Your failure to object to the posts which prompt the responses you find so offensive is duly noted.
I don't have the free time to play both sides of an irrelevant "gotcha" game just to avoid the terrible threat of you noting things. Sorry.
A fact, hardly - that's your assertion. I don't believe anybody on this thread has either the expertise or access to the raw case data to make that claim.
All the data you need is in the Massei report. Massei just misinterpreted it. We've fixed the court's mistake to establish the correct time of death.
But have you dropped your claim that death was definitely before 9.30pm.
Yes/No ?
That seemed to be a mainstay of your earlier analysis.
You don't appear to have understood my earlier analysis very well if you think so.
The most likely time of death based on the state of Meredith's bowels, the eyewitness testimony, the phone records, her body temperature and so on is about 21:05, as soon as she got home. Each slice of time after that is less likely than the one before, and by 22:00 or 22:30 we're getting into the realm of the staggeringly unlikely.
On the first - 1 of the pair was, probably both - no biggie.
On the second - disputed to put it mildly - lets see what the appeal brings ?
I was not aware of any dispute on this matter - can you provide a citation to any credible source disputing the appeal team's claim that the computer records show a Naruto file being opened at 21:26?
In a nutshell - Rudy is a convicted murderer, his obviously self serving claims have to be viewed with a certain skepticism.
[Nor am I convinced that this is an accurate summation of the totality of his/the evidence in any case. Obviously the earlier he is off the scene the better for him.]
No even mildly plausible story has been put forth as to why Rudy, in his initial claim before he had the chance to alter it to conform with the prosecution's favoured narrative, would put the time of death back two hours for no reason. Excellent reasons have been given for why he would not want to do so: If someone saw him hanging around Meredith's house at 20:30 and he claimed he was not there at that time, he'd be in deep trouble.
It would be far more logical for Rudy to make up a story that was accurate in terms of timing and the details of what he did and touched, except with the murder and rape being carried out by a stranger while he was in the loo with headphones on.
False on all 3 counts - the first 2 [probably all 3] seem indisputable on the evidence presented.
Now this is the sort of thing we're looking for - genuine new ideas or evidence.
What do you think the evidence is for a staged break-in or a clean-up, other than the moles we have already whacked flat three or more times? Why do you think that the criticisms we have made against Massei's reasoning with regard to the alleged break-in and clean-up do not demonstrate that they are nonsensical?
I thought we had all these issues nailed down pretty thoroughly, but I'm open to hearing something new on these topics.
To sum up ........
The above has been gone over and over ad nauseam.
Where are the appeal docs and the arguments on same -
which was the whole point of my post [others have asked this before but to no avail].
The courts will decide - lets address the salient issues.
.
Not this damned mole again?
The court can decide whatever it likes. I'm only interested in the process to the extent that it brings up new evidence or arguments - for example, the claimed evidence that shows that we were right all along in thinking that Amanda and Raffaele were at home with their computers all night.
You haven't answered that question by the way - if it turns out that the computer logs indeed show activity all the way through the entire time in which Meredith could possibly have been murdered, would that change your view of the case in any way?
.......... Tell it to the judge.
