Did Poe Mark The Shells?

[Martin Weidmann]

The fact is.... Nobody can verify with 100% certainty that the shells in the archives are the exact same shells that were allegedly picked up at the scene...

BTW... Did you send a PM .....   I received notice but no message....

BTW... Did you send a PM .....   I received notice but no message....

Yes, I replied to your message. It seems the pm system isn't working correctly.

[Walt Cakebread]

BTW... Did you send a PM .....   I received notice but no message....

Yes, I replied to your message. It seems the pm system isn't working correctly.

Ok ...I thought that perhaps you were using invisible ink......

[Bill Brown]

The fact is.... Nobody can verify with 100% certainty that the shells in the archives are the exact same shells that were allegedly picked up at the scene...

The fact is.... Nobody has proved that the shells in evidence were NOT the shells collected at the scene.  It is one thing to bitch and moan about what you believe to be a lack of validity of the evidence; any kook can do that.  It is another thing entirely to actually do something about it by proving that the shells are not authentic.

[Walt Cakebread]

The fact is.... Nobody has proved that the shells in evidence were NOT the shells collected at the scene.  It is one thing to bitch and moan about what you believe to be a lack of validity of the evidence; any kook can do that.  It is another thing entirely to actually do something about it by proving that the shells are not authentic.

Nobody has proved that the shells in evidence were NOT the shells collected at the scene.

Huh??....Are you living in Iran?.....  It's the prosecutions responsibility to demonstrate that theses shells are in fact the same shells that were allegedly found at the scene....  And I say allegedly because I believe only ONE of the shells was picked up while the police were there on the scene .

[Martin Weidmann]

Nobody has proved that the shells in evidence were NOT the shells collected at the scene.

Huh??....Are you living in Iran?.....  It's the prosecutions responsibility to demonstrate that theses shells are in fact the same shells that were allegedly found at the scene....  And I say allegedly because I believe only ONE of the shells was picked up while the police were there on the scene .

It's the prosecutions responsibility to demonstrate that theses shells are in fact the same shells that were allegedly found at the scene....

Exactly right, Walt and in this case this goes for the LNs as well, as they are the one making the claim. But instead of proving their case, they try shift the burden of proof around to a "unless you prove me wrong, I am automatically right" scenario. It's truly pathetic and weak.

[Tim Nickerson]

The fact is.... Nobody has proved that the shells in evidence were NOT the shells collected at the scene.  It is one thing to bitch and moan about what you believe to be a lack of validity of the evidence; any kook can do that.  It is another thing entirely to actually do something about it by proving that the shells are not authentic.

That isn't how it works though. But the fact is that the shells in evidence are the shells that were collected at the scene. It has been established beyond any reasonable doubt. Those who refuse to accept that fact are simply not reasonable people and it's pointless to try to reason with them.

[Martin Weidmann]

That isn't how it works though. But the fact is that the shells in evidence are the shells that were collected at the scene. It has been established beyond any reasonable doubt. Those who refuse to accept that fact are simply not reasonable people and it's pointless to try to reason with them.

But the fact is that the shells in evidence are the shells that were collected at the scene. It has been established beyond any reasonable doubt.

When you claim it with so much certainty, I am beginning to think that I might have missed something. Please explain how it has been established beyond reasonable doubt that the shells now in evidence are the same ones that were collected at the scene.

Those who refuse to accept that fact are simply not reasonable people and it's pointless to try to reason with them.

Calling somebody unreasonable simply because he does not agree with your opinion is what's really unreasonable. I mean, c'mon, isn't this kind of whining just tantamount to admitting that your arguments are simply not convincing enough? You wouldn't be one of those people who think they are always right, would you? Perhaps you should try to accept that your arguments simply might not always be as conclusive or persuasive as you think they are.