Email sent to 490 people who were at Skyline School on 6/4/10

[cluciano63]

LE just got through saying a week ago they have zero physical evidence pointing to Terri or anyone else. That is why I find it hard to take this latest as a move forward, rather than just trying to see what shakes loose. I am at a loss to see how the case could be close to tying up when the DA just said that unless a big break comes in, there are months of work ahead.

Not trying to be a downer, but am not seeing the bright side of this particular bit of news.

 

[gardeness]

I like this news. I really like the part about:

"one of the remaining steps we feel is necessary is to share that list with you, the members of the Skyline Community, and ask you to examine it and inform us of:"

This sounds like they are making certain that Terri's attorneys can't try to blame the landscaper or the non-existent mystery male chaperone. I really, really like the word "remaining"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hoping that they are going to bust Terri soon!

All I want for Christmas is to see Terri Moulton Horman in handcuffs being charged with the kidnapping/murder of her stepson Kyron Horman.. Because when LE does make the arrest that many question as having a meaning that maybe Terri is NOT the "ONE"... It will be because LE and the DA have taken their time with getting all their ducks in a row as well as making sure all of those T's are crossed and those I's are dotted{just as they are doing with this mail out}... IMO ensuring their case will have no "holes" for Houze to escape Terri through...

In context, "remaining steps" refers to the conclusion of LE compiling an accurate list of who was at Skyline that day, a "complex endeavor"...

 

[ThoughtFox]

Just out of curiousity, for those of you that believe that this might mean they are close to an arrest- why do you think that?

I'm truly not being snarky, I really don't know. I'm still new to all this.

I see this as a good sign that the investigation is wrapping up and heading for trial.

Here on the forum the question has come up thousands of times about "how many interviews?" there were and "how many people were at the school?" The police have to get this straight now so the defense won't tear into them about a shoddy investigation. Terri herself wrote in an email that the school was sort of in chaos that morning, which may or may not be true, the her attorneys might spin it that way.

This email serves several purposes - all this is just my opinion only. JMOO

First it is good PR to let the public know that yes, they do know approximately WHO was at the school that morning, and that they are following it up and giving people one more chance to say whether they were there, absent, or hanging around in the parking lot.

Second: You can bet that several of those people listed on the email will be called as witnesses - many have already spoken to the Grand Jury.

To me, this email sends a signal to people that if they know something they'd better come forward now because the police are "taking names" and might call any of those on the list to testify in court. If "friends of Terri" are still trying to protect her somehow, this might shake them up into spilling what they know.

Three, this might just jog someone's memory out there who isn't paying attention to this case the way we are - hard to believe at this late date, but it's worth a try.

 

[pinktoes]

So, is the list just of parents and relatives, non-Skyline school children, and school staff? Is it all the school staff? I recognize the principal and janitor; others I'd have to dig up the school staffing info.

The list doesn't include--and isn't intended to include??--delivery men, garbage haulers, outside workers (other than the official groundskeeper, who IS on the list), etc.

If the list is intended to include everyone on the grounds and inside that day, then it's not gonna work. So, I assume it's not intended to cover all those people.

The school's "community", it turns out, is not all that small or tightknit. What about someone a child's grandparent saw there, but didn't know by sight or name? It can't encompass those folks.

 

[pinktoes]

I just reread the letter. LE wants to include everyone who was seen there or who is believed to have been there. Or not. Between 8 am and noon. So, 490 people would include staff and visitors. I'm still not sure about delivery people.

There is also a daycare onsite all the time. So, everyone present or dropping off a child for daycare during those hours.

Extending the time to noon would include anyone seen after Ky went missing. Say, a perp who removed Ky from his usual space and secreted him on the grounds; then returned later to pick him up.

 

[AvalonBlue]

I hope that no stone was overlooked for sure. I personally don't know how many individuals were actually interviewed. To me a questionaire is not a interview. Eye to eye contact is a interview. On June 25th there was a article on Orgeonian live (sp)..oh I am not good at cuttin and pasting (under the thread of how many children where at skyline)..it states 350 questionaires were returned...on 12/4..Staton says they interviewed 300 some odd and determined ...and now today, 6 days later we now have 490 people interviewed who were present. I honestly would love to know, and it's not my business for sure, how many people were actually interviewed face to face, eye to eye...not a piece of white paper who can write in on a #2 pencil and erase what you want...were there...the numbers don't add up to me, nor does 7 months later...Thank You Ms.Dee..

I'm thinking that the 490 number includes minor children who were not students. So, I don't think, at this point anyway, that 490 individuals were interviewed. The 350 figure regarding the questionnaires makes more sense considering the minors.

Also, I feel pretty certain that as new names may have come in as to people who were present, people who didn't return questionnaires, etc. that there was individual contact by LE that has pushed the number up from 350 since then.

I'm hopeful (until it perhaps is proved otherwise) that this latest move by LE is dotting i's and crossing t's in preparation for an eventual trial and covering bases Houze would certainly hit.

Long ago and far away, though not forgotten -- I was involved in a case where the alleged perp was found not guilty in the rape trial of a fifteen year old girl, mainly because the state could not produce the other male who had been in the home the night the girl was raped. Even though the girl knew who raped her, because it was at a friend's home, because it happened in the dark, and because there was another male in the home and the state could not find him, the perp got off. (This was before DNA evidence was available.)

Under the circumstances, even though the jury believed the girl, because the state could not produce the other guy the jury had to admit that legally the defense had raised reasonable doubt. Really upsetting case. The girl, and those of us who worked with her, were devastated.

This perp was facing his third felony and would have been put away for life if found guilty. Within a year of the trial, however, this guy was killed by an "act of nature" that I still feel certain was overseen by the Long Karmic Arm of True Justice. :whip2:

It is so easy for us to forget that the defense doesn't have to prove innocence -- just reasonable doubt -- no matter how unreasonable it may seem to us. :twocents:

fftopic: & OKAY about it:

Hurray for Elizabeth Smart and the jury Friday! :balloons:

Hurray for Brittany Mae Smith being found alive in San Fran Friday --
and James Easley being behind bars tonight! :behindbar

(All WS'ers on her threads were great this last week and I just know we helped! Thanks Tricia for making WS possible.) :grouphug:

 

[SusieMom]

I just can't see how this is helping to "wrap up" their case against TMH. Determine that there wasn't anybody KNOWN to be at the school who they didn't consider? Well, I gotta tell you, that is the LEAST of what I would expect an investigation to include and producing this list "Well, these are the folks who we know were there" begs the question "what if Kyron was abducted by somebody you DON'T know was there?" and really the only way this could be REMOTELY helpful to eliminate the "stranger abduction theory" is if there is someone dependable who can say that 1. They could recognize on sight every single individual named on the list and 2.They are 100% certain they saw nobody else at the school that day. That's not very likely. What is likely is that most people who receive the list won't know, even casually, at least half of the people on it, which means that at least half of the people they might have encountered at the school were strangers to them. I can't see anyway that this is intended to bolster their case against TMH. A defense attorney would consider this list a blessing, parade all 400+ of them thru the stand "How about this guy? Would you be able to recognize him?" It would be a silver platter full of reasonable doubt.

I think they are fairly certain somebody else WAS there who is involved and that TMH knows (to at least some extent) who it was b/c she was an associate of this person... but no one has been able to supply them any information about who the person is, what the person looks like, etc. I think they have no solid clues but I do think they know that TMH knows quite a lot about what happened to Kyron. Her timeline that day screams "something really bad happened, but I can't fix it so I'm going pretend like everything is normal" I think the purpose of this list is one more attempt to find out who the person is, just like the plea for information about the identity of a mystery adult seen by TMH's truck.

I have not much confidence in this investigation, I think they won't ever know a thing until TMH talks and I don't think that's going to happen. If losing Baby K wasn't going to get her to talk, nothing will except for possibly the opportunity to get attention for herself once everyone has nearly forgotten about her.

 

[citigirl]

So, is the list just of parents and relatives, non-Skyline school children, and school staff? Is it all the school staff? I recognize the principal and janitor; others I'd have to dig up the school staffing info.

The list doesn't include--and isn't intended to include??--delivery men, garbage haulers, outside workers (other than the official groundskeeper, who IS on the list), etc.

If the list is intended to include everyone on the grounds and inside that day, then it's not gonna work. So, I assume it's not intended to cover all those people.

The school's "community", it turns out, is not all that small or tightknit. What about someone a child's grandparent saw there, but didn't know by sight or name? It can't encompass those folks.

Not sure what you mean here. I think that what the police are trying to do is build on the list...they know it might not be prefect...that's why they are sending it out.

I also kind of wish new outlets had not redacted the names. There will be people such as deliverypeople who might not know someone who got the email, but be unaware that the police need to contact them.

 

[SurfieTX]

http://www.nobodycases.com/tips.pdf

If this is a basic script for preparing for trial without a body, I can see why LE put out this email at this stage.

 

[LadyL]

also, what if there is conflicting info?

someone notices her neighbour's name is not on the list but is positive her neighbour was there
her neighbour keeps stating that he/she was not there

it's a good way to ferret out conflicts and re-interview people to clarify/resolve prior to trial

IMO

 

[ami]

I guess I'm not sure why this would be seen as a bad sign.

In the way I've been thinking about the investigation, we already know LE does not have physical evidence, such as blood, or Kyron's clothing, or footprints in the snow (metaphorical). What they have is: alibi information, receipts, computer forensics/email, phone call records, gym check-in data, phone pings, security video, and eye witness information.

LE has recently said they've given themselves a February 2011 deadline to reach a certain point in the case. Therefore, working backwards, if they want to anticipate a worst case scenario for a trial, they would have to build a seamless circumstantial case with as few loose ends as possible. That would mean eliminating the most obvious "someone else did it" defense.

In an early PC, they intimated that they were triangulating a car map of the parking lot based on eye witness reports of where people were parked and who they were parked next to. I imagine they have something like a map of the lot with cars listed, owners of cars, who they said they were parked next to, what times they came and went, and whether they saw anyone when they drove in or drove out. By now they've identified the owners and operators of most or all of the cars in the lot. So if a complete stranger was there that day trolling for a child to abduct, someone parked next to him. There would be a missing piece on their map, a person parked by the school they hadn't yet interviewed. They'd have a lead to go on. But from what we've heard so far, this hasn't happened. There hasn't been a flier distributed with a dark blue sedan or a green mini van - just a white truck.

They have a list of people who were in the school that morning, questionnaires, interviews. Now they're triple or quadruple checking. This seems completely sensible to me ESPECIALLY since Terri the unofficial POI referred to Kyron last being seen with a mystery man. How many of the 350 people saw Kyron with a man that morning? How many people saw a man they couldn't identify walking with children, period? This is IMO basic triangulation. Is it likely there was one person in the school that no one saw, or one person that people saw but no one knew? If the defense in a future trial wanted to place a mystery man in the school, they would have to explain why no one in 350 interviews naming 490 people present saw the mystery man, or parked next to him. Etc.

can the culprit say, "hey I wasn't there...take my name of the list"

(If I did something terrible and then was sent a list with my name on it of people that were around when it happened that is what I would do)

I think LE would loooooove for just something like this to happen. If 20 people remember seeing someone there, then that person writes to LE and says no they were never there - I think that would be an awesome lead. Why would 20 independent people be wrong, why would someone who really was there say they weren't? etc.

 

[Jo in Calif]

ANY INDIVIDUAL (to include a minor child), other than a Skyline
Student, who you have reason to believe was on the campus between 8-12
on June 4 but is not on this list; and
ANY INDIVIDUAL who is on the list but who you have reason to believe
was not on campus during that time.

This question just made my hinky meter go off.
I stated up thread, that this was the first time that we heard that the baby was with Terri at the school that morning, because she was listed as a minor child of Terri and Kaine, as being there.
They are asking people if there is anyone on the list, that they believe was not there.
Could baby K be one of them? I hate this.

 

[Jules71]

What would be really interesting to me is for someone to say - hey, the minor child of Terri and Kaine's is listed on here, but I did not see her in the school with Terri. Maybe she was in the truck with the mystery person. People who know Terri should be able to remember if she had baby K with her or not.

ETA: I doubt though that she would have left her in the truck with someone - because that would screw up her story.

 

[passionflower]

Makes me think that LE thinks someone knows something and might tell something now that they were afraid to tell back then...........

 

[jadejazzkayla]

What would be really interesting to me is for someone to say - hey, the minor child of Terri and Kaine's is listed on here, but I did not see her in the school with Terri. Maybe she was in the truck with the mystery person. People who know Terri should be able to remember if she had baby K with her or not.

ETA: I doubt though that she would have left her in the truck with someone - because that would screw up her story.

bbm....

one person saying "i didn't see so-and-so there." will not be enough to take so-and-so off the list.

to get off the list someone would have to know so-and-so wasn't there or every single person at the school would have to say they didn't see so-and-so there.

 

[joshiesmom]

My concern about this email is how does LE expect anyone to accurately remember all the people they did or did not see in a relatively short period of time one day 6.5 months ago?

I go to church every Sunday and I could not tell you with any degree of accuracy who was or was not in attendance one month ago, much less 6.5 months ago.

Maybe I'm just not very observant, but even when I go someplace where I know lots of people, I don't necessarily register WHO is there aside from the people I talk to at that time.

Just because a dozen people don't remember seeing someone ~ for example, baby K ~ at the school doesn't prove she wasn't there. People's memories are faulty, especially over half a year later.

I'm assuming LE has a reason for the email, but I personally don't see the validity in asking people to recall things from 6.5 months ago.

 

[CASH]

So Stanton tells us last week in his 6th month update that they think more than one person was involved in Kyron's disappearance. This list tells us exactly who they think was there at the school that morning. And the email that accompanied this list insinuates that they are headed to trial soon.

Maybe there is someone on this list that LE wants to send a message to. A message like, we know you were there, we think you were involved, and we are preparing for trial.

I see no reason why this letter/list would be released publicly other than LE has used the media is a very strange way since the very beginning.

 

[Dee10]

I am known to be a very unobservant person, but if I had had a conversation with TH that day at the school, I would be able to remember if Baby K was with her. I am not sure though what they are doing now has anything to do with Baby K, but I think more likely just recovering the bases hopefully for court purposes.

 

[cluciano63]

It is strange, no doubt, unless they are zeroing in on whether or not the baby was there. Unless it is because Terri always has the baby with her, as others had stated at different times, I thought it was unusual for her e-mail alibi that I think she only spoke in the first person, as in I left him at the school in the hall..rather than "we."

But what does make me uncomfortable is back when they tried to reconstruct where everyone was parked, that too was done months (August?) after June 4th...when I thought it should have been known by like, June 8th, where every car was in that lot. So I kind of got a bad feeling about this, as if they are trying to get information that should have already been confirmed.

But it does seem they should already know from first set of flyers who did see Terri and just go question those people, if all they wanted to know was if she was in the school alone at any time she was seen. Or ever alone.

 

[pinktoes]

Well, it does make you wonder what's going on in the investigation when in the last week we've had the publication of this list, and Staton stating that LE has no physical evidence of Ky or tying Ky to the perp.

WHY would closed-mouth Staton, right now, state publicly that they have no physical evidence???

And is that info-release related, or not, to the use of "The List"??