ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Amy Adams , Ellie France , Mark Lundy , murder cases , New Zealand cases

Reply
Old 12th March 2015, 02:15 PM   #401
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,361
Villisca, Iowa murders (the husband didn't do it)

TheAthiest,

The Villisca axe murders in Iowa in 1912 were pretty gruesome. I am not sure that this qualifies as a thrill killing, inasmuch as these murders remain unsolved.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 12th March 2015 at 02:16 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2015, 02:38 PM   #402
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Ok, I'd like to see a precedent of a thrill-killer murder that matches the Lundy murders.
What about ye olde Jack the Ripper? His victims were of a type, but essentially random. And more gruesome than the Lundy killings.

Perhaps the Lundy murders were the first of potentially others which did not eventuate for whatever reason - the perpetrator died, committed suicide, moved away, was imprisoned for some other crime, or simply abandoned the idea.

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 12th March 2015 at 02:58 PM.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2015, 03:18 PM   #403
Charlie Wilkes
Illuminator
 
Charlie Wilkes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,177
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Well, since you can't and I have, I'll tell you what you can do:

Get a large watermelon and stand it on a box at bed height 4 or 5 feet from a wall. Pin white paper over the wall. Attack watermelon with a tomahawk. Measure splatter after each pair of blows.

When the blows have left enough splatter for there to be an identifiable space where the splatter has landed on you instead of the wall, you're at the same place as the murder scene. Note how much has splattered on you during the process and see how difficult it is to get rid of it all while not covering everything else with it.
I don't dispute that whoever did this would have been spattered with blood, which is one more reason why it could not possibly have been Lundy. He fell under suspicion right away. Police would have found evidence in his car or among his belongings, something much better than the mystery specks on his shirt.

The murderer(s) in this case got away from the crime scene and had plenty of time to clean and get rid of evidence.

Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Ok, I'd like to see a precedent of a thrill-killer murder that matches the Lundy murders.
No two crimes have exactly the same fact pattern, but here in the US there are scads of precedents for the type of crime I am describing. Alex Kreider got into a house where a family was sleeping and killed three people, everyone in the family for the daughter, who escaped. He used a knife. He did it purely because he had fantasized about committing murder.

We had a famous death row case in Texas some years back involving a woman named Karla Faye Tucker. She and her boyfriend killed two people for kicks. Tucker said afterward that she had the most intense orgasm of her life while bludgeoning someone to death with a pickaxe.

Beyond depraved losers like Tucker lies the realm of psychotic/schizophrenic killers, like Richard Tuite or Richard Trenton Chase. There's no telling what people like that will do, but they make a mess.

I don't think the Lundy case was a thrill killing, although it might have been. I think it was more likely a cold-blooded murder for cause.
Charlie Wilkes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2015, 03:28 AM   #404
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Here is the thing
This is an Americanism, but here goes.

The lawyer I mentioned is my sister in law.
I discovered tonight that all in her office are convinced of Mark's guilt, including a senior detective who achieved a law degree, and is now a very skilled defence lawyer.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2015, 10:55 AM   #405
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Here is the thing
This is an Americanism, but here goes.

The lawyer I mentioned is my sister in law.
I discovered tonight that all in her office are convinced of Mark's guilt, including a senior detective who achieved a law degree, and is now a very skilled defence lawyer.
Smart people!

Meanwhile, I've been waiting for this one: John Barlow.

Also, one more that I find quite interesting:

The little combover guy of the shocking memory and monstrous lies who passes for our Prime Minister, has said that he believes New Zealand courts get it right 99.9% of the time. (in that link)

Amazingly good judges we must have here.

Peter Ellis still guilty, though.

I'd laugh if it didn't make me nearly cry.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2015, 05:21 PM   #406
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,672
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
The little combover guy of the shocking memory and monstrous lies who passes for our Prime Minister, has said that he believes New Zealand courts get it right 99.9% of the time. (in that link.
Oh, he might be right if he was talking about ALL court cases, including the simple and straightforward ones. Its in the complex, high profile cases where our system appears to be falling down.
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2015, 06:09 PM   #407
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Oh, he might be right if he was talking about ALL court cases, including the simple and straightforward ones. Its in the complex, high profile cases where our system appears to be falling down.
I'm sure he was talking about all court cases, and the idea is laughable.

I don't have any statistics, because I don't see any reliable ones, and for small sentences appeals won't be sought, but I'd be amazed if the percentage of wrong verdicts was under 2-3%.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 02:20 AM   #408
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
I was reading the beginning of the Jeffry MacDonald thread, and Charlie referred to this case which has many similarities to Mark Lundy's position.

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exo...px?caseid=3834

That morning, Christine’s body was found. She appeared to have been bludgeoned to death in her bed with a weapon made of wood. A wicker basket and suitcase were piled on top of her. The sheets upon which she lay were stained with what was later determined to be semen.

The Investigation

The day after Christine’s body was found, August 14, police recovered a bloody bandana found at a construction site located about 100 yards from the Morton home.

Later that month, Christine’s mother told police that the Mortons’ three-year-old son, Eric, had been present during the murder. According to Eric, the murderer was not Michael, but a “monster.” Eric described the crime scene and murder in great detail, and specifically said that his “Daddy” was “not home” when it happened.


Amber could tell us plenty if she had stayed out of the way.

On John Barlow, I remember him being interviewed soon after, he was very articulate, his gun and so on. It probably was a killing he arranged, loan sharks causing him grief, or similar.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 02:33 PM   #409
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,672
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
On John Barlow, I remember him being interviewed soon after, he was very articulate, his gun and so on. It probably was a killing he arranged, loan sharks causing him grief, or similar.
The John Barlow one was a very interesting case. Barlow is a very intelligent, articulate person, and yet he supposedly

- had his name in the Thomas' appointment book at the end of the day on which the murders were committed. Why did he use his own name when he could have made his appointment under any name.?

- was stupid enough to throw the murder weapon (a CZ-27), silencer and ammunition, all traceable back to him, in the rubbish where it could be found. He apparently had replaced the original barrel, filed down the firing pin and cartridge case extractor and replaced the original magazine with a home-made one. This is a lot of trouble to go to when he lived in Wellington, where there is any amount of coastline to ditch a gun. He could have easily dismantled the gun and gone to several different coastal locations, walked out at night at low tide and hurled the pieces of evidence as far as he could throw them. Even better, he could have gone to Picton on the overnight ferry (there was a 8:15 pm sailing on the night of the murders) and deep-sixed the evidence in the middle of the Cook Straight under cover of darkness where there would no chance of it ever being found.
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 02:40 PM   #410
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
It probably was a killing he arranged, loan sharks causing him grief, or similar.
Urban legend says he whacked them before they whacked him, but I don't buy it myself. They weren't like that.

I did business with the Thomases in the 1980s as their banker and they were straight about what they did. They were more or less loan sharks, but Barlow was a big noter and knew what - if anything beyond the $70k was involved - he was getting into.

Strange case again.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 02:44 PM   #411
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
The John Barlow one was a very interesting case. Barlow is a very intelligent, articulate person, and yet he supposedly

- had his name in the Thomas' appointment book at the end of the day on which the murders were committed. Why did he use his own name when he could have made his appointment under any name.?

- was stupid enough to throw the murder weapon (a CZ-27), silencer and ammunition, all traceable back to him, in the rubbish where it could be found. He apparently had replaced the original barrel, filed down the firing pin and cartridge case extractor and replaced the original magazine with a home-made one. This is a lot of trouble to go to when he lived in Wellington, where there is any amount of coastline to ditch a gun. He could have easily dismantled the gun and gone to several different coastal locations, walked out at night at low tide and hurled the pieces of evidence as far as he could throw them. Even better, he could have gone to Picton on the overnight ferry (there was a 8:15 pm sailing on the night of the murders) and deep-sixed the evidence in the middle of the Cook Straight under cover of darkness where there would no chance of it ever being found.
He went to a lot of trouble to persevere exoneration. Too hard for me to solve, but the 70k loan is troubling, was the meeting more likely to be a reverse annuity proposition, or where's our money? And he may as well deep six the weapon even as a fake cover up to avoid the link to himself.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 10:29 PM   #412
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Inspector Clouseau takes the stand in the Lundy trial:

Quote:
"At present, the only thing I can say with certainty is Christine Lundy and Amber Lundy died between when they were last known to be alive to the time the bodies were discovered."
O RLY?
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th March 2015, 10:46 PM   #413
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
Inspector Clouseau takes the stand in the Lundy trial:



O RLY?
yeah, shooting fish in a barrel, getting very embarrassing for the prosecution.
Everyone still saying guilty as sin though that I mention the trial to. There is a job on hand if Mark Lundy is ever to be rehabilitated, and it is true the contract killing idea can never be refuted. The best chance is to do more work on the psychological probabilities, and to that end, the morning after anecdotes are of most interest. Steve Braunias covered some of that.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 12:47 AM   #414
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
yeah, shooting fish in a barrel, getting very embarrassing for the prosecution.
Everyone still saying guilty as sin though that I mention the trial to.
I wonder what that's based on though (even for your lawyer friends) - critical examination of the evidence, or because they reckon it's the fat bloke they saw on TV that looked like was acting and who liked to visit prostitutes? People like to think the worst of others, especially if their appearance or actions reinforce their own prejudices. No wonder New Idea, Woman's Day, et al. sell so well.

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
There is a job on hand if Mark Lundy is ever to be rehabilitated, and it is true the contract killing idea can never be refuted. The best chance is to do more work on the psychological probabilities, and to that end, the morning after anecdotes are of most interest. Steve Braunias covered some of that.
Yep, none of his behaviour strikes me as being anything out of the ordinary for a man who had no idea that anything had happened to his wife and daughter. Even the prostitute visit (and him being able to perform sexually) is at odds with him either just having violently hatcheted two people to death, or just about to.

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 16th March 2015 at 12:50 AM.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 01:38 AM   #415
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
I wonder what that's based on though (even for your lawyer friends) - critical examination of the evidence, or because they reckon it's the fat bloke they saw on TV that looked like was acting and who liked to visit prostitutes? People like to think the worst of others, especially if their appearance or actions reinforce their own prejudices. No wonder New Idea, Woman's Day, et al. sell so well.



Yep, none of his behaviour strikes me as being anything out of the ordinary for a man who had no idea that anything had happened to his wife and daughter. Even the prostitute visit (and him being able to perform sexually) is at odds with him either just having violently hatcheted two people to death, or just about to.
Remember this is a huge learning curve for the mugs including me. Lundy has been guilty for 13 years, and I would be baying like the crowd, but, after flogging myself on disqus over poor Amanda Knox, I chanced on this forum oh, 21 months ago, and I realised what was going on. It was like scales falling from the eyes, rational debate that covered the detail rigorously, but particularly successive posters talking sense.
As I said my sister in law works with a small team of lawyers, and she was literally flabbergasted when I said Lundy could not have been the killer, and she added, and ******** says he's certainly guilty. He is a high ranking police officer turned high paid barrister.
Be very afraid, but only in the most unlikely circumstances.

What is illuminating to me is the inability of the innocent to get traction. I have literally never met anyone who studied the evidence, but it is amazingly easy to get people to agree with the hired killer, so he should be in jail anyway. That is better than the alternative, which is Lundy, who is "probably" guilty, going free, and making the police do some hard work. Like many in business, they might fail anyway.

Anyway, from today, the most remarkable real time quote I could not have written the script for

In 2002, during the 56-year-old's first trial, pathologist James Pang told the court that based on the stomach contents, he estimated the times of death to be roughly an hour after the pair ate dinner -- about 7pm.
Today he said he had changed his position to say Mrs Lundy and Amber could have died anytime within a 14 hour period.


Yes, this really happened.

Last edited by Samson; 16th March 2015 at 03:15 AM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 03:21 AM   #416
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Rolfe won't read this while she is absent. I find it frustrating that people with good media profile can not be reached by email, or any straightforward means. Anyway, Rolfe, we are really a Scottish colony.

What do you think of this?

In 2002, during the 56-year-old's first trial, pathologist James Pang told the court that based on the stomach contents, he estimated the times of death to be roughly an hour after the pair ate dinner -- about 7pm.
Today he said he had changed his position to say Mrs Lundy and Amber could have died anytime within a 14 hour period.


The Mark Lundy retrial.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 04:33 AM   #417
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Anyway, from today, the most remarkable real time quote I could not have written the script for

In 2002, during the 56-year-old's first trial, pathologist James Pang told the court that based on the stomach contents, he estimated the times of death to be roughly an hour after the pair ate dinner -- about 7pm.
Today he said he had changed his position to say Mrs Lundy and Amber could have died anytime within a 14 hour period.


Yes, this really happened.
It's very interesting his new positioning on this. He's leaving a 14 hour window open for a TOD (possibly in an effort to not to make himself look any sillier than he already has), going to the complete other end of the accuracy spectrum. You or I or a 6 year old could have come up with the same conclusion. In the autopsy he found that the food had not started digesting - the only way that reconciles with a 2am death is if they both started eating a meal purchased at 5:45pm after midnight. Christine eating at that time teeters on the edge of plausibility, but the idea that a 7 year old would be awake then and eating reheated McDonalds is ludicrous. Unless they are going to claim a meal eaten at, say 6:30pm can remain in the stomach 8 hours later at 2:30am, with digestion "not having started"....maybe it can, I'm no expert. McDonalds burgers do tend to sit in your stomach like a rock but it seems unlikely to me
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 07:02 AM   #418
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,361
not a realistic TOD at all

Rolfe would be in a better position to comment than I am. However, Pang's statement is totally at odds with the literature I have read on stomach emptying times and is completely unbelievable. See also a 2013 paper, "ESTIMATION OF TIME SINCE DEATH BY GASTRIC CONTENTS" by V. Patel et al. He should be asked why then did he testify the way he did in the first trial.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 11:42 AM   #419
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
What is illuminating to me is the inability of the innocent to get traction.
Which innocents are you referring to?

Remembering that being found not guilty is by no means the same as innocent.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 11:44 AM   #420
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
Yep, none of his behaviour strikes me as being anything out of the ordinary for a man who had no idea that anything had happened to his wife and daughter. Even the prostitute visit (and him being able to perform sexually) is at odds with him either just having violently hatcheted two people to death, or just about to.
Have you studied his behaviour after the murders and before he was charged? Was that out of the ordinary?

Maybe he was horny at the thought of bludgeoning his wife to death?
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 11:46 AM   #421
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
Rolfe would be in a better position to comment than I am. However, Pang's statement is totally at odds with the literature I have read on stomach emptying times and is completely unbelievable. See also a 2013 paper, "ESTIMATION OF TIME SINCE DEATH BY GASTRIC CONTENTS" by V. Patel et al. He should be asked why then did he testify the way he did in the first trial.
From yesterday, we have

She was weighed at 9.25pm. Her body was washed at 10.52pm prior to the autopsy. At 12.45pm, Dr Pang opened her stomach, and Calkin wrote down what he said: "The contents are possibly potato, maybe fish, maybe meat, no apparent vegetables." Maybe food: her last meal was from McDonald's. And then Calkin read out Pang's assessment: "Most likely death has occurred within one hour of the meal."

The privy council appeal document also stated, I typed this from the pdf file

32. Dr Pang carried out the autopsies on both bodies. Amber's beginning at 7 30pm on 29th and that of Christine at 9am the following morning. He found that both stomachs were "quite full" and he was able to identify the stomach contents as a meal such as would be purchased from the fast food restaurant from which Mrs Lundy and her daughter had obtained the takeaway the evening before. He described the duodenum in both bodies as empty which he took to be a further indication that the digestive process had not started.

Dr Pang now says

Hislop: "Your position now is markedly different."
Pang: "Not entirely."
Hislop: "Are you saying that your 14-hour window which you tell us today is consistent with your position in 2000, that they died one hour after the meal?"
Pang: "That's right. Yes."
Hislop: "When was it you changed your mind? When did you change your mind? Do you accept you changed your mind?"
Pang: "No. The one-hour estimate is within the 14-hour certainty."


He is doing a rather poor job as a civil servant rather than a specialist who gave very plausible testimony at the first trial. He is now retired.

More on his testimony

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11418257

It seems likely as it was mid week Amber went to bed at 8pm as usual, so had finished eating by then in the unlikely event the meal was held over from the drive through. And her duodenum was empty when killed. The computer being turned off seems to push the tod as late as feasible, say 11pm.

Last edited by Samson; 16th March 2015 at 11:48 AM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 12:09 PM   #422
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,361
What actually changed his mind?

"Hislop: "Let's just try again. When was it you changed your mind?"

And then Pang said, "I would think it was after reading the Privy Council judgment."

It was 3pm. He had taken two hours to answer the question. Dr Pang will be remembered."

Unless the privy council judgment has information on gastrointestinal transit, it sounds like domain-irrelevant information changed his mind. For a quick guide to the subject of stomach emptying times, see the graph at this link.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 16th March 2015 at 12:27 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 12:34 PM   #423
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Which innocents are you referring to?

Remembering that being found not guilty is by no means the same as innocent.
Remember the focus is the prosecution case, which is a 2 30am time, that is the case they have brought for the people, you, me, etc. Sticking solely to that, how do you honestly think they are doing? Surely everything else is another subject. No one can prove he did not instigate, without more evidence, but his behaviour before and after can be scrutinised. For example, why did he say (allegedly) that he was glad the jewellry box had been stolen? Was it relief that there was a sense of closure, ie an explanation for the killings, not totally senseless, or an attempt to confirm the burglary and the break in to the police?
Those are the sorts of questions to discern whether he had involvement, but physical involvement seems to have been ruled out.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 01:25 PM   #424
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
"Hislop: "Let's just try again. When was it you changed your mind?"

And then Pang said, "I would think it was after reading the Privy Council judgment."

It was 3pm. He had taken two hours to answer the question. Dr Pang will be remembered."

Unless the privy council judgment has information on gastrointestinal transit, it sounds like domain-irrelevant information changed his mind. For a quick guide to the subject of stomach emptying times, see the graph at this link.
It seems Pang is being disingenuous and deliberately obtuse in his new statement. A TOD late into the 14 hour window is only possible with the aid of either an unreasonably late and unlikely meal time of post-midnight, and/or some extreme statistical possibilities of Christine and Amber both emptying their stomach contents far more slowly than the average.

The upper limit for TOD in this case must surely be in the order of 2.5 - 3 hours post meal. According to the table in your link, roughly 50% of the stomach is emptied by this time, and here digestion hadn't even started.

To me, the only logical reason for quoting a 14 hour window is because the Crown requires planting the vague, unscientific possibility of a 2am TOD in the jury's mind. Their case is toast otherwise.

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 16th March 2015 at 01:27 PM.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 02:31 PM   #425
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Remember the focus is the prosecution case, which is a 2 30am time, that is the case they have brought for the people, you, me, etc. Sticking solely to that, how do you honestly think they are doing? Surely everything else is another subject. No one can prove he did not instigate, without more evidence, but his behaviour before and after can be scrutinised. For example, why did he say (allegedly) that he was glad the jewellry box had been stolen? Was it relief that there was a sense of closure, ie an explanation for the killings, not totally senseless, or an attempt to confirm the burglary and the break in to the police?
Those are the sorts of questions to discern whether he had involvement, but physical involvement seems to have been ruled out.
All very relevant to the case, but total avoidance of the question I asked you.

You said:

What is illuminating to me is the inability of the innocent to get traction.

Who are the innocents?

(As to how I think the case is going, I've stated a number of times that I expect the jury to take 5 or 6 minutes to find him not guilty - expect hugs a la Baino.)
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 02:47 PM   #426
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
All very relevant to the case, but total avoidance of the question I asked you.

You said:

What is illuminating to me is the inability of the innocent to get traction.

Who are the innocents?

(As to how I think the case is going, I've stated a number of times that I expect the jury to take 5 or 6 minutes to find him not guilty - expect hugs a la Baino.)
The list is endless, but in a local context, and a case you mentioned, I remember law professor Brown from Auckland University telling us he had visited Arthur Thomas in jail in the early 70s. Guilty he said, because he could tell from long experience.
Raffaele Sollecito is struggling to get traction, and if he is jailed at the end of the month don't expect him to be released for a decade. He is innocent.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 05:43 PM   #427
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The list is endless,...
So you keep saying, yet...

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Raffaele Sollecito is struggling to get traction, and if he is jailed at the end of the month don't expect him to be released for a decade. He is innocent.
You give me one.

From Italy.

We were talking about NZ.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 06:14 PM   #428
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,361
unlucky Lindy

Lindy Chamberlain was imprisoned on the basis of pseudo-forensics, and she probably would still be were it not for an unfortunate hiking accident. There are still plenty of people who think she was guilty, but I seem to recall a survey indicating that they are in a minority. Yes, it's Australia as opposed to New Zealand, but that is close enough for us geographically challenged Yanks. More seriously, I didn't think Samson's original comment was restricted to one country.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 16th March 2015 at 06:40 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 07:20 PM   #429
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
I never got too bothered by the Chamberlain case, so I don't know for sure, but was she proven innocent?

Did the dingo take the clothes off?

The coroner refused to exonerate the Chamberlains and blame the dingo.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 07:46 PM   #430
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,361
two competing narratives, but only one was plausible

Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I never got too bothered by the Chamberlain case, so I don't know for sure, but was she proven innocent?

Did the dingo take the clothes off?

The coroner refused to exonerate the Chamberlains and blame the dingo.
There have been a couple of threads here. (long story short) The Chamberlains were exonerated by the CJ system more fully within the last two years, but the details escape me. The key piece of evidence was a jacket worn by Azaria that was found in a dingo lair. The jacket would not have been found but for the fall of the unfortunate hiker, whose body was recovered there. The problematic blood evidence was discredited through the work of several people, especially professor Barry Boettcher.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 07:52 PM   #431
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I never got too bothered by the Chamberlain case, so I don't know for sure, but was she proven innocent?

Did the dingo take the clothes off?

The coroner refused to exonerate the Chamberlains and blame the dingo.
It is both true she was exonerated, and that it made no difference to people. Their minds were made up, as I found the day the news was announced a few years ago, the first person I saw was a Queenslander, who listed several reasons off pat, that she was guilty for all time. Chris knows the detail about the incorrect forensic findings that kept her judicially guilty for thirty years.

The Arthur Thomas case is very relevant on this thread because only one item specifically tied him to the crime, discovered very late. We have this situation here, with the brain tissue, just now,

It was "overwhelmingly, incontrovertibly incontestable" that tissue found on Mark Lundy's polo shirt was from the central nervous system, a court was told today.
British-based forensic neuropathologist Daniel du Plessis performed tests on the substance and gave evidence today in the High Court at Wellington.


http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11418441

Is there truly a local besides Thomas that could have been the killer?
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th March 2015, 08:53 PM   #432
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Which innocents are you referring to?

Remembering that being found not guilty is by no means the same as innocent.
It ought to be. You start out innocent until proven guilty. They don't prove you guilty. What's left if not innocent? Is there some indeterminate quantum state on offer?

If he's not guilty, he's innocent.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 04:12 AM   #433
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,672
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Is there truly a local besides Thomas that could have been the killer?
Len Demler, Jeanette Crewe's father.

http://crewemurders.com/?page_id=100
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 01:40 PM   #434
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Len Demler, Jeanette Crewe's father.

http://crewemurders.com/?page_id=100
It was my understanding the latest theory prefers another local farmer, and that ultimately Len Demler has been abandoned as a suspect. Maybe The Atheist played rugby with him .

Meanwhile today should be interesting, as they have all identified spinal chord or brain tissue, but not the species of the beast.
Steve Braunias is like the Frank Sfarzo of NZ trial reporting.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11418834

Last edited by Samson; 17th March 2015 at 01:51 PM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 03:02 PM   #435
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
It ought to be. You start out innocent until proven guilty. They don't prove you guilty. What's left if not innocent? Is there some indeterminate quantum state on offer?

If he's not guilty, he's innocent.
You're confusing legal reasoning with factual situations.

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
It was my understanding the latest theory prefers another local farmer, and that ultimately Len Demler has been abandoned as a suspect. Maybe The Atheist played rugby with him .
Not out there. We city boys preferred to play against other city boys. The days when I was playing, guys like Grumpy (Jim Coe) were 1000x tougher than us, so we didn't play Counties teams much. For some reason, 115 kg farmers and cops used to enjoy ripping city slicker poofs to bits.

The only Counties team we ever played was Onewhero in very friendly games when we were providing the grog, so they couldn't go too hard on us. I recall one year my chick was there watching and she passed the comment "You're going to die!" before the game.

One of my brothers, on the other hand, has been farming in the region since 1968. He may well have played rugby with them.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 04:10 PM   #436
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,672
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
It was my understanding the latest theory prefers another local farmer, and that ultimately Len Demler has been abandoned as a suspect.
Well the actual latest theory is that Detective Len Johnstone was the killer.

http://www.defrostingcoldcases.com/d...er-the-crewes/

I consider that vaery much a "left field" theory, especially as it comes from Ian Wishart, whose theories are often "out there".... although;

► Johnston was known among his Police pals as "The Fitter" for his known skill and propensity for framing suspects.

► He was suspected of committing arson at Otahuhu Police Station to try to incriminate a police colleague (there were arsons at the Crewe farm prior to their murders.)

► He visited the Crewe farm in 1967 regarding a burglary which was suspected to be an attempted insurance fraud by Harvey Crewe and that that Len Johnstone knew this and was blackmailing the Crewes

► He is one of the two Policeman who planted the cartridge cases at the Crewe house (note I didn't say alleged, its a fact that they did plant the cartridge case)

► He is also alleged to have planted mechanical equipment at the Thomas farm that was related to the axle used to weigh down Harvey Crewe's body.

I am in no doubt there is a whole lot more to this case than we have been told. For example, someone cut the brake lines on Jeanette Crewe's car a year before the murders. Was this a previous murder attempt?
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 04:30 PM   #437
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Well the actual latest theory is that Detective Len Johnstone was the killer.

http://www.defrostingcoldcases.com/d...er-the-crewes/

I consider that vaery much a "left field" theory, especially as it comes from Ian Wishart, whose theories are often "out there".... although;

► Johnston was known among his Police pals as "The Fitter" for his known skill and propensity for framing suspects.

► He was suspected of committing arson at Otahuhu Police Station to try to incriminate a police colleague (there were arsons at the Crewe farm prior to their murders.)

► He visited the Crewe farm in 1967 regarding a burglary which was suspected to be an attempted insurance fraud by Harvey Crewe and that that Len Johnstone knew this and was blackmailing the Crewes

► He is one of the two Policeman who planted the cartridge cases at the Crewe house (note I didn't say alleged, its a fact that they did plant the cartridge case)

► He is also alleged to have planted mechanical equipment at the Thomas farm that was related to the axle used to weigh down Harvey Crewe's body.

I am in no doubt there is a whole lot more to this case than we have been told. For example, someone cut the brake lines on Jeanette Crewe's car a year before the murders. Was this a previous murder attempt?
I just finished listening to this

http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Investiga...7/Default.aspx

Riveting and probable, murder suicide. I believe it may have been debunked but in a nutshell

1. Harvey beats her and breaks her nose
2. Jeanette shoots Harvey
3. She and her father Len dispose of the body
4, She feeds the baby
5. She is in a lousy psychological and physical state and shoots herself
6. Len disposes of her body (in too deep to back off)
7. Allows Arthur Thomas to go to trial expecting acquittal because he didn't do it.
8. Too late when he is convicted to tell the true story.

Relevance to Lundy thread? The cartridge case is equivalent to the polo shirt (oh and a bra clasp somewhere else)
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 05:27 PM   #438
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,505
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Well the actual latest theory is that Detective Len Johnstone was the killer.

http://www.defrostingcoldcases.com/d...er-the-crewes/

I consider that vaery much a "left field" theory, especially as it comes from Ian Wishart, whose theories are often "out there".... although;
"Out there" would be a very - and unfairly - benign view of the filth, lies and misinformation that pour from Ian's vents.

If Wishart believes it, it's almost certainly wrong, as he is with intelligent design, climate change, the Kahuis, Helen Clark, Don Brash and every other subject he's written on or spoken about.

The guy is a world-class idiot.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 09:57 PM   #439
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,218
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
"Out there" would be a very - and unfairly - benign view of the filth, lies and misinformation that pour from Ian's vents.

If Wishart believes it, it's almost certainly wrong, as he is with intelligent design, climate change, the Kahuis, Helen Clark, Don Brash and every other subject he's written on or spoken about.

The guy is a world-class idiot.
He states that intelligent design is replacing evolution. He has persuaded the other world class idiot Leighton Smith.

Meanwhile the defence says the spot is lamb chops and the prosecution said it is Christine's brain. The process is broken.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news...ectid=11419042
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th March 2015, 11:13 PM   #440
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 461
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Meanwhile the defence says the spot is lamb chops and the prosecution said it is Christine's brain. The process is broken.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news...ectid=11419042
CNS tissue in meat products isn't as unlikely as you might think, in the UK it was discovered as probable cause of vCJD, through ingestion of BSE infected meat:

Quote:
Since tissues from the central nervous system were not a feature of the British diet, it remained unclear how humans had become exposed until ‘mechanically recovered meat’ came under the spotlight. Mechanically recovered meat is recovered from bones (such as the vertebral column) of cattle by high pressure techniques. The resulting product, a meat paste, was commonly used in burgers, sausages, pies, baby food and similar processed products.
Spinal cord was removed before vertebral columns were processed to harvest this meat, but each segment of the backbone includes two dorsal root ganglia. These were being collected along with the meat paste, and therefore as much as 2% of the resulting product could be central nervous system tissue. That is, a 100 gram sausage might contain two grams of infectious material, and the infectious oral dose of BSE for a sheep had been shown to be only 0.5 grams. It is now considered probable that it was the dorsal root ganglia in mechanically recovered meat that exposed British consumers to BSE infectivity in their diet

http://www.foodsafety.govt.nz/elibra...c_Evidence.pdf
- NZ apparently doesn't regulate the use of mechanically recovered meat

Quote:
We could prohibit the harvesting of "mechanically recovered meat"
The use of wire brushes and other mechanical tools to recover meat scraps attached to the bones and spinal column can pull out infectious tissue and contaminate meat that would otherwise be safe. Such "mechanically recovered meat" is used in certain processed meat products. Some experts believe that the BSE agent was transmitted to humans by products containing mechanically recovered meat which had been contaminated with central nervous tissue.

http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/pests...afe-to-eat.htm
- when Lundy's car was seized on the day of the murders, police found a wrapper for a beef and chilli pie
- what were the content and labelling standards for pies back in 2001? I think the bar is set pretty low

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 17th March 2015 at 11:18 PM.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.