Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ~Kim4VRWC's~
Welcome! Are you a new member in general or did you join cuz of the westerfield trial threads?

WRT: the jacket and why didn't he burn it..That very thing crossed my mind too... Why didn't he just burn the green jacket or get rid of it. So we have to ask, did he know the blood was on there before he took it to the cleaner? Maybe he thuoght it was his own blood, from when he scratched up his arms??Hi "Kim4VRWC's":

Thank you for asking. I joined b/c of the Westerfield debate/discussion, mainly because Court TV was driving me mad. I find the input you and many others here provide provacative and informative. So that's why I'm here.

You can see my previous posts about the "thought it was his own blood" theory, but the "did he know the blood was on there?" question is a good one. My argument was based on the prosecution's assumption that he took it to the dry cleaner BECAUSE he wanted to clean the blood BECAUSE OF the source -- i.e., he KNEW there was blood on it.. If he took it merely to clean a stain of his own blood, then his actions are innocous at best.

I appreciate your insight because it helps balance out this board.

Stiv

421 posted on 07/13/2002 11:08:22 PM PDT by Stiv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies ]


To: Stiv
If he took it merely to clean a stain of his own blood, then his actions are innocous at best.

You know, I thought of this after my earlier reply to you! He must have been under the mistaken notion that drycleaning would destroy DNA. (JMO)

431 posted on 07/13/2002 11:38:41 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 421 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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