Wandering Off Topic

[Mr Gray]

But you agree that the mode of death and transportation of the corpse happened broadly as described by the prosecution?
I listened to that podcast. Pretty interesting. He's quite an eloquent and convincing character. Guilty AF, obviously.

The problem is the total lack of forensic evidence....every contact leaves  a trace...but in this case it didnt. There was blood in the boot....so it wasnt thoroughly cleaned....but not hers...or his

[Vertigo Swirl]

But you agree that the mode of death and transportation of the corpse happened broadly as described by the prosecution?
I listened to that podcast. Pretty interesting. He's quite an eloquent and convincing character. Guilty AF, obviously.

It makes you wonder how much unconscious cueing of the dogs goes on, when one human assesses another to be as guilty AF even in the absence of any actual evidence.

[The General]

The problem is the total lack of forensic evidence....every contact leaves  a trace...but in this case it didnt. There was blood in the boot....so it wasnt thoroughly cleaned....but not hers...or his

I agree. Maybe he went prepared - roll of visqueen, gaffa tape, gloves and strangled her, alas.
But it leaves these dog alerts a little puzzling. Of all the places to 'alert' is the place where the polus thought it happened.

[The General]

It makes you wonder how much unconscious cueing of the dogs goes on, when one human assesses another to be as guilty AF even in the absence of any actual evidence.

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.

[Mr Gray]

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.

The SCRCC also thought he would have been convicted without the dog alerts......the evidence does seem to be overwhelming

[Vertigo Swirl]

The circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. The dogs evidence, admissible or not, may not have made a difference.

I agree, that's not the point though.  The point concerns the dog alerts and whether or not they were reliable.   Just because the guy was obviously guilty doesn't necessarily validate the dog alerts. 

[The General]

The SCRCC also thought he would have been convicted without the dog alerts......the evidence does seem to be overwhelming

Remember, when you're thinking of killing someone you've been hounding for days, make sure you keep hounding her after she 'goes missing'. Not you, Davros, a would be perp.

[Mr Gray]

Remember, when you're thinking of killing someone you've been hounding for days, make sure you keep hounding her after she 'goes missing'. Not you, Davros, a would be perp.

Yes ill remember should I ever be in a similar situation..

[The General]

I agree, that's not the point though.  The point concerns the dog alerts and whether or not they were reliable.   Just because the guy was obviously guilty doesn't necessarily validate the dog alerts.

I get it. Because this, that. I know you can't go on record as stating that these alerts corroborate, because that would be you contradicting yourself. But these alerts are more compelling, irrespective of the 'unconscious cue' argument, as we're 'almost sure' (cross thread skills), actually way more than that, she was killed right there and stored there for a time.

Conversely, if you're looking for an example of someone who can hold their nerve and lie in a world class manner and be somewhat convincing, then this guy......

[Mr Gray]

I get it. Because this, that. I know you can't go on record as stating that these alerts corroborate, because that would be you contradicting yourself. But these alerts are more compelling, irrespective of the 'unconscious cue' argument, as we're 'almost sure' (cross thread skills), actually way more than that, she was killed right there and stored there for a time.

Conversely, if you're looking for an example of someone who can hold their nerve and lie in a world class manner and be somewhat convincing, then this guy......

theres no evidence she was killed in the basement.
The Gilroy case was seen as breaking ground by scepetic as regards the admissibility of the alert evidence.
we now know taht isnt the case. Whats also interesting is Prof Cassella...Grimes colleague ....being very unsupportive of the alerts

[The General]

theres no evidence she was killed in the basement.
The Gilroy case was seen as breaking ground by scepetic as regards the admissibility of the alert evidence.
we now know taht isnt the case. Whats also interesting is Prof Cassella...Grimes colleague ....being very unsupportive of the alerts

There's loads of circumstantial evidence that she was. That's evidence. She may have been rendered unconscious in the basement, but the lack of forensic evidence doesn't support that. She may have been bundled in to the boot of the car / a car, but the timings don't support that.
Unless you think he killed her and posted her through a time portal?

[Mr Gray]

There's loads of circumstantial evidence that she was. That's evidence. She may have been rendered unconscious in the basement, but the lack of forensic evidence doesn't support that. She may have been bundled in to the boot of the car / a car, but the timings don't support that.
Unless you think he killed her and posted her through a time portal?

i dont think there is much circumstantial evidence to support that

[The General]

i dont think there is much circumstantial evidence to support that

So, having admitted you think he killed her, where, when and how do you think he managed that?

[Mr Gray]

So, having admitted you think he killed her, where, when and how do you think he managed that?

Ive no idea...I dont think theres any evidence she actually entered the building

[The General]

Ive no idea...I dont think theres any evidence she actually entered the building

You have no idea?
How, given that you think he killed her, did he manage that if she didn't enter the building, bearing in mind the timings are quite specific?