Re: CBS Sunday nights--Screwed up by sports ... again


"Obveeus" <Obveeus@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fshlhk$rq$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:WbydnYGiv8VjyXHanZ2dnUVZ_ramnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Obveeus" <Obveeus@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
Wrapping up body parts at the crime scene makes sense. Wrapping up
drills and scalpels and such in watertight black plastic so that you can
dump them at sea (which you already know fom prior experience is not
safe) is just plain stupid.

If anyone knows about "transference" it's a forensics expert. He knows
his "tools of trade" are the most damaging evidence against from the
multiple hits of dna that might be obtained from them. True, it would
work "better" if he unwrapped everything and dumped in the ocean to be
exposed to the corrosive water--but that would risk evidence
"transfering" to his boat.

Oh come on, you can't be seriously trying to claim this crappy plot point
is logical. If he was worried about 'transference all he would have to do
is dump everything into a garbage sack and then pour it out in the ocean
slowly while his boat is moving along at a decent speed.. Absolutely
nothing is 'logical' about wraping all the tools carefully in watertight
packages and then dumping them all in the exact same spot in the shallow
ocean water when

How do you know where he was dumping stuff the second time after he was
(almost) exposed?

he already knows that his 'friend' can watch him do exactly that and
retrieve the stuff back out of the water. It was stupid.

And by the time that happened he could skip town.

The dilemma is exposing the evidence to crossive water while not exposing
himself and property to the evidence. What do you choose? The balance
tilts toward keeping everything sealed because there's another problem:
not having bits of evidence float to the surface--or worse, to shore.
Thus he has everything sealed up and sunk to the ocean floor.

Sure...because a drill and a set of surgical scalpels will float in the
water, but they will sink if wrapped tightly with black plastic.

He wrapped the tools to keep them from contaminating himself, his home, car
and boat.

-- Ken from Chicago (who knows about "transference" from CSI)

Ah, thast may explain your 'reasoning'. You think CSI is a good source of
accurate crime scene investigation information.

Forensics evidence does NOT transfer from the body to the scene--and vice
versa?

Admittedly CSI is flawed (e.g., foresenics techs doing detective work,
grilling witnesses, having endless amount of time and resources to
investigate, only having a one case per week, etc.) but the basic idea about
"transference" is sound. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

P.S. Too bad he doesn't know where some sharks are so he could feed the
evidence to them.

Sharks likely won't eat stuff wrapped tightly in waterproof black plastic
since it gives off no odor. According to you, it would be too dangerous
to take the body out of the bag because of 'transference'.

He just coats it with animal blood. The sharks tear thru the bag and
remains. The water corrodes what's left. People assume whatever debris is
left is some poor dead swimmer / surfer.

-- Ken from Chicago


.

Quantcast