JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 You keep referring to the "rape kit" which is inaccurate, based on what we know. It is only the evidence bag, empty. Otherwise, I'm not paying attention to your argument above, no offense, the things we know are already intriguing enough. Just trying to help you remain accurate in whatever it is you're trying to say. I'm referring to the rape kit exam, that was performed on here (supposedly) the night of the incident. We're going on two months now. The evidence/results have already been determined, I would assume. Wasn't it announced recently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I'm referring to the rape kit exam, that was performed on here (supposedly) the night of the incident. We're going on two months now. The evidence/results have already been determined, I would assume. Wasn't it announced recently? The results have yet to be officially made available. The only thing we have are "leaks". And with how long it takes to get forensic evidence processed, it could very well have just been done this week. We don't know though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 The fact that it's just the bag makes me lean more towards intimidation instead of tampering. Watching clips of Eoannou's press conference (edited clips, so not the full press conference) make me think that too, with the way he pointed out how the bag had her name and DOB on it. This is admittedly pure rampant speculation on my part, but that's where I am right now. It is going to be an interesting next couple of days for this story.How does the empty bag "intimidate" the alleged victim? Or more accurately, how would any Kane "supporter" be stupid enough to think it would? (Waiting for the inevitable S Buffalo joke/knock here.) Wouldn't something like this happening tick her & her team off and strengthen her resolve? (She appears to be strong-willed and level thinking to this casual observer.) It definitely on first hearing of it seems to support the prosecution given the earlier leak, so what benefit does the defense gain from this attempt at intimidation? If this bag turned up after the leak of the "no DNA" except on shoulder/ under fingernails, wouldn't this (taking the bag to the alleged victim's mother's house) be something that might have been done by a supporter of hers? (As this definitely leads to questioning of the validity of the tests among the potential juror pool.) If the bag was found prior to the leak, then it would make more sense for it to be from a knucklehead supporting Kane; but why wouldn't that info have been brought to light sooner? Apparently law enforcement believes the custody chain remained intact. Has any outside observer corroborated that? If chain of custody was broken, when did it occur? Would go a way towards indicating which side this event bolsters. Curiouser & curiouser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 The results have yet to be officially made available. The only thing we have are "leaks". And with how long it takes to get forensic evidence processed, it could very well have just been done this week. We don't know though. I would have to assume after more than six weeks that the lab would have received the evidence and have already completed testing. I'm not sure how the mother ended up with an empty evidence bag, but if the results have already been determined I'm sure they have been recorded and stored. In that case, an empty evidence bag isn't going to sway the story one way or the other. What is highly confusing is how and why she ended up with the evidence bag. Like I said earlier, there are way too many holes in this story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I would have to assume after more than six weeks that the lab would have received the evidence and have already completed testing. I'm not sure how the mother ended up with an empty evidence bag, but if the results have already been determined I'm sure they have been recorded and stored. In that case, an empty evidence bag isn't going to sway the story one way or the other. What is highly confusing is how and why she ended up with the evidence bag. Like I said earlier, there are way too many holes in this story. I think I just figured out where you lost everyone earlier. You're referring to the evidence bag story, not the victim's story. Bringing up the victim's story and then switching directions back to this one was disjointed. Forensic testing takes a long time to do unfortunately. Most forensics offices are really backed up, sometimes 6 months to a year behind. That they've already done an analysis is amazing and speaks to the high profile of the case. The significance of the bag may depend on who delivered it and who is familiar with the process. If the rape kit bag showed signs of being opened in an unusual manner, that might raise suspicion of tampering, which someone in the position of a lab tech might be strong-armed into ignoring by their superiors. Lots of hypotheticals here that might make "just the bag" a significant item. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 So IF she went to the hospital, the proper authorities would be in possession of all evidence and there wouldn't be any chance of tampering. As this Tweet clearly indicates. Thereby making her attorney's claim bogus. Evidence just doesn't find its way from possession of the county to the mother's home. So then maybe she did not go to the hospital? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 We know nothing. We are all Jon Snow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I'm referring to the rape kit exam, that was performed on here (supposedly) the night of the incident. We're going on two months now. The evidence/results have already been determined, I would assume. Wasn't it announced recently? Why supposedly? What do you mean by that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I think I just figured out where you lost everyone earlier. You're referring to the evidence bag story, not the victim's story. Bringing up the victim's story and then switching directions back to this one was disjointed. Forensic testing takes a long time to do unfortunately. Most forensics offices are really backed up, sometimes 6 months to a year behind. That they've already done an analysis is amazing and speaks to the high profile of the case. The significance of the bag may depend on who delivered it and who is familiar with the process. If the rape kit bag showed signs of being opened in an unusual manner, that might raise suspicion of tampering, which someone in the position of a lab tech might be strong-armed into ignoring by their superiors. Lots of hypotheticals here that might make "just the bag" a significant item. Assuming this is a legitimate claim from her attorney, I'd like to know why the evidence bag had yet to be delivered after close to two months. And if it already had been delivered to a lab, why was is re-delivered to a private address? You mentioned an analysis had already taken place, why was the evidence bag re-delivered elsewhere? It would seem to me that the evidence would have one destination, and one destination only. To a lab where the evidence is to be secured. Just when you think there couldn't be any more 'what ifs'............................... this just gets crazier by the day. So then maybe she did not go to the hospital? Perhaps...... If she didn't go to the hospital that would only diminish the legitimacy of her claim without substantial evidence. Who else would she have gone to besides her own doctor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I'm referring to the rape kit exam, that was performed on here (supposedly) the night of the incident. We're going on two months now. The evidence/results have already been determined, I would assume. Wasn't it announced recently? Hence the IF I've been referring to. Since/if she went to the hospital, there is evidence either supporting her case, or not supporting her case. Somebody is in possession of said evidence (or results). Whatever, and however this rape kit made it to the mother's house has no bearing on the evidence that does exist. Wherever that may be. If I'm missing something, please let me know. Supposedly and IF what? Tell me specifically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Why supposedly? What do you mean by that? I say 'supposedly' because it has been inferred since day one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I say 'supposedly' because it has been inferred since day one. So then logically you are inferring it could not have occurred? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Supposedly and IF what? Tell me specifically. I really don't know where you're going with this. So then logically you are inferring it could not have occurred? Again, I have no idea where you're going with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I really don't know where you're going with this. I am trying to understand your point. So then logically you are inferring it could not have occurred (the hospital visit and rape kit that night)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 I am trying to understand your point. So then logically you are inferring it could not have occurred (the hospital visit and rape kit that night)? I'm not inferring one way or the other whether a hospital visit occurred. We've been given the impression that one did occur since a rape kit exam was performed. At the very least, a visit to her family doctor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 and there would be my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Taro, I think of it as someone loosely affiliated with Kane dropping the bag as a "I know who you are and where you live" comment. So that wouldn't necessarily be directly from Kane and his camp, but possibly a supporter as you suggested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Taro, I think of it as someone loosely affiliated with Kane dropping the bag as a "I know who you are and where you live" comment. So that wouldn't necessarily be directly from Kane and his camp, but possibly a supporter as you suggested. OK. Thanks. That would make sense as an attempt at intimidation. (Still think it would/will backfire if that's what it was; but that is plausible.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 OK. Thanks. That would make sense as an attempt at intimidation. (Still think it would/will backfire if that's what it was; but that is plausible.) Yeah, anyone who would be going the intimidation route here wouldn't be the brightest tool in the shed... Or is it the sharpest bulb in the box. I always get those mixed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 and there would be my point. That's also been my point all along. I fail to see the confusion from post 2089. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 That's also been my point all along. I fail to see the confusion from post 2089. Let's look at post 2089 http://forums.sabrespace.com/topic/23551-patrick-kane-under-police-investigation-in-hamburg-ny/?p=729686 You are suggesting that she may not have gone to the hospital, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Let's look at post 2089 http://forums.sabrespace.com/topic/23551-patrick-kane-under-police-investigation-in-hamburg-ny/?p=729686 You are suggesting that she may not have gone to the hospital, correct? No. I was suggesting that authorities would have (should have) evidence from the rape kit if she went to the hospital. I used the term 'if' and not 'since' because nobody knows for sure that she actually went. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 No. I was suggesting that authorities would have (should have) evidence from the rape kit if she went to the hospital. I used the term 'if' and not 'since' because nobody knows for sure that she actually went. Which is the weird part to me. No one anywhere has disputed that she did go to the hospital but you insist on qualifying it. That seems out of place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 Which is the weird part to me. No one anywhere has disputed that she did go to the hospital but you insist on qualifying it. That seems out of place. The main focus of my point wasn't whether or not she went to the hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 23, 2015 Report Share Posted September 23, 2015 The main focus of my point wasn't whether or not she went to the hospital. true but why even qualify it at all? No one anywhere has disputed she left Kane's and went to the hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.