CO - The Stalking and Mysterious Death of Morgan Ingram #5

[concernedmother]

The thing I wonder......what is the difference between harassment/bullying/stalking?

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harassment"]Harassment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Harassment (/həˈræsmənt/ or /ˈhærəsmənt/) covers a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset, and it is characteristically repetitive. In the legal sense, it is intentional behaviour which is found threatening or disturbing. Sexual harassment refers to persistent and unwanted sexual advances, typically in the workplace, where the consequences of refusing are potentially very disadvantageous to the victim.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying"]Bullying - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Bullying is a form of aggressive behavior manifested by the use of force or coercion to affect others, particularly when the behavior is habitual and involves an imbalance of power. It can include verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion and may be directed repeatedly towards particular victims, perhaps on grounds of race, religion, gender, sexuality, or ability.[2][3] The "imbalance of power" may be social power and/or physical power. The victim of bullying is sometimes referred to as a "target".
Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal, and physical.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking"]Stalking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Stalking is a term commonly used to refer to unwanted or obsessive attention by an individual or group toward another person. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them. The wordstalking is used, with some differing meanings, in psychology and psychiatry and also in some legal jurisdictions as a term for acriminal offense.
According to a 2002 report by the National Center for Victims of Crime, "Virtually any unwanted contact between two people [that intends] to directly or indirectly communicates a threat or places the victim in fear can be considered stalking"[1] although in practice the legal standard is usually somewhat more strict.

 

[Confusion]

but all these stories are coming from only one source.

That is the idea; we're supposed to be discussing that blog. Saying it can't be properly discussed without reading information from opposing sources is like saying that a book report can't be accurate unless it's based on several books. I'm not sure exactly what it is we're supposed to be doing here, but IMNSHO, it seems more like we should be trying to figure out what the facts we're given mean, not figure out what facts we may not have. (although this whole thing would be MUCH easier to figure out with more facts.)

 

[rollinginit]

Her death was ruled natural causes tho so at this point LE didnt have a case any more.

Her death was ruled natural on dec 19, 2011. So you would figure the LE at least gathered some evidence in those 17 days between her death and the ME's ruling.

Then he ruled suicide on July 28, 2012.

http://www.postindependent.com/article/20120901/VALLEYNEWS/120839978

 

[gitana1]

IMO, in regards to the stalker element, if someone is an avid hunter and hunting fanatic, wouldn't a human be the ultimate prey? Considering this point, typical stalking behavior could be absent because the act was not fueled by obsession of the prey but rather, thechallenge of hunting "The Most Dangerous Game"?

Especially if said hunter is a sociopath.

I don't know what evidence she has. But the way I have read it is that one person did the physical stalking and at least one person covered for him.

She is female.

Remember when the police went to talk to him and she said he was sleeping then later told her mom that the police were there because M. was missing?

Here's what I recall from blog posts, comments and the radio interview, collectively: The family eventually began to suspect one person in particular and thinks the motivation may have begun as a desire to mess with her because she angered his girlfriend who felt she was stuck up, perhaps, and/or angered by her reaction to this girl's boyfriend (who gave her a bad vibe and caused her to turn on her heel when first encountering him, and leave without a word of greeting - quite a strong reaction, IMO), and/or her unwillingness to associate with this girl much.

Then, the stalking naturally escalated as a result of the dangerous psychopathology of the stalker - remember, it apparently contined after he moved out of the girl's home.

Is that gang stalking? Well, the motivation may be a group motivation but unless the girl directly participated in the harassment, I would not classify it that way.

 

[hambirg]

She's pretty selective about what 'evidence' she posts then. See: game cam photo of 'stalker' and photo of footprint in the mud.

But I see those as concrete, and somewhat ambiguous. They are what they are and I also believe they were already shared within Morgan's circle of friends. To put it another way, I don't think either of those two are holding any unknown secrets.

Why is the initial report evidence but not the follow up report/letter that she posted? If anything, I'd think it would be the other way around?

Because the follow up letter is just evidence that there is some disagreement in professional opinions. It's used to show there are some valid questions here. It doesn't reveal anything other than Morgan died of Amitriptyline intoxication and that she had Flexeril and possibly other drugs in her system. However, the actual autopsy report might reveal quite a bit more. Possibly details and facts that only the killer would know. It might also show things that were overlooked and dismissed, SOP that wasn't followed, etc. It's a tight rope. . .show enough to raise questions, but not everything so CYA doesn't take effect.

Furthermore, if the original autopsy report and toxicology reports were posted - how could they possibly be tampered with in a way that they could end up inadimssible in court? What she would have would be copies, not originals, therefore the original could always be accessed.

I don't think anyone is going to tamper with the original reports, at least I would hope not. But they certainly could reveal details that shouldn't be made public when all you are trying to do is show that there are enough unanswered questions that this should be all looked at again through an independent investigation.

If she was just telling a story and raising some questions about her daughter's death, fine. But if you are going to make concrete allegations against neighbours, LE, the coroner, reporters, etc. then you should be clear about what evidence there is to support these claims. And by clear, I mean the evidence should be able to be evaluated on its own. Telling us that evidence exists is not the same thing.

Just my opinion.

BBM1-I think that is what she is doing.

BBM2-But how do we know it's not? And evaluated by whom? I don't think the goal is to lay out the entire case to us. I think it's to raise enough questions so that somebody in a position of authority can evaluate all the evidence. I would suspect that everything would be shared with that person if and when that ever happens.

If it was me, I wouldn't share everything. I would just share enough to show that there are some valid issues and questions with how Morgan's case went. The goal is to get someone in a position of authority to re-evaluate the case, not to lay out and argue the entire case to strangers on the internet. They have an attorney now. I can't imagine in my wildest dreams that he is not advising them the same thing.

MOO!!!

Btw. . .you have to excuse me today. My keyboard is doing that funky thing where when you want to type it does this. . .thhhhhhhheeeeeeeee hhhhhhhorsssssssee rrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaan. :banghead:

 

[AbbeyR]

They know all the neighbors.

And the body type on the video is pretty specific.

And he happened to live three doors down.

Coincidence?

A random stranger just happen to be caught on camera who is the same build as the guy suspected of doing this who happens to live three doors down?

Doubt it.

The picture is so blurry and distorted, I'm not sure how anyone could be certain about an identity.

 

[marycarney]

That is the idea; we're supposed to be discussing that blog. Saying it can't be properly discussed without reading information from opposing sources is like saying that a book report can't be accurate unless it's based on several books. I'm not sure exactly what it is we're supposed to be doing here, but IMNSHO, it seems more like we should be trying to figure out what the facts we're given mean, not figure out what facts we may not have. (although this whole thing would be MUCH easier to figure out with more facts.)

BBM
No - it's saying a book report is accurate but not being allowed to read the book.

 

[gitana1]

Harassment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Harassment (/həˈræsmənt/ or /ˈhærəsmənt/) covers a wide range of behaviors of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset, and it is characteristically repetitive. In the legal sense, it is intentional behaviour which is found threatening or disturbing. Sexual harassment refers to persistent and unwanted sexual advances, typically in the workplace, where the consequences of refusing are potentially very disadvantageous to the victim.

Bullying - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bullying is a form of aggressive behavior manifested by the use of force or coercion to affect others, particularly when the behavior is habitual and involves an imbalance of power. It can include verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion and may be directed repeatedly towards particular victims, perhaps on grounds of race, religion, gender, sexuality, or ability.[2][3] The "imbalance of power" may be social power and/or physical power. The victim of bullying is sometimes referred to as a "target".
Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal, and physical.

Stalking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stalking is a term commonly used to refer to unwanted or obsessive attention by an individual or group toward another person. Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them. The wordstalking is used, with some differing meanings, in psychology and psychiatry and also in some legal jurisdictions as a term for acriminal offense.
According to a 2002 report by the National Center for Victims of Crime, "Virtually any unwanted contact between two people [that intends] to directly or indirectly communicates a threat or places the victim in fear can be considered stalking"[1] although in practice the legal standard is usually somewhat more strict.

You know what? I think we still downplay bullying in our society. If it involves harassment or stalking behavior, it should be charged as such.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Her death was ruled natural causes tho so at this point LE didnt have a case any more.

That's TI's point.
TI and SI went into shock when their daughter died. As they came out of their states of shock, their daughter's death began to haunt them. They knew she had been on a downward slide and knew the stalking had been stressful for all, but couldn't/didn't put it all together until they began to look backwards partly in reaction to the coroner's rulings, etc. Their grief, sadness and fear began turning to anger because, to them,
it seemed nobody really cared about uncovering the truth of what happened to their daughter.

The truth of their observations, suspicions and theory needs to be proven. Nobody can deny that TI's approach is getting the recognition that SHE WAS CRYING OUT FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE. Actually, it's pretty ingenious imo.

 

[concernedmother]

That is the idea; we're supposed to be discussing that blog. Saying it can't be properly discussed without reading information from opposing sources is like saying that a book report can't be accurate unless it's based on several books. I'm not sure exactly what it is we're supposed to be doing here, but IMNSHO, it seems more like we should be trying to figure out what the facts we're given mean, not figure out what facts we may not have. (although this whole thing would be MUCH easier to figure out with more facts.)

Facts
Footprint by Morgans window
Pic on someone on wildlife cam
Multi lights, cameras installed no images or signs of a human being (as of now)
2nd opinion-high level of ami in her system that caused her death
death ruled natural causes then suicide
2nd opinion undetermined
What did I miss?

 

[MelissaDawn]

That's TI's point.
TI and SI went into shock when their daughter died. As they came out of their states of shock, their daughter's death began to haunt them. They knew she had been on a downward slide and knew the stalking had been stressful for all, but couldn't/didn't put it all together until they began to look backwards partly in reaction to the coroner's rulings, etc. Their grief, sadness and fear began turning to anger because, to them,
it seemed nobody really cared about uncovering the truth of what happened to their daughter.

The truth of their observations, suspicions and theory needs to be proven. Nobody can deny that TI's approach is getting the recognition that SHE WAS CRYING OUT FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE. Actually, it's pretty ingenious imo.

I think the point here is that she died December 2, the memorial was December 6, and the cause of death wasn't determined and placed on a report until December 19. According to LE they treat all unattended deaths as a homicide until otherwise verified, therefore it would have been investigated as a homicide until COD was determined. Now, whether or not LE got information regarding COD before the actual date of the autopsy report could still be in question.

 

[Cazzie]

Especially if said hunter is a sociopath.

Originally Posted by mysterygirl
I don't know what evidence she has. But the way I have read it is that one person did the physical stalking and at least one person covered for him.

She is female.

Remember when the police went to talk to him and she said he was sleeping then later told her mom that the police were there because M. was missing?

Here's what I recall from blog posts, comments and the radio interview, collectively: The family eventually began to suspect one person in particular and thinks the motivation may have begun as a desire to mess with her because she angered his girlfriend who felt she was stuck up, perhaps, and/or angered by her reaction to this girl's boyfriend (who gave her a bad vibe and caused her to turn on her heel when first encountering him, and leave without a word of greeting - quite a strong reaction, IMO), and/or her unwillingness to associate with this girl much.

Then, the stalking naturally escalated as a result of the dangerous psychopathology of the stalker - remember, it apparently contined after he moved out of the girl's home.

Is that gang stalking? Well, the motivation may be a group motivation but unless the girl directly participated in the harassment, I would not classify it that way.

Don't forget that we don't have the whole story yet; TI is only up to September 26, and Morgan died on December 2.

For me, it just means that I have tentative opinions that may very change as we get more of TI's narrative (and then also if we get evidence).

It's an analogy to discussing a crime before the trial, IMO.

(not directly to you only, gitana)......

Re: the "one source" issue....

We've had collaboration on several things from Morgan's Father (he's verified here...search his posts; I believe they are all on thread #2). And he has commented on the blog and even wrote a couple entries.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

BBM
No - it's saying a book report is accurate but not being allowed to read the book.

It's unfolding one page at a time - just like the story in a book does. :waitasec:

If TI came out and said, 'blank did it in the bedroom with a blank', how would that help her get the help she wants? Peeps would say, 'Oh, that's too bad' and move on with their lives. LE would say, 'We already told you the coroner ruled suicide, case closed'.

 

[AbbeyR]

BBM2-But how do we know it's not? And evaluated by whom?

By the readers on the public website where she is making these allegations.

The criticism she posted of the reporter who published an article on Morgan's case revolves around the responsibility one has to check facts and support information that is made public, however she doesn't seem to hold her blog to the same standards or expect her readers to ask the same questions of her. And as she notes -- as of today it has had one million hits.

 

[shellbee]

Based on what we've seen so far, I have to say that (today) I wonder if Morgan may have continued taking the Ami without her parents' knowledge. She may have been exhibiting some of the severe side effects, however her parents didn't realize it. Dry mouth (always had a water bottle), loss of appetite/nausea/chills/sore throat, delusions, new or worsening agitation, anxiety coupled with periodic exaggerated feelings of well being, hallucinations, etc. eventually leading to suicidal thoughts and actions.

I believe that Toni and Steve believe she was stalked and murdered. I truly do. As for the wildlife camera pic that keeps hanging me up, I think maybe it was just a nosy neighbor skulking about wondering what all the police activity was all about. When he realized that he was photographed, he tried to knock the camera down.

I have been thinking the same thing more or less. I think Morgan may have been depressed and unbeknownst to mom started taking the ami. Knowing that anti-depressants have to build up in the system before they reach a therapeutic level, she innocently thought to speed up the process by increasing the initial dosage with plans to level off to the prescribed dose when she felt better.

 

[marycarney]

It's unfolding one page at a time - just like the story in a book does. :waitasec:

If TI came out and said, 'blank did it in the bedroom with a blank', how would that help her get the help she wants? Peeps would say, 'Oh, that's too bad' and move on with their lives. LE would say, 'We already told you the coroner ruled suicide, case closed'.

BBM
You don't know what LE would say if she did this.

And I - for one - think this would be an excellent approach. Stop dragging it out (allowing any potential 'stalkers' or 'murderers' an opportunity to get away), lay out ALL the evidence, and let LE do their job. If there is evidence LE does not have, WHY would you keep it form them? It makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

 

[concernedmother]

Keep in mind also mom has only said so far that M stopped taking the med but not what meds Morgan had access to in the home and if the ami from before was still in the house. M had her own bathroom so its normal to assume she had a med cabinet with her stuff in it.That would be a good question for someone brave to ask T.

 

[rollinginit]

By the readers on the public website where she is making these allegations.

The criticism she posted of the reporter who published an article on Morgan's case revolves around the responsibility one has to check facts and support information that is made public, however she doesn't seem to hold her blog to the same standards or expect her readers to ask the same questions of her. And as she notes -- as of today it has had one million hits.

Just wondering something, don't mean anything snarky by my questions.....but why do people care so much about her naming people on her blog? Those people have a complete right to sue ( I know I would)
Could it be possible mom wants that????? Maybe she wants to bring this out. Media attention would surely pick up then, and there would be a court case.

I don't know. Probably a stupid idea.....just something I was kicking around in my NON-LEGAL mind.

 

[MelissaDawn]

Just wondering something, don't mean anything snarky by my questions.....but why do people care so much about her naming people on her blog? Those people have a complete right to sue ( I know I would)
Could it be possible mom wants that????? Maybe she wants to bring this out. Media attention would surely pick up then, and there would be a court case.

I don't know. Probably a stupid idea.....just something I was kicking around in my NON-LEGAL mind.

I think it's out of genuine concern that a grieving mother is going to end up getting more than she bargained for in this. Like someone said, if they had that much hard evidence it should have gone straight to LE or some other LE agency if they don't trust the first one. If she's merely hoping the named suspects will trip themselves up, if there is no hard evidence, she could be in deep legal trouble and this would be a huge risk to take.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

The thing I wonder......what is the difference between harassment/bullying/stalking?

They all serve the same purpose and that's to hurt another human being.
The degree of hurt depends on the duration of the perp's efforts and if other people join in (like a fat girl in elementary school who is relentlessly made fun of by many kids everyday).

Stalking poses the most imminent danger to the victim's physical self whereas the other two cause mostly mental anguish. Although school bullies do chase others around and follow them home, etc. Maybe a bully can be considered a young stalker. With a stalker, you never know when they'll be around the corner to physically assault you and kill you.