Results 37 to 48 of 138
Thread: Hi-Tec crime scene photos
-
January 7, 2010, 9:21 pm, Thu Jan 7 21:21:03 UTC 2010 #37
I think the angles are slightly different in the modeling clay example vs the moldy picture (har har har) making it look like the lettering is different, but I don't believe it is.
Fr brown, could you grow some mold and do the experiment again? (Just kidding) Great job both of you.It's probably too late to get justice for JonBenét. Maybe it always was. But knowing where things went wrong is the first step to not going there again. **-- Alan Prendergast-Dec 21, 2006--**
______________________
Bring all our Missing Home www.usearchut.org
Prayers for our military who are protecting our freedom.
-
January 8, 2010, 12:43 am, Fri Jan 8 0:43:50 UTC 2010 #38
Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Posts
- 650
-
January 8, 2010, 7:49 am, Fri Jan 8 7:49:00 UTC 2010 #39
I tried flour first. That was a real mess.
I'll take a photo of the shoes head-on and post it. They have an unusual asymmetrical pattern on the toe box. Someone may be able to spot them in a photograph of Burke--or of JonBenet because I don't see why she couldn't have worn them as hand-me-downs.
-
January 8, 2010, 11:16 am, Fri Jan 8 11:16:46 UTC 2010 #40
FFJ Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Posts
- 4,288
Thanks, Fr Brown, for obtaining the Hi-Tec shoes and the photos, including the one with modeling clay.
The logo looks the same to me, even to the inclusion of the two 45 degree accent lines attached to the bar that underscores the brand name.
I've made two composites, one with inverted color, to see if it helps with visual identification.
-
January 8, 2010, 11:17 am, Fri Jan 8 11:17:49 UTC 2010 #41
FFJ Senior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Posts
- 4,288
Here is the second photo.
-
January 8, 2010, 5:07 pm, Fri Jan 8 17:07:50 UTC 2010 #42
Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Posts
- 650
-
January 8, 2010, 7:09 pm, Fri Jan 8 19:09:51 UTC 2010 #43
Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- In the Federal Witness Protection Program
- Posts
- 1,311
Thanks for posting that photo. Obviously, Hi-Tec may make some minor changes from year to year, but I think we can all tell that this is most likely a very similar shoe to one that BR admitted owning (though his parents denied it).
This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
-
January 8, 2010, 8:30 pm, Fri Jan 8 20:30:47 UTC 2010 #44
-
January 9, 2010, 4:08 pm, Sat Jan 9 16:08:00 UTC 2010 #45
Superior Cool Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Texarkana, USA
- Posts
- 4,301
This post, unless it is a legal court document, may not be carried in part, or in its entirety to any other discussion forum or bulletin board without the express written consent of the party who wrote it. It is proprietary to the author and to www.forumsforjustice.org. Violators will be reported to their Internet Service Providers.
-
January 10, 2010, 3:09 pm, Sun Jan 10 15:09:36 UTC 2010 #46
There's a photo of the blanket with the piece of tape in the "Tape? What tape?" thread. Is that pretty accurate for the location of JonBenet's body? I know the shoeprints were found near her body so could someone who knows post the photo of the blanket here with an indication of the location of the prints?
Thanks.
-
January 11, 2010, 3:44 pm, Mon Jan 11 15:44:25 UTC 2010 #47
Here are the Columbus boots. Note the pattern on the toe.
The boots also came in navy blue.
-
January 12, 2010, 11:38 pm, Tue Jan 12 23:38:46 UTC 2010 #48
Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Location
- In the Federal Witness Protection Program
- Posts
- 1,311
As far as we know, the blanket was found "in situ" in the wineceller. Though FW, who followed JR into the room, would have known if the blanket was moved by anyone. My thinking is that the photo represents the blanket as it remained on the floor after JB was lifted out by her father. No one but JR and FW know if it is in the exact same position as they left it behind in the room.
The body (and blanket) was close enough to the doorway that even though FW couldn't find the light switch to the wineceller, there should have been enough ambient light from the area outside the wineceller to see her if she'd been there that close to the door. That room is not THAT large. However, the position of the body has been described as being such that someone looking into the room actually had to step into the room and look to the side.
The footprints in photos seem to be right next to the blanket, so that someone making the prints would be standing right over the body.
Keep in mind that footprints, like fingerprints and other kinds of DNA, can't be actually "dated" as to the time it was left. That type of evidence is circumstantial- if the person who left the print is known, and was known to be in the house where the body was found during the time frame that the death occurred prosecution will try to link them to the crime, especially if found in the same room as the body. But the defense can argue that it doesn't prove involvement because it can't be proved it was left at the same time the death occurred. Other things are needed to tie it to the crime- for example, the actual HI- Tec shoes would bee needed, and tested to see if the same mold found in the wineceller is found on the sole of the shoe- also if any hair, blood, etc. belonging to the victim is found anywhere on the shoe. The print alone isn't enough.
BUT- if a print from a person who DOESN'T belong in the house is found, that would be suspicious, but in order to tie it to the crime the owner of the print MUST be known. It can't be an unknown person because you'd have to be able to look at the person who left the print and say that they had never had a legitimate reason to be in the house. That isn't the same as saying it was an intruder print. That can never be said in the JBR case for the simple reason that BR had admitted to owning Hi-Tec shoes. That doesn't mean the prints were his, but if he had those shoes, the prints COULD have been his. I think he no longer had the shoes in question because I can't imagine LE not wanting to match them to the print. Maybe another thing taken by Aunt P?This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Similar Threads
-
What do you see in JBR crime scene photos?
By INSIGHT in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public ForumReplies: 119Last Post: November 12, 2006, 3:50 pm, Sun Nov 12 15:50:34 UTC 2006 -
Crime scene pics--again
By koldkase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public ForumReplies: 25Last Post: August 5, 2006, 5:10 pm, Sat Aug 5 17:10:00 UTC 2006 -
Crime scene photos - Steven Jones - GRAPHIC CONTENT
By Moab in forum FIRE-In-The-HOLEReplies: 7Last Post: June 13, 2006, 9:06 am, Tue Jun 13 9:06:42 UTC 2006