|
|
Post by Hope on Feb 19, 2022 21:22:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Feb 19, 2022 21:22:43 GMT
|
|
camfaults
Full Member
Historian, researcher, writer; major focus on cold cases of California
Posts: 151
|
Post by camfaults on Feb 28, 2022 8:36:20 GMT
In a 4-13-1981 report by Deputy Forcino, he noted that he "delivered one item of evidence to DOJ Sacramento and started toward Redding to deliver the other items." Is there any other report that clarifies which item of evidence went to DOJ in Sac?
|
|
|
|
Post by mew1987 on Feb 28, 2022 12:29:18 GMT
  The print which matches the sole of Dana’s boot he was wearing also why was X-Rays don’t on Johnny’s spine Did I miss something in the autopsy report |
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Feb 28, 2022 17:54:06 GMT
I believe the spinal x-ray was performed because of this stab wound:
Cam, I have not seen a report specifying which items were sent to DOJ Sac vs. Redding. There should be documentation, we just haven't seen it, unfortunately. Knowing these things would be helpful. It seems evidence was sent to several different locations/labs throughout the years. Sacramento, Redding, Chico, Richmond (Jan Bashinski Lab), at least. According to the Evidence Freezer Report, in 9/04 the autopsy kits were kept at the Plumas County Jail. They were then sent to the "DOJ" for DNA analysis and the report says:
The "attached DOJ Physical Evidence Examination Report", wasn't uploaded by Josh when he posted the freezer report. Why not? What did the report say? What items were sent for DNA analysis? Which items weren't sent for analysis? What happened to the items after they were analyzed?
According to Gamberg's files, in 2014, the DNA Analyst at Jan Bashinski had asked about the current location of the fingernail scrapings. Since those were sent to Richmond in 2004 shouldn't the lab have documentation of where they went after their lab had possession of them? If she was questioning their current location, can we assume they were sent back to PCSO? Were they ever located and sent to her?
Either she was hopeful results could be obtained with the advances in DNA technology or they weren't tested for DNA when sent off in 2004. Without the report we don't know the answer to that. Either way, they should be retested today, as well as any other evidence which hasn't been tested in recent years. I believe "Touch DNA" wasn't possible/routinely performed until around 2007 and there's been 15 years of advancements since then!!
Also, from the Evidence Freezer Report is that whole issue with the hairs not being in the package. When did they go missing? Are they still sitting in some lab's storage? The report said they were unable to be tested in 2003 because only one hair had root material and there wasn't enough of it to test. Then what happened to those hairs!?! They don't even need root material to extract DNA today. It's all very frustrating and feels like these victims cannot catch a break.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Feb 28, 2022 20:59:31 GMT
<button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button><button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button> The print which matches the sole of Dana’s boot he was wearing "Dana died first" is something that is often repeated in this case, however, the evidence says otherwise. Dana's right boot was collected as evidence. No mention of the left one or Johnny's tennis shoes being collected. Forcino writes that it is to be examined for blood and hair/fibers. Bloody boot prints can be seen in the crime scene photos. In her 2018 article for Plumas News, Victoria Metcalf reported: There was the questionable lividity mentioned in Stoy's 1983 report. However, Cam's research and post on the subject explained away the lividity - it is a common occurrence. Dana was positioned onto his back while the victims were transported to Sacramento & held until the autopsies. The posterior lividity occurred during that time period. In addition, according to the autopsy reports, the tape bindings on Dana were broken. He had freed a hand and broke the tape around his ankles. The autopsy report also states there was no blood underneath the tape. So what was the order of events? Did Dana breaking free cause things to escalate? In order for the soles of shoes to be "covered in blood", wounds had to have already been inflicted resulting in a substantial amount of blood on the floor. What blood type was identified on his boot? Did Johnny & Dana allow themselves to be tied up? I find it hard to believe they wouldn't have but up a struggle, especially Johnny who everyone said was a scrapper. Both boys had a single blow to the back of the head, were those dealt first to render them unconscious and then be tied up? But how would neither boy see it coming/have time to react? |
|
brick
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by brick on Feb 28, 2022 22:08:44 GMT
Not true, again. What I've read is Dana or Tina died first. The facts back it up, and your 'facts' don't because they aren't even facts. There are no bloody boot prints at the crime scene. That's a fabrication on your part, or someone lied to you and you didn't question it. The only shoe/foot prints at the scene are attributed to Sue, so all your talk about Dana's bloody boot prints are very simple to explain: they are lies.
Stoy's mention of lividity in 1983 is Stoy lying. In 1981, a "psychic" was brought in and shown reports and photos before giving a "reading". She was even shown autopsy photos, which is how she invented this crap about Dana being tied in a chair. It was invented by a "psychic" and repeated as fact by Don Stoy, which all on it's own proves Don Stoy is not trustworthy. I've seen this lie repeated as fact on this forum many many times, which is sad. Cam's post on lividity is just speculation and not factual or trustworthy in any way. Lividity remains fixed, for the most part, which means the blanching on his shoulders and back happened shortly after death. That means the prevailing theory is correct, not yours: Dana was on his back after death then rolled over and staged by the killers. Dmac even explained in great detail years ago about the breakdown of blood into blood and serum, which he brought up again a few days ago. He was just saying that, with asphyxiation deaths, the blood is more likely to separate and then re-integrate after death, which means Dana may not have died of asphyxiation. He now supports Mike G's assertion that Dana was "choked out" to death, which is using the military/martial arts hold that deprives the brain of blood rather than the lungs of oxygen. I believe that, as it also explains the petechiae in Dana's pons (near the brain stem) and lack of petechiae in his eyes. Another failure by the ME, who really did a rushed and poor job.
There is nothing to indicate Dana "broke free". Nothing of the sort. Rather, it likely happened after death when the bodies were being moved around, beaten, stabbed and otherwise manipulated. You made up this garbage about Dana "breaking free" and you have no facts to back it up, so I'm calling you out for what it is: Wild and bad speculation dressed up as a fact. So, it's really a lie.
Do not expect me to post on here without me calling it as I see it. Your last post is almost pure fiction, even the line about "questionable lividity" is a lie because it's not what Stoy wrote.
My question is why are you fictionalizing this case? What are your lies meant to gain?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 1, 2022 4:20:46 GMT
He now supports Mike G's assertion that Dana was "choked out" to death, which is using the military/martial arts hold that deprives the brain of blood rather than the lungs of oxygen. I believe that, as it also explains the petechiae in Dana's pons (near the brain stem) and lack of petechiae in his eyes. Obviously. Gamberg had to tell you that? You couldn't figure that out on your own? Not surprising. Go actually read Cam's post, backed up with scientific evidence with actual sources cited. And read those sources. The lividity on Dana's posterior was NOT fixed, "mild blanching" was present. The lividity on the front of his body was fixed. Go read the autopsy report. Do some more research and fact check yourself. Had Dana had expired on his back, left there for some time and then was rolled over & staged, then the posterior lividity would be fixed. It's not, therefore , the prevailing theory is not correct. While your researching that, do some more research into the difference between antemortem vs postmortem wounds. Serum & blood separation? Really? You're able to make all that out in the crime scene photos? Reading the autopsy report will tell you whether or not a wound was made post mortem. Bruising, hematomas, bleeding of the wound edges, do not occur in post mortem wounds. Look it up. I will post the information for anyone else interested. There is nothing to indicate Dana broke free? His bindings were broken because it occurred during your so called staging, because you say so? Got it. I don't know, wouldn't it be easier to roll someone over or for two people to carry them while their hands & feet were still bound? Honestly, why do you feel the need to come over here and post? I mean keep it up, we'll just keep shooting down your "because I said so's" with legitimate information. But did it ever occur to you that people are visiting this site because they don't have someone else's theory constantly shoved down their throat? Don't think you can come over here and do that. You have your own forum for that stuff. Your sole purpose is to disrupt any discussions outside of your forum and to prevent people from joining this one. You want to shove your theory down everyone's throat when people cannot even have their own opinion on your forum. You've used your bullying tactics all across the internet until people give up or ban you. It's not going to work here. I want this forum to be a place where people feel safe to discuss the case without having to fear your wrath. I see no benefit of having you here and I'm not down to play your games. By the way, we aren''t fictionalizing this case. That was already done by you. |
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 1, 2022 5:24:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mew1987 on Mar 1, 2022 5:30:33 GMT
Antemortem vs Postmortem Wounds
Ourforensicmedicine.blogspot.com<button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button> <button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button> <button disabled="" class="c-attachment-insert--linked o-btn--sm">Attachment Deleted</button> Thanks for these Hope |
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Mar 3, 2022 22:02:15 GMT
Oh I'm gonna have a field day with this! I just gotta jump over to some of DR Uthers posts!
"druthers
New Member
*
druthers Avatar
Posts: 19
Kell1 @ Websleuths Assessment
Jul 31, 2021 at 7:23pm QuotelikePost OptionsPost by druthers on Jul 31, 2021 at 7:23pm
Yes, and, unfortunately, I'm left to conclude anything that ever visited the Chico lab was questionable. Dmac gave access to any such files he found relevant to the autopsies or fingerprinting and DNA."
If the problem with this statement isn't immediately apparent, just carry on wearing blinders. Dmac is trying to control the narrative and that's just fascist as hell.
Apparently this "former ME" DR Uthers offers this as a scientific opinion, " Sue was a slut and porked any equally stupid dick within reach. The house was a disaster, Sue was the perfect NON-mommy. Sheila is clearly a murderer JUST for the lies she told about Sue, John, Dana, Tina. Sue brought murder into her house because she lived very stupidly and dangerously. That in no way makes it her fault. Except she may as well have been begging for it." Soooo professional!
druthers
New Member
*
druthers Avatar
Posts: 19
Kell1 @ Websleuths Assessment
Jul 31, 2021 at 5:28pm QuotelikePost OptionsPost by druthers on Jul 31, 2021 at 5:28pm
The blogger is a mental case, and his site has zero relevance.
Petichiae was noticeable on Dana's pons, which is surprising since his head was basically obliterated. That appears to be the sole mention of strangulation. I don't recall any mention of tissue damage or fracture of the hyoid, which is commonly present in manual strangulations (I haven't revisited those reports in some time, as there's far too much else drawing my focus). No mention of the ME cutting tissue in search of subdermal damage. So, of course, all the talk of manual strangulation has little basis, according to the ME's mishandling of the autopsy. The pons and nothing else. And that peticheia can have several equally valid causes, such as the pummeling of his skull. Postmortem.
Petichiae has several causes. The images I saw, IF it is indeed petichiae (there's much spatter in the same vicinity, but some of the dots have no runs and do appear to be the former), sparked my interest more about the timing of the murders, and perhaps the position of the victim. The restraints, particularly the tightly knotted electrical cord, can cause postmortem petichiae, but it should have expressed below the ligature, not above.
Even if it is petichiae, the report is a minefield, so the photos may be the only way to confirm my line of inquiry. It doesn't affect the timeline as laid out on the 28 site, nor the order of deaths. I believe Dmac got that difficult part spot on, and his logic is convincing. Much more than I expected from some armchair sleuth, but nothing about this case has turned out normal to my fatigued eyes. I've never seen a case so obviously mishandled, and with so many documents available to make valid observations and conclusions. I wish this site was anywhere near as topical or comprehensive as the other, but all I see here makes me suspect this is professional naysayers, not a valid forum. Seriously, their deity is some loon who thinks the Zodiac is a fake, and has threads on a whole range of crimes he clearly knows equally little about. And this Horan fellow claims to be a professional investigator. Of what? Alien probes?
To sum up the petichiae, it's just a nagging thought, the type that I always note. In the big picture, I don't think it's of significance to the case, because what's already been spelled out in documents and 28's work nails this pretty well to any wall. TBH, I can't believe I fell victim to this case and still follow it. But an ME never gets to work cases, like that bullshit (and fittingly titled) "Quincy, ME". Jack Klugman was the perfect over-actor for that complete fraud. "The Wad Couple". Maybe this case, since it was delivered to me with so many remarkable documents and outside work, fills the gap I never could in my career." I thought it funny what was claimed here, and then that blood spatter on Sues legs was in fact petechiae."
For crying out loud, I/we had to explain to you how sleeper holds and soft hanging's work, you think I'd forgotten that?
|
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Apr 9, 2022 5:17:00 GMT
the bracelet. It could be the bracelet Kathy had given to Dana, which she wrongly believed he had given to Alyssa. Kathy would have seen Dana wearing it on the 11th. At what point did she think Dana had given it to Alyssa?
|
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Jun 7, 2023 6:29:44 GMT
I had an unsettling thought today, we’ve really believed that DNA evidence may hold the key to solving the Keddie homicides, but should we? I was thinking back on some cases before DNA testing was available and investigators would have been misdirected by forensic evidence. Body bags that were reused in murder cases without having been properly cleaned/sterilized transferring hairs, fibers, skin cells ect.
We already have an example of this in the Keddie case, with a technicians DNA contaminating evidence. Which immediately led to finger pointing, claiming with certainty that the “female” DNA belonged to Marylyn.
I’m sure there’s more we haven’t seen from the autopsies, but would the coroner or pathologist be as thorough then as today? And there’s no documentation of procedure?
Were the bodies placed in sanitized bags? And the nail scrapings/clippings, was a new or sanitized instrument used for each finger of each victim, or was the same one used unwashed on all fingers of all victims?
Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely want any and all evidence that can be tested needs to be. But I also wonder how well new technology can stand up to older, archaic collection techniques?
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Jun 7, 2023 21:07:02 GMT
Snoho I couldn’t agree more! I think of CS photo of Johnnys hands (blood covered) vs what they looked like during autopsy (not nearly as much) it appears they rubbed against the body bag.
either one of you told it before or I heard on a podcast of how bodybags were reused years ago. Unbelievable
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Jun 12, 2023 18:52:16 GMT
That is definitely a depressing thought & unfortunate reality. We can see gloves weren't yet the norm for lab personnel based on that July 1981 KOVR news footage on the case. That hurt to see. It would be nice to know what the protocols the Sacramento's ME's office were following in 4/81, in regards to the specifics you mentioned. Especially the nail clippings.
I still feel all hope is not lost. They collected so much evidence, over 200 pieces. There has to be something in there that can still yield results. Contamination definitely occurred as we've seen which is a shame, but they were still able to isolate Js DNA from the piece of tape found on the floor. Even though the tape especially was highly likely to have been contaminated, who knows how many people handled that over the years. Between PCSO, the ME, the FBI lab it was sent to. Same for the electrical cords, although it'd still be nice to see what a private lab can do with the mix DNA identified on those.
There gotta be something the perpetrators touched that was handled by a dozen LE officers & lab people. The pieces of wallboard with the knife marks always stands out. Seems a good possibility the perpetrators rested against it or placed a hand while pulling the knife back out. And at least in the footage shown in the documentary the officers were shown to be wearing heavy gloves as they carried it out. The curtains? How about those scissors? The items found in the dumpster? The blanket, which should confirm whether or not it was definitely J who placed it. The lamp in the girls BR that the wire was cut from. The phone cord coiled up & left in the LR. The bloody fingerprint & smears. The LR light switches. That's more than I expected off the top of my head. The weapons were probably handled quite a bit over the years unfortunately. Still wonder if attempting mvac on them would be worth a shot. That bathroom cabinet. The kitchen drawer would have been a good one for DNA, but it doesn't seem they collected that : ( Same for the medicine cabinet, especially if Sue's rings were missing.
And I know we've talked about this many times before, but don't believe for one second the killers wore gloves or came prepared for what occurred. They left something behind. Any latent fingerprints ID'd or DNA results over the years would be a start. Even if those people had previously been in the cabin. Sue appeared to keep a clean house. Her countertops were spotless. If someone's fingerprints were IDd say on the countertop around the knife drawer, that'd be iffy! Especially if they belonged to someone who was in the cabin months prior.
July 81 KOVR footage:
|
|
