AR AR - Cassie Compton, 15, Stuttgart, 14 Sept 2014 #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont think the writing style matches Cassie's either if you compare it to the posts on her FB pages. It does resemble JC's way of expressing herself for sure.
 
I wonder if JC meant Cassie wrote all of that or just the top portion....I have to say that bottom portion would be a very odd thing for a child to write....okay... it's just odd given the whole situation no matter who wrote....if written different times, wonder which came first??

explicate that
 
I think, like with the rest of this case, there are broad statements being made and the accuracy of them is open to interpretation. Let's take that particular FB post-JC made a broad statement that could be interpreted to indicate that Cassie wrote both things and that there was some kind of forgiveness going on there. Just one example. Now if she is pressed on this point, it is possible she will say she didnt mean both. If she is pressed again she might even say that the only authentic item that could be attributed is the signature of Cassie. And if pressed some more, she might say that the bible is Cassie's and the rest of the writing is someone elses.

I am not saying this is the case in this instance. I am just using it as an example. We have a hundred others to pick from Lord knows...eyes, height, hair color, clothing, shoes, phone, time she arrived home, was she seen, was she heard, what time JC woke up.....all of the incredible pressure for details still has only yielded a few things, and most of them have nothing to do with statements from JC.
 
Just to clarify-I dont know whether or not JC has any knowledge of where Cassie is and what has happened to her. I do kind of feel like she is determined to present herself and her parenting in the best light possible. I dont know why-I suspect that she has made choices that dont stand up well to the light of day, but then again everyone probably has moments they arent proud of. I am not sure, jmo, that she has any idea of who her daughter is and what she actually did in her spare time as a child.
 
Yes, it is odd. Beyond odd, actually. Is there someone advising JC? If not, there needs to be. Or whoever is on the job, needs to be off.
Mvhoo
 
believe09 said:
Didnt someone have a twitter conversation with a reporter covering this case? I am going to dig this up, because perhaps that reporter would be interested in the Docket from 10/28/14 showing the disposition of BR.
Click to expand...

Is this what you recall believe??
Thank you to the creator of the word press, I am linking to this from it....
https://findcassiecompton.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/image2.jpg


eta...wonder why this person, who I guess is a reporter, hasn't sunk their teeth into this case??
 
She sure hasn't come out swinging like ole BJD down in CCity, has she?
 
at first glance, like Hailey's, in that the mother had a younger boyfriend cohabitating, which is really the only similarity I can see, imho
well...there is the fubaresqueness vibe off LE


...but ...not really...kwim? Can't get folks around Cassie's to talk, and in HD's case they wouldn't shut up, lol

eta- I guess one difference is on HD's various FB's people let it all hang out and on CC's there is a lot of tip toeing...I understand being respectful, don't get me wrong, but somethings you got to let it fly, then wade thru it
 
Yep, I totally get ya.
One similarity I think? No one appears to know anything about the missing child. Except what they say they know about the missing child, online.
At the beginning of the case, anyway.
 
Was it Caring4 who spoke with a reporter who has been covering Cassie's case and they said they had done multiple sit downs but received the same info...something like that? Brb.
 
Oriah said:
So Mark Duke verified the information given? It is your understanding that you contacted NaMus, and they contacted Mr. Duke for verification?
Click to expand...

The only thing I can tell you is I entered the information to NamUs, regarding Cassie's information and also the investigator working the case. NamUs then verifies it. Yes, most everyone knows MD is one of the ones working the case. That's the information I gave to NamUs. So it would make sense to me, that is who NamUs verified it with. Now can I guarantee you, that is exactly whom NamUs spoke with, no I can't. All I know is, it's been verified and her case is now registered. That I'm thankful for..
 
TY for taking the leap into NAMUS. It would be really interesting to know who gave the go ahead to the NAMUS entry and it would be interesting to know what they thought of the identifier information.
 
believe09 said:
TY for taking the leap into NAMUS. It would be really interesting to know who gave the go ahead to the NAMUS entry and it would be interesting to know what they thought of the identifier information.
Click to expand...

I honestly feel in my opinion that they're many other things with this case that needs focusing on besides the NamUs and who verified it. She's verified and that's what matters to me. JMo
 
I understand your perspective for sure, bigheart. I see it a little bit differently only because there has been so little solid identifying information about Cassie. Her clothing, for example, has been a moving target. So who enters information and who verifies it will become part of the investigation. For example, in the case linked in my siggy, Bob was entered into NAMUS by a family member. The clothing description that was entered was false. In his case, it is part of the active investigation regarding Bob's murder. (His case had a status change and is now a presumed homicide.) So it is very relevant who entered the information, what the information is and who verified the information...and in Bob's case, why it was verified. It is my suspicion, in Bob's case, that it was verified because the information that was added was misinformation. Which was supplied deliberately in order to obstruct his recovery.

I learned a lot from that-I learned a lot about all of the little pieces and what it means to an investigation. Everyone should be aware that when they contribute to an investigation into a case, they become part of the record kwim?
 
believe09 said:
I understand your perspective for sure, bigheart. I see it a little bit differently only because there has been so little solid identifying information about Cassie. Her clothing, for example, has been a moving target. So who enters information and who verifies it will become part of the investigation. For example, in the case linked in my siggy, Bob was entered into NAMUS by a family member. The clothing description that was entered was false. In his case, it is part of the active investigation regarding Bob's murder. (His case had a status change and is now a presumed homicide.) So it is very relevant who entered the information, what the information is and who verified the information...and in Bob's case, why it was verified. It is my suspicion, in Bob's case, that it was verified because the information that was added was misinformation. Which was supplied deliberately in order to obstruct his recovery.

I learned a lot from that-I learned a lot about all of the little pieces and what it means to an investigation. Everyone should be aware that when they contribute to an investigation into a case, they become part of the record kwim?
Click to expand...

Well the info that I entered regarding the clothing was information that I had gotten from one of the organizations and the same information from JC. But how NamUs verifies it and with whom is out of my hands once I give it to them.
 
I get that. And you were confident enough in the information to enter it, and I get that to.
 
believe09 said:
I get that. And you were confident enough in the information to enter it, and I get that to.
Click to expand...

Thank you. My take on it now more than ever is to protect Cassie and be her voice more so than what I've been. I won't protect those that have failed to protect Cassie. In my opinion this beautiful child has been failed in every possible way.
 
bigheart said:
I honestly feel in my opinion that they're many other things with this case that needs focusing on besides the NamUs and who verified it. She's verified and that's what matters to me. JMo
Click to expand...

bigheart, I thank you for taking that step with NamUs, but I disagree. Verification of source(s) is going to be EVERYTHING in Cassie's case. Or it should be, anyway.
Maybe we need a verified attorney to come in to comment?
 
bigheart said:
Well the info that I entered regarding the clothing was information that I had gotten from one of the organizations and the same information from JC. But how NamUs verifies it and with whom is out of my hands once I give it to them.
Click to expand...

Definitely their problem. But it is the org/ parent/guardian/ LE responsibility to own that info. Because we are talking about something very serious here...a missing child.

If it is possibly inaccurate info, NamUs has inaccurate info.
And we have a missing child that is wearing flip flops, not cowboy boots. Kwim?

So the need to know who is responsible for that sort of dispersal of info is important.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 159 more.
Total: 1,980 (members: 160, guests: 1,820)

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
1,820
Total visitors
1,980
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,036
Messages
18,133,669
Members
231,215
Latest member
Karmalicious478
Back
Top