a good question concerning evidence

theories and spec; back up posts w/ reasoning and evidence/examples

a good question concerning evidence

Postby bugzmom » Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:06 pm

It is normal procedure when questioning a suspect in a violent crime,to take pictures. Of the hands,fore arms,and face to document if there's any questionable injuries
can anyone tell me if any photos or written reports on exist on marty and bo?
bugzmom
 

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby jhancock » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:10 pm

Good question--Amanda and I never saw any photos like that of Marty or Bo. Granted, we didn't see every single document, but we were pretty careful and attentive to what we did see. Also--the Marty and Bo material seemed to be all in one folder or area. Some have argued that the PCSO could have gone into the files before us and removed certain documents before giving us access, but I'm confident this was not the case.
jhancock
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 11:59 am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 273 times

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby 7Scarlet » Thu Mar 21, 2013 4:04 pm

It would be ordinary procedure to take pictures only if the suspect were arrested and charged with a crime. It would be customary to note any obvious wounds, bruises or abrasions on the hands, face, arms, or other visible area on a POI, or even someone being questioned.
'Confirmation Bias:' Find the evidence that supports your contention, and explain away or ignore that which doesn't.
User avatar
7Scarlet
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:01 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby bugzmom » Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:02 pm

when conducting a interview with a suspect/poi any good detective would inform the interviewee he would like to document the lack of or presence of visible wounds. Of course only in the there non obtrusive body parts I mentioned. If the interviewee refused to allow pictures to be taken it would be noted in the case files. If there were obvious wounds a a detective doing his job,he would then go to a judge to seek a probable cause warrant just like if they were seeking your DNA they build a case then they press charges. Of course this is all assuming they care to do their jobs.
bugzmom
 

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby 7Scarlet » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:02 pm

bugzmom wrote:when conducting a interview with a suspect/poi any good detective would inform the interviewee he would like to document the lack of or presence of visible wounds. Of course only in the there non obtrusive body parts I mentioned. If the interviewee refused to allow pictures to be taken it would be noted in the case files. If there were obvious wounds a a detective doing his job,he would then go to a judge to seek a probable cause warrant just like if they were seeking your DNA they build a case then they press charges. Of course this is all assuming they care to do their jobs.



I asked my Dad about this (he's a retired policeman), and he told me, without looking at the case at all, that different cops have different methods of questioning, and there are a lot of variables, even though they all follow, or are supposed to, the same basic pattern.

He said he would not in any case, ever tell a suspect/POI during preliminary questioning that he was or was not going to note anything. He told me it wouldn't be appropriate to even mention taking pictures, during preliminaries...which is what the cops were doing with Marty and Bo the one time they questioned them. This is the part where they take notes, get a feel for the guys they are questioning, and decide whether this is a lead to be pursued, etc.

He said if the guy had obvious wounds to his hands, face, arm, etc, they would probably find a reason to hold him and take photographs, fingerprint him...but they have to have a good solid reason to do that, or run the risk of "a lot of crap" that will not hold up in a court of law and may hurt the investigation.
'Confirmation Bias:' Find the evidence that supports your contention, and explain away or ignore that which doesn't.
User avatar
7Scarlet
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:01 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby 7Scarlet » Thu Mar 28, 2013 4:58 pm

I argue with him some, but it doesn't help me any. lol.
:have_a_nice_day:

I've been trying to get him to have a peek into at least the time line to get more of his two cents, but so far all I've gotten is a "Ok, we'll see about it sometime"
'Confirmation Bias:' Find the evidence that supports your contention, and explain away or ignore that which doesn't.
User avatar
7Scarlet
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:01 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby 7Scarlet » Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:38 am

I will share his thoughts, for sure.

As for the date Dana allegedly smashed the lights, I have no idea. I've never seen it written anywhere. I believe it occurred prior to September 1980 based on other things I've learned about him, so it happened before the Sharp's moved to Keddie.

Of all the victims, we know the least about young Mr. Wingate. Poor kid.

Oh, and today would have been Sue's 68th birthday, I think.
:-(
'Confirmation Bias:' Find the evidence that supports your contention, and explain away or ignore that which doesn't.
User avatar
7Scarlet
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:01 am
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: a good question concerning evidence

Postby Princess » Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:25 am

Yes, today is Sue's birthday. Here is the link: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=497
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


Return to just speculatin'

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest