and 3) we cannot discuss those that have not been named by LE or MSM as players in the case.
That makes this case difficult to discuss and it is only going to get harder, but without confirmation, everyone is innocent.
Thanks,
Salem
CO - The Stalking and Mysterious Death of Morgan Ingram #2
- Thread starter snarkymalarkey
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
- Status
and 3) we cannot discuss those that have not been named by LE or MSM as players in the case.
That makes this case difficult to discuss and it is only going to get harder, but without confirmation, everyone is innocent.
Thanks,
Salem
Sorry. I actually read the forum rules right before I posted and could have sworn I saw a clarifying post that said it was okay to bring the Mom's blog posts here. I misinterpreted that to mean it was okay to partially quote them here.
eta: I guess discussing a suspect includes references with no names, initials or other identifying information? I really wasn't meaning to discuss any particular person. I was focused on the language of the blog, itself.
I think my cat is a lot like M's cat. My cat too runs and hides with any stranger, but will slowly come out and examine. (curiosity) I think Cat's have much better hearing then dogs, a cat hearing someone hiding would be near that area, rubbing the body up against the closet door or something. I believe more then likely he rigged a door to where it didn't lock. The Ingram's might have thought it was secure but it wasn't. Family very tired, when they hit that deep rem sleep he creeps in. I believe he probably had treats for the animals to keep them busy and or put them in M's bathroom.
twinkiesmom
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,660
- Reaction score
- 41
I don't know if that's true...What she is telling us is M wasn't suicidal, not that M wasn't at the end of her rope with the stalker.
She could still have been perfectly lucid and described her upcoming plans while being just done with the stalker.
Any suicide theory would have to account for how the drugs got into her system...and 300 perfectly digested amy pills + the flexeril doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever.
alwaysonmymind
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2008
- Messages
- 5,349
- Reaction score
- 4,870
I don't know anything about medicine.
How much was in her system, and how much would that mean in liquid or powder form?
How soon would that amount knock you out?
If she was given it earlier in the day, okay, I can see that, but would she still be up chatting with dad?
If someone was in the house, I'm running into problems figuring that out. If someone came in her room she would have screamed. Mom and Dad would have heard that for sure. If they didn't get there until she was asleep, could you inject without waking or would it just make you pass out right away? I see no way to get anything down anyone's throat at night without them choking, waking, screaming. Maybe I am overlooking methods.
How much was in her system, and how much would that mean in liquid or powder form?
How soon would that amount knock you out?
If she was given it earlier in the day, okay, I can see that, but would she still be up chatting with dad?
If someone was in the house, I'm running into problems figuring that out. If someone came in her room she would have screamed. Mom and Dad would have heard that for sure. If they didn't get there until she was asleep, could you inject without waking or would it just make you pass out right away? I see no way to get anything down anyone's throat at night without them choking, waking, screaming. Maybe I am overlooking methods.
MayraMM
New Member
I stated this in the last string for this topic, but I'd like to say it again. I think it's likely one of two scenarios:
There was peeping in the beginning (notice how it's different than the later stalking). I think it stopped shortly after M moved into the closet and the family became hyperalert, scaring the peeper away. This could have been related to some activity in other areas of town the summer before.
1) The family is already hypervigilant, having almost lost M to the CO poisoning. They're scared, and every sound is a stalker. This is supported by the lack of evidence on camera or found by police or seen thru thermal imaging, etc. And/or all the police calls send LE over to question certain people, who think it would be funny to escalate the "stalking", bullying, a la Carrie.
I don't think M was killed. I think she saw the medication at the stables, recognized the name and knew it would help her sleep, and took some, not realizing the dose was massive compared to what she had taken years back and accidentally overdosing (or intentionally OD'ing if we consider the first report of her conversation with dad the night she died).
2) My other theory can't be discussed here, but I think is just as likely.
My concerns are that the story is contradicting itself as it unfolds, and issues that we express on any given day are then incorporated in the narrative the next day. That REALLY bothers me, because I want to hear the story unbiased (as unbiased a one-sided story can be), without addressing concerns from outside observers. I want to know what they were thinking AT THE TIME, not in retrospect because people have expressed concern.
That's the biggest problem with telling the story on a day-to-day basis, which would be great for a novel, but not for a crime you want help solving. I hope TI reconsiders and decides to tell the story all at once. It's just sentiment that's making her tell it day-by-day as it happened last year, and probably therapeutic to her, but if she really wants to get to the bottom of what may or may not have happened, she needs to consider changing how she shares the details of the case.
There was peeping in the beginning (notice how it's different than the later stalking). I think it stopped shortly after M moved into the closet and the family became hyperalert, scaring the peeper away. This could have been related to some activity in other areas of town the summer before.
1) The family is already hypervigilant, having almost lost M to the CO poisoning. They're scared, and every sound is a stalker. This is supported by the lack of evidence on camera or found by police or seen thru thermal imaging, etc. And/or all the police calls send LE over to question certain people, who think it would be funny to escalate the "stalking", bullying, a la Carrie.
I don't think M was killed. I think she saw the medication at the stables, recognized the name and knew it would help her sleep, and took some, not realizing the dose was massive compared to what she had taken years back and accidentally overdosing (or intentionally OD'ing if we consider the first report of her conversation with dad the night she died).
2) My other theory can't be discussed here, but I think is just as likely.
My concerns are that the story is contradicting itself as it unfolds, and issues that we express on any given day are then incorporated in the narrative the next day. That REALLY bothers me, because I want to hear the story unbiased (as unbiased a one-sided story can be), without addressing concerns from outside observers. I want to know what they were thinking AT THE TIME, not in retrospect because people have expressed concern.
That's the biggest problem with telling the story on a day-to-day basis, which would be great for a novel, but not for a crime you want help solving. I hope TI reconsiders and decides to tell the story all at once. It's just sentiment that's making her tell it day-by-day as it happened last year, and probably therapeutic to her, but if she really wants to get to the bottom of what may or may not have happened, she needs to consider changing how she shares the details of the case.
I think, in general that pet's reactions can't be counted on. At different times in my life I had a particular breed of dog. One of the dogs was hyper vigilant, nosy and noisy. The later dog was incredibly laid back, so much so that strangers would come in the back yard (with our permission) and the dog wouldn't even raise his head to greet them.
There have been plenty of murders/kidnappings etc where the dog didn't attack the perp. Most of us train our animals to be friendly! We hope that they would do something to protect us, but sometimes they don't.
Also, I have noticed when there are multiple animals in the house, some people get used to hearing them roam around- especially cats since they are nocturnal. It just becomes background noise to the owners. So if the cat/dog/bird isn't flipping out I don't think the owners would even notice if Fido decided to walk down to the kitchen to get a drink vs. Fido is walking around with the intruder.
JMO
There have been plenty of murders/kidnappings etc where the dog didn't attack the perp. Most of us train our animals to be friendly! We hope that they would do something to protect us, but sometimes they don't.
Also, I have noticed when there are multiple animals in the house, some people get used to hearing them roam around- especially cats since they are nocturnal. It just becomes background noise to the owners. So if the cat/dog/bird isn't flipping out I don't think the owners would even notice if Fido decided to walk down to the kitchen to get a drink vs. Fido is walking around with the intruder.
JMO
Herding Cats
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 7,966
- Reaction score
- 46
In re: the animals and their reaction (or lack thereof).
Generally speaking: cats aren't quite as reactive to strangers as other creatures. They are not going to respond to a stranger for the most part. They tend to be "as long as you leave me alone, I'm not going to even be interested..." with strangers. However, that being said, I have two that will approach strangers and ask for lovies...Oliver and Malachi. They are interested, but there is nothing about their interest which would ever be something I could count on to give me clues that there is a problem.
Newfoundlands, which one of their dogs is (Tessi), are notoriously friendly, charming, and laid back. There was exactly one time where she "protected" me, and even that was not an aggressive protection - just moving herself between me and who she considered a potential issue. And this was after the person had been hollering at me for a minute or two. She is valuable in home defense purely from size and appearance alone...her huge head goes into the window to "see" who's there, and the people who see her back off (once all the way to the street). But if Grace knows you, and you know her, she will say hi by pushing her head into your hand, and asking for lovies. LOL. And Newfs are just like that. They will save a stranger from danger, but if the stranger is danger...and/or she knows the intruder, she'd help carry things to the car, thinking she'd get to go on a ride.
As for my beagle, he's a scaredy cat. He will absolutely bark and let me know that there's something out there, but he won't confront them at all.
I believe (although haven't read it anywhere) Wylah is an Australian Cattle Dog. They are great working dogs, but will also defend their person. However, they are also very loyal dogs; if it's a person they know and trust, they very well might not do anything to protect their owner, simply because they know that person is a "friend".
Wylah was a puppy during this time, and was apparently very well socialized. She went a lot of places with Morgan, and was probably well known with her friends. Because of that, Wylah would not have thought those 'friends' were dangerous, even if they were, or were doing something dangerous to Morgan, because Wylah knew them as friends, and knew them from other locations and places.
I have to discount any questions about Tessi, the Ingram's Landseer Newf. And I have to think that either the puppy knew the person(s) who did this, or was not of an age where she would protect. Assuming the puppy was about 4 months when she was brought home in August, she would be very young when the stalking started, and only +/- 8 months when Morgan died. That, to me, is far too young to expect her to be able to protect, or to even understand what danger would be, and bark a lot at someone she knew and trusted as a friend (as that is who I think did this...a "friend" of Morgan, or at least someone she thought of as a friend).
And I have to discount the cat's response...there are no "guard cats" for a reason (but they are still valuable members of a family...and provide a ton of love and cuddles and laughter at their antics).
Best-
Herding Cats
Generally speaking: cats aren't quite as reactive to strangers as other creatures. They are not going to respond to a stranger for the most part. They tend to be "as long as you leave me alone, I'm not going to even be interested..." with strangers. However, that being said, I have two that will approach strangers and ask for lovies...Oliver and Malachi. They are interested, but there is nothing about their interest which would ever be something I could count on to give me clues that there is a problem.
Newfoundlands, which one of their dogs is (Tessi), are notoriously friendly, charming, and laid back. There was exactly one time where she "protected" me, and even that was not an aggressive protection - just moving herself between me and who she considered a potential issue. And this was after the person had been hollering at me for a minute or two. She is valuable in home defense purely from size and appearance alone...her huge head goes into the window to "see" who's there, and the people who see her back off (once all the way to the street). But if Grace knows you, and you know her, she will say hi by pushing her head into your hand, and asking for lovies. LOL. And Newfs are just like that. They will save a stranger from danger, but if the stranger is danger...and/or she knows the intruder, she'd help carry things to the car, thinking she'd get to go on a ride.
As for my beagle, he's a scaredy cat. He will absolutely bark and let me know that there's something out there, but he won't confront them at all.
I believe (although haven't read it anywhere) Wylah is an Australian Cattle Dog. They are great working dogs, but will also defend their person. However, they are also very loyal dogs; if it's a person they know and trust, they very well might not do anything to protect their owner, simply because they know that person is a "friend".
Wylah was a puppy during this time, and was apparently very well socialized. She went a lot of places with Morgan, and was probably well known with her friends. Because of that, Wylah would not have thought those 'friends' were dangerous, even if they were, or were doing something dangerous to Morgan, because Wylah knew them as friends, and knew them from other locations and places.
I have to discount any questions about Tessi, the Ingram's Landseer Newf. And I have to think that either the puppy knew the person(s) who did this, or was not of an age where she would protect. Assuming the puppy was about 4 months when she was brought home in August, she would be very young when the stalking started, and only +/- 8 months when Morgan died. That, to me, is far too young to expect her to be able to protect, or to even understand what danger would be, and bark a lot at someone she knew and trusted as a friend (as that is who I think did this...a "friend" of Morgan, or at least someone she thought of as a friend).
And I have to discount the cat's response...there are no "guard cats" for a reason (but they are still valuable members of a family...and provide a ton of love and cuddles and laughter at their antics).
Best-
Herding Cats
ScotsPaddy
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 588
- Reaction score
- 95
Spot on MayraMM.
Theres that cow again.MOO
Theres that cow again.MOO
twinkiesmom
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,660
- Reaction score
- 41
One of mom's recent responses on the blog....Morgan had the equivalent of 7900 mg in her system but the pills she was prescribed were 25 mg. I may have the numbers wrong, feel free to correct me, but that's a ton of pills to not have any undigested in her stomach.
Edited to add:
the blog poster did have the units wrong...it was 7900 ng/mL.
rollinginit
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 1,518
- Reaction score
- 13
Did everybody read the blog post that's pretty detailed about the meds? There is also some comments at the bottom.
http://morganingram.com/wordpress/?p=1207#comments
http://morganingram.com/wordpress/?p=1207#comments
MayraMM
New Member
She had 7909 ng/mL, not mg (nanograms per milliliters, not milligrams), which converts to 7.909 mg/liter (milligrams per liter). Estimate 5 or 6 liters (probably less, since she was small) of blood in her body, that would come out to 39.5 to 47.5 mg of the drug in her system. People were given an average of about 75 mg a day in divided doses for depression, so the amount in her system isn't nearly as large as it sounds.
It wasn't until you mentioned it that I went back and noticed it was nanograms, not milligrams.
The nortriptyline is also a relatively small amount.
I couldn't find how much Flexeril was found.
Now I'm wondering why EITHER pathologist would call this amitriptiyline toxicity when the dosage found was less than the average dose given an adult for depression.
Either my math is way off, or I'm reading something wrong, or I'm missing something vital.
Anyone want to chime in, because I just totally confused myself . . . :dunno:
Herding Cats
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 7,966
- Reaction score
- 46
If the math were done, 7900 mg in 25mg form is 316 25mg pills. Even if the effect is cumulative (and for ami, it is), you still have to consider the amount of pills she'd have to take to get that extraordinarily high number in her system...
Even going on a hugely reduced estimate, she would have to have taken more than 100 pills (imho) to achieve those numbers.
In my opinion, she did NOT take 100 pills, or any kind. There would have been fragments, and possibly whole pills, left in her stomach and small intestine; and yet none were found.
We're not even mentioning the flexeril here...just the ami. Far, far too many for her to take at the rx'd mg for her to have taken those on her own, and have NO FRAGMENTS in her system.
Best-
Herding Cats
ETA: Mayra, can you link over where it says nanograms? For if this is the case, I agree that this wouldn't even approach the level of toxicity...which means a few other things, to me. So can you link for me, pretty please?
rollinginit
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 1,518
- Reaction score
- 13
Also, in the above link, m was a babysitter. Don't know how often she did it, but that is what she was suppose to do the next day (the day she was found dead)
MayraMM
New Member
If my math is correct (a couple of posts up), that's why there are no pill fragments: The report was nanograms not milligrams. She didn't need to take 100s of pills. To get the amount in her system would have been 2 or 3 pills.
Would 2 or 3 pills be enough to OD if added say with 1 flexeril, and let us just assume she did not eat that day or only ate a yogurt?
Now I'm sooooo confused, lol.
ETA: I am making up amount flexeril and yogurt or no food to try to get an understanding of what happened. I just don't understand medication and how little or how much, or what needs to be going on in a body enough to understand.
twinkiesmom
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,660
- Reaction score
- 41
Agree with you on the ng/mL not being mg.
Disagree with you on that it was a low concentration. If you look at this article, Morgan's concentrations were 10X higher than their highest recorded overdose. (see Figure 3)
http://www.clinchem.org/content/22/6/777.full.pdf
Since that patient had a broad range of possible dose...look at the next patient lower (look at the data table)....An over dose of 1200 mg (e.g., 48 of those 25 mg pills) resulted in a plasma concentration of 333 ng/mL (ng/mL = micrograms per liter)...Morgan's concentration was 7900 ng/mL.
- Status