Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: nickcarraway

All the evidence against him is circumstantial though there appears to be 3 circumstances and 3 testimonies of other young women that put together paint a pretty ugly picture.

There were tire tracks near the body drop that matched the police cruiser and those tires were somewhat unique. They were given to the cops by a tire shop because snow/mud tires had been accidentally delivered and the shop figured they would not sell in Florida.

There were hand and palm prints from the victim in a pattern that indicated she was sitting forward on the hood of the police cruiser but nobody saw her in this position prior to the cop “sending her home” and there were witnesses for the entire interaction before she got into his cruiser. There also is a 1 hour communication gap in his patrol which was apparently not customary, and three women indicated he had picked them up in his patrol car and attempted to engage them in sexual activity, one of them assenting.

Less convincing to me was a hair comparison was made between the cop and evidence on the victim. The FBI said it was a likely match but their word should always be suspect. The comparison technique is no longer used though I don’t know if it was inaccurate or if modern dna tests rendered it moot.


7 posted on 04/01/2026 1:23:18 PM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: RightOnTheBorder

The defense argued to keep the DNA out of the case over 20 years ago. Now that they have nothing to lose, they want the DNA tested. It’s a hail Mary move to delay execution. The DNA will match Duckett.

It’s a shame he wasn’t executed decades ago. The trial evidence was conclusive. Ducketts changing story to fit the evidence only confirmed his guilt. It’s a shame we allow the perp to delay execution in a case where the perp is clearly guilty.


8 posted on 04/01/2026 1:34:33 PM PDT by TheDon (Remember the J6 political prisoners! Remember Ashli Babbitt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Circumstantial evidence is the majority of evidence in most trials. Non-circumstantial, or direct evidence, is that which is proffered as testamentary.


11 posted on 04/01/2026 3:30:46 PM PDT by Thommas (The snout of the camel is already under the tent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson