Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 **ARREST** #36

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear @oviedo,

Thank you for these important words.

I intend to light a candle and take a moment or two in silence for Gannon before I read the document.

This has been such a hard case for us to follow. It's been so hard on the heart.

I don't know if I could have followed Gannon's case without being in the midst of such compassionate and kind people here. I really don't think I could have.

This has been a difficult journey we've taken together, throughout all of the threads, and I deeply appreciate everyone here and the heartfelt loss we've all felt for Gannon.
@zencompass Your post is kind and very thoughtful. Thank you.
 
Yes, of this I am aware.

Do you think she killed Gannon outside of the truck, then put him back in the truck, and drove somewhere to conceal him?

Or did she kill Gannon, and return to the scene at another point in time to retrieve his body and move him?

Or did she kill him in the truck, and directly conceal his body from the truck to wherever his body is now?

Or she didn't harm Gannon past the initial injury but put him the truck.

Or she made Gannon (still alive) get out of the truck and he then died. (If they find that to be true, they will likely drop the tampering charge).

Since it is the case that there is a tampering charge, I am going to assume that there were byproducts of decomposition associated with one of the vehicles (or some clothing).

Possible sources of cadaverine:

Red Truck (particularly steering wheel)
Rental Car (particularly steering wheel)
HH's white car
TS's own car (less likely)

The piece of wood
The sock

TS's clothing
TS's laundry
Any bags or purses handled by TS on January 27/post-mortem

There would be other sources of course (you can use your imaginations).

The problem is this: cadaverine is not produced in significant quantities at the moment of death. In fact, it probably isn't going to be detectable in any of the above places unless the vehicle or person interacted with the body from 2 hours after death (and really, 8-12 hours would be better).

If TS immediately rid herself of the body right after death or killed him outside of the vehicle, I don't think they'd be able to detect these chemicals reliably enough for trial.

If she moved the body or returned to the body to slightly move it or interact with it in any way, if it was 8-12 hours after death, then yes, probably lots of forensic evidence.

If I were the Defense, I'd be very interested in such matters.

Anyway, I sure do wonder if she didn't return to the body the next day...in a rental car...
 
Trying to read as fast as I can & catch up, but people were asking about the USAA in relation to their mortgage. That may be the connection, but you can get a credit card & bank account through them too. So I think the more likely connection is looking at their bank statements & credit card transactions.
I agree, there’s just a person on there who handled MY mortgage, but I would tend to agree that a mortgage isn’t likely evidence here. They also handle insurance: auto, home, renters, and life.
 
I think he died after they divorced but who knows.

He died around 3 years after they divorced, I believe. At any rate, he died in October 2014 and she married AS a few months later in 2015 (January, I think.) So I don't know why TS would have cared what her ex was doing by late 2014 unless there was a custody issue. Or the ex disliked AS and custody became an issue for that reason. JMO
 
Ok, jumping off your post (thanks again); IF she'd poisoned him hoping he'd die from it --wouldn't that be immediately discernible at the autopsy ?
TS would still be held accountable.
It could be, but I don't know if there is any sure way of inducing serotonin syndrome in someone. People can take medication for years and never develop it, even in large doses.

If she wanted to poison him I would think she would use something else.

Imo
 
It isn't a good sign. LE might know exactly LS' route, and located along that route might be a waste management location, dumpster or other refuse container. If TS did what that suggests, Gannon might never be found. I need not expand on that.
I kept thinking in the beginning that TS had help, but now I'm leaning towards 'she did this all by her lonesome'.

It would have fed her arrogant narcissistic personality. "See what I accomplished ?" (gag)

Take heart, CM--- they have enough already to charge with murder in the first.
I think that's rare without a body.
 
I love you, and I respect your opinion, but I see it a different way. As a CASA advocate, with a Judge for a neighbor, and as a member of the public who has sat on a jury multiple times- the professionalism matters. The attitude matters. First impressions are so important.

Juries are compromised of the public. You best believe there is plenty of talk about the attorneys- from how they are dressed, to the way they carry themselves, etc. That all affects jurors and their thoughts.

All involved in that courtroom are paid for by the public. The proceedings down to the cleaning of the floors. " Behind closed doors" breeds mistrust in many.

My neighbor was pretty vocal about the hearing. His wife was really concerned about Landen and her feelings. He has 0 concern about cameras in his courtroom- and with or without them, he expects professionals to act as such. Her hiding behind the moving PD who was running block would not have happened. Respect for the process. This is not talk around the water cooler nor the company picnic- it is a court of law. If they act like that with an audience, how badly do they act without one. The defendant and the victims typically don't find much amusement in others' amusement.

I personally want no reason for her to appeal due to ineffective counsel.

Perhaps you and I live in different parts of the world?

First, there was no jury present. I don't know about you, but I see a difference in the behavior of participants when there is no jury present. Every judge I know (ask your neighbor) has much more formal expectations of decorum (sometimes getting downright onery about it) when there is a jury. There is no jury yet in this case.

Most of the public is not watching these brief snippets of proceedings. Only people who are deeply into WS or reddit or social media have even the slightest clue about how those PD's were behavior (and of those, half would probably think their behavior was actually comforting and fair - insofar as the defendant is presumed innocent).

Behind closed doors is completely different and would take many, many posts to discuss.

I do agree that the shielding behavior of the one PD is really out of the ordinary and I would not allow it if I could prevent it. But judges cannot act as media advisors or television producers. If they allow media, then the Defense Counsel gets to respond as they wish, as long as not illegal.

I personally find their behavior entirely necessary - but that's a different topic. I also believe the Judge knows exactly why the PD is behaving as they are and they have spoken to him about it prior to the proceedings we saw. IMO, some behavioralist (probably FBI) has advised the parties as to how and why such behavior may be advisable or even necessary.

Once again, all this debate over what may be necessary or professional behavior on the part of the Defense is merely going to lead to one place: We, the public, will see far less if we don't take into account how Defense Counsel has to behave in order to best represent their client - not the State's interest - but the Defendant's interest.

It's in no one's interest if TS literally goes apesh!t consistently in the courtroom. Not at all.
 
Dear @inmyhumbleopinion,

Brilliant!

Thank you for your insights and great catch!
Gannon is my hero! My understanding from posts here, is that Leticia had divorced this man years before, but it is reassuring to see LE is covering all the bases, I would like to know what type work related accident, and whether Letecia was anywhere near work... not trying to be funny. We have seen the assault, and other charges uncovered, keep digging!
 
I think the "EZ Lock" witness listed may be a local locksmith. The address listed is an apartment and nowadays many locksmiths work out of their home. I don't think that witness has anything to do with a Dremel attachment. It's local.

I called a "locksmith" when I got locked out of my home. Guy came with no business card and "broke into my home". I thanked him profusely and paid him in cash, because he made it clear when he arrived (with NO legit toolbag) "cash only."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
1,762
Total visitors
1,921

Forum statistics

Threads
606,476
Messages
18,204,420
Members
233,857
Latest member
prettyuglybefore
Back
Top