The knife, hammer, and cassette tape

And no worries about the watermarks, they drive me nutz, especially the ones of the crime scene that cover the entire photo

Thanks for that info Snoho! I find it very interesting since I know nothing about metal detecting/detectors.

What you are saying makes perfect sense to me (based on my zero knowledge lol). If he was simply searching for a wedding ring, a precious item I'm sure this person was very much hoping could be found, you would think the settings would be set for gold. Why waste time getting a hit on everything else? How dried up did that pond get?? Dried up enough that somebody would be walking on the area  where water used to be (and lose a ring)? If so then, you would think the hammer could have been noticed sooner. 

But when did the pond first start "drying up"? I am not at all sure, but was under the assumption it was maintained as a pond for some years but once things were let go it began to fill & empty naturally? So perhaps it was maintained long enough for the hammer to have sank into muck prior to the first dry out? But still, how could someone lose a wedding ring in that area? Had it been lost recently, when the pond was dried up? Or when it was filled with water & the metal detectors went out searching once it dried up?

Do all metal detectors have the different settings? Or just newer ones? Do you have to choose a specific setting or is there a general/everything setting? I hope what I'm trying to ask is making sense lol.

Cassiopeia, I personally have lots of questions about the hammer found in the pond, aka "Marty's hammer". According to LE reports & even newspaper articles from the time, the weapons left at the scene were the murder weapons.  The Pathologist never said two different hammers were used. This was a deduction someone else came up with. Someone with no experience in forensics, pathology, LE, crime scene investigation or reconstruction, etc. 

We have never seen an official document stating two hammers were used. Of course, I'm not a professional either, but based on information I've read or listened to, from people who are professionals and involved with crime scene investigation, etc. the size of a wound can vary depending on the force used. So the same weapon can leave a larger wound if greater force is used. It does not mean there were two different weapons used. Also, it does not appear a second opinion or re-examination of the autopsy results was performed by a pathologist to confirm a second hammer was used since this deduction was made. Until that happens no one can say two different hammers were used. There is no evidence of it, other than someone's opinion.