Found Deceased AL - Paighton Houston, 29, left bar with 2 men, Birmingham, 20 Dec 2019 #4

[Elle*Bee]

That actually is part of my question....whether LE is liable if they do not control narrative. SM whizzes out of control when LE does not give info. So if LE knows that someone is innocent, and if this person is being harmed on SM - could that individual sue?

LE has no obligation to make any statements about an active investigation. Do they? Sure, sometimes. Especially if they think it might help further the case or generate leads. Other times, LE wants to keep any info they’ve obtained close to their vest.

Just my opinion based on my query of friends/family in LE in 5 different states.

 

[stattlich1]

The courts have ruled consistently that, in the United States, the police do NOT have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, unless said person is in police custody.

Fact of the matter is, your personal protection is YOUR responsibility.

Warren v. District of Columbia

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

Police Have No Duty to Protect You, Federal Court Affirms Yet Again | Ryan McMaken

 

[Seajay]

Personally, I think it's kind of crappy to denigrate a person, especially a victim, without some evidence of the fact stated. Not stating the COD yet is not evidence of drug use. It might be enough for me to look down that avenue and keep it open as an option but definitely not enough for me to PUBLICLY disparage them. Of course, all just "MOO" and we can agree to disagree.

I don’t think I saw anyone publicly disparage her. Many talked in general as to what drugs would do to you in her situation, but not her in particular. At least I didn’t. IME

 

[Elle*Bee]

Personally, I think it's kind of crappy to denigrate a person, especially a victim, without some evidence of the fact stated. Not stating the COD yet is not evidence of drug use. It might be enough for me to look down that avenue and keep it open as an option but definitely not enough for me to PUBLICLY disparage them. Of course, all just "MOO" and we can agree to disagree.

I don’t see discussing the possibility - based on prior history- denigrating. Most of us are careful to state *IF* she relapsed, but most posts I’ve seen are open to other possibilities.

A year or two ago, a young man from my hometown disappeared from his college campus approx. 70 miles away. He was last seen on video in the wee hours riding his bike on a road that leads off campus. He visited home a week or so earlier for the winter break. Friends, family reported he was in good spirits. Doing well in school.

Initial thoughts were that he was a victim of a crime. (University located in a major metropolitan area.) Since he was riding late at night, many theorized that he was struck by a drunk driver and left roadside or, worse, hidden.

We later learned that in during his adolescence, he struggled with- and was treated for - depression. Everyone close to him thought that was behind him. Knowing this information added to information used during a search. The young man tragically was found in a deer stand in the woods. Coroner ruled it a self inflicted gunshot wound.

Had we not learned of his past struggles which clearly did not define him, searchers would still have their eyes focused on the ground, in ditches and culverts, rather than in the trees where he was ultimately found.

Exploring the possibility of drug relapse (or in the case I mentioned, mental illness) doesn’t denigrate, but rather shines a light on what many people feel they need to hide. It’s time to remove the stigma or addiction and mental illness and let those know who suffer from either that they are not disposable, they are not invisible, nor are they forgotten. JMO

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Really well stated. I do agree that the co-worker is sort of a generic POI. Not officially named as such by the investigating LE team, however, and that does make a difference. As for the blaming/shaming, I believe that comes from an inner sense that most people have that demands justice for such an injustice. Initially it comes from a good hearted place, but then turns into a nutty lynch mob mentality, rather quickly, if not kept in check.
moo.

BBM
This is so true!

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Had this witness not been made public and her story told by her attorney, I'd have no knowledge of her or what she's facing on social media.

My understanding of defamation is you can sue someone, whether libel or slander, if they have written or said something bad about you (providing you can prove the elements of defamation suit). I don't believe you can sue somebody for remaining silent.

I can only think of one instance where LE made a statement in defense of somebody being falsely implicated in a crime on social media.
It was for the parents of a young boy (J Minard) that worked after school and weekends on a dairy farm. He also went missing and was found a week later in a shallow grave on farm property. His cause of death was related to fentanyl. After months of investigation, the farm owner's son was charged with his death.

BBM
In the Sherri Papini case SM went crazy accusing the husband of being part of the "coverup" or of murdering her. In response, LE made a statement that he was not a suspect and that he had passed a lie detector test.

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Who would she sue? Facebook friends, Reddit comments? I have not seen anything from LE to indicate they have released any information with regard to her.

Yes she would!
Federal Prosecution of Cyberharrasment

 

[Beth11311]

I don’t see discussing the possibility - based on prior history- denigrating. Most of us are careful to state *IF* she relapsed, but most posts I’ve seen are open to other possibilities.

A year or two ago, a young man from my hometown disappeared from his college campus approx. 70 miles away. He was last seen on video in the wee hours riding his bike on a road that leads off campus. He visited home a week or so earlier for the winter break. Friends, family reported he was in good spirits. Doing well in school.

Initial thoughts were that he was a victim of a crime. (University located in a major metropolitan area.) Since he was riding late at night, many theorized that he was struck by a drunk driver and left roadside or, worse, hidden.

We later learned that in during his adolescence, he struggled with- and was treated for - depression. Everyone close to him thought that was behind him. Knowing this information added to information used during a search. The young man tragically was found in a deer stand in the woods. Coroner ruled it a self inflicted gunshot wound.

Had we not learned of his past struggles which clearly did not define him, searchers would still have their eyes focused on the ground, in ditches and culverts, rather than in the trees where he was ultimately found.

Exploring the possibility of drug relapse (or in the case I mentioned, mental illness) doesn’t denigrate, but rather shines a light on what many people feel they need to hide. It’s time to remove the stigma or addiction and mental illness and let those know who suffer from either that they are not disposable, they are not invisible, nor are they forgotten. JMO

Bravo. Perhaps it’s because I have what some might consider a “sordid past”, but I don’t see discussing whether someone struggled with addiction in the past and may have again confronted their demons as victim bashing, denigrating, etc.

If we found out PH had a history of bipolar depression for example, and discussed that instead, I wonder would it be more palatable to some? Like Elle says, remove the stigma.

There is no one trashing sweet PH. We are merely discussing possibilities with the little known info that we have, and ALL information about her life, past drug use included, could be important. It shouldn’t be shameful. It’s simply what is. MOO.

 

[Beth11311]

And for the record I certainly am not committed to any one theory yet. We have very little information, and tons of unsubstantiated rumor.

 

[Optics]

Yes she would!
Federal Prosecution of Cyberharrasment

Time will tell if she does and is successful. MOO is that there is more to issue and its a bit complicated. <modsnip>

 

[Seattle1]

Hundreds attend Paighton Houston’s funeral

 

[Deleted member 110058]

The courts have ruled consistently that, in the United States, the police do NOT have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, unless said person is in police custody.

Fact of the matter is, your personal protection is YOUR responsibility.

Warren v. District of Columbia

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

Police Have No Duty to Protect You, Federal Court Affirms Yet Again | Ryan McMaken

Nice! Thanks for doing the research on this. Guess I'm not the only person who's had this question

 

[Deleted member 110058]

DBM

 

[MassGuy]

Bravo. Perhaps it’s because I have what some might consider a “sordid past”, but I don’t see discussing whether someone struggled with addiction in the past and may have again confronted their demons as victim bashing, denigrating, etc.

If we found out PH had a history of bipolar depression for example, and discussed that instead, I wonder would it be more palatable to some? Like Elle says, remove the stigma.

There is no one trashing sweet PH. We are merely discussing possibilities with the little known info that we have, and ALL information about her life, past drug use included, could be important. It shouldn’t be shameful. It’s simply what is. MOO.

Exactly. If someone thinks that discussing the victim’s documented history of drug abuse is “victim bashing,” then they’re the problem.

Why? We don’t think less of her for it, but the implication that discussing that theory is in fact doing just that, shows that person’s own bias (talking about drug use is saying we think less of her).

It’s a legitimate theory, and supported by evidence of past drug issues. Personally, I don’t think it factors in.

Who knows though. We know so little at this point, and pretty much every scenario (within reason) is on the table.

 

[Deleted member 110058]

Optics said: ↑
Who would she sue? Facebook friends, Reddit comments? I have not seen anything from LE to indicate they have released any information with regard to her.

Time will tell if she does and is successful. MOO is that there is more to issue and its a bit complicated. <modsnip>

Just to reiterate...I am an undecided as to whether Grace is at all responsible for PH's death. Was asking the question on principle and out of curiosity.

 

[Deleted member 110058]

I'm gonna blow your mind. Pediatricians, nurses, even lawyers- the doctors and CEO- some of them get high too, not just their children. They have addictions too. I can name some in the town i live..i told my family what pediatrician & urologist to stay away from. Ive also dealt with a drunk nurse- at the hospital, in my line if work. Its sad and dangerous
Edit to add: my line of business is in the hospitality industry.

I'm gonna 2nd this. My husband is a Neurologist. The mental/emotional state (Burnout) of the healthcare providers, in the country, is a HUGE problem. And sadly this group are the LEAST likely to get help. Not saying this is the only reason for addiction issues within this group but it's got to be a huge component.

 

[Sillybilly]

If members think a post violates TOS, please use the Report feature to let us know.

With regard to a victim's past, I am bumping this post from earlier:

ADMIN NOTE:

With regard to Websleuths policy as it relates to being Victim Friendly, and speculative discussion about the possibility of drug involvement in this case, the following excerpt from The Rules should help clarify:

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.

As long as the comments related to PH's past struggles remain respectful, they are not considered victim blaming / shaming.

 

[Artis]

Exactly. If someone thinks that discussing the victim’s documented history of drug abuse is “victim bashing,” then they’re the problem.

Why? We don’t think less of her for it, but the implication that discussing that theory is in fact doing just that, shows that person’s own bias (talking about drug use is saying we think less of her).

It’s a legitimate theory, and supported by evidence of past drug issues. Personally, I don’t think it factors in.

Who knows though. We know so little at this point, and pretty much every scenario (within reason) is on the table.

I'm so glad you said this. I'm not convinced it factors in, either, but everything known about her is relevant and drugs remain something that was a big deal in her life. We aren't talking weed here, either, but heroin which can put someone into contact with some seriously undesirable people.

The whole thing about blaming the victim came about as a result of women getting slimed in rape cases. If they had been prostitutes or even promiscuous, the defense would imply they were asking for it. The push back against that is not about hiding a victim's life and mistakes but to make people understand that even if a hooker gets into a car with a stranger, it doesn't excuse someone else of a crime. IOW, no matter what the victim did - from nothing to very stupid judgement or being a raving b**** - rape or murder is not justified and is on the perpetrator, period.

Sometimes I think people take "victim friendly" to the extreme. These are just people we're talking about and they have good points and faults and if something about them may have made them more vulnerable to a crime, it doesn't make them any less a victim.

 

[Seajay]

We really do not know very much about this case, do we?

We know she went to the Tin Roof after work with her co-worker, riding with her co-worker, leaving her car at the co-workers house. We “think” as per the co-worker, that she walked out of the bar with two black guys. They have never been verified. A friend reported that she received a text on her phone from PH that said she was with people she didn’t know and she thought she was in trouble and to pick up if she called, but the friend says she did not read the text til the next morning. She tried to call but it went to vm.

PH was found deceased. They are still doing the autopsy and we are waiting for the top results.

That’s it. Right?

 

[Artis]

We really do not know very much about this case, do we?

We know she went to the Tin Roof after work with her co-worker, riding with her co-worker, leaving her car at the co-workers house. We “think” as per the co-worker, that she walked out of the bar with two black guys. They have never been verified. A friend reported that she received a text on her phone from PH that said she was with people she didn’t know and she thought she was in trouble and to pick up if she called, but the friend says she did not read the text til the next morning. She tried to call but it went to vm.

PH was found deceased. They are still doing the autopsy and we are waiting for the top results.

That’s it. Right?

Yep and we don't even know anything about her alleged trip to the bar. Was she there? If so, did her friends or friend see her leave or had they left way earlier?