kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 15, 2008 19:41:20 GMT -5
Only a guess, but I would say the two section configuration which would put the double top cleats close to the top of the shutter.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 16, 2008 8:26:33 GMT -5
Would the point, in your opinion, be to scrape the mud off of one shoe or for some other reason?
Anyone else with opinions please jump in too.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,652
|
Post by Joe on Jun 16, 2008 11:01:33 GMT -5
Did any of the detectives actually note the condition of the mud on the first floor shutter and attempt to differentiate it from a chunk that might have fallen off the "shoe" of the kidnapper, or a compressed deposit as a result of a stepping down motion?
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 17, 2008 6:47:25 GMT -5
I don't think that scraping off a piece of mud would be a high priority given the circumstance. What I think is important is that this "chunk" found on top of the shutter pretty much proves two things. First, it shows that the ladder was climbed and was not a "prop" as some might wish. Second, it shows that the soil conditions were not excessively wet just as Kelly's photo indicates. Under those conditions it would be reasonable to expect the climber to pick up some soil but it wouldn't be excessive.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Jun 17, 2008 22:16:47 GMT -5
Good question Joe. There is mention of it in a report but that's it. There are also inventory sheets listing the pictures taken of it. I saw those pictures, and I believe that Kevin was at the Archives that day and saw them as well. It's a "chunk" just as Kevin describes. It's not "smashed" down at all in my opinion.
Might it not be? I would think if the person had this amount of mud on their shoe they wouldn't want it there walking on that Nursery floor.
Does it though? I still can't figure out how it got there without some doubt. It does seem to show someone had been on that ladder, or at least, on the top of that shutter. But might it have been dropped from the Nursery window landing on it? It's an important clue so I wish I could nail down exactly what it indicates with a degree of certainty.
I am not sure how much wetness it would take for a shoe to pick up a chunk of mud like this which apparently stuck to it for the climb.
I am not trying to be a pain but wouldn't a chunk like that indicate an "excessive" amount? Of the large prints, only one is pointing towards the Nursery window while all the others, with the exception of the smaller ones, were leading away. And so, if you accept that evidence, it seems to show one step in the mud produced that chunk.
|
|
kevkon
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,800
|
Post by kevkon on Jun 18, 2008 5:54:01 GMT -5
I guess I don't see it that way Michael. First, why "this amount of mud"? What amount? If there was a great amount, it would be all over the place. And why would anyone up on the ladder in this position care about tracking mud into the room? Who cares? I think there would be greater concerns at that point.
I think any doubt on this can be pretty much eliminated. Of course given the nuttiness of this case I am sure that someone will say the mud was placed on the shutter to draw our attention to it.
I am not sure how much wetness it would take for a shoe to pick up a chunk of mud like this which apparently stuck to it for the climb.
I am not trying to be a pain but wouldn't a chunk like that indicate an "excessive" amount? Of the large prints, only one is pointing towards the Nursery window while all the others, with the exception of the smaller ones, were leading away. And so, if you accept that evidence, it seems to show one step in the mud produced that chunk. Michael[/quote]
I am not a soil expert, but I do work in the stuff more often than I'd like. It's not only the "wetness", but the specific type of the soil and the type of footwear worn that must be considered. That area around the house is still relatively disturbed from excavation, backfill and grading. Typical for new construction. That usually means it will drain or perk fairly well and that the soil is mixed from various layers. Bottom line, you might walk in one spot and pick up nothing while 10 ft away it could be a quagmire. Remember, if the soil was that wet and loose the footprints and the ladder prints would be indistinct. You would never know, for example what type of shoes or in this case coverings were worn. And I hate to be a pain but Kelly's photo clearly shows the ladder imprints. Look closely and you can see how smooth and well defined those impressions are. That requires damp, not excessively wet, soil and some clay.
|
|