jameson's Links  Terms of Service  News  Chat  Forum Archives  Cord Photos  Email  

jameson's WebbSleuths

Subject: ""     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy    
Conferences Ramsey evidence Topic #67
Reading Topic #67

Charter Member
Dec--, 00: AM (EST)
Click to EMail Click to send private message to Click to add this user to your buddy list  
of places on the internet, if you look up stun guns. It's
completely false as to what these things do as far as incapacitation rates. These are good devices to
keep somebody at bay at best.

Reporter: Is it possible, even though it may not have produced the desired reaction of incapacitation,
is it possible to produce the very same marks? Let's take a look, by the way, on the autopsy photo...
there you see, 3.5 cm apart, is it possible to produce those marks with what you have in your hand
there, Steven?

ST: I can't do it and I've never been able to replicate it on a person in my 7 years with the company.
Neither has anybody in our company been able to replicate those

Reporter: Are you telling me that your taser has never left a mark on any human being or any animal?

ST: It certainly leaves a mark in some cases like a reddish mark. I'm looking at my arm right now and
I've got little red spots here, all over the place - cause the electricity's dancing all over the place.
I'm not able to keep it in one spot. If I were to keep it in one spot, I might be able to get those two
3.5 cm type width spots but what's key here is even if I'm a 30 pound person, I'm going to get
instinctually away from this pain. If you were to have it, especially in two spots to be perfectly still, I
just don't know how....

Reporter: You're not being restrained and you don't have duct tape across your mouth but, Steven,
I'm afraid we're out of time. I want to thank you so much for coming here today and showing us how
it works, we appreciate it. Steven Tuttle of Taser International.

PART 2 - AFTER VIEWING LOU'S PRESENTATION

R: ...heard that story we had on during the break. Do you buy the theory? Does it hold water?
ST:I don't know. It's bewildering to us as a company. We were approached by Lou Smit in the
very
beginning of the investigation. We provided a list of people who had the actual AIR TASER in
Colorado. We've also provided them a lot of information...
MISSING SECTION!!!!!!!
R: ...distinctive marks that appear to be the same spread. I think you have an AIR TASER with
you
right now and there are in fact - - can you hold it up? - there are two electrodes in the end,
right?

ST: There are two electrodes right here what they are talking about is actually leaving marks
here
and they are about 3 1/2 cm apart and they're fairly similar in width if you were to measure
those
two.

R: Now here's the big question - Can someone hold that to somebody without them flinching
or
moving back?

ST: That's the crux of the bewilderment from our company's perspective. I'm going to go
ahead and
do this on my arm. I don't like doing this at all but

R: I'm sure you don't

ST: I want to try to hold it there as long as I can. Now this would be simulating anybody's
reaction.

(He grimaced and held the stun gun to his arm, he did NOT cry out or make any noise until he
pulled
the stun gun away.)

UH! That is exceedingly painful to say the least, it's something instinctually I want to get
away from

R: OK, but you're a grown man, Let's take ourselves to the crime scene. This is a little girl who
was
asleep, she's 6 years old, what's to say a grown man can't hold her down and just simply hold
that to
her?

ST: Well, that could be done, but what we're seeing is a mark that's not moving and as you
saw my
arm flailing about... even if someone is heavier,holding that down, that person is going to
wake up
immediately and instinctively want to get away from the pain.

R: What about the the notion of incapacitating someone? Is this, obviously when you're being
shocked there, you're out of it for that moment, but when you took it away, you were fine.
Will it
knock somebody out?

ST: That is very, very crucial to the issue here, it will not knock someone out, it will not render
them
mute. They will kick and scream. I did my best to not scream into the microphone here
because it
was very uncomfortable.

R: Once you took it away, though, you were fine?

ST: ... once you stop it. And it's very loud when it's in the air. It does go much more silent as
Lou
Smit pointed out with the pillow. It does go more silent when you stick it in the skin.
However, the
minute that person breaks contact you do get that loud arcing sound. And again, it just
simply would
not cause incapacitation

R: Mr. Tuttle, I can certainly understand why a company would not want their name or
product
associated with a crime in this case. Do you see any reasonable possibility that it COULD
have been a
TASER and that a child that young COULD have been incapacitated?

ST: It could have been ours and I certainly, we want to work with the investigators, we have
from
the very beginning. Um, I don't know. It's bewildering to see if this was ours. The
measurements are
close. They're not exact, but I don't know. That's what's stupifying - is you've got two
separate
marks that are crystally clear, perfect, without any movement shown on the suspect's, oh,
I'm sorry,
on JonBenét. I just don't understand that, how that can be there. (Showing his arm) I don't
have the
marks here, they're all over the place. I'm not sure if you can see... from me moving, they've
gone
everywhere. Ah,

R: Certainly not as deep as what we saw there. You mentioned... we're quickly running out of
time...
you mentioned that you provided list of those who had been sold. Is this something you have
to
register to buy?

ST: Yes We do require as a company that if a person purchases an AIR TASER, we are going to
know
who that person is. They are registered in a data base and if it's used in the TASER mode,
which
would incapacitate somebody, it's going to emit little confetti tags that would match back to
the
owner. In this case the taser was not used so we don't have these confetti tags. But we do
have
serial numbers. If they find one, we could match that up to who it was sold to.

R: Steven Tuttle, we do appreciate you spending the time with us today.

ST: Thank you . ""
In response to message #
 
  


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

[View All], , 00: AM, Dec--, (of places on the internet, if you look up stun guns. It's
completely false as to what these things do as far as incapacitation rates. These are good devices to
keep somebody at bay at best.

Reporter: Is it possible, even though it may not have produced the desired reaction of incapacitation,
is it possible to produce the very same marks? Let's take a look, by the way, on the autopsy photo...
there you see, 3.5 cm apart, is it possible to produce those marks with what you have in your hand
there, Steven?

ST: I can't do it and I've never been able to replicate it on a person in my 7 years with the company.
Neither has anybody in our company been able to replicate those

Reporter: Are you telling me that your taser has never left a mark on any human being or any animal?

ST: It certainly leaves a mark in some cases like a reddish mark. I'm looking at my arm right now and
I've got little red spots here, all over the place - cause the electricity's dancing all over the place.
I'm not able to keep it in one spot. If I were to keep it in one spot, I might be able to get those two
3.5 cm type width spots but what's key here is even if I'm a 30 pound person, I'm going to get
instinctually away from this pain. If you were to have it, especially in two spots to be perfectly still, I
just don't know how....

Reporter: You're not being restrained and you don't have duct tape across your mouth but, Steven,
I'm afraid we're out of time. I want to thank you so much for coming here today and showing us how
it works, we appreciate it. Steven Tuttle of Taser International.

PART 2 - AFTER VIEWING LOU'S PRESENTATION

R: ...heard that story we had on during the break. Do you buy the theory? Does it hold water?
ST:I don't know. It's bewildering to us as a company. We were approached by Lou Smit in the
very
beginning of the investigation. We provided a list of people who had the actual AIR TASER in
Colorado. We've also provided them a lot of information...
MISSING SECTION!!!!!!!
R: ...distinctive marks that appear to be the same spread. I think you have an AIR TASER with
you
right now and there are in fact - - can you hold it up? - there are two electrodes in the end,
right?

ST: There are two electrodes right here what they are talking about is actually leaving marks
here
and they are about 3 1/2 cm apart and they're fairly similar in width if you were to measure
those
two.

R: Now here's the big question - Can someone hold that to somebody without them flinching
or
moving back?

ST: That's the crux of the bewilderment from our company's perspective. I'm going to go
ahead and
do this on my arm. I don't like doing this at all but

R: I'm sure you don't

ST: I want to try to hold it there as long as I can. Now this would be simulating anybody's
reaction.

(He grimaced and held the stun gun to his arm, he did NOT cry out or make any noise until he
pulled
the stun gun away.)

UH! That is exceedingly painful to say the least, it's something instinctually I want to get
away from

R: OK, but you're a grown man, Let's take ourselves to the crime scene. This is a little girl who
was
asleep, she's 6 years old, what's to say a grown man can't hold her down and just simply hold
that to
her?

ST: Well, that could be done, but what we're seeing is a mark that's not moving and as you
saw my
arm flailing about... even if someone is heavier,holding that down, that person is going to
wake up
immediately and instinctively want to get away from the pain.

R: What about the the notion of incapacitating someone? Is this, obviously when you're being
shocked there, you're out of it for that moment, but when you took it away, you were fine.
Will it
knock somebody out?

ST: That is very, very crucial to the issue here, it will not knock someone out, it will not render
them
mute. They will kick and scream. I did my best to not scream into the microphone here
because it
was very uncomfortable.

R: Once you took it away, though, you were fine?

ST: ... once you stop it. And it's very loud when it's in the air. It does go much more silent as
Lou
Smit pointed out with the pillow. It does go more silent when you stick it in the skin.
However, the
minute that person breaks contact you do get that loud arcing sound. And again, it just
simply would
not cause incapacitation

R: Mr. Tuttle, I can certainly understand why a company would not want their name or
product
associated with a crime in this case. Do you see any reasonable possibility that it COULD
have been a
TASER and that a child that young COULD have been incapacitated?

ST: It could have been ours and I certainly, we want to work with the investigators, we have
from
the very beginning. Um, I don't know. It's bewildering to see if this was ours. The
measurements are
close. They're not exact, but I don't know. That's what's stupifying - is you've got two
separate
marks that are crystally clear, perfect, without any movement shown on the suspect's, oh,
I'm sorry,
on JonBenét. I just don't understand that, how that can be there. (Showing his arm) I don't
have the
marks here, they're all over the place. I'm not sure if you can see... from me moving, they've
gone
everywhere. Ah,

R: Certainly not as deep as what we saw there. You mentioned... we're quickly running out of
time...
you mentioned that you provided list of those who had been sold. Is this something you have
to
register to buy?

ST: Yes We do require as a company that if a person purchases an AIR TASER, we are going to
know
who that person is. They are registered in a data base and if it's used in the TASER mode,
which
would incapacitate somebody, it's going to emit little confetti tags that would match back to
the
owner. In this case the taser was not used so we don't have these confetti tags. But we do
have
serial numbers. If they find one, we could match that up to who it was sold to.

R: Steven Tuttle, we do appreciate you spending the time with us today.

ST: Thank you )

 
Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Guppy
Charter Member
531 posts
Apr-13-02, 02:59 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Guppy Click to send private message to Guppy Click to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "oohhhh...."
In response to message #7
 
   > You tell me what YOU would have done with the file.

This may be one of the five dumbest theories I have read over the years, so I would have definitely put it up for its entertainment value.

The "SBTC" translation is bad, but not bad enough, creatively speaking, to make the bottom five list.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
LovelyPigeon
Charter Member
Apr-13-02, 06:06 PM (EST)
Click to EMail LovelyPigeon Click to send private message to LovelyPigeon Click to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "I'd pass it over, too"
In response to message #8
 
   Matter of fact, I didn't even finish reading it.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Dec-01-01, 08:46 AM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "combining threads"
In response to message #0
 
   "Thomas' expert on stun guns"

Vargas: A key part of this intruder theory is Lou Smit's theory that a stun gun was used and, in fact,
the Boulder coroner says he can't rule out the fact that a stun gun may have been used on
JonBenét.

Thomas: We went to great lengths to try to prove or disprove whether or not a stun gun was used in
this. And we consulted with some of the most respected and prominent forensic experts in the
country - one of whom is Dr. Werner Spitz, out of Michigan, and he's said quite definitively, "This is
not a stun gun."

Spitz on tape - The one on the jaw had a pattern within it which suggests that this is the imprint of
a snap or something like a snap. You know, a snap like a button. These things just don't look like
taser marks, anyways, no taser marks that I have ever seen.

I wonder if Spitz ever did any experiments with stun guns. The marks sure DO match - - we
have all seen that. Smit and Dobersen have done the research and will prove it in court. It will
be quite interesting. I have seen the presentation and spoken to both Smit and Dobersen
about all this - and any jury would believe them - - they have the documentation to prove
what they say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


1 . "Pattern on the jaw"
Posted by LovelyPigeon on Nov-21-01 at 09:36 PM (EST)
Spitz' comment about a mark with a pattern "on the jaw" may refer to this abrasion described in the
autopsy: Located on the right side of the chin is a three-sixteenths by one-eighth of an inch area of
superficial abrasion.

If that's the mark referred to, it has no comparision to the marks on JonBenét thought to be made by
a stun gun. The two areas with abrasion (the right side of face and left lower back) believed to be
made by a stun gun are, from the autopsy:

Located just below the right ear at the
right angle of the mandible, 1.5 inches below the right external auditory canal is a 3/8 x 1/4 inch
area of rust colored abrasion.

AND

On the left lateral aspect of the lower back,
approximately sixteen and one-quarter inches and seventeen and one-half inches below the level of
the top of the head are two dried rust colored to slightly purple abrasions. The more superior of the
two measures one-eighth by one-sixteenth of an inch and the more inferior measures
three-sixteenths by one-eighth of an inch. There is no surrounding contusion identified.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 . "not a bruise"
Posted by jameson on Nov-21-01 at 09:46 PM (EST)
People don't bruise after death - - she didn't have those marks on her when she went to bed, so he
is saying she did that between being tucked in and dying?

Silly theory.

The marks were not bruises and they were not abrasions - -they were the unique marks of an
electrical shock.

Why is the BPD SO upset over the idea of a stun gun? After all, they can't link the Ramseys to the
cord or stun gun or hi-tec boots or pubic hair or DNA or handwriting.... what scares them so about
the stun gun.

And if they were SO sure it was NOT a stun gun.... why were they asking the friends and neighbors if
they had one? They didn't ask if they had guns, bows and arrows or carving knives. But they DID ask
about stun guns.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Mikiemoderator
Charter Member
1906 posts
Dec-01-01, 08:59 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Mikie Click to send private message to Mikie Click to add this user to your buddy list  
2. "Does not incapacitate?"
In response to message #1
 
   So explain to me, if it does not incapacitate, how the stun gun rapist in Hawaii managed to stun and rape five women without being caught?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Dec-01-01, 09:00 AM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "If it doesn't"
In response to message #2
 
   incapacitate, why are people supposed to be buying them?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
why_nut
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 10:03 AM (EST)
Click to EMail why_nut Click to send private message to why_nut Click to add this user to your buddy list  
4. "Jameson"
In response to message #3
 
   "If it doesn't incapacitate, why are people supposed to be buying them?"
....................................................................................................
The simple answer is that the stun-gun manufacturers want to make money, and will say anything to convince consumers that there is a benefit to spending money. There is no government oversight agency to demand that stun-guns adhere to a minimal functional standard. (This is why there has been of late a spate of stun-belt-like devices advertised on television, offering to help one lose weight and gain muscle definition by doing what a stun gun does; dumping small amounts of electric current into the muscle and causing it to contract impressively.)

In law enforcement, split seconds make the difference between being able to cuff and control a suspect, and watching the suspect remain free to either run or turn back on the officers and beat or knife or shoot them. The useful purpose of a stun-gun, in that scenario, is to inflict for a few seconds just enough non-lethal, non-damaging pain to distract the suspect, to cause him to turn his thoughts and reactions inward to his own body and away from officers, who can then rush him and cuff him. Bean-bag bullets are being used for the same purpose.

For a famous example of how a stun gun fails to distract enough to permit control, see the Rodney King case. If stun guns were good enough to take a target down and keep him there, one would have thought the LAPD would have continued to use the Taser they had already used twice on him, rather than bringing out the batons to do the job the Taser was failing at.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
why_nut
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 10:14 AM (EST)
Click to EMail why_nut Click to send private message to why_nut Click to add this user to your buddy list  
5. "Mikie"
In response to message #4
 
   "So explain to me, if it does not incapacitate, how the stun gun rapist in Hawaii managed to stun and rape five women without being caught?"
....................................................................................................
Apparently, there is no proof that he did. A judge dismissed all charges against the man last year, and dismissed them with prejudice, meaning that he cannot be reindicted on the same charges.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Believer
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 12:07 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Believer Click to send private message to Believer Click to add this user to your buddy list  
6. "I don't understand what Tuttle meant"
In response to message #5
 
   I don't understand what this means.
From the interview above:"ST: Yes We do require as a company that if a person purchases an AIR TASER, we are going to
know
who that person is. They are registered in a data base and if it's used in the TASER mode,
which
would incapacitate somebody, it's going to emit little confetti tags that would match back to
the
owner. In this case the taser was not used so we don't have these confetti tags. But we do
have
serial numbers. If they find one, we could match that up to who it was sold to."

What does he mean that a confetti tag is sent?
Is the Taser company able to say if ANY confetti tags were sent out ( to the company?) on Dec. 25, 1996?
I am not sure I understand anything about the so called confetti tags.

Jameson, can you explain? It seems to me that the guy is saying that some sort of signal is sent to the company?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
tipper
Charter Member
737 posts
Dec-01-01, 01:00 PM (EST)
Click to EMail tipper Click to send private message to tipper Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "Believer"
In response to message #6
 
   As I understand it, there is a mode in which it shoots out a wire? tag? something? but you don't HAVE to use that aspect of it. It can just shock directly as well.

http://www.911-direct.com/airtaser/


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
shesherre
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 07:15 PM (EST)
Click to EMail shesherre Click to send private message to shesherre Click to add this user to your buddy list  
13. "Well all I can say is:"
In response to message #5
 
   The LAPD has just recently purchased a whole mess of AirTaser brand "tether point" guns and the demos on the evening news showed BIG men being forced to their knees for upwards of 20 seconds to one minute. The shock caused all motor control to be lost and the twitching and frothing was sinisterly spectacular, if you are of a very thick skin.

We also have had a smallish teen boy killed by a stun stick (short cattle prod) applied to the groin and neck in Southgate, by cops that held the charge too long in the wrong place.

I am not sure I agree that a stun gun was even used in this case - but from the recent coverage, it would seem that AirTaser, ST was a little off in his technical aspects.

BTW - Rodney King was an anomaly and not an uncommon one. He was found to have high amounts of PCP in his system. PCP is known to short curcuit the pain centers in the brain and anatomy. That is why they have had many instances of PCP users running around the streets after police stun gun attacks or bullits through the brain and it doesn't slow them down one iota. One of the aspects of PCP is the "Superman syndrom" they don;t feel the fact that they just dropped from a 5 story building until they come down from it. That was exactly why it took so much force to get King down in the first place. Not that it was "right" but it was not exactly "cruel and unusual" when he wasn't feeling anything until the drugs wore off. Also why the jury decided the way they did at first and why the aftermath happened....


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
shesherre
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 07:30 PM (EST)
Click to EMail shesherre Click to send private message to shesherre Click to add this user to your buddy list  
14. "a case......"
In response to message #13
 
  

TWO MEN CHARGED IN STUN-GUN DEATH
Published on 07/22/2000
SOURCE: The Associated Press
BLYTHEVILLE, Ark. - Two men have been charged in the death of a man who was found with injuries from a stun gun.
Tracy Scott Dabbs, 34, died Nov. 7. A medical examiner declared his death a homicide.
Denna Walters, 26, and Nathan Taylor, 23, both of Blytheville, were charged with second-degree murder in Dabbs' death, said Mississippi County sheriff's Capt. Ed Guthrie…

Amnesty International argued this as well, but the court deemed later it wasn't caused by the stun gun, even though it may have been the only reason applicable, ( we all know that courts favor police and jail personell by now.)http://www.walnet.org/csis/news/vancouver_99/province-990516-3.html


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Lavender
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 12:54 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Lavender Click to send private message to Lavender Click to add this user to your buddy list  
7. "I agree"
In response to message #4
 
   "If it doesn't incapacitate, why are people supposed to be buying them?"
....................................................................................................
The simple answer is that the stun-gun manufacturers want to make money, and will say anything to convince consumers that there is a benefit to spending money.

***************

I used to carry a stun gun while in college. I had my brother stun himself and it didn't produce much of a response really. He was standing and it didn't take him down. He likened it to something slightly worse than a light socket shock and was laughing immediately afterwards. Not too comforting when I was using it to protect myself. I never felt that it would completely incapacitate anyone I needed to stun. I felt it might give me a chance to catch them off guard so that I might be able to escape. I was also very afraid that it would end up being used against me. I always had it in a case that was attached to my wrist so that it would be harder to get away from me. It shocked through the case.

Movies portray so many things to exaggeration. Cars rarely blow up when crashed, just as people are rarely knocked unconscious when stunned with a stun gun. Understandably it would be worse on a six year old who is being held down and repeatedly shocked.

Even if her physcial response to the stun gun was not to be knocked out, she could have fainted from the stress. Think he probably slapped the tape on her mouth, wrapped her with the blanket, stunned her and took her downstairs. So even if she didn't faint or wasn't knocked unconscious, the taped mouth and wrapped limbs would have muffled any movement.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Lavender
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 01:00 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Lavender Click to send private message to Lavender Click to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "No marks "
In response to message #7
 
   By the way, there were no marks left either. But, he did a jolt and let it go. It wasn't forceably held against him like it would have been on JBR.

By the way, does the current travel through? Does the person stunning have to have a barrier to protect him from being stunned if he is touching the victim???

I fully believe she was stunned by a stun gun. There is no other explination in my book.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Dec-01-01, 03:08 PM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
10. "pressed into her"
In response to message #9
 
   Mr. Tuttle jerked his arm away from the stun gun - just as anyone would - - if they could. But if the person were forced to be still - - like a 45 pound child could be if a grown man were pressing her into her bed - the stun gun could be pressed into her body and she would not be ABLE to get away.

The more current, the longer the exposure, the greater the effects.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Mariene
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 03:13 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Mariene Click to send private message to Mariene Click to add this user to your buddy list  
11. "Mr. Tuttle did have marks"
In response to message #10
 
   from the stun gun. I watched the presentation live and the folow up also. His arm had marks that spread and looked like bad bruises. it was then that he back peddled and said it "could have been ours" the camera didn't lie when it showed the injuries.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
RHGC
Charter Member
Dec-01-01, 06:19 PM (EST)
Click to EMail RHGC Click to send private message to RHGC Click to add this user to your buddy list  
12. "Alteration"
In response to message #11
 
   1. The marks indicate not only that JonBenet was stunned by a stungun but that it most likely incapacitated her.
2. The effect of the stun gun would, logically, be greater on a child than on an adult.
3. The use would indicate that the user had experimented with the device earlier, probably on an animal.
4. Because the killer was quite adept at electrical devices, I think it is likely that the device was NOT the model air taser as sold, but had been "improved" - increasing the dosage it would give when used. The limited amount of struggle shown indicates the incapcitation caused and I would only hope that those who can't understand the stun gun would recognize that it gives added understanding of the background of the killer: that he WAS adept in electrical matters, even designing circuits as he, indeed, testified he did.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Jan-16-02, 09:38 AM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
15. "It is important"
In response to message #12
 
   The stun gun people had not done tests on living subjects then sacrificed them to determine what kind of marks would be left. They did not experiment with what might happen int he stun gun was held firm for a ful second, or two.

When the rep saw the test results on TV he backed down from his position that it couldn't have been a stun gun.

I hope THEY have done testing and documented the results. I think they need to - - and let people know what can happen if they use the stun guns in ways not recommended.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
BraveHeart
Charter Member
140 posts
Jan-16-02, 07:49 PM (EST)
Click to EMail BraveHeart Click to send private message to BraveHeart Click to add this user to your buddy list  
16. "Since many S.Guns are traceable"
In response to message #15
 
   it wouldn't surprise me if the gun were modified. But a knowledge of electrical circuitry was not necessarily required-there were, and still are, many kits availiable on the internet, or possibly at stores like the one in Longmont that sold soldier of fortune stuff.

Probably one or the other is the case.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Jan-30-02, 06:39 PM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
17. "lists"
In response to message #16
 
   Air Taser had a couple stun guns registered to CO people. IMO, the cops should have contacted each owner and asked them if they had their stun guns in their possession - - ask them to get it and read the serial number to the cop on the phone.

I think they might have found a couple missing, or someone who was flustered MUCH more than the others. Possible leads to follow.

But the point wasn't to develop leads, was it?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Apr-01-02, 07:19 PM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
18. "chat last night"
In response to message #17
 
   I was a guest in a chat last night where a man ranted about how there was NO STUN GUN - - but he offered NO alternative explanation for the marks.

Dr. Mike Dobersen is the expert on stun gun marks as far as I know. I have sat with him and spoken to him and looked at the results of the experiments and I believe he is right - - the marks were from a stun gun.

Until someone comes up with a reasonable alternative explanation, I will continue to believe it was a stun gun.

(If the Ramseys owned one, the BORG would agree those marks couldnt' be anything BUT a stun gun - - but it is exculpatory evidence so they simply deny it - - and feel no need to explain it.)


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
jamesonadmin
Charter Member
10561 posts
Oct-20-02, 02:43 PM (EST)
Click to add this user to your buddy list  
19. "bump"
In response to message #18
 
   Steve Tuttle from Air Taser can't say it wasn't theirs - - how can the BORG?

Easy - - they have no ethics and can ignore anything that doesn't fit the BORG theory.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic