to see the boys discovering hobbs in the woods with whomever when neighbors attest to seeing the boys with TH outside the house around 6:30, especially since TH had amanda with him that night.
anyone want to take a swing at this possibility?

I don't think Hobbs would have had time to kill three little boys since he was seen at different locations. I believe the boys were killed in the woods at the ditch. I just posted something about some who heard water splashing and the sounds of running here:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10072600&postcount=39"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Viable suspect: Damien Echols[/ame]

We just started a thread on the last sightings of the boys here:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229773"]Last Sightings of the 3-eight-year-old Boys - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[Graznik]

Thomas Fedor, the forensic serologist at Echols' 2007 press conference, estimated 1.5% of the population for hair from the shoelace and 7% for the one from the tree stump.

What we also have to take in to account here is that that 1.5% and 7% of the population had to be present in West Memphis that day.
Surely, what percent of the population that would match the ciggarette butt DNA would have to be considered as well (0.12% in the case of the "Hobbs hair").
That will all narrow it down further.

In that very link Fedor also states that Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley could not been the source.

 

[EntreNous]

I don't think Hobbs would have had time to kill three little boys since he was seen at different locations. I believe the boys were killed in the woods at the ditch. I just posted something about some who heard water splashing and the sounds of running here:
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Viable suspect: Damien Echols

We just started a thread on the last sightings of the boys here:
Last Sightings of the 3-eight-year-old Boys - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

it only takes a moment to kill someone, especially if you have a storage place, like a private home. if the boys were killed where they were found how in the world were they discovered in full rigor in seated positions from rigor mortis? is that even possible?
rigor commences about 3-4 hrs. after death and peaks around hour 12. due to chemical changes within the body it freezes in the position it is in at that time and it takes at least 3 hours after death for that process to begin. i cannot reconcile with myself that the boys were killed and simply left in the drainage ditch. unconscious, submerged in water, dying as they were, providing the information is accurate and they died from drowning it would be virtually impossible for rigor to contort their bodies into the positions they were found in. not even laying on their sides would that have been possible as their legs were spread with their knees being a good foot apart.
i just don't see someone staying with them for the hours it took for rigor to set in while holding their limbs in those awkward positions. this is why i cannot get the pool out of my mind.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

it only takes a moment to kill someone, especially if you have a storage place, like a private home. if the boys were killed where they were found how in the world were they discovered in full rigor in seated positions from rigor mortis? is that even possible?
rigor commences about 3-4 hrs. after death and peaks around hour 12. due to chemical changes within the body it freezes in the position it is in at that time and it takes at least 3 hours after death for that process to begin. i cannot reconcile with myself that the boys were killed and simply left in the drainage ditch. unconscious, submerged in water, dying as they were, providing the information is accurate and they died from drowning it would be virtually impossible for rigor to contort their bodies into the positions they were found in. not even laying on their sides would that have been possible as their legs were spread with their knees being a good foot apart.
i just don't see someone staying with them for the hours it took for rigor to set in while holding their limbs in those awkward positions. this is why i cannot get the pool out of my mind.

I think the awkward position you refer to as 'seated' could be from being bound left arm to left leg, right arm to right leg. I don't see someone having to stay with them.

I want to show you a photo of a person who committed suicide. This is a graphic photo and it shows his arms up in the air frozen in full rigor.
http://www.pathguy.com/~tdemark/0006.htm

It would take 12 hours to be in full rigor and then an additional 12 hours for it to disappear.

The reason that I don't think Hobbs would have had time is because he was seen by too many people at different locations looking for his step-son including his own father in-law.

What time do you think the boys were murdered?

 

[kyleb]

What we also have to take in to account here is that that 1.5% and 7% of the population had to be present in West Memphis that day.

No, there's nothing to prevent those hairs have come from a person or persons who who'd left West Memphis days or more before the murders, or who'd never been to West Memphis but whose hair wound up carried there by other means.

Surely, what percent of the population that would match the ciggarette butt DNA would have to be considered as well (0.12% in the case of the "Hobbs hair").

No, 0.12% is simply Fedor's estimate is the percentage of "the population could also be the source of that cigarette butt DNA", and hence doesn't rightly do anything to narrow down the percentage of the populations which could be the source of the other mtDNA samples.

In that very link Fedor also states that Echols, Baldwin or Misskelley could not been the source.

Sure, but he doesn't explain why Baldwin and Echols can be excluded from the hairs which have only only two polymorphic differences from their reference sample respectively, and page 2 of this Bode report states "in standard reporting practices three differences are required for exclusion."

 

[EntreNous]

I think the awkward position you refer to as 'seated' could be from being bound left arm to left leg, right arm to right leg. I don't see someone having to stay with them.

I want to show you a photo of a person who committed suicide. This is a graphic photo and it shows his arms up in the air frozen in full rigor.
http://www.pathguy.com/~tdemark/0006.htm

It would take 12 hours to be in full rigor and then an additional 12 hours for it to disappear.

The reason that I don't think Hobbs would have had time is because he was seen by too many people at different locations looking for his step-son including his own father in-law.

What time do you think the boys were murdered?

rigor begins between the 3rd and 4th hr. it only peaks at the 12 hour. it is typically gone by the 24th hour but that's not to say it takes the full amount of time for it to dissipate. to keep their thighs apart in the manner that they were, yes. they'd have to hold that position. regardless if they were tied or not. tie your ankles to your wrists. you will be plenty mobile on your side, back and prone.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

rigor begins between the 3rd and 4th hr. it only peaks at the 12 hour. it is typically gone by the 24th hour but that's not to say it takes the full amount of time for it to dissipate. to keep their thighs apart in the manner that they were, yes. they'd have to hold that position. regardless if they were tied or not. tie your ankles to your wrists. you will be plenty mobile on your side, back and prone.

I don't think I got your time of death though....

On that suicide photo nobody was holding his arms up and he's in full rigor.

 

[Ausgirl]

It would take 12 hours to be in full rigor and then an additional 12 hours for it to disappear.

In this series, rigor was complete in 14% of cases at 3 hours post mortem and this percentage had risen to 72% at 6 hours and to 90% at 9 hours. By 12 hours post mortem rigor was complete in 98% of cases. (Note that this data is presented in a somewhat confusing way in Ref. 10 at p. 15). Against the background of this data it can be readily appreciated that the generally quoted rule of thumb that rigor commences in 6 hours, takes another 6 to become fully established, remains for 12 hours and passes off during
the succeeding 12 hours, is quite misleading.

http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

 

[UdbCrzy2]

In this series, rigor was complete in 14% of cases at 3 hours post mortem and this percentage had risen to 72% at 6 hours and to 90% at 9 hours. By 12 hours post mortem rigor was complete in 98% of cases. (Note that this data is presented in a somewhat confusing way in Ref. 10 at p. 15). Against the background of this data it can be readily appreciated that the generally quoted rule of thumb that rigor commences in 6 hours, takes another 6 to become fully established, remains for 12 hours and passes off during
the succeeding 12 hours, is quite misleading.

http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/timedeath.pdf

What do you think about the other poster's theory of being 'seated' at a house somewhere and drowned in TH pool?

BTW do you have a time of death yet? The other poster didn't give one.

wanted to add - we are not really sure about the rigor because none of us are qualified to give an opinion and these boys were bound and drowned. Rigor may have lasted a full 3-days too.

 

[Graznik]

No, there's nothing to prevent those hairs have come from a person or persons who who'd left West Memphis days or more before the murders, or who'd never been to West Memphis but whose hair wound up carried there by other means.


No, 0.12% is simply Fedor's estimate is the percentage of "the population could also be the source of that cigarette butt DNA", and hence doesn't rightly do anything to narrow down the percentage of the populations which could be the source of the other mtDNA samples.


Sure, but he doesn't explain why Baldwin and Echols can be excluded from the hairs which have only only two polymorphic differences from their reference sample respectively, and page 2 of this Bode report states "in standard reporting practices three differences are required for exclusion."

Hang on a minute. You're trying to suggest that someone who visited WM days or weeks before the murder at some point lost a hair and that just that hair somehow blew (or whatever) on to the crime scene and in to the ligature? Or that it just rocked up from another state?
That's a bit far fetched. Like, really far fetched.

Right. But if you were to make a mathematic calcuation of likelihood, which I am not even going to attempt, that should surely be taken in to account?

Well, the simple fact that someone else fits it a lot better?! As we don't have A match, surely we have to focus on the best match when there is one?!