I'll give you a fair chance. So far you've shown you only believe the mummy guy and Dusek and what bits you can pull out of context to prove Dusek's self-contradictory theory. If you're truly interested in the truth, you'll show it, and I'll watch for that. I'll even say I can understand if you don't want to believe what the TOD evidence shows, as I didn't -- it's not pleasant.
Until then...
This is simply a discussion, it's NOT a contest. I've changed my mind on issues in this case, have waited before making decisions about certain issues in this case, and am still undecided on certain issues. I would suspect you are in the same boat. If you are completely decided on all issues in this case, you are very lucky..
**FREE NINJA DAVE**FREE NINJA DAVE**FREE NINJA DAVE**
Dread, look at underlined testimony..dissection occurred.
Wonders---, Indeed, his testimony changed between PH and the Trial.
PRELIMINARY HEARING
http://members.cox.net/jeneal/PrelimTranscripts/PVW311.txt
12 Q WERE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE HOW LONG SHE'D 13 BEEN DEAD? 14 A WITHIN A BROAD RANGE, YES. 15 Q HOW DID YOU MAKE THAT DETERMINATION? 16 A WELL, JUST EVALUATING THE DECOMPOSITION AND 17 THE OTHER -- THE ANIMAL ACTIVITY, REALLY. IT'S 18 CERTAINLY CONSISTENT WITH THE THREE-AND-A-HALF WEEKS 19 SHE'D BEEN MISSING.
http://members.cox.net/jeneal/PrelimTranscripts/020311p1.txt
1 Q. At what point, the 11th -- I mean how far do I go 2 before you say no, I guess is what I'm really asking? 3 A. Well, the body is decomposed and mummified. It 4 certainly has been out there weeks. I don't think it's one 5 week. I think it's more than one week. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. Two, two and a half, three, three and half. All 8 of those would be consistent.
TRIAL
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/20020605-9999-pm2.html
A. WELL, THE BODY WAS OF A YOUNG WHITE FEMALE IN A 26 STATE OF MARKED DECOMPOSITION. IN ADDITION TO THE 27 DECOMPOSITION, THERE WAS EXTENSIVE ANIMAL FEEDING ON THE BODY. 28 SO A LOT OF THE TISSUE ON THE BODY WAS MISSING. AND THE FACE 3711 1 WAS INTACT, THE SKIN WAS MUMMIFIED OR JUST DRIED, BUT THE 2 FEATURES WERE STILL QUITE RECOGNIZABLE. 3 THE HAIR WAS PRESENT AND RECOGNIZABLE AS BLONDE AND 4 FAIRLY LONG. HOWEVER, FROM BELOW THE COLLAR BONE, THE ENTIRE 5 FRONT OF THE BODY, ALL THE SKIN AND THE MUSCLE, SOME OF THE 6 MUSCLE EVEN WAS MISSING BY THE ANIMALS
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/danielle/transcripts/20020606-9999-am1.html
Q: WERE YOU ABLE TO GIVE US A BALLPARK ESTIMATE ON TIME OF DEATH FOR DANIELLE?A: WELL, JUST LOOKING AT THE BODY, IT WAS CLEAR TO ME SHE HAD BEEN DEAD FOR A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD OF TIME. AND JUST LOOKING AT THE BODY ALONE, NOT TAKING ANY CIRCUMSTANCES INTO CONSIDERATION, I WOULD SAY FROM TEN DAYS TO POSSIBLY SIX WEEKS
Q: WHY DO YOU SAY THAT, DOCTOR?A: WELL, IT WOULD TAKE A MINIMUM OF TEN DAYS OUTSIDE IN THE ENVIRONMENT TO GET THE EXTREME DEGREE OF MUMMIFICATION AND HAVE THE PUTREFACTION GO THROUGH MOST OF ITS PROCESS AND THEN SORT OF DISAPPEAR SO THAT THINGS LIKE THE LIPS WERE ALREADY, WERE NOT SWOLLEN, THEY WERE SORT OF BACK TO NOT NORMAL SIZE, BUT THEY HAD RECEDED. WE SEE THIS IN CASES WHERE BODIES ARE FOUND IN THE DESERT, FOR INSTANCE. I KNEW IT WOULD BE A MINIMUM OF TEN DAYS. AND THE MAXIMUM, WELL, THE HEART AND THE LUNGS WERE STILL IDENTIFIABLE AND, IN FACT, I WAS ABLE TO DISSECT THEM IN ALMOST A NORMAL FASHION. SO IT WASN'T A LONG TIME; IT WASN'T MONTHS. SO IT'S SUBJECTIVE. IT'S AN ESTIMATE. THAT'S MY ESTIMATE.Q: AND THAT IS FROM THE TIME OF THE AUTOPSY YOU'RE COUNTING BACK TEN DAYS OR SIX WEEKS?A: UNTIL THE TIME I EXAMINED HER ON THE SCENE BASICALLY