GUILTY - Tammy Moorer trial for Kidnapping Heather Elvis, 8 Oct 2018 #3

[meinmyrtlebeach]

While I agree that this seems to be a growing mountain of circumstantial evidence, I sure hope that the prosecutor can somehow wrap it all up together. Because, even knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt who is responsible and what I believe happened, I can't help but wondering if all of this random phone/video/restaurant stuff is enough to even claim she was kidnapped? Hopefully, I'm just missing the closing arguments where the prosecutor references all of this and SHOWS how it leads up and convinces of guilt for kidnapping. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the jury at this point is just confused or wondering why all these weird little tidbits of circumstantial evidence are being offered, and how they all match up.

Let's hope they are smarter than me and can connect all of these pieces.

 

[geevee]

They had a security system and bought a new one a few days after Heather went missing. Where did the old one go and why?

RSBM

Probably dropped in the water off PTL from the boat the video expert testified the truck was captured towing (a couple nights later?). The why? Seems TM didn't like being caught on candid camera, even her own.

 

[Knox]

If convicted, how long will Tammy serve?

 

[bandwife1]

Is it possible that SM met HE at LB and gave her the pregnancy test which she then went back to her apartment to open/use in the hall bathroom which would be closest to the door? Then took the results with her to meet at PTL...

 

[lstiff]

Is it possible that SM met HE at LB and gave her the pregnancy test which she then went back to her apartment to open/use in the hall bathroom which would be closest to the door? Then took the results with her to meet at PTL...

It fits the timeline of her phone going from LBs back to her apartment then back out to PTL but I’m unsure why she would do that when she could just take one herself at home like she had previously done. One of them would have been with her I would guess in that scenario. I still think bad things happened at LBs bc her phone was there moving around the parking lot for too long and the fact (that we just learned this trial) that both M phones were at LBs hours prior is too much of a “coincidence” for me.
IMO

 

[bestill]

If convicted, how long will Tammy serve?

I would love to know this!

 

[spiritseeker31]

I haven't caught up on today's postings but I'm sitting here watching part 2 on the trail and got bored and my brain started wandering. Is it possible that they wanted the youngest Moorer off the witness list and in court for "support" because it's possible the child might "break" or slip up during testimony?

 

[jenseib]

While I agree that this seems to be a growing mountain of circumstantial evidence, I sure hope that the prosecutor can somehow wrap it all up together. Because, even knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt who is responsible and what I believe happened, I can't help but wondering if all of this random phone/video/restaurant stuff is enough to even claim she was kidnapped? Hopefully, I'm just missing the closing arguments where the prosecutor references all of this and SHOWS how it leads up and convinces of guilt for kidnapping. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the jury at this point is just confused or wondering why all these weird little tidbits of circumstantial evidence are being offered, and how they all match up.

Let's hope they are smarter than me and can connect all of these pieces.

I agree. At this point I still don't think they have enough to convict. It's a bunch of jumble. They need to put a complete timeline together and also show how it all works. I found it all interesting, but on the evidence shown, it just isn't enough to say yes.

Is it possible that SM met HE at LB and gave her the pregnancy test which she then went back to her apartment to open/use in the hall bathroom which would be closest to the door? Then took the results with her to meet at PTL...

I personally don't think she ever went to PTL.

 

[2Hope4]

If one of the Moorers was left at LB, and that person then met with Heather at LB, that could explain a few things. Like the multiple calls to the Moorers cellphone from PTL. Someone was in a hurry to get the heck away from PTL. If it was one Moorer calling the other Moorer, that would make sense. BUT, how can prove that's a possible theory?

 

[Hatfield]

Also, Heather was not missing at that stage, as far as they were aware. TE may have wanted to protect his daughter's privacy is all!!

Catching up.

About the car being taken by TE.

JMO
Yeah, he had no idea there was any real foul play at that point and as a concerned father he probably just wanted to take her car back away from PTL so it would not be stolen by someone.

He most likely expected her to call him at any moment wondering where her car is or to call for a ride home because she could not find her car. Nobody at that point realized how dire the situation really was. Which also explains why LE at first did not do as thorough of a search as they could have.

Both LE and TE likely thought she would be showing up at any time and they all likely thought she had gone off in another vehicle with friends for an overnighter or two.

 

[stillwatersc]

Is it possible that SM met HE at LB and gave her the pregnancy test which she then went back to her apartment to open/use in the hall bathroom which would be closest to the door? Then took the results with her to meet at PTL...

This is what I think happened too.

 

[Surfside]

I'm with Joyce Aland, "I don't believe in coincidences".

And please stop asking your asinine questions sir.

 

[Surfside]

Some of the key things that came out today (IMO) are:

• Tammy allowed police to enter her home and the camper to view/photograph on Dec. 20th but claimed she didn't have a key for the black truck (brand new vehicles come with multiple keys, often two with remotes and one valet key; hard to believe she who ruled the roost would not have access to at least one of the spares)

• RSBM & BBM: This is everything. She has to be in control of every aspect of her life. She's a walking case study for narcissistic personality disorder. She's the smartest person in the room, and everybody else is an idiot. She has no empathy, accountability, or boundaries. She has an undying need to control all situations. There's no way she would let a vehicle sit on her property that she had zero access to. No.way.

 

[Harmony 2]

While I agree that this seems to be a growing mountain of circumstantial evidence, I sure hope that the prosecutor can somehow wrap it all up together. Because, even knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt who is responsible and what I believe happened, I can't help but wondering if all of this random phone/video/restaurant stuff is enough to even claim she was kidnapped? Hopefully, I'm just missing the closing arguments where the prosecutor references all of this and SHOWS how it leads up and convinces of guilt for kidnapping. Unfortunately, I'm afraid the jury at this point is just confused or wondering why all these weird little tidbits of circumstantial evidence are being offered, and how they all match up.

Let's hope they are smarter than me and can connect all of these pieces.

Livesay did a masterful job of wrapping up information in Sidney's obstruction of justice trial. I have heard many closing arguments in my 10 years at Websleuths and hers is in the top 10. I am hoping she is the one that delivers the closing.

Closing arguments delivered in Sidney Moorer obstruction of justice trial

 

[Surfside]

Sorry for overposting; I'm getting settled in and backreading from what I missed. Plus a couple glasses of wine.

I really think this is a slam dunk. I hope I'm not wrong, and maybe I'm biased, but I think people downplay circumstantial cases way too much. For me, direct evidence is overrated. Look at how many of us have been here, following this case for 5 years. Admittedly, most of us have are having a difficult time remembering the details we all once knew so vividly. Now imagine you were an eyewitness 5 years ago and didn't realize the gravity of what you were witnessing. For the most part, that's what direct evidence is, and as long as human beings are the source of that evidence, you have to account for human error and human memory lapse. I'm currently out of state to testify as a material witness to something that happened 5 years ago (coincidentally). I can tell you that most of what I'll be saying on the stand tomorrow is "I don't recall," and that's the honest truth.

On the other hand, circumstantial evidence is all about the circumstances surrounding the crime. Circumstantial evidence includes things like fingerprints at a crime scene. If there's enough circumstantial evidence, you would have to be in a state of severe denial to not see what happened. I keep trying to see the circumstantial evidence with fresh eyes, like the jury is doing right now. Think about all the things that, individually, could be coincidences. Fine. If only one of those things were brought up in this trial, then sure - they could be coincidences. But where do you draw the line? TM harassing Heather. The purchase of the pregnancy test. TM's and SM's phone being at Longbeard's hours before Heather's phone. TM telling Heather's manager to fire her. The neighbor overhearing TM telling SM that the tattoo is his punishment for his relationship with Heather. TM not having keys to the truck. All of the old lies we know about the evolving alibis from that night. The case of the missing surveillance system vs. the brand new one purchased to replace it. Heather's phone and car ending up at PTL (if you aren't from here, it might not seem like a big deal, but if you are from here, you know how close that is to the M's house and how far out of the way it would be from Heather's apartment).

I mean, I'm not going to keep listing the circumstantial evidence, but how much does it take for the jury to realize exactly what happened? At the very least, conspiracy to commit kidnapping is a slam dunk for me.

Sorry for the super-long, rambling post.

TL;DR = Circumstantial evidence shows TM is guilty of conspiracy to kidnap.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

Sorry for overposting; I'm getting settled in and backreading from what I missed. Plus a couple glasses of wine.

I really think this is a slam dunk. I hope I'm not wrong, and maybe I'm biased, but I think people downplay circumstantial cases way too much. For me, direct evidence is overrated. Look at how many of us have been here, following this case for 5 years. Admittedly, most of us have are having a difficult time remembering the details we all once knew so vividly. Now imagine you were an eyewitness 5 years ago and didn't realize the gravity of what you were witnessing. For the most part, that's what direct evidence is, and as long as human beings are the source of that evidence, you have to account for human error and human memory lapse. I'm currently out of state to testify as a material witness to something that happened 5 years ago (coincidentally). I can tell you that most of what I'll be saying on the stand tomorrow is "I don't recall," and that's the honest truth.

On the other hand, circumstantial evidence is all about the circumstances surrounding the crime. Circumstantial evidence includes things like fingerprints at a crime scene. If there's enough circumstantial evidence, you would have to be in a state of severe denial to not see what happened. I keep trying to see the circumstantial evidence with fresh eyes, like the jury is doing right now. Think about all the things that, individually, could be coincidences. Fine. If only one of those things were brought up in this trial, then sure - they could be coincidences. But where do you draw the line? TM harassing Heather. The purchase of the pregnancy test. TM's and SM's phone being at Longbeard's hours before Heather's phone. TM telling Heather's manager to fire her. The neighbor overhearing TM telling SM that the tattoo is his punishment for his relationship with Heather. TM not having keys to the truck. All of the old lies we know about the evolving alibis from that night. The case of the missing surveillance system vs. the brand new one purchased to replace it. Heather's phone and car ending up at PTL (if you aren't from here, it might not seem like a big deal, but if you are from here, you know how close that is to the M's house and how far out of the way it would be from Heather's apartment).

I mean, I'm not going to keep listing the circumstantial evidence, but how much does it take for the jury to realize exactly what happened? At the very least, conspiracy to commit kidnapping is a slam dunk for me.

Sorry for the super-long, rambling post.

TL;DR = Circumstantial evidence shows TM is guilty of conspiracy to kidnap.

I understand the angst and my heart goes out to you. I think the most difficult thing about being a part of this forum is knowing much about a case, but we aren't allowed to talk about it. We just have to post with in terms of service.

It makes me dizzy , I get it , and my heart goes out to you.

 

[brandalous]

Surely she wouldn’t use her own funds for a lawyer. She wants for us to pay for it.

IIRC, hers is a top-notch lawyer paid for by her mother and his is pro-bono appointed by the state.

I'm going to snip just the part I'm responding to on this next post, because it's so long.

Some of the key things that came out today (IMO) are:

• police found a pregnancy test box in Heather's apartment (but no test or applicator)

• an unfired bullet was found in Heather's car

• police observed a shotgun shell casing, opened bag of cement and some cleaning fluid near the Moorer's camper on their property on Dec. 20th
  <snipped stuff here for brevity's sake>

I suppose my comment here will show how little I know about guns, but I'm wondering if bullets come with things like lot numbers or serial numbers? It would be interesting to know if the unspent bullet in her car, the spent shell at the compound, and even the bullets from the shooting at the Terry Elvis property matched in any way. I know there's ballistics, but AFAIK that's only on bullets that have been shot?

I haven't caught up on today's postings but I'm sitting here watching part 2 on the trail and got bored and my brain started wandering. Is it possible that they wanted the youngest Moorer off the witness list and in court for "support" because it's possible the child might "break" or slip up during testimony?

I also had that thought. The police said that the kids seemed well-rehearsed when speaking to them, so I can imagine NL really wants to hear from all of them!

 

[Chelly]

Sorry for overposting; I'm getting settled in and backreading from what I missed. Plus a couple glasses of wine.

I really think this is a slam dunk. I hope I'm not wrong, and maybe I'm biased, but I think people downplay circumstantial cases way too much. For me, direct evidence is overrated. Look at how many of us have been here, following this case for 5 years. Admittedly, most of us have are having a difficult time remembering the details we all once knew so vividly. Now imagine you were an eyewitness 5 years ago and didn't realize the gravity of what you were witnessing. For the most part, that's what direct evidence is, and as long as human beings are the source of that evidence, you have to account for human error and human memory lapse. I'm currently out of state to testify as a material witness to something that happened 5 years ago (coincidentally). I can tell you that most of what I'll be saying on the stand tomorrow is "I don't recall," and that's the honest truth.

On the other hand, circumstantial evidence is all about the circumstances surrounding the crime. Circumstantial evidence includes things like fingerprints at a crime scene. If there's enough circumstantial evidence, you would have to be in a state of severe denial to not see what happened. I keep trying to see the circumstantial evidence with fresh eyes, like the jury is doing right now. Think about all the things that, individually, could be coincidences. Fine. If only one of those things were brought up in this trial, then sure - they could be coincidences. But where do you draw the line? TM harassing Heather. The purchase of the pregnancy test. TM's and SM's phone being at Longbeard's hours before Heather's phone. TM telling Heather's manager to fire her. The neighbor overhearing TM telling SM that the tattoo is his punishment for his relationship with Heather. TM not having keys to the truck. All of the old lies we know about the evolving alibis from that night. The case of the missing surveillance system vs. the brand new one purchased to replace it. Heather's phone and car ending up at PTL (if you aren't from here, it might not seem like a big deal, but if you are from here, you know how close that is to the M's house and how far out of the way it would be from Heather's apartment).

I mean, I'm not going to keep listing the circumstantial evidence, but how much does it take for the jury to realize exactly what happened? At the very least, conspiracy to commit kidnapping is a slam dunk for me.

Sorry for the super-long, rambling post.

TL;DR = Circumstantial evidence shows TM is guilty of conspiracy to kidnap.

Thanks for taking the time to compose and write this. This is a good post and I agree. Just too weary to comment further, except to say.....what an amazing set of circumstances.

 

[Knox]

South Carolina Kidnapping/Abduction Laws

Kidnapping is the crime of taking a person against their will to an undisclosed location. This may be done for ransom or in furtherance of another crime, or in connection with a child custody dispute.

According to the laws of South Carolina, whoever shall unlawfully seize, confine, inveigle, decoy, kidnap, abduct or carry away any other person by any means whatsoever without authority of law, except when a minor is seized or taken by his parent, is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be imprisoned for a period not to exceed thirty years unless sentenced for murder as provided in Section 16-3-20.

Further, if two or more persons enter into an agreement, confederation, or conspiracy to violate the provisions of Section 16-3-910 and any of such persons do any overt act towards carrying out such unlawful agreement, confederation, or conspiracy, each such person shall be guilty of a felony. Upon conviction, such persons shall be punished in like manner as provided for the violation of Section 16-3-910[ii]
South Carolina Kidnapping/Abduction Laws – Kidnapping

Looks like the sentence can be up to 30 years!!!

 

[imstilla.grandma]

The South Carolina woman on trial for allegedly abducting her husband’s lover reportedly forced her spouse to get her own name tattooed above his crotch as payback for cheating.

Jacob Melton, who was friends with one of the Moorers’ sons, testified Monday that Sidney got Tammy’s name tattooed on his lower waist when she learned about the extramarital affair.

“If you didn’t have that thing with that girl, this wouldn’t be happening,” Tammy allegedly told her husband, according to Melton’s testimony.

“Tammy barged into the conversation and proceeded to tell me how Heather was causing problems for her family, spreading rumors that she was pregnant by her husband and [said] to fire her,” Clark told the court.
https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/jilte...-hubby-get-her-name-tattooed-over-his-crotch/