Evidence - The crime scene of Robert Wone 2

Reporters

Speculation

Judge

D.C. Court Judge

Advertising Space - After your hub is published advertisements may be placed in this space. Please note, it can take some time after you publish for the ads to match the content of your hub.

DNA - Finding Suspects and Contributors

Searching for DNA evidence requires the most accurate calculation of all gathered sources. Although it may yield the most affective outcome of the jury's decision, all problems in the case have to be analyzed and concluded, including the problem forensics of DNA interpretation (uncertain data), circumstantial evidence and cross examinations, the testimony of witnesses on the stand, case of the defense lawyers, and credited knowledge articulated by field professionals. Let's consider what Chris McGreal, Guardian of the Washington correspondent said in his article, "The mystery of Robert Wone's death," concerning the prosecutors of this case. He said, andI quote, There are certainly weaknesses in the prosecution case . Well, technically speaking, all cases have weakness until they are either solved or overuled. When defense lawyer, David Schertler ended with his closing argument that prosecutors could not prove the true circumstances of what happened August 2nd, 2006,could also be a weak statement in nature. Could David Schertler prove that anything the prosecutors said wasn't true? So there was a fight on both sides. Now, let's consider the odd circumstances. The defense argued that a lot would have had to happen within a 90-minute time frame, estimating the time of the phone call from R. Wone's friend vs. the approximate time close neighbors who heard screaming andnoises according to the police report. The court found that the forensic evidence was improperly admitted, because the prosecution’s case relied on the forensic evidence as a “cornerstone” of its case, andbecause the rest of the circumstantial evidence was “unconvincing. But I Personally beg to differ the hearsay of the appeals court. They argued that the Superior Court Judge James Boasberg erred at trial by failing to instruct the jury of the distinction of drawing conclusions from facts they felt were justified based on reasonable inferences as opposed to establishing the truth. To me this is bologna. First of all, the fact that Gardner's (suspect who was charged guilty of 1st-degree murder) lawyer claimed that he had no time to cross-examine the DNA and blood technicians who made the initial examination of forensic evidence, does not mean for one, that Gardner's convictions should have been reversed, and two, that Gardner was innocent. When it comes to circumstantial evidence, I can almost safely say that the court's jury should have reconsidered the previous cases of events surrounding Gardner, the small blood smear on his jacket police found at the time of his arrest, the 2004 murder of Andrew Kamara, a Washington taxi driver who was shot and killed while on the job, and Gardner's clothing matching the description of a witness, and his arrest after the incident of a motel 6 shooting. Well I guess that all depends on the definition of circumstantial.

Charges Dropped

court room

Conspiracy

Homophobia? In Spite of the unusual sightings at the time the cops arrived at the crime scene, the prosecutors' case based on the evidence of the investigators was put under scrutiny in court. Officials were saying that the investigators' case was motivated by, or could have been motivated by "homophobia," and that they had no facts to support their conclusions. But, however, they still needed to consider the odd instances of Wone's stomach clear of blood, as though it had been wiped, Wone's friends who were tidied in bed robes during the arrival of the cops, the needle marks in Wone's neck, the data tracking of data information on the laptops, and the replacement of the murder object close to Wone's body. All of these things, in my opinion, are predominate contributors to the prosecutions' case, and should have been sufficient enough for circumstantial evidence. Why was the 12-page appeal written by the defense more persuasive to the argument? I think the thing with defense lawyers is that they make a car out of a lemon, and whenever they can accuse the opposing party of unethical inferences, they almost certainly have their case won, and the criminal gets to walk free as a bird. I guess that's what they get paid to do. Below is an excerpt I borrowed from an interview report, and one of the questions asked was...
"In all of your interviews with law enforcement officials and the prosecution, did you get the impression that homophobia is a driving force behind this investigation? It sounds like during the first interview with Price on the night of the murder that the lead investigator was pushing that theory without having any facts to back it up. It just seems to me that first impressions rooted in homophobia have colored the direction of this case from the get-go."
I could be wrong about this, but, maybe the alleged burglary was a conspiracy attempt to cover up the murder case? Perhaps, there is a clear reason why charges were dropped. Stay tune for the final sequel to this hub entitled, "Getting Away With Bloody Murder."