AL AL - J.B. Beasley, 17, & Tracie Hawlett, 17, Ozark, 31 July 1999 #4 *ARREST*

[Andreee]

.

 

[Andreee]

It'

I would find it had to believe if he had made unwanted comments or advances towards her she would have voluntarily gave hi a ride once much less twice..but thats just my opinion.

Your opinion makes a lot of sense for sure!

 

[cherrymeg]

BBM...I've wondered about that myself. While he may or may not have flirted with one or both of them, he may have simply been very nice and polite and asked for a ride. Ted Bundy was very nice and charmed his way into the vehicles and homes of several of his victims. Now, before anyone yells at me for comparing CM to Bundy, I am not doing that. I am simply saying that sometimes killers are very polite and charming until they get the victim where they want them.

Good point. It's really easy to feel like someone is safe because they are around friends or acquaintances. Bundy didn't look out of place on college campuses he went out of his way to seem non-threatening at times.

 

[cherrymeg]

Is his DNA in the system now? If it is does that mean it can be checked against other cases? I can't help but think if McCraney committed this crime there might be others.

 

[shark315]

Is his DNA in the system now? If it is does that mean it can be checked against other cases? I can't help but think if McCraney committed this crime there might be others.

I don't think it can be entered into the database yet until he has been convicted, but that also doesn't mean that another LE agencies can not contact OPD and run a sample against it

 

[cherrymeg]

I don't think it can be entered into the database yet until he has been convicted, but that also doesn't mean that another LE agencies can not contact OPD and run a sample against it

I'm curious how this works. If he did commit other crimes he may have been more careful about DNA. That is just speculation. In 1999 would they have ran the DNA against other crimes? And would it have been nationwide?

 

[Crazy Mama]

<modsnipped quoted post>

I am going to make a peace offering. Unlike some, I am not sure this guy acted alone. 1st let me say that I think CM was involved in the murders. Like everyone else, I am anxious to see what other evidence the prosecution has. I feel that they must have more, but time will tell. I will add that while I am certainly not sure, I think there is a decent chance that someone else is involved in the murders. If so, CM is in a tough spot-albeit by his own doings . He can't name the other party without implicating himself. If he keeps his mouth shut like I am sure his lawyer is telling him to do, the other party will never come to light (unless the Police have or develop another suspect). Lets all stay open minded, but still the DNA in and on Beasley is very incriminating to CM, no matter how his attorney and his supporters try to spin it.

I disagree. If there was another perpetrator then most likely both girls would have been molested and they would have found other DNA.

 

[LR1]

I'm curious how this works. If he did commit other crimes he may have been more careful about DNA. That is just speculation. In 1999 would they have ran the DNA against other crimes? And would it have been nationwide?

They would have ran it through the unknown offender index in CODIS but they wouldn't necessarily let on if the did find a match to another crime. I think since he's been identified though if there was another crime that matched we would have heard about it by now. Yes nationwide.

 

[cherrymeg]

They would have ran it through the unknown offender index in CODIS but they wouldn't necessarily let on if the did find a match to another crime. I think since he's been identified though if there was another crime that matched we would have heard about it by now. Yes nationwide.

Thank you.

 

[Andreee]

Is his DNA in the system now? If it is does that mean it can be checked against other cases? I can't help but think if McCraney committed this crime there might be others.

He had avoided getting his DNA taken twice in a parental matter, for some unknown reason, but now that it has been taken, it will be interesting to see if any other crimes turn up.

 

[Sillybilly]

Admin Note:

Excerpt from The Rules: Etiquette & Information re Websleuths' Victim Friendly Policy:

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.

"Discussing victim behavior" means known behavior as reported in MSM, by LE, or official documents. It does NOT mean that you can wildly speculate that the victim may have been involved in negative behavior.

 

[Andreee]

Admin Note:

Excerpt from The Rules: Etiquette & Information re Websleuths' Victim Friendly Policy:

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.

"Discussing victim behavior" means known behavior as reported in MSM, by LE, or official documents. It does NOT mean that you can wildly speculate that the victim may have been involved in negative behavior.

I respect these rules wholeheartedly!

 

[Blacklist]

One final thought before I back off of this thread for a while, I would remind all posters to be mindful of the Terms of Service (TOS). For the newbies, they are listed on the home page. This thread has been shut down once before. Lets follow the rules so it won't happen again. Also, remember that the families of the victims and possibly the accused read here. Choose your words carefully.

Thanks for the reminder. I agree. Families of the victims, the accused and others of sensitive nature (L.E. and possibly/ probably additional perpetrators) are reading this.

Best wise with words.

Quo Vadis

 

[Achilles81]

Thanks for the clarification Admin. Surely wasn't my intention, as I didn't think my thoughts were bashing or wildly speculating. I will be more cognizant of what to post and not to post here on out.

 

[Blacklist]

I disagree. If there was another perpetrator then most likely both girls would have been molested and they would have found other DNA.

Possibly. But instead of or in addition to a of another perpetrator the could very well be a provocateur involved in this.
Remember, open minds. There is more history to this than just the July 1999 date of the crime.

All possibilities and motives considered

Quo Vadis

 

[YESorNO]

Thank you - but I read those. I was just wondering if the next court date was said. I personally didn't see it in any of the tweets!
TIA!

The only thing mentioned in this article was:

"The trial is expected to move toward a grand jury in June." No other court date.

Coley McCraney appears in court for his preliminary

 

[YESorNO]

Can Genealogy DNA Link To The Wrong Suspect? (with clip)

April 3, 2019

"SACRAMENTO (CBS13) — The technique that led to the arrest of the alleged Golden State Killer has now helped police in Alabama crack a decades-old double murder. The suspect in court Wednesday claims he’s innocent, but as this type of crime fighting becomes more common, some are wondering if genealogy DNA can link to the wrong suspect.

CBS13 investigator Julie Watts found that yes, DNA can get it wrong, and it has. In fact, genealogy DNA led to a different suspect in the Golden State Killer case before police arrested Joseph DeAngelo. His case has a lot in common with the Alabama case....

Parabon has helped solve nearly 50 cold cases. Moore said the company’s work generates leads.

“We’re providing a highly scientific tip, but no one’s going to be arrested based on what we say alone. Law enforcement has to take that tip and then go and build their traditional forensic case against this person,” Moore said.

The technique has faced criticism from privacy advocates, and a 2014 British study on familial DNA searches reportedly found an 83 percent failure rate.

Investigators in the Golden State Killer case even misidentified a 73-year-old Oregon man as their suspect before finding DeAngelo, because the two men had the same rare genetic marker....

McCraney faces the death penalty if he is convicted. It is important to note that this type of evidence has not been used in trial yet. The Golden State Killer case will likely be the first to use it."

Can Genealogy DNA Link To The Wrong Suspect?

 

[TJtennispro]

I brought this up Thursday but it didn’t gain much traction

 

[Blacklist]

I brought this up Thursday but it didn’t gain much traction

Just had to be presented differently. BTW.... ever hear anything from your Auburn/ Northview persons that had some kind of knowledge of the case? How did that pan out?

 

[Catmommy]

Having a "rare" genetic marker being the exception and not the rule, an anomaly not usually found. I appreciate the knowledge.