Is the fact that Terri hasn't been arrested indicative of lack of evidence?

[kathead]

I have struggled with Motive, Opportunity and Means for some time now.

I don't think people always need a motive. I think all they need is the Opportunity.

How many people would keep a bag of money* or shoot an ex* if they thought they could completely get away with it? Most of us wouldn't, since we follow moral codes, but there are those of us that would do so in a heartbeat if there was no fear of being caught.

*=examples only! I don't suggest anyone actually do these!

 

[Aedrys]

I don't think people always need a motive. I think all they need is the Opportunity.

How many people would keep a bag of money* or shoot an ex* if they thought they could completely get away with it? Most of us wouldn't, since we follow moral codes, but there are those of us that would do so in a heartbeat if there was no fear of being caught.

*=examples only! I don't suggest anyone actually do these!

ITA. And this is especially true if the same person is cocky enough to believe that they CAN and WILL get away with the crime they are committing, which I believe is what happened here. Just because you watch CSI doesn't make you a master criminal. She made mistakes, and in time, she will pay for what she's done to Kyron. LE's job may be harder here, but it doesn't mean that she's going to get away with this, or that there's no evidence on her at all. They just need those missing pieces, including Kyron, to nail her to wall, IMO.

 

[debs]

LOL! I don't know about cocky! I imagine the only thing we can all know is that Terri CAN and WILL expect the State to prove its case before convicting her. As it is so popularly stated "The Court of Public Opinion" doesn't need such a burden of conscience and decency. Hard to believe we then attempt to assign those to lawyers (no offense, you legal eagles, y'all know I have people like JB in mind). But in any case, Terri can rely upon her attorney to do his job. We can all hope the State will do its job.

ITA. And this is especially true if the same person is cocky enough to believe that they CAN and WILL get away with the crime they are committing, which I believe is what happened here. Just because you watch CSI doesn't make you a master criminal. She made mistakes, and in time, she will pay for what she's done to Kyron. LE's job may be harder here, but it doesn't mean that she's going to get away with this, or that there's no evidence on her at all. They just need those missing pieces, including Kyron, to nail her to wall, IMO.

 

[desquire]

I don't think people always need a motive. I think all they need is the Opportunity.

How many people would keep a bag of money* or shoot an ex* if they thought they could completely get away with it? Most of us wouldn't, since we follow moral codes, but there are those of us that would do so in a heartbeat if there was no fear of being caught.

*=examples only! I don't suggest anyone actually do these!

Both the examples you provided included a motive (money and revenge). When you think about it, there is a motive behind almost everything anybody does, even people who follow no moral code. I suppose there are some things that people do out of habit or for no reason whatsoever but kidnapping a child from school and disposing of him is probably not one of them. The motive may not be rational but I think it has to exist. We all have the opportunity to do a million different things throughout the course of our day - I have the opportunity to jump on my desk right now and do the hokey pokey - but we don't because we have no reason to; opportunity is useless without motive and vice versa.

 

[debs]

Both the examples you provided included a motive (money and revenge). When you think about it, there is a motive behind almost everything anybody does, even people who follow no moral code. I suppose there are some things that people do out of habit or for no reason whatsoever but kidnapping a child from school and disposing of him is probably not one of them. The motive may not be rational but I think it has to exist. We all have the opportunity to do a million different things throughout the course of our day - I have the opportunity to jump on my desk right now and do the hokey pokey - but we don't because we have no reason to; opportunity is useless without motive and vice versa.

I think you have a reason to jump on your desk and do the hokey pokey, and it involves a video camera and an uplink

That would make my day. Promise.

 

[desquire]

I think you have a reason to jump on your desk and do the hokey pokey, and it involves a video camera and an uplink

That would make my day. Promise.

I'd normally be happy to make your day, but the last time I danced on my desk it resulted in alot of flying papers, a broken monitor, and orthopedic surgeon's bill. Besides, we're already too far off topic.

 

[ami]

Most of everything about this case has been discussed at length elsewhere that is why we are here.

If they announced to the general public that Terri was seen in X place, or Kyron was seen alive at Y time, then from that point forward they can no longer gain info about those facts from the public.

That information could well jog the public's collective memory without compromising the case. As to no longer being able to gain info please explain how that would be? If they had the info already it wouldn't become less because we were aware of it, it would remain the same or maybe jog others memories by recounting the information. I'm sure if there are any witnesses they are aware of who they are at this point.

Or as I said before, they are looking at more than one person, an accomplice or otherwise and need to keep this information undisclosed at this time. Which change the dynamics somewhat.

Bold and Ital above by me.

LE simply believes differently than you do. They have stated as much many times and probably more clearly than I am now in their press conferences. They have given out information and pictures to jog people's memories when they believe this is necessary and won't interfere with the investigation. Other than that, they do not want people's memories falsley jogged by giving them information they don't already have. Holding back certain information is common. They are doing it on a large scale here, and they've explained why and it's a common tactic. A trade off, for certain, but still legit.

 

[GrainneDhu]

Great post Bean,

I have struggled with Motive, Opportunity and Means for some time now.

One could say the motive was to get back at KH, but then it gets muddy for opportunity and means. She had a baby with her, and like you said there is no evidence that he is dead, no blood in the truck, no weapon found with blood, no past history of abuse, nothing. The only thing that points to her in my mind is her odd behavior to all of this.

I think motive is usually irrelevant to an investigation. Why? Because I've heard motives that could not possibly have been guessed by any reasonable person.

For instance, Brenda Ann Spicer famously said ""I just did it for the fun of it. I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day." She was the 16 year old girl who sat in her parent's living room and shot at students going to the elementary school across the street.

I doubt any reasonable person could possibly come up with "I don't like Mondays" as a motive for murder (let alone mass murder).

Find the means and you'll find the perpetrator. And then you'll find out what the motive was.

 

[debs]

Bold and Ital above by me.

LE simply believes differently than you do. They have stated as much many times and probably more clearly than I am now in their press conferences. They have given out information and pictures to jog people's memories when they believe this is necessary and won't interfere with the investigation. Other than that, they do not want people's memories falsley jogged by giving them information they don't already have. Holding back certain information is common. They are doing it on a large scale here, and they've explained why and it's a common tactic. A trade off, for certain, but still legit.

I imagine it is then just as legit that not once but TWICE, LE has come out and stated that what Kaine Horman and Desiree Young were saying to the public did NOT come from them.

 

[BeanE]

I imagine it is then just as legit that not once but TWICE, LE has come out and stated that what Kaine Horman and Desiree Young were saying to the public did NOT come from them.

Four times. 2 MCSO press releases, Staton in a press conference, and Staton in an interview.

Gates may also have said something in a presser, but not being able to specifically recall what he said, and not having the energy to look it up, I'll stick with four for now.

 

[debs]

I think motive is usually irrelevant to an investigation. Why? Because I've heard motives that could not possibly have been guessed by any reasonable person.

For instance, Brenda Ann Spicer famously said ""I just did it for the fun of it. I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day." She was the 16 year old girl who sat in her parent's living room and shot at students going to the elementary school across the street.

I doubt any reasonable person could possibly come up with "I don't like Mondays" as a motive for murder (let alone mass murder).

Find the means and you'll find the perpetrator. And then you'll find out what the motive was.

Brenda Spencer, who killed two and injured 9 more, so not a mass murderer but a spree shooter. But I get what you're saying

 

[BeanE]

This may be related?

Multnomah Co. prosecution suffers, mayor criticizes decisions
Posted on October 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM

In his 29 years as District Attorney, Mike Schrunk says he's never had to do this.

The County's Board of Commissioners has cut his budget to the point where he has to redraw the line on what his department can and cannot afford to prosecute.

snip

Portland Police Chief Mike Reese is telling his officers to forge ahead and make arrests as they always do. It'll be up to Schrunk, then, to review which cases are serious enough to afford prosecution.

"If there isn't the capacity within the system to prosecute people and hold them accountable," said Reese, "it makes the entire system a failure and we're very concerned about it."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Multnomah-C...or-criticizes-budget-decisions-104456619.html

 

[32beatspersecond]

This may be related?

Multnomah Co. prosecution suffers, mayor criticizes decisions
Posted on October 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM

In his 29 years as District Attorney, Mike Schrunk says he's never had to do this.

The County's Board of Commissioners has cut his budget to the point where he has to redraw the line on what his department can and cannot afford to prosecute.

snip

Portland Police Chief Mike Reese is telling his officers to forge ahead and make arrests as they always do. It'll be up to Schrunk, then, to review which cases are serious enough to afford prosecution.

"If there isn't the capacity within the system to prosecute people and hold them accountable," said Reese, "it makes the entire system a failure and we're very concerned about it."

http://www.kgw.com/news/Multnomah-C...or-criticizes-budget-decisions-104456619.html

are you kidding me...a judicial system that can't afford to go to trial? I guess it's true...the apocalypse will not be an end all to planet earth but more of a "change in values" throughout human cultures....great.

 

[nursebeeme]

This question was asked on another thread, and, at mods' advice, I'm starting a thread to discuss this.

So the question is: is the fact that Terri has not been charged with Kyron's disappearance indicative of the investigators having insufficient evidence to charge her?

as per the topic of this thread, I just wanted to weigh in that in my opinion just because she has not been charged yet does not mean that LE doesn't have goods on Terri Moulton Horman. I think a poll would be great to add to this thread.

 

[gwenabob]

Good idea! What should the questions and answers be?

 

[Calliope]

Good idea! What should the questions and answers be?

Is the fact that Terri hasn't been arrested indicative of lack of evidence?

1. Yes
   
   
2. No

 

[debs]

Is the fact that Terri hasn't been arrested indicative of lack of evidence?

1. Yes
2. No

That about sums it up

 

[Calliope]

Maybe -->

3. Don't know / no opinion.

 

[nursebeeme]

yeah, I like the three choices... good thinking Calliope

 

[gwenabob]

I thought we could add qualifiers such as:

1. "They have enough evidence to arrest and convict. What are they waiting for?"
2. "They have enough evidence to arrest, but not to convict."
3. "They don't have any evidence against Terri at all."

and so forth.