Gilgo Beach LISK Serial Killer, Rex Heuermann, charged with 6 murders, July 2023 #15

[wcasewatch]

If it were easy to list untrue assertions by John Ray, you would have already done so, right?

MOO

I previously did, but a mod removed the conversation for being off topic.

Example: Ray once went live on air and claimed that Shannan may have had a neat hole drilled into her hyoid. He stated that the SC medical examiner didn't know what had caused the hole. This was false, as the medical examiner theorized that it had been caused by a relatively common cyst that often goes unnoticed. Michael Baden (who Ray hired), did not dispute this. In fact, Baden didn't even mention the small hole.

Two medical professionals saw nothing suspect about this hole, yet Ray ran with the theory that someone, for reasons unknown, had gone through the effort of drilling a hole into her hyoid.

Bizarre and irresponsible conspiracy peddling.

 

[wcasewatch]

Ray also claimed that a woman may have been involved because Baby Doe was wrapped in a blanket... yet another baseless claim.

 

[Ruminations]

BTK broke into other people's homes. The vast majority of Ridgway's occurred while he was divorced.

Not really the same thing as Heuermann, who is believed to have killed his victims inside his home while he was married w/ kids.

Hansen kidnapped a surviving victim named Cindy Paulson and brought her back to his house while his family were out of town. This was made clear from the start.

Regardless of the above, I feel as though people are missing the point with this. Heuermann killing while his family were out of town is a pattern that will likely be highlighted in court. It is part of a larger puzzle. It is not just a case of "clearing" the family. They want to show that there were a number of similarities between this series of murders.

I also don't see a problem with a DA being forthcoming with the facts. I thought that everyone here liked clarity? Didn't this case suffer from a lack of public information? Are we suddenly against the truth being revealed now that it doesn't line up with our preconceptions?

The thing is, while I do not believe there is any reason to think the family is involved in murder, I also think there is reason to believe that the AC trip during Maureen's disappearance is not true.

The preconception is that the family had to be out of town for every murder, and the truth is the Atlantic City trip is debunked.

When the DA is forcing a narrative, it does not feel like transparency. When a DA clears people it just feels weird. They don't do that.

MOO

 

[wcasewatch]

The thing is, while I do not believe there is any reason to think the family is involved in murder, I also think there is reason to believe that the AC trip during Maureen's disappearance is not true.

The preconception is that the family had to be out of town for every murder, and the truth is the Atlantic City trip is debunked.

When the DA is forcing a narrative, it does not feel like transparency. When a DA clears people it just feels weird. They don't do that.

MOO

Can you link me to where the AC trip was debunked? From what I remember, that was another one of John Ray's claims that wasn't backed up by any evidence.

 

[Ruminations]

Can you link me to where the AC trip was debunked? From what I remember, that was another one of John Ray's claims that wasn't backed up by any evidence.

Witnesses interviewed the hotel staff.

People said things claiming it can't be true, but they never said that it is not true. That in itself is bizarre.

Asa's own attorney could, if he wanted to, simply say Asa is certain that the DA's interpretation of the credit card statement is correct, but he has not. The DA could say his interpretation of the credit card statement is correct, but he has not.

Asa's attorney or the DA could have said "No comment," but they did not.

Instead, they deflected but did not deny what several witnesses observed: the hotel had Asa checked in different dates than the DA originally thought from the credit card statement. They spent so much energy attacking John Ray that it appeared to me they were very invested in thus tiny detail, and that the witnesses who interviewed the hotel employees were correct.

What does it matter? Does this make Rex less guilty? (Allegedly, so it seems?)

Besides, the amount my of time that Rex held victims alive and dead is not yet clear.

General note: There is a difference between facts and interpretations if what they mean. Baby Peaches was wrapped in a blanket is a fact. That this suggests a female is an interpretation.

That the AC check in dates were different from the way the DA read them is a fact. That the family was home for the murder is an interpretation.

The condition of Shannan's hyoid bone is a fact. How things such as that the horns are missing are interpretations.

I asked for factual errors by John Ray. We won't find them.

MOO