Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 **ARREST** #46

[pepper 34]

^^^^^THIS

That she does! And if they have evidence that she has mislead LE or tried to cover up crimes that her mother committed then she is going to go down with the ship.

Her best option is to cooperate and (I know its probably "taboo" in T's family), to to do whats morally right and cooperate.

If not she can and will be compelled to do so!

They very likely then may offer her immunity if and only if she agrees to be truthful and act in good faith. At that point there's no using the 5th amendment as a crutch and she will be forced to either answer truthfully on the stand or lie and face the legal consequences of lying under oath.

Either way her answers on the stand will point to T's guilt. Juries are generally pretty perceptive and they can tell when a witness is evasive on certain questions.

There's truly only one option in this case and I hope she chooses wisely

JMO

Oh, yes for sure... all of it. It's very early on. The legal gears turn slowly but she's not heard the last from LE, imo.
And, not just HH either. Every member of that moving party is no doubt being scrutinized for guilty knowledge... texts, phone calls, vehicle rentals, hotels, who contacted who and when and where and for what... money spent and routes of travel... It's hard to do anything invisibly in this day and age. Even if someone withdrew a large amount of cash before the trip; that could be noted and could have significance. LE would want to get anyone with direct knowledge who cooperated and assisted TS while knowing what she did. Maybe not to arrest them but at least in order to get more information about TS as a bargaining tool. I'm just throwing all this out there. I have no experience at all other than crime shows and books. I have noticed that, unfortunately, with time and money constraints, the smaller players often just walk away.

 

[Ontario Mom]

My guess is that AS did NOT adopt HH. If he did, that would stop her monthly Social Security check that TS received when HH's father died.
However, I am sure AS was generous with HH as well.

Plus if so, HH would be HS and TS would be sure to post that on SM to rub in LH's face. JMO.

I haven't posted much lately but have tried to stay up to date.

It's possible I missed something but was it ever confirmed HH was receiving SS survivor's benefits?

 

[MemPat]

I suppose it would be but that information would have to come to be known to LE, I would think, before HH could be charged with anything. If surveillance showed HH in a car and TS getting out of the same car to discard something, iow.... it might look suspicious but it could just have been a Burger King hamburger wrapper. LE would have to prove HH saw and knew what TS threw out and knew of it's impact on the case... and, therefore knew TS had actually murdered Gannon, etc... I think this is why LE often lets some of the less vital things go rather than trying to chase down every little thing. They've caught the big fish they wanted to catch, imo... if they thought HH had played a roll in Gannon's murder, I think HH would have been arrested already.

There was that case recently where the husband's lover helped him throw out bags of bloody evidence of his wife's murder and he had killed his wife... He and "Lovey-dear" drove along in a car throwing the bloody bags of evidence into trash cans along the street and that was that until LE located some of the bags. The husband's lover's fingerprints were found on some of the bags, as I recall. What happened to her? I'm not sure but the last I heard, she hadn't been charged with anything. I lost track of that case so I don't know but I thought he committed suicide so, unless LE decided to charge her with something, it looks like everyone's off the hook on that one.

You might want to let Michelle Troconis know she hasn't been charged with anything as she's wearing an ankle monitor while out on bond in the Jennifer Dulos case. The murdering hubby did commit suicide but MT isn't off the hook, last I heard. (Now you're going to make me research it! )

 

[ZoriahNZ]

I suppose it would be but that information would have to come to be known to LE, I would think, before HH could be charged with anything. If surveillance showed HH in a car and TS getting out of the same car to discard something, iow.... it might look suspicious but it could just have been a Burger King hamburger wrapper. LE would have to prove HH saw and knew what TS threw out and knew of it's impact on the case... and, therefore knew TS had actually murdered Gannon, etc... I think this is why LE often lets some of the less vital things go rather than trying to chase down every little thing. They've caught the big fish they wanted to catch, imo... if they thought HH had played a roll in Gannon's murder, I think HH would have been arrested already.

There was that case recently where the husband's lover helped him throw out bags of bloody evidence of his wife's murder and he had killed his wife... He and "Lovey-dear" drove along in a car throwing the bloody bags of evidence into trash cans along the street and that was that until LE located some of the bags. The husband's lover's fingerprints were found on some of the bags, as I recall. What happened to her? I'm not sure but the last I heard, she hadn't been charged with anything. I lost track of that case so I don't know but I thought he committed suicide so, unless LE decided to charge her with something, it looks like everyone's off the hook on that one.

Sounds like you're discussing the CT case where Fotis Dulos was charged for the murder of his wife Jennifer who went missing, leaving behind five kids. His lover, Michelle Troconis was most definitely charged. I believe the charges were: Conspiracy to commit murder, first degree hindering prosecution, two counts of tampering with physical evidence. She is still facing those charges, despite FD being deceased by suicide.

The difference is LE believe that MT was actively involved in the planning, execution and cover-up of JD's murder. I think it's pretty clear in the arrest warrant that they don't believe HH was an active participant in the crimes committed against Gannon before or during the fact.

 

[pepper 34]

*

 

[pepper 34]

You might want to let Michelle Troconis know she hasn't been charged with anything as she's wearing an ankle monitor while out on bond in the Jennifer Dulos case. The murdering hubby did commit suicide but MT isn't off the hook, last I heard. (Now you're going to make me research it! )

No, it's not necessary to research another case at this time... and, as I stated, I wasn't following that case after the "last I heard" ... so, I'm the one who's uninformed. I'm just glad the legal system isn't going to let her slip out the back door because that was a perfect example of a case where a person's guilty knowledge and involvement was very provable, imo. I love when the system works and hope she spends a very long time in jail. If not for her silent cooperation, the murdered woman would be alive today. I think we all love to see "the right thing" happen.

 

[pepper 34]

Sounds like you're discussing the CT case where Fotis Dulos was charged for the murder of his wife Jennifer who went missing, leaving behind five kids. His lover, Michelle Troconis was most definitely charged. I believe the charges were: Conspiracy to commit murder, first degree hindering prosecution, two counts of tampering with physical evidence. She is still facing those charges, despite FD being deceased by suicide.

The difference is LE believe that MT was actively involved in the planning, execution and cover-up of JD's murder. I think it's pretty clear in the arrest warrant that they don't believe HH was an active participant in the crimes committed against Gannon before or during the fact.

Your comment BBM: You and MemPat have made my night. Those are heavy duty charges and I'm surprised she's not in jail awaiting trial and only wearing an "ankle bracelet." But, her day is coming.
(That's all for me on OT subjects. I don't want to disrupt the continuity of the thread but I appreciate you both sharing a little bit of good news that came out of such a sad case.)

 

[O.Incandenza]

But if HH witnessed odd behavior, like stopping car randomly and tossing something in a public trash, and did not tell police wouldn't that be assisting a cover up?

Not unless she encouraged her to do it, helped her plan it, or actively and knowingly participated in disposing of whatever it was.

Just witnessing something very rarely creates a legal duty to report it. Lying to LE about what she witnessed would be a crime, but not saying anything wouldn't be. That changes once a subpoena is involved of course.

IMO and all that.

 

[katydid23]

I really don't either. It just seems like a huge mistake was made by LE.

You mean by not following her out of state on her road trip?

I am not sure they have the resources and manpower to do that. JMO

 

[MemPat]

No, it's not necessary to research another case at this time... and, as I stated, I wasn't following that case after the "last I heard" ... so, I'm the one who's uninformed. I'm just glad the legal system isn't going to let her slip out the back door because that was a perfect example of a case where a person's guilty knowledge and involvement was very provable, imo. I love when the system works and hope she spends a very long time in jail. If not for her silent cooperation, the murdered woman would be alive today. I think we all love to see "the right thing" happen.

Amen, my friend! Many of us think she did far more than cooperate silently but I guess we won't know that until the trial.

 

[NCWatcher]

IANAL but I think that's why the prosecution schedules depositions in the presence of the potential witness's attorney(s.) Just as you said, they don't want to ask questions unless they know what the answer will be. If the witness gives different answers during the trial than they gave during a deposition, this can be pointed out during a trial so the jury is made aware of any discrepancies in the witness's testimony.
"A deposition— The purpose of a deposition is to allow the lawyers to find out what a witness knows about the case, and to preserve that witness's testimony for trial."

"You are NOT REQUIRED to answer any questions of ANY law enforcement agency including the FBI. You ALWAYS have the right to consult with an attorney and you ALWAYS have the right to remain silent."

This is true but this is early on in the process and isn't when a person has been summoned to court to act as a witness during a trial. This is when LE believes a crime has taken place and they are investigating that crime and questioning anyone who they think may be able to add to their knowledge of that crime. HH has the right, at this point in time, to refuse to answer any questions LE might want to ask.

But if HH witnessed odd behavior, like stopping car randomly and tossing something in a public trash, and did not tell police wouldn't that be assisting a cover up?

As I said I'm not an attorney. I don't know if either of the posts I quoted are from attorneys. But

1. I agree with @pepper 34
that's a reason depositions are taken. But I'm not sure a person can be legally compelled to answer all questions in a deposition in a criminal matter. The DA's staff has no power to haul a witness off to jail who won't answer questions (at least not without a court order. And it's good DA's don't have that solo power.) A person can be legally compelled to testify in court or plead the 5th or be charged with contempt, of course.

Unless a Hail Mary pass is needed, I doubt any attorney would call a witness without knowing what she'd say no matter what he/she hopes the witness will say or how perceptive he/she hopes the jury will be. So if a person isn't willing to be deposed or refuses to answer all deposition questions, then I'm not sure that person would be called to testify even though testimony could be legally compelled in court. But I'm not an attorney.

I asked yesterday if people thought TS would walk without HH's testimony. So far as I can tell people don't think that. (I certainly don't.) It appears for the people answering to be more of a moral issue --- the belief HH should answer questions or suffer consequences. That's fine, but I'm not sure how far the DA will go to enforce a "moral imperative" in the midst of preparing for a first-degree murder trial IF there's no evidence HH was actually involved in GS's tragic death.

2. It has always been my understanding that refusing to provide information is not the same as "covering up" a crime or the obstruction of justice. Lying to LE about what one saw or did is a crime. Not talking to LE isn't. This link suggests my understanding is correct. Obstruction of Justice | LegalMatch

(Italics added by me.)

"The right to remain silent allows an individual to refuse to answer questions asked of them by the police. However, it does not protect an individual if they answer with a lie. As previously mentioned, obstruction does not occur simply because an individual fails to assist in an investigation; rather,
obstruction occurs when an individual attempts to mislead the investigation altogether."

3. Juries may or may not be perceptive. I just doubt a seasoned attorney would take the chance of calling a witness without having a solid idea about everything that person would say. We've all seen surprises in court. Some welcomed, some not. Ad-libbing is usually risky though. (Remember the famous gloves that didn't fit?)

4. IF LE suspected HH was involved in the crime after the fact (active involvement which is a crime, not just a refusal to talk which isn't a crime), she could be threatened with prosecution and offered immunity if she talked. That's not the same thing as prosecuting her for not talking. But it's worth noting at the time of the AA, it appeared LE thought she was not involved.

I guess we'll see. It's perfectly possible HH has voluntarily talked to LE by now. (May 3) The AA saying she hadn't cooperating was dated February 28. The AA also appeared to say she wasn't cooperating based solely on her initial refusal to answer questions. (And it is unclear at what other times LE could have attempted to question her early on.) On the other hand, she may not have cooperated. Whatever she's decided to do, I do hope she's had a competent attorney advising her. With what we know now, I do consider her another victim of TS's.

JMO

 

[Angels27]

I agree. The board fits perfectly into the narrative contained within the AA, as does the bloody scene in the bedroom, and the blood in the garage.

The board really only fits into one narrative, as I think trying to come up with another use for it would be a stretch.

If Gannon was really his listed weight (90 some odd pounds), I can’t imagine dragging a suitcase with his body up the stairs would be an issue.

I think he was lighter than that even. If you could do it, there’s no reason to think she couldn’t.

The bloody board works in another theory as well. She uses it to pick up bloody body (possibly in suitcase or not) on Tuesday from original Monday dump zone and places it into another vehicle for transport to the next hiding spot, which I think people are saying was the airport parking lot. She didn’t want blood in her trunk.

 

[Angels27]

Do we know if there was blood on carpet beside the bed, or just on the bed, under it, and on the walls? Thanks.

 

[MtnMama]

Please forgive me if this has been discussed as I'm several pages behind, but in the AA this text is sent to Harley (from Gannon's phone, most likely sent by LS):

10:37 a.m.
Text sent from Gannon’s phone to Harley

“Tecia left the phone at home if you need her txt me”

Does anyone find it incredibly odd that this text was sent in case Harley needed to contact LS, but nothing was sent to let AS or Laina's school know that LS didn't have her phone on her 4 hr jaunt?

Did AS try to contact her during this time to find out how Gannon was doing (because he stayed home sick from school)? If he didn't it's a clear indication what state their marriage was in, IMHO! If he did (I think he did) he must have thought it REALLY odd that LS didn't pick up or respond! I think he definitely knew something was wrong & off when he hadn't heard from Gannon & got no response to his multiple "Hey Buddy" texts throughout the day. I think that's why he kept sending them. His heart must have been in his chest and slowly breaking with each hour that he did not get a response from his son, I know mine would have been!

MOO JMO

 

[MtnMama]

I'm not convinced TS had an active murder plan until after 4 am on that Monday.... though more than likely she had all kinds of passive murder plans that date back years....

But let's say she realized on Monday morning that there was no turning back, Gannon was already severely injured. She leaves with him. Possibly she's seen leaving with a weapon, concealed in the bag. There's a reason she took the truck. There's a reason she took Gannon but not her phone. There's a reason she's off the grid between 11 and 1, that's no accident. She was SOMEWHERE.

It doesn't click for me that she'd bring him home to COMPLETE a murder. You'd arrange THAT in a bathtub... somewhere to contain the damage.

I think we're looking at TWO acts of violence. At least two. Sunday night, blunt force injury, hardly survivable. This was the only point of reference the DA had. IMO the autopsy revealed a bullet wound of such they'd earlier had no indication, suspicion or evidence. If the blood spatter in his bedroom was consistent with a gunshot and/or there was, say, damage to his headboard from a bullet, those charges would've been immediate, not add-ons post-autopsy! Surely the DA has more-than-considered the possibility/ likelihood he was first injured at home and secondarily shot elsewhere.

Without his body, they may never have known he'd been shot.

If his vision was at all impaired by the Sunday injury, she could easily have driven to a location, told Gannon they were going to the hospital, walked him out of the truck, and shot him. From behind.

The location and trajectory of that bullet entry will tell a major story.

I've never fired a gun. We'd speculated TS tried to bury him and we based that on the bandaid we think she's hiding under her sleeve in the Cousin It interview. Is it possible, when firing a gun, a long gun, to get your webbing pinched?

I think now it's MOST likely she injured her hand when she FIRST injured Gannon because she presplained her blood and his, on the walls, on the cover....

Me, I take greater satisfaction imagining Gannon injuring her. I hope he bit her. Not likely but it just makes me so angry, so sad that she overpowered a wholly defenseless, kind-hearted, loving little boy.

I hope she's finding jail to be absolutely miserable.

And that prison will be even worse.

JMO

CBM

Yes to all of this, especially the ending which I colored blue...Gannon's favorite color!

 

[MtnMama]

I'm wondering about Gannon's little sister being put to bed in LS & AS's bedroom on Sunday night?!

Was this a regular occurrence? I doubt it, as LS doesn't seem like the snuggly, go ahead and cuddle in my bed for comfort type! I think LS told little sis to go to sleep in her bedroom on purpose. She could have the TV blaring in the living room and control what little sis saw & heard better that way. I'm sure that little girl had already experienced the rage of LS and didn't dare question her! Little sis went to that bedroom and stayed in bed like she was told and was probably scared out of her mind. She still heard & witnessed much of what went on in that house on Sunday night.

IMHO, LS may have started her rage attack on Gannon in the basement, then sent little sis to bed, and continued her abuse of Gannon (including the carpet/candle video.) I think Gannon was already severely injured at that point and LS brought him upstairs to continue her abuse and record that staged video (I believe he was in the upstairs guest bathroom at that point.) This tragedy may have started as an abuse incident, but it quickly became a premeditated cover up & murder! I am so, so sad for Gannon & his sister!

MOO JMO

 

[MtnMama]

I never gave a thought to LE having the murder weapon. I hope so.

Remember those searches of water with the submersible and divers?? I could totally see LS chucking the murder weapons (at least some of them) in a pond. I hope LS has the weapon(s) too!

 

[MtnMama]

GS wanted to be found! We know from prior thread that there had been flooding in the area January 2020 which makes me think there could have been water around the bridge. I think either the water receded or LS missed it altogether and the suitcase landed on the bank. Regardless -- I'm grateful the suitcase was visible on March 17.

!

 

[MassGuy]

Remember those searches of water with the submersible and divers?? I could totally see LS chucking the murder weapons (at least some of them) in a pond. I hope LS has the weapon(s) too!

Just imagine if she was dumb enough to leave a murder weapon inside the suitcase.

I’m really struggling with the gun, as it makes so little sense. It would have been completely unnecessary to use one, there were apparently no bullet holes found, and I would think the neighbor’s security camera had a decent chance of hearing it.

So either there was no gun (despite the charges apparently indicating otherwise), or I think she did in fact shoot him during their trip, and he didn’t return home after all.

I’m skeptical though, as I think the blood evidence is going to be compelling (pointing to him being killed in the house).

The preliminary can’t come soon enough.

*Fixed grammar caused by Leticitus*

 

[dawnraks]

There are suggestions elsewhere that a strong connection exist between an address in the area of the searches in Colorado and an address near Pace. I am curious if any sleuthers here have come up with this same connection?