Hailey Dunn General Discussion #2

[ahintexas]

or what about this one?

 

[For The Kids]

I wonder why he even bothered to go in? Maybe to drop off his soiled overalls? Or did he have something he had to pick up?

The strange thing is many have said that the company Shawn worked for wash your coveralls for you so if that's true why would Billie need to wash them?

 

[ahintexas]

The strange thing is many have said that the company Shawn worked for wash your coveralls for you so if that's true why would Billie need to wash them?

I always found this day odd. Why would he go in at all? To pick up something? To establish an alibi?

 

[nannymo]

ahintexas-I changed my avatar-It looks great! Thank you! What do you think??

 

[ahintexas]

ahintexas-I changed my avatar-It looks great! Thank you! What do you think??

I like it!

 

[nannymo]

I always found this day odd. Why would he go in at all? To pick up something? To establish an alibi?

Maybe he washed them to "clean" them up and then he took them in and put them in a laundry bin with everyone else's. I agree he was either leaving something or picking something up.

 

[amberjul]

I keep mulling over the possibilities. Who was called? Possibility someone 'helped' or gave advice?

Something Leapt out at me from your post, Knox, which I'm sure folks already know but here goes:

Affidavits showed Adkins' phone was used in Colorado City from 6:35 to 6:56 a.m. It was then used in Big Spring several times between 9:38 a.m. and 2:40 p.m.

SA's phone was silent from 6:56 am to 9:38 am. It's in the January affidavit IIRC. Where was he? Between Colorado City and Big Spring?

 

[amberjul]

Organizers say Hailey's favorite colors were purple, blue and orange and add that the colors represent the journey of searching and praying to bring Hailey home.

http://www.kcbd.com/story/22133101/colorado-city-residents-make-plans-to-honor-hailey-dunn

A purple ribbon with one blue and one orange pinstripe around the border? All three colors seem important to her memory and journey toward justice, and to continue in solidarity with the organizers.

(I wish I could draw right here with the mouse, lol!)


jmo

 

[MsFacetious]

I think I am still in shock.
Every time I open Websleuths and see:

HAILEY DUNN'S REMAINS HAVE BEEN FOUND

It's like I'm seeing it for the first time.
I still just cannot believe it. :thud:

 

[Tugela]

One of those interviewed witnesses, the guy that said he watched her talking on the cell phone outside, also said he saw her talking on the cell outside quite often.

First of all, he was reported to be a drug addict, heroin IIRC, and was kicked out of the house he had been crashing in.

And his report that she was standing outside talking on the cell conflicts with the fact that there was no cell activity that afternoon. It also conflicts with the fact that she didnt usually have access to cell phones in the afternoon because her mom usually had it at work with her.

So that guys testimony is worthless. As is the hairdresser who claims she saw Hailey walking with a young bi-racial boy. That is the description of her younger 'stepbrother', Naoimi's son. And they went on a walk together the previous day, NOT that Monday. There is video evidence from the corner store they walked to. And he was not at Clint and Naomi's on Monday. So that is also a mistaken report.

There was also a woman who said she thought she saw Hailey walking with some friends around town on Monday evening. I do not believe that, because I know how small towns are and how kids are. If Hailey had been out and about in public, with other kids, then some kids would have known about it. When I drive through town with my kids in the car, they turn and look at every kid they see walking or standing around. They know who was with who and when. So I do not believe for a second that Hailey was out and bout in town and nobody but this one woman saw her.

Um...it doesn't conflict with her cell phone use. The cell phone was left at home and used as the home phone, that was how it was routinely used. And in fact, a text message was sent from it at around the time he claimed to have seen her.

As to his background, that is irrelevant.

The hair dresser didn't know who the boy was, she didn't identify him. Posters here concluded that it was the GF's boy, not the witness. The reason she said she took notice was because she didn't know who it was.

The woman who saw HD that evening is less sure.

As far as other people seeing or not seeing, you need to remember that seeing HD would not have been out of the ordinary unless there was something that caught a witnesses attention. If something is not out of the ordinary, people would not have paid attention and therefore would not recall. That doesn't mean that no one saw her.

These three witnesses are the ones that have been brought to our attention. There are probably more people who have claimed to have seen her as well. LE generally do not share that sort of information with the public. The only reason we know about these three is that they have chosen to talk about outside of their report, but there are bound to be more.

 

[Tugela]

If the witnesses statements of when Hailey was seen and where cannot be proved to be based in fact, then that is not credible to me, and to me LE is saying the same. If I were sitting on that jury you would have to make me believe that was true and just knowing the pieces I know I can't get there

As for that text message, I don't believe that it was sent by Hailey. In fact I've never believed that.

I believe there were two people that were involved in Hailey's disappearance. One of those LE has named a suspect.
MOO

Almost everything else about this case is based on unsubstantiated witness testimony as well, and is in dispute, would you disbelieve all that unless it had been proven to be true as well?

As for the text, someone must have sent it, and it apparently wasn't the two people you suspect, so who was it then?

Keep in mind that you are only believing things that can be proven, so speculation about some unidentified third party isn't an acceptable answer.

 

[Tugela]

Do you have any links that state there is no proof about the witnesses being wrong? or that no evidence was offered that the witness was wrong?

As for the text message it could have been sent by anyone. As has been repeatedly said there is no proof she was alive Monday to go out anywhere unfortunately.

Let me flip that around back to you: Do you have any links that state there is proof about the witnesses being wrong? or that evidence was offered that the witness was wrong?

Unless you have evidence that these people are lying, I think we have to go with the assumption that they are being truthful.

It may turn out that they are wrong about the dates, or they might be being untruthful, but you can't just assume that as fact simply because what they say contradicts your theory. At least provide a rational basis for why they might be wrong.

 

[Tugela]

Something Leapt out at me from your post, Knox, which I'm sure folks already know but here goes:

Affidavits showed Adkins' phone was used in Colorado City from 6:35 to 6:56 a.m. It was then used in Big Spring several times between 9:38 a.m. and 2:40 p.m.

SA's phone was silent from 6:56 am to 9:38 am. It's in the January affidavit IIRC. Where was he? Between Colorado City and Big Spring?

No, it means he didn't make or receive any phone calls or texts between 6.56 and 9.38.

Remember, 9.38 AM and 2.40 PM corresponded to the first and last phone calls of that periods, so IMO they are talking about pings for the call routing data, not pings in general (Unless you are one of the people who believe he switched his phone off the second he dialed the last phone call).

 

[Ruby Sue]

I have no ideas or information to post other than ribbons. I am going to try to incorporate orange and blue. Here's a purple ribbon draft.

ETA: Here's purple, blue and orange ones.

 

[ozazure]

The affidavit isn't worded conclusively but it does seem that the 6:35 to 6:56 could well be a call (to whom?) and that the break in usage does not mean the phone was switched off. Given that the affidavit states these are phone records, it seems to me on balance they have no more information for the affidavit than you get in your phone bill. The smoking gun in the affidavit is his location at 6:30 in the morning in contrast to his statement he went straight to his mothers.

His phone could have been off, or on and not making calls based on the information in the affidavit. He still had from 7am to 9:30 am to do the estimated 90 minute trip from CC to Lake J.B. Thomas to Big Springs. Sounds about right to me with the added task of getting a body in and out of a car and associated chores.

I'd like to know:
Who did he make the 11 or 12+ calls to? They are in this up to their neck. At one point Billie was interviewed and it was raised that Shawn rang her phone in CC during that period and she expressed (no affect) concern about that if it was true. Ring any bells? I would love to go dig that up, I can't remember if that was Nancy Grace or a BTR show.

I know it is only circumstantial but the phone records before this time would be pretty relevant too, to see where Billie's phone usually was and who was contacted on it, so that one text could be known to be completely aberrant or not. I also hope they paid for their fuel electronically because I think we'd see a major spike in distance covered that week, not only for that potential 66 mile trip but the picking Billie up from work because Shawn had her car is seemingly a very odd "normal" practise - coming home from Snyder to CC to do the round trip again a few hours later? I don't think that happened much before this time period.

 

[For The Kids]

Um...it doesn't conflict with her cell phone use. The cell phone was left at home and used as the home phone, that was how it was routinely used. And in fact, a text message was sent from it at around the time he claimed to have seen her.

As to his background, that is irrelevant.

The hair dresser didn't know who the boy was, she didn't identify him. Posters here concluded that it was the GF's boy, not the witness. The reason she said she took notice was because she didn't know who it was.

The woman who saw HD that evening is less sure.

As far as other people seeing or not seeing, you need to remember that seeing HD would not have been out of the ordinary unless there was something that caught a witnesses attention. If something is not out of the ordinary, people would not have paid attention and therefore would not recall. That doesn't mean that no one saw her.

These three witnesses are the ones that have been brought to our attention. There are probably more people who have claimed to have seen her as well. LE generally do not share that sort of information with the public. The only reason we know about these three is that they have chosen to talk about outside of their report, but there are bound to be more.

not according to LE there isn't.

 

[For The Kids]

Let me flip that around back to you: Do you have any links that state there is proof about the witnesses being wrong? or that evidence was offered that the witness was wrong?

Unless you have evidence that these people are lying, I think we have to go with the assumption that they are being truthful.

It may turn out that they are wrong about the dates, or they might be being untruthful, but you can't just assume that as fact simply because what they say contradicts your theory. At least provide a rational basis for why they might be wrong.

I have to go with the assumption that they are wrong and yes I have my reasons for believing that

 

[For The Kids]

The affidavit isn't worded conclusively but it does seem that the 6:35 to 6:56 could well be a call (to whom?) and that the break in usage does not mean the phone was switched off. Given that the affidavit states these are phone records, it seems to me on balance they have no more information for the affidavit than you get in your phone bill. The smoking gun in the affidavit is his location at 6:30 in the morning in contrast to his statement he went straight to his mothers.

His phone could have been off, or on and not making calls based on the information in the affidavit. He still had from 7am to 9:30 am to do the estimated 90 minute trip from CC to Lake J.B. Thomas to Big Springs. Sounds about right to me with the added task of getting a body in and out of a car and associated chores.

I'd like to know:
Who did he make the 11 or 12+ calls to? They are in this up to their neck. At one point Billie was interviewed and it was raised that Shawn rang her phone in CC during that period and she expressed (no affect) concern about that if it was true. Ring any bells? I would love to go dig that up, I can't remember if that was Nancy Grace or a BTR show.

I know it is only circumstantial but the phone records before this time would be pretty relevant too, to see where Billie's phone usually was and who was contacted on it, so that one text could be known to be completely aberrant or not. I also hope they paid for their fuel electronically because I think we'd see a major spike in distance covered that week, not only for that potential 66 mile trip but the picking Billie up from work because Shawn had her car is seemingly a very odd "normal" practise - coming home from Snyder to CC to do the round trip again a few hours later? I don't think that happened much before this time period.

I have a feeling possibly D.O.

 

[FruitTingles]

or what about this one?

Looks great. Hope you don't mind if I use it.

 

[ahintexas]

Looks great. Hope you don't mind if I use it.

yes, use it!