More Closing Arguments

General point that due to the publicity, some witnesses doubted David, leading to arguments.
( Scott Shrank )

(Don)
One of the core principles of the scientific method is the ability to reproduce results via validly conducted experiments. And notably, since we know have confirmation of blood on the bottom of David’s shoe . . . as many here have postulated, why wasn’t at least some of that “transferred” to his truck IF he “returned” to the gym to continue his B-Ball deception?

https://twitter.com/davidcamm_gb/status/383341004557778944

Note: is the adverse press coverage from 3rd October in evidence?

Boney’s Parole Officer , will he be a witness? ( see DKE )

We and the jury now know how unfairly David was portrayed in the press on October 3 2000, with David’s aunt (Deborah Van Tee)’s statement about three gunshots being completely reversed.

Michael West, incarcerated with #DavidCamm & Jeremy Bullock–inmate who testified Camm confessed to him.

West is serving life sentence. Tells jury Jeremy Bullock had cell next to him and told him he planned to lie in testimony against #DavidCamm

West: Bullock said he was a cop. He didn’t like cops. “I’ve got 10 more yrs to do. I’ll try anything to get out.”
West denies expecting anything. Says testifying because what Bullock did “isn’t right.” Says lies are reason he’s behind bars.

Also
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20131001/NEWS02/310010062/David-Camm-trial-Inmate-testifies-other-inmate-lied-get-out-prison

external image 885226_10202155099668934_1367036613_o.jpg

http://www.wdrb.com/story/23672815/david-camm-blog-camms-sister-speaks

From
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=549548311788318&set=gm.10151692661737135&type=1

There is a significant fact that the prosecution simply ignored – why I’m not sure other than to hypothesize that (a) it was a fact that was inconsistent with David’s guilt; (b) it was a fact that supported Bonehead’s guilt; and more telling, (c) it would have opened the door to Bonehead’s foot fetish even more. BUT, the fact remains, just as the gorilla video is in evidence, so is this.
From the autopsy and ME’s testimony, injuries to Kim’s feet:

• top of right 3rd toe

• top of right 4th toe
• top of right foot
• top of left 5th toe
• top of left 2nd toe
• top of left great toe
• top of left foot
“Of particular interest was the fact that the tops of both feet had bruising and cuts worse then any other injury other than the gunshot wound itself. It was as though her feet and toes, which had chipped, partial nail polish, had themselves been a target of the assailant’s attack, possibly by being stomped with a hard sole shoe. As with a lot of other evidence, however, the attacks on her feet were ignored and the injuries were dismissed as irrelevant.”
http://www.justicefordavidcamm.com/pages/original_investigation/autopsies.shtml
And I’m quite sure that there are plenty of photos in evidence that show Kim’s bare feet.
So, Mr. Levco:
– Where are her socks?
– How did her feet get so injured?
– Aren’t those injuries consistent with a large, bulky man such as Bonehead standing on her feet to keep her from kneeing him in the balls as he’s trying to pull off her panties?
– Are we supposed to believe that Bonehead’s crazy story that he heard David and Kim arguing and then, Bam, Bam and Bam as he executed his wife and two kids and THEN went and stomped on Kim’s feet?
– But, how could he do that with her feet under the Bronco?
– You can’t make those injuries go away and you can’t expect this jury to ignore an obvious and undisputed fact!
– Those injuries are the pink elephant here!
– You can run from that elephant, but you can’t hide – your own witnesses, your own photographic evidence gave that elephant to this jury.
– You examined David’s shoes in microscopic detail.
– You examined David’s shoes in molecular detail!
– You expect this jury to believe that David’s gym shoes caused those injuries when all the investigators had to do was look at the soles of those shoes – rubber basketball shoes!
– No, those injuries were caused by shoes worn by a large heavy pink elephant whose name is Charles D. Bonehead – that’s the ONLY conclusion YOUR evidence can lead any rational juror to conclude.

To rebut any suggestion that Boney acting alone is puzzling

“You do not have to understand how or why Charles Boney acted as he did. There are aspects of his past, and his past crimes, that you may not be aware of. There are aspects of human behaviour you may not be fully familiar with. But you do know that Charles Boney is a liar and a criminal. Please apply what you do know about violent criminals.”

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “More Closing Arguments”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s