CO - The Stalking and Mysterious Death of Morgan Ingram #2

[rollinginit]

So M died Dec 1-2, 2011, her first autopsy was finished on Dec 19, 2011 that said she died of natural causes. Then on July 28, 2012, her cause of death was changed to suicide.

Why the 7 mth gap? Is that how long it takes to get blood work and such back?

I know on a few crime shows I've watched....usually the testing comes back in a few weeks. Also, don't the ME investigate the victim's life in making a call like that? Seems that is what Dr. G did a few times that I watched her show. She would always interview people close to the victim, check their medical records, etc.... Don't they take everything going on before the victim was killed into account?

I really don't know, which is why I am asking.

 

[Confusion]

Here's a question that I should probably know the answer to, but I'm just starting, so I have a lot of questions.

Are these blog entries from a diary/journal Morgan's mom kept during this time? When I started reading, I assumed she was just going by memory, but they're too detailed for that. Also, how does she know the exact times and verbiage of their texts? Had she saved them?

I believe she said it was from notes that had been kept, text messages on her, S's and M's phones, paperwork they'd received, memory and probably other things.

 

[21merc7]

So M died Dec 1-2, 2011, her first autopsy was finished on Dec 19, 2011 that said she died of natural causes. Then on July 28, 2012, her cause of death was changed to suicide.

Why the 7 mth gap? Is that how long it takes to get blood work and such back?

I know on a few crime shows I've watched....usually the testing comes back in a few weeks. Also, don't the ME investigate the victim's life in making a call like that? Seems that is what Dr. G did a few times that I watched her show. She would always interview people close to the victim, check their medical records, etc.... Don't they take everything going on before the victim was killed into account?

I really don't know, which is why I am asking.

Hmm, 7 month gap is a good question, unless they had to ship it to a larger and busy lab.

I would think if the area is small they would have asked questions about Morgan's life. I would think LE or EMT's would have if ME did not. They would here, but any unexplained death would bring lots of questions here.

I would like to know on both counts too.

I was also wondering, and I hate to ask it, but was the ami med that was already there capsules or tablets? Just a thought I had.

 

[MindMountaineer]

Also in the blog,it states that Morgan would go out alone in her car sometimes in the evenings. I don't understand why a stalker wouldn't have seized the opportunity of abducting her when she was alone driving. JMO

It seems that part of the "fun" for the stalker is the torment he causes his victims, not the capture of his victims. It's like threatening to tickle someone: sometimes the threat of impending tickle is worse than actually being tickled (I speak from experience on the tickling bit!). I think this stalker in particular reveled every time the ante was upped by the family buying more equipment, increasing their vigilance, etc.

 

[rollinginit]

Hmm, 7 month gap is a good question, unless they had to ship it to a larger and busy lab.

I would think if the area is small they would have asked questions about Morgan's life. I would like to know on both counts too.

I was also wondering, and I hate to ask it, but was the ami med that was already there capsules or tablets? Just a thought I had.

They were the large lab.

Her death initially was attributed to natural causes, according to an autopsy report dated Dec. 19 by Dr. Robert Kurtzman, of Grand Junction, a forensic pathologist and former coroner for Mesa County. The Mesa County coroner routinely handles autopsies for Garfield County.

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search

 

[alwaysonmymind]

So M died Dec 1-2, 2011, her first autopsy was finished on Dec 19, 2011 that said she died of natural causes. Then on July 28, 2012, her cause of death was changed to suicide.

Why the 7 mth gap? Is that how long it takes to get blood work and such back?

I know on a few crime shows I've watched....usually the testing comes back in a few weeks. Also, don't the ME investigate the victim's life in making a call like that? Seems that is what Dr. G did a few times that I watched her show. She would always interview people close to the victim, check their medical records, etc.... Don't they take everything going on before the victim was killed into account?

I really don't know, which is why I am asking.

Mesa County handles autopsies for Garfield.
They have a very detailed Standard Operating procedure online that covers all of these items.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MindMountaineer]

Why the 7 mth gap? Is that how long it takes to get blood work and such back?

I really don't know, which is why I am asking.

I have heard that it can indeed take months for testing results to come in.

Where I heard this: I read an article once that the many crime shows, CSI in particular, are spurring many people to study criminal justice or forensics. The article claims that these CSI aspirants perhaps do not realize that the fast pace of crime-solving seen on TV is not at all reflective of the more frustrating reality: that the forensic testing, interrogations, etc. are extremely time-consuming, laborious, tedious, and produce more lost leads than anything else.

My apologies that I cannot remember where I read this article, otherwise I would post a link here.

 

[21merc7]

They were the large lab.


http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search

In this article I see the Sheriff's Office said they will not open the case unless there is new evidence. So, does that mean they looked at the video recordings and did not find new evidence?

 

[rollinginit]

I know testing like DNA takes a while, but I don't think they were testing DNA, were they? I was talking more like testing for chemicals or whatever is in M's body? Or testing blood? Why would it take 7 months for the Dr. to change his first ruling?

It took 16 days to get the ruling for the first autopsy.

 

[MayraMM]

I don't see a suicide being likely with so many medications on board, several of them being date rape medications. This was overkill by manyfold....In my mind, there is great spite involved in loading her up this way.

This death occurred last year. She could have googled all these medications and picked up one that would just put her to sleep permanently...Ami would not be a drug of choice because you could end up in a long-term coma...other side effects are painful/scary.

I hear what you're saying but can't get past this is someone who had an enemy.

Overkill would have been the point. It would have insured she wasn't saved at the last minute. Those "date rape" drugs are also used for other things, and so many young folks are dosed to their eyebrows these days. I think the very mixture of medications shows that she did this herself. If she "borrowed" a sleep aid from one friend a few times, a pain killer from another a few times, an anxiolytic from another a few times, she'd have a nice supply saved up for when she decided to take them That gave her control.

 

[21merc7]

I know testing like DNA takes a while, but I don't think they were testing DNA, were they? I was talking more like testing for chemicals or whatever is in M's body? Or testing blood? Why would it take 7 months for the Dr. to change his first ruling?

It took 16 days to get the ruling for the first autopsy.

The lab would be testing for drugs. This testing would not be pushed forward of the many others they needed as it was not viewed as a crime. It was simply viewed as a death and put on the list with any other deaths that were not considered rush jobs, just go into the normal rotation.

 

[rollinginit]

In this article I see the Sheriff's Office said they will not open the case unless there is new evidence. So, does that mean they looked at the video recordings and did not find new evidence?

Mom said last night that they (LE) did not get around to looking at it when she inquired about the videos. She got the videos and found images. She said somebody was running away from the house and it was on the night M died. I don't know if LE looked at them. Maybe mom and LE's relationship were not good at this point??? Don't know. JMO

 

[21merc7]

Mom said last night that they (LE) did not get around to looking at it when she inquired about the videos. She got the videos and found images. She said somebody was running away from the house and it was on the night M died. I don't know if LE looked at them. Maybe mom and LE's relationship were not good at this point??? Don't know. JMO

If there is anything on them, that would be considered new evidence.

I hope they did at least look at them after she talked with them!

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Mom said last night that they (LE) did not get around to looking at it when she inquired about the videos. She got the videos and found images. She said somebody was running away from the house and it was on the night M died. I don't know if LE looked at them. Maybe mom and LE's relationship were not good at this point??? Don't know. JMO

BBM: Or perhaps her interpretation of the images viewed by LE and Mom didn't corroborate? Let's hope they are better quality images than the blurry, weird looking night vision pic of the stalker. I hope she posts them here for us to see!

 

[Moxie Vi]

also, what is the mother's focus-having the manner of death changed?

IIRC the mom's main goal is to get LE to thoroughly investigate all possibilities. This was in the comments of her blog. In most states a natural cause of death or suicide ruling halts the investigation.

 

[21merc7]

IIRC the mom's main goal is to get LE to thoroughly investigate all possibilities. This was in the comments of her blog. In most states a natural cause of death or suicide ruling halts the investigation.

Agreed about the end of an investigation.

What I think we are not understanding is if LE thinks there was a case at all. There is literally zero other info from LE. There is some suggestion that there could be a stalker in this article, but LE says not enough evidence.

This article that rollinginit posted earlier:

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search

Toni Ingram steadfastly insists that the stalker — she has an idea of who he is — is the prime suspect for the murder of Morgan Ingram. She has a picture, taken with a wildlife camera mounted outside the home, that she believes shows the stalker.

She said Garfield County sheriff's Detective Rob Glassmire confronted the potential suspect at his place of work soon after Ingram died.

Glassmire concluded that the suspect had not been involved, but Toni Ingram feels differently.

She said the man was arrested in Glenwood Springs about two weeks after Morgan died, and police found drugs and jewelry in his car.

She said the Glenwood Springs Police Department, which made the arrest, would not allow her to see the jewelry to know if it matched some jewelry missing from her daughter's bedroom. Officials at the Police Department was not available for comment.

Glassmire was not available for comment, but his partner, Detective Megan Alstatt, said that the stalker case is not necessarily closed.

“I believe it's inactive, but technically we could reopen it,” she said, although she said the department has no plans to do so without new evidence of some sort.

Several different people were viewed as suspects, she said.

“At this time we don't have enough evidence to go through with arrests for any of those people,” she added.

and then of course the results:

Toni Ingram said she is not going to let go of her conviction that her daughter was murdered, no matter what the coroner and the Sheriff's Department say.

Sheriff Lou Vallario, however, stuck by Kurtzman's conclusions.

“The results of the autopsy and pathology reports were that the manner of death was suicide,” the sheriff wrote in an email.

“Unfortunately, the family, who are clearly victims in this case, are traumatized by the death of their daughter, rightfully so, and are struggling to deal with her death,” Vallario added. “I am sorry for the grief and difficulty the family is going through.”

 

[rollinginit]

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search

Glassmire was not available for comment, but his partner, Detective Megan Alstatt, said that the stalker case is not necessarily closed.

“I believe it's inactive, but technically we could reopen it,” she said, although she said the department has no plans to do so without new evidence of some sort.

Several different people were viewed as suspects, she said.

“At this time we don't have enough evidence to go through with arrests for any of those people,” she added.

See, that's what I don't understand. Is the case open or not? Couldn't LE just come right out and say....instead of "not necessarily closed" or "I believe it's inactive" and "technically we could reopen it"........IMO, that's like the hot potato game.

 

[concernedmother]

http://morganingram.com/wordpress/?p=1230#comments
Interesting one toward the bottom

 

[Moxie Vi]

Agreed about the end of an investigation.

What I think we are not understanding is if LE thinks there was a case at all. There is literally zero other info from LE. There is some suggestion that there could be a stalker in this article, but LE says not enough evidence.

This article that rollinginit posted earlier:

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search



and then of course the results:

I honestly don't think that LE thinks there is a case at all. That's just my opinion from articles and actions. Any investigation into stalking becomes unnecessary once M dies of natural causes as originally thought. Case closed.

My response was more to indicate that the mom's end goal is not only about changing the death certificate.

 

[21merc7]

http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20120907/NEWS/120909901&parentprofile=search





See, that's what I don't understand. Is the case open or not? Couldn't LE just come right out and say....instead of "not necessarily closed" or "I believe it's inactive" and "technically we could reopen it"........IMO, that's like the hot potato game.

The article quotes are a bit contradictory, what's new?

At least we know they questioned the number 1 suspect, and reading between the lines about questioning other suspects, the others thought to be involved. They felt there was nothing there to go on.

Inactive must mean it is a file, in a box, it is not a cold case, it is not a resolved case, it is a file of complaints and their procedures to look into them.