AL AL - Brittney Wood, 19, Mobile, 31 May 2012 - # 4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Inthedetails04 said:
Brittney is not, I repeat, not in protective custody. LE has told the family and Klaas Kids that she is not in protective custody and they believe she simply ran away from home. They have said that Brittney was not being investigated for anything and is not tied to the sex abuse cases in any way. LE has stated that they do not suspect foul play in any way concerning Brittney's disappearance. These are the facts according to LE. I don't believe a single word of it, other than that she is not in their custody. I do suspect foul play and I think some of those arrested and some of those that are not arrested know exactly what happened to her. The family, those looking for her, hold out hope that she is alive but is proceeding as if she isn't. They just want her brought home, regardless. I do suspect that Brittney is linked to the sex abuse case as a victim of one or more of these men. Stay tuned, I expect more info will be released soon.
Click to expand...

CBM
Thanks for that clarification. We can put that notion to rest. Discussing LE statements, which is all we can do, apart from speculation, is tedious and limiting in my opinion. My apologies if necessary, it is obviously heartbreaking for you when you know the situation.
Great news that we can expect new info.
The situation is ridiculous as it stands . It boggles the mind.

MOO
 
raindrops said:
[/COLOR]
CBM
Thanks for that clarification. We can put that notion to rest. Discussing LE statements, which is all we can do, apart from speculation, is tedious and limiting in my opinion. My apologies if necessary, it is obviously heartbreaking for you when you know the situation.
Great news that we can expect new info.
The situation is ridiculous as it stands . It boggles the mind.

MOO
Click to expand...

Well, the fact that Brittney is not in Protective Custody can be understood by the way LE is handling the situation and the fact that Klaas Kids, family and supporters are still expending funds to search for Brittney. Everything I say is my opinion but can be backed up by what we see and hear from the family, LE and supporters. It is mind boggling. I believe that WKRG-5 recently asked locals what they thought and every one of them said that they believe 1) BW's disappearance and the sex abuse cases are related 2) BW didn't simply run away but has been taken and/or killed by someone related to both cases 3) that one or more of the family that is related to the case know more than they are saying. Why can't LE see that? I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch but it looks like LE either has more info than they want to share at the moment or are being told not to give her case the attention it deserves.
 
Inthedetails04 said:
Brittney is not, I repeat, not in protective custody. LE has told the family and Klaas Kids that she is not in protective custody and they believe she simply ran away from home. They have said that Brittney was not being investigated for anything and is not tied to the sex abuse cases in any way. LE has stated that they do not suspect foul play in any way concerning Brittney's disappearance. These are the facts according to LE. I don't believe a single word of it, other than that she is not in their custody. I do suspect foul play and I think some of those arrested and some of those that are not arrested know exactly what happened to her. The family, those looking for her, hold out hope that she is alive but are proceeding as if she isn't. They just want her brought home, regardless. I do suspect that Brittney is linked to the sex abuse case as a victim of one or more of these men. Stay tuned, I expect more info will be released soon.
Click to expand...

Right...I thought I asked....about " witness protection" Witness protection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - which is different than " protective custody" Protective custody - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do police do when someone is really in " witness protection" do they tell people........?
 
iSleuth said:
Right...I thought I asked....about " witness protection" Witness protection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - which is different than " protective custody" Protective custody - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do police do when someone is really in " witness protection" do they tell people........?
Click to expand...

I would suspect that they would let an agency like Klaas Kids know something, perhaps not where she is or the details of it, but they would notify them so that the agency would not expend unnecessary funds looking for her.
 
judgeb said:
Wow! So much info to check out!
I have been following all along and remember looking at CW fb page and she said she is the mother of 5 children (two years ago). Seems she and PH have had another child since. My question is where is the other son two years younger than Brittany? and if WH is the father of DW and BW and PH is the father of the two toddlers, who is the father of the other son?
Click to expand...
I had always thought WH was father of CW's oldest 3 children, but he commented on the news FB that he is father of BW & DW.
So now, I am confused about that.
 
iSleuth said:
Right...I thought I asked....about " witness protection" Witness protection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - which is different than " protective custody" Protective custody - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What do police do when someone is really in " witness protection" do they tell people........?
Click to expand...

Regardless, I believe the evidence will point to neither being the case, in the end. The facts suggest that DH picked BW up and was the last person to see BW before she went missing. DH shot himself using BW's gun, probably because it was the only one he had access to at the time due to the investigation. To say why Brittney went to see him would be speculation at this point. WWH did delete voice messages off DH's phone, as well as text meassages. She also attempted, and according to some family members was successful, to access BW's phone and deleted messages from it. That act alone would seem to imply guilt for something, whether it was evidence of sexual abuse or of what happened to BW is anyone's guess. I would be willing to stake my life that BW is missing and/or deceased, not ran away, and it was foul play. Ofcourse, I believe that everyone associated with BW's case, including us here, would love it if she was in either Protective Custody or Witness Protection because that would mean she is alive and can one day, perhaps, return home safely.
 
If she is in witness protection or protective custody, why would they tell ANYONE? Totally defeats the intent and purpose.

IMO of course.
 
Inthedetails04 said:
I would suspect that they would let an agency like Klaas Kids know something, perhaps not where she is or the details of it, but they would notify them so that the agency would not expend unnecessary funds looking for her.
Click to expand...

Thank You, Maybe Klaas kids are active in the case- and in collecting funds because they're interested in helping ( all) the victims in this case, and BW may possibly be one.

I still maintain that LE - Reinforcing this issue of BW not " missing" not "under protective custody or under investigation as part of the Criminal Case is part of her " witness " protection.

Do You really think they would secretly leak information to agencies ( Klaas Kids)? What if the leak was leaked? What sort of protection would that be?
 
AzPistonsGirl said:
If she is in witness protection or protective custody, why would they tell ANYONE? Totally defeats the intent and purpose.

IMO of course.
Click to expand...

How many people have been placed under "witness protection" while agencies (some local, state and federal) are expending their time, materials and funds to find them? The ABI, Federal Marshall's, Justice Department, Klaas Kids, the NCMEC, the ACMEC, as well as other public and private agencies, have either offered to or have expended resources looking for BW. As one prominent person put it, and I am paraphrasing, "Does it make sense for the devil to cast himself out?" Now this is not to say that these agencies are the devil but does point to the reality that no agency would expend these funds hunting for someone they have in custody or witness protection and I would certainly expect that, if the MPD had BW in custody or under witness protection, they would at the very least, notify state and federal agencies, all of which consider that an impossibility to begin with. Brittney is missing, not in Protective Custody and not in Witness Protection.
 
Inthedetails04 said:
How many people have been placed under "witness protection" while agencies (some local, state and federal) are expending their time, materials and funds to find them? The ABI, Federal Marshall's, Justice Department, Klaas Kids, the NCMEC, the ACMEC, as well as other public and private agencies, have either offered to or have expended resources looking for BW. As one prominent person put it, and I am paraphrasing, "Does it make sense for the devil to cast himself out?" Now this is not to say that these agencies are the devil but does point to the reality that no agency would expend these funds hunting for someone they have in custody or witness protection and I would certainly expect that, if the MPD had BW in custody or under witness protection, they would at the very least, notify state and federal agencies, all of which consider that an impossibility to begin with. Brittney is missing, not in Protective Custody and not in Witness Protection.
Click to expand...

<<"Does it make sense for the devil to cast himself out?">>
I am sorry I have no idea what this means with regard to this case.
 
Maybe a professional from Law Enforcement can tell us more. My question remains truly a question and not rhetorical.

WHat does local LE usually do ( for real) when a person and or whole family enters the FEDERAL witness protection system.

Do they help the cover- up ? or are they left in the dark?
 
iSleuth said:
Maybe a professional from Law Enforcement can tell us more. My question remains truly a question and not rhetorical.

WHat does local LE usually do ( for real) when a person and or whole family enters the FEDERAL witness protection system.

Do they help the cover- up ? or are they left in the dark?
Click to expand...

That's a very good question!
 
Inthedetails04 said:
How many people have been placed under "witness protection" while agencies (some local, state and federal) are expending their time, materials and funds to find them? The ABI, Federal Marshall's, Justice Department, Klaas Kids, the NCMEC, the ACMEC, as well as other public and private agencies, have either offered to or have expended resources looking for BW. As one prominent person put it, and I am paraphrasing, "Does it make sense for the devil to cast himself out?" Now this is not to say that these agencies are the devil but does point to the reality that no agency would expend these funds hunting for someone they have in custody or witness protection and I would certainly expect that, if the MPD had BW in custody or under witness protection, they would at the very least, notify state and federal agencies, all of which consider that an impossibility to begin with. Brittney is missing, not in Protective Custody and not in Witness Protection.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to explain your OPINION.

Can you find proof that if a person is taken into PC or WP, that such information would be conveyed to ANY other agency or organization like this?

I don't belive that it happens, but it might...
 
I will apologize to start off b/c this is my first time posting after following this case from here in Mobile, Alabama...

1.) MWK has a "subscription" on facebook to a minor's updates? it's the only one that is showing, but why would she be doing this? especially when they are not even friends?

2.) BW posted on a friend's facebook page with the initials MT on May 27 about going to see him, and her friend AB was in the conversation as well. (just poor timing?) this same person (MT) is also friends with a (HT - family member) - and she is posting about this case all over her page..
 
sleuthing911 said:
I will apologize to start off b/c this is my first time posting after following this case from here in Mobile, Alabama...

1.) MWK has a "subscription" on facebook to a minor's updates? it's the only one that is showing, but why would she be doing this? especially when they are not even friends?

2.) BW posted on a friend's facebook page with the initials MT on May 27 about going to see him, and her friend AB was in the conversation as well. (just poor timing?) this same person (MT) is also friends with a (HT - family member) - and she is posting about this case all over her page..
Click to expand...



also, if you look in the "mobile uploads" for HT - there appears to be a pic of MWK and WWH playing on computers?
 
fabvab said:
I had always thought WH was father of CW's oldest 3 children, but he commented on the news FB that he is father of BW & DW.
So now, I am confused about that.
Click to expand...

I thought that was just because the two older children were the topic being discussed. The third child hasn't been in the news so I can see not bringing him up during that particular discussion about the two in the news.
 
sleuthing911 said:
I will apologize to start off b/c this is my first time posting after following this case from here in Mobile, Alabama...

1.) MWK has a "subscription" on facebook to a minor's updates? it's the only one that is showing, but why would she be doing this? especially when they are not even friends?

2.) BW posted on a friend's facebook page with the initials MT on May 27 about going to see him, and her friend AB was in the conversation as well. (just poor timing?) this same person (MT) is also friends with a (HT - family member) - and she is posting about this case all over her page..
Click to expand...

:welcome: Sleuthing911:welcome:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 150 more.
Total: 1,447 (members: 151, guests: 1,296)

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
1,296
Total visitors
1,447
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,579
Messages
18,097,073
Members
230,887
Latest member
DeeDee214
Back
Top