GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #8

[Seajay]

Not to beat a dead horse :deadhorse: but MB has so much detail to what he reported for it to have been attention seeking or to be discounted so easily. How it all fits, we've yet to find out but that's our job, isn't it? IMO MOO

 

[SuziQ]

Yes. absolutely. HE is married. SHE is married. Even if he was single, if he was having an affair with a married woman, it's punishable by the UCMJ.

Rank doesn't necessarily play into it but could/has in some cases.

Thank you. Bumping this up for some who are not seeing CL having a motive to disappear EC. Which is just one of many. I also see:

Means=trained Marine/every Marine is a Rifleman. PCS states possible gun used. Bullet casings found in Jeep with no matching gun located.

Motive=Risk punishment from USMC, risk of divorce and child support costing money, etc. etc.

Opportunity=Makes date to take EC out "Hunting" in the desert. Plenty of privacy to commit murder and conceal the crime.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Exactly what I was thinking. How many people would notice so many details about something so random?

I don't think it's random myself, and believe the Beasley's saw what they said they saw -- I would remember what people looked like that I had driven by who were pulled over on the side of a deserted road on a route near my home that I regularly took. I would also remember what they were doing (the female doing something at the blue car and getting in the red car). And I would notice the empty blue car left there afterward and notify the police and give a statement, especially after hearing of a woman who was missing near there having driven a blue car.

 

[sophiebelle]

I don't think it's random myself, and believe the Beasley's saw what they said they saw -- I would remember what people looked like that I had driven by who were pulled over on the side of a deserted road on a route near my home that I regularly took. I would also remember what they were doing (the female doing something at the blue car and getting in the red car). And I would notice the empty blue car left there afterward and notify the police and give a statement, especially after hearing of a woman who was missing near there having driven a blue car.

I believed him. I don't think he saw this becoming a national or world wide case when he called 911. I don't think he was looking for his 15 minutes or inserting himself into a BIG deal. He had no way of knowing that at the time. I would notice a lot of things about what I saw if it was unusual in my area. This was unusual.
I am agreeing with you in case this looks like I'm on a rant!

 

[shadetree44]

I don't think it's random myself, and believe the Beasley's saw what they said they saw -- I would remember what people looked like that I had driven by who were pulled over on the side of a deserted road on a route near my home that I regularly took. I would also remember what they were doing (the female doing something at the blue car and getting in the red car). And I would notice the empty blue car left there afterward and notify the police and give a statement, especially after hearing of a woman who was missing near there having driven a blue car.

Just a thought folks. Too many people trying to make everyone disregard the MB sighting and the red car. I may be way off track but this matter, I think, is important. I mentioned VERY early on (check my earlier post - Threads 6 or 7 ??) that I think the sighting and time line are CRITICAL in locating EC. If I am mistaken so be it, but until someone can offer evidence otherwise I am staying with this avenue. I think, at this time, this is all we have to work with to reach a conclusion. Everything else is speculation. At this point my only objective is locating EC. If we do that the rest will fall in place! You'll have a good day!

 

[NYC Girl]

Was just thinking about the hunting story. It could be that he, at some point, had planned to say they went hunting together and there was an "accident" to explain him shooting her. Then, something went wrong and left him unable to use that excuse. As far as MB, I believe him and think his info is very important.

 

[Fascinated1]

I believed him. I don't think he saw this becoming a national or world wide case when he called 911. I don't think he was looking for his 15 minutes or inserting himself into a BIG deal. He had no way of knowing that at the time. I would notice a lot of things about what I saw if it was unusual in my area. This was unusual.
I am agreeing with you in case this looks like I'm on a rant!

So just to refresh our memories--mb didn't call 911. It was the water guy who heard about her being missing and then called 911 when HE saw the car. That's what we hear on scanner. Does anyone know HOW MB actually got involved and gave his statement to the police? Did he just happen to see them all there and he then drove over to see them and gave his statement? We have not heard anything about the water guy again. Just mb. Not sleuthing mb just looking at different things that we have not yet talked into the ground. . Wish there was 1 new tidbit.

 

[RSC]

Actually, this isn't off topic at all. This really clarifies possible motivation. It's not against the rules just to cheat, necessarily, but it is if you can prove:
1. They had sexual intercourse (clearly demonstrable by getting someone pregnant),
2. The other person was married (EC clearly was), and
3. The conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces--this article clearly says that this includes an affair with another member of the military or their spouse... Add to that the fact that CL ranks above JC, and I think you can argue that this would cause an issue within the military ranks--ESPECIALLY once people found out that CL had gotten JC's wife pregnant.

I think this adds significant depth to the motive. Thanks for posting.

I also found this from the article: "In my experience, adultery is almost never charged as a "stand alone" criminal offense in Article 15 or Court-Martial actions. It is generally added on to the list of charges, only if the member is already going to be prosecuted for one or more other criminal offenses."

Food for thought if LE thinks CL is guilty but doesn't have enough to prove it; combine potato guns with an adultery charge, and there could be some jail time regardless.

Thank you. I did not know this. The reason I asked about rank is because the very little I read about Court-Martials mentioned officers and midshipmen.

A little off topic but if anyone is interested I found an article that explains more about the crime of adultery in the military. It's some interesting reading.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/adultery.htm

 

[Fairy1]

Just a thought folks. Too many people trying to make everyone disregard the MB sighting and the red car. I may be way off track but this matter, I think, is important. I mentioned VERY early on (check my earlier post - Threads 6 or 7 ??) that I think the sighting and time line are CRITICAL in locating EC. If I am mistaken so be it, but until someone can offer evidence otherwise I am staying with this avenue. I think, at this time, this is all we have to work with to reach a conclusion. Everything else is speculation. At this point my only objective is locating EC. If we do that the rest will fall in place! You'll have a good day!

You make a good point (points, actually)! I also don't believe there's any reason to question the credibility of the sightings - just because they don't fit exactly into what else we think we know. Even if the details of the sightings are perhaps misremembered by the witnesses, the timing of when the vehicles were there is very important if we consider the "two-hour trip" reference in EC's text to her friend.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

All I can go off of is MSM. I have posted the transcript from his interview several times. I take it as stating she exited her car, walked to the passenger side of his car, locked her car, and got in his car. Can you post where in MSM you read/heard him state that she walked around to HER passenger side after exiting the blue car?

He said once she got out of the car she "got to the passenger side, maybe did something, maybe locked HER door or something"....

He's obviously explaining what her reason might have been for her to go to her passenger side first. Why would he care if she did something if it was at his passenger side. That doesn't make sense. And it was her door not his door or the door, HER door. [modsnip]

 

[77DarkHorse7]

Does anyone know if there is a way to find out when and where EC & JC purchased their blue Toyota?

I don't think it's necessary to pry into their lives from before all this happened, unless it would absolutely be relevant to the case at hand.

I also wonder why Nichole would be hanging around in Yucca without Chris. Seems strange.

 

[la2cabo]

Actually, this isn't off topic at all. This really clarifies possible motivation. It's not against the rules just to cheat, necessarily, but it is if you can prove:
1. They had sexual intercourse (clearly demonstrable by getting someone pregnant),
2. The other person was married (EC clearly was), and
3. The conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces--this article clearly says that this includes an affair with another member of the military or their spouse... Add to that the fact that CL ranks above JC, and I think you can argue that this would cause an issue within the military ranks--ESPECIALLY once people found out that CL had gotten JC's wife pregnant.

I think this adds significant depth to the motive. Thanks for posting.

I also found this from the article: "In my experience, adultery is almost never charged as a "stand alone" criminal offense in Article 15 or Court-Martial actions. It is generally added on to the list of charges, only if the member is already going to be prosecuted for one or more other criminal offenses."

Food for thought if LE thinks CL is guilty but doesn't have enough to prove it; combine potato guns with an adultery charge, and there could be some jail time regardless.

Above BBM: This is exactly what I was thinking. Court-Martial, reversal of his honorable discharge (and benefits, etc.), possible time in the military pokey and then let the civilian courts have a bite at the apple - or vice versa.

 

[Love Never Fails]

I am fairly new to this thread and have seen it posted that Erin and Lee had an affair previously. Can someone update me about that? She had an affair with Chris, broke it off and then started it again? Did his wife Nicole and her husband Jon know about it? How did they find out or is this all speculation? That is huge to me. If so, Nicole or JC could have been devastated by this. Motive.

 

[rollinginit]

I am fairly new to this thread and have seen it posted that Erin and Lee had an affair previously. Can someone update me about that? She had an affair with Chris, broke it off and then started it again? Did his wife Nicole and her husband Jon know about it? How did they find out or is this all speculation? That is huge to me. If so, Nicole or JC could have been devastated by this. Motive.

I think most of it is "maybe, could have been, possible, suspected, alleged, etc...

A friend told police and it was in the official police documents that Erin texted her that she was spending a special day about the pregnancy with CL. She told her friend they were having an affair.

CL told police that he wasn't having an affair with Erin, then later changed it to say they kissed once and his wife knew he was getting to close with Erin.

Some media reports made it seem like Erin had an affair with CL after she miscarried in Feb. I'm not sure if it's clear when JC actually found out about the affair. From the police documents that have been released, it seems like NL knew about the affair, but it's not clear exactly when she found out about it.

As far as I know, the police don't have a POI that they have released to the media. Of course, they also haven't ruled anybody out yet in the media either.

 

[smc1225]

So just to refresh our memories--mb didn't call 911. It was the water guy who heard about her being missing and then called 911 when HE saw the car. That's what we hear on scanner. Does anyone know HOW MB actually got involved and gave his statement to the police? Did he just happen to see them all there and he then drove over to see them and gave his statement? We have not heard anything about the water guy again. Just mb. Not sleuthing mb just looking at different things that we have not yet talked into the ground. . Wish there was 1 new tidbit.

MB from the bonus interview with CBS8:

...next thing I hear, the weekend goes by and Monday morning the sheriffs are there looking for this girl cause she ain't home yet and you know, I ah, ah, I just report with the sheriff's office and show what I see, I hate to think that, again, I hate to think that I, that something happened there between some Marines out there that didn't take care of this girl. When they asked me about the vehicle that morning, I says, you know, this is what I seen, I ah, Saturday morning but now that I'm looking at the scene now, that car wasn't there Saturday morning like that. It was further in so somebody had to have moved that car further in and maybe about 100 feet or so, 150 feet further in and it wasn't there.

 

[smc1225]

He said once she got out of the car she "got to the passenger side, maybe did something, maybe locked HER door or something"....

He's obviously explaining what her reason might have been for her to go to her passenger side first. Why would he care if she did something if it was at his passenger side. That doesn't make sense. And it was her door not his door or the door, HER door. duh. I don't understand why you would argue with him about what he said or meant to say?

I can see it either way. She walked around her car to the passenger door of the other car and then locked her door - maybe with a remote - that is one way to interpret what he said.

Another way is that she walked around the car, locked her door or did something to the door/car on the passenger side before getting into the other car - possibly she did not have a remote, realized she didn't lock the door and did it from the passenger side.

 

[Snoop Sister]

Not definitively but, based on the model year, Tennessee seems most likely. Curious about what you are thinking...

I am curious too.

 

[sophiebelle]

So just to refresh our memories--mb didn't call 911. It was the water guy who heard about her being missing and then called 911 when HE saw the car. That's what we hear on scanner. Does anyone know HOW MB actually got involved and gave his statement to the police? Did he just happen to see them all there and he then drove over to see them and gave his statement? We have not heard anything about the water guy again. Just mb. Not sleuthing mb just looking at different things that we have not yet talked into the ground. . Wish there was 1 new tidbit.

Well didn't he have to call at some point to get the officers out there to talk to him? I never said he was the first to call, and I know about the water guy. I just don't think he was inserting himself into the case at that point to get on the news.

 

[nikb]

All I can go off of is MSM. I have posted the transcript from his interview several times. I take it as stating she exited her car, walked to the passenger side of his car, locked her car, and got in his car. Can you post where in MSM you read/heard him state that she walked around to HER passenger side after exiting the blue car?

Please forgive me if everyone's already thought of this, but I can see how the witnesses statement could be taken a few different ways. For example: if I were switching from my car into my husband's I might get out, walk around my car to grab something out of the other side, lock the door, or whatever, then continue on to his car and get into the passenger side. Since that's the side I'm getting in I could see someone calling it "her" passenger side even though it's his car. I am also assuming that the witness didn't know who owned which car. Unless he knows them the witness would only know who was driving which one and who got out of/into which one, right? For all he knew the man could've been picking the woman up in HER car but he was driving (this makes less sense, but still a possibility - I've been picked up in my own car before if someone was doing me a favor driving it from a repair shop, for example).

There are certainly clearer ways it could have been worded. In other words for anyone who finds the red car witness credible, I'm thinking any interpretation that also matches the set of described footprints could be 'right,' but there are different ways to read it. I'm assuming that LE has clarified this and has a much better idea than we do from what the witness said to MSM.

 

[Fascinated1]

Well didn't he have to call at some point to get the officers out there to talk to him? I never said he was the first to call, and I know about the water guy. I just don't think he was inserting himself into the case at that point to get on the news.

Totally agree but it's interesting to note the quote in post 595 above ( sorry I don't know how to get both posts in quotes). He had to show them the car had moved. The police had to have found the car at that point because the water guy called 911. The police had to have known about the prints leading from the blue car to tire tracks then. They released later that the tracks were consistent with a jeep not a smaller sedan. I'm assuming they probably would have looked at the passengers side as well to see what was there. If a single set of footprints leading from drivers door to jeep is what was on search warrant-does that mean they didn't find anything on passengers side? Interesting to think about because if we take Mbs story as 100% truth then the blue car would have had to be moved after the red car was there to fit what we know from the search warrant, I think (because of the footprints and tire tracks being a jeep and not a sedan). Also-jeep must have been parked in opposite direction or person got in back seat if footprints stopped at tire tracks. OR the person who left the blue car was driving the jeep. Does any of that make sense?