"New" Old Photos

facts surrounding the Keddie Murders, for beginners and up

"New" Old Photos

Postby dmac » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:02 pm

Here are notes of things I've just seen in crime scene photos I'd almost forgotten to really work at fixing in Photoshop. They are amongst the best, most important photos I've seen of the crime scene, but are in such technically poor shape that extracting detail with Photoshop is most troublesome. I meant only to post these notes in chat as a reminder to myself and a beacon to those that regularly participate there, but I realize the majority of members don't chat, and non-members cannot read chat, so I've decided to repeat the info here because it is of potential importance:

I was looking at some photos that I'd almost forgotten I had. They have technical issues, but do show the crime scene in angles and ways where I've no duplicates. By working hard in Photoshop with them, I'm seeing some amazing things. They are of poor quality, but show Johnny and the bent knife next to each other, for instance, and show the true color of Johnny's pants and the blood on him. They also show the TV area from an entirely different angle, and I have seen things I never noticed before due to highlighting this different perspective. I've seen a lot of new things that are in no other photos, now that I've enhanced the area behind the TV where the table was. I need to rework the photos from scratch in Photoshop to get the most from the raw data of what's in that TV corner, but I do have new proof that FURTHER SUBSTANTIATES the table leg as W4. It also substantiates staging.

We'll get into this in chat later, I'm just posting it here as a precursor (if not reminder to myself) of what I'm working on. I think it's quite big.

One last thing I want to note: I've long known these "new" photos prove there were TWO holes in the wall panelling near the baseboard: one by the front door, and one by Johnny's feet. These photos prove PCSO concluded the hole by Johnny's feet may have been evidence (they gave it an evidence card, and two photos are about the hole, not the knife or johnny himself or the TV or anything else. These two photos are entirely about the hole. Also, there are documents indicating the hole by the front door was there PRIOR to the murders, yet we have no such indication the hole by Johnny's feet was there prior. In fact, because there is no mention of the hole by Johnny and no photos of the hole by the front door marked by an evidence card indicates only the hole by Johnny was ever suspect. We need to follow up on this.


By further examination of these pisspoor photos I'd all but forgotten, and by comparing them with all the other photos I have, it's a veritable mine of new data. My bad for not aggressively photoshopping these images long ago.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 714 times
Been thanked: 2695 times

Re: "New" Old Photos

Postby renosmom » Fri Dec 16, 2011 2:09 pm

Does this lead you down the road of thinking that the hole was a hiding place for drugs?
renosmom
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 4:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

"New" Old Photos

Postby dmac » Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:07 pm

Not even remotely. I have to line all the photos of that area up against each other and closely look, but LE thought the hole was part of the crime yet do not seem to have taken it into evidence. They stated the similar hole by the front door was there prior to the crimes, but we see no photos of the hole by the front door with an evidence card, nor do we see any claims that the hole by Johnny's feet was there prior to the crimes. From my cursory look at all the photos of the area today, it looks like there may have been a reflected portion of the drywall paneling, held on by a flap of wallpaper, and it appears the hole changes throughout the chain of photos. Again, it's only a cursory look and will take a lot of work to tell.

The hole could have nothing to do with the crime, or may be pertinent. It could have come from a kick, or a hammer blow. If it was a hammer blow, was it a threat of "what's to come" to a victim already bound and pinned to the ground? If so, it would certainly tie in with the knife marks on the wall also being threats, and other aspects of the crime.

=====================================================================================================

Notes about photos I've seen which are not online, including questions brought up by some freshly re-studied photos I've long considered of such low quality to be of little value:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the shot of Johnny on his back (016), note the amount of blood and spatter clearly visible on his hands and vest and arms of his jogging suit jacket, but not on the chest of his jacket. This, if true, suggests the attack happened when the vest was buttoned up or at least covering his chest, protecting it. The vest, of course, would have slipped when he was carried- by two people- and lowered to where he was found, those exposing the relatively blood-free chest of the jogging suit. However, the material of the jogging suit (cotton or cotton-poly blend) is far more absorbtive than the water-resistant shell of the down vest. Combined with the dark color of the jogging suit, the blood may be in large, absorbed patterns undetectable due to the nature of the photographs. There is clear, deep staining to the wrists of the jacket, but the chest does not seem to have the same stains. Any ref to them on the autopsy (or other) reports? Also note the number of white specks on Johnny's clothing- his chest, pants, arms, even the vest. There is similar white "stuff" on the carpet in the same photo, particularly easy to see near Dana's body. Note the same white specks in other photos. Was Johnny face-down for a time, as Dana was found? Rolled and dragged prior to being lifted altogether and lowered into place? Compare to the autopsy for info on Johnny's chest wounds and his clothing- there should be details which confirm the condition of his clothing, possibly indicating whether the chest wounds were also postmortem staging.

    016 has a very clear bloody footprint of Sue to Johnny's left. To Johnny's right, the photo also shows a bit of the sole indication of blood spatter I would expect from the aortic spray from the neck wound Sue sustained. It is the only wound sustained by a victim I can think of which would cause such arcing spray, and it is found directly underneath where Dana was placed by the killers during staging. 032 is the best shot of this stain.

    Look at 031 vs 036. The bodies have already been removed in both shots, yet 31 clearly shows no white cloth on the cushion where Dana's head rested. However, it appears in 36, taken from a greater distance. Why was the cloth magically appearing and disappearing? Were they trying to sop up the blood in the cushion prior to removing the cover and taking it into evidence? Take close-ups of the cushion, then apply a cloth to sop up some of the blood while you move on to other photos? Clearly a mishandling of evidence, no matter it being 1981.

    Photo "Carpet 2" confirms the presence of the second cord to the TV, which I discovered in the "new" color shot of the hole in the wall at Johnny's feet. The cord goes from behind and underneath the corner of the card table and tautly up to the TV. This photo also shows the wood paneling behind the TV and carpet chunks removed from the scene, yet the paneling with the hole by Johnny's feet is still in place.

    In another "new" photo, which I named "floor_from_door_no_bodies", the ball has been moved from where it was on the wood floor by Dana's feet, over by the bundle of clothing that was between the wall and table. This shot clearly shows it's a baseball, and also shows the hard, square object in the bundle of clothes is a notebook, likely for school. It also shows Sue's bloody footprint(s) in again color again. Also note the color of the stain under Johnny's left knee to be dull and greenish, unlike all the reddish blood stains, indicating it likely has nothing to do with the crime and should be removed from the blood map.

    The redacted color photo of legs, taken after he was removed from c28, shows no visible blood on his boots, and only two tiny droplets on his light blue cord pants. It also shows, despite conflicting reports, that the white cord around his ankles is tied in a full, tight knot.

    In the shot of Dana's buttocks and legs show no livor mortis on the buttocks as they were in contact with the floor when he was left laying on his back for an extended time after death. The W4 bruise to his buttocks is quite distinct, as is the similar bruise to his left posterior thigh. The bruise to the thigh is in the middle of an area of full, uninterrupted lividity, yet there is a strange lightness around the edge of that bruise, similar to blanching. Is this further indication that the W4 wounds were postmortem? Did the bruising to his thigh cause the appearance of blanching at the edges, by drawing blood from the nearby lividity to form the postmortem bruise itself?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even without seeing the photos, hopefully these notes will prove informative, especially as I attempt to develop and prove what comes from these random thoughts.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 714 times
Been thanked: 2695 times

Re: "New" Old Photos

Postby dmac » Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:58 pm

From Johnny's autopsy report:
CLOTHING

The subject wears a sleeveless light blue ski vest which is fairly well saturated with blood anteriorly. Beneath this exists a darker blue sweat jacket with a zipper down the front. In the left anterior chest of this jacket exists an oblique hole measuring an estimated l/2 inch in length. It occurs approximately over the area of the left breast. The pants are sweat pants with a white stripe down the sides (5 white stripes). The remainder of the pants are blue and the pants are pulled up. Beneath these pants are a red pair of athletic shorts
stating "Groton Physical Ed." beneath a shield, and in the shield in ink is the name "Shiela Sharp". Beneath these red P.E. pants is a pair of jockey shorts which are also pulled up. They are white in color and show a blue band about their top.

Beneath the sweat jacket exists a tank top net or mesh shirt showing a defect in the upper anterior near mid portion near the defect previously described in the garment exterior to this tank top shirt.


The pathologist concurs the vest, as I mentioned in my last post, is notable for the amount of blood on it. However, the pathologist mentions no noticeable amounts of blood on the jacket underneath, despite the fact he details the defect from the stab wound. He describes the defect to the jogging jacket as "approximately over the left breast", yet mentions no related defect in the outer shell, the blood-covered vest. Why no blood-soaked area by the stab mark in the jacket? Likewise, he goes to lengths describing the blood found on the face, neck, arms, wrists, hands, and there is no mention of blood on the chest. Neither of the two chest wounds puncture the chest cavity; one, in fact, goes in at such a shallow angle it is 4 1/2 inches deep without hitting ribs, meaning it penetrated at such a shallow angle as to run almost parallel with the skin. It's dimensions, and depth of 4.5", also closely match the bent steak knife, while ruling out both the pocket knife (too short a blade) and the butcher knife (to wide, thick, long, and sturdy a blade). What other blades have we attributed to this crime thus far (and the pocket knife is a freebie we argued over)?

Where is all the blood from these chest wounds to Johnny?

No blood to speak of because they, too, are postmortem injuries. After working Dana over with W4, they made a similar postmortem attack on Johnny. Fortunately for us, the perps did it after they'd picked little Johnny completely off the floor and moved him to where he was found. In doing so, gravity pulled the vest Johnny wore downward at the back, distorting the bloody vest's positioning and exposing the otherwise-blood-free jogging jacket underneath. The perps were stupid enough not to fix this glaring error before stabbing Johnny's body through his otherwise-clean jogging jacket. When the knife bent on the second stab, they discarded the knife nearby.

NOTE: We need to look at the autopsy diagrams and reports to see if we can determine the likely position of the killer(s) when the stab wounds were made to Johnny;s corpse. Due to the shallow angle of the deep wound, the perp seemed to be in an unstable position, not making solid contact. Again, this is AFTER they'd done postmortem trauma to Dana, and in that instance they had plenty of room to move around and do major damage with the table leg. With Johnny, the perp used a flimsy knife and likely avoided kneeling on the ground when straddling Johnny. This meant the first wound went in at a bad angle altogether, and the second stab was a more solid hit, resulting in the knife bending upon hitting Johny's ribcage.

CONCLUSION: the stab wounds to Johnny's chest were postmortem.

I believe all three victims in Cabin 28 were attacked postmortem as part of the staging. I also believe that, as with Dana, we will find that some of the head wounds to Johnny and/or Sue were also postmortem, particularly when you line up head wounds with the position the head was in when found, as well as the blood patterns underneath. With Johnny, that's easy because we know he was lowered into place, he was stabbed in his chest after he died, and there is substantial blood under his head. I believe Sue's body was staged last, and her postmortem trussing, alongside the lack of bloodstains under her matching her wounds, will make her pre and postmortem wounds more difficult to determine.

Note that the perps- or perhaps single perp- responsible for post-death mutilation used multiple methods for these attacks:
    Weapon Four, used specifically for the attack on Dana (and the single wound to Sue's thigh?)
    Knife to Johnny's chest...

We need to find a single instance where that HUGE butcher knife got bloody. It seems the thin table steak knife bent on Johnny's chest was also used to greater effect on Sue's neck, for instance- a clearly lethal wound if premortem. It's time to re-read each report over and over and over again! We also have the bloody pocket knife to match wounds to...

...but was the large butcher knife used in any other act than to hold the victims against the wall and threaten them? How much of a threat is a pocket knife or a flimsy steak knife which, indeed, bent in an after-death attack on Johnny's corpse?! Which wounds, exactly, can POSSIBLY be matched to each of the known weapons? If we graph that, the nature, timeline, and scope of this crime is narrowed considerably. THIS IS DAMNED IMPORTANT!

The math, the angles, it's all tightening up. The number of possibilities are decreasing quickly.

I've long said each victim was "killed twice". I now amend that to say they were killed once and "killed again" as part of the staging, most likely to make it seem each victim got equal abuse. By meticulously reading through the reports and discounting wounds as postmortem (in effect, removing them from the real picture), we will finally make headway in proving the true focus of these murders.

___________________
NOTE that the examiner states Johnny's pants, shorts, and underpants are "PULLED UP". What he's missing from the equation is that they had been pulled DOWN during the crime, when Johnny was dragged around the room. WE KNOW THAT from the photos, but the pathologist had no photos or frame of reference to deduce the clothing was pulled either up or down, yet his language is an assumption Johnny's pants had been pulled down, then up- terminology for the victim of a sexual attack. I wouldn't have noticed that without my newly-gained McClishability. Thanks again to Aus for McClishing this case!
...

Oh, and something else I came up with today and don't want to forget: With all the clothes and laundry in the front room, what is missing? The laundry room was downstairs, right? Or did Sue have to go to a laundromat? Or did she do laundry at the Meeks house Saturday morning? Either way, what's missing? A LAUNDRY BASKET? Sue used cardboard boxes a lot, so did she use them for laundry? Did the killers toss a box full of laundry around the room, then use the empty box to gather evidence that was later deposited in the Gen Store trash? Flimsy, but still a few thoughts may pan out.

===========

One last note: it is something of a relief to me to find so much evidence of postmortem wounds as part of the elaborate staging. In the end, the more wounds proved to be staging means the victims suffered less than we'd believed. It debunks decades-old bullshit theories of hours-long torture sessions, and also damages my own theory the killings were quick but drawn out to torture victims forced to witness. I don't withdraw that theory whatsoever, as it remains intact. What has changed, and changed by miles, is the severity of damage inflicted while some victims were alive. It is small comfort, of course, because this remains just as despicable a crime. Name one single surviving victim who was given the comfort of knowing much of the wounds were postmortem? LE never investigated the case properly, and the hundred family and close friends who remain traumatized by this were not told what any decent preliminary findong SHOULD HAVE. Had LE done the job right, they would have easily deduced what this crime really was: much of the damage was after death, that the dead did not suffer as thought. LE would have told the surviving victims, within days, that the dead did not suffer as much as thought. Those in charge have left victims suffering for thirty years, and it takes outsiders to discover the truth.

Law enforcement exacerbated surviving victims' pain by telling of hours-long torture, of "blood sprayed absolutely everywhere", of every imaginable surface being broken or blood-smeared. Tina was responsible, then killed by a co-conspirator. Justin is a liar, every child's testimony must first be ignored and then summarily discredited... ALL PURE LE HOKUM.

Name every LE dick who made outrageous claims of what happened that night and I think you'll have a good barometer of Pig vs Regular, Hard Working Cop. I cannot stress enough my empathy for the few good cops out there, and those that worked this case. It was a shambles from the start, and that blame lies on Doug Thomas' slim, leather-padded shoulders. Crim and Bradley were corrupt, hence their positions in SAC DOJ in 81. DeCrona is a bag of pus and fake, fiber-like hair. Stoy? Shanks? No, thank you. But let me make this clear: the majority of those involved in this case (well, maybe less than half, the more I learn) were not corrupt DOJ or PCSO. It only takes one well-placed corrupt assholes to destroy a case like this, and the Keddie case has a bagful of scum on the wrong side acting as though they were investigating the case. To put it bluntly, I have huge respect for the troops that went to Iraq, and those that put them there should be executed. The majority of feet on the ground during this case had nothing to do with corruption, and my anger is only at those who acted so shamefully.

This is still a crime about criminals who inflicted as much damage and pain as possible. They returned and tried to mask their crimes by damaging corpses and further staging.

Tell me how a living family member or real friend of a victim is able to subtract the pain of intentional postmortem damage they didn't realize was postmortem for ten days or ten decades? The number of surviving victims is in the hundreds, and maybe one of them knows, after 30 years, that abuse and torture inside 28 was less because so many wounds were intentionally postmortem. How, exactly, does that make the perp less guilty? by saying he did a lot of damage after they were already dead, simply to hide his involvement?

It's taken thirty odd years to publicly figure out some of the wounds to the Cabin 28 victims came after they were already dead. Exactly what kind of clemency do the killers deserve for that? ZERO If Bo and Marty are dead, we still go after the surviving #3, and we are zero-ing in on that. And Marilyn and Dee, both as guilty today as they were in 81. We are after anybody involved, and we'll get there.

It's moving faster today than in the past 30 plus years.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 714 times
Been thanked: 2695 times


Return to keddie facts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron