CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #33 *ARREST*

[Artis]

Do we have anything to indicate she never met him in person before moving everything to be with him?

Because otherwise, what's the difference? It's like a blind date. They had those in the 50's and 60's. They have them now too. Amber Frey met SP on a blind date set up by a friend.

Big difference today is that you can easily do background checks. Which makes women today probably safer, if they'd utilize them, than they were in the past.

The fact is not everyone met through church or work of friends back then and not everyone meets people through the internet now.

Plenty of people then met total strangers at dance halls, on buses, at bars, cafes, etc. And plenty of people now still meet at work or church or through friends.

But the question is, what's the difference (besides the ability to do cheap and quick background checks)? So you meet someone on line. Eventually you're going to meet in person. There's no contract created or circumstances that would prevent intuition and gut instinct from kicking in at that moment, right?

I don't think women are less safe today because of technology. Maybe more safe if they'd use it wisely. But probably about the same.

It might comes down to the same reason countless intelligent, intuitive women have fallen for terrible men, going back as far as recorded history. They ignore their gut. They want babies and marriage and ignore that intuition.

Finally, while we know KB was an intelligent woman with her life together, how do we know she was intuitive? Not everyone is. Do we have information to indicate that?

After Chris Watts, I'm beginning to think that when someone wants to get involved with someone else that full psychological profiles should be done on both families, MMPIs and the Hare Psychopath test take by both; spiritual counseling to make sure you're on the same page there; maybe PET scans of the brain; astrological charts, tarot cards, background checks, credit checks and completing Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University. Worse part is, I'm not kidding. One or more of those things might reveal information that would make someone take pause and go in another direction.

 

[kay74]

Many assume Kelseys Aunt got the information from Kelseys mother, who was told by PF. He may have told her mom that she broke up with him in order to justify his lack of concern for her being missing. Imo

I think it would have been the opposite. If PF tole her mom they broke up on Thanksgiving that would give everyone a red flag. That's why he killed her! If he had a half of brain he would never have told anyone this.

 

[kay74]

I have never read anywhere that Kelseys Aunt stated Kelsey told her she and PF broke up on Thanksgiving. It was reported that they broke up, but I never saw it verified that this came from Kelsey herself. Imo

It sounded like the aunt knew about this and got the info either from KB or CB.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

We also need to factor in, IMO, the possibility that CB knew the bad stuff about the relationship but opted (or was advised by LE) to downplay it or even leave some things out, at the time she made her initial statement including that it was a "loving" relationship.

 

[Kapua]

CB must have known at the time she spoke publicly that 1) PF had claimed that they broke up on or the day before Thanksgiving, and/or 2) that her sister/niece had heard from KB that they had broken up. Yet she did not say that. Why? We can all speculate, but IMHO it was likely because CB had not heard it directly from KB and was going by her impression of the relationship between PF and KB at the time she last spoke to her daughter. MOO

 

[Irmese]

Hmmm. This is going way back, but did we ever know how the aunt knew they'd broken up the night before Thanksgiving? I'm inferring that the aunt would have had it from KB herself, but I wonder why she would tell her aunt but not her mom? Maybe she wanted to wait until she could have a good sitdown with her mom or some uninterrupted phone chat time?

KB talked to CB twice on Thanksgiving and her mom said she sounded "normal." She said the relationship was loving. I believe PF told CB that KB broke up and left to go see her family and CB shared that with the family including the aunt. MOO.

 

[MsBetsy]

I just looked around, the Daily Beast says the aunt wrote it on facebook.

Yes, Kelseys Aunt also posted the information in an earlier thread, explaining that she wanted to get the details out to truckers, and that they were on the alert. But this was very early on in the case, before she was believed to be deceased.
She did not post much after that, probably because by that time there was an active investigation. Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

We also need to factor in, IMO, the possibility that CB knew the bad stuff about the relationship but opted (or was advised by LE) to downplay it or even leave some things out, at the time she made her initial statement including that it was a "loving" relationship.

Yes, and she may not have wanted to give any information which would contribute to the theory that Kelsey committed suicide or ran off on her own due to being distressed over a breakup. Imo

 

[Noharg]

Oh, I don't think the aunt lied either. I'm just a little confused about where the aunt got it from, and why mom had different intel. That's why I'm wondering if KB wanted "time" to tell mom. I think my confusion is probably just my head spinning on this merry-go-round

ETA a sentence

So we don’t know where the aunt got her info about Thanksgiving breakup, correct?
I wonder if she spoke to PF or KB.

 

[Harmony 2]

Admin note: Posts have been removed. The dating practices of yesteryear as compared to currently are not the topic of the thread.

 

[MsBetsy]

So we don’t know where the aunt got her info about Thanksgiving breakup, correct?
I wonder if she spoke to PF or KB.

It's unlikely that she spoke to KB, as she went missing that day and its only been reported that she spoke to her mother. Since the Aunt relayed the same information that PF told her mother, it's assumed that all of the details came from him. Imo

 

[Dave F.]

The Solicitation charge can carry up to 24 years in prison. I wonder if that is for each charge? Colorado’s "Criminal Solicitation" Laws (18-2-301 C.R.S.)

Below is exactly how the first charge of solicitation is stated in the Complaint, followed by the FindLaw citations of each coded component of the charge. While District Attorney May explained that all three charges are separate solicitations, they are tied, by the coding, to one of two charges. The sentence in major felonies is customarily added onto the primary sentence. The minimum for this First Degree Murder Charge is currently 40 years before eligibility for parole. If he serves 40 and becomes eligible, the Solicitation sentence would begin that day:

COUNT 1: MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, C.R.S. 18-3-102 (1)(a)(F1)(01011)
CRS = Colorado Revised Statutes
18-3-102 = Murder in the First Degree
(1) = A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if:
(a) = After deliberation and with the intent to cause the death of a person other than himself
(f1) = Endeavored to disengage himself from the commission of the underlying crime or flight therefrom immediately upon having reasonable grounds to believe that another participant is armed with a deadly weapon, instrument, article, or substance, or intended to engage in conduct likely to result in death or serious bodily injury.
01011 = coded version of the citation

COUNT 2: SOLICITATION TO COMMIT MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, C.R.S. 18-3-102(1)(a): 18-2-301(F2)(01011S)
CRS = Colorado Revised Statutes
18-2-301 = SOLICITATION
(F2) = It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that, if the criminal object were achieved, the defendant would be the sole victim of the offense or the offense is so defined that his conduct would be inevitably incident to its commission or he otherwise would not be guilty under the statute defining the offense or under section 18-1-603 dealing with complicity.
(01011S) = coded version of the citation

Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-3-102 | FindLaw
Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-2-301 | FindLaw

 

[GordianKnot]

Below is exactly how the first charge of solicitation is stated in the Complaint, followed by the FindLaw citations of each coded component of the charge. While District Attorney May explained that all three charges are separate solicitations, they are tied, by the coding, to one of two charges. The sentence in major felonies is customarily added onto the primary sentence. The minimum for this First Degree Murder Charge is currently 40 years before eligibility for parole. If he serves 40 and becomes eligible, the Solicitation sentence would begin that day:

COUNT 1: MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, C.R.S. 18-3-102 (1)(a)(F1)(01011)
CRS = Colorado Revised Statutes
18-3-102 = Murder in the First Degree
(1) = A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if:
(a) = After deliberation and with the intent to cause the death of a person other than himself
(f1) = Endeavored to disengage himself from the commission of the underlying crime or flight therefrom immediately upon having reasonable grounds to believe that another participant is armed with a deadly weapon, instrument, article, or substance, or intended to engage in conduct likely to result in death or serious bodily injury.
01011 = coded version of the citation

COUNT 2: SOLICITATION TO COMMIT MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, C.R.S. 18-3-102(1)(a): 18-2-301(F2)(01011S)
CRS = Colorado Revised Statutes
18-2-301 = SOLICITATION
(F2) = It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that, if the criminal object were achieved, the defendant would be the sole victim of the offense or the offense is so defined that his conduct would be inevitably incident to its commission or he otherwise would not be guilty under the statute defining the offense or under section 18-1-603 dealing with complicity.
(01011S) = coded version of the citation

Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-3-102 | FindLaw
Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-2-301 | FindLaw

Good info...thanks for the links to the CO statutes! Helpful for TOUWANA.

 

[Hatch]

It's so sad. Here's a beautiful, accomplished woman settling for that? Why?

It baffles me what women will sometimes struggle to maintain when they should be running in the opposite direction.

Perhaps PF was KB first adult real love relationship. Real first love is a potent thing until it is NOT.

 

[Hatch]

I don't think he appears to be the type you can break up with obviously.

I am wondering if more of his past relationships have came forward and LE is keeping that info under wraps. I can understand it would be beneficial to not reveal all their informants this early on.

 

[MassGuy]

I am wondering if more of his past relationships have came forward and LE is keeping that info under wraps. I can understand it would be beneficial to not reveal all their informants this early on.

They certainly would have talked to these people.

Their entire investigation will be kept under wraps.

This is the type of information that would not be included in arrest warrant, even when it is unsealed.

 

[GordianKnot]

They certainly would have talked to these people.

Their entire investigation will be kept under wraps.

This is the type of information that would not be included in arrest warrant, even when it is unsealed.

If PF has a history of physical abuse in prior relationships, I'm wondering if the testimony of prior gfs could come in at trial to show a pattern of behavior, or if that type of testimony would be considered prejudicial.

 

[MassGuy]

If PF has a history of physical abuse in prior relationships, I'm wondering if the testimony of prior gfs could come in at trial to show patterns of behavior, or if that type of testimony would be considered prejudicial.

They could certainly call these people to rebut the testimony of any character witnesses.

If mommy takes the stand, an ex girlfriend could refute her characterization of him.

 

[GordianKnot]

They could certainly call these people to rebut the testimony of any character witnesses.

If mommy takes the stand, an ex girlfriend could refute her characterization of him.

BBM:
"He's a good boy. He makes his bed every morning. I never have to remind him to take out the trash....Oh. Wait. On second thought, Your Honor, forget that part about him taking out the trash."

 

[Dave F.]

If PF has a history of physical abuse in prior relationships, I'm wondering if the testimony of prior gfs could come in at trial to show a pattern of behavior, or if that type of testimony would be considered prejudicial.

My opinion is that the prosecution is going to have to call pretty much everyone who ever knew KB to establish that she is dead because she is no longer where she should be. Each one of them may have the opportunity to say "Yes, the last time I saw her she was crying because........." If what they say is innappropriate, the judge will order it stricken. As for calling PF's old girlfriends just to hear how much they don't like him now, it can't be done. I believe the proper term is "irrelevant".
IMO