LA LA - Eugenie Boisfontaine, 34, Baton Rouge, 13 June 1997 - "Killing Fields"

[Hiandmighty]

They were cutting back and forth between Metairie Road scenes and Elmwood and those streets aren't near each other (as in the way it was shown).

 

[bessie]

So, per Sanchez, of all the DNA samples submitted, the only individual who cannot be excluded is the ex.

 

[Hiandmighty]

You don't behave that way and show up with 3 defense attys, one of whom was a state prosecutor formerly, if you have nothing to hide.

 

[bessie]

I didn't realize today is Eugenie's birthday. She would have been 53.

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but the ex sure ain't lookin' too good. Wouldn't it be something if after all these years, when the general consensus held that Eugenie was the victim of a serial kiler, it turns out the killer was the usual suspect, an ex-husband.

 

[ObserverEagle]

This is my first post, so someone please correct me if I've misunderstood or am wrong. I believe the person who posted before that the ex-husband is the person named in the child's education suit/filing is correct. He has a New Orleans address, as opposed to his brother (that another poster named), and it looks like he was remarried in and had a daughter in 1996 which seems to tie into aubrey's statement.

 

[Hiandmighty]

Yup, and I really want to know why they excluded him so quickly and easily 18 years ago.

Happy birthday memories to Eugenie's family and friends.

 

[bessie]

Yup, and I really want to know why they excluded him so quickly and easily 18 years ago.

Happy birthday memories to Eugenie's family and friends.

Tunnel vision in the face of emerging serial killings. Ex was remarried, had a young child. He would easily have been dismissed, as DTL, SVG, et al continued to pile up the bodies. JMO

 

[kimi_SFC]

I didn't realize today is Eugenie's birthday. She would have been 53.

I don't want to jump to conclusions, but the ex sure ain't lookin' too good. Wouldn't it be something if after all these years, when the general consensus held that Eugenie was the victim of a serial kiler, it turns out the killer was the usual suspect, an ex-husband.

Thank you bessie for letting us know that today is Eugenie's birthday

:floating:
:rose:

I am in the process of catching up on episodes 1 & 2 and awaiting the Season Finale. ITA, the ex-husband appears entirely suspect to me. It was something to watch the DNA exclude the serial killer. I hope justice is finally delivered to Ms. Boisfontaine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hiandmighty]

Tunnel vision in the face of emerging serial killings. Ex was remarried, had a young child. He would easily have been dismissed, as DTL, SVG, et al continued to pile up the bodies. JMO

I agree that this is probably what happened.

 

[bessie]

No sleuthing the ex.

 

[ObserverEagle]

Tunnel vision in the face of emerging serial killings. Ex was remarried, had a young child. He would easily have been dismissed, as DTL, SVG, et al continued to pile up the bodies. JMO

I've been trying to figure out how they seeimgly wrote the ex off so easily, even back then with minimal forensics. This makes so much sense though, given how many SKs appeared to have been operating in Louisiana in the time frame. Happy Birthday Eugenie! Hopefully you will have justice soon.

 

[Sylv]

Per the most recent episode and the DNA results:
I'm beginning to think that "Robert" never existed and that's why the victim was so vague when speaking about him. She could have been seeing her ex husband and was too ashamed go admit it to her friends since 1) he was remarried and 2) he divorced her and left her broken hearted.
As for the multiple DNA on the underpants: when her deceased friends daughter said they helped the victim "get ready" for her dated with Robert, what did that entail? Could she have borrowed an outfit from the friend? Could she have borrowed underpants, something "sexier" than what the victim owned. Could the underpants have been worn by the friend and not laundered before Eugenie wore them?
As for the Alligator Bar: Eugenie told her sorority sister that she was going with Robert to the Alligator Bar on their next date. They know the date Eugenie went missing. Could there be bartenders or waitresses who worked there and perhaps always worked certain days of the week? Did the owner keep any records? Maybe even copies of employee schedules? Employees that the detectives could interview?

 

[charminglane]

Let us rejoice in Eugenie on her birthday.
That her case is seeing action and that her killer may be caught.

 

[bessie]

Per the most recent episode and the DNA results:
I'm beginning to think that "Robert" never existed and that's why the victim was so vague when speaking about him. She could have been seeing her ex husband and was too ashamed go admit it to her friends since 1) he was remarried and 2) he divorced her and left her broken hearted.
As for the multiple DNA on the underpants: when her deceased friends daughter said they helped the victim "get ready" for her dated with Robert, what did that entail? Could she have borrowed an outfit from the friend? Could she have borrowed underpants, something "sexier" than what the victim owned. Could the underpants have been worn by the friend and not laundered before Eugenie wore them?
As for the Alligator Bar: Eugenie told her sorority sister that she was going with Robert to the Alligator Bar on their next date. They know the date Eugenie went missing. Could there be bartenders or waitresses who worked there and perhaps always worked certain days of the week? Did the owner keep any records? Maybe even copies of employee schedules? Employees that the detectives could interview?

Underwear swapping is unlikely, imo. But...laundering clothes does not always remove DNA. Theoretically, DNA could have remained from previous encounters.

As a way of reference, I'm sharing the following link. The criteria doesn't match the circumstances precisely, but closely enough to support my point about residual DNA.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497315300508


If one DNA deposit found in the underpants is from the killer's semen, that would mean they had sex, she dressed, and THEN the perp killed her. Not the MO of your typical random killer.

As for bar employees, if someone remembers seeing Eugenie, it would be wonderful if s/he'd speak up. Unfortunately, if it hasn't happened yet, it probably won't. What could happen -- also unlikely, but not impossible -- is someone who has information about the ex that s/he's held back all these years, will come forward now.

 

[Sylv]

IMO, the ex husband has somewhat of a "nerdy" look. I would think if he walked into a bar with Eugenie it would stick out as somewhat of an odd coupling. Also, he would look out of place in a biker/college student bar.
I would have thought that 18 years ago the ex husband would have been the main suspect and ruled out. If that was overlooked, I seriously doubt they were diligent enough to interview bar employees. If the only contact they had with the bar owner was what was shown on the show, they didn't ask him nearly enough questions for someone connected to the possible last place Eugenie was at before she was murdered.
Also, did anyone else think that the ex-husband's vehicle, a hummer, didn't fit his look? I wonder what he was driving in 1997?

 

[Angusdarlin]

I think in the episode (#3) that aired this week, we got a glimpse of Robert's full name. I didn't get a chance to re-watch yet, but I think it was Robert <modsnip> [sp?], which is still a fairly common name.

On a different note, in addition to Derrick Todd Lee there was another serial killer active in that area around the same time of Eugenie's murder - Sean Vincent Gillis - I wonder if he has been excluded yet?

I believe Gillis was excluded. He also loved to brag about his crimes, his victims. He never owned up to this one.

 

[bessie]

I believe Gillis was excluded. He also loved to brag about his crimes, his victims. He never owned up to this one.

True. He also stabbed and mutilated his victims.

 

[Deleted member 165632]

Like everyone, I am wondering more than ever why the ex was not further investigated back in 1997... remains to be seen. But one thing I thought about was that if he was quick to lawyer up now, it may have been the case in 1997. He may have put up roadblocks for the cops back then.

In terms of DNA- the DNA technician explained that the samples from Eugenie were too degraded for CODIS, but that they could at least be used for manual to include/exclude. For the husband's sample, the technician stated she could NOT include him, NOR could she exclude him.

I'm sure his attorneys could have a field day with that.

This is a tough case no matter how you cut it. Even if they are able to make a case (regardless of who they charge) I wonder what it will be like to prosecute it. It just feels like it would be a tough one for any DA to take to trial.

Like Det. Aubrey said at one point in the episode, that he'd like it for DNA (testing) to advance again so that it could confirm or deny.

I'm hoping that these cops get a chance to solve the case... but it is tough.

 

[zippitydoda]

You don't behave that way and show up with 3 defense attys, one of whom was a state prosecutor formerly, if you have nothing to hide.

Well, that's one way to look at it.

This is an unsolved 18+ year old murder investigation, and LE has had no real suspect in all this time. If I was the ex husband, I'd lawyer up, even if I was 100% innocent. I don't have to like that he did that, and is also not cooperating, but it is his right, and, some would advise, a smart thing to do.

The need for three lawyers to show up? Well, call me cynical, but I've watched plenty of defense attorneys over the years basking in any and all brushes with fame and/or being in front of a camera. I would expect that the Discovery production team had to advise all that this would be filmed - so maybe that enticed the entourage of attorneys.

The ex husband now knows that the DNA evidence samples are so degraded that they can not be used to identify the suspect. And I don't know the weight of "can't exclude or include" identification.

It is so awful to watch what a monster feels compelled to do to a victim. I am grateful that LE has reopened her case, and if it is never solved, I can hope that the new investigation causes the monster turmoil for the rest of their lives. They may have thought they got away with it, and I hope that they now have to look over their shoulder every minute.

Happy Birthday Eugenie.

 

[cheg]

JMO...
I'm fairly new to posting but I have watched this show from the beginning. IIRC, she died from blunt force trauma to the head-back of the head? It seems that a serial killer would relish in the killing of his victim and would likely prolong the event such as strangulation or stabbing, although I'm aware that this is not the case with all SKs. Hitting somebody in the back of the head sounds to me like it might have been done quickly out of anger. What if Eugenie had a rendezvous with her ex husband during which they had sex...then she threatened to tell the ex husbands wife (who had already had a child by him?). That might make him angry enough to want to get rid of her during which he hit her on the head out of rage then dumps her body and puts her personal items in a place he knows she frequents (the walking trail). Just thinking out loud.