breaking news.............

as i asked before, what is everything!?

The fishing trip and the hair and cement dust? That doesnt make someone a murderer. All you need is a reasonable doubt, and there is so much reasonable doubt in this case.

Remember, it was 1 single hair and TRACE amounts of cement..dust. Its not like there was a big glob of cement and a lock of hair sitting in the boat.

 

do you think someone committing a murder would be that stupid to leave traces of hair in the boat to begin with?? Im sure there wouldnt be a lock of hair in the boat, I mean that would be obvious for him to find and dispose of. or would he leave big globs of cement in the boat?? come on now.

 

You got some kind of perverted crush on this guy?

 

Well, he IS very handsome Wait!! that sounds like I like him and I don't!

 

are you 12 years old?

 

so by your logic, I can just murder someone by giving them rat poison, or gassing them to death, or kill them with a pillow, or any strangulation without physical evidence, and dump their body in a lake or pond, and not have any form of murder weapon anywhere on the boat or near the pond or in the home, and not have any traces of blood in the boat, or large amounts of hair in the boat, that I could get off scott free from a murder because there is no overwhelming physical evidence that I killed that person?? wow, I would love to live in that society.

 

How can you convict a person of murder based on 1 hair...that can be transported on a persons body

How can you convict a person of a murder based on dust. Its not uncommon to keep cement in your garage..i have cement.

You honestly dont think there is reasonable doubt in this case?

 

It's well known that women fall for men on trial for their lives all the time.

 

They can tell if you're killed by rat poison..or gassed to death..or by being smothered to death.

Do you not understand that RAT POISON would be hte murder weapon?

They dont know what killed lacie/conor.

 

That's hilarious. Do you really think that there should be a limit to how small a piece of evidence can be? Would one finger print be enough, or do we need the whole hand print? Cement is cement. I doubt he would be stupid enough to leave a big blob of it laying around.

 

In my next life when i have a set of boobs, i'll remember that.

 

thats exactly what I said!!!!!!!!!!

 

Doesn't mean you didn't fall for him, dude.

 

ok you tell me how they can tell if a person was smothered to death by a pillow.

 

please..a finger print is unique..to compare them is insane.

1 piece of hair...do you honestly not think it could have been carried on his shirt to the boat? I go off all the time and find pieces of dog hair/gf hair on my clothes. It hardly proves anything.

Dust, yeah, we know dust doesnt accumulate in places we dont want it too

 

Grow up, goodbye.

 

You're the one having a tantrum over this.

 

what am i a coroner? They can tell if a person has been asphyxiated to death.

Are you really stretching this bad to go from the peterson trial to some weird random hypothetical that you made up? Stick to the peterson case, not your fantasy land, please.

 

all I am saying is that you are ignorant in thinking that people can get off scott free because there isnt overwhelming physical evidence that someone murdered another person. this guy had a motive. he has no alibi. lets say a loved one of yours was murdered, and because they didnt have any physical evidence whatsover that person was acquitted of the crime?? even though the person had a motive and no alibi??

 

There isnt any overwhelming evidence AT ALL..not direct or circumstantial evidence.

What, that he had an affair? Most people who have affairs dont kill their significant other! Thats not a motive. It makes him an easy target.

Does that make him a murderer?

This is the problem. You are asking me a question that plays off my emotions. Emotion has NO place in a criminal case.