- Joined
- Jun 20, 2014
- Messages
- 522
- Reaction score
- 5,801
Correct again. But, the accused is able to sue those who have defamed him, even on places like this.
I called him a disgusting specimen. Good luck to him with suing a floofy white cat.
Correct again. But, the accused is able to sue those who have defamed him, even on places like this.
Has the audio portion of his conversation with his Dad been released? It struck me as super odd how many times he felt he had to tell Dad he didn't push or throw her.
Here we have this treasure trove recording and it seems like the prosecution is ignoring so much of it. He actually threatened to toss her over the balcony and then she actually winds up over the balcony.
Sorry to be stressing what is very old news to you all. I have been following so many stateside cases. I never knew there was a recording in this case.
I'm fascinated and horrified equally. He makes my skin crawl something awful.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
It is possible, too, that he had his paw tightly clamped over her mouth and nose as he was roughing her up. That would have caused the obvious struggle in her breathing, and added to her evident great fear of him.
It is another form of asphyxiation that can lead to the gurgling sounds as she tried to breathe out of any crevice she could suck air in and out through, as she also struggled to free herself from his clutches.
Compressive asphyxia.There is a term for a manner of asphyxiation and I cannot remember what it is called for the life of me...it's something like blurping or burking...but basically someone applied weight to the chest region and covers the mouth and nose, it leaves little evidence. Someone who has had their coffee for the day please chip in and help me remember!
There is a term for a manner of asphyxiation and I cannot remember what it is called for the life of me...it's something like blurping or burking...but basically someone applied weight to the chest region and covers the mouth and nose, it leaves little evidence. Someone who has had their coffee for the day please chip in and help me remember!
Compressive asphyxia.
I wonder though, the extreme trauma of her remains due to a 14 story fall could conveniently make this difficult to diagnose during autopsy?
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Yes it is burking:
verb (used with object), burked, burking.
1. to murder, as by suffocation, so as to leave no or few marks of violence.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/burke
Thank you! And as your quote shows, it leaves little to no marks. It was used back in the day to acquire cadavers to sell to med schools as there were no indications that the cadaver had in fact been murdered.
Another thing that makes me question the blood evidence...I have been hit with a small pebble, after it was flung out of a lawn mower, and it hit me hard enough to draw blood, but, it left a bruise and welp that were very noticeable. I feel if he had been struck with these items(rocks, telescope/stand) with any amount of force, there would be clear evidence pointing to what exactly he was hit with and the marks would be fresh, and easily recognizable.
Her injuries were certainly horrific, when you read the details. Including severe head injuries. I think those types of injuries could mask all manner of things.
They had to take her alcohol reading from her eye fluid, due to the massive blood loss, I think.![]()
I assume you mean Simpson. Sorry, this is Queensland, not America.
3.
PERSONS WHO MAY BRING AN ACTION
In Queensland, the wrongful death legislation provides that a claim for damages may
be brought by the executor or administrator of the deceased’s estate.19 If there is no
executor or administrator, or if no action is brought by the executor or administrator
within six months after the death of the deceased, an action may be brought by and
in the name of any person for whose benefit such an action could have been
commenced.
He'll never be 'free'I addressed this already. He didn't punch, hit or kick her. He apparently didn't choke her (according to the pathologist). He wrestled her outside and closed and locked the door. It doesn't matter where she was locked out, or what he said. The suggestion is that he used force that was reasonably necessary to make an effectual defence. He locked her outside to stop the rock throwing. Put her away from the rocks and telescope.. pretty simply stuff.
Read the actual law and my post very carefully, because it pretty much answers the question. If you're 'speculating' about 'possibilities' the evidence might suggest you're already in acquittal territory. If it's arguable either way, you're in acquittal territory.
Even the most vengeful person must be looking at this evidence and having doubts about what exactly occurred.
You only need one single person on the jury and he's free.
I just got chillsIntruducing My 20 year old med student daughter (not saying she's qualified, just objective), knows nothing of this case, lives here in New York and often thinks I'm bonkers for always being on WS. She is sexually active, drinks and I don't even want to know if she ever went on a blind date. Anyway,
I played the audio for her with ZERO instruction, only stating it was part of a case.
She mistakenly thought it was a rape Cass lawsuit, and declared omg he's choking the $h*t out if her. When she heard her screams she said "Oh mommy is he going to shoot her?" Turn it off".
Then I told her about the case.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk