August 1, 200618 yr what about finger prints/blood stains etc? A lot of murderers might use gloves so there won't be any fingerprints,if he doesn't spill any of his own blood then how does that prove anything.
August 2, 200618 yr what about finger prints/blood stains etc? Fingerprints only prove that someone was there at some point, not that they committed a murder, it's not definite in itself, only circumstantial (which isnt enough to convict anyone). We've all seen enough episodes of CSI and the like to know that....
August 2, 200618 yr Fingerprints only prove that someone was there at some point, not that they committed a murder, it's not definite in itself, only circumstantial (which isnt enough to convict anyone). We've all seen enough episodes of CSI and the like to know that.... What, even say if it was finger prints all over a gun or something? I'm not saying just finger prints mean they definately did it, but when they are put with other things then isn't that enough proof? And Brian I meant if the the victims blood is found in their house etc.
August 2, 200618 yr What, even say if it was finger prints all over a gun or something? I'm not saying just finger prints mean they definately did it, but when they are put with other things then isn't that enough proof? And Brian I meant if the the victims blood is found in their house etc. Thing is though Lucy that there are a lot of corrupt cops out there, it is very easy for a cop to plant evidence such as a victims' blood at someone's house or that sort of thing, merely finding a victims blood at a suspect's house would not be evidence enough to justify a death penalty given the possibility of corrupt cops, the OJ Simpson case highlighted that with the glove etc Edited August 2, 200618 yr by Ozzy Osbourne
August 2, 200618 yr What, even say if it was finger prints all over a gun or something? I'm not saying just finger prints mean they definately did it, but when they are put with other things then isn't that enough proof? And Brian I meant if the the victims blood is found in their house etc. Depends on if they actually owned the gun or not really dunnit...? So, again, that in itself is not proof because if they were the registered owner of the gun, stands to reason their dabs would be on it. If I was a murderer and wanted to use a gun to kill someone, I'd use someone else's cos their dabs would be on it and they'd get the blame.... As for blood evidence, well, just take a look at what went on in the Sion Jenkins trial, and, as Ozzy said, the O J Simpson case....
August 2, 200618 yr I can't remember the exact circumstances (I will do a search) but a cop involved in the investigation who was exposed as a racist planted a glove containing the victim's blood on OJ Simpson's property and this severely damaged the case against him
August 2, 200618 yr i also think that the reason why the crime was committed should be considered. im all for curing people if it can be done, and if not then more research has to be undertaken.
August 2, 200618 yr I can't remember the exact circumstances (I will do a search) but a cop involved in the investigation who was exposed as a racist planted a glove containing the victim's blood on OJ Simpson's property and this severely damaged the case against him The cop's name was Mark Fuhrmann (I think...) and it was established that he had links to white supremacist Militia groups. Hardly the sort of person who's exactly gonna be objective in investigating an alleged murder committed by a very famous black man... And he indeed was accused of planting a glove at the scene. The irony is, I think that there was a high probability that O J would've been found guilty without the evidence tampering, frankly I do believe the man was guilty, the LAPD's institutional racism fukked that one up totally....
August 2, 200618 yr The cop's name was Mark Fuhrmann (I think...) and it was established that he had links to white supremacist Militia groups. Hardly the sort of person who's exactly gonna be objective in investigating an alleged murder committed by a very famous black man... And he indeed was accused of planting a glove at the scene. The irony is, I think that there was a high probability that O J would've been found guilty without the evidence tampering, frankly I do believe the man was guilty, the LAPD's institutional racism fukked that one up totally.... Thanks yeah thats the guy, yeah the case was absolutely destroyed after his behaviour came to light so there is no way it would have been a safe conviction, there is a lot of Mark Fuhrmann's in police forces sadly and very few people have the money to buy the very best lawyers like Simpson did so the likes of Fuhrmann are one of the very big reasons why I will never support the death penalty I think were it not for Fuhrmann that he would have probably been found guilty and I would say the balance of probability is that either Simpson or that Kato guy who was staying with Simpson at the time or both of them carried out the murders but Fuhrmann's actions and his past behaviour ruined any chance of a conviction Check out this link to the behaviour of the cop :o :angry: http://rwor.org/a/firstvol/890-899/896/fuhr.htm Edited August 2, 200618 yr by Ozzy Osbourne
Create an account or sign in to comment