"Jersey" and MW

[RANCH]

dog thread
Human Remains (*cadaver) Detection (HRD) dog questions and answers **NO DISCUSSION** - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Thanks. It's nice to keep threads on topic. Here's the one that can have discussions.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152518"]Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[cowtowner]

Would a defense attorney be able to use LE repeatedly clearing Jersey of any involvement against the case if they do end up charging him?

They could try. Of course LE can and does openly lie to a suspect, the press, etc. it's perfectly legal.


If I were on a jury the fact that LE lied when they said the defendant was cleared because LE wanted to do something like monitor his actions and see if he led them to an abducted infant wouldn't prejudice my decision.

 

[EarlyT79]

It's not up to anyone's opinion; the crime of burglary/robbery is different than the crime of kidnapping. So different, in fact, that our criminal justice system has chosen to name them two separate crimes. Pretty compelling stuff, eh?

ETA - It's also important to note that these two separate crimes because they fall under two separate jurisdictions. The crime of burglary is local/county/state. It's under jurisdiction of Clay County to prosecute and KCPD to investigate. But the crime of kidnapping is a federal crime and falls under the FBI jurisdiction. ESPECIALLY if they cross the state line which is about 5 minutes away.
Has LE crossed state lines? From what I deemed, LE has no reason to think the 'kidnapper-thief' crossed state lines.

We have no idea if they took place at the same time, separate times, same person, separate people. (Wouldn't it be great if we did?) The only thing we DO know is we have a theft and we have a kidnapping.
You might be mistaken. LE knows for a fact the parents reported Lisa and three phones missing at the same time.

Actually Deb's not the only one who said it. Read the article I linked, the neighbor Blondo was there and DB told her "she was going to bed."

How about please read the article I linked.

Not exactly correct. There is actually Blondo to say that DB blacked out drunk. She was there. She can either corroborate the "blacked out" story or refute it. So there is actually someone who can say that "DB blacked out drunk." Her name is Blondo.
Deborah said she blacked out or may have blacked out. NO other corroboration is needed. An admitted drunk mom told LE she may have blacked out.


Given that their daughter is missing and presumed dead, I don't see how we can argue these things were "in their favor."

LINK to presumed dead. Presumed dead by whom?

You're right about one thing, I don't think they are capable of pulling something like that off either. And if I don't think someone is capable of pulling something off, then they probably did not pull it off -- so I look elsewhere.

I look where the data, facts and evidence points.
SNIPPED

I choose not to focus my attention on those I don't think could pull off a crime. Instead I focus my attention on those connected to the crime who are known, adjudicated, convicted criminals and/or those who fit the profile of the offender.

Say, you don't think the parents are connected to this crime?
I have a bridge to sell.


My post in purple.

 

[natsound]

Regardless of the different opinions on this, the bottom line is that there is a baby missing, and a HRD hit on something in the house. And, in addition to that, we don't know if there wasn't a dozen more dogs paraded through that house and they all hit. One hit, to me, is enough, considering there is a baby missing. But, that's just me.

:yesss: :toastred:

 

[yllek]

*set bottle of aspirin on table and slowly backs out of thread*

Hey, toss me one of those! Right behind you... :seeya:

 

[powayparent]

Not on a prepaid phone with prepaid minutes. There is no bill. Those phones and cards can be bought at the WalMart. You do not have to give anyone your name, ssn, address or any other identification. Pay in cash and go. If you delete the history, destroy the SIM card, if any, and get rid of the battery and dispose of the phone immediately and get out of the area immediately after the call, it makes it very tough to track.

Odd that none of that happened, huh? She still had the phone and posted an ad with the number.

 

[EarlyT79]

My only problem with that is we don't know if those two crimes occurred. Instead of a theft and a kidnapping, we could very likely (statistically speaking) have a murder and a cover-up.

That's the million dollar question.

cha--ching

 

[Eileen730]

There wouldn't necessarily need to be a dead body on the floor if someone took the baby, who perhaps had recently expired and the person was carrying that baby around and then took off their shirt and layed it on the floor and transferred the scent that way. JMO - and I'm a IDI person at the moment.

Those clothes were probably burned in the dumpster fire!

 

[katshep]

As was stated by Sarx early in the thread, the HRDs are one small aspect of the case:





yes, they have to develop leads. And they use the results of the HRD's search to help them develop that lead. However, one cannot definitively say "The dog hit so __X__ is what happened."

The dog made "a hit." Assuming this is a well-trained dog and a well-trained, competent handler (no reason to doubt they were anything less) this means that either a dead body was there or something that came into contact with a dead body was there.

Within the context of the other facts we have this fact simply doesn't shed a lot of light.

Dogs are investigatory not evidentiary. I have dogs who go out in the woods and fields. Some of these dogs have killed rabbits or rolled in dead animals and afterward come back into the house. I would imagine there would be hits by HRD in my house, but that is not evidence of a homicide.

 

[hollyblue]

Although, the kitty could be the transfer. JMO

I was just thinking that when I read your post. What if one of the boys put the kitten in her crib and the kitten "took her breath away"...old wive's tale, but it has happened. The kitten smothered her...then the kitten would be the transfer to DB's bedroom. ?

 

[EarlyT79]

ITA.

It's the stuff defense attorney's dream about, no?

I think when it comes to Occam's Razor you have to keep in mind, who had "access?" What is the simplest answer to who had access to BL that night?

:blushing: I was ready to post the same thing. Maybe some don't know the definition of Occam's Razor.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor.htm

You've probably heard it before: The simplest explanation is usually the right one. Detectives use it to deduce who's the likeliest suspect in a murder case -- you know, the butler did it. Doctors *use it to determine the illness behind a set of symptoms.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Those clothes were probably burned in the dumpster fire!

We don't know that, though. DB simply says that LE showed her burnt clothes. She never said they were baby clothes, nor did she ever state that they came from the burned dumpster.

 

[cowtowner]

Dogs are investigatory not evidentiary. I have dogs who go out in the woods and fields. Some of these dogs have killed rabbits or rolled in dead animals and afterward come back into the house. I would imagine there would be hits by HRD in my house, but that is not evidence of a homicide.

THANK you. Again, it's important to compartmentalize investigation from evidence, from conviction, from theory, from etc..

 

[natsound]

chaching

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you mean... cha-CHING!!

 

[Eileen730]

wow Now on HLN they say Dad was banging on neighbors door around 3 45 that morning after he came home.

 

[tehcloser]

a------------------------b. Occam's Razor.

Not a>>
**$^&*
<<<*#
>>b.

 

[cowtowner]

:blushing: I was ready to post the same thing. Maybe some don't the definition of Occam's Razor.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor.htm

You've probably heard it before: The simplest explanation is usually the right one. Detectives use it to deduce who's the likeliest suspect in a murder case -- you know, the butler did it. Doctors *use it to determine the illness behind a set of symptoms.

I don't find the explanation "the one person who can be corroborated by her neighbor as blacked out drunk killed her daughter and - in this blacked out drunk stupor - so skillfully disposed of her body that it hasn't been recovered 30 days later" to be very simple at all.

In fact, it's the most complex of the theories in this case.

 

[EarlyT79]

ITA.

It's the stuff defense attorney's dream about, no?

I think when it comes to Occam's Razor you have to keep in mind, who had "access?" What is the simplest answer to who had access to BL that night?

:blushing: I was ready to post the same thing. Maybe some don't know the definition of Occam's Razor.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/scientific-experiments/occams-razor.htm

You've probably heard it before: The simplest explanation is usually the right one. Detectives use it to deduce who's the likeliest suspect in a murder case -- you know, the butler did it. Doctors *use it to determine the illness behind a set of symptoms.

 

[Eileen730]

Put on HLN guys!

 

[katydid23]

I don't find the explanation "the one person who can be corroborated by her neighbor as blacked out drunk killed her daughter and - in this blacked out drunk stupor - so skillfully disposed of her body that it hasn't been recovered 30 days later" to be very simple at all.

In fact, it's the most complex of the theories in this case.

Unless of course she wasn't blacked out drunk.