And also checked into police safety. And the policeman that went to the site that night unattended and then went into the police evidence room without signing in never touched it??
And the witness who saw him said he had a tie on under his overalls (that mysteriously vanished) and last I knew it was not fashionable to wear ties with tee shirts???
smelly fishies here
Quote Jan 2020 Posted by Katman
Life would be so much easier if you addressed questions with a simple answer.
I'm going with Spud on this. Mark Lundy murdered his wife and kids.
All the prosecution have to do to get a guilty verdict is to make a case to present to the jury. All the defense have to do is get the jury to have a reasonable doubt about guilt and the verdict is not guilty.
The defense in this case did not present anything that gave the jury room to have a reasonalbe doubt.
GUILTY. Simple really. We have not got the evidence that was [resented in the court to make any informed comment, all we can go on is the media reporting.
It was found in the boot of his car, presumably with other clothes and personal belongings. Regardless of where it was found how can you explain the presence of your wife's brain matter on your shirt a day after she has been found in her bed with her head and face stoved in?
Any doubt that may have existed due to the questions around the timing of the alleged journey I'm sure would have been totally overshadowed by the presence of this brain matter on his shirt.
As soon as I saw his "performance" at the funerals on the news, I knew it was him....
There is distraught, and then there was Lundy's "faking it..." There really is a difference.
Did you not read this re blood matter
http://www.lundytruth.com
__________________
Quote Jan 2020 Posted by Katman
Life would be so much easier if you addressed questions with a simple answer.
Good question and pretty damning at the time. It now transpires that the respected Texas scientist who detected neural cells, did so from 6 month old samples. Neural cells won't usually last that long. Futhermore he used a new testing method which had not been peer reviewed or accepted in forensic science.
It sounds like a guy who is highly capable and got carried away with his own innovation. It would be interesting to know if his methodology has been tested elsewhere. The point is, other scientists are incredulous that the tests were done and produced to a Court as 100% correct.
He's just misunderstood!
Only a Rat can win a Rat Race!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks