tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post2324189062563224577..comments2024-03-20T18:05:50.971+13:00Comments on NOSTALGIA-NZ: Scott Watson innocent in Kiwi language.Nostalgia-NZhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-88255566338711261992016-10-13T15:00:30.735+13:002016-10-13T15:00:30.735+13:00I agree. But I see a way forward. There are a mini...I agree. But I see a way forward. There are a minimum of 3 outstanding murder cases where the convictions are questionable. Starting, Tamihere, Watson and Lundy. All these convictions coincide with an out of touch Appeal Court which had 3 out 3 convictions overturned by the Privy Council.<br /><br />Putting Tamihere aside because it is currently before the Court with an explosive potential possibly worse reading that the PC Judgements in Bain, Pora and Lundy.<br /><br />Focusing only on Watson and Lundy, both of these cases, like many of the others, have evident forensic evidence shortcomings. The tests by Miller break all the forensic rules yet only 1 appeal Court Judge appreciated that. The hair evidence in Watson said to be that which holds the case together is absolutely abysmal as is shown above. I think both men have to concentrate on what is claimed to be the strongest evidence against them to show that not only were the forensics disciplines applied woeful and amateurish but that forensic standards are much improved now and that the Crown case can no longer rest on its laurels, all the forensic testing procedure need to be reevaluated according to current standards - and if coming up short retested using all the new protocols adopted in Jurisdictions such as Britain and America. If the Government and The Crown believe in their science then let it be tested again. Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-14842301085501733902016-10-13T14:35:00.072+13:002016-10-13T14:35:00.072+13:00After the last question I replied that 'the co...After the last question I replied that 'the counts should have happened,' that is after each 'search' of the hairs. The Questioner responded as follows:<br /><br />I doubt if they were that thorough.The standard of forensic testing in this country is appalling .Like the report by Dr Walsh on the Robin Bain thumb marks- just utterly ridiculous.Yet the whole system relies on them, people’s lives get shattered because of some poor lab procedure.Questionernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-44371081445191316582016-10-13T13:17:11.231+13:002016-10-13T13:17:11.231+13:00Now the questioner asks a very obvious question th...Now the questioner asks a very obvious question that may not have been thought of previously:<br /><br />'If the hair examiner has notes from the 1st count and 2nd count which shows that the counts were the same, then if the 3rd count is also the same, except for the addition of 2 blonde hairs, then that would pretty much prove that contamination of the evidence has occurred.'Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-58563887162025423102016-10-12T22:31:06.966+13:002016-10-12T22:31:06.966+13:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-32523692723340667302016-10-12T22:29:42.865+13:002016-10-12T22:29:42.865+13:00I wish she would, or at least agree that her testi...I wish she would, or at least agree that her testing methods, and safety of those against contamination, while being accepted at the time don't pass muster these days because of current recognised contamination hazards. I'd like to know how it was taken off the yacht and how it was transported.Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-28771485000397572422016-10-12T22:18:32.186+13:002016-10-12T22:18:32.186+13:00Here's a response from the original questioner...Here's a response from the original questioner. <br /><br />'Ok, so not off the blanket, but out of an evidence bag.<br />Sorry but all I have is more questions….<br /><br /> What was the inventory of hairs at the 1st count, the 2nd count and the 3rd count ?<br />What was her method for counting them?eg did she put them into little groups of 10 for easy counting? Did she put them into groups by color? Did the the other hair colors also change in number at each count ? Was count 1 the same as count 2 ?<br /> Was the only difference between count 3 and 2, the addition of the blonde hairs ?<br />How did she empty the evidence bag to ensure that all the hairs had come out.Did she thoroughly check that the bag was empty each time she did a count?<br />Did she wear a hair net to stop her own hairs getting into the mix?<br />Did everybody else in the room also wear a hairnet?<br />How big was the counting table? What color was it? What light did she use?Was a fan or air conditioning operational or windows open at the time ?Was there a lot of other hustle & bustle in the room at the time of counting?Any photographs of the lab ?<br />Was there an inventory of hairs from the bag with the slit in it ?If so did anybody check if it was missing 2 hairs ?<br /><br />I guess only the forensic scientist could answer these .'<br />Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-39651232146473601852016-10-12T16:13:40.123+13:002016-10-12T16:13:40.123+13:00To answer your questions only 1 thing needs to be ...To answer your questions only 1 thing needs to be said. The blanket was not where the blond hairs were found.All hairs were removed from the blanket and placed in an evidence bag early in the investigation. The blond hairs were 'found' when the bag was once again (the third time) emptied on the bench and the hairs searched through, that was on the bench that hair from Olivia's hair brush had been examined on that same day.onlookerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12325067865429740022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-36619782256070196332016-10-12T06:37:56.761+13:002016-10-12T06:37:56.761+13:00Some questions from a correspondent. Anyone know t...Some questions from a correspondent. Anyone know the answers, or the details of the search of The Blade.<br /><br />'A few questions spring to mind ….<br />How many total hairs did she find in the first search vs the second search vs the 3rd search.<br />Were the blonde hairs found together or were they on different parts of the blanket?<br />What was her method for collecting hairs from the blanket? For example did she divide the blanket into grids and use an eyeglass of some sort to find the hairs?Did she photograph the hairs on the blanket before removing them?Were other hairs also found on the blanket during her 3rd search?Where was the blanket stored between searches ? Why did she allow the plastic bag containing hairs from the brush to get anywhere near the blanket? Long blonde hairs would surely stand out on the blanket compared to the many short dark hairs that she found, what is her explanation for missing them in the first 2 searches.<br />It all seems so dodgy to me.'Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-72115027754019003072016-10-05T22:38:29.687+13:002016-10-05T22:38:29.687+13:00I know who I believe.I know who I believe.Nostalgia-NZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048029433699816931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4909488748140942076.post-63320391973256736192016-10-05T19:25:30.409+13:002016-10-05T19:25:30.409+13:00Hey. They believed the secret witnesses but didn&#...Hey. They believed the secret witnesses but didn't believe the honest members of the public?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com