MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis #5

[geevee]

RSBM: Not a blatant hole, so much as a "what I don't understand" situation. I mentioned this earlier on the Evidence thread. What I don't understand is why SM would've gone to that Wal-Mart if it was a pregnancy test for his wife. The one in Surfside is 4 miles closer to the compound.

I think going to that one could be reasonable if he had decided to call Heather to let her know the good news (about him finally deciding to leave TM (if she's not pregnant) it may have been the closest Walmart to a payphone, since TM had taken his cell away.

 

[TTF14]

Since the State couldn't prove where he was after the pay phone call, I don't understand why the State didn't have his work records to prove where he wasn't .

YES! But, maybe they didn't know where to look. Except he did say on camera he was working at Sticky Fingers....

 

[Surfside]

Since the State couldn't prove where he was after the pay phone call, I don't understand why the State didn't have his work records to prove where he wasn't .

If he was doing maintenance work, he wouldn't have "clocked in" to have a time sheet or anything. He's not a Sticky Fingers employee; he's a contractor, so there really wouldn't be work records.

 

[TTF14]

If he was doing maintenance work, he wouldn't have "clocked in" to have a time sheet or anything. He's not a Sticky Fingers employee; he's a contractor, so there really wouldn't be work records.

They could have at least been able to get a copy of an invoice SM submitted to them for work done (and I'd assume SF would not pay him if he didn't do it).

 

[TTF14]

They could have at least been able to get a copy of an invoice SM submitted to them for work done (and I'd assume SF would not pay him if he didn't do it).

Quoting myself.....on the other hand, they might not have been able to verify exact times he was there if he just submitted an invoice for "2 hours."

 

[Surfside]

They could have at least been able to get a copy of an invoice SM submitted to them for work done (and I'd assume SF would not pay him if he didn't do it).

True, if he had a legitimate business, wrote up a legitimate invoice, with a legitimate date on it, and legitimately worked there that night.

ETA: What you said...

on the other hand, they might not have been able to verify exact times he was there if he just submitted an invoice for "2 hours."

 

[Unykorn&Reignbeaus]

Where is Sticky Fingers located ? Maybe SM was truthful about working at Sticky Fingers that night and the Walmart on Seaboard was closer ?

Stickey Fingers is located near the Coastal Grand Mall... maybe 3-4 minute drive... 1-1.5 miles from Walmart on Seaboard

 

[LBDunes]

If he was doing maintenance work, he wouldn't have "clocked in" to have a time sheet or anything. He's not a Sticky Fingers employee; he's a contractor, so there really wouldn't be work records.

Seems like there would have been a bill or some receipt though?

 

[Madeleine74]

Since the State couldn't prove where he was after the pay phone call, I don't understand why the State didn't have his work records to prove where he wasn't .

I don't understand. How do you prove a negative? Sid was not an employee, he owned his own company. I would think if the defense had the proof of him working that night they would have submitted it, no?

 

[Surfside]

Seems like there would have been a bill or some receipt though?

With a time stamp on it?

 

[Unykorn&Reignbeaus]

With a time stamp on it?

I remember when I hired contractors (for inventory control) when they submitted their invoice it had to have the time they started and the time they ended and it had to be signed by an individual in management.... I wonder if ANY of the restaurants he contracted with required this type of information or was it just like someone said...2 hours on a particular day?

 

[escape2sc]

I think SM and TM or whoever , split up taking care of Heather . All we " know " about SM's movements that night are the Walmart purchase and the pay phone call . His phone powered on at 3:03 and pinged at his home. His phone had a close to 5 minute connection with HE's phone from 3:16- 3:22 and SM's truck was caught on video minutes from PTL and within a few minutes of HE's phone activity then phone silence at PTL.
We do not have any information for TM's actions that morning .

Yes I believe Heather talked with SM during that almost 5 minute phone call, and yes I think he was in the truck heading to PTL. But I think TM's movements hold the other pieces of the puzzle. The State had to have something on her to be able to bring kidnapping charges against her. They couldn't just charge her for kidnapping based on her month old phone threats to HE , or just because she was SM's wife and her rants on Facebook after HE disappeared. IMO, the State has evidence connecting TM with Heather during the morning of the 18th.

 

[escape2sc]

I don't understand. How do you prove a negative? Sid was not an employee, he owned his own company. I would think if the defense had the proof of him working that night they would have submitted it, no?

Sorry, I should of said the State must not of been able to prove he wasn't working that night. The State did not offer any evidence on SM's whereabouts after the video at the pay phone, so the Defense didn't have anything to counter.

 

[magnolia]

I have to say I think the pregnancy maybe should not have been brought up by the prosecution. It really is the only thing in the testimony that was inconclusive. I imagine they felt they needed to provide a motive? I don't think so though. Unless you don't believe the pay call was the lure. I do believe Bri when she said Heather said SM wanted to leave his wife. I believe that was deceptive, when I string all of the other lies and deceptive things SM said.

BBM -- I believe Heather told Bri SM wanted to leave his wife. I'm not convinced Sidney told Heather that tho.

 

[jillycat]

I disagree with none of this supports the lure. Unless you don't believe Bri's account. The man was deceptive about "I'm leaving my wife, I want to be with you" and you string together all the lies he told. Especially getting rid of the original video equipment, then I personally see premeditation. Unless I am mistaken, when he made that call, it fit the legal definition of the charge. He set in motion the crime. Also, I do not think the state should now put forth a new theory. That would be a mistake on their part. I believe she was kidnapped at PTL.

What did he say to her and when? Was it in the first call or the second or both that he wanted to meet at PTL? So she went to Longbeard's because...why?

As for Bri, if I said I found all witnesses credible, so how can I not believe her account? I do think there's a difference between what a witness says under oath, as truthfully as she can, about hearsay from a deceased person who may or may not have told her the whole story.

And I would only put forth a new theory with new evidence, or at the very least I would integrate all movement that morning with their theory. At least if they want a better outcome than they had on the murder charges and this trial. I don't think a creepin around narrative or the claim that she drove to Longbeard's to think about driving to PTL is a sure thing for the state.

 

[Canaille]

If he was doing maintenance work, he wouldn't have "clocked in" to have a time sheet or anything. He's not a Sticky Fingers employee; he's a contractor, so there really wouldn't be work records.

But, surely there would have been someone else there when he was working. Or if he was alone, did he have the security code to lock up when he was done?

 

[Paulas88]

But, surely there would have been someone else there when he was working. Or if he was alone, did he have the security code to lock up when he was done?

Wouldn't sticky fingers have surveillance cameras?

 

[Dockins]

BBM -- I believe Heather told Bri SM wanted to leave his wife. I'm not convinced Sidney told Heather that tho.

I believe it. That call so late at night, and then Heather leaves to meet SM. IMO, it must have been something pretty convincing to get her to go back out. I think he told her that, and that he needed to talk to her in person. After that, I'm conflicted on where the actual kidnapping took place.

 

[LBDunes]

What did he say to her and when? Was it in the first call or the second or both that he wanted to meet at PTL? So she went to Longbeard's because...why?

As for Bri, if I said I found all witnesses credible, so how can I not believe her account? I do think there's a difference between what a witness says under oath, as truthfully as she can, about hearsay from a deceased person who may or may not have told her the whole story.

And I would only put forth a new theory with new evidence, or at the very least I would integrate all movement that morning with their theory. At least if they want a better outcome than they had on the murder charges and this trial. I don't think a creepin around narrative or the claim that she drove to Longbeard's to think about driving to PTL is a sure thing for the state.

I believe it was the first call. I also believe the "I am going to sleep on it" expression to Bri showed the mindset to be Heather was torn about it. Someone with mixed emotions may drive around to clear their thoughts. Maybe she was debating herself back and forth, hence the stop at Longbeards and then turning around and going back home. I can't imagine the state would put forth a new theory, but they may present it differently. I don't think it would fly that her phone went to PTL and she didn't. I can't imagine if they said something happened to her at Longbeards and then her phone, not her went to PTL with whoever to dump the car. Do you think that would have been more believable to the jury? I seriously don't.

 

[Paulas88]

Wouldn't sticky fingers have surveillance cameras?

Of course, now that I think about it, SM most likely picked a place without cameras.