Truth. Here is how I see it.
Thank you for responding. I was hoping you would put something together so that I could see more about where you were coming from.
The evidence proves that:
Amber was held in that camper
Good, we both agree on that.
A shirt belonging to CF had ambers blood on it and was found in CF's car
Agreed.
CF has a period of about 10 hours that are unaccounted for.
I might lessen this down a bit, because he did text one of his women that he was at his father's place around 5 in the morning; but I agree that he has unaccounted hours.
CF clearly has some sort of knowledge about what happened to Amber.
Agreed, here, too; although I suspect I would give his knowledge about what happened to Amber a higher rating on a scale than you would.
Now let's look at what they don't have:
No motive
Although the Crown doesn't have to prove motive, I will concede this as I feel that it is a point for the defence when they can't. The striking resemblance between Amber and one of his girlfriends, gives me pause, though. Maybe no-one on the jury caught that, or maybe they did.
Again, not necessary; but not having one is not a point that particularly favours of the Crown.
Agreed, even though we heard he thought about confessing, it didn't happen. And most people do not confess to their atrocious crimes.
True; but thin, because even people with low IQ's have enough sense not to do what he is accused of doing in front of witnesses. Amber died a violent death. She tried so hard to defend herself that he split one of her fingers in two. That also shows his force--which his size matches.
No witnesses that can place CF and AK together at any point
True. The Crown has stated that they did not know each other. This was a stranger abduction; so the fact that they were never seen together would work for the prosecution, here, I think.
The video shows Amber leaving alone.
NO CRIME SCENE!! (They don't seem to know what happened OR where it happened including BOTH the murder and kidnapping)
Regarding the kidnapping, with the video as evidence, we can see her walking out of the range of the surveillance camera at Dooly's. She was never picked up on the surveillance camera at Big Al's. There is a very small window of opportunity there where he could have grabbed her. Again, his familiarity with the area would circumstantially suggest that he would have knowledge of this.
Something evil happened inside that camper. There is evidence of violence there. Amber's ripped clothing; Amber's DNA on duct tape; Amber's hairs on the head board. Drugs in a water bottle.
That's not evidence of a day at the playground.
No physical evidence whatsoever(DNA,fingerprints) of CF on Ambers body
The medical examiner believed her body had been in the wet clay for a period of three days to two weeks, or possibly longer, iirc. Decomposition starts immediately. Evidence is destroyed. It's no-ones fault except the murderer's, of course; but it's common to see this sort of lack of evidence on a victim that has been buried.
Two interesting connections for me, though circumstantial, are: 1) the location of the body--near Falconer's father's home and near his step-sister's home.
And 2) Amber's feather earrings hanging in a tree--just like her shoe found in a bush near the residence of one of Falconer's endless girlfriend's.
No physical evidence whatsoever of CF being at camper
Yes; however they did find a box of latex gloves in the trunk of his car. Plus the time existed for him to wipe down any surfaces in the camper.
No physical evidence of CF being at burial site.
Other than his 'trophy' display of the earrings, and other points I have touched on above; I have to agree with this.
They just don't seem to know what happened.... At all...
Now, I disagree with this quite a bit. We know Amber was abducted and hideously murdered. We know she was held captive for some period of time. We know she was bound, drugged and stabbed repeatedly. We may conclude from her nakedness and the unidentifiable semen that she was most likely raped.
How much more do we get in any murder case?
But they do have a whole bunch of "unknown" DNA,
They have some unknown DNA, yes; but it is fairly common for unknown DNA to appear at trials. I see it in almost every trial I watch, and I'm referring to real live streamed trials; not TV shows.
an unsecured car where as Mike Taylor put it "a bag with CFs shirt with blood on it was neatly placed in the back seat,
But they do have a witness that places Falconer retrieving that bag from his father's garage and placing it in his vehicle. This right after he had seen the first presence of law enforcement.
an unsecured camper where Amber was likely held.
True enough. Quite the coincidence that it was Falconer's step-sister's 'unsecured' camper, though. And located about 10 feet from her mini-home; which could work in the Crown's favour as to why there were no prints found; ie, lots of time to wipe surfaces.
And I'm editing to add: his step-sister testified today that Falconer somewhat often stayed overnight in that camper; so, by rights, his fingerprints should have been on something in there.
There is a big piece of the puzzle missing, actually a few big pieces.
At the start of this trial, I was sure I was going to be here with you on this.
All I am saying is that if I was on the jury with the info I have (albeit mostly from tweets and media articles) I could not with good conscience find him guilty.
I believe I could, with clear conscience. Yikes--if we were on the same jury.
But on he other hand if I was on the jury and therefore a resident of the county would I want to live with the backlash of setting this man who has been labelled a psychotic monster free?
This is the really difficult part, actually. If a person finds their doubt reasonable as to his guilt, this thinking should never factor in. We're all human, though.
I want to mention, too, that I do not believe he has been "labelled" a psychotic monster. This trial has been fairly held and fairly reported on.
I don't know how bad it is in his hometown, of course; but sometimes if the shoe fits you can't blame anyone but yourself.
It's not over yet though. Maybe there is more to come.
There is still a little, at least. I think we are going to see the defence call a few witnesses. Interestingly enough, maybe even Campbell's mother.
We'll see soon.
