Oil not just talk of the world, it's in the courtroom, too
The smell of oil is in the air. If George Bush - either one of them - was in the room, he'd be drooling. Lt. Pyle showed the jurors the oil filters collected from the farm on Jan. 26, 2005. The date on one of the filters was 12/29/05. The hours were 298. A second oil filter had 1/16/2006 on it, with 298 also written on it. That oil filter was found in water runoff behind the farm. A third filter found buried in a pile of manure was dated 11/8/05. Another one was dated 12/29/05 with hours 6303 on it. The filters dated 12/29/05 were taken from actual tractors. The filter on tractor model No. 4430 was still dated 1/16/06, however.
Basically, two tractor filters were dated 12/29/05. One was still dated in January. Investigators found filters dated 1/16 and 11/8 hidden around the farm. They were unable to locate a third filter missing, which was supposed to be in the dumpster, is what Pyle said Jose Garcia said.
Dubs asked Pyle if anyone actually checked the tractor gauge to check the hours/miles. He said, he didn't and he didn't know if anyone else checked.
Dubs continues to question Pyle.
Basically, two tractor filters were dated 12/29/05. One was still dated in January. Investigators found filters dated 1/16 and 11/8 hidden around the farm. They were unable to locate a third filter missing, which was supposed to be in the dumpster, is what Pyle said Jose Garcia said.
Dubs asked Pyle if anyone actually checked the tractor gauge to check the hours/miles. He said, he didn't and he didn't know if anyone else checked.
Dubs continues to question Pyle.
posted by THE HICKORY DAILY RECORD at at
3:36 PM
14 Comments:
There better be a punchline to these randomly dated oil filters or I'm sending a letter to the Governor asking for an investigation of the investigators.
Allison, did I hit a nerve today?
You really must be some kind of woman to think that you sending a letter could make a difference. They are going to find him guilty. why don>t you just take your opinions to some one who cares.
Mr/Mrs Friend in Sawmills....It is quite evident you care what Allison says because it seems to have hit your nerve with current and previous comments......Just because people belive he is guilty does'nt make him guilty or innocent.....Leave it up to a group of his peers..
This case has been a Circus from the start of the trial...I would hate to have to sit on this jury, I too would laugh as they did..
On another note...This is funny....The cops are reading this looking for information because what they have proven so far is nothing..Not one solid piece of evidence..
Okay the dated oil filters made no sense to me. Granted it's odd that there are two with the same date but what does that truly mean, someone forgot what the date was?
friend in sawmills how can you be so sure that Mr. Anderson killed his wife? Were you there? It is people like you who refuse to see any thing other than black in gray that sit on juries that don't understand what "beyond a reasonable doubt means" and wouldn't hesitate to possibly send an innoncent man or woman to prison or to their death in the case of Mr. Anderson.
Look up the defination of "resonable doubt" and then let everyone on this blog know if you thing that the state up to this point has given any prooft beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Anderson killed his wife.
Allison,
You and I must be going to different trials. NOBODY ever stated that they found Emily's glasses. It was stated that a pair of glasses were left in a hotel room, but never was it stated that the glasses were Emily's.
Now for the oil filters.....It was testified that Jerry ordered the filters changed and to backdated the new ones to 29 Dec 2005. This happened on 19 Jan 2006. When they compared the old filters with the new filters, the same usage hours were on both. Also he instructed the workers to say he was there all day. Mr. Garcia testified he was missing until late in the afternoon. Now, Allison, why would an innocent man require someone to lie for him?
allison i think he wanted people to think she had got the filters and had returned them to the farm after he called her about them so it would look like she had been back to the farm at some point.that i think is why he wanted the oil filters changed to 12/29/06.
my mistake 2005
Lee said:
"Allison, You and I must be going to different trials. NOBODY ever stated that they found Emily's glasses. It was stated that a pair of glasses were left in a hotel room, but never was it stated that the glasses were Emily's."
Some confusion here Lee, I never said they found her glasses either (in that prior thread). That's my point. She didn't have her glasses when found. She said she was going to a Sams Club. One Sams club deals in eyeglasses. So wouldn't it have been wise to check in with that store.
Apparently some newspaper said glasses were found, but I know nothing about that nor trust in that information until I hear such testimony at the trial.
So I'm not sure what you are getting at in your quote above.
Lee also said:
"... he instructed the workers to say he was there all day."
Granted, the defense would have to explain this point. Then again, the testimony comes from a man using a phony name. So I'm not sure what to make of the whole thing.
This is a quote from wcnc.
"Defense attorneys also said Anderson’s eyeglasses were found inside a Duncan, S.C., motel room several days after her disappearance."
Junebug said:
"i think he wanted people to think she had got the filters and had returned them to the farm after he called her about them"
Ah, a good theory you bring up. I now better understand where the prosecution was going with this. Yes, it is concerning. Finally today is seems that the defense has a little explaining to do.
Thank you all for clearing this up for me. Guess I'll hold off on that letter to the Gov.... :)
"... he instructed the workers to say he was there all day."
This is also coming from the man that Emily called 46 times, once to ask what to order at a Mexican restaurant. These two were a little closer than employer/employee.
As far as the oil filters providing an alibi for Jerry.. the theory suggested here still doesn't make sense to me. Jerry NEVER said that Emily came back with the filters. So are we to believe he connivingly set up the alibi.. then never followed through with it?
On the glasses.. I think we can all agree that glasses were found.. Emily's or not. I would presume that the hotel would have alerted law enforcement that there were glasses at which time the glasses would have been picked up by an investigator, then shown to Emily's family and friends to identify. I would also think that if they were Emily's glasses found inside a hotel room that Emily had been in that hotel room, at which point some sort of investigative exercise would have taken place. (Even just fingerprints). However.. the presence of this evidence would tend to steer suspicion AWAY from Jerry.
I think it will be interesting to see what comes of the glasses. Since the state is required to turn over all evidence to the defense.. I suspect that the defense will be presenting the glasses when they take their turn, again, assuming they have them. If they don't have the glasses.. I'm worried we might see additional evidence that law enforcement dropped the ball.
Also Wednesday, Dubs mentioned bank records which show Emily Anderson’s credit card was used at a Hickory Mall several hours after prosecutors believe she had been murdered.
This was the new I ask if anyone had heard about: From WCNC on Wednesday
"Defense attorneys also said Anderson’s eyeglasses were found inside a Duncan, S.C., motel room several days after her disappearance.
Bennett testified he was not aware of the bank records or the eyeglasses. "
Where is the weapon? Where is the scene of the crime? What could have happened between Duncan, SC and Lenoir, NC? Where is the testimony of Mr. Keith Keen? Where is the history of the chain of evidence?
Wayyyy to many questions in my mind. Looks like a conspiracy to convict Mr. Anderson to me.
So far, we've got "Goober" bette known as "Buffy", Mr. Pyle, "Gomer" Mr. McNeil, the dog trainer with 1 dead dog, 1 drunk dog and a video reeactment,"Daisy" with a the reenactment, and a nosy and interferring (and illegal) "Cooter" wrecker driver.
Where is "Boss Hog"? What is somebody covering up? Oh, and don't forget the missing glasses, the officer from Duncan (who didn't bring his files to the trial), and the evidence technician who didn't take notes. Not to mentinon the "Lead Investigator" who didn;t even take a picture of Emily when trying to trace her route on the day she disappeared when she had only been in the area for 2 years.
Sorry, but I've been watching too much CSI and seeing how professinoal investigators work. But how can the jury convict someone on purely circumstantial evidence when the Prosecution's witnesses are questionable, including the Hispanics?
Appears to be a "railroding to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home