Replies

I certainly don't want to argue with the Schindlers but their account

"When Bobby arrived at their place," Bob explained, "he found Terri lying face down in the hallway, with her feet over the threshold of the doorway, as though she had been coming out of the bedroom. Her hands were clutched around her throat, and her breathing was gurgling. Michael was sitting on the couch in the living room; he was a total basket case."

And Michael's

He went out into the hall, he said, and saw Terri lying in the hallway. She was, he said, unconscious....Michael claimed that he was holding Terri in his arms when Bobby arrived.

don't agree with the police report

She was found with her head facing east out into a hallway and her feet and legs pointing west on the bathroom floor.

You would need to review the original statements of all concerned before you could argue about the placement of the body. Even the police report I read was not the original. It stated that the inititial report was on microfilm but was barely readable, so they gave a new report from memory and/or notes.

I don't have a problem believing the Schindlers...with minor changes (depending on the reporting) their story is very consistent. Michael can't seem to remember what story he told last and keeps changing. What troubles me is that even the official records aren't original.

According to the officer who reproduced the report(who was one of the responding oficers), it is absolutely accurate as to the details of the original report. He stated it was easily readable on the microfilm screen but illegible in printed form.

" The quality of the microfilm onto which the report was transferred has degenerated; the report can be read on the microfilm screen but it is largely unreadable in printed form. Due to the circumstances of this case, I have reproduced the report in its entirety so the record can be preserved. This new entry is absolutely accurate as to the content of the narrative, which could be easily read on the microfilm screen. The captions are also easily readable on the microfilm screen and they, too, were reproduced accurately as to content. Only small. technical aspects of the captions are different because the report writing format has changed since 1990."

What I would like to know is why it was reproduced by this officer on October 22, 2003??? Did somebody ask for it to be done? That would have been around the time that the feeding tube was re-inserted, right?