0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.
What have I ever done to you or any one on the bamber forum roch?
Patti xxxx'd out "fresh cuts/scratches" why?
Lithium, for all your bravado and IT savvy, I think you need to watch your step on here. Not that you wouldn't hack the forum if you were banned. But I think people are getting sick of your arrogance. Reign it in... or you are banned.
And who am I trying to scare? You took it there first by trying to work out who I am and accusing me of being Steven Kelly. Mods, do you not want me posting on here? I'll leave no bother if that's the case just say the word.
Quote from: Lithium on November 03, 2012, 10:43:PMAnd who am I trying to scare? You took it there first by trying to work out who I am and accusing me of being Steven Kelly. Mods, do you not want me posting on here? I'll leave no bother if that's the case just say the word.I don't mind you discussing the case....
there is no forensic evedence linking him to the linking luke but plenty of forensic evedence linking other people to it.
Quote from: Patti on November 04, 2012, 12:06:AMIt is widely accepted that when a person is murdered it is by someone who is known to them. I have briefly looked at this case and I wonder why the Luke's brothers evidence was taken into consideration. Because he was watching porn it does not mean he was alone in the house. The other fact I want to bring up is the fact that Luke found the body. He was familiar with the area so it would be natural that he would he have looked and gone through the hole in the wall, he must have known it was there. Dogs naturally seek these things out....Or maybe the dog had been there before?Is there any forensic evidence that links Luke to the murder? It wasn't just the porn, there was a number of inconsistencies that lead me to believe Luke wasn't at home.We may never know if there was forensic evidence linking Luke as the crime scene wasn't properly preserved and the body was exposed to the elements all night. This is an issue that Luke's supporters will use while also using the "no dna linking him" thing. Picking and choosing again.
It is widely accepted that when a person is murdered it is by someone who is known to them. I have briefly looked at this case and I wonder why the Luke's brothers evidence was taken into consideration. Because he was watching porn it does not mean he was alone in the house. The other fact I want to bring up is the fact that Luke found the body. He was familiar with the area so it would be natural that he would he have looked and gone through the hole in the wall, he must have known it was there. Dogs naturally seek these things out....Or maybe the dog had been there before?Is there any forensic evidence that links Luke to the murder?
Quote from: nugnug on November 04, 2012, 12:08:AMthere is no forensic evedence linking him to the linking luke but plenty of forensic evedence linking other people to it.do you man the condom that was found 50 yards away? That could have been anyone's that used that area for sex....it does not mean that person killed Jodi?
