cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Sion Jenkins on Tonight with Sir Trevor - what did you think?
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
Al Blood on his clothes is explained by he having been bending over her when he discovered her. There would have been more blood on him if he was the murderer.

The weapon being on his property is hardly surprising as that is where the murder took place.

Her DNA being on him - same explanation as the blood. Plus the fact that they lived together and had been in regular close contact.

Body language can be confused by nervous unrest. Anyone placed in his situation would display uncomfortable body language.

None of this so called evidence is sufficient to prove that he was guilty.
andrew I personally think he is quilty but I don't want to say any allegations etc but there many clues that for me he is probably guilty.

Blood on his clothes, bin liners outside the house near she was attacked, the weapon used was on his own property, some of her DNA was on him, when he was interviewed his body language implied that he is lying.

I've studied body language so I know that sometimes someone is lying.

So many clues but so little evidence - still I was pleased he got some years in custody
Al ... witnesses had been paid several thousand pounds each to testify against Rose West at her trial, and the judge permitted their "evidence" despite this obvious media sponsorship. This doesn't automatically mean she wasn't guilty, but it does discredit the entire trial process and leaves me asking serious questions about the system.
mikemacca Imagine your local vicar or doctor having a false charge against them,e.g. some 20 stone woman believing her 29 year old handsome doctor tried it on with her...I guarantee you'd find another 10 in the parish who'd say "oh yes he tried it with me as well".Any moment of sympathy would be turned into a "come-on". It's human nature, within the lesser intelligent members of society, to actually believe their own lies.The truth gets lost.
JK2006 As the Police knew well... what other reason was there for their conduct?
Trawl By Media.