the murder of sarah cherry

[nugnug]

in your opion they are.

[scipio_usmc]

in your opion they are.

All I know is that they deleted numerous posts of his attacking me and others and the only posts of mine that were deleted were deleted because they were responses to his attacks and got deleted by virtue of the post they were addressing being deleted so obviously the paper didn't like his attacks.

I was able to retrieve my response to his post:


"It's my earnest desire that, while the entity calling itself Basilone remain free to post his puerile theories and false interpretations of my documented account of the Dechaine case -- allegations he makes without admitting his identity and (unlike the account in my book) without citing any evidence (scientific or otherwise) supporting his whimsy -- that Basilone refrain from posting them as replies to my posts.
Every time he posts them as replies to my posts, Disques sends me an email notifying me that Basilone did it again. Basilone's mental/emotional wanderings really aren't worth the slight click it takes to delete those emails.

Get a life, Basilone. It's impossible to really care what you think because you're just another nobody. Arguing with you is like d ueling with an unarmed child."


Your lies just make you look even worse. I have posted evidence. I referred to the trial experts- the most significant experts- as well as evidence from medical literature. I even explained that evidence discussing specific issues. What evidence do you cite? You posted a link to a trial and error webpage which I dismantled point by point and rely on two expert opinions which I refuted by pointing to contrary expert opinion from the prosecution which the courts adopted over such speculative claims and I explained in detail why they were wrong.

You failed to rebut the evidence I presented.

With respect to the insect evidence, I posted the expert evidence of Roy which is backed up by literature. Such literature says those insects that target bodies immediately after death as opposed to a days or weeks after death do not dig to get to a body unless there is a substantial amount of blood in the material surrounding the body. Your sole response was to post the false claim that most of her body was uncovered which was easy to dispatch by bringing up trial testimony of those who found her and Dr Roy's who testified he had a hard time finding her body even with it pointed out to him.

Roy and other prosecution experts reject the claim of your expert that rigor had to be gone within 36 hours of death. The courts found such claim unpersuasive because a multitude of literature that cites 48 hours as the maximum under normal conditions not 36 and even this is not absolute. You stated that your own research says 36 all that means is you don't know how to research very well because just do a google search of 48 hour rigormortis which is the most simplistic search not even a very competent one and you will find plenty of sources that refute your claims.

In the meantime you keep running away entirely from my evidence that your allegations are ludicrous. You allege that after police took the vehicle away that someone else brought Cherry to the very location where his truck had been then walked her to the location where the dog tracked from the vehicle and killed and raped her in that very location then buried her 100 feet away. How could someone know that is where Dechaine's truck was found by police and that is where the dog tracked to? You completely ignore my challenges about this issue because you have no plausible answer beyond accusing one of the cops who had been at the scene to see the truck and see where the dog tracked to. Your allegations were extremely poorly thought out and built around erroneous expert claims that have been rejected by the courts.

You are little more than a legend in your own mind.

By the way your implication by the word "entity" that I am posting on behalf of a government organization just further demontrates your delusions of grandeur.


---

I think it is pretty obvious he has a screw loose.

[scipio_usmc]

Unfortunately the best I can do is read my own posting history and see what they deleted of mine.

This was in response to his bogus claims about there being blood based DNA under her nails and he posted that he wanted to find out who I was and attacked me for not revealing my name..  This was my response:

My identity is immaterial to the facts and issues. You just demonstrated how careless and imprecise you are in making claims. You contradicted yourself in your various points.

Prior to trial blood found under her nails was tested to ascertain blood type and it was Cherry's. That is an example of blood being tested.

You are referring to tests where her nails were ground up and then such sample was tested for DNA. There was a minute amount which was too small to test using a basic DNA test thus they had to replicate the sample to get it to a size large enough to get any markers.

Your claim all these years and just a moment ago that blood under her nails was DNA tested is false.
In point one you doubled down insisting the DNA test was a test run on blood found under Cherry's nails. this is blatantly false. The only blood detected under her nails was a minute amount, it type tested and such testing expended such blood so that there was nothing left to DNA test years later. No blood was found under the nails that the defense took possession of and ultimately transferred back to the state and then got DNA tested.

In point 3 you admitted point one is wrong. You admitted you have no idea whether the DNA detected was blood based or not. So that means point one is false and your assertions all these years alleging blood based DNA was found is false. You have no idea whether the DNA you rely upon was blood based or not.

Why did you even make point 1 at all since you recognize it is false and that I was correct in pointing out it was false?

The one who is all over the place is in your mirror. You are no more capable of defending your babble than Dechaine was able to explain his way out with doubletalk and lies.

The fact the DNA was not Dechaine's doesn't matter. It could have gotten there from a dollar bill she touched. It could have gotten there from contamination at the lab, there are countless ways for innocent contamination to occur. There is nothing at all to suggest it is the killer's DNA though. I guess being an ATF agent didn't teach you anything about law. You need to establish the killer's DNA would get her her nails and it most likely is his in order to try to use such DNA evidence to refute guilt. This is quite basic but you ignore the basics which is quite clear in you ignoring the issue of how someone could have found out where the dog tracked to and Dechaine's truck had been in order to kill Cherry in such location. Your ramblings are totally devoid of logic.

The rape charge was dropped prior to trial because the Vaginal swabs were mishandled and contaminated. The courts and rational people do not characterize such as official misconduct let alone intentional misconduct done to prejudice Dechaine on the contrary it prejudiced the state forcing them to drop the rape charge.

While you think yourself to be such a great mind you demonstrate the complete opposite anytime you post.

[scipio_usmc]

another response of mine they deleted when they deleted the post I was responding to, he again said he wanted to find out my identity:

Instead of my identity what should concern you is the fact that the entire premise of your book is ludicrous and based upon the fiction that Cherry could not have died prior to Dechaine encountering the police.

You have no ability to explain to everyone how someone could have known where police found Dechaine's truck let alone decided to wait to rape and kill Cherry in the location where his truck was found.You expect everyone to ignore the sheer idiocy of this suggestion and simply believe it happened based on the fiction that Cherry could not have been killed prior to police finding the truck.

Such fiction hinges upon the false claim that there would have been more insect activity if Cherry had been killed prior to the truck being found and the fiction that rigor had to have vanished within 36 hours of Cherry being killed. I explained why these claims are wrong and why they thus were rejected by the courts.

You have no ability to refute my points so instead try to divert attention from the issues to the irrelevant issue of my identity. All you are doing is demonstrating to everyone that you can't walk the walk.

[scipio_usmc]

Moore attacked me personally and posted this link saying that he had no need to debate me in any detail he would simply post a link that proves me wrong and posted a link.  This was my response:

While Moore is too scared and/or unable to discuss my points in detail I am neither a coward nor wrong so will actually discuss the points he raised though he merely did so by posting a link to what some other Dechaine supporter asserts.

Here is the heart of that link:
"Dr. Roy said rigor was passing off and, “The parameters of rigor mortis suggest probably a minimum of 30 to 36 hours and it could well be longer.”
Jurors were left to do the math.

Textbooks confirmed my understanding: rigor normally begins twelve hours after death, remains twelve hours, and passes off in another twelve hours. If Roy was correct when he added, “it could be longer,” i.e. counting further back, more than 36 hours before the autopsy, that would mean death occurred earlier.

Textbooks on forensic pathology say that was not possible.
Sarah was twelve and temperatures were near ninety that week. Textbooks tell us that rigor progresses more quickly in the old and the young, more rapidly in warm environments. That would mean the span of rigor would be shorter in this case and, by Roy‘s calculation, death came in even less than Roy‘s estimate of 30-36 hours before the autopsy i.e. later in time.

Sarah’s neck was constricted to a diameter of 2½-3 inches; life couldn’t have lingered after she was strangled.

Even Roy’s thirty to thirty-six hours before his autopsy at 4:20PM that Friday places the time of death between 4:20AM and 10:40AM Thursday."
--------


1) Roy's autopsy was at 3:20 not 4:20. 48 hours from that time is 3:20 July 6.

2) The mean temperature was 70 degrees the time Cherry's body was in the woods. It only got into the 90s the same day her body was found it was cooler the other days and it not only got cool at night it is cooler in woods than it is out of the woods. It is also cooler on the ground especially when in a shallow grave.

3) Textbooks note that rigor is generally gone 48 hours after death. In cooler climates this is longer and in very hot climates this is shorter but there is no exactness it varies according to other things than just temperature which is why there is always a time of death window given not an exact time when rigor is used. In the case of a mean temperature of 70 degrees it takes 8-12 hours for rigor to fully establish it remains in place for about 18 hours then the next 18 hours of so it passes off which is where the general 48 hours so many sources refer to comes from.

I already mentioned some of the variables. Generally people with more fat go through the process faster than people with less fat as do people who are full of liquids rather than people who have less fluids in their system. There are others which is why there are only generalizations.

So the author distorted by claiming rigor has to be gone after 36 hours from death.

4) The author also distorted Roy's testimony. At the beginning he admits Roy testified she was dead a minimum of 30-36 hours and it could have been much longer. Yet in the final sentence quoted he misrepresents that Roy said she was dead a maximum of 36 hours thus claiming even according to Roy she died at 4:20AM July 7 at the earliest. This is the typical dishonest nonsense from trial and error. When one actually looks at the claims they always fall apart.

5) Roy's unrefuted trial testimony was that Cherry died on July 6. On cross examination the defense got him to admit she could have died anytime on July 6 up till midnight. The defense failed to find any experts to testify at trial who could refute his assertion she died on July 6. If it were as clear cut as Moore and these trial and error fools claim then the trial defense would have been able to get a witness to testify that rigor could have lasted no more than 36 hours fromt he time of death and that she had to have died after the truck was found by police. The trial defense could not find anyone to assert such because there is no scientific way to assert such. There was not a mean temperature of 90 degrees as the trial and error author asserts. There is variation which the trial and error author refuses to face. The actual scientific figure is within 48 hours of death not 36.

As a result of the defense failing to refute the evidence of Roy the appeal courts always cite the TOD as July 6 when reciting the facts of the case. For instance see the federal District of Maine case.
On appeal 2 experts opinions were presented to try to prove that Cherry had to have died after the truck was picked up by police but the claims were refuted by government experts and were thus rejected by the courts. I have already explained why their claims were false and failed.

Note how I have no problem addressing things in detail while all Moore can do is post links and hide.

[scipio_usmc]

My response to his attack telling someone else that he must believe the Earth is flat because he beleived the government claims he confessed:

"He confessed to his lawyer who then effectively let it out. He also confessed to being at the house Cherry was from and described it to the letter. Though he later recanted his nonsense about taking a piss there he would not have been able to describe the house if he had not been there. A neighbor saw him driving on the block. His tireprint was in the driveway not merely his papers. He his his keys under the seat of the cruiser so that when his truck was located he could try to pretend that someone else took his truck and drove it there.

You making fun of someone else for being foolish is hilarious considering you assert the most absurd claims of all. You advance the notion that someone stole items from Dechaine's vehicle, kidnapped Cherry planting the papers at the time of the abduction, took her somewhere in the vicinity holding on to her, around 14 hours later, spied on police to watch them take Dechaine's vehicle away then after that took her a few hundred feet from that location in the dark woods to rape her, kill her and buried her under dense brush. Or perhaps you suggest they stayed there till it got light then he took her in the woods to do it so waited until 16 or more hours after kidnapping her to finally rape her and kill her there.
You are attacking someone as a fool for believing Dechaine confessed because police, prosecutors and other lawyers say he confessed.

What you assert is far more ludicrous you are in no position to call anyone a fool. You are either the biggest fool around or are advancing nonsense you recognize is nonsense but doing so for attention and economic reasons."

[nugnug]

Moore attacked me personally and posted this link saying that he had no need to debate me in any detail he would simply post a link that proves me wrong and posted a link.  This was my response:

While Moore is too scared and/or unable to discuss my points in detail I am neither a coward nor wrong so will actually discuss the points he raised though he merely did so by posting a link to what some other Dechaine supporter asserts.

Here is the heart of that link:
"Dr. Roy said rigor was passing off and, “The parameters of rigor mortis suggest probably a minimum of 30 to 36 hours and it could well be longer.”
Jurors were left to do the math.

Textbooks confirmed my understanding: rigor normally begins twelve hours after death, remains twelve hours, and passes off in another twelve hours. If Roy was correct when he added, “it could be longer,” i.e. counting further back, more than 36 hours before the autopsy, that would mean death occurred earlier.

Textbooks on forensic pathology say that was not possible.
Sarah was twelve and temperatures were near ninety that week. Textbooks tell us that rigor progresses more quickly in the old and the young, more rapidly in warm environments. That would mean the span of rigor would be shorter in this case and, by Roy‘s calculation, death came in even less than Roy‘s estimate of 30-36 hours before the autopsy i.e. later in time.

Sarah’s neck was constricted to a diameter of 2½-3 inches; life couldn’t have lingered after she was strangled.

Even Roy’s thirty to thirty-six hours before his autopsy at 4:20PM that Friday places the time of death between 4:20AM and 10:40AM Thursday."
--------


1) Roy's autopsy was at 3:20 not 4:20. 48 hours from that time is 3:20 July 6.

2) The mean temperature was 70 degrees the time Cherry's body was in the woods. It only got into the 90s the same day her body was found it was cooler the other days and it not only got cool at night it is cooler in woods than it is out of the woods. It is also cooler on the ground especially when in a shallow grave.

3) Textbooks note that rigor is generally gone 48 hours after death. In cooler climates this is longer and in very hot climates this is shorter but there is no exactness it varies according to other things than just temperature which is why there is always a time of death window given not an exact time when rigor is used. In the case of a mean temperature of 70 degrees it takes 8-12 hours for rigor to fully establish it remains in place for about 18 hours then the next 18 hours of so it passes off which is where the general 48 hours so many sources refer to comes from.

I already mentioned some of the variables. Generally people with more fat go through the process faster than people with less fat as do people who are full of liquids rather than people who have less fluids in their system. There are others which is why there are only generalizations.

So the author distorted by claiming rigor has to be gone after 36 hours from death.

4) The author also distorted Roy's testimony. At the beginning he admits Roy testified she was dead a minimum of 30-36 hours and it could have been much longer. Yet in the final sentence quoted he misrepresents that Roy said she was dead a maximum of 36 hours thus claiming even according to Roy she died at 4:20AM July 7 at the earliest. This is the typical dishonest nonsense from trial and error. When one actually looks at the claims they always fall apart.

5) Roy's unrefuted trial testimony was that Cherry died on July 6. On cross examination the defense got him to admit she could have died anytime on July 6 up till midnight. The defense failed to find any experts to testify at trial who could refute his assertion she died on July 6. If it were as clear cut as Moore and these trial and error fools claim then the trial defense would have been able to get a witness to testify that rigor could have lasted no more than 36 hours fromt he time of death and that she had to have died after the truck was found by police. The trial defense could not find anyone to assert such because there is no scientific way to assert such. There was not a mean temperature of 90 degrees as the trial and error author asserts. There is variation which the trial and error author refuses to face. The actual scientific figure is within 48 hours of death not 36.

As a result of the defense failing to refute the evidence of Roy the appeal courts always cite the TOD as July 6 when reciting the facts of the case. For instance see the federal District of Maine case.
On appeal 2 experts opinions were presented to try to prove that Cherry had to have died after the truck was picked up by police but the claims were refuted by government experts and were thus rejected by the courts. I have already explained why their claims were false and failed.

Note how I have no problem addressing things in detail while all Moore can do is post links and hide.

yes hes posting links to prove what your saying isnt true,

[scipio_usmc]

yes hes posting links to prove what your saying isnt true,

He posted a single link and I took his link apart.  You are too ignorant to realize it though.  That is no surprise you rarely demonstrate comprehension skills and actually think like him it is possible someone spied on police and waited for police to take his truck away then raped and killed her in that location.

Anyone who thinks that is possible needs to give someone else control over their finances because they will fall for any scam out there.   

[marty]

A very interesting interview on the trial and error website that supports Dennis decline. It's Dr Cyril wecht on the report he submitted
as to, and explaining the reasons, why, he thinks it couldn't have been dechaine that killed Sarah cherry.
Worth a watch.

[nugnug]

 mind you dechaine doesnt allways come over well in interviews i can see why he was convicted.

[marty]

It says the body was found 450 feet through woods from dechaines truck

[nugnug]

oh yes hang on so it does were did i get that from.

sorry i was thinking of a diffrent case then.

[nugnug]

are here we are.

http://www.trialanderrordennis.org/

[nugnug]

https://t.co/w6oybfIfPk

[nugnug]

are this was another thread that wasnt visble.