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 30th April 2018, 03:35 AM   #1601
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
responses to Dr. Temple-Camp

There are three blog entries that rebut many of the claims made by Dr. Temple-Camp. link1 link2 link3
__________________
“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 11th June 2018, 04:45 AM   #1602
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
Bennet Omalu on the application of immunohistochemistry

I contacted several American forensic experts to see if anyone knew about IHC, and eventually I was referred to Dr. Bennet Omalu, a forensic pathologist, neuropathologist, and clinical professor of medical pathology and laboratory medicine at the University of California, Davis. He is also the trailblazer in CTE research whose life and career were portrayed in the 2015 movie Concussion. His email response was quick and unequivocal. 'This is crazy. … This is simply ridiculous. … If this was the only evidence that linked him to the crime, then this is a travesty of justice. Simply unbelievable.' A few minutes later, Omalu sent another stream of emails, saying that the evidence would not be admissible in America. One simply read: 'IT IS ********.'" Link to D Magazine.
__________________
“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 11th June 2018, 05:22 PM   #1603
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Mike White does a follow up story

https://www.noted.co.nz/currently/cr...nst-the-rules/
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 8th October 2018, 01:52 AM   #1604
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
The judgement is due 11 30 am NZ time.
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 8th October 2018, 05:32 PM   #1605
Ampulla of Vater
Illuminator
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 3,019
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The judgement is due 11 30 am NZ time.
Did it happen yet? What time is it in NZ right now?
Ampulla of Vater 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 8th October 2018, 06:27 PM   #1606
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
appeal denied

His appeal was rejected, despite the court's belief that the messenger RNA work should not have been admitted into evidence. I am disappointed that the immunohistochemistry work continues to get a pass that it does not deserve.
__________________
“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; 8th October 2018 at 06:28 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 8th October 2018, 06:56 PM   #1607
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,428
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
His appeal was rejected, despite the court's belief that the messenger RNA work should not have been admitted into evidence. I am disappointed that the immunohistochemistry work continues to get a pass that it does not deserve.
That sucks. Wasn't the messenger RNA work the reason for the appeal?
Elagabalus 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 8th October 2018, 07:10 PM   #1608
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
Mike White on the decision

Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
That sucks. Wasn't the messenger RNA work the reason for the appeal?
It was a major plank. I don't get the logic of the decision. Unless one were certain that the jury gave the mRNA evidence zero weight, the rejection doesn't make sense. Link: “'This is an issue that should have been thrashed out between the experts in peer reviews and in conferences, not in front of a jury.'”
__________________
“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 8th October 2018, 07:49 PM   #1609
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,428
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
It was a major plank. I don't get the logic of the decision. Unless one were certain that the jury gave the mRNA evidence zero weight, the rejection doesn't make sense. Link: “'This is an issue that should have been thrashed out between the experts in peer reviews and in conferences, not in front of a jury.'”
It's interesting because today whilst researching for another thread I ran into this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Marks

The case was handled by NZ

Quote:
Both the United States and Australia agreed to a coroner's inquest being held in New Zealand.
And they reached the following conclusions,

Quote:
DSS Wormald indicated that Raytheon and the National Science Foundation had not been cooperative.[15] DSS Wormald stated regarding the NSF conclusion that Marks' death was from natural causes: "We wanted the results of [the NSF] internal investigation and to get in contact with people who were there to ask them some questions," said Wormald. "They weren't prepared to tell us who was there "... "they have advised that no report exists. To be frank, I think there is more there; there must be",[15] Wormald said. "I am not entirely satisfied that all relevant information and reports have been disclosed to the New Zealand police or the coroner".[9]

And after seeing this thread and Scott Watson, I think, you know, maybe he just accidentally swallowed some methanol.
Elagabalus 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 8th October 2018, 08:19 PM   #1610
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
murder by methanol?

IMO both cases have problems with the putative murder weapon. In the case of Marks, there was only dilute methanol used for cleaning (a good deal hinges on its potency and whether or not one might be able to taste anything else in the fluid). In the case of Lundy, a tomahawk weapon was posited, but no specific weapon was ever found.
__________________
“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; 8th October 2018 at 08:23 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 9th October 2018, 03:03 AM   #1611
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
IMO both cases have problems with the putative murder weapon. In the case of Marks, there was only dilute methanol used for cleaning (a good deal hinges on its potency and whether or not one might be able to taste anything else in the fluid). In the case of Lundy, a tomahawk weapon was posited, but no specific weapon was ever found.
On this fine point, Mark's tomahawk was found in his garage, but because it was not a tool for a building site he never painted it to identify its owner in such a situation.
The legend of the tomahawk would prevail, despite the weapon used by the killer being sharp enough to cleave hair roots. Source reliable, but I should check.
The blue and orange paint flecks are described and not critiqued in Mark Cooper's disgraceful decision.

There is so much for case specialists to deconstruct in this establishment "decision".
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 9th October 2018, 03:23 AM   #1612
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
His appeal was rejected, despite the court's belief that the messenger RNA work should not have been admitted into evidence. I am disappointed that the immunohistochemistry work continues to get a pass that it does not deserve.
I think it is time to get back to basics.

The prosecution case is that brain was smeared into a polyester shirt and after 59 days discovered.

The simplest experiment is to do this, with any mammalian brain, and find immunohistochemists who will identify this as 100% CNS tissue, spinal chord or brain.

I believe the cellular material on the shirt must have had preservative added before it hit the shirt.
This is easy to establish, Temple Camp would ascribe to Mark Lundy a perfect airdrying procedure, that du Plessis would state is the worst method of preservation.
Brain degrades to unrecognisable gunk in 24 hours according to information I have read.
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 9th October 2018, 11:03 AM   #1613
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
from Radio New Zealand

Massey University's pro vice chancellor professor Chris Gallavin said he was surprised by the decision.

"Effectively the defence won every aspect of their legal argument.

"They were arguing that the novel scientific evidence that resulted in a positive affirmation of the material being on Lundy's shirt was more likely to be brain or spinal matter and the defence won in their argument saying that not ought to have been admissible."

"What was really interesting was the Court of Appeal still, nonetheless, said that wasn't really of sufficient significance to change the conclusion of the case and part of me finds that quite remarkable." Link
__________________
“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 9th October 2018, 07:25 PM   #1614
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Statement for the media:

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF MARK LUNDY
I have spoken briefly with Mr Lundy and outlined the 395 paragraph Court of Appeal
decision dismissing his appeal against conviction. He now has a copy of the decision.
He is, of course, very disappointed at the outcome of the appeal. Mr Lundy has long
argued that for whatever reason his case has become the testing grounds for novel
science. It was the novel use of the IHC that lead to a successful appeal against
conviction before the Privy Council back in 2013 and it was novel use of the mRNA
evidence that was the primary focus of the 2017 appeal. The Court of Appeal has
found that the mRNA evidence was wrongly admitted at his 2016 retrial.
The Court of Appeal have applied the proviso. It was only after the appeal was heard
that the Crown confirmed that it would seek to rely on the proviso if its primary
argument as to admissibility of the mRNA evidence was rejected. In a lengthy
decision the Court of Appeal have concluded that notwithstanding the wrongful
admission of evidence that was so strenuously contested both before trial and at
trial, that allowing that evidence to be considered and accepted by the jury, has not
given rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice and did not make the trial unfair.
That decision raises important issues and is inevitably one that Mr Lundy will ask the
Supreme Court to review.
In those circumstances any further comment on behalf of Mr Lundy is not
appropriate.
JHM Eaton QC
Counsel for Mr Lundy
9 October 2018
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 9th October 2018, 09:17 PM   #1615
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Here is an interview with Jonathan Eaton, by Wendyl Nissen, (starting - 12 30)

https://www.radiolive.co.nz/home/on-...-10-10-18.html

Wendyl's husband Paul Little published In Dark Places, the Teina Pora story.

Last edited by Samson; 9th October 2018 at 09:27 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 10th October 2018, 11:02 AM   #1616
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
This is appalling.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 10th October 2018, 12:59 PM   #1617
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
I keep coming back to the alleged night drive. I don't think it's possible any way you slice it.

I was thinking about it in relation to the peculiar daytime drive undertaken by David Gilroy being discussed in the other thread. He had the body of his murdered ex in the boot of his car and he was looking for somewhere to stash this where it wouldn't be found. (I suspect he thought he couldn't be convicted of murder if the body was never found.)

We've been comparing his times over various sections of road to the times the AA Route Finder web site gives for the same bits of road, and he was pretty damn close most of the time (except when he disappeared off the radar, presumably for body-concealing purposes). Gilroy, of course, absolutely could not afford to have an accident, or be caught speeding, or even draw attention to himself by dangerous overtaking or other time-saving manoeuvres. He was clearly driving at a sober and sensible speed the whole day.

Lundy must have had similar constraints, especially on the way back, but even on the way there as he might have been clocked by a speed camera without actually realising, or have been noticed by people who would later recall hearing or seeing a car being driven far too fast along that road. It's already been noted that every time you're forced to slow down significantly below the average speed you're trying to achieve, the harder it is to claw that back by exceeding that average speed.

How much faster than the AA timings for Lundy's route is it actually possible to drive? (Assuming the AA driving times are as reasonable in NZ as they are in Britain.) Has this point ever been satisfactorily resolved?

I just checked and the AA says the Lundy drive is 88.3 miles and should take 1 hour 51 minutes. That's an average speed of just under 48 mph. What average speed were they alleging Lundy achieved?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 10th October 2018 at 01:05 PM.
Rolfe 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 10th October 2018, 01:23 PM   #1618
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
IIRC he had consumed a considerable amount of whiskey

Just a couple of offhand comments. One, it is undisputed that Lundy drank prior to his encounter with the prostitute; this is not going to improve his car handling skills. Two, apart from the tightness of the timing (at least after one factors in a need to clean up), there is a concern about the amount of petrol he would have consumed. There are others who are better versed in that part of the case than I am.
__________________
“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 10th October 2018, 02:42 PM   #1619
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I keep coming back to the alleged night drive. I don't think it's possible any way you slice it.

I was thinking about it in relation to the peculiar daytime drive undertaken by David Gilroy being discussed in the other thread. He had the body of his murdered ex in the boot of his car and he was looking for somewhere to stash this where it wouldn't be found. (I suspect he thought he couldn't be convicted of murder if the body was never found.)

We've been comparing his times over various sections of road to the times the AA Route Finder web site gives for the same bits of road, and he was pretty damn close most of the time (except when he disappeared off the radar, presumably for body-concealing purposes). Gilroy, of course, absolutely could not afford to have an accident, or be caught speeding, or even draw attention to himself by dangerous overtaking or other time-saving manoeuvres. He was clearly driving at a sober and sensible speed the whole day.

Lundy must have had similar constraints, especially on the way back, but even on the way there as he might have been clocked by a speed camera without actually realising, or have been noticed by people who would later recall hearing or seeing a car being driven far too fast along that road. It's already been noted that every time you're forced to slow down significantly below the average speed you're trying to achieve, the harder it is to claw that back by exceeding that average speed.

How much faster than the AA timings for Lundy's route is it actually possible to drive? (Assuming the AA driving times are as reasonable in NZ as they are in Britain.) Has this point ever been satisfactorily resolved?

I just checked and the AA says the Lundy drive is 88.3 miles and should take 1 hour 51 minutes. That's an average speed of just under 48 mph. What average speed were they alleging Lundy achieved?
This is interesting, we know that he drove as on a racetrack. He was timed by police from Johnsonville roundabout to just short of Karamea Crescent to have averaged 104 km/hour. This is through built up areas and 5 sets of traffic lights. Ironically this is also not possible, the police conflated this speed to suit their first crime theory.

This is judge Cooper creating fiction,

........CA went into some considerable depth on the fuel consumption issue ( as they did with the complex issue of the brain tissue pathology and other matters ) ,

Here are their conclusions,

“285] First, and obviously, he reports the result of tests carried out on a closed circuit. The circumstances of the tests were therefore very different from those faced by Mr Lundy when he drove back to Palmerston North at speed from Johnsonville on the morning of 30 August. They were achieved by driving hard on a race track, a very different context from driving on the open road. The consumption is approximately three times higher than normal consumption. Second, the results of Mr Robertson’s tests insofar as the reported figure of 36 litres per 100 km is concerned do not fit with the figures achieved by Detective Johanson in the road trips which he recorded in evidence and on which he achieved, hard driving on each occasion, figures of 16.44 litres per 100 km and 13.6 litres per 100 km. These figures were unchallenged in the defence closing. Unlike a race track, these conditions were no doubt similar to those faced by Mr Lundy. The distance between those figures, achieved while driving
178
R v Lundy [2015] NZHC 542.
hard in real on-road conditions, and the closed track result achieved by Mr Robertson are too great.
[286] We note finally that the figure of 16.1 litres per 100 km, to which Mr Robertson said his hard driving figure would need to be reduced to fit the fuel available for the Johnsonville to Palmerston North journey, is in the vicinity of the figure achieved by Detective Johanson in 17 October 2000.
[287] For these reasons, we are of the view that the application to adduce the further evidence of Mr Robertson should be declined and we will order accordingly. Otherwise, our conclusion is that there was evidence before the jury on which it was entitled to conclude that Mr Lundy could have made the late night trip between Petone and Palmerston North for the purposes of the murders and return as contended by the Crown. They could also have concluded he would have had sufficient fuel for thetravel that he made the following day, including the fast trip back to Palmerston North from Johnsonville, although as the Crown conceded all along, it would have been tight. That is consistent with the fact that as Mr Lundy said to the police, by the time he had reached Palmerston North the petrol warning device on his car was sounding….”

NZCA 410 BETWEEN MARK EDWARD LUNDY Appellant
https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/cases...d/fileDecision
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 10th October 2018, 02:47 PM   #1620
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
There is an interesting constant across all petrol powered vehicles, from small to super 8 race cars, they consume 3 times the fuel in racetrack conditions as they do when most carefully driven to conserve fuel. This should be well known, but in fact was uncovered by the defence.
He was 30 liters short of petrol to do what was claimed, this is quite easy to demonstrate, and I expect the Supreme court to consider this... oh wait, defence have squandered their chance.
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 10th October 2018, 04:25 PM   #1621
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
The fuel thing seems to me to be too much of a moving target. The same thing comes up with Gilroy's drive, in that the cops drove the route themselves and then said he'd used up so much more fuel that they reckoned he'd gone 124 miles further than the actual distance they know he covered. But there are a few things wrong with that. First, the further he drives the less time he has to conceal the body, so there's a conflict there. But mainly, his car had completely borked suspension and a chunk of landscape on its undercarriage. He had been driving on rough forestry tracks (which tend to be very hilly) at some speed, and he had driven off-road. This eats up petrol compared to normal road driving. The petrol thing means nothing in the Gilroy case.

In the Lundy case the question is different, in that it comes down to did he actually have enough petrol to do what they said he did? The only way to find out is to do the actual drive. Close the roads if you have to. You think Lundy drove that 88-mile route in how long? Well, get his car (or an identical one if you can't use his own car) and do it. And measure how much petrol you use.

If you can't drive that route in the time you're accusing Lundy of having driven it, then you're in trouble right there.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 10th October 2018, 04:28 PM   #1622
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
Even getting an identical car, well I wonder. I have kept detailed petrol consumption records for my present car. After it had covered 35,000 miles from new its engine seized up. Volkswagen replaced the engine under warranty. The petrol consumption since then is significantly better, even though it's supposed to be an identical engine.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 11th October 2018, 02:17 AM   #1623
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 429
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
Just a couple of offhand comments. One, it is undisputed that Lundy drank prior to his encounter with the prostitute; this is not going to improve his car handling skills. Two, apart from the tightness of the timing (at least after one factors in a need to clean up), there is a concern about the amount of petrol he would have consumed. There are others who are better versed in that part of the case than I am.
Extending this line of thinking shows how ridiculous the story is. At 12:48 am he is in Petone, having had 1/2 bottle of rum and saying goodbye to the prostitute. Then he needs to walk to his car (that the prosecution says he parked up the road from the motel), and then drive conservatively (under the influence) to Palmerston North to have 10 litres of fuel left when picked up the next day. Let's say 1hr 55 min, as per Google, which puts him at Karamea Crescent at around 3:00 am.

Let's give him 30 minutes to kill his wife and daughter, clean himself up miraculously, and dispose of his clothing, the murder weapon, and the jewellery box so well that they've never been found in 20 years. Remember, he can't really drive anywhere to dispose of these items - he doesn't have enough fuel.

So by 3:30 am he's on the road again, which puts him back at the motel at around 5:30 am, somehow miraculously avoiding being witnessed anywhere on the road or entering the motel.

I can tell you from late night 10+ hour drives from Sydney to the Queensland border, that if you're still on the road at 4-5 am you're in very real danger of falling asleep at the wheel. Not sure that having a 1/2 bottle of rum in you is going to improve things.

But let's say fortuitously he arrives, unnoticed, back at the motel. That gives him 1 1/2 hours of sleep at the most - probably less, because he need to be showered, up and dressed and asking the motel manager for batteries at 7:00 am, and this manager supposedly doesn't notice his condition as a guy who's been up all night. Maybe he doesn't. Strangely nor do the customers Lundy visits that morning. If I recall, they actually say the opposite - that he was in a cheerful mood, and there was nothing out of the ordinary about him.

Then by mid morning he gets the call from the police, and a man with maybe an hours sleep under his belt does a breakneck drive, averaging 100 km/h plus, back to Palmerston North, without falling asleep at the wheel or running off the road. And when he arrives, the police don't notice anything unusual - not a man who looked tired, someone who had supposedly been drinking, had driven through the night, and had had next to no sleep. No remarks of lethargy, droopy eyes, or slow speech.

Sounds legit.

Last edited by Hard Cheese; 11th October 2018 at 02:19 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 11th October 2018, 04:08 AM   #1624
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
Extending this line of thinking shows how ridiculous the story is. At 12:48 am he is in Petone, having had 1/2 bottle of rum and saying goodbye to the prostitute. Then he needs to walk to his car (that the prosecution says he parked up the road from the motel), and then drive conservatively (under the influence) to Palmerston North to have 10 litres of fuel left when picked up the next day. Let's say 1hr 55 min, as per Google, which puts him at Karamea Crescent at around 3:00 am.

Let's give him 30 minutes to kill his wife and daughter, clean himself up miraculously, and dispose of his clothing, the murder weapon, and the jewellery box so well that they've never been found in 20 years. Remember, he can't really drive anywhere to dispose of these items - he doesn't have enough fuel.

So by 3:30 am he's on the road again, which puts him back at the motel at around 5:30 am, somehow miraculously avoiding being witnessed anywhere on the road or entering the motel.

I can tell you from late night 10+ hour drives from Sydney to the Queensland border, that if you're still on the road at 4-5 am you're in very real danger of falling asleep at the wheel. Not sure that having a 1/2 bottle of rum in you is going to improve things.

But let's say fortuitously he arrives, unnoticed, back at the motel. That gives him 1 1/2 hours of sleep at the most - probably less, because he need to be showered, up and dressed and asking the motel manager for batteries at 7:00 am, and this manager supposedly doesn't notice his condition as a guy who's been up all night. Maybe he doesn't. Strangely nor do the customers Lundy visits that morning. If I recall, they actually say the opposite - that he was in a cheerful mood, and there was nothing out of the ordinary about him.

Then by mid morning he gets the call from the police, and a man with maybe an hours sleep under his belt does a breakneck drive, averaging 100 km/h plus, back to Palmerston North, without falling asleep at the wheel or running off the road. And when he arrives, the police don't notice anything unusual - not a man who looked tired, someone who had supposedly been drinking, had driven through the night, and had had next to no sleep. No remarks of lethargy, droopy eyes, or slow speech.

Sounds legit.
Hang on Hard Cheese, you are somehow doubting two juries and 2 appeal courts?

This is the mantra, but of course Arthur Thomas and Teina Pora have done this scenic route.

The information is collated and it is time to disseminate in a way that changes perceived history.
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 11th October 2018, 04:50 AM   #1625
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,609
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Hang on Hard Cheese, you are somehow doubting two juries and 2 appeal courts?
Well where is guilt finally decided? On an Internet forum?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill

Last edited by lionking; 11th October 2018 at 04:53 AM.
lionking 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 11th October 2018, 06:14 AM   #1626
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Well where is guilt finally decided? On an Internet forum?
Yes actually, no axe to grind in these parts.
Hard Cheese and Fixit and I know pretty much how the New Zealand police lied and cheated to get Mark Lundy in jail.
This judgement written by Mark Cooper plumbs the depths of judicial depravity.
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 11th October 2018, 06:17 AM   #1627
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,609
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Yes actually, no axe to grind in these parts.
Hard Cheese and Fixit and I know pretty much how the New Zealand police lied and cheated to get Mark Lundy in jail.
This judgement written by Mark Cooper plumbs the depths of judicial depravity.
Er, no actually.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 11th October 2018, 06:35 AM   #1628
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Er, no actually.
I back an internet forum ahead of judicial process.
Watch season 2 of Making a murderer, due in 4 days. There is a continual race to the bottom by ill meaning judges in many countries. They will never fool the people on the internet that have done the research, remember Amanda Knox for example? Did she slaughter her flatmate?

Mark Lundy is innocent and a panel of judges have not erred, they have deliberately violated all that can be known about human decency.
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 11th October 2018, 06:44 AM   #1629
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,609
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I back an internet forum ahead of judicial process.
Watch season 2 of Making a murderer, due in 4 days. There is a continual race to the bottom by ill meaning judges in many countries. They will never fool the people on the internet that have done the research, remember Amanda Knox for example? Did she slaughter her flatmate?

Mark Lundy is innocent and a panel of judges have not erred, they have deliberately violated all that can be known about human decency.
Oh for goodness sake, as much as some obsessive posters may imagine, Internet forums had nothing to do with the Knox case.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 11th October 2018, 06:49 AM   #1630
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
I don't think Samson meant that internet forums were responsible for the acquittal, but that internet forums recognised that the verdict was flawed before the judicial process did. Same thing with the Lockerbie case. Megrahi is still convicted under the law, but on the forum we (hopefully) understand that this verdict was flawed.

Equally, it's possible to believe the Lundy verdict is flawed and to go on believing that even after an unsuccessful appeal. Court verdicts and actual objective truth are not common sets.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 11th October 2018, 06:56 AM   #1631
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,609
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I don't think Samson meant that internet forums were responsible for the acquittal, but that internet forums recognised that the verdict was flawed before the judicial process did. Same thing with the Lockerbie case. Megrahi is still convicted under the law, but on the forum we (hopefully) understand that this verdict was flawed.

Equally, it's possible to believe the Lundy verdict is flawed and to go on believing that even after an unsuccessful appeal. Court verdicts and actual objective truth are not common sets.
Okay, I take your point. But sometimes a line should be drawn. Lundy may be not be guilty, but due process seems to have occurred.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking 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 11th October 2018, 07:05 AM   #1632
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Okay, I take your point. But sometimes a line should be drawn. Lundy may be not be guilty, but due process seems to have occurred.
This is a unique case for me because I attended all three days of the appeal hearings, and carefully read all the submissions from both sides beforehand.

The prosecution repeated falsehoods that had been intensively and totally debunked by the case activists, without shame. I was disgusted and ashamed for my country, it has got much worse now with this train wreck of a judgement that violates scientific method at every turn.
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 11th October 2018, 07:28 AM   #1633
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
process versus content

The judgment is a paradox: The mRNA evidence should not have been allowed in, yet somehow the trial was still fair. I have problems with this, not the least of which is that immunohistochemistry as a forensic technique is just as questionable as the mRNA evidence.
__________________
“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 11th October 2018, 07:40 AM   #1634
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Okay, I take your point. But sometimes a line should be drawn. Lundy may be not be guilty, but due process seems to have occurred.

I don't agree with the "a line should be drawn" position. This is the same legal argument as the moves in Scots law to invoke "certainty and finality" to bring an end to the appeal process. The reason for these moves was the European court finding that many convicted prisoners in Scotland had been denied their human rights by being denied access to a solicitor for a period at the beginning of their detention. The courts wanted to stem the feared flood of obviously guilty petty criminals trying it on with appeals based on that ruling.

However, I think it's pernicious. There are many cases where courts have doubled down on blatantly unsafe findings, with the wrongfully convicted only being acquitted after numerous appeals and retrials. The mere fact that something that can be described as "due process" has occurred should not be a barrier to people using their brains and expressing the opinion that this is a travesty.

I don't think Lundy killed his wife and child. What is perhaps more pertinent here is the blatant disregard of the "beyond reasonable doubt" requirement. This case is bristling with extremely reasonable doubt, and the court seems utterly determined not to recognise that.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 11th October 2018, 07:56 AM   #1635
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
I believe that Walter James Bolton was innocent, and that his wife died either through arsenic from the sheep dip above the water supply, or that her sister poisoned her.
He was hanged soon after his direct appeal after conviction was denied by the trial judge.
I think something similar happened to Damien Echolls, check, trial judge decides the appeal.

In modern times, 1957, that looks to be our worst miscarriage of justice.

Unquestionably this Lundy case is the second worst, and we are living in a world obsessed with safety, god help us.
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 11th October 2018, 08:40 AM   #1636
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
We seem to be in an era, as regards the criminal justice system, where the question is not "is this person guilty beyond reasonable doubt?" but "is it possible this person might have done what they're accused of, even if it's quite unlikely?"
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 11th October 2018, 01:12 PM   #1637
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,227
anchors away!

In my observation some people who think that Mr. Lundy is guilty are anchoring their beliefs to the immunohistochemistry results. By anchoring, I mean that they take one fact as a certainty and then bend timelines and commonsense to make the rest of the facts fit.
__________________
“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 11th October 2018, 11:02 PM   #1638
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 429
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Okay, I take your point. But sometimes a line should be drawn. Lundy may be not be guilty, but due process seems to have occurred.
IMO due process failed as soon as the prosecution abandoned their original fairy tale and were allowed to create a new one. It proves anyone can end up on a 20 year stretch based on untruth, creative license and "expert" testimony that turns out to be anything but.
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 October 2018, 02:55 AM   #1639
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,772
Yes, I was thinking about that. Due process should not allow someone to face an entirely new allegation of how they were supposed to have committed the crime that abandons almost all the evidential points that were crucial in obtaining the original conviction.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe 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 October 2018, 03:53 AM   #1640
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,007
Charlie Wilkes posted on IA a few weeks ago

"They will uphold the conviction. They are trying to figure out how to word their ruling."

Sinister, the evidence I listened to in that appeal court proved Mark was innocent, those 3 judges heard it too.
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
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 12:06 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.