- Dec 27, 2016
- 26,867
- 56,856
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You've done it again - you're looking for conclusive proof when a conviction is based on proof beyond reasonable doubt. If a conviction relied on conclusive proof there'd be a hell of a lot of criminals walking the streets. In court, an expert has to prove he or she is an expert so it's not just a case of he said she said.Not saying that. Whatever I think is irrelevant anyway.
In my defence thou these were well researched and put together.
A trial does omit certain facts. To a point also it's not an undertaking for truth but an adversarial contest. You put your side I put mine and some voters (the jury) can determine what version of the truth they accept. (not like the jury are spectators at the event they are making decisions on evidence presented).
What is weird about this case is you can not conclusively say what happened and prove enough elements to be certain. Where as in other cases you can easily establish a chain of events saying
Event a happened leading to be and c and here is the concrete evidence that pinpoints each fact and establishes a chain. This case to me is a bunch of circumstance and assumption thrown together, which may be correct but hardly engenders confidence.
You've done it again - you're looking for conclusive proof when a conviction is based on proof beyond reasonable doubt. If a conviction relied on conclusive proof there'd be a hell of a lot of criminals walking the streets. In court, an expert has to prove he or she is an expert so it's not just a case of he said she said.
The DNA will show whatever the prosecution wants it to show.honestly the red rooster explanation would not create reasonable doubt in my mind, perhaps if they could show they found DNA from 20 other people at RR who she brushed shoulders with?
The information came in a letter from Anonymous.
http://honey.nine.com.au/2017/04/20/05/25/peter-falconio-letter
'Anonymous' or an anonymous person?The information came in a letter from Anonymous.
http://honey.nine.com.au/2017/04/20/05/25/peter-falconio-letter
Anonymous person, but an Australian ex-pat now living in London so I guess every journo in GB is trying to track him down. Or they will just continue making stuff up.
Apologies for not thanking you earlier for correcting me previously regarding Murdoch admitting he was at servo. Thankyou.Named and image in the press so, meet Roman Heinze the Salt Creek attacker and the photofit of Peter Falconio's murderer. #Uncanny.
View attachment 369279 View attachment 369280
Apologies for not thanking you earlier for correcting me previously regarding Murdoch admitting he was at servo. Thankyou.
Look a lot alike I agree. Still believe Murdoch was rightfully convicted. JMHO
Named and image in the press so, meet Roman Heinze the Salt Creek attacker and the photofit of Peter Falconio's murderer. #Uncanny.
View attachment 369279 View attachment 369280
2) Does this guy have a dog and Was there even a dog at all?
The top pic looks more like Murdoch. However, I think we're all better off with both of them behind bars so let it be
If I had to pic a person from Murdoch or Heinze from the pic on left I would go Heinze. The jaw structure is interestingly close for me. The upper body shape. Murdoch ( to me) seemed more doughy
Witness says Murdoch didn't do it but more interesting this snippet.
"New laws introduced by the Northern Territory Government mean he won't be released, unless he tells police where Falconio's body is."
http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...rdoch-didn-t-do-it-.html#sthash.WxYRvP7g.dpuf
Obscene.