evidence

Diane's son Steven Daniel (Danny) consistently described the shooter as 'that mean man'. These spontaneous uttering's of Danny were rejected as 'fantasy' and deemed inadmissible by Judge Foote. Christie (Ann's) detailed sketch of the attacker complimented her mother's composite of the attacker. Christie wasn't even aware her mother had described a male as the attacker let alone make a composite which turned out to be very similar to her own sketch.

LEFT HANDED SHOOTER

The individual who attacked the Downs family was 'left handed'. Diane is 'right handed'. In her testimony Christie was made to lie that her mom committed the crime. When the attack occurred Christie testified that she was 'sitting' behind the driver's seat with Danny laid alongside her and Cheryl (Lynn) was 'sitting' on the front passenger seat. The State claimed that Diane had knelt on the front seat to fire at the children and possibly shot Cheryl a second time when she exited the car after being shot the first time. The following will explain how ludicrous and untenable this claim is.

Diagrams 1, 2 and 3 are sketched to scale and show the trajectory of the shots fired. The bullet that entered Christie's left breast area and exited at the base of the neck traveled 'upwards' at a 30% angle. The bullet that entered Danny's lower back and lodged in his upper chest traveled 'upward' at a 30% angle. The shots to both victims were fired so rapidly neither child had the time to raise from where they lay on the back seat. In Cheryl’s case the child had been shot from behind in both shoulder's. She was lifted off the car floor by hospital staff. 'Forward' of the front passenger seat where she had lain covered with her mother’s clothing. A pool of blood was left where she had lain and a spent bullet found under the carpet in the same area. Proving that she was on the floor (sleeping) as Diane had said when the fatal shots were fired and not 'sitting' on the front seat as Christie testified. These trajectories and subsequent injuries can only be explained if Christie were 'lying' on the back seat and Cheryl was 'lying' on the car floor when shot. Danny could only have been shot by a 'left-handed' person, and the shooter didn't have time to switch the gun from right to left. Proving the weapon was almost parallel with the body which was parallel with the seat. Which in turn was three feet below the ceiling of the car, (App, 90, p.p. 1251, 1302). The attack could not have come from the right side of the car (as you face the grill) as can be seen in diagram 2. Because the accessibility of that angle is blocked by the back of the seat and the wall of the car. The shot could only have been fired from the center of the car. Only a left-handed person, positioned in the drivers seat could fire a weapon from between the front bucket seats. The arm holding the weapon would have to be elevated less than six inches above the seat to satisfy the coordinates (distance and trajectory), (diagr 1&2, diagr, 3)

Both shots entered Christie's 'left' side (see) and the trajectories cannot be explained if Christie were 'sitting'. This was difficult to get around for State Criminalist Jim Pex. So he claimed the first shot that hit Christie would have knocked her into a 'half reclining position'. But his difficulties still remain because both Christie's entry wounds are in close proximity to each other, an indication of rapid fire and no movement on the part of Christie. Pex's calculation following the first impacted bullet would not have shown such close proximity. Besides, the trajectories took a similar path. The bullet that did not exit was lodged near the exit wound itself. Showing Christie would not have elevated or moved the trunk of her body between shots.

Pex also deduced that the first shot probably hit Cheryl as she 'lay on the floor', (forward of the front passenger seat). Contradicting Christie's testimony that Cheryl was 'sitting' on the front passenger seat when the shooting began. Pex obviously hadn't read the script. He perhaps had other anomalies on his mind like explaining his theory that Cheryl could have been shot 'outside' the car. In a reflex action she exited or attempted to exit the car or... Diane went around and opened the door and shot the child on the road. Incredible. This after the first (fatal) shot hit the child. A shot which caused severe damage to her ribs, lungs, heart and trachea. To have opened or attempted to open the door would have been more of a miracle than a reflex. Considering the shot was delivered to a six year old. Cheryl was hit (from behind) in both shoulders, a trajectory which can only be explained if she were 'lying' on the floor when shot 'both' times.

LUMINOL

In their examination of the crime scene forensics carried out extensive Luminol testing. Luminol is a widely used chemical in determining possible blood evidence otherwise unseen by the naked eye. Usually distributed from a hand-held spray the chemical reacts with the bloods enzymes. If blood is present it can then be highlighted using an amplified light source. It is not necessary of course where bloodstains are obvious. This was evident on the center console in the car and various other places of the cars interior. In particular the ceiling (see). Pex himself said he was surprised to discover 'blood spatter' (discussed below) on the 'pocket' of one of the doors. Not in line with Christie being shot 'sitting', but more suggestive of her being shot in a prone position. Luminol sprayed on the back of the front seats revealed a minimal amount of blood at the bottom of one seat although Pex was unsure as to its exact position. The chemical revealed 'no' blood on the (front) seats, sitting or back-rest area.

Pex was questioned extensively by Attorney Jagger on (Cheryl's) shooting outside the car. Luminol tests revealed negative results for blood in the vicinity outside the car. Pex's extraordinary theory for this was that Cheryl's clothing (the child wore a 'T' shirt) could have soaked it up. A scientific claim it appears, that defies the laws of gravity. Why was this (soaking up) not the case inside the car where a pool of blood was discovered beneath the child?. No doubt her clothing would have soaked up a certain amount but to claim that it would be so much that even luminol would detect not a trace of it outside the clothing is beyond comprehension.

Christie testified:

Q. (Jagger) " Do you remember if Cheryl....when the shots were being fired, did

Cheryl get out of the car " ?

A. (Christie) " No "

Q. " Do you remember if the person who shot Cheryl and Danny and you, if that

person got in through the driver's....the side where the steering wheel is or on

the other side ? "

A. " The driver's seat ".

If the shooter were Diane then it would mean that, apart from becoming ambidextrous all of a sudden, 'all' the blood spatter totally missed her and the back of the seats (see). This, along with the theory that Cheryl had exited or attempted to exit the car would make two miraculous events in the space of around a minute. The State could have saved themselves this strained effort had they listened to the truth and concluded the obvious. Tests carried out on Diane (discussed below) for blood spatter proved she was not the shooter. Blood spatter on the car's interior is more consistent with Christie in a prone position than a sitting position. The nurse who removed Christie from the car had to push the front passenger seat 'forward' to gain access to her. This was because Diane had moved it back to allow Cheryl more room to sleep on the floor. The fact was the State needed Christie to be 'sitting' to support their fabrication of a witness. Even when the forensics (not to mention logic) dictated otherwise.

back Top next