MI MI - Julia Niswender, 23, EMU student, Ypsilanti, 10 Dec 2012 - #3

[Trojan1966]

I think the computer WS seized in December 2014 ......? Nothing before that? Trojan or 4ist, can you confirm? It is so confusing as to when the FIRST computer was taken from the home.

The first Turnquist computer was taken in December 2014 from their house. The second Turnquist computer taken was in February 2015 from their house with a search warrant. Other devices were also taken....cell phones, cameras. etc.
Please do not get confused with the fact that the Grandma's computer was freely given early in the investigation (Jan or Feb 2013). This was a laptop at her house that Julia had probably used when she lived there. LE was investigating her uses of it and her possible contacts.

 

[Spellbound]

The first Turnquist computer was taken in December 2014 from their house. The second Turnquist computer taken was in February 2015 from their house with a search warrant. Other devices were also taken....cell phones, cameras. etc.
Please do not get confused with the fact that the Grandma's computer was freely given early in the investigation (Jan or Feb 2013). This was a laptop at her house that Julia had probably used when she lived there. LE was investigating her uses of it and her possible contacts.

Thank you so much! I think I finally understand the trail of computers. :findinglink:. That was tough! I have changed my post above to add this in the "timeline" of computers

 

[black_squirrel]

If you have been a victim, the signs are there.

I am skeptical of "signs" and "red flags". They are often very subjective. If you have been a victim, you may be more likely to pick up signs, but you are also more likely biased IMO. If you have a strong emotions about an issue, it is more difficult to make an objective determination. What signs do you see in the Julia Niswender case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FindHG]

Well psyquestor, I have to read a bit between the lines and things sometimes become a blur to me, too. It appears the first computer from which the charges arose showed (child) *advertiser censored* on it from November 2012. Julia died in December 2012. The arrest came in February/March 2015 after a second computer and other devices were seized. But the pursuit of the investigation appears to stem from the first computer in possession of Ypsi police, which was turned over (or just the info was) to Monroe Sheriffs. The child *advertiser censored* investigation is now in the hands of Monroe Sheriffs. (or is it now the State Police?)

It appears to me that the *advertiser censored* did indeed come first, though it was not known until much later.

Trojan, do I have that right?

RBBM

Marking for reference

 

[psyquestor]

I don't know where our posts are when we discussed this, but if memory is correct...... Ypsi police felt they had to comment when the *advertiser censored* charges came out and a connection was being made to the two cases. Ypsi police turned over the computer (or images) to Monroe, and then the arrest came. JT was named as a person of interest after the arrest became public.

ETA: Gress = Ypsi Lt., Stablein = attorney for JT
BBM
Although Gress would not comment on whether the child *advertiser censored* charges in Monroe County at all stemmed from investigation into Niswender's death, Stablein said the charges are related.

Stablein said his client voluntarily gave his computer to Ypsilanti police in late 2014 as part of the investigation into Niswender's death. Stablein said Turnquist was then asked to answer further questions, but the lawyer intervened.
"I'm not going to let him be repeatedly interrogated by officers that are hell bent on tripping him up -- if that's what it is," he said.

Police allege they found child *advertiser censored* on the computer and took a number of electronics in the search of his Monroe home, Stablein said.

Gress said the departments are sharing information as needed, and he believes Monroe County is still looking into the evidence against Turnquest.

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2015/03/julia_niswenders_stepfather_wa.html

Okay, maybe nitpicking here but I understand the investigations are linked, but the lawyer states the charges are related?

Comprehension issue on my part?

TIA
Red added by me for clarity

 

[FindHG]

Okay, maybe nitpicking here but I understand the investigations are linked, but the lawyer states the charges are related?

Comprehension issue on my part?

TIA
Red added by me for clarity

The lawyer and the red crew claim that the charges are related in that they are a pressure tactic to have him give more of a full statement on the Julia case, which frankly seems to me like more spin, and bad spin at that trying to make him a victim when there is clearly so much information that they can no longer control, like the door he took off, his hunting blog, the parents of the kids he's been asked to avoid at the DO JO, his bad relationships, weird personal antics, lack of funds and yet expensive hobbies, legal and I guess what you'd call moral support of like minded individuals in terms of standards on *advertiser censored*, etc...

 

[psyquestor]

I am skeptical of "signs" and "red flags". They are often very subjective. If you have been a victim, you may be more likely to pick up signs, but you are also more likely biased IMO. If you have a strong emotions about an issue, it is more difficult to make an objective determination. What signs do you see in the Julia Niswender case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know this post is not directed at me, but I would like to jump in and state that I had marked several things which I felt were red flags and included citations from relevant sources to back up my "claims." Many of these were removed, as they were in response to another post which was deleted. Rather than edit out the quote, the whole post was deleted. I inquired, but received no response in regards to what the reason behind this was.

As stated later, I will not be posting those again. Spellie is not the only person who has stated she sees red flags in certain aspects of this case. Many of us have also posted the same. Also, the Grandmother (Rose) states in an article that she suspected sexual abuse. So it is not just those of us on the board who have thought this.

MOO
NAP

 

[psyquestor]

The lawyer and the red crew claim that the charges are related in that they are a pressure tactic to have him give more of a full statement on the Julia case, which frankly seems like more spin, and bad spin at that trying to make him a victim when there is clearly so much information that they can no longer control, like the door he took off, his hunting blog, the parents of the kids he's been asked to avoid at the DO JO, his bad relationships, weird personal antics, lack of funds and yet expensive hobbies, legal support, etc...

...or child *advertiser censored*, or controlling behavior, or Julia moving out of the home due to conflicts with her parents, or accusations leveled by Grandma Rose. . . (eta - Julia tweeting "trust no one" and a follow up citation by me which is gone).

I hear ya.

MOO, Speculation, No insider knowledge, no reason to be biased.

 

[Spellbound]

I am skeptical of "signs" and "red flags". They are often very subjective. If you have been a victim, you may be more likely to pick up signs, but you are also more likely biased IMO. If you have a strong emotions about an issue, it is more difficult to make an objective determination. What signs do you see in the Julia Niswender case?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe not as objective as you would want me to be, but previous experience and emotions have bearing on the "signs" I consider. Julia appears to have been the more studious, while also being outwardly friendly and caring. She is the one who caused the school concern enough to report to CPS. Whether proved or not, does not mean it didn't happen. Being disbelieved, keeping things quiet so as not to upset mom and/or dad is quite common. Concern for a younger child (may or may not be a part of this). No door on the bathroom when the girls were pre-pubescent aged. The allegation of child *advertiser censored* on family computer(s). The distance between mom and dad in social settings. These in addition to the quotes attached below with more "red flags". While none may be proof of any sort of abuse, I consider them all to be "red flags" and worthy of further investigation by LE.

I do not consider myself biased, as I am open to the truth and facts that indicate Mr. T is not involved in child *advertiser censored* or any sort of abuse against his daughters. I would welcome concrete proof, and hope the trial finds the right verdict. I would certainly be relieved to know child *advertiser censored* or abuse is not a factor in Julia's death. Repeated comments by a third party have to be weighed with a grain of salt, I realize that. Which side has the most weight? Which side has the most evidence? Do we really have to take sides? Just some questions I toss around daily with myself.


below are what I consider more red flags and BBM: (if not highlighted, does not mean I completely disagree, just not my personal red flags)

The lawyer and the red crew claim that the charges are related in that they are a pressure tactic to have him give more of a full statement on the Julia case, which frankly seems to me like more spin, and bad spin at that trying to make him a victim when there is clearly so much information that they can no longer control, like the door he took off, his hunting blog, the parents of the kids he's been asked to avoid at the DO JO, his bad relationships, weird personal antics, lack of funds and yet expensive hobbies, legal and I guess what you'd call moral support of like minded individuals in terms of standards on *advertiser censored*, etc...

I know this post is not directed at me, but I would like to jump in and state that I had marked several things which I felt were red flags and included citations from relevant sources to back up my "claims." Many of these were removed, as they were in response to another post which was deleted. Rather than edit out the quote, the whole post was deleted. I inquired, but received no response in regards to what the reason behind this was.

As stated later, I will not be posting those again. Spellie is not the only person who has stated she sees red flags in certain aspects of this case. Many of us have also posted the same. Also, the Grandmother (Rose) states in an article that she suspected sexual abuse. So it is not just those of us on the board who have thought this.

MOO
NAP

...or child *advertiser censored*, or controlling behavior, or Julia moving out of the home due to conflicts with her parents, or accusations leveled by Grandma Rose. . . (eta - Julia tweeting "trust no one" and a follow up citation by me which is gone).

I hear ya.

MOO, Speculation, No insider knowledge, no reason to be biased.

 

[dmc43613]

I know we had discussed the fact that that JT was being investigated in early November 2012 on an earlier thread, but I have to ask; if the first Tournquist computer was not given to LE until December 2014, WHAT did LE have that prompted an investigation in November 2012? WHO/WHAT initiated the 2012 investigation?

ETA: Was it from the Grandma's accusations?

 

[black_squirrel]

...or child *advertiser censored*, or controlling behavior, or Julia moving out of the home due to conflicts with her parents, or accusations leveled by Grandma Rose. . . (eta - Julia tweeting "trust no one" and a follow up citation by me which is gone).

I hear ya.

MOO, Speculation, No insider knowledge, no reason to be biased.

1. Child *advertiser censored* Charges: Fair enough. This is a red flag. Whether these charges are true is still to be determined. This is the reason why JT cannot stay with his daughter.
2. "Controlling Behavior". What controlling behavior? I do not see any evidence of that.
3. Julia moving out of the home due to conflicts. Nearly every child has conflicts with their parents. Also, it is normal to move out of your parents house in your early 20's, to become more independent and have more freedom. This is not a red flag.
4. Grandma's allegations of sexual abuse. Note that she did not make any accusations of sexual abuse before the child *advertiser censored* charges. Obviously, if someone is accused of child *advertiser censored* possession, people start suspecting that this person may also be guilty of child abuse. But this is not a new red flag.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Can someone please help me straighten out a data point that is confusing me please.
If I understand correctly, KT has stated the *advertiser censored* in question is *hers*, not *JT's*. Is that right?

Is she stating guilt (*if* the images have minors in them), and offering herself up for potential charges? Why would she do that? I'm truly confused. Set me straight.

 

[black_squirrel]

Maybe not as objective as you would want me to be, but previous experience and emotions have bearing on the "signs" I consider. Julia appears to have been the more studious, while also being outwardly friendly and caring. She is the one who caused the school concern enough to report to CPS. Whether proved or not, does not mean it didn't happen. Being disbelieved, keeping things quiet so as not to upset mom and/or dad is quite common. Concern for a younger child (may or may not be a part of this).

I don't accept it (yet) as a fact that Julia allegedly reported abuse at her school and that the school contacted CPS. This info was posted by 4ist but I have my doubts. It is not publicly known who the anonymous accuser was. It is unclear how she could have possibly known this. 4ist did not yet have the opportunity to explain where this information came from, but until then I won't accept it as a fact, and don't consider it a "red flag" (yet).

No door on the bathroom when the girls were pre-pubescent aged.

As I understand it, there was a curtain instead of a door. The reason for this is less clear. If the reason was, so that JT could peek at the children while they were taking a shower, then, of course this is a red flag. If the reason was something else, then it may not be a red flag. Perhaps we should hear JT"s reason for having a curtain instead of a door.

The distance between mom and dad in social settings.

From the interviews that I have seen, the family seems close and loving. So no red flag for me.

 

[MIMOMMY]

I don't accept it (yet) as a fact that Julia allegedly reported abuse at her school and that the school contacted CPS. This info was posted by 4ist but I have my doubts. It is not publicly known who the anonymous accuser was. It is unclear how she could have possibly known this. 4ist did not yet have the opportunity to explain where this information came from, but until then I won't accept it as a fact, and don't consider it a "red flag" (yet).

As I understand it, there was a curtain instead of a door. The reason for this is less clear. If the reason was, so that JT could peek at the children while they were taking a shower, then, of course this is a red flag. If the reason was something else, then it may not be a red flag. Perhaps we should hear JT"s reason for having a curtain instead of a door.


From the interviews that I have seen, the family seems close and loving. So no red flag for me.

My understanding of the bathroom door is this - JT and KT moved to a home in Gaylord on what most would consider a temporary basis ( 2-4 months ) This was not to be a long term address - they did this because JT had a chance to improve himself in employment, when that fell thru they began the process of coming back down to Monroe. The door was not TAKEN off by JT or KT - but in fact was off the hinges when they moved into the home, which has been described to me as --- not the greatest home but acceptable on a short term basis. They made contact with the Landlord in regards to correcting the door - and when that did not happen - they hung a dark colored drape/curtain over the door with a rod to create some sense of privacy for both themselves and the children.

Again - this is what I have been told and I can not state it as fact since I was not in the home to physically see this! But am told it had nothing to do with the girl's bathroom behavior and was not removed by either parent.

I then question this --- IF the family was aware that CPS had been called, and IF the grandparent's still had rights, and IF there were all of these concerns about JT and his behavior's even in general..... Why didn't any of these overly concerned individual's make their own calls to CPS?

I know from personal experience that I have called MULTIPLE times on the same group of individual's because I feared for the safety of the children - and they were of no relation to me. I can not image how many times a DAY I would have called if they had been relatives or even grandchildren.

 

[MIMOMMY]

As far as the "fighting" between the members - My understanding here is that it was an isolated event. An extended family member needed a key to the home, KT could only find Julia's key - and gave it to this family member. Julia became upset when she came home and realized KT had given the key to someone else - a verbal disagreement occurred and became heated. Because it was happening in front of the minor child - Julia was asked to leave until she calmed down.

It had nothing AGAIN to do with JT and was a argument between mother and daughter. Please also remember that because KT was so young when she had the twins, there may be moment's where the relationship would appear to be more of best friends than mother parent - Which is VERY common in early teen pregnancies.

Again - I was not there when the fight occurred - as it was in the family home, and only the direct family was present. But, this is my understanding as it was relayed to me.

 

[rosesfromangels]

MiMommy,

When KT was caring the alleged *advertiser censored* pictures around in her purse and showing them to people, did she show them to you?

 

[MIMOMMY]

MiMommy,

When KT was caring the alleged *advertiser censored* pictures around in her purse and showing them to people, did she show them to you?

She was NEVER carrying around the images. What she was carrying was the "discovery packet" because at that time she would have been the one doing the most communication with JT's attorney.

 

[black_squirrel]

I know we had discussed the fact that that JT was being investigated in early November 2012 on an earlier thread, but I have to ask; if the first Tournquist computer was not given to LE until December 2014, WHAT did LE have that prompted an investigation in November 2012? WHO/WHAT initiated the 2012 investigation?

ETA: Was it from the Grandma's accusations?

I don't think that JT was investigated in early November. One document states that the offense was in November 2012. I think this is just the date that the pictures were saved to the hard drive, or perhaps it is the date that the image is created. This is not clear to me.

 

[FindHG]

I don't think that JT was investigated in early November. One document states that the offense was in November 2012. I think this is just the date that the pictures were saved to the hard drive, or perhaps it is the date that the image is created. This is not clear to me.

Hunting season. Maybe something happened in October that was discovered in November and investigated before Julia's murder, it could be possible. It's hunting season, Julia and Chelsea's murders.

 

[DazednConfuzed09]

Hunting season. Maybe something happened in October that was discovered in November and investigated before Julia's murder, it could be possible. It's hunting season, Julia and Chelsea's murders.

Tlcya – WS Forum Moderator 4-27-15 12:37 pm Post #696 Chelsea Brock #4 forum
James Turnquist is a named POI in Julia's case but has not been named or even remotely suggest as one by LE in Chelsea's case. Thanks. - Has this changed???

Technically there has never been mention of JT being a POI or a suspect of any sort with Chelsea or did I miss that news report? If this is new information, I thought it was to be accompanied with a link. Would you kindly post a link please. Thank you.