LA - ***ARREST*** Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette 19 May 2012 - #34

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd delete my account. Who the heck would want to be associated with a like BSL? That said, I'd probably open another account using a nickname or my maiden name or something like that.

Ahem... maybe other Ps-OS? Hence why I was asking how these two are connected. I can't say anything as to the character or moral quality of this individual, as TOS does not allow us to sleuth non-POIs.
 
KPEL Interview, Audio at this Link!

Q: When something like this happens, and we know that there’s a whole bunch of other steps to go … thinking in terms of the alphabet this is maybe A or B I don’t know … but when you reach this stage and you’ve been at least able to string some of these points together and get an arrest, what’s the feeling in the department? Is it relief? Is it “it’s a small victory but boy there’s a lot to go in this war to finally put this case to rest”?

A: Yeah, you know, we’ve been working on this case and our multi-jurisdiction task force agencies all across this area – nationwide – have been assisting us in anything we’ve asked for and to finally get in a direction – a positive step – before I think we were stepping out in just about every direction there was because everything was on the table. And so when we received the information about this particular truck and this tip and as we gained more information not only about the owner – about Lavergne – but about the history of the truck … that it had been burned, and that it was reported stolen, we were able to verify through the video at Lafayette Consolidated Government along with other video that it was in fact Lavergne’s truck that traveled behind Mickey. Uh, some other information that we’re not just yet ready to release because of the ongoing investigation … it was definitely, you know, 1, 2, 3, 4 good steps in the right direction. And so, you know, to come from thousands of tips from A to Z and to finally have that direction ... it’s not relief but it gets us excited, you know, because we know we finally have a good direction we’re going in. We have an arrest, we have the guy that we know is responsible for her disappearance and that is definitely a positive. But don’t get me wrong, that task force that’s working out there, they know they have a lot of work to do left. As a matter of fact, our crime scene technicians are still at Lavergne’s residence at this hour.


Q: A lot of work to be done, such as …? What are the next steps for you guys?

A: Okay well first of all we’re searching his property right now … things such as, have to be determined if there’s any evidence value. Our technicians are going to go through his residence and the property around it based on the search warrant that we have and they’ll have to pick up things that they feel may have evidence value. And once that’s all brought in and have to be laid out and the detectives will have to come in and work with the crime scene technicians and make that determination. So that within itself is very difficult. But, you know, obviously people know phone records, cell phone records, all that comes into play. It’s not something that we have … that’s just within clicking on the Internet and pulling it. All that has to be subpoenaed, that takes time, a judge has to sign it, it has to be sent, it has to be filled out, sent back to us. Any DNA that is collected … unfortunately we don’t solve crimes in an hour like you see on TV. DNA has to be sent off, it has to be processed. Then you have to have something to compare it to. You know, just because you have a DNA – DNA from something – if you don’t have anything to compare it to, whether it would be the victim or person who was at the scene or the suspect then that’s basically all that you have … an XYZ DNA sample that you haven’t matched with anyone at all. So a lot of different things we’re doing … also areas that we are going to be searching for possible locations that Mickey may have been placed. We have a lot of ideas that we think that, you know, we try to put ourselves in his mindset as to what he would have done at that point and so we’re going to be searching those particular areas. And again, we’re going to call for the assistance of the members of our task force and their resources to help us in that as well.


Q: Has he given you anything? Any information – is he talking to you guys or is he strictly “talk to my lawyer” right now?

A: Well when initially was brought in – and I’m basing this off of one of the conversations I had with one of the lead detectives in this investigation – he did talk in general, you know, general conversation. But you have to understand, and this isn’t just with the Shunick case but in any case, someone that has been in the system, a criminal, and has a background and has dealt with law enforcement, has a system. And they’ll come in and it’s kind of a, you know, “let’s see what you have or what I have”, and so they’re going to fish us … basically try to seek out what information we have to determine if they’re going to even talk or not. And so, you know, that may have been the case but right now, you know, he came in and we put some question to him and unfortunately he feels the need – which is his right – to have an attorney. And so we’ll have to find other means to continue to piece our case together. But we still feel that we have a very strong case.


Q: How long ago did you get this tip on him? Can you share that?

A: Yeah, if I’m not mistaken, I believe the actual tip came in in June – 14th maybe – we received information from a concerned citizen about the Z-71 pickup. If you remember correctly I believe we had three to four vehicles of interest that were in the immediate area that we were very interested in. And we eliminated three – look, they were in the area, they confirmed they were in the area, but they all had, you know, credible stories and credible information that we felt they were not involved. But we never could find the Z-71. Not the driver, not the person, why wouldn’t that person come forward? Because you would know if you were driving in that area at the time. Fortunately because of the volunteers, because of the friends of the Mickey Shunick family just did such an excellent job with social media and getting the word out – continue to get the word out – that we just felt they would have known. And so we started investigating his background, with the plate, with the owner Lavergne and his background and then based off of that we were able to discover that, in fact, the vehicle had been burned and then after it was burned, that same day that it was reported stolen. You know, that’s some powerful information on top of some other things that we have that we haven’t released yet. So once we were able to gather everything – to get to the day that we were, which was yesterday – that we sat down with members of the district attorney’s office and we felt we have a strong case to get the warrants that we did, which were first degree murder and aggravated kidnapping – and put this guy in jail.


Q: Now Corporal, y’all said that he was arrested yesterday after a traffic stop on I-10 near I-49. What was it that he did that caused officers to pull him over? Was it just a coincidence that he happened to be pulled over and that ended up leading to his arrest when they discovered that he had a warrant?

A: Well, in the case we had been (pause, as if to think about answering) monitoring the uh, his whereabouts and his goings so we knew that he was working at the time – if I’m not mistaken he works for an oilfield company in an offshore capacity – and so we had been monitoring him. And so when it was told to us that he would be traveling, that information was passed on to the Louisiana State Police who were in the area as to what was happening. The initial charge, or the probable cause, for the violation – what they pulled him over for – I don’t have that information. But what I can tell you is, when they verified who he was and they ran his name it came back with the warrant for the registration as a sex offender.


Q: Now on that we learned that his driver’s license had been altered? To hide the fact that he was a sex offender? Maybe if you can just educate me – I’m not sure – sex offenders have something on their driver’s license that show, that signal, that they are on the registry?

A: That’s correct. I’m not exactly sure of the placement but on the driver’s license itself, they have “registered sex offender” on it if I’m not mistaken. And it’s my understanding that when he went to purchase the vehicle – the new vehicle – that that information was covered up so that it would not show up when he made the purchase. If I’m not mistaken.


Q: A question or so, Corporal Mouton, about I guess procedure and some of the decisions that you guys have to make. Now you mentioned a couple times about information that hasn’t been released. Maybe not just this case but in all investigations in general, why can you release some stuff and why can’t you? There’s been an arrest here … some might say “well, now all bets are off, let’s release it”.

A: You would think that would be the logic …

Q: Again, I’m one of those that watch TV and the crimes are all solved in 48 minutes, minus commercials.

A: You would think that would be the logic behind it but it’s not. You know, when people come in and provide statements and information to us, we want it to be the first time they provide that information. And if we provide details of crimes that only the perpetrator knows, and so when the person comes in to confess to the crime, or the witness comes in to give the information, if they don’t give that information that only that perpetrator would know, then chances are we would have to look into how credible that witness is or how credible this person that’s coming in to confess to this crime. So it’s real important that the details about the crime that are held for the investigation, until the investigation is complete and submitted to the district attorney’s office, that we’re able to verify people’s stories as to how credible the information they’re providing to us … You know, the second is that we don’t want them to be tried in the public. Everyone, regardless of what you think of someone, or the charges that they face, it’s so important that they be afforded that fair trial.

Q: Part of our country

A: And whether you like it or not, that’s exactly right. That’s the process. And so, it’s so important that we afford that. And another reason would be that we wouldn’t want a change of venue. You know, if everybody’s tainted with the information … You know, we want this suspect to be tried in our court system and where the crime was (sic) occurred. And if a jury pool cannot be pulled together and be unbiased in the decision that they make, then it’s going to be moved and we don’t want that.


Q: That’s the other question I had … when the news broke yesterday evening, the passions that were inflamed last night among everybody in Acadiana and when his name was released to the public last night, it was almost as if the majority – and this is on social media sites like facebook – it was almost as if the majority of the people had already tried and convicted him in their minds. What’s the possibility, do you think, that we’ll be able to find a fair, unbiased jury in Lafayette?

A: Ah, I don’t know if I want to give an opinion about that. I feel that there’s still people out there that still don’t know all the aspects of this case, one reason we don’t release all the information for one reason. And two, there’s some people out there that just don’t follow it as closely. You know, you talk about social media – definitely social media was our friend in this investigation, but it also hurt us in a lot of ways. A lot of ways in that it released information or there was rumor of information that wasn’t accurate. And, you know, it spread so fast, to curb that inaccuracy that that information that’s going out – is just very difficult. So, you know, there was a suspect’s name that was brought up early in this investigation and we really didn’t think this was the guy we were going in the right direction, but all these different sources were telling us things but it was all second and third hand information. So, you know, it can help you and it can hurt you. But I really feel that currently that any individual in this case would stand a fair trial here in the 15th Judicial District.


Q: Paul, about 20 seconds, what’s the very next step for you guys?

A: Process all this evidence, continue to interview witnesses or people that may have information now that the suspect’s name’s out. We’re going to get more people that have – “Oh I saw that guy here or I noticed this about him” and so that’s going to open up different avenues of directions that we’re going to need to go. And most importantly, most importantly of all, is to locate Mickey Shunick. And that – we will not stop until we can do that and put the Shunick family at ease.
 
I cannot find it anywhere but I swear I read the truck had been 'stripped' - most thought this was to prove the truck was stolen...or perhaps it was stripped by someone actually robbing the truck where it was left, who knows. But youre right - someone in TX could be walking around with a cell phone or backpack belonging to Mickey. Or it could be burned in the truck. Since LE have the burned truck Im sure we would have heard if something major was in it...but maybe not?

Still looking for the quotes about the state of the truck when it was found - Im thinking that may have been comments and not in the article but I cant even find comments about it now!
Are you sure you're not thinking of the other truck that was involved in that tool shop fire? http://www.katc.com/news/tool-shop-in-lafayette-burglarized-and-burned/
 
New Details about traffic stop, with audio

"Many have expressed their frustration over the apparent lack of information coming from the police department about the case. Mouton said this is done in order to protect the integrity of the case and to avoid the unwanted possibility of a change of venue in Lavergne’s trial."

http://kpel965.com/new-details-about-lavergne-traffic-stop-investigation-process-audio/

eta: listening to audio now. They referred to him as "Brandon Lee Lavergne.......hmm...

says they are still searching BSL's property now (even though they said the search at his house was over the other day) THIS is why I said earlier, I wouldn't suggest anyone going out there on their own. You don't want to accidentally tamper with evidence. Let LE do their job.

truck burned same day reported stolen


RE: "Many have expressed their frustration over the apparent lack of information coming from the police department about the case. Mouton said this is done in order to protect the integrity of the case and to avoid the unwanted possibility of a change of venue in Lavergne’s trial."


Motions for change of venue are frequently filed by the defense in high profile cases. However the motions are seldom granted by Judges. In Florida's history there has only been three; Ted Bundy, Murder of a State Trooper, & in the Casey Anthony trial the jurors were brought in from an outside county.

'The change of venue motion was denied by the Judge in the prolific 'Serial Killer Derick Todd Lee' trial in 2002. Doubtful that Brandon Scott Lavergne's trial will be any different..

[PDF]
05KA2098 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. DERRICK TODD LEE

www.lasc.org/opinions/2008/05KA2098.opn.pdf
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
Derrick Todd Lee, with the May 31, 2002, first-degree murder of Charlotte ...... Defendant contends the trial court's denial of his motion for change of venue ...
 
You cannot rule out some random person giving him a ride. Picking up a hitchhiker is one of the dumbest things someone can do, but people STILL do it.
 
As my original post stated I have been here long before Mickey went missing. I have read every post in every thread and I am well aware of what each person believes. And just as well, there have been many others that have left because they felt bullied for sharing their opinions. I am well aware that my theory is not a welcome one.

I stated my opinion early on and I will state it again for clarification that I do believe that truck hit Mickey in front of the station. I do not think she is under the truck. I think she was either grabbed here or made a start off down the street and somehow ended up by the printing services building and that foot bridge. From there I think she and the bike were taken to WB and dumped.

Once I stated my opinion I have had to defend it daily and I would much rather spend my time looking into other matters in regards to this case. It is not conducive to the forum for y'all to be continuously trying to make me change my opinion. I will be happy to debate it but I think all has been said on both sides of this argument.

Here is my question, and the issue that makes me doubt that he hit her right there in front of the Circle K. Since he is a predator, and he was following her, planning this abduction, why the heck would he choose that specific location, right in front of all of the customers at the station and the obvious cameras, to hit and grab her? Why wouldn't he wait a block or two when it was more deserted?
 
I wonder how strong their case is against him? If it is pretty strong, this would definitely be a death penalty case. That could be used to get him to talk about what he did with her body.
 
A big :tyou: to megsy for transcribing!

KPEL Interview, Audio at this Link!

Q: When something like this happens, and we know that there’s a whole bunch of other steps to go … thinking in terms of the alphabet this is maybe A or B I don’t know … but when you reach this stage and you’ve been at least able to string some of these points together and get an arrest, what’s the feeling in the department? Is it relief? Is it “it’s a small victory but boy there’s a lot to go in this war to finally put this case to rest”?

A: Yeah, you know, we’ve been working on this case and our multi-jurisdiction task force agencies all across this area – nationwide – have been assisting us in anything we’ve asked for and to finally get in a direction – a positive step – before I think we were stepping out in just about every direction there was because everything was on the table. And so when we received the information about this particular truck and this tip and as we gained more information not only about the owner – about Lavergne – but about the history of the truck … that it had been burned, and that it was reported stolen, we were able to verify through the video at Lafayette Consolidated Government along with other video that it was in fact Lavergne’s truck that traveled behind Mickey. Uh, some other information that we’re not just yet ready to release because of the ongoing investigation … it was definitely, you know, 1, 2, 3, 4 good steps in the right direction. And so, you know, to come from thousands of tips from A to Z and to finally have that direction ... it’s not relief but it gets us excited, you know, because we know we finally have a good direction we’re going in. We have an arrest, we have the guy that we know is responsible for her disappearance and that is definitely a positive. But don’t get me wrong, that task force that’s working out there, they know they have a lot of work to do left. As a matter of fact, our crime scene technicians are still at Lavergne’s residence at this hour.


Q: A lot of work to be done, such as …? What are the next steps for you guys?

A: Okay well first of all we’re searching his property right now … things such as, have to be determined if there’s any evidence value. Our technicians are going to go through his residence and the property around it based on the search warrant that we have and they’ll have to pick up things that they feel may have evidence value. And once that’s all brought in and have to be laid out and the detectives will have to come in and work with the crime scene technicians and make that determination. So that within itself is very difficult. But, you know, obviously people know phone records, cell phone records, all that comes into play. It’s not something that we have … that’s just within clicking on the Internet and pulling it. All that has to be subpoenaed, that takes time, a judge has to sign it, it has to be sent, it has to be filled out, sent back to us. Any DNA that is collected … unfortunately we don’t solve crimes in an hour like you see on TV. DNA has to be sent off, it has to be processed. Then you have to have something to compare it to. You know, just because you have a DNA – DNA from something – if you don’t have anything to compare it to, whether it would be the victim or person who was at the scene or the suspect then that’s basically all that you have … an XYZ DNA sample that you haven’t matched with anyone at all. So a lot of different things we’re doing … also areas that we are going to be searching for possible locations that Mickey may have been placed. We have a lot of ideas that we think that, you know, we try to put ourselves in his mindset as to what he would have done at that point and so we’re going to be searching those particular areas. And again, we’re going to call for the assistance of the members of our task force and their resources to help us in that as well.


Q: Has he given you anything? Any information – is he talking to you guys or is he strictly “talk to my lawyer” right now?

A: Well when initially was brought in – and I’m basing this off of one of the conversations I had with one of the lead detectives in this investigation – he did talk in general, you know, general conversation. But you have to understand, and this isn’t just with the Shunick case but in any case, someone that has been in the system, a criminal, and has a background and has dealt with law enforcement, has a system. And they’ll come in and it’s kind of a, you know, “let’s see what you have or what I have”, and so they’re going to fish us … basically try to seek out what information we have to determine if they’re going to even talk or not. And so, you know, that may have been the case but right now, you know, he came in and we put some question to him and unfortunately he feels the need – which is his right – to have an attorney. And so we’ll have to find other means to continue to piece our case together. But we still feel that we have a very strong case.


Q: How long ago did you get this tip on him? Can you share that?

A: Yeah, if I’m not mistaken, I believe the actual tip came in in June – 14th maybe – we received information from a concerned citizen about the Z-71 pickup. If you remember correctly I believe we had three to four vehicles of interest that were in the immediate area that we were very interested in. And we eliminated three – look, they were in the area, they confirmed they were in the area, but they all had, you know, credible stories and credible information that we felt they were not involved. But we never could find the Z-71. Not the driver, not the person, why wouldn’t that person come forward? Because you would know if you were driving in that area at the time. Fortunately because of the volunteers, because of the friends of the Mickey Shunick family just did such an excellent job with social media and getting the word out – continue to get the word out – that we just felt they would have known. And so we started investigating his background, with the plate, with the owner Lavergne and his background and then based off of that we were able to discover that, in fact, the vehicle had been burned and then after it was burned, that same day that it was reported stolen. You know, that’s some powerful information on top of some other things that we have that we haven’t released yet. So once we were able to gather everything – to get to the day that we were, which was yesterday – that we sat down with members of the district attorney’s office and we felt we have a strong case to get the warrants that we did, which were first degree murder and aggravated kidnapping – and put this guy in jail.


Q: Now Corporal, y’all said that he was arrested yesterday after a traffic stop on I-10 near I-49. What was it that he did that caused officers to pull him over? Was it just a coincidence that he happened to be pulled over and that ended up leading to his arrest when they discovered that he had a warrant?

A: Well, in the case we had been (pause, as if to think about answering) monitoring the uh, his whereabouts and his goings so we knew that he was working at the time – if I’m not mistaken he works for an oilfield company in an offshore capacity – and so we had been monitoring him. And so when it was told to us that he would be traveling, that information was passed on to the Louisiana State Police who were in the area as to what was happening. The initial charge, or the probable cause, for the violation – what they pulled him over for – I don’t have that information. But what I can tell you is, when they verified who he was and they ran his name it came back with the warrant for the registration as a sex offender.


Q: Now on that we learned that his driver’s license had been altered? To hide the fact that he was a sex offender? Maybe if you can just educate me – I’m not sure – sex offenders have something on their driver’s license that show, that signal, that they are on the registry?

A: That’s correct. I’m not exactly sure of the placement but on the driver’s license itself, they have “registered sex offender” on it if I’m not mistaken. And it’s my understanding that when he went to purchase the vehicle – the new vehicle – that that information was covered up so that it would not show up when he made the purchase. If I’m not mistaken.


Q: A question or so, Corporal Mouton, about I guess procedure and some of the decisions that you guys have to make. Now you mentioned a couple times about information that hasn’t been released. Maybe not just this case but in all investigations in general, why can you release some stuff and why can’t you? There’s been an arrest here … some might say “well, now all bets are off, let’s release it”.

A: You would think that would be the logic …

Q: Again, I’m one of those that watch TV and the crimes are all solved in 48 minutes, minus commercials.

A: You would think that would be the logic behind it but it’s not. You know, when people come in and provide statements and information to us, we want it to be the first time they provide that information. And if we provide details of crimes that only the perpetrator knows, and so when the person comes in to confess to the crime, or the witness comes in to give the information, if they don’t give that information that only that perpetrator would know, then chances are we would have to look into how credible that witness is or how credible this person that’s coming in to confess to this crime. So it’s real important that the details about the crime that are held for the investigation, until the investigation is complete and submitted to the district attorney’s office, that we’re able to verify people’s stories as to how credible the information they’re providing to us … You know, the second is that we don’t want them to be tried in the public. Everyone, regardless of what you think of someone, or the charges that they face, it’s so important that they be afforded that fair trial.

Q: Part of our country

A: And whether you like it or not, that’s exactly right. That’s the process. And so, it’s so important that we afford that. And another reason would be that we wouldn’t want a change of venue. You know, if everybody’s tainted with the information … You know, we want this suspect to be tried in our court system and where the crime was (sic) occurred. And if a jury pool cannot be pulled together and be unbiased in the decision that they make, then it’s going to be moved and we don’t want that.


Q: That’s the other question I had … when the news broke yesterday evening, the passions that were inflamed last night among everybody in Acadiana and when his name was released to the public last night, it was almost as if the majority – and this is on social media sites like facebook – it was almost as if the majority of the people had already tried and convicted him in their minds. What’s the possibility, do you think, that we’ll be able to find a fair, unbiased jury in Lafayette?

A: Ah, I don’t know if I want to give an opinion about that. I feel that there’s still people out there that still don’t know all the aspects of this case, one reason we don’t release all the information for one reason. And two, there’s some people out there that just don’t follow it as closely. You know, you talk about social media – definitely social media was our friend in this investigation, but it also hurt us in a lot of ways. A lot of ways in that it released information or there was rumor of information that wasn’t accurate. And, you know, it spread so fast, to curb that inaccuracy that that information that’s going out – is just very difficult. So, you know, there was a suspect’s name that was brought up early in this investigation and we really didn’t think this was the guy we were going in the right direction, but all these different sources were telling us things but it was all second and third hand information. So, you know, it can help you and it can hurt you. But I really feel that currently that any individual in this case would stand a fair trial here in the 15th Judicial District.


Q: Paul, about 20 seconds, what’s the very next step for you guys?

A: Process all this evidence, continue to interview witnesses or people that may have information now that the suspect’s name’s out. We’re going to get more people that have – “Oh I saw that guy here or I noticed this about him” and so that’s going to open up different avenues of directions that we’re going to need to go. And most importantly, most importantly of all, is to locate Mickey Shunick. And that – we will not stop until we can do that and put the Shunick family at ease.
 
Here is my question, and the issue that makes me doubt that he hit her right there in front of the Circle K. Since he is a predator, and he was following her, planning this abduction, why the heck would he choose that specific location, right in front of all of the customers at the station and the obvious cameras, to hit and grab her? Why wouldn't he wait a block or two when it was more deserted?

IMO, he did wait a few blocks...
 
I'm familiar with the area, Boudin. What do you mean they've been searching the wrong place? That house was at 143 Elaine Ln in CP two years ago when it was listed for sale.

The town of Church Point is in Acadia Parish but it doesn't mean that some people with a Church Point address don't live in St. Landry Parish. The city of Eunice is in St. Landry Parish. I have a Eunice address but live in Acadia Parish.

This warrant for arrest also confirms his physical address as 143 Elaine Lane Church Point: http://www1.katc.com/files/Affidavit and warrants for arrest of Brandon Scott Lavergne.pdf

Sorry, just not following you.

According to the map that is shown with this house it is located right near downtown Churchpoint. BSL's home is north of CP close to Lawtell in the community of Swords.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/143-Elaine-Ln-Church-Point-LA-70525/2133139363_zpid/
 
OK Just one more for y'all

:fence::fence::fence:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh7YyoDD138"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nh7YyoDD138[/ame]
 
I wonder how strong their case is against him? If it is pretty strong, this would definitely be a death penalty case. That could be used to get him to talk about what he did with her body.

I would have to believe it's pretty strong. I would think, and someone could correct me, that you don't come out the gate with the strongest charge possible. It seems if their case wasn't such a good one they would have come in with lesser charges and then continue to investigate and possibly accelarate the charges as they found more evidence.
 
Here is my question, and the issue that makes me doubt that he hit her right there in front of the Circle K. Since he is a predator, and he was following her, planning this abduction, why the heck would he choose that specific location, right in front of all of the customers at the station and the obvious cameras, to hit and grab her? Why wouldn't he wait a block or two when it was more deserted?

That and the fact that LE's spidey senses went up when the one vehicle out of three or four (according to mouton) didn't come forward. Makes me think they didn't have the incident on tape at that time. (I think they got video from the Advertiser's office, possibly the bike in the bed of his truck).
 
I would have to believe it's pretty strong. I would think, and someone could correct me, that you don't come out the gate with the strongest charge possible. It seems if their case wasn't such a good one they would have come in with lesser charges and then continue to investigate and possibly accelarate the charges as they found more evidence.

That is what I would assume. Unless the family for some reason does not want it, I'd imagine prosecutors will attempt to make a deal in exchange for him telling what he did with her.

I cannot see him going to trial and being found not guilty, even without knowing what evidence they have or don't have against him.
 
I really do not think Mickey was left in TX. I think he probably left Mickey the very night/morning he took her. I don't believe he took her to his home, either. He had a serious girlfriend, one never knows when one might pop in etc...or be there the next morning. I think this all happened within 2-3 hours and he went back to his house "finished" with everything, until it came time to get rid of his truck.

I think LE had to treat his home as a potential crime scene and take away anything that might tell them something. If a carpet had a stain, for example, they would cut part of that away, and take computers, any other devices, stained clothing, shoes, etc...but it does not mean that Mickey was there for sure. That is what they are trying to determine, IMO.

I think the truck held all of the evidence and even burned, may still hold enough. But as to Mickey's whereabouts-I think she must be someplace within a 25-mile range of where she was taken. A huge area to search, and hoping that pings, etc. can develop some specific locations to search soon.
I also suspect that the time of the video taken from the Advertiser is closer to 4 AM than 2 AM and that whatever happened to Mickey happened between 2 AM and the time on the video. I believe that he passed the Advertiser on his way home. She is either on his property or close. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that he took her back to his place and hid her before moving her to wherever she is now. Interesting that he replaced the skirting around his trailer recently and LE investigated that area.
 
I would have to believe it's pretty strong. I would think, and someone could correct me, that you don't come out the gate with the strongest charge possible. It seems if their case wasn't such a good one they would have come in with lesser charges and then continue to investigate and possibly accelarate the charges as they found more evidence.

That's my feeling too. Casey Anthony comes to mind. She wasn't charged w 1st degree until the remains were found. If I'm remembering that correctly.
 
It dawns me on at this point three things:
1. This guy spent time at Central Louisiana State Hospital. For those who are not familiar with this hospital, it houses severely criminally insane folks. I personally visited their forensics unit. which housed at the time probably 20 adult men. I was told by the nurse in charge as I walked throuh the door: Do not lay your keys down. Charles will eat them. While I was visiting one patient put his fist through the door window because another patient had peaked through it and it set the patient off. Hannibal HAS NOTHING on these guys.
2. Someone was paying for all those appeals (4 to 5) when BSL was in prison. Lawyers are not cheap.
3. I first thought that BSL had a female accomplice, and I still believe that. However at this point I believe it is very possible he had a male accomplice also. Someone was funding this behavior and someone else was doing some thinking for him. I say that because there is two different lines of thinking going on here. The first line is whiting out the SO on your driver's license. Not so bright. However, the second line of thinking -- going out of state to buy a truck that was a silverado and not a Z71 so that your friends would think you always drove a Silverado and that was NOT your truck in the video -- now -- that kind of thinking is a different thought process. It is coming from a different mindset. I am sure there is some different contributions here -- I am just not sure where they are coming from. The reason I say this is because the kind of guy who spends time at that particular hospital is the kind of guy who would bump a girl off her bike and kill her, but he is not smart enough to cover his tracks this well by himself.

I also think it is important to find the dates that those houses burned and match them up with the dates someone in that area went missing and was never found. I think he burns to get rid of evidence.
 
So we know either by rumor or fact (cannot recall) he took off the door handles inside the truck right?
"MOO" Thinking out loud


This is the first I have heard of this and don't think it is a fact.
 
How would he explain to them why he needed a ride? IMO, he ditched the truck and hitch hiked to rent a car and then returned to burn the truck. He would not want to burn the truck before he got a ride because it would draw too much attention from whoever gave him a ride. Somehow, i don't think he would have contacted anyone he knew because they would be able to place him in the area.
Just my opinion though.



I don't remember this but it would be very interesting to hear. If the jeans are important, we'll hear about them at trial.


BBM
I wondered the same thing. However, according to Megsy's terrific timeline:

1. He ditched the truck somewhere in San Jacinto Co. on or around May 26.
2. On May 26, he reports the truck stolen in Montgomery Co. (about 35 miles away from where he ditched the truck)
3. On May 31, at 9:51 am, he rents a car in Spring, Tx, which is in Harris Co.
(about 20 miles from where he filed the police report, and over 50 miles away from where he ditched the truck)
4. The burned truck was discovered on May 31. We don't know the time of day, or if it was actually burning at the time of discovery.

There was time for him to set fire to the truck after he rented the car. However, he had already reported it stolen 5 days before it was found, and he was on the move and very busy for those 5 days.
IMO

ETA: according to the press conference, LE believes he set it on fire the same day he reported it stolen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
129
Guests online
2,133
Total visitors
2,262

Forum statistics

Threads
601,774
Messages
18,129,687
Members
231,139
Latest member
Maktub
Back
Top