- Joined
- Feb 15, 2019
- Messages
- 116
- Reaction score
- 760
I would be absolutely amazed if there is anything but a guilty verdict now.Yeah, he'll be found guilty for this now I'm very sure. I doubt the jury will buy his special defence.
I would be absolutely amazed if there is anything but a guilty verdict now.Yeah, he'll be found guilty for this now I'm very sure. I doubt the jury will buy his special defence.
Yes, that’s not clear.Traces though... is that a very small amount?
Have they checked the shed for forensics where he claimed to have had sex ?
We already kinda knew that would be the case....
The wording "traces" concerns me, almost backs up the defences story.
Traces is enough. No way in hell that he didn't do it. This should seal it for the prosecution. For some people it seems that they need to have a HD video of the whole act to convince them.Yes, that’s not clear.
Ahh I forgot it was only mentioned in courtThat claim only came at the opening of the trial though, didn't it? But I would have hoped the shed was examined as part of the search.
I don't think so... if you were attempting to frame a Male by emptying a condom FULL of semen at a crime scene ... I'm pretty sure you'd cause more than a 'trace' ...
Without wanting to get too graphic, I don’t think there only being traces is much of an issue.
There could be a couple of reasons for this - he might have cleaned up somewhat afterwards, or there might only be traces because he didn’t actually ejaculate.
I'm baffled at how he thought he would get away with this though. Maybe he didn't. Maybe he just didn't care.