Bloody Fingerprints Evidence Thread

[dmac]

This thread is to put all SOLID info we have on the bloody fingerprint, including those matched to Marty. Please add sourced or quoted material or links to other posts/details that are trustworthy.

This quote is from an old Superchat from March 2011, and it's the best single reference point I have to info on the print.

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:51 pm
Bloody fingerprints-- what do we know about the fingerprints on the glass, attributed by PCSO to Marty

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:53 pm
we know there was a fingerprint on it belonging to him, and we know that according to sheila he had never been in the cabin before

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:53 pm
and was the fingerprint in blood?

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:55 pm
didn't he also state in his DOJ int that he'd never been in the cabin?

mrs.mcglovin11 - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:55 pm
Well there isnt much to know. The fingerprint on the glass was never matched, but the hard thing is M's fingerprints were never taken.

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:55 pm
or blood on said glass, etc

BUTTERFLYVALLEY1 - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:56 pm
I thought I read that fingerprint had indeed been matched.

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:56 pm
so which is it??

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:57 pm
an email from a current PCSO told me it was matched to Marty...but i dont have any copy of his prints

mrs.mcglovin11 - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:57 pm
Josh, M's fingerprints werent in the files I saw? At least I dont remember his. I remember Bo's from his records but not M's

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:57 pm
well he was current as of a few years ago

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:58 pm
I know, i dont think they were, mcg

mrs.mcglovin11 - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:58 pm
Ok, just making sure i wasnt giving wrong info.

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:59 pm
They had to have his prints from when he was booked and screaming at Meeks

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:00 pm
within days of the crime they had his prints and failed to match it with a bloody fingerprint on that glass? Is that an accurate statement by which I can write an angry post or three?

mrs.mcglovin11 - Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:00 pm
Im sure they had them i just didnt see them in the case files

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:00 pm
yeah im pretty sure we either saw the prints and didn't realize it...but they definitely had them i think

dmac - Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:02 pm
gotcha. So does the email, or anything else. explain when the fingerprint was matched? And, once and for all, was it in blood or blood on the glass?

jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:03 pm
he only said "bloody fingerprint"

Cheshire asked "Whos is Mrs McGlovin"-I don't recall if she was credited or how, but it would likely have been a producer or p/a credit in the documentaries. She was responsible for helping gain and maintain access to PCSO and their files.

[Chichibcc]

I don't understand why something as significant as a glass with a "bloody print" hasn't been mentioned in the CS reports....and it should've been, regardless of whether there was a bloody print, or just blood on the glass.

It sounds as if either the glass was "withheld" for some reason unknown to us, or never existed at all.

[krazykat]

So it can't be proved to be real, or rumor. Just one more piece of the possible evidence that muddies the water even further.

[dmac]

Don't throw the bathwater out with the baby. I posted one piece from a chat about the glass, and asked others to ADD FACTS. Very few recall other fact-based examples of the glass, much less can show them, much less frequent the board often enough to respond quickly enough to satisfy. Please wait for others to add facts instead of speculating the glass as unprovable.

There are plenty of documents out there to read and re-read before making such assumptions. I know for a fact there's a document which discusses comparing new fingerprints (from a suspect or something- I can't recall the specifics) against a certain piece of evidence that LE makes nothing but a direct and intentionally veiled reference to. That document- and I made a post earmarking it when it was first put on the forum- seems to say an article of evidence to compare the 'new' prints to is some sort of GOD: It is their Holy Grail of fingerprint evidence. I could take time to find that thread/document/post, but I am currently working a couple projects that are already eating up my time- which is spread thin lately. IMO, the bloody glass exists (or existed) and if PCSO hasn't lost it yet, they will before the case gets earnestly worked by honest LE.

There's a lot more to the bloody glass than one blurb from an old, confusing chat transcript. To dismiss the glass instead of researching it- or waiting for others to add INFORMATION to this thread (I did ask for others to ADD INFO)- is premature, if not weak.

[dmac]

Evidently there were several bloody prints, and this 'final' entry to Timeline A clearly concerns a 'partal' print being enhanced for comparison. I'm not saying it's the glass or not, I'm just copying it her for future reference. We really should make this thread about ALL fingerprint evidence- it makes a lot more sense to pile everything together that is KNOWN about fingerprints, then we can draw whatever truths there are from all the documents- including several of the lies LE (and we) have developed.

860310-????a DOJ reports a new process for developing partial prints using laser. The bloody print from the scene was enhanced so suspects’ names should be resubmitted for comparison.

Here's the report that I thought was a direct ref to the bloody glass print. Since that post, we've seen evidence reports of many other bloody prints and fingerprints, alot of them scratched out/redacted in an effort to remove them from the official record. WTF? From the Stoy report on Steve Howard:

10·12-89. I attempted to contact Joe Sypnicki to compare the evidence held
fingerprint with prints from Howard. Sypnicki was on assignment and
unavailable.

[dmac]

OK, even though the prints on the back post have no print value (it was smudged and on the ridge/groove surface of the rough post- you can clearly see that no print could come from it), it is still print evidence. Here's a cleaned-up version of the highest resolution file I've found.



These prints really tie into traffic into and out of the cabin once blood had clearly been spilled. I'll edit this post with relevant details concerning these prints.

[dmac]

Here's the best shots we have of the bloody print(s) found on the wall by the front door, above the light switch. There were c/u shots taken, which we don't have. The print(s) get mentioned on the Stoy photo report, and that chunk was also cut out and taken into evidence.

.

http://keddie28.com/gal/Crime%20Scene/C ... tdoor.html

Unknown if these were of print match quality.

ALSO NOTE #3, the front doorknob. Bloody, taken into evidence, unknown value.

[krazykat]

Blood smears on girls' bedroom door. Clearly no print evidence related to these smudges.

This is an interesting photo. It looks like whoever left these prints grasped the door by it's edges so not to leave prints unlike the bloody prints on the post outside the back door which looks like an intentional wipe.

If you were a wacked out killer why would you grasp the door by it's edges? If you were wearing gloves why would you grasp it by the edges? If you were outside the door why would your grasp it by the edges? The person with the bloody fingers had to have been inside the room with no gloves on and grasped the door by the edges to open it.

[not sure]

Did you watch the deleted scenes? I know one of the investigators said they found a clear print on the front door jamb. I'm trying to watch all of the deleted scenes at Youtube but I'm not seeing it. But I'm positive of this...wrote it down in my notes as I was watching it the first time.

Maybe Josh remembers...?

[Chichibcc]

I still don't get why Josh didn't put the deleted scenes on the DVDs....I think they would've helped to better enhance a lot of people's understanding of the case by having them on there, all in one place.

[Princess]

I really hope that Josh shared everything of importance with us. It would also be nice if Doug Thomas and Decrona would share what they have.

[justice17]

I'm confused...

Can someone please tell me if it has been confirmed that Mardy's bloody fingerprint was identified on that drinking glass?

[dmac]

This thread is just as it appears- posts designed to show all known instances of the legendary "bloody print on glass". I came along late in the case, and only remember various versions Josh told, which is why I posted the exchange between myself, Josh, and one of his producers (mrsmcglovin) in a Keddie Chat from 2011. Josh himself never added to the thread, which is not surprising.

What we know is several fingerprints are mentioned in case files, including prints in blood. We also see unusable prints in blood on the rear stairs post. According to Stoy's evidence report, several bloody doorknobs were taken into evidence (4, from memory) and bloody prints were on the chunk of wall above the front door light switch. More bloody evidence was recovered from the trash by the Gen Store. PCSO also asked for reports concerning knife wounds from hospitals in a couple adjoining counties (inexplicably, not all), and the Reno area.

Were money riding on it, the bloody print isn't from a drinking glass, but from a glass ashtray recovered on the kitchen floor.

[justice17]

What in the heck is wrong with Josh?! Why does he act so vague regarding important information
Such as a bloody fingerprint...


jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:53 pm
we know there was a fingerprint on it belonging to him, and we know that according to sheila he had never been in the cabin before

[kmik]

From Marty Smart's interview:
Ah, I'd like to see the hammer. I've been in Sue's house. The only hammer I ever knew came out of there was a wooden handled one.

I'm sure from Sheila's knowledge that Marty had never been to Sue's house. But I think we have been over it before that Sheila lived in Keddie for a little over a month. She was in Oregon having a baby. So she really doesn't know who all had or had not been to Sue's house. She makes this VERY clear in the video where she goes back to Keddie with Josh and the psychics.

And let's not forget Josh was doing a documentary - he was not an investigator with privileged information. He was allowed to look at what they let him look at.

[dmac]

...and steal what they let him steal...

[Chichibcc]

What in the heck is wrong with Josh?! Why does he act so vague regarding important information
Such as a bloody fingerprint...


jhancock - Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:53 pm
we know there was a fingerprint on it belonging to him, and we know that according to sheila he had never been in the cabin before

I think that was one of his ways of trying to tantalize people new to the case to buy the DVD's at the time, by "stringing along" just enough bits of information to make people plop down cash for their copies.

Kmik, PCSO practically let him have free reign of the files, which were just a disorganized hodepodge of papers (an obvious sign that the C28 murders were far from being a priority on their list, and had been for a very long time). Josh had posted a short 30-second or so video on his FB page of the condition the files were in.

[kmik]

It gets really frustrating trying to determine fact from fiction. I know nothing about Josh only from the forum where it is insisted he is a liar - did he lie about Marty Smart? And if there was so much corruption at the PCSO then why turn over any files? If the important files were carried out of the PCSO (and I do believe that) - then why was Marty's interview left in the files? If Josh had anything else of worth I feel there would have been a third documentary.

Where do we draw the line to decide what and who we choose to believe? Josh, the Meeks, and Marilyn are the ones who originally came up with the Marty theory anyway (not that I do not think he was involved) - but there are plenty of other people who also had the opportunity to be part of the crime or cover up -or at least had knowledge of what was going on.

[dmac]

I'm sure from Sheila's knowledge that Marty had never been to Sue's house. But I think we have been over it before that Sheila lived in Keddie for a little over a month. She was in Oregon having a baby. So she really doesn't know who all had or had not been to Sue's house. She makes this VERY clear in the video where she goes back to Keddie with Josh and the psychics.

She also makes this point abundantly clear when recently speaking to the same psycrocks on their BS Fraudcast:

"[Sheila] doesn't remember Marty at all, because she was "gone part of the time my family lived in Keddie". She said Sue hung out with Marilyn, though."

Whether Marty had or had not been in 28 prior to April 11-12, he's definitely not lying when he told Crimley "I've been in Sue's cabin before." Anyone want to guess why he's implying to LE another hammer was used? And loudly broadcasting his hammer is missing?

This bit belongs elsewhere (autopsy thread?), but I'm putting it here b4 I forget it: According to autopsy reports, indentations on victims heads (presumably from hammer blows) ranged in size from 3/4" to 5/8". I have 6-7 (yes, it's true) hammers and just measured the heads of three of them: two are 1" in diameter, the third is 3/4" (it's smaller and lighter, like a kids hammer meant for light duty- and less damage). Hammers can create larger wounds than the diameter of the head, but not smaller.

[budrfligh]

Nothing to match them to?? Seriously when is somebody going to put pressure on the FBI? Local cops can't stop them if the family persists! Blood spatter evidence and such should be investigated. Sorry but I call bullshit! When my adult son was murdered and the local police were dropping the ball I personally called the FBI. Family can get their intervention. His body was recovered and his murderer incarcerated within three months. I'm beginning to think it's not solved because nobody's trying to actually solve this. There's enough evidence to actually solve this. That there's no resolution speaks volumes.