Don't get confused by all the smokescreens put up by Söring. The decisive consideration is how somebody would behave who is actually not guilty and was not present at the crime scene. As a matter of common sense, such person would do the utmost possible to enforce a new DNA test and I am sure he would find the right arguments to file a petition without lying about facts. So if a person does exactly the opposite, i.e. looks for arguments not to apply for a new DNA test, what is the only logical conclusion?
Well, as I am rather convinced that both had been at the scene I have to add something substancial and correct you. The first one who had confirmed the possibility and being interested in the retesting had been Chip Harding and this was before the long break of STBC. If this had been happened based on a permission given to Harding by Soering is not known. But generally Soering's Supporter are briefed and he can get very angry if someone doesn't stick to. The reason was that based also on the investigations of STBC it came up that DNA Retesting could be senseful, while Wes Nance didn't found it that conclusive. So Harding brought the idea up that there are 200 items of evidence which are stored to the case file possible to be retested
This is a good article which backs up the Gist contradiction around 1989 to 2017. I would like to know if Nance or STBC shoot back against Soering, cause he gives no proof demanding Retesting in 2017.
You're right, claiming STBC to follow Team Haysom or Updike is ridiculous. They said, maybe they are both lying. That is the right point to start with. What I do not understand is that they are claiming that all the suspects named by Soering are exonerated. Well that is right or wrong but technically not reliable.
@FS007/FS008
It is completely wrong to investigate on the case just to proof Soerings guilt, because Haysom's alibi is anything else than waterproof!! In fact she has none! Wright is just pointing to his favourite theory which Elizabeth had destroyed logically in her own interview!
A lot of evidence points in that direction. Technically, logically forensically, logistically and based on their own admissions after they had been convicted and before. BTW from Alpha to Omega there are a lot of persons believing this. Heller, Lemley, Englade, STBC they all had doubts about the right murder version.
So if you are one of the guys claiming Soering must did the atrocities alone, cause he is such a violent, brutal, bad guy it is not a proof, instead of what you like to be the outcome. So if they did it together, and she still claims that Soering did it alone, he put it just the other way round. That is what simply had happened from 87 til 90. But she is defining it also more clearly in her own words. She wanted him to be punished in the SAME way - her statement at her trial 87. But she had an early parole, That was her deal. And in 2016 she said to Heller, that he has exactly the same guilt as herself. And not to forget that she is refering to the bloody sneaker imprints as made by her mother as Nancy had smaller shoesize as herself! Well Soering has a bigger shoesize than Haysom 🤦
@FS007/008
All are weak points.
1. A smart killer would wear gloves. They planned it - they did it. But both got small cuts, scratches whatever. She wanted to go back to the crime scene to clean the front door and the door handle. She also knew that fingerprints won't be a problem cause she had been there a week before. She also wanted to leave the country at this point. She didn't want to be confronted by her brother who was very suspicious on her! (See her testimony)
2. No time log about the 5 calls on Saturday. Haysom testified and confirmed it in an interview that she called some jewelery shops where she sold some stolen rings, watches from her mother. What does it mean? No use for money, so no use to call anybody giving her card number. Neither Beth nor Kim did confirm any call by Haysom for this Saturday! -> Logical exclusion followed by zero proof.
AND there would have been money for a more proper alibi: second ticket for Rocky Horror!
3. Soering is a liar and many parts of his confessions are bullshit. Especially the details given around the murder deeds. No corroborating evidence at the crime scene. Soering said all his blood fell in his lap. No blood on Derek's seat, only a few spots . He said there was a fight around the table and the table felt upside down. Nonsense. If he said he pulled Mrs. Haysom firmly at her wrist as a shield, the autopsie report doesn't confirm this. If he said that Mrs Haysom ran into the Kitchen to pick up a knife it is bullshit. She could use her steak knife. If he said Derek pushe him against the fire place with his head, no birthday card had dropped down. So the true version must completely different. Soering has invented a version of a single killer. In his last confession there popped a second killer out of nothing ???
4. That is a sweet story to make her more empathic or remorseful. She knew how to emotional influence the Jury playing the victim.
She was allways using an unemotional language while talking about her parents. Pups brain, a bloody poem for her mother in interviews where she was telling that here parents arguments stick like knives in your body (!!)
5. He killed her father, she killed her mother from different directions in different rooms. No happy meal of leftovers before or conversation before. No dog was hurt in that night. Maybe they have heard Psycho killer on their way back, wearing clean clothes after showering. Both were great fans of Talking heads.
Well you have the bloody shoe imprints which belong to Haysom. If Haysom's DNA would be in a beer can, in the midth (no contact to the floor) of a blood stain on the kitchen floor and it is her hair in the bath room she would have been incriminated 100%
@ FS007/008
You're getting even weaker!
Sure. Haysom and Soering had studied a ton of criminal stories before the murder weekend. If you wear gloves, you can save a lot of time in cleaning anything you had touched. And you won't forget something. Also Soering had studied Soldier & Fortune to select the proper knifes where your hands won't slip over the blade while stabbing somebody. As he joined a fencing club in his youth he knew the importance of self protection. So don't get silly and a troll accepting that Andrew can also think of gloves. It is the easiest way to prevent leaving fingerprints
But something went wrong cause of blood 0 in the master bedroom, on the screen door and on the door handle and blood B on a wash cloth. A pendant like Soering won' t forget a thing in general. They had a time slot to be back before or shortly after the Rocky Horror will end to catch up the last tickets that was thrown away. Unfortunately 2 tickets seemed to be impossible.
In fact there had been no coffie mugs that might keep fingerprints cause there consist out of foam (styropor).
On this interview event with Gardner he had also written something without gloves on. He had asked for a pen. Soering's claims that the diary entry was made to create papertrail that Soering is the single killer as his promise would be keeping her away from the crime scene is a true part. It is obvious that Haysom had to rely on such an act being in stron dependency by Soering.
But after the cops were after him, he wanted to keep them off tracing him down by his fingerprints. Logical for a murderer. But he knew that there had been no fingerprints at the scene (gloves)!
Lieber Jens Söring, der du hier sicherlich genau mitliest, um deine nächste Unterlassungsklage vorzubereiten, du erzählst bei jeder passenden Gelegenheit, daß du $ 1,4Mio. von Virginia bekommst, wenn die Virginianer endlich kapieren, daß du unschuldig bist.
Hier hast du nun die gratis Chance auf 1,4 Mio. indem du die DNA Tests veranlasst, die du immer wolltest (oder vielleicht doch nicht immer ...?).
Und was Meineide angeht, da bist du doch nicht immer so streng mit dir gewesen: Ich erinnere nur an das Jahr 1990, als du in den Anhörungen vor dem Hauptverfahren erklärt hast, die Geständnisse in England seien von dir unter Zwang erpresst worden und du nur ein paar Wochen später ebenfalls unter Eid vor demselben Richter (!) erklärtest, diese Geständnisse hast du als wahrer Held abgegeben um Elizabeth zu retten. Oder haben dich die bösen englischen Beamten gezwungen, Elizabeth vor der Todesstrafe zu retten, der sie nie angeklagt war ? Oder ist das jetzt ein Spin zuviel ?
Hey, it's me again. Though I am really Sure, that JS is a liar and wrightly convicted murderer, there is one point, I have to agree to him: He mentioned that Nance haven't signed the petition in anyway. I took a look at the petition the podcasters posted. And He is right at that point. So, although I am still deep impressed of their work, this circumstance confuses me. As they told in the podcast, Nance gave an official statement, that he has no objection.
Here we go ! Soering can get his often asked tests. Oh Dear, the show Soering produces is better then every Blockbuster I've ever watched! I need popcorn!!!
1. A smart killer would wear gloves. They planned it - they did it. But both got small cuts, scratches whatever. She wanted to go back to the crime scene to clean the front door and the door handle. She also knew that fingerprints won't be a problem cause she had been there a week before. She also wanted to leave the country at this point. She didn't want to be confronted by her brother who was very suspicious on her! (See her testimony)
2. No time log about the 5 calls on Saturday. Haysom testified and confirmed it in an interview that she called some jewelery shops where she sold some stolen rings, watches from her mother. What does it mean? No use for money, so no use to call anybody giving her card number. Neither Beth nor Kim did confirm any call by Haysom for this Saturday! -> Logical exclusion followed by zero proof.
AND there would have been money for a more proper alibi: second ticket for Rocky Horror!
3. Soering is a liar and many parts of his confessions are bullshit. Especially the details given around the murder deeds. No corroborating evidence at the crime scene. Soering said all his blood fell in his lap. No blood on his seat. He said there was a fight around the table and the table felt upside down. Nonsense. If he said he pulled Mr. Haysom firmly at her wrist as a shield, the autopsie report doesn't confirm this. If he said that Mrs Haysom ran into the Kitchen to pick up a knife it is bullshit. She could use her steak knife. If he said Derek pushe him against the fire place with his head, no birthday card had dropped down. So the true version must completely different. Soering has invented a version of a single killer. In his last confession there popped a second killer out of nothing ???
4. That is a sweet story to make her more empathic or remorseful. She knew how to emotional influence the Jury playing the victim.
She was allways using an unemotional language while talking about her parents. Pups brain, a bloody poem for her mother in interviews where she was telling that here parents arguments stick like knives in your body (!!)
5. He killed her father, she killed her mother from different directions in different rooms. No happy meal of leftovers before or conversation before. No dog was hurt in that night. Maybe they have heard Psycho killer on their way back, wearing clean clothes after showering. Both were great fans of Talking heads.
Well you have the bloody shoe imprints which belong to Haysom. If Haysom's DNA would be in a beer can, in the midth (no contact to the floor) of a blood stain on the kitchen floor and it is her hair in the bath room she would have been incriminated 100%
@ FS007/008
You're getting even weaker!
Sure. Haysom and Soering had studied a ton of criminal stories before the murder weekend. If you wear gloves, you can save a lot of time in cleaning anything you had touched. And you won't forget something. Also Soering had studied Soldier & Fortune to select the proper knifes where your hands won't slip over the blade while stabbing somebody. As he joined a fencing club in his youth he knew the importance of self protection.
But something went wrong cause of blood 0 in the master bedroom, on the screen door and on the door handle and blood B on a wash cloth. A pendant like Soering won' t forget a thing in general. They had a time slot to be back before or shortly after the Rocky Horror will end to catch up the last tickets that was thrown away. Unfortunately 2 tickets seemed to be impossible.
In fact there had been no coffie mugs that might keep fingerprints cause there consist out of foam (styropor).
On this interview event with Gardner he had also written something without gloves on. He had asked for a pen. Soering's claims that the diary entry was made to create papertrail that Soering is the single killer as his promise would be keeping her away from the crime scene is a true part. It is obvious that Haysom had to rely on such an act being in stron dependency by Soering.
But after the cops were after him, he wanted to keep them off tracing him down by his fingerprints. Logical for a murderer. But he knew that there had been no fingerprints at the scene (gloves)!
Don't get confused by all the smokescreens put up by Söring. The decisive consideration is how somebody would behave who is actually not guilty and was not present at the crime scene. As a matter of common sense, such person would do the utmost possible to enforce a new DNA test and I am sure he would find the right arguments to file a petition without lying about facts. So if a person does exactly the opposite, i.e. looks for arguments not to apply for a new DNA test, what is the only logical conclusion?
Well, as I am rather convinced that both had been at the scene I have to add something substancial and correct you. The first one who had confirmed the possibility and being interested in the retesting had been Chip Harding and this was before the long break of STBC. If this had been happened based on a permission given to Harding by Soering is not known. But generally Soering's Supporter are briefed and he can get very angry if someone doesn't stick to. The reason was that based also on the investigations of STBC it came up that DNA Retesting could be senseful, while Wes Nance didn't found it that conclusive. So Harding brought the idea up that there are 200 items of evidence which are stored to the case file possible to be retested
https://dailyprogress.com/soering-adds-to-pardon-petition/article_78bc9be5-b69e-58d2-82ef-e8c0020d3ac3.html
This is a good article which backs up the Gist contradiction around 1989 to 2017. I would like to know if Nance or STBC shoot back against Soering, cause he gives no proof demanding Retesting in 2017.
You're right, claiming STBC to follow Team Haysom or Updike is ridiculous. They said, maybe they are both lying. That is the right point to start with. What I do not understand is that they are claiming that all the suspects named by Soering are exonerated. Well that is right or wrong but technically not reliable.
@FS007/FS008
It is completely wrong to investigate on the case just to proof Soerings guilt, because Haysom's alibi is anything else than waterproof!! In fact she has none! Wright is just pointing to his favourite theory which Elizabeth had destroyed logically in her own interview!
A lot of evidence points in that direction. Technically, logically forensically, logistically and based on their own admissions after they had been convicted and before. BTW from Alpha to Omega there are a lot of persons believing this. Heller, Lemley, Englade, STBC they all had doubts about the right murder version.
So if you are one of the guys claiming Soering must did the atrocities alone, cause he is such a violent, brutal, bad guy it is not a proof, instead of what you like to be the outcome. So if they did it together, and she still claims that Soering did it alone, he put it just the other way round. That is what simply had happened from 87 til 90. But she is defining it also more clearly in her own words. She wanted him to be punished in the SAME way - her statement at her trial 87. But she had an early parole, That was her deal. And in 2016 she said to Heller, that he has exactly the same guilt as herself. And not to forget that she is refering to the bloody sneaker imprints as made by her mother as Nancy had smaller shoesize as herself! Well Soering has a bigger shoesize than Haysom 🤦
@FS007/008
All are weak points.
1. A smart killer would wear gloves. They planned it - they did it. But both got small cuts, scratches whatever. She wanted to go back to the crime scene to clean the front door and the door handle. She also knew that fingerprints won't be a problem cause she had been there a week before. She also wanted to leave the country at this point. She didn't want to be confronted by her brother who was very suspicious on her! (See her testimony)
2. No time log about the 5 calls on Saturday. Haysom testified and confirmed it in an interview that she called some jewelery shops where she sold some stolen rings, watches from her mother. What does it mean? No use for money, so no use to call anybody giving her card number. Neither Beth nor Kim did confirm any call by Haysom for this Saturday! -> Logical exclusion followed by zero proof.
AND there would have been money for a more proper alibi: second ticket for Rocky Horror!
3. Soering is a liar and many parts of his confessions are bullshit. Especially the details given around the murder deeds. No corroborating evidence at the crime scene. Soering said all his blood fell in his lap. No blood on Derek's seat, only a few spots . He said there was a fight around the table and the table felt upside down. Nonsense. If he said he pulled Mrs. Haysom firmly at her wrist as a shield, the autopsie report doesn't confirm this. If he said that Mrs Haysom ran into the Kitchen to pick up a knife it is bullshit. She could use her steak knife. If he said Derek pushe him against the fire place with his head, no birthday card had dropped down. So the true version must completely different. Soering has invented a version of a single killer. In his last confession there popped a second killer out of nothing ???
4. That is a sweet story to make her more empathic or remorseful. She knew how to emotional influence the Jury playing the victim.
She was allways using an unemotional language while talking about her parents. Pups brain, a bloody poem for her mother in interviews where she was telling that here parents arguments stick like knives in your body (!!)
5. He killed her father, she killed her mother from different directions in different rooms. No happy meal of leftovers before or conversation before. No dog was hurt in that night. Maybe they have heard Psycho killer on their way back, wearing clean clothes after showering. Both were great fans of Talking heads.
Well you have the bloody shoe imprints which belong to Haysom. If Haysom's DNA would be in a beer can, in the midth (no contact to the floor) of a blood stain on the kitchen floor and it is her hair in the bath room she would have been incriminated 100%
@ FS007/008
You're getting even weaker!
Sure. Haysom and Soering had studied a ton of criminal stories before the murder weekend. If you wear gloves, you can save a lot of time in cleaning anything you had touched. And you won't forget something. Also Soering had studied Soldier & Fortune to select the proper knifes where your hands won't slip over the blade while stabbing somebody. As he joined a fencing club in his youth he knew the importance of self protection. So don't get silly and a troll accepting that Andrew can also think of gloves. It is the easiest way to prevent leaving fingerprints
But something went wrong cause of blood 0 in the master bedroom, on the screen door and on the door handle and blood B on a wash cloth. A pendant like Soering won' t forget a thing in general. They had a time slot to be back before or shortly after the Rocky Horror will end to catch up the last tickets that was thrown away. Unfortunately 2 tickets seemed to be impossible.
In fact there had been no coffie mugs that might keep fingerprints cause there consist out of foam (styropor).
On this interview event with Gardner he had also written something without gloves on. He had asked for a pen. Soering's claims that the diary entry was made to create papertrail that Soering is the single killer as his promise would be keeping her away from the crime scene is a true part. It is obvious that Haysom had to rely on such an act being in stron dependency by Soering.
But after the cops were after him, he wanted to keep them off tracing him down by his fingerprints. Logical for a murderer. But he knew that there had been no fingerprints at the scene (gloves)!
Lieber Jens Söring, der du hier sicherlich genau mitliest, um deine nächste Unterlassungsklage vorzubereiten, du erzählst bei jeder passenden Gelegenheit, daß du $ 1,4Mio. von Virginia bekommst, wenn die Virginianer endlich kapieren, daß du unschuldig bist.
Hier hast du nun die gratis Chance auf 1,4 Mio. indem du die DNA Tests veranlasst, die du immer wolltest (oder vielleicht doch nicht immer ...?).
Und was Meineide angeht, da bist du doch nicht immer so streng mit dir gewesen: Ich erinnere nur an das Jahr 1990, als du in den Anhörungen vor dem Hauptverfahren erklärt hast, die Geständnisse in England seien von dir unter Zwang erpresst worden und du nur ein paar Wochen später ebenfalls unter Eid vor demselben Richter (!) erklärtest, diese Geständnisse hast du als wahrer Held abgegeben um Elizabeth zu retten. Oder haben dich die bösen englischen Beamten gezwungen, Elizabeth vor der Todesstrafe zu retten, der sie nie angeklagt war ? Oder ist das jetzt ein Spin zuviel ?
Hey, it's me again. Though I am really Sure, that JS is a liar and wrightly convicted murderer, there is one point, I have to agree to him: He mentioned that Nance haven't signed the petition in anyway. I took a look at the petition the podcasters posted. And He is right at that point. So, although I am still deep impressed of their work, this circumstance confuses me. As they told in the podcast, Nance gave an official statement, that he has no objection.
Here we go ! Soering can get his often asked tests. Oh Dear, the show Soering produces is better then every Blockbuster I've ever watched! I need popcorn!!!
@FS007/008
All are weak points.
1. A smart killer would wear gloves. They planned it - they did it. But both got small cuts, scratches whatever. She wanted to go back to the crime scene to clean the front door and the door handle. She also knew that fingerprints won't be a problem cause she had been there a week before. She also wanted to leave the country at this point. She didn't want to be confronted by her brother who was very suspicious on her! (See her testimony)
2. No time log about the 5 calls on Saturday. Haysom testified and confirmed it in an interview that she called some jewelery shops where she sold some stolen rings, watches from her mother. What does it mean? No use for money, so no use to call anybody giving her card number. Neither Beth nor Kim did confirm any call by Haysom for this Saturday! -> Logical exclusion followed by zero proof.
AND there would have been money for a more proper alibi: second ticket for Rocky Horror!
3. Soering is a liar and many parts of his confessions are bullshit. Especially the details given around the murder deeds. No corroborating evidence at the crime scene. Soering said all his blood fell in his lap. No blood on his seat. He said there was a fight around the table and the table felt upside down. Nonsense. If he said he pulled Mr. Haysom firmly at her wrist as a shield, the autopsie report doesn't confirm this. If he said that Mrs Haysom ran into the Kitchen to pick up a knife it is bullshit. She could use her steak knife. If he said Derek pushe him against the fire place with his head, no birthday card had dropped down. So the true version must completely different. Soering has invented a version of a single killer. In his last confession there popped a second killer out of nothing ???
4. That is a sweet story to make her more empathic or remorseful. She knew how to emotional influence the Jury playing the victim.
She was allways using an unemotional language while talking about her parents. Pups brain, a bloody poem for her mother in interviews where she was telling that here parents arguments stick like knives in your body (!!)
5. He killed her father, she killed her mother from different directions in different rooms. No happy meal of leftovers before or conversation before. No dog was hurt in that night. Maybe they have heard Psycho killer on their way back, wearing clean clothes after showering. Both were great fans of Talking heads.
Well you have the bloody shoe imprints which belong to Haysom. If Haysom's DNA would be in a beer can, in the midth (no contact to the floor) of a blood stain on the kitchen floor and it is her hair in the bath room she would have been incriminated 100%
@ FS007/008
You're getting even weaker!
Sure. Haysom and Soering had studied a ton of criminal stories before the murder weekend. If you wear gloves, you can save a lot of time in cleaning anything you had touched. And you won't forget something. Also Soering had studied Soldier & Fortune to select the proper knifes where your hands won't slip over the blade while stabbing somebody. As he joined a fencing club in his youth he knew the importance of self protection.
But something went wrong cause of blood 0 in the master bedroom, on the screen door and on the door handle and blood B on a wash cloth. A pendant like Soering won' t forget a thing in general. They had a time slot to be back before or shortly after the Rocky Horror will end to catch up the last tickets that was thrown away. Unfortunately 2 tickets seemed to be impossible.
In fact there had been no coffie mugs that might keep fingerprints cause there consist out of foam (styropor).
On this interview event with Gardner he had also written something without gloves on. He had asked for a pen. Soering's claims that the diary entry was made to create papertrail that Soering is the single killer as his promise would be keeping her away from the crime scene is a true part. It is obvious that Haysom had to rely on such an act being in stron dependency by Soering.
But after the cops were after him, he wanted to keep them off tracing him down by his fingerprints. Logical for a murderer. But he knew that there had been no fingerprints at the scene (gloves)!
Are there any insights about the alleged 2017 DNA test application?
"If the DNA test shows Söring’s DNA at relevant areas of the crime scene".
What do you consider as "relevant areas" ?