MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #4

[ElemWatson]

Welcome! And I agree I don't see a random crime here at all. I think the idea of a boogie man in the woods seems far fetched too, and think it's far more likely that someone was able to approach her/ get near her simply because she was kind and trusting. And I think someone who knew her, was able to get closer to her for this reason. JMO.

Agree it seems like someone she knew. Given VM had lived in NYC for a bit, she'd have been wary, and unlikely to get drawn into a close interaction with a stranger in the woods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Steleheart]

Some questions have been posed about how far speculation and sleuthing can go. I will answer the main ones now:

1) Regarding an automobile crash fatality that occurred not long after Vanessa was murdered: Until or unless LE connects the wreck/suicide to Vanessa's case it is not open for speculation/theorizing as related to this murder. Happening in the same general time frame as this murder and social media or other internet rumors are not enough to warrant it's entry into this discussion.

2) Regarding police blotter reports in the days before and after Vanessa was killed: Until or unless LE gives us some reason to believe every suspicious vehicle/person report/barking dog or babysitter call are connected to this killing they are not to factor into this discussion.

If anyone has a question about what is or what is not allowed please private message a mod or an admin. If anyone feels the discussion has entered an area that is not allowed please alert on the post or posts so a moderator can evaluate the situation.

Finally, part of what makes this one of the largest true crime forums on the web is that a certain level of respect can be expected from fellow members. Lots of differing life experiences, professions, opinions and skills come to the table here from all walks of life. That makes for a lot of varied viewpoints and ideas. This is a good thing and makes for a lively discussion enabling all of us to see things from other perspectives than our own. Turning the case over and viewing it from all angles.

It should be expected that not everyone will agree. What a boring conversation that would be if we all sat around agreeing all day. That said - Disagree respectfully. Agree to disagree when you must.

On those rare occasions where someone simply rubs you wrong no matter what scroll and roll or make use of your ignore feature accessed via your settings.

thank you for caring about Vanessa,

tlcya

Thank you for that tlcya. I don't know how you do what you do but please keep doing that which you do so well.
And thank for all you do do.

 

[femalejogger]

Last night a young woman was grabbed off the street in Rockland, Maine. The short version: she was walking home from work at 11:30 pm, when a man in a ski mask jumped out of his vehicle, put her in a choke hold until she lost consciousness and tossed her in his car. Apparently she came to and was able to fight him off enough to cause erratic driving which caught the attention of a police officer. The officer pursued the car until it crashed and was able to apprehend the perpetrator after a short foot chase. It is all over the Maine media; here is just one article:
http://bangordailynews.com/2016/09/...ed-off-street-in-rockland/?ref=relatedSidebar

While I realize this MO is very different from VM, it caught my attention for a couple of reasons: stranger abductions rarely occur in Maine and it provides a window into how an abduction actually occurred because the victim survived to talk about it. I also think it would be worthwhile for Mass State Police to check this guy out for any connection to the Princeton area. While there may not be any connection, the suspect is from Portland which is about two hours from Princeton and he has a lengthy criminal record. A stranger abduction in Rockland is as incongruous as a murder in Princeton.

 

[Madeleine74]

Last night a young woman was grabbed off the street in Rockland, Maine. The short version: she was walking home from work at 11:30 pm, when a man in a ski mask jumped out of his vehicle, put her in a choke hold until she lost consciousness and tossed her in his car..

Sounds like a crime of opportunity and if so, this is how most of these kinds of crimes happen. A woman is out alone somewhere, a perp sees an opportunity to strike, and he (or they if it's more than 1) do. Much less often that a woman is out alone and someone she knows is the one who abducts her. Yes it happens, but it's not something we hear about as much.

 

[Kickoff61]

There are many scenarios. He could not know her at all, but crime of opportunity running in his area. He could have known of her through activities and/or association in vicinity or met her before but not necessarily been close in any relationship.

 

[Madeleine74]

I guess we'll just have to wait until there is something else to go on. I think most of the possibilities have been gone over many times now.
By the looks of your post count, you have been busy here. It's good to have so much imput.

I've been here many years and followed a bunch of different cases. My interest and following crime cases extends back further than my time on WS. One quickly sees common patterns emerge among cases, and the one that is universally true that perhaps may surprise "Internet Sleuthers" is that investigators/detectives do not share many details of cases with people outside the investigation. Sometimes an anonymous source will let something 'slip' to someone they know in the media, or maybe to a family member, but that's not the rule. Here's something else I learned: people who like to follow crime cases and discuss their opinions on the Internet are not seen by LE as part of the investigative team, not in the least. I had this very discussion with a couple detectives and a couple assistant DAs as I wanted to hear their thoughts. It's binary: one is either part of the case (i.e. works on the case within LE or is part of the DA or Defense or Court Staff/system) or one is "the public." And the public is not privy to the inner workings of an investigation. Detectives are not taking their directions from people of the web. I always assumed this was common sense and common knowledge.... but maybe it wasn't.

 

[Kickoff61]

If he lives close by, that gives him access to things at home to use, and easy to return, especially with any attempts to cover things up when things went wrong by her fighting him beyond what he may have expected.

 

[Kickoff61]

IF he had any plans to go back after dark to cover up more - thanks to quick response by law enforcement - that was stopped.

And IF anyone is associated in any way, it is possible they are acting differently , maybe detached without the expected reaction to horrific crime nearby. JMO

 

[femalejogger]

I've been here many years and followed a bunch of different cases. My interest and following crime cases extends back further than my time on WS. One quickly sees common patterns emerge among cases, and the one that is universally true that perhaps may surprise "Internet Sleuthers" is that investigators/detectives do not share many details of cases with people outside the investigation. Sometimes an anonymous source will let something 'slip' to someone they know in the media, or maybe to a family member, but that's not the rule. Here's something else I learned: people who like to follow crime cases and discuss their opinions on the Internet are not seen by LE as part of the investigative team, not in the least. I had this very discussion with a couple detectives and a couple assistant DAs as I wanted to hear their thoughts. It's binary: one is either part of the case (i.e. works on the case within LE or is part of the DA or Defense or Court Staff/system) or one is "the public." And the public is not privy to the inner workings of an investigation. Detectives are not taking their directions from people of the web. I always assumed this was common sense and common knowledge.... but maybe it wasn't.

I did not read Rocky1's comment to suggest somehow that she/he thought detectives were "taking directions from people of the web." I interpreted the comment as a simple compliment: she/he appreciates your contribution to the forum. Having followed this thread from day one, I have not seen evidence of any posters who think they are "part of the investigative team." Instead, I mostly see people with a connection to the location or the victim's demographics. For instance, I identified with VM because I often run alone and would not have hesitated to do exactly what she did. I, and probably others, find solace in this site as I try to comprehend the incomprehensible.

Solving a murder is one thing, building a case is an entirely different thing. We can easily throw out scenarios, but we don't have to make it stick in court. I am confident that most of the posters on this thread understand that distinction and have no delusions of being part of the investigative team.

 

[ThinkHard]

State Police searched the woods off Boylston Avenue in Princeton Monday for evidence in the death of Vanessa Marcotte.
By Michael Levenson and Travis Andersen Globe Staff August 11, 2016

It could be from this later search - **not certain**

That would be north of the crime scene. Didnt someone mention a search south of the crime scene? Or am I just confused.

 

[Mskin]

I did not read Rocky1's comment to suggest somehow that she/he thought detectives were "taking directions from people of the web." I interpreted the comment as a simple compliment: she/he appreciates your contribution to the forum. Having followed this thread from day one, I have not seen evidence of any posters who think they are "part of the investigative team." Instead, I mostly see people with a connection to the location or the victim's demographics. For instance, I identified with VM because I often run alone and would not have hesitated to do exactly what she did. I, and probably others, find solace in this site as I try to comprehend the incomprehensible.

Solving a murder is one thing, building a case is an entirely different thing. We can easily throw out scenarios, but we don't have to make it stick in court. I am confident that most of the posters on this thread understand that distinction and have no delusions of being part of the investigative team.

I agree. I am new to this site because of this case. I think many of us come here because we are in some way touched by this event. At least that is my case. I live within 100 miles. I have two daughters and a wife who excersise and run. They could be VM, and I could be her dad. It hits close to home. It feels good to know even though the story dies In the news, there are others who remain affected. I know it won't be solved on a web forum. I know police don't come here for clues. We all know that. But we all want to see resolution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

I did not read Rocky1's comment to suggest somehow that she/he thought detectives were "taking directions from people of the web." I interpreted the comment as a simple compliment: she/he appreciates your contribution to the forum. Having followed this thread from day one, I have not seen evidence of any posters who think they are "part of the investigative team." Instead, I mostly see people with a connection to the location or the victim's demographics. For instance, I identified with VM because I often run alone and would not have hesitated to do exactly what she did. I, and probably others, find solace in this site as I try to comprehend the incomprehensible.

Solving a murder is one thing, building a case is an entirely different thing. We can easily throw out scenarios, but we don't have to make it stick in court. I am confident that most of the posters on this thread understand that distinction and have no delusions of being part of the investigative team.

My comments to Rocky were me being chatty.... to Rocky... filling her/him on me and how I got to my perspective, based on what I learned. Try not to take it personally; it's not a criticism, it's just being chatty. I can't help that's what I was told when I had that conversation, but it was, and it stayed with me since I learned it. You don't have to like it; you don't even have to agree with it. It's something that was said to me during a conversation and I shared it because I thought it was insightful, that's all.

And to Mskin: no, not everyone knows that. There are people who don't know how cases unfold and are highly troubled when info from LE isn't shared. I read that every day on various cases.

 

[Kickoff61]

That would be north of the crime scene. Didnt someone mention a search south of the crime scene? Or am I just confused.

You could ask whoever may be bringing up South - where that is reported.

 

[1306kayaker]

That would be north of the crime scene. Didnt someone mention a search south of the crime scene? Or am I just confused.

We weren't saying that this image (possibly Boylston Rd) was tied to any evidence found south of the crime scene. We were just trying to determine where the image was taken - where is there an open meadow, fallen down trees, and crime scene tape.

 

[Kickoff61]

It is great they expanded their search to build their case.

 

[Forager]

Last night a young woman was grabbed off the street in Rockland, Maine. The short version: she was walking home from work at 11:30 pm, when a man in a ski mask jumped out of his vehicle, put her in a choke hold until she lost consciousness and tossed her in his car. Apparently she came to and was able to fight him off enough to cause erratic driving which caught the attention of a police officer. The officer pursued the car until it crashed and was able to apprehend the perpetrator after a short foot chase. It is all over the Maine media; here is just one article:
http://bangordailynews.com/2016/09/...ed-off-street-in-rockland/?ref=relatedSidebar

While I realize this MO is very different from VM, it caught my attention for a couple of reasons: stranger abductions rarely occur in Maine and it provides a window into how an abduction actually occurred because the victim survived to talk about it. I also think it would be worthwhile for Mass State Police to check this guy out for any connection to the Princeton area. While there may not be any connection, the suspect is from Portland which is about two hours from Princeton and he has a lengthy criminal record. A stranger abduction in Rockland is as incongruous as a murder in Princeton.

Great article!

Stephen Betts of The Bangor Daily News did a followup peice with more details from the victim:
Police: Man kidnapped woman off street in Rockland, tried to elude officer

 

[ThinkHard]

We weren't saying that this image (possibly Boylston Rd) was tied to any evidence found south of the crime scene. We were just trying to determine where the image was taken - where is there an open meadow, fallen down trees, and crime scene tape.

Which image though? I'm confused? I wasn't able to open the link.

I thought the talk of the picture of the field, and report of police investigating boylston road were two seperate things.

 

[Camerabug]

Last night a young woman was grabbed off the street in Rockland, Maine. The short version: she was walking home from work at 11:30 pm, when a man in a ski mask jumped out of his vehicle, put her in a choke hold until she lost consciousness and tossed her in his car. Apparently she came to and was able to fight him off enough to cause erratic driving which caught the attention of a police officer. The officer pursued the car until it crashed and was able to apprehend the perpetrator after a short foot chase. It is all over the Maine media; here is just one article:
http://bangordailynews.com/2016/09/...ed-off-street-in-rockland/?ref=relatedSidebar

While I realize this MO is very different from VM, it caught my attention for a couple of reasons: stranger abductions rarely occur in Maine and it provides a window into how an abduction actually occurred because the victim survived to talk about it. I also think it would be worthwhile for Mass State Police to check this guy out for any connection to the Princeton area. While there may not be any connection, the suspect is from Portland which is about two hours from Princeton and he has a lengthy criminal record. A stranger abduction in Rockland is as incongruous as a murder in Princeton.

14 miles from where I live...scary stuff..this NEVER happens around here.

 

[1306kayaker]

Which image though? I'm confused? I wasn't able to open the link.

I thought the talk of the picture of the field, and report of police investigating boylston road were two seperate things.

If you google the article you'll see the image of the police searching a clearing. There are fallen trees and police tape.

The comment referencing the Boylston Rd search was a response to me saying that I didn't recognize the image location and did anyone have any ideas.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[JEF]

I am the one who originally posted that picture. I'm new to the forum and didn't realize links that are not from MSM won't post correctly. I did post the date and source if you want to google the story, but am not sure if even that is okay (sorry, if it's not). One thing I wonder - could that shot be of the cemetery on Connor Lane? That has mown lawn and is a place MSM reported police searched. Thoughts?

Also, I found another link that mentions a witness who saw her walking and talking on her cell phone at 1 p.m. I'm not sure if the source is MSM or not but will try to post it. Is this the same witness who drove past her and turned around then didn't see her?


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lf-mile-mom-s-home-speaks-best-kid-world.html

If you google the article you'll see the image of the police searching a clearing. There are fallen trees and police tape.

The comment referencing the Boylston Rd search was a response to me saying that I didn't recognize the image location and did anyone have any ideas.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk