lying....
Here's a photo from a paper which he said didn't exist, there are probably others. Here is the pose that Stockdale says can't have happened, the right hand reaching the silencer which Stockdale said couldn't happen. In fact there were a number of poses demonstrated all of which Dr Dempster said were feasible to the presumption that Robin had suicided.
A small note to Jeeves and other idiots, that describe the suicide couldn't have taken place unaided by an assistant. Note, Joe Karam, properly standing away - showing the absurdity once again promoted by the hate-sites that the Judge would have allowed any assistance demonstrating the actual suicide. The only assistance Karam gave at any point was with a microphone, assisting with placing the rifle barrel on the skull cap rod which was in fact a Crown exhibit, and to overcome the encumbrance of movement the skull cap and trajectory rod created for the model - Robin had no such encumbrance he was able to shoot himself straight into his left temple, unworried of course by the need to show trajectory, or the blood smears already on his palms and the high speed spatter already on his shoe and probably totally unaware or concerned that his own blood and brain matter would be vacuumed back into the barrel.
Maybe Stockdale doesn't realise that people can bend their arms at the elbows. From that photo it's plain that Robin could have most easily held the rifle in his left hand at point of balance as he got into position to shoot himself.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'd like to know is why Stockdale and his mates lie about such obvious evidence. Is the man certifiable? I saw he said earlier to disregard Sanderson's evidence in favour of what Clark said. Doesn't the man understand that Sanderson's evidence was part of that withheld from the first jury and was a major part of the construction of the Miscarriage of Justice that the Privy Council ruled upon?
Yes, he could have easily manoeuvered the rifle with either hand into position before using his left hand to push down the trigger. I don't think he could bring himself to fire into his forehead or mouth, a death too intimate for a holy man. I use to ask the stalker wanakafan if he believed Robin flinched at the last second, I think he did, then the impact of the shot took over.
ReplyDeleteI put the picture up to show what Stockdale and Taylor claimed couldn't happen, in fact happened.
the picture also shows something else that should (but probably won't) make Mike Stockdale stop and think a bit about the rubbish he is repetitively posting. If (in the demonstration) he moved his right foot slightly to the left in that pose, it would explain fully all of the blood splashes both on Robin's pants and the right shoe. It also shows how Robin got the blood smears on the inside of his right hand, steadying the gun.
ReplyDeleteTo 'watching Stockdale'
ReplyDeleteWhy do they lie? Probably they don't realise they are lying. Stockdale has made no secret of the fact that he has been phoning witnesses in the trial, but those he claims he has phoned include Weir and Hentschel - Dempster wasn't forthcoming. So any information he has obtained will be a tad one-sided. It's noticeable that as he reads the transcript he has become less absolute, and is having to work hard to make everything fit with his prior judgement of guilt. Just a late onlooker repeating the error. Certifiable? Doubt it. Prejudiced? certainly.
Replying to anonymous. Yes that is correct, fairly comprehensive explanation.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it's not critically important, I'm struggling with the spatter on the shoe, scientifically it was described as high speed spatter and occluded from coming from Robin's wound. It was said to come from the same event, unfortunately I can't connect the blood drops (spill) and high speed spatter occluded as coming from the temple wound to the 'same' event. I would have liked Manlove to have been asked a couple more questions on the matter, perhaps he was but I'm unaware of it to this point.
Replying to watcher....
ReplyDeleteSome of them lie because they don't care, others find themselves forced to lie in light of the actual evidence rather than what was found on the hate-sites and disseminated before and during the trial. If you believed some of that stuff, and weren't a person interested in the truth, but rather someone that needed to be right, it would be difficult to change course.
Yes certainly Stockdale is less certain. When (if he was) reporting what Hentschel said, he was absolutely lying as the released evidence later showed. He and Taylor were calling it mythological.
Stockdale fits in that small catagory of people we would generally call know it alls. There is probably a lot that he does know from experience, but crime and methodology of crime, plus the law and investigation, indeed logic is beyond him as he has demonstrated many times. When he reaches an impasse he simply makes something up, draws a conclusion he's unqualified to make or brings up Mrs Clark or some other nonsense about the glasses. I see Beyond this morning has reported that he was trying to pass off reproductions of the footprints as the real thing.
What he has achieved however is strong assistance in collapsing the hate-sites and also showing (and continues to show) the cauldron of hate from whence the defamation began in an orchestrated way.