Prints on post

facts surrounding the Keddie Murders, for beginners and up

Prints on post

Postby TREELAND » Thu Jan 17, 2013 3:49 pm

How large were the prints on the post, does anyone know? When I first saw the crime scene evidence photos they almost looked like partial small footprints then it dawned on me these are fingerprints. Not sure of the one that looks like a fingerprint pattern is actually one or just the raised pattern of the post's wood grain. Could of the person that left the print been wearing gloves, the prints seem large.
TREELAND
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:40 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Chichibcc » Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:37 pm

I don't remember reading any measurements regarding the stair post prints...and I doubt whoever left them was wearing gloves, given how much evidence was sloppily left behind inside.

Question-does anyone know what the circled symbols/letters on the evidence card mean? I've always wondered this, but still am unsure.
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Fri Jan 25, 2013 4:04 pm

I've super-imposed a ruler over the image to measure the prints. Keep in mind, a 4"x 4" support post is really only 3.5"x 3.5":

.post-ruler.

As for all the #s on the card:

81-1644 is the case number
4-22-81 is the date the evidence was collected
DS is the initials of the person collecting the evidence and the photographer: Don Stoy
111 is the number of the evidence collected, as it appears on the evidence collection sheet.
YYYY is the letter of the photograph, as it appears on the evidence collection sheet.

(The lettering system goes alphabetically according to which order the photos were taken, first from a-z, then additional images are listed aa-zz, then aaa-zzz, then aaaa-zzzz, etc. )

Unfortunately, the evidence sheets are so screwed up that multiple "mistakes" are scratched out with numbers and letters being arbitrarily reassigned. In the instance of 111, the above "complete" sheets have that number assigned "misc papers from school (Tina)". However, that sheet also scratches out the last three items, all taken from Tina's school, and notes that they are "different" something (I can't read the pigscratch)- probably put onto a different sheet/report. Also, that sheet has no photograph notations, but the sheet prior does.

As the sheet prior ends with the last collected piece of evidence being #100 (cabinet door from bathroom, poss blood) and the corresponding photo being vvvv, then the next sheet being a non-original photocopy from another "working set" field copy which was later amended, split into different reports, and discarded. That last page does NOT belong to the final report, because PCSO clearly went through multiple versions of their "field copies" before settling on final "field copies". However, it is a good indication of what SHOULD BE on the next page of the "real" (ha! ha!) set.

Having explained the lettering system, look at what I stumbled across when looking at the images used to construct this post:

.br-wall-smear.

According to PCSO,Field Report Page 8, this image is:

83-TTTT Possible blood found on wall in east bedroom by door. (smear).

It was on the previous page, yet scratched out for some reason (I believe so they could reassign some numbers and end the page with an "overall view" shot without the blood on the bedroom door or wall being listed prior to the "overall shot")

83-SSSS Possible blood on south wall in East Bedroom near Door

So, according to PCSO, the smudge is from that wall, not Tina's bed sheet. What's funny is, if it's so close to the door, where's the light switch? When entering the girls' room, the doorknob was on your right, with the door swinging open to the left. The light switch was not on the wall just to the right, on the interior wall by the door jamb, but when you swung the door full open, it was just beyond the door on the left. This photo is roughly a space on the wall of 15" wide by 9" high. Where was the smudge? Between the light switch and the closet door a couple feet away? Or between the light switch and the door jamb, hidden by the door when fully open?

And, oh, WHERE THE F*** are shots of the bed sheets with the blood on them? And ANYTHING from the basement?
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:39 pm

I think I've figured out how these prints occurred. You don't leave a print pattern like that if you are grasping the stairs for support walking DOWN, as your hand and fingers would point down. These prints are pointing up, like someone was grasping it to CLIMB the stairs, the thumb grasping the opposite parallel side of the post. It's fairly low on the post, meaning the person was at least forearms length from the post when it was grasped. The back yard was a downhill slope, and there was a concrete slab under the foot of the stairs, leading to the basement and Johnny's room. This killer was in no rush and did not initially grasp the stairs as a way to lift [him]self. If it had been meant to lift weight, it would have been a much higher grasp, and far smudgier (sp?). This hand grasp is nothing other than a characteristic of this killer, he has a habit of doing. Grab local support. Don't step on a crack. Break your momma's back.

Prints are just slightly smudged, not a smear or swipe, so it's a fairly solid initial grasp. The blood means a LOT- this was a casual climb up the stairs, not a hurried rush or someone gripping it ue to carrying any weight, just a plain old simple grab. So why is blood involved? HAd the killer left and cleaned up and returned? No way, there would be med tape on the killer to fix the wound(S) and stop the bleeding. This happened DURING the crime, while the killer(s) calmly went back upstairs into the cabin after having blood on their hands and simply not noticing/caring. Seeig as it was a couple of dipshit morons of the Bo and Marty Smartt variety, it's because they simply didn't notice it. If the light dangling over the porch beam was on, it would never illuminate the dark side of the beam where the prints were.

Any other ideas?

My belief is the prints were left by a killer leaving the basement area, Johnny's room, and returning to the upstairs. The clotheslines just opposite the door to Johnny's room mean it wasn't a traveling access route, unless you wanted to garrote yourself.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Princess » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:09 pm

What if you walk down the stairs and go right, not towards the clothes line, is there a fence on that side of the house?
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
User avatar
Princess
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:49 pm
Has thanked: 272 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:16 pm

If you exit c28 from the back, you turn right and go down the stairs. Once you hit the bottom of the stairs, there is a small concrete platform connecting to the door on the right, into the basement (Johnny's room). If you bear straight on from the bottom of the steps, you are decapitated by 5 clotheslines nailed to the top border of the window of the basement utility room, slung downhill to a 2x4 nailed to a distant and lower tree. If you step to your left at the bottom of the stairs, you are in the dirt and going downhill at a decent slope. So the prints were most likely left by someone exiting the basement and climbing the stairs back into the murder scene.

The basement has been sealed from all evidence reports, from every record we know of. Why? Is this the only sign we have that something significant happened downstairs?

methinks this may have been more about drugs and Johnny than previously admitted by myself. Sorry if I'm blind.

Loads of shots of the downstairs rear of c28. Those bloody prints were likely made by a killer casually exiting Johnny's basement room. It means the person was in NO RUSH, and was NOT walking from the backyard dirt slope, and was actually leaving the basement. Counter ideas about the casual bloody prints?
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby TREELAND » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:40 pm

Maybe the person that left the prints wasn't leaving the basement but listening and gazing up towards the upstairs porch back door,marking the post in a tentative light fashion possibly unaware that they even touched it, The top print looks to me very light and lower one is only complete in outline on it's upper edge but not the lower side like that fingertip was at a slight angle not flat down. Or if they were going back upstairs they could of just grazed the post with their fingertips on accident, and if that was the case they could have been moving fairly quickly.
TREELAND
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:40 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Chichibcc » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:32 pm

I agree with Dmac's theory....given how dark the backyard would've been (and dangerous, with all the stuff lying around to trip and fall on) it's doubtful anyone would've accessed the stairs from that direction, and it's unlikely anyone did so from the side of C28 that faced the Seabolts' cabin, since that area appeared to be blocked off by boards.
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:31 pm

The front yard of Seabolts (27) was completely fenced in, so the fence between the cabins by that big tree was board and wire. The opposite side of 28 had a gate, seen open in the CS photos, and was the only way from the front to back yards (besides going through the cabin). Plus, the light on the back porch was dangling from the support post at the top of the stairwell, and would not illuminate the far side of the bottom post that had the prints on it. IF that lamp was on (timelines indicate it was off, then on, then off) it would have been right in their face as they walked up the steps.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Chichibcc » Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:51 pm

dmac wrote:methinks this may have been more about drugs and Johnny than previously admitted by myself.


That's why having any info related to the basement (such as photos/reports) would've been so helpful....I'm sure the condition the basement was found in could be a determining factor in whether this had anything to do with drugs or not.

For instance, was the basement (particularly Johnny's room) found ransacked or disturbed in any way? That could be a big indication that there was someone looking for something. Without any information, there's just no way to know.

If everyone was attacked upstairs, what reason would there have been to be down there otherwise?
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby TREELAND » Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:07 am

If the basement showed evidence of being gone through maybe the persons or person was looking for money. Cash they thought was rightfully theirs or money they thought would be somewhere for example from the sale of stolden drugs. Maybe that is why upstairs Johnny's wallet was found on the floor behind the sofa it had been rifled through then tossed either ending up on the floor right away or falling from the top of the couch when that was moved.
TREELAND
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:40 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Princess » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:43 am

I found a post that Josh had made in regards to the question about the condition of Johnny's room after the murders.

Here is Josh's response: "As far as I know, there was no evidence that Johnny's room had been entered by the perpetrators. I've seen before and after photos, and there's no difference, plus I saw no mention of anything important in his room in the case files"

Here is the link: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=218&p=3659&hilit=room#p3659
A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
User avatar
Princess
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:49 pm
Has thanked: 272 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby Chichibcc » Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:49 am

Thanks, Deborah....had no idea that Josh had ever seen any basement photos.

But then again, perhaps LE didn't know what they were supposed to be looking for in the first place...while nothing may have seemed "out of place," there may have been less noticeable clues that they missed, things they didn't know to look for in the first place.
User avatar
Chichibcc
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:08 am
Has thanked: 656 times
Been thanked: 239 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:45 pm

    "As far as I know, there was no evidence that Johnny's room had been entered by the perpetrators. I've seen before and after photos, and there's no difference, plus I saw no mention of anything important in his room in the case files"

LE to Bo and Marty: "OK, we're done taking photos down here. Carry on with the murders, but let us know when you're done so we can come back and take "after" photos. We'll be napping in our undercover green-and-white van down the street."

How else do you get reliable "before and after" photos of Johnny's room?
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby frida » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:39 pm

The phrasing on that is weird--Josh saw before and after photos of the basement area and there was no difference? He saw photos of the basement area that were taken before the murders? Like hours before? Then photos taken after the murders? How would Josh know what the basement area / Johnny's room was supposed to look like? Other than it not being completely torn apart, how would the police know the perps hadn't gone down there? As far as we know, none of the attack took place down there--so no blood but what would make LE so sure that they hadn't been in the basement?
I'm here all week folks!
User avatar
frida
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:11 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Has thanked: 201 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: Prints on post

Postby DB92 » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:57 am

How the fuck did they know what the room looked like before ? How long before ? Really strange conclusion to draw.

Anyway, here is my take on it.. It is logical to assume the prints where made in one of two ways, in any scenario the person would have HAD to have been facing up the stairs at the point of leaving the prints, as dmac points out the prints/fingers are facing up the way, this means its ALMOST a physical impossibility these where made in a downward facing motion, possible but highly improbable, the only way i can see these being made by someone going down the stairs is if on the way down they gently held the post with their right hand turning around or looking up at something or talking to someone or looking out towards the back garden. The most plausable cause imo is, either the perp was leaving Johnnys room and going back into the main body of the cabin, or standing at the bottom of the stair case possibly speaking to someone at the top & leaning on the post very gently/casualy.

I have been interested in this case and checking this forum for around 5 years but have only recently joined, hence why i have bombarded the place with posts and dug up old threads, apologies :mrgreen:
DB92
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:31 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Prints on post

Postby dmac » Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:31 pm

How did who(m) know which room 'looked like that before''?

Yep, I still think the print was made going up the stairs, not coming down, but I also must consider there was a lot of odd things going on. They removed Tina, probably out the back door as it's a more direct and quieter path directly to the swinging bridge. It would have taken considerable time- about half an hour- to cross the bridge and dump Tina's body on the opposite side of 70/89 (where they could retrieve her later without being noticed) and return to 28. The print probably wasn't made when returning from dumping Tina, because how could they do all that walking, cross a swinging bridge, using the rails on the bridge for steadiness, and still have wet blood on their hands upon returning. Also, there was blood on many knobs, including bedroom and both upstairs entry doorknobs, the sheets, smears on the walls, on doorjambs- a sign one of the killers may have been bleeding.

Since this thread began, it's been proved one of the clotheslines went down right around the time of the murders. Whether it's related or not, we don't know. There was also the drop light on the back porch, and the front door light. Don and others have said porch lights (including porch) were off at 28 that night, yet several lights were on- including the front and back porch lights- in CS photos. The killers would have done all of this with as little light as possible- perhaps only the bathroom light on during the majority of their time in the cabin. The killers knew that cabin very well, knew the environs. They didn't need the lights on inside or out of the cabin... in fact, they needed every light source possible OFF so as not to draw attention. They had a kill kit, maybe they came with flashlights, too- like any good creepy-crawler would. You think Bo, with his decades of experience, would go to a home invasion party without one?!

As for dusting off old threads, many of them hold Big Keys to the case and need revisiting. That's why they're still here.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
reach me at
keddie28 AT gmail DOT com
User avatar
dmac
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3209
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 7:26 pm
Has thanked: 709 times
Been thanked: 2666 times


Return to keddie facts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests