Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

decepta-scott wrote:SHADOWMAN why dont you show me this "reason" of which you speak?

That you might be wrong. For every piece of evidence, you act like it didn't exist, doesn't count, or it's meaningless. I'm not saying "Shut up and accept they're innocent" I'm saying "Open your mind to the possibility they might be innocent."

decepta-scott wrote:Had you taken time to read the posts that you scrutinize you may have known that.

I didn't scrutinize anything. In fact, if you read my post, you'd see I admitted that I skimmed your posts. That's the opposite of scrutiny.

decepta-scott wrote: DEAD METAL Perhaps I should have been more specific. The s.t.d. thats only contracted through intercourse with a corpse in infact an urban ledgend. As for the rest of the story who knows. You say it happened and I cannot refuet it although bodys are generally taken straight from the funeral home to the cemetary with all the family and friens following (youve never seen a funeral precession on the road?) to be blessed and comitted to the earth at the final gathering. All that happens right away with no time inbetween.
The casket is also locked tight and the key turned over to the next of kin following the ceromony.
If the man who was guilty was always by his wifes side as uou say then when would he have time to sneak away to get the body, how would he have the key?
I guess it is POSSIBLE if the funeral went wildly different tht others go but I just thought Id give you some food for thought.
And I never said I didnt see how the story had anything to do with the w.m.3. case at all, I said I didnt see how your story proved the sagnifigance of a hair as it pertains to the w.m.3 case.

Have you forgotten that I'm German? You know not everyone does stuff the same way as you in the US do, and the way it's done varies form region to region, even within the US.
Just food for thought.

We bring the body, especially here in a small village, to the cemetery and put it in the cemetery building. It's almost like a church, only it's never used for any ceremony other than funerals. Then everyone gathers at the church, which is quite a bit away in this village, there a special sermon is held after which everyone walks to the cemetery, while the priest gives blessings.
Then the building is opened and everyone gets to look at the corpse to say their farewells, then the casket is closed and carried to its grave.

The thing is, he removed the corpse after putting it in the building. While his wife went to the Church, he stayed behind and removed it from the casket, hid it somewhere and went to the church.

He never said why he killed her, only that he did and that he took her from the casket and had sex with her.

I have no idea if that with the STD is true or not, but that was the answer I got to how they found out about where the corpse was, I can only repeat what I've been told.


Also, forensic evidence trumps circumstantial evidence. The hair was found at a spot where it could only have gotten if the owner of the hair tied those knots.


Also an explanation to what reason means.

I also believe that the back an forth you went through and the research you did was done on sites and sources that are super biassed. Kinda like researching black people by reading KKK websites.

Actually dead metal most of the research I have done was on the three documentarys made by the defence for the defense of the three and verbatum court transcripts. The fact is the hair COULD HAVE GOTTEN THERE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. You should read a post or two before you give an unresearched response.
Im wondering also what trouble one must have had removing carrying arround and ultimately having relations with a stiff embalmed corpse.........

Shadow man there exists, for the UMPTEENTH time no evidence save a hair which could be tthere via secondary transfer and a "weird" acting father. THATS ALL. What you say of me goes DOUBLE for sympathetic reader. Id wager you have a hard time getting her to say they could be guilty. And yes you did scrutinize me and my posts in addition to admitting you know nil of the case and didnt read my posts..

Can someone please close this?
It's becoming seriously irritating.

Va'al wrote:Can someone please close this?
It's becoming seriously irritating.

Excuse me??? Heres what ya do sport. Dont click the link to this thread and ya dont have to read it. VIOLA!!!!
FYI No rules are being broken, noone is calling names and theres no reason to close the thread.
Again if you dont wanna read it then DONT CLICK THE LINK.

decepta-scott wrote:And yes you did scrutinize me and my posts in addition to admitting you know nil of the case and didnt read my posts..

"Scrutinize" and "did not read" are two very different concepts. I'm surprised you didn't know that.

decepta-scott wrote:

Va'al wrote:Can someone please close this?
It's becoming seriously irritating.

Excuse me??? Heres what ya do sport. Dont click the link to this thread and ya dont have to read it. VIOLA!!!!
FYI No rules are being broken, noone is calling names and theres no reason to close the thread.
Again if you dont wanna read it then DONT CLICK THE LINK.

You are calling people liars.
Namely, Dead Metal.
How? He has been as clear as possible in his counter-arguments, and you have responded by saying:

decepta-scott wrote:As for the rest of the story who knows. You say it happened and I cannot refute it although...

And then used a US-centric description of how funerals happen.

This, to a post where he told you not his opinion, but relayed some facts that affected him personally.


I seriously try not reading the responses in this thread, but I am interested in the topic, despite my efforts not to get worked up by board-arguing.

Also, it's 'voilà'.

SHADOWMAN it wasnt the fact that u admitted to not reading my posts or not knowing anything of this case that was scrutinous. It was the part where you say i should think a different way that was scrutinous.

VAAL try and understand this now. Dead metal information on an std that is only contracted through sex with a courpse was infact wrong. Dosent it stand to reason then that more of the info given to him could also be wrong? I never called him a liar. He was repeating what he was told. I simply asked questions. Theres nothing wrong with that.

DEAD METAL I havnt forgotten that things are done differently and infact said that was a possibility did i not? I would like to point out that you said the body was not used for any ceromony other than the wake and then go on to explain how there Was A ceromony.

This has gotten a bit from topic my friends. Id like to steer back to the subject that was supposed to be discussed if we could.

decepta-scott wrote: DEAD METAL I havnt forgotten that things are done differently and infact said that was a possibility did i not? I would like to point out that you said the body was not used for any ceromony other than the wake and then go on to explain how there Was A ceromony.

The only info I was given second hand was the one with the STD, the rest is first hand and or from the local newspapers.

Also, let me explain it again, the body is put into the casket, which is left in the building.

Then everybody goes to the church for the ceremony, goes back, say their farewells and then it's put into the ground.

Ergo, the body is not used for any ceremony.

decepta-scott wrote:SHADOWMAN it wasnt the fact that u admitted to not reading my posts or not knowing anything of this case that was scrutinous. It was the part where you say i should think a different way that was scrutinous.

First off, that's not what scrutiny means.

scru·ti·ny
   [skroot-n-ee]
noun, plural -nies.
1.
a searching examination or investigation; minute inquiry.
2.
surveillance; close and continuous watching or guarding.
3.
a close and searching look.

Second, yes, you should think a different way. I'm not saying switch your position entirely, just open yourself up to the possibility that your position is wrong.