Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,968
tunnel vision again
Good to hear from you, as always. Can you find a source for your claim? Skinner's website said, "There were numerous hand-prints around the house. Two (subsequently identified as Hank's) were found, 24 inches (two feet) and 30 inches from the floor respectively, on the door to the bathroom/washer-dryer room. Leading out of the house, two hand-prints were found on and near the door leading from the kitchen to the utility room at the rear of the house; one was subsequently identified as belonging to Hank, the other was never identified, but was assumed to be his for the purposes of the trial. On the door leading outside, another print was found and identified as Hank's."
Skinner and his supporters suggested that the print investigation was half-hearted due to tunnel-vision: "From the Statement of Testimony filed by Steven C. Losch, the attorney representing Hank for his Direct Appeal, 'Unnasch believed that a search of the crime scene for latent prints that were not made in blood could have produced important evidence, but he did not collect it because the Pampa police did not ask him to do so. Unnasch was also not asked to compare appellant's handprint to the apparent latent bloody handprint that Burroughs saw on Twila Busby's left forearm.'" (highlighting mine)
From this same site: "Additionally, the Statement of testimony observes that 'There were no fingerprints on the knives, but Unnasch [Glenn Unnasch, Dept Public Safety latent fingerprint examiner] found a handprint on the black bag that was not made by the appellant [Hank Skinner]. The Pampa Police asked Department of Public Safety criminalist Gary Stallings to determine whether the brown stain on the towel ....was human blood. Stallings did not perform that test or test the knife in the bag for blood.'" If one only looks for Skinner's prints, it is not surprising that that is all one finds. Sound familiar? I thought so.
Radley Balko reported, "'They only tested the material they thought would implicate Skinner,' Protess told me via phone. 'They fixated on their suspect, and once they thought they had enough for a conviction, they stopped.'" The hair in Twila's hand did not match Skinner (tested by mitochondrial DNA forensics). If Uncle Robert's DNA turned up on the jacket, what would you conclude? If Twila's blood is on the jacket, what would you conclude? If Uncle Robert's DNA or prints turned up on the knives, what would you conclude?
lane99,
Good to hear from you, as always. Can you find a source for your claim? Skinner's website said, "There were numerous hand-prints around the house. Two (subsequently identified as Hank's) were found, 24 inches (two feet) and 30 inches from the floor respectively, on the door to the bathroom/washer-dryer room. Leading out of the house, two hand-prints were found on and near the door leading from the kitchen to the utility room at the rear of the house; one was subsequently identified as belonging to Hank, the other was never identified, but was assumed to be his for the purposes of the trial. On the door leading outside, another print was found and identified as Hank's."
Skinner and his supporters suggested that the print investigation was half-hearted due to tunnel-vision: "From the Statement of Testimony filed by Steven C. Losch, the attorney representing Hank for his Direct Appeal, 'Unnasch believed that a search of the crime scene for latent prints that were not made in blood could have produced important evidence, but he did not collect it because the Pampa police did not ask him to do so. Unnasch was also not asked to compare appellant's handprint to the apparent latent bloody handprint that Burroughs saw on Twila Busby's left forearm.'" (highlighting mine)
From this same site: "Additionally, the Statement of testimony observes that 'There were no fingerprints on the knives, but Unnasch [Glenn Unnasch, Dept Public Safety latent fingerprint examiner] found a handprint on the black bag that was not made by the appellant [Hank Skinner]. The Pampa Police asked Department of Public Safety criminalist Gary Stallings to determine whether the brown stain on the towel ....was human blood. Stallings did not perform that test or test the knife in the bag for blood.'" If one only looks for Skinner's prints, it is not surprising that that is all one finds. Sound familiar? I thought so.
Radley Balko reported, "'They only tested the material they thought would implicate Skinner,' Protess told me via phone. 'They fixated on their suspect, and once they thought they had enough for a conviction, they stopped.'" The hair in Twila's hand did not match Skinner (tested by mitochondrial DNA forensics). If Uncle Robert's DNA turned up on the jacket, what would you conclude? If Twila's blood is on the jacket, what would you conclude? If Uncle Robert's DNA or prints turned up on the knives, what would you conclude?
Last edited:
