Stockdale an idiot in full flight..

Apart from the obvious, I'll comment on the primary difficulty Stockdale is having with that blood on the shoe and a couple of other things......first this,

Yes,as per #15173,Manlove said he obtained a DNA profile the majority of which he said could have come from Robin Bain. There was some confusion due to a media report that said that Manlove said he was not sure whether it was blood on Robin Bain's shoe,but he was talking about some smears,not those three bloodspots. As for those suicide scenarios,three did show Robin Bain's right foot tucked away where no blood spatter from his head wound could have got to.The fourth showed both his feet on the floor,but apparently airborne blood spatter would not have gone the length of his body,it would have dissipated before it reached the floor. So none of those demonstrations fit with those bloodspots on Robin Bain's right shoe.He would have had to have his foot in front of him on the chair,and that would have taken his head to far away for him to have shot himself from close contact. As I said,Bain's supporters realise this,and that is why they are now saying that the blood was from one of the children. If you have seen those photos of Robin Bain's left hand you will be aware all those marks on his hand are pretty minute.And that blood splash on his left hand fingernail would fit perfectly with him praying sitting on his beanbag with his hands resting on his cheeks,as Barbara Neasmith said that he did. I take your point about his right hand be free of marks.Robin Bain was right-handed,so that is the hand one would expect to have marks on it,had he been in a fight.But those marks on his left hand probably came from him repairing the spouting.David Bain's supporters say they happened within 12 hours of him dying,but a close reading of the transcript proves this not to be the case.Those marks could have been 24 hours old,or even older.
Edited by supersleuth at 6:54 pm, Sun 9 Jan
Quote
supersleuth (0 ) 6:50 pm, Sun 9 Jan #15177


Where Stockdale uses the word 'apparently' (in the same fashion as the idiot twin, Ralph Taylor,) he has no evidence of what he claims. He talks about the a proposed absence of injuries on Robin's right hand if he'd been in a fight, but all right handed riflemen hold the weapon in their right hand as a primary weight, capable and ready to be fired at any second by the firing hand, not the one that balances the barrel.

However, he again says that the blood on Robin's shoe couldn't have come from his death. Which is exactly the point that explains why the father shot himself - because he was the last to die and it was with the blood and brain matter of at least one of his children on his shoe.

Stockdale can't explain the spatter, apart from saying it wasn't from the father. The father cannot have had spatter from the children on his shoe if he were not their killer.

Nor can he have had blood smears on his hands. Once he was dead there was no opportunity for blood smears to somehow appear on his palms. The fact those smears were there, along with blood spatter, contusions to his hands displays that he killed his family. That evidence was not regenerated, it survived from the time of the murders-suicide.

'Apparently' Stockdale you're a complete moron and ..ckhead.