To: runningbear
A strand of her hair on a pair of pliers isn't going to mean diddly-squat. Why does the writer call it a "bombshell"?
Now if her blood or tissue were found on it, it may have been a different matter. But one hair on a common household tool she may have used herself.....?
The media circus is beginning to really rev up now.
Leni
15 posted on
05/13/2003 5:49:08 AM PDT by
MinuteGal
(THIS JUST IN ! Astonishing fare reduction for FReeps Ahoy Cruise! Check it out, pronto!)
To: MinuteGal
Well, if the hair was torn out (and they can determine this by examining the hair) and found wound around the pliers, Peterson has a problem.
20 posted on
05/13/2003 5:51:30 AM PDT by
mewzilla
To: MinuteGal
compare it with scaughty's full body photos, and hair... (second thoughts, can't fathom that image....;o))
56 posted on
05/13/2003 6:12:15 AM PDT by
runningbear
(Lurkers beware, Freeping is public opinions based on facts, theories, and news online.......)
To: MinuteGal
Thanks for clearing that up for us all!
To: MinuteGal
If this is a hair that has a follicle attached that was pulled from the scalp, that is one thing. If the hair is one that had fallen out naturlly or was a strand of cut hair, it is something else entirely.
Which is it? I suppose we'll find out if it is introduced as evidence at the trial.
115 posted on
05/13/2003 6:51:00 AM PDT by
John Valentine
(Writing from downtown Seoul, keeping an eye on the hills to the north.)
To: MinuteGal
A bunch of hair pulled out by the roots is another thing altogether.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson