FL FL - Michelle Parker, 33, Orlando, 17 Nov 2011 - #22

[Kamille]

I have a question about dale's work van seen on the video that shows Michelle arriving that day. Was it there when the police searched the condo? It's been a long time since this has been discussed but I think someone posted a picture of it parked in another location in the complex. Could she have been in the van parked in that other location in his complex while authorities where searching his house? Was his van searched that night or ever searched?
It's late and I'm tired so maybe this has already been discussed but I can't remember the details.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

The van in the video is not DSJr's van. At this time we do not know who that van belongs to.

HTH

ETA: The van was also not parked there when Michelle drove up to the condo. It arrived sometime after that.

MOO

 

[notmissing]

Thanks! I knew we discussed it for days but I couldn't remember what the final decision was.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Thor]

DSJr was asked by YS I believe about when Michelle dropped off the children at his home within hours of the event actually taking place. And at this point I'd just like to note that YS was unable to get in contact with DS at his parent's home or on his cell phone when she first attempted to contact him. His mother apparently did not know where he was and had to get him to call her back. Now when they finally did make contact, the most important thing that YS had to ask him was when Michelle was there and when she left. So I do not believe there is any room for error in what she was told. The family had already contacted the police. This information was very important to them and they wouldn't have "recollected" that conversation incorrectly.

DSJr made 3 statements to police prior to the video surveillance coming out. When that video came out, the family even stated that the time must be incorrect because they were still working on the assumption that she had arrived at 4pm. So it only stands to reason that DSJr had given that time in his statements to LE as well.

So it is DSJr's recollection of the time that was incorrect. And only he could have given a plausible explanation as to why that may have been. Which apparently he could not. And he obviously also did not explain why it took him an hour to get to his parent's house.

MOO

There is no public record of what DS said or not said to the police in this matter or any other matter. The only statement that can be attributed directly to DS is the one related by his attorney which is that he left about the same time as MP. There are conflicting reports of who said what to whom when one interposes seemingly conflicting recollections by members of MP's family. As I said, it is entirely understandable here that recollections may not be intentionally misleading but simply not accurate per se.

 

[notmissing]

I think I'm gonna go through her threads this weekend for a little refresher it's been a while.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[Kamille]

There is no public record of what DS said or not said to the police in this matter or any other matter. The only statement that can be attributed directly to DS is the one related by his attorney which is that he left about the same time as MP. There are conflicting reports of who said what to whom when one interposes seemingly conflicting recollections by members of MP's family. As I said, it is entirely understandable here that recollections may not be intentionally misleading but simply not accurate per se.

I never said that what DSJr said to the family was "public record" of what he said to the police. I only stated that it stands to reason that he gave the same version to them since the family was still under the impression that 4pm was her arrival time when the video came out.

Just speculating...that's what we do here.

And I guess we'll have to agree to disagree that the family would recollect something incorrectly about anything they were told when they had a missing person on their hands and the police had been called. I have never seen any variation from the family on that story so if you find one perhaps you can post it.

TIA

MOO

 

[Thor]

I never said that what DSJr said to the family was "public record" of what he said to the police. I only stated that it stands to reason that he gave the same version to them since the family was still under the impression that 4pm was her arrival time when the video came out.

Just speculating...that's what we do here.

And I guess we'll have to agree to disagree that the family would recollect something incorrectly about anything they were told when they had a missing person on their hands and the police had been called. I have never seen any variation from the family on that story so if you find one perhaps you can post it.

TIA

MOO

Outside of the fact that anyone can potentially have a wrong recollection about an event, a time and so on, since this is a basic human trait not particular to an individual or a group of individuals, ... you did state the following:

"DSJr made 3 statements to police prior to the video surveillance coming out. When that video came out, the family even stated that the time must be incorrect because they were still working on the assumption that she had arrived at 4pm. So it only stands to reason that DSJr had given that time in his statements to LE as well."

Now, DS giving 3 conflicting statements to the police on this issue is either true or not true obviously, however the issue is mute since there is no actual record available in the public sphere of what DS said to the police let alone that he said anything conflicting.

Now the facts being as follows:

1. Ds' attorney stated on behalf of his client that DS left his condo at about the same time as MP and that is the only factual statement attributable to DS.

2. MP's family recollects DS stating a different time of the arrival of MP at the condo, his own departure and that of MP.

3. The police has made no statement about what DS said or not said to them on this issue.

So, if I understand you correctly, your opinion is as follows:

1. DS has given 3 conflicting statements to the police because Mp's family believes there are discrepancies in what they recollect DS having said to them.

2. Hence, It stands to reason that DS must have made those same 3 conflicting statements to the police simply because he gave the same 3 statements to the family.

That is notwithstanding that the police has made no statements about what DS said or not said to them let alone any conflicting statements. Notwithstanding that the only attributable statement to DS is not in conflict with anything on the public record as it relates to anything he said to the police and/or publicly. Notwithstanding that recollections can be mistaken on all sides. Notwithstanding anything but what MP's family recollects and believes.

If I understood you here correctly, I will strongly but respectfully disagree with your conclusions on this issue.

 

[Jazzmaster]

Well it is mutual... I really like you too :rocker:

Outside of the fact that anyone can potentially have a wrong recollection about an event, a time and so on, since this is a basic human trait not particular to an individual or a group of individuals, ... you did state the following:

"DSJr made 3 statements to police prior to the video surveillance coming out. When that video came out, the family even stated that the time must be incorrect because they were still working on the assumption that she had arrived at 4pm. So it only stands to reason that DSJr had given that time in his statements to LE as well."

Now, DS giving 3 conflicting statements to the police on this issue is either true or not true obviously, however the issue is mute since there is no actual record available in the public sphere of what DS said to the police let alone that he said anything conflicting.

Now the facts being as follows:

1. Ds' attorney stated on behalf of his client that DS left his condo at about the same time as MP and that is the only factual statement attributable to DS.

2. MP's family recollects DS stating a different time of the arrival of MP at the condo, his own departure and that of MP.

3. The police has made no statement about what DS said or not said to them on this issue.

So, if I understand you correctly, your opinion is as follows:

1. DS has given 3 conflicting statements to the police because Mp's family believes there are discrepancies in what they recollect DS having said to them.

2. Hence, It stands to reason that DS must have made those same 3 conflicting statements to the police simply because he gave the same 3 statements to the family.

That is notwithstanding that the police has made no statements about what DS said or not said to them let alone any conflicting statements. Notwithstanding that the only attributable statement to DS is not in conflict with anything on the public record as it relates to anything he said to the police and/or publicly. Notwithstanding that recollections can be mistaken on all sides. Notwithstanding anything but what MP's family recollects and believes.

If I understood you here correctly, I will strongly but respectfully disagree with your conclusions on this issue.

Any WAY you slice it Dale had plenty of time to either kill or incapacitate Michelle with or without help that may have been at the condo. One hour and 12 minutes was available per MN's own admission...Dale knows he lied and why he lied because he cannot explain how in the world if he left at 3:30 why it took an hour to get to his parents and if he left at 4:00 what happened during the previous 30 minutes.

You see the timeline is damning as he has no reasonable explanation as to what took place. You say he misrecollected. I say he lied for convenience in the same way he said she "went shopping"...all of Dale's known statements benefit his version of the story which simply is not true and he knows it.

It is my opinion that when he realized he was "caught" in a series of lies, he had no choice but to stop answering questions for fear of further incriminating himself. At which point MN enters the picture in an attempt to make sense of the false statements Dale made...which to this date still cannot be explained and probably one of the MANY reasons why Dale is still the PRIME SUSPECT.

 

[Thor]

Any WAY you slice it Dale had plenty of time to either kill or incapacitate Michelle with or without help that may have been at the condo. One hour and 12 minutes was available per MN's own admission...Dale knows he lied and why he lied because he cannot explain how in the world if he left at 3:30 why it took an hour to get to his parents and if he left at 4:00 what happened during the previous 30 minutes.

You see the timeline is damning as he has no reasonable explanation as to what took place. You say he misrecollected. I say he lied for convenience in the same way he said she "went shopping"...all of Dale's known statements benefit his version of the story which simply is not true and he knows it.

It is my opinion that when he realized he was "caught" in a series of lies, he had no choice but to stop answering questions for fear of further incriminating himself. At which point MN enters the picture in an attempt to make sense of the false statements Dale made...which to this date still cannot be explained and probably one of the MANY reasons why Dale is still the PRIME SUSPECT.

The only thing that are damming in such cases are evidence and LE has "very limited evidence and very limited info" as stated by them publicly and it is reasonable to assume that such limited whatever is not in terms of forensic evidence collected at the condo or anything else at the condo unless such evidence is presented, and that is why, almost a year from MP's disappearance DS has not been charged with any crime.

DAs don't bring charges against anyone solely on the basis that a defendant had both the time and the opportunity, (which here is even highly questionable) that is the beginning of the theory not the middle and much less the end.

The key to solving this crime is only to find MP. DS, if guilty, is not likely at all to provide LE with evidence not already available today after 10 months from her disappearance. JMO

 

[What'sThatClue]

Killed/abducted same thing for the purpose of my post you quoted. But yes, kids are at the crime scene, time of day ... peole coming and going in droves outside, no evidence of foul play, no witnesses, no one hears anything ... no evidence ... nothing. Motive? A verbal fight breaks out? When she is just there to hand over the kids? Not likely, but again no one hears anything. The kids? Asleep? And I can really go on ... so, is it possible? Yes it is, but is it likely? No ... and bordering on the surreal, unless you have at least some evidence to support this theory which I think here would be very much required. JMO.

People coming and going in droves outside? Jmo, I doubt that. This is a gated community, very little traffic, most people work. Plus, we really don't know what neighbors may have said to LE.

As for the kids being there...reminds me of the Josh Powell case again. How could he kill Susan with the kids there? But he did...

 

[Thor]

People coming and going in droves outside? Jmo, I doubt that. This is a gated community, very little traffic, most people work. Plus, we really don't know what neighbors may have said to LE.

As for the kids being there...reminds me of the Josh Powell case again. How could he kill Susan with the kids there? But he did...

People are coming and going outside, some getting off work etc ... I'm not going to argue semantics here ... as for the kids being there I did not suggest it is not possible I just said it is not likely especially in this particular circumstances where MP is there to drop off the kids on her way to somewhere else, where she has no apparent reasons to argue with DS in front of his door with two 2 kids in tow ... to then suggest that under this circumstances DS incapacitates/kills MP, and no one hears anything , no evidence, nothing that we know of or that at least warrants an arrest let alone a successful prosecution ... is to say that anything is possible of course but not to show any level of credibility where such a theory is not backed up by at least one single solitary evidence (at least at the margins) or even an hearsay, or even a twice removed hearsay ... backed by nothing but the belief that DS is guilty no matter what and that's about it. And that is what I find both unlikely and not credible and that is why I believe an impartial jury would not find credible and that is why DS has not been charged with any crimes to this day. JMO

 

[Jazzmaster]

People coming and going in droves outside? Jmo, I doubt that. This is a gated community, very little traffic, most people work. Plus, we really don't know what neighbors may have said to LE.

As for the kids being there...reminds me of the Josh Powell case again. How could he kill Susan with the kids there? But he did...

Good point clue. Dale reminds me of Josh Powell in more ways than one. It still makes me wonder how much research Sr did on that case as well as others...was it purely coincidence that Sr was commenting on how Josh could commit murder with two kids present MONTHS before Michelle went missing OR was there a buncha hokie pokie going on? This Smith family with their extensive criminal history and knowledge of beating the legal system has allowed them to escape charges for months but is their stroke of luck running out? The evidence has already been complied so I would expect multiple charges to come out of this. Jmo

 

[Jazzmaster]

People are coming and going outside, some getting off work etc ... I'm not going to argue semantics here ... as for the kids being there I did not suggest it is not possible I just said it is not likely especially in this particular circumstances where MP is there to drop off the kids on her way to somewhere else, where she has no apparent reasons to argue with DS in front of his door with two 2 kids in tow ... to then suggest that under this circumstances DS incapacitates/kills MP, and no one hears anything , no evidence, nothing that we know of or that at least warrants an arrest let alone a successful prosecution ... is to say that anything is possible of course but not to show any level of credibility where such a theory is not backed up by at least one single solitary evidence (at least at the margins) or even an hearsay, or even a twice removed hearsay ... backed by nothing but the belief that DS is guilty no matter what and that's about it. And that is what I find both unlikely and not credible and that is why I believe an impartial jury would not find credible and that is why DS has not been charged with any crimes to this day. JMO

SO not only is it possible that Dale did this with the kids around, it is likely he made Michelle disappear with them there. This was all part of his plan. How could I do this with kids present, limited time, etc etc...all he needed to do was ask her to the garage for a min and no one would hear or see anything...the twinners included. Dale is guilty and it will be PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt in due time. You must have faith that he will pay for his crimes and justice will be served...he will have to answer for what he did...not only to society but more importantly when he meets his Maker. Just saying!

 

[Thor]

SO not only is it possible that Dale did this with the kids around, it is likely he made Michelle disappear with them there. This was all part of his plan. How could I do this with kids present, limited time, etc etc...all he needed to do was ask her to the garage for a min and no one would hear or see anything...the twinners included. Dale is guilty and it will be PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt in due time. You must have faith that he will pay for his crimes and justice will be served...he will have to answer for what he did...not only to society but more importantly when he meets his Maker. Just saying!

Faith (as you said)... that is the exact word that comes up frequently in my mind ... nothing but faith and beliefs ... as it would matter to poor MP who killed her, as if it was to anyone's benefit that Dale is responsible let alone to those two children in particular that have already lost one parent in such a tragic matter, as if Dale in particular being guilty here would bring any unique consolation to a family suffering through the most unspeakable grief a human being can experience ... the loss of a son or a daughter ... as if it is something mandate by an higher power who above all is the ruler of both morality and truth ... and I don't believe DS needs to be guilty here, not unless we see evidence to that effect, and guilt or innocence is not a matter of faith is a matter of proof, is a matter of equity, is a matter of fairness, it is the way we would hope others would judge us in similar circumstances, it is the reason why we don't live in a police state but in a state with police and laws and courts and juries. There's ultimately a line between theorizing the possibilities for the purpose of sleuthing/investigating and having an opinion that someone is guilty based on beliefs and faith absent real evidence ... where the line is drawn there is anyone's judgement but the line exists nevertheless. JMO

 

[Kamille]

Outside of the fact that anyone can potentially have a wrong recollection about an event, a time and so on, since this is a basic human trait not particular to an individual or a group of individuals, ... you did state the following:

"DSJr made 3 statements to police prior to the video surveillance coming out. When that video came out, the family even stated that the time must be incorrect because they were still working on the assumption that she had arrived at 4pm. So it only stands to reason that DSJr had given that time in his statements to LE as well."

Now, DS giving 3 conflicting statements to the police on this issue is either true or not true obviously, however the issue is mute since there is no actual record available in the public sphere of what DS said to the police let alone that he said anything conflicting.

Now the facts being as follows:

1. Ds' attorney stated on behalf of his client that DS left his condo at about the same time as MP and that is the only factual statement attributable to DS.

2. MP's family recollects DS stating a different time of the arrival of MP at the condo, his own departure and that of MP.

3. The police has made no statement about what DS said or not said to them on this issue.

So, if I understand you correctly, your opinion is as follows:

1. DS has given 3 conflicting statements to the police because Mp's family believes there are discrepancies in what they recollect DS having said to them.

2. Hence, It stands to reason that DS must have made those same 3 conflicting statements to the police simply because he gave the same 3 statements to the family.

That is notwithstanding that the police has made no statements about what DS said or not said to them let alone any conflicting statements. Notwithstanding that the only attributable statement to DS is not in conflict with anything on the public record as it relates to anything he said to the police and/or publicly. Notwithstanding that recollections can be mistaken on all sides. Notwithstanding anything but what MP's family recollects and believes.

If I understood you here correctly, I will strongly but respectfully disagree with your conclusions on this issue.

I didn't say that I believe that DSJr made 3 conflicting statements to police. In fact I doubt very much that he did. That would not make any sense.

IMO, it likely went like this.... DSJr made an initial statement. Police started working off that statement. Then they got that video surveillance and knew that there was a problem with his statement so they asked him to come in again. He probably repeated his original statement word for word because he didn't know what they had. So the police were suspicious but continued to look at other possibilites. Then they got the phone records. Again...problems with the two likely identical statements so they called him in again. And I believe he re-iterated and maintained his previous two statements.

So three identical statements, not three conflicting statements IMO.

Then the tape came out. For everyone to see. He was called in again and he made no further statements and refused to co-operate any more with the investigation.

That's the way I see it. Again...just speculation.

And as Jazzmaster has stated, his lawyer tried to do damage control. But IMO he failed at that miserably. He made a statement to the public based on what the public saw on that tape. Which made no sense. He needed to get his client in to LE to make a statement as to why that time was so off.

I don't care what "public statements" are attributed to DSJr when trying to figure out what happened that day. This is not a court of law and I can have an opinion of what I think may have happened. Call it the court of public opinion if you will. And in that court, DSJr, for lack of any other possible scenarios that make any sense at all, is guilty of at the very least, participation in this crime.

Now if anyone can give a plausible scenario that someone else could be responsible and that he just lost track of time for 40 minutes to an hour, and his and his witness(s) recollection of the time he arrived at his parent's home may be incorrect then I'd be more than willing to look at a different theory. For Michelle, and her family. For justice for all of them. The reason we are here on this discussion board.

And as always this is MY OPINION ONLY.
:moo:

 

[What'sThatClue]

the following is only a simplification because of time constraints

Timeline? He was at Sr. around 4:30pm, the kids present , the time of day ... and on and on ...

Cell location in an area made up of hundreds or thousands of houses?
He leaves in the area, MP lives in the area, Sr lives in the area, and so do thousands of others ...

It's a fact that he was the last known person to have seen MP alive, but that is meaningless on its own. All my opinions.

Iirc, MP does not live in the area.

 

[Thor]

I didn't say that I believe that DSJr made 3 conflicting statements to police. In fact I doubt very much that he did. That would not make any sense.

IMO, it likely went like this.... DSJr made an initial statement. Police started working off that statement. Then they got that video surveillance and knew that there was a problem with his statement so they asked him to come in again. He probably repeated his original statement word for word because he didn't know what they had. So the police were suspicious but continued to look at other possibilites. Then they got the phone records. Again...problems with the two likely identical statements so they called him in again. And I believe he re-iterated and maintained his previous two statements.

So three identical statements, not three conflicting statements IMO.

Then the tape came out. For everyone to see. He was called in again and he made no further statements and refused to co-operate any more with the investigation.

That's the way I see it. Again...just speculation.

And as Jazzmaster has stated, his lawyer tried to do damage control. But IMO he failed at that miserably. He made a statement to the public based on what the public saw on that tape. Which made no sense. He needed to get his client in to LE to make a statement as to why that time was so off.

I don't care what "public statements" are attributed to DSJr when trying to figure out what happened that day. This is not a court of law and I can have an opinion of what I think may have happened. Call it the court of public opinion if you will. And in that court, DSJr, for lack of any other possible scenarios that make any sense at all, is guilty of at the very least, participation in this crime.

Now if anyone can give a plausible scenario that someone else could be responsible and that he just lost track of time for 40 minutes to an hour, and his and his witness(s) recollection of the time he arrived at his parent's home may be incorrect then I'd be more than willing to look at a different theory. For Michelle, and her family. For justice for all of them. The reason we are here on this discussion board.

And as always this is MY OPINION ONLY.
:moo:

Nobody suggested you may not have an opinion of course, but one can try to decipher what is an opinion and what is a fact which in your original post was not that clear to me, I simply re-stated your opinion and asked if I was correct, (correction noted) and then I stated that I disagreed with your opinion or as I put it precisely ... your conclusion ... as I still do and as similarly others openly disagree with mine ... including you.

Now on your correction ...

Three identical statements (that are in conflict with MP's family recollection I'd suppose) or three conflicting statements are a distinction without a difference for the purpose of the point I was making. And I think it is still a fact that your opinion in this issue, either correctly or incorrectly, is notwithstanding that the police has made no statements about what DS said or not said to them let alone any conflicting statements. Notwithstanding that the only attributable statement to DS is not in conflict with anything on the public record as it relates to anything he said to the police and/or publicly. Notwithstanding that recollections can be mistaken on all sides. Notwithstanding anything but what MP's family recollects and believes, and that again is only the factual context in this issue not your conclusion/opinion which again ma be valid or not notwithstanding anything since you are entitled to consider whatever you wish and come up with your conclusions just like everybody else. .

As for the need to have a plausible scenario other then DS did it I think that first, there are many posts by me indicating IMO, how implausible the scenario is where DS is guilty ... and second I don't think one needs necessarily an alternate scenario in order to be skeptical of any other particular ones, unless of course one is guilty until proven innocent which is IMO not true either in a court of law, here or anywhere else. And that is not to say that this is what you implied, (I'm not sure that you did) but in general terms that is my opinion nevertheless as it is all that I'm writing in this post.

 

[katydid23]

Ok my point was that it was not likely not impossible. Also I'm not understanding why somebody would have to have noticed the Hummer, it appears that no one noticed anything, Not MP arriving or leaving, not Ds leaving and what is the significance of it one way or another?. My point was that IMO it is quite surreal imagining foul play at the condo for the reasons already stated in previous posts.

Of course it is surreal. Any time someone chooses to murder their partner it is going to be a surreal scene. And Dale is a surreal type guy. You have seen many of his pictures, correct? His costumes? Surreal, imo.

 

[Thor]

Of course it is surreal. Any time someone chooses to murder their partner it is going to be a surreal scene. And Dale is a surreal type guy. You have seen many of his pictures, correct? His costumes? Surreal, imo.

Yep, I think the whole Star Trek costume thingy is surreal or at list idiotic ... but say ... do you think he might have used the plastic light saber as a weapon?

 

[What'sThatClue]

Nobody suggested you may not have an opinion of course, but one can try to decipher what is an opinion and what is a fact which in your original post was not that clear to me, I simply re-stated your opinion and asked if I was correct, (correction noted) and then I stated that I disagreed with your opinion or as I put it precisely ... your conclusion ... as I still do and as similarly others openly disagree with mine ... including you.

Now on your correction ...

Three identical statements (that are in conflict with MP's family recollection I'd suppose) or three conflicting statements are a distinction without a difference for the purpose of the point I was making.

As for the need to have a plausible scenario other then DS did it I think that first, there are many posts by me indicating IMO, how implausible the scenario is where DS is guilty ... and second I don't think one needs necessarily an alternate scenario in order to be skeptical of any other particular ones, unless of course one is guilty until proven innocent which is IMO not true either in a court of law, here or anywhere else. And that is not to say that this is what you implied, (I'm not sure that you did) but in general terms that is my opinion nevertheless as it is all that I'm writing in this post.

JMO, I do think one needs an alternate scenario if one is going to claim "how implausible the scenario is where DS is guilty" and wants others to explore alternate scenarios where the Prime Suspect could not be involved. After all, we are limited on this board to discussion of the victim and the Prime Suspect until and if we have other evidence to the contrary that someone other than the Prime Suspect committed the crime.

It would be nice to have other avenues to explore but the fact is we have Dale Smith Jr. as the Prime Suspect in Michelle's disappearance and he was named, and continues to be, Prime Suspect. No other evidence exists that I know of that would clear him.

Michelle and her family deserve the truth...and I still hope with all my heart that an arrest may come soon.

Thanks

MOO JMO IMO

 

[Pias]

What degree of involvement would Dale Jr need to have to be considered guilty in Michelle's disappearance?