Dede defends Terri - People Magazine

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did he admit any other communication wi6h Kaine Horman? If he didn't and it comes out (not likely) that he did, I wonder where that would leave this case? Probably in the "Terri did it" camp, eh what?

Help me understand what you are asking. There was nothing in the link that said he was speaking with Kaine. In fact in this second article it states that Law Enforcement went to Kaine with the information.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/07/kyrons_stepmom_wont_contest_he.html

snipped:

Law enforcement informed Kaine Horman that Terri Horman not only shared concerns about her marriage with Cook and made sexual overtures to him, but made similar overtures to the landscaper who she had attempted to hire to murder Kaine months before Kyron's disappearance, the filing says.

In an interview with law enforcement, Cook told authorities that Terri Horman let him photograph the sealed restraining order, photograph Kaine Horman's new undisclosed address, and he shared the information with at least two people.

Law enforcement found hundreds of text messages between Terri Horman and Cook, as well as photographs of Terri "in various stages of undress and graphic sexual activity" on Cook's cell phone, the filing says.
 
Yeah, somthing doesn't pass the smell test. Is it LE ot DDS? I vote for L...let's leave it there.Meanwhile, will the REAL perp please stand up???

No, I didn't think so.

BBM.. Black LOL..IMHO. That smell is coming from another LE in a state far away from Portland...Doesn't apply to Portland LE...IMHO

BBM Dark Red
I heard someone in Putnam County say those exact words to the press not too long after he first stated someone stoled his daughter....Remember that? JMO
 
<snipped with respect for space...>

Always remember that words are weapons, and how they're used, and in what length, and in what setting, can change things signficantly. At one point, when I was doing sometimes literally dozens of radio interviews daily, I learned to ask if they wanted 10, 30, or 60 second sound bites. And I'd tailor my response. I also learned that in a longer sound bite, or in a longer interview, never, ever, to use even one phrase that could be pulled out by itself to say something that was the opposite of the entire interview. The unscrupulous reporters will do that.

No offense, Kat, but I'm never giving you an interview again. :snooty:

:floorlaugh:

j/k! sincere thanks for that input & sharing your experience! :)
 
Just an attempt to clarify some perceptions on the "landscaping-gardening-nursery" thing here. DeDe was not working at a typical landscaping nursery. It is not a wholesale business with a huge selection that sells to the public. It is a private property, that has a business located on it. The business consists of far more than plants. There is a Yoga studio, and a studio for filming and recording. It has a large section set aside as donated for conservancy-almost half the 40 acres. It was a stop on The Garden Conservancy Tour that weekend, and DeDe was likely there to prep for that, clean up, weeding, new planting, fill in etc..

As far as wandering so far off as to not be found for 3 hours... I don't see it. I believe all of her assigned tasks would have been in the formal garden/housing/studio area where other people would have been also. It's all very central and if you look at it on Bing Maps or Google Maps, you can see it's not really a "nursery". This is a guess, by the way, based on the searches LE did. Maybe she wasn't at this location and they simply searched because...I don't know, they wanted to find a new yoga place? Looking for lavender?
 
Here's the reality of dealing with media, and it comes from decades of being both media and also at times, being a spokesperson for an agency.

Unless, say, you're Jennifer Aniston announcing your engagement, you don't get to set terms and conditions. At least not with any ethical reporter. It's very common for people to ask to see the article before publication, and the answer is, and always has to be "sorry, no."

There's also the factor of how people respond to media, especially "big name" media. Many people have no clue how to handle the media, and that fact gets fed on. Many people get so entranced with the idea of themselves in the spotlight--let's say, Ric Mims, Drew Peterson's ol' buddy--that they just go crazy with it.

Someone who knows how that biz works doesn't have to negotiate. You just make darned certain that at some point you take the interview where ou want it to go and make an important statement with good verbs and headline content that you can bet the reporter will bite on and use. But most folks not in the biz don't know how to do that.

In general, a People snippet does not provide us with much to hang our hats on. They're a "gossip and go" publication, and they have that market sewed up.

And, yes, someone could say "If you don't let me make a nice statement about Kyron I won't talk to you." Forgive me, but that's a dumb move. Why? The reporter may say "We can't be dictated to, bye bye now" and the potential interviewee could lose the chance to say something they really really wanted to say in public (whatever that is).

Or, the reporter could accept that term, and boy howdy, could the interviewee be in deep trouible then. When the article comes out, the text includes (because reporters do not like to be dictated to; independence is part of the breed, just ask any editor!) something like this:

Smith demanded that this article include what he called a "nice" statement about xyz. Although normally we do not negotiate with those being interviewed, we felt that this conversation was important enough to provide that platform.

This is being written as quickly as I can type, which is PDQ. Notice the verb: Smith DEMANDED. The use of that word, with its connotations, sends a clear message.

No matter what else Smith has said, Smith now has taken a big hit in more than one way.

Or, let's say that the reporter uses the "nice" statement without an editorial note. Then the reporter uses another quote like this: Despite his vehement statement of support, Smith earlier said "quote that contradicts the "nice" statement.

Always remember that words are weapons, and how they're used, and in what length, and in what setting, can change things signficantly. At one point, when I was doing sometimes literally dozens of radio interviews daily, I learned to ask if they wanted 10, 30, or 60 second sound bites. And I'd tailor my response. I also learned that in a longer sound bite, or in a longer interview, never, ever, to use even one phrase that could be pulled out by itself to say something that was the opposite of the entire interview. The unscrupulous reporters will do that.

Please understand that the sculpting of interviews and then the sculpting of the article, and all the variables, contains many potholes--and many opportunities. But you have to have spent a lot of time on that road to know the differences, and know how to steer things where you want to go.

When you read or hear an interview, please always remember that it isn't the whole interview, that there are connotative words as well as denotative words, and that how it's put together is part of the story that you perceive. A reporter can present a picture that seems good, but isn't complete at all.

Whew. I've also counseled political candidates, and got a longshot elected, and it was hard work to teach her how to handle media and forums. The first hurdle was getting her to accept how the game is played, and it is a rouigh rough game.

I keep swearing that one day I'll write a "how to handle the media" guide for the average person in a crisis, or the average person who's doing community work and needs PR for a group.

Excellent post and agreed with all you say which is why I don't think I'd ever do an interview (and wouldn't be wanted for one, lol)...it's just impossible to predict the outcome no matter what you say or how little...That's why I had said in the beginning of this thread that this particular interview reallys says nothing, one way or the other. The only thing it says to me is that DS just wants her 15 minutes like most other people in this and other cases and that she can't keep her mouth shut as I'm pretty sure her lawyer has advised her to- or she doesn't have a very good lawyer. Even TH has not been speaking to media and I am pretty sure that is killing her...IMOO...
 
No offense, Kat, but I'm never giving you an interview again. :snooty:

:floorlaugh:

j/k! sincere thanks for that input & sharing your experience! :)

Not to worry. I'm good enough (humbly said, ahem) and ethical enough that I don't have to play tricks. However, if I'm dealing with someone I have the goods on and know they're a lying "ahem" that's say, stealing $ from public funds, then the gloves come off. But by that time, they're already toast.

But I've been on the other end with those who don't play straight. And those with agendas and predetermined angles. I once had a TV reporter try to ambush me and sandbag me on live TV. Let's just say that he never tried that again, ahem.

And thanks for appreciating my work in sharing that. I think it is important to know how to evaluate what we see in the media. There are some "reporters" in this case who I wouldn't trust if they reported that the sun rose in the East. Ahem. In fact, I can think of one who I doubt even knows which way East is. But--she controls some of the flow of information unless and until her editor improves standards.

Scary, isn't it?
 
ok... so I just have an observation on the people article.... the title of the article says that DDS defends her friend... but in the article she seemed to be defending herself as well. In the article she seems to say she never left the property that day but it seems that LE may not be of that same opinion.

revisit the flyer:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/49808947/Police-Flyer--Terri-Horman-and-DeDe-Spicher

I think the title of the article should be DDS defends her friend and herself.

mOO
 
Were her co-workers actively looking for her, or just calling her phone? And did they think it was odd before the police came around? Or just chalk it up to her working someplace off on her own?

Anybody from the area know if this might be a cell phone "dead zone"? It would explain her not answering.
 
(paraphrasing dd)

!. she has nothing to hide.
2. cops wanted her to say terri kidnapped kyron
3. cops wanted her to say terri knows something about it
4. she told the cops everything she knows
5. she never left the property in the middle of her workday
6. she stayed at the horman's for 11 days after kyron was kidnapped

that's quite a lot more than we knew before.
 
Anybody from the area know if this might be a cell phone "dead zone"? It would explain her not answering.

But it wouldn't explain why the property owner or co-workers would attempt to use cell phones to reach her.
 
'Mystery Woman' DeDe Spicher Defends Stepmom in Kyron Horman Case
By Elaine Aradillas

Tuesday August 17, 2010 09:45 AM EDT


But Spicher, the so-called "mystery woman" in the case, says she's just a good friend of Kyron's stepmom's, and that neither of them has anything to hide.

Asked by PEOPLE in an exclusive new interview whether she thinks stepmom Terri Horman was involved in Kyron's disappearance, Spicher, 43, says, "I just really don't. In my heart, I really don't. In all of these years [as her friend], I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe that she is capable or motivated in any way to do something like this."

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20413527,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Well that just does not make sense.

Dede is saying "I just really don't. In my heart my heart, I really don't."

So, Dede is saying she does not think that Terri is involved.

That is very odd to me because Dede's lawyer made the statement to the press the day that Dede went before the Grand Jury that he would be really surprised if there was NOT an arrest made of Terri Horman in the Kyron case.

So, does Dede's lawyer know something that Dede does not know. That would not be possible, would it?

Going by what her lawyer said on June 26th and what Dede said in this interview they do not match.

So, is her lawyer lying? I don't believe he just made that statement without knowing something incriminating about Terri's involvement in Kyron's disappearance.
 
...And thanks for appreciating my work in sharing that. I think it is important to know how to evaluate what we see in the media...

Very respectfully edited. I taught high school Journalism in the early 1970s - long before the emergence of cable news and internet. I tried to focus on those "old school" journalistic values like "all the news that fit to print", reliable sources, answering the who, what, where, when, why, and how without personal commentary. I wanted my students to become conscientious observers and report exactly what they saw and heard - not what they thought might be a juicy story for the purpose of ratings. But, that was then, and I've come to accept that not all of today's "news" is fit to print and that sensationalism sells magazines and garners TV ratings. I listen, read, watch - but always with those basic journalistic values and questions permeating my thoughts. More often than not, I'm disappointed :( jmo
 
Well that just does not make sense.

Dede is saying "I just really don't. In my heart my heart, I really don't."

So, Dede is saying she does not think that Terri is involved.

That is very odd to me because Dede's lawyer made the statement to the press the day that Dede went before the Grand Jury that he would be really surprised if there was NOT an arrest made of Terri Horman in the Kyron case.

So, does Dede's lawyer know something that Dede does not know. That would not be possible, would it?

Going by what her lawyer said on June 26th and what Dede said in this interview they do not match.

So, is her lawyer lying? I don't believe he just made that statement without knowing something incriminating about Terri's involvement in Kyron's disappearance.

BBM. I know lots of people who think Terri is involved and will be arrested and charged, and none of them know Dede at all.
 
But it wouldn't explain why the property owner or co-workers would attempt to use cell phones to reach her.

Well, technically (pun almost intended there!) it would: They would have known about the Verizon dead zone and would have no doubt had ATT cells. or, contrarily, called from a land line.
 
BBM. I know lots of people who think Terri is involved and will be arrested and charged, and none of them know Dede at all.
I think Dede's lawyer was of the opinion that the DA is truly seeking an indictment of Terri. Given that GJs usually can be lead to do what DAs want done..i.e. indict a ham sandwich....then he felt it was simply more likely than not that Terri would be indicted....doesn't address guilt or innocence or whether she would be convicted at tiral...
 
But it wouldn't explain why the property owner or co-workers would attempt to use cell phones to reach her.

It would if some brands/providers worked there, and some didn't. (I live in a black hole - there's only one kind that seems to connect reliably around here - which is part of the reason I don't own a cell.)
 
Well that just does not make sense.

Dede is saying "I just really don't. In my heart my heart, I really don't."

So, Dede is saying she does not think that Terri is involved.

That is very odd to me because Dede's lawyer made the statement to the press the day that Dede went before the Grand Jury that he would be really surprised if there was NOT an arrest made of Terri Horman in the Kyron case.

So, does Dede's lawyer know something that Dede does not know. That would not be possible, would it?

Going by what her lawyer said on June 26th and what Dede said in this interview they do not match.

So, is her lawyer lying? I don't believe he just made that statement without knowing something incriminating about Terri's involvement in Kyron's disappearance.

He very well could be responding to the observation that TH is the focus of the investigation and that they are attempting to build a case against her. That is, he could be making a prediction about what LE will do (arrest her), not whether she is involved. He may even believe that she will not be found guilty. JMO
 
from the CNN link above:


Have I lost my mind? When has LE ever talked like this? What would a "successful solution" be? (a "solution" being the answer to a problem). And it's a crime because the parents have been "deprived of their son for 53 days"? Not that Kyron might be dead? Been deprived of HIS life? Do they KNOW he's alive? Clearly, Reiser's new lens doesn't involve looking at the parents. But--what is he talking about?

You couldn't make this case up.

BBM

LE, KH and DY have all said repeatedly that they have no evidence that Kyron is dead and so they are assuming that there is a possibility he is still alive.

Considering the water searches, clearly that is not the only possibility they are looking at. But they are still considering it a possibility.

It sounds to me like Reiser is saying that, absent any evidence of Kyron's death, his disappearance is still a crime because of the interference in custody.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
162
Guests online
2,343
Total visitors
2,505

Forum statistics

Threads
601,882
Messages
18,131,329
Members
231,174
Latest member
Jmann420
Back
Top