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

[MayraMM]

Robbing numerous houses is different than stalking one house repeatedly for 4 months, especially with the family being more and more vigilant. It just doesn't strike me as something a group of kids, who by the way like to get high, can pull off so cleanly.

Someone who possibly had experience in burglarizing houses and was caught with stolen goods? Someone like that could be quite stealthy I think.

A little OT but I think the argument that kids couldn't do this is kind of silly. A few years back there were quite a few burglaries in our neighborhood. When they caught them it was two 15yr old boys who lived in the neighborhood. They found a notebook where they kept notes of people's coming and goings, so they knew people's routines of when they would be home, etc. How they were caught is some neighbors who are gone for most of the day on Sundays with church activities, caught them. One day their daughter had a birthday party to go to and so the Dad stayed behind to take her. They ran some errands and he dropped her off at the party and then went back home. As he pulled up he thought he saw someone going into his backyard. When he went in the house he got his gun and started checking rooms. He caught one of the boys crawling through an open bathroom window. When LE searched the boys' home, from what I heard, the garage was full of stolen goods. Over 20 robberies they were able to pin on them. Who knows, there were probably more. So I think kids are capable of doing something like this. Well, I know they are.

 

[bearx]

Someone on the ROOF?

I get the impression from the blog that it's fairly wooded but I do wonder what other houses could see this from their roofs now.

 

[gitana1]

Yes, I absolutely thought of money as being a possibility of why no lawsuit pursued, but imo for it to be the factor with holding them from pursuing the lawsuit I personally do not find very likely(and maybe thats just me..and thats ok as well)..but I can say that with this "case" having very much picked up steam I know that there are absolutely Attys who self servingly offer their services in such an event..hoping/praying for it to pay off in any type local notoriety(that a local atty once involved would really begin to play up the media)..along with hoping the the good ol' mom intending on publishing a book and making into documentary..praying that to come to fruition and the local atty play his and his clients cards right and he may just get a little bit of that local notierity along with possibly a few funds on the back end if successfully winning his client the defamation law suit..

Not only that did I ponder on but IMO I know many mothers would likely to be of a similar frame of mind as me in seeing the mother, themselves and/or their innocent childs name being flooded in cyber world of criminal activities thats damage to your childs rep that would likely be lifelong..in seeing that happening to my child whatever retainer fee necessary to retain the atty to strike back asap would be found and would be paid(besides we're not talking some $10,000 retainee not even in the ball park)..

The money issue imo is not a large enough obstacle that would prevent atty from being retained and shutting down the defamation asap..

I wont drone on but I do know that in terms of there being sufficient evidence according to the legal standards to establish there is in fact defamation against an individual...being able to prove evidence of the actual funds and amounts lost as a direct result of the defamation is not a necessity to establish defamation in the legal sense of the word..im certain itd be a great benefit to have that evidence but its not a necessity to establish that there is defamation of an individual ..the only necessity is defamation that is required in order to file a lawsuit..

Jmo.

As an attorney, I have to challenge your statements here.
1. I do not think this case is famous enough for civil attorneys to want to get involved defending possible defamation subjects, for free. In cases where attorneys step in for free for the publicity, we are talking about extremely famous cases where a defendant already exists or a suspect has been named or it is very obvious that a POI has been identified and is being investigated, or, when there are political implications such as discrimination, or constitutional issues and/or a celebrity or famous person is involved. Otherwise, no way.
2. You better believe 10k is a likely retainer for such a case. In fact, I think it is actually pretty low. We are probably talking closer to 18 k. I base this on experience.
3. Money is absolutely and obstacle to legal representation in such a case. Lawyers make money by being choosy about cases and demanding retainers unless they are slam dunk PI cases or flat fee cases.
4. Yes, all you need to file a lawsuit is to claim defamation. But in order to PROVE defamation in Colorado, you need to establish the elements of defamation. Those elements include: 1. A defamatory statement (untrue statement that tends to affect a person's reputation in the community); 2. published to a third party; 3. the existence of special damages (essentially, "economic") or actionability (the ability to sue for a specific purpose due to a specific status; 4. actual malice. http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/Documents/Judges/MSK/msk_samp_dis_mot.pdf

See, also:

In Colorado, there are four required elements of a cause of action for defamation. The first element includes a defamatory statement concerning another, and the second element is publication of that statement to a third party. The Colorado statute also sets forth that the defamatory statement must be communicated directly to a third party.

The third element of defamation is fault amounting to at least negligence on the part of the publisher. This simply means that defamation need not be intentional. Even if a person did not knowingly or willingly destroy a person's reputation, he can still be held liable under the law.

The fourth element of defamation under Colorado law is either that the statement is of a type as not to require special damages, or the existence of special damages to the plaintiff caused by the publication. This basically means that the plaintiff may or may not have actual, tangible damages, such as medical expenses incurred as a result of the defamatory statements. Still, the plaintiff must prove that the publication of false or defamatory statements did cause damages, such as the destruction of his
reputation and good name.

http://www.ehow.com/info_8587597_colorado-statutes-defamation-character.html

However, the type of defamation we are discussing here is libel, not slander, which means I was wrong about them needing to show economic damages, under Colorado law. Instead, if the defamatory statement accuses someone of criminal activity, then they do not have to prove that they lost a job or lost business or whatever, to have a judge or jury find they were defamed. (For some reason I cannot find a link to that now, even though i saw several earlier which I bookmarked on another computer).

Nevertheless, while they may be entitled to some punitive damages as a result, that may not be enough for a lawyer to want to get involved at a cut rate or pro bono. And this many not be a strong case at all. Lawyers won't usually take a case unless they think it is a strong one, especially if the clients have no or little money. That's just reality.

I think it might be interesting to talk with a Colorado tort attorney, have them look at some of the blog and tell what they think about whether there is a case and whether they would take the case for free or at a cut rate.

Hello Everybody - sorry for the interruption of the Morgan Ingram case, but it was necessary.

First, please realize this is a UNIQUE type of case at WS. There is little MSM or LE information to go on. This case is built entirely around a blog with information that cannot be confirmed at this point in time, and won't be confirmed unless/until LE reopens Morgan's case and takes a second look at it. That appears to be the PURPOSE of the blog. Please take the blog for what it is worth, believe it or not, but don't argue over it or bash it, please.

I have removed 95-99% of the posts talking about the "kids." Even if this information is coming from the blog - we must follow WS's rules about minors. At WS, minor's are not to be sleuthed, named, linked to, or pictured UNLESS the minor is the victim or LE has publicly announced the minor is the perp.

The ages of the kids being discussed on the blog are unknown at this point in time. In addition, accusations absolutely can't be brought here, not even initials unless LE weighs in on a possible POI. At this point, there is NO indication there are ANY suspects in the eyes of LE. If that changes - please link it up and alert a mod.

Because I have removed approximately 2 pages of posts, much information has been lost. I did not snip posts, because it is much easier to restore a post, then it is to restore a modsnip, if needed.

There is plenty to sleuth, discuss and speculate about, without questioning/bashing the parents, such as:

- How Morgan could have ingested the date rape drug? Had she been out that night? If so, doesn't it work faster than allowing her time to go home, go to bed and then later be found dead in the home?
- How a stalker (or perhaps a persistent peeping tom) broke into the house undetected and somehow slipped this drug into Morgan's system?
- Was there a stalker at all? If so, how did they obtain access to Morgan and somehow get her to ingest Flexiril.
- Was it suicide, an accidental overdose, or a homicide?
- What was Morgan's state of mind? Did the CO poisoning affect her ability to reason, etc.
- MSM articles that have been written and are linked right here: The Stalking and Mysterious Death of Morgan Ingram: timeline, picture,media thread: - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

So there is still lots of work to be done, even though there are boundaries on the discussion.

What is OFF LIMITS:
- Mom's state of mind, reason for blogging, etc., etc.
- Possible suspects, POIs (without some kind of back up link).
- Any discussion involving minors.

The ground rules still apply. Please read them carefully and abide by them. If you have any questions, please pm a Mod and get clarification BEFORE posting.

Thanks for your patience!

Salem

BBM.

Thanks for the overall clarification.

I'm still noticing discussion of possible minors and/or suspects with no backup, though. I think I was guilty of some of that before and now I have learned. I also had no idea some of these people were minors. Now I do. I just don;t want the board shut down again in case more info comes to light.

Hey- had a thought about the "PUTU" thing. Does anyone think it could be "STFU"? (As in, you know... Shut The *advertiser censored** Up.) Don't know why, but can't get it out of my head, and I can't see it for myself, for some reason.

Could be. But I did find evidence of a person named PUTU who lives in Carbondale.

 

[concernedmother]

Opinions. With what we have learned so far, do you think they will open this case back up?

 

[MayraMM]

Hey- had a thought about the "PUTU" thing. Does anyone think it could be "STFU"? (As in, you know... Shut The *advertiser censored** Up.) Don't know why, but can't get it out of my head, and I can't see it for myself, for some reason.

I took a screen shot, so I can up it to Dropbox and post it here so you can see it. Give me a few.

 

[rollinginit]

Opinions. With what we have learned so far, do you think they will open this case back up?

IMO...I think it depends on how much publicity this gets.

 

[bearx]

Opinions. With what we have learned so far, do you think they will open this case back up?

IMO, no, because (going on blog) the police don't believe they have proof of a stalker, and the COD has gone from natural to suicide to undetermined with no body to re-examine.

 

[Marshmallow]

Opinions. With what we have learned so far, do you think they will open this case back up?

no. I don't think there's anything that really proves a stalker and/or murderer.

 

[concernedmother]

LE already know everything she has told anyway as it actually happened and so far she has no actual proof other than her word of who the stalker is. I dont think it would be on the stalking alone unless people know something and come forward. I think the pathologist report with reported incidences of stalking its possible. IDK

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Another useful tidbit I just received in an e-mail was from Trulia.
If you are interested in a neighborhood's crime rates, sexual predators, and DEA drug manufacturing locations check this out....

Go to Trulia and click on the tab titled "7 Neighborhood Need-to-Knows" and that will take you to a page that has lots of useful links and databases.

You can even sign up for e-mail alerts of perps in your area. Can't attach the Trulia link, so sorry....

Stay safe Sleuthers!

 

[concernedmother]

IMO, no, because (going on blog) the police don't believe they have proof of a stalker, and the COD has gone from natural to suicide to undetermined with no body to re-examine.

Thats the kicker. No body and no samples left.

 

[airplanelamp]

Just regarding the question about the date rape drug, mentioned above ^^....if Morgan had been out earlier in the evening and ingested it then, it would have taken effect long before she traveled home, and had a lengthy discussion with her father. It works pretty quickly. I had the misfortune of ingesting it once.

 

[MayraMM]

Opinions. With what we have learned so far, do you think they will open this case back up?

With what we have so far, there's no reason to open the case. We might find out more later that will allow it to be reopened.

In today's blog, mom said a detective was being assigned. What was the turning point? She said something happened that made them assign the detective and make is a felony, but nothing really happened except the car following her. Was that the event that changed it to a felony?

 

[rollinginit]

Just wondering....how do we know she had a talk with her father the night she died?

 

[MayraMM]

put u?

I was thinking someone was going for puto or puta and just didn't know enough Spanish, or "P-U to you"

 

[rollinginit]

Welcome airplanelamp.

 

[Marshmallow]

Just wondering....how do we know she had a talk with her father the night she died?

the same way we're getting all the other details, stories, and everything else.

 

[airplanelamp]

Welcome airplanelamp.

Thanks. I have been lurking and reading for a little bit, but I haven't really figured out how to navigate the site yet. I can't believe its taken me this long to discover it though.

 

[bearx]

Hopefully this works. I had to up the pic as an attachment, since there was no button to embed a pic from my comp. If you can see the pic, notice which direction the words are facing; towards the house. It's possible the last U was supposed to be an O, which would be the masculine of puta.

Looks like the word is meant to be viewed from the rooftops, not the berm.

I really see it as a W and not a U for some reason.

 

[airplanelamp]

According to Urban Dictionary, PUTU is an actual word, derogatory term, meaning "rank, stink, below average, crap". I apologize if that's already been mentioned.