Look at the flashlight on the kitchen counter
Yes: It could have been placed into a baggie or in wax paper, etc. before being used. Or it could have been stored in or near something that out-gassed and coated it with some kind of waxy substance over a long period of time.

I wouldn't at all be surprised, assuming that the flashlight is the blunt-force trauma weapon, if the perpetrator wrapped it in something before using it, especially if he planned on taking it with him.  It would keep the flashlight free of blood and tissue.
The blow to the head did not break the skin so there was no blood or tissue. Doesn't prove it was the murder weapon, but it may help someone ID the killer - I mean, if he left it behind, maybe someone in HIS house remembers their flashlight went missing that Christmas.
(08-07-2017, 10:18 AM)jameson245 Wrote: The blow to the head did not break the skin so there was no blood or tissue. 

Correct, but he didn't know that in advance.
I honestly think the flashlight was one of the officers. They say no prints were retrieved and that it was wiped clean but that only tells me that no identifiable prints were found. I don’t trust the BPD and they have a way of saying things that are deceitful.
(08-05-2017, 08:18 PM)jameson245 Wrote: Fact - there was an unidentified "waxy type substance" on the flashlight.  Any thoughts on that?

I assume that this is the same flashlight that the BPD said had "disappeared" for awhile?  (When in fact it was later found on an inventory sheet of theirs.) And that this was the same flashlight that John Andrew had given John as a gift at an earlier time?  

I read on another forum that John couldn't identify the flashlight because he was shown a photo of it after the crime lab had processed it for fingerprints, and the chemicals used in the processing turned the aluminum surface of the flashlight a mottled color. Also, that the anodized aluminum casing was not damaged.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)