Search of MR's house Aug. 14, 2013

[rebeccaeee]

The bank has moved to foreclose but they have not taken possession yet. Mark still lives there. And when and if the bank does repossess, LE does not have carte blanche to go inside without the same procedures as before. I seriously hope they do take advantage of another look before the home is repossessed and auctioned off to someone new. This is one of those instances where I'm hoping for slowness in bureaucracy, actually, because once the home is in new hands, well, any evidence can be discounted by defense attorneys IMO.

 

[RANCH]

I have heard people say that IF something happened in Mark's house or his truck, the search would have absolutely picked up on it. And many think the apparent lack of evidence in the home and truck point to innocence.

However, LE just now arrested Joseph McStay's business partner for murder. And they claim he killed all 4 of the family INSIDE THE HOUSE, by blunt force trauma. And he moved the bodies in the family vehicle, reportedly. And originally, LE did not find any evidence left behind in the house or vehicles. :waitasec:

I don't know much about the McStay case but I think that it's possible that Dylan was killed in Mark's home and no evidence of it was left behind. Strangulation is one way. JMO.

 

[RANCH]

The bank has moved to foreclose but they have not taken possession yet. Mark still lives there. And when and if the bank does repossess, LE does not have carte blanche to go inside without the same procedures as before. I seriously hope they do take advantage of another look before the home is repossessed and auctioned off to someone new. This is one of those instances where I'm hoping for slowness in bureaucracy, actually, because once the home is in new hands, well, any evidence can be discounted by defense attorneys IMO.

If there is a fourth search of Mark's house and evidence is found, I think that a defense attorney could make a point of why wasn't this evidence found before. Inept LE? Planting?

This could be used by a defense whether the search is done while Mark still lives in the house or not.

JMO.

 

[Ghostwheel]

If there is a fourth search of Mark's house and evidence is found, I think that a defense attorney could make a point of why wasn't this evidence found before. Inept LE? Planting?

This could be used by a defense whether the search is done while Mark still lives in the house or not.

JMO.

Agreed, but there would be a better chance of anything being considered admissible if they were to search after Mark left, but before someone else moved in. I keep thinking of all the things I have found in weird places in houses I have moved into and remodeled (tape player, walkman type, sitting on a crossbeam in the wall behind a toilet, for example) , and even the things I left behind in weird places in houses I've moved out of and didn't recall until years later (box of Christmas decorations in a hidden crawl space in a washer closet, for example). The LE searches are only as good as the warrants and searchers.

 

[Ghostwheel]

I have heard people say that IF something happened in Mark's house or his truck, the search would have absolutely picked up on it. And many think the apparent lack of evidence in the home and truck point to innocence.

However, LE just now arrested Joseph McStay's business partner for murder. And they claim he killed all 4 of the family INSIDE THE HOUSE, by blunt force trauma. And he moved the bodies in the family vehicle, reportedly. And originally, LE did not find any evidence left behind in the house or vehicles. :waitasec:

Just watch some Forensic Files, and it is obvious that evidence isn't always left behind....

 

[RANCH]

Agreed, but there would be a better chance of anything being considered admissible if they were to search after Mark left, but before someone else moved in. I keep thinking of all the things I have found in weird places in houses I have moved into and remodeled (tape player, walkman type, sitting on a crossbeam in the wall behind a toilet, for example) , and even the things I left behind in weird places in houses I've moved out of and didn't recall until years later (box of Christmas decorations in a hidden crawl space in a washer closet, for example). The LE searches are only as good as the warrants and searchers.

I think that after three LE searches, no matter how inept they may have been, there wouldn't be anything left to find.

If we were talking about the first consent search then I could understand something being missed by LE. After that search and two extensive searches with warrants, not so much. JMO.

 

[RANCH]

Just watch some Forensic Files, and it is obvious that evidence isn't always left behind....

I agree that evidence isn't always left behind in murder cases. Waiting 10 days to execute a search warrant isn't a good idea if you wish to collect evidence in my opinion.

 

[Ghostwheel]

I think that after three LE searches, no matter how inept they may have been, there wouldn't be anything left to find.

If we were talking about the first consent search then I could understand something being missed by LE. After that search and two extensive searches with warrants, not so much. JMO.

I wish I could agree with you on that one. My opinion is that there could very well be something to find that three searches didn't unearth. Mainly because IMO, they didn't do an exhaustive search of every part of the house each time. I am, of course, referring to anything which could be moved, as well as static evidence. Again, I think of my own house and good luck searching "everything" here. It'd take them months, because I use all kinds of weird storage cubbies and hidden spaces. (I am also the premier Easter Egg hider-hidden some so well I can't even find them and they turn up later). Since I don't know exactly what was searched each time, it is IMOO, based on my own experiences. But I see what you are saying.

 

[MissJ]

Maybe EH will buy the house and seal it to preserve evidence.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Who on earth would buy that place.
Jeepers creepers.
The bank would be better off demolishing it and donating the land as a park or something like that.
Dylan Park. I like that.

 

[Ausgirl]

I honestly think if they haven't found proof there by now, then whatever proof might have been there will long gone.

I'm betting there was no blood evidence anyway, or things wouldn't have been gone about as calmly as they were, iykwim.

Tick tock, though. Sooner or later.

 

[RANCH]

I honestly think if they haven't found proof there by now, then whatever proof might have been there will long gone.

I'm betting there was no blood evidence anyway, or things wouldn't have been gone about as calmly as they were, iykwim.

Tick tock, though. Sooner or later.

I agree. I'm sure any blood evidence would have been found during the early search's. I really doubt that Mark would hang onto evidence like a murder weapon or something else that would point to his guilt. He had plenty of time to get rid of things.

If something is found in Mark's home two years after Dylan's disappearance, I would strongly suspect planting. JMO.

 

[SCHMAE]

Here is what I think . I think they did find some ' evidence' in the home. I think they did find some ' evidence' in the truck(s). But that evidence is not necessarily evidence of a crime. If you have 2 boys in a home the age of MR's sons, then it's clear there is going to be blood in that home at some point, broken nose, scraped knees, etc. So I think there were things found that could point to a crime BUT not enough to point to a crime without some other evidence. So they sat on it and hoped something else comes up .

Brings up a question I'm sure one of my WS'ers knows. Once blood is dried , can you tell its age ? Say they found blood in the home several weeks later. Wasn't there one search that was literally months later? So if they found dried blood at that time, is there any way to say this blood has been here 3 mos or 6 mos or over 12 mos? TIA

 

[Ghostwheel]

I agree. I'm sure any blood evidence would have been found during the early search's. I really doubt that Mark would hang onto evidence like a murder weapon or something else that would point to his guilt. He had plenty of time to get rid of things.

If something is found in Mark's home two years after Dylan's disappearance, I would strongly suspect planting. JMO.

What about having hidden a murder weapon that wasn't found and he doesn't dare move out of it's hiding place (because I'm willing to bet someone is checking his trash, even if it isn't LE) or just moving a murder weapon around, depending on what it was? I'm with you, any sane person would not hang onto a murder weapon. But then you have to wonder what sane person would kill a 12 year old. Since Mark was not initially a suspect by LE, why couldn't he have removed a murder weapon from his home, maybe left it with a family member because it was innocuous looking and brought it back at a later date (again, not saying any sane person would do this, but a sane person doesn't normally have SWAT hallucinations, either, so there is that). Or the item was something that he loaned to someone else after the murder and before the first search warrant and was later returned ( a gun, a digging bar, a cast iron skillet, what have you). I think it would depend on what it was and where it was found as to whether I would suspect planting of evidence or not. And it would depend on what other evidence they already have.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Here is what I think . I think they did find some ' evidence' in the home. I think they did find some ' evidence' in the truck(s). But that evidence is not necessarily evidence of a crime. If you have 2 boys in a home the age of MR's sons, then it's clear there is going to be blood in that home at some point, broken nose, scraped knees, etc. So I think there were things found that could point to a crime BUT not enough to point to a crime without some other evidence. So they sat on it and hoped something else comes up .

Brings up a question I'm sure one of my WS'ers knows. Once blood is dried , can you tell its age ? Say they found blood in the home several weeks later. Wasn't there one search that was literally months later? So if they found dried blood at that time, is there any way to say this blood has been here 3 mos or 6 mos or over 12 mos? TIA

It is available. If they still have the carpet from the house, this could work:
http://www.forensicmag.com/news/2013/10/blood-stain-breakthrough
"Month-old blood samples can be dated to within a day, while fresh traces have been pinpointed to within an hour of their being taken, potentially helping police to establish a time of death immediately"

This was interesting. It doesn't look like it is used yet, though.
http://www.forensicmag.com/news/2013/12/3d-space-camera-tech-has-forensic-applications

“For example, a police officer at a crime scene does not have to wait for a lab to tell him how old traces of blood are. Hyperspectral technology can determine its age immediately, by color alone.”

This does imply that there are lab tests to determine age of blood, as well, but I didn't find reference to it in a quick search. I probably used the wrong search terms.

 

[RANCH]

What about having hidden a murder weapon that wasn't found and he doesn't dare move out of it's hiding place (because I'm willing to bet someone is checking his trash, even if it isn't LE) or just moving a murder weapon around, depending on what it was? I'm with you, any sane person would not hang onto a murder weapon. But then you have to wonder what sane person would kill a 12 year old. Since Mark was not initially a suspect by LE, why couldn't he have removed a murder weapon from his home, maybe left it with a family member because it was innocuous looking and brought it back at a later date (again, not saying any sane person would do this, but a sane person doesn't normally have SWAT hallucinations, either, so there is that). Or the item was something that he loaned to someone else after the murder and before the first search warrant and was later returned ( a gun, a digging bar, a cast iron skillet, what have you). I think it would depend on what it was and where it was found as to whether I would suspect planting of evidence or not. And it would depend on what other evidence they already have.

I don't think that Mark's own trash can would be where he would get rid of evidence and I don't think he would loan the murder weapon out to someone. Throwing incriminating evidence in a trash dumpster would make more sense to me.

I can understand people's desire that evidence which could lead to the conviction of Dylan's killer is still in Mark's house. After all of the search's I just don't feel that any evidence is still there. JMO.

 

[MissJ]

I don't believe DR was killed in MR's house. I doubt he ever made it there.

 

[rosesfromangels]

I dont know if he made it to the house, but I believe he was murdered close to where his partial remains were discovered. I also believe there are remains in the damn, based on the alerts from the dogs.

 

[MissJ]

I dont know if he made it to the house, but I believe he was murdered close to where his partial remains were discovered. I also believe there are remains in the damn, based on the alerts from the dogs.

I think so too. I believe he may have been moved from original crime scene. Some items used may be at MR's house though.

 

[rosesfromangels]

I think so too. I believe he may have been moved from original crime scene. Some items used may be at MR's house though.

You could very well be right, but I would think LE has scoured that home up and down? Even if his back pack were tucked away is some crevice in an attic, I would think it would have been found. Who knows, anything is possible. I would tend to think that anything remaining is in the dam, weighted down, or stuck in the dam machinery. Sorry, not a pleasant thought at all.

All this said, I have no doubt this case will be solved. It's only a matter of time, IMO.