MO - Elizabeth Olten, 9, St Martin's, 21 Oct 2009 #14

[LadyBug99]

How would anyone know if it was just a shout out and not a phone call?

The only reason I don't think the "call" came from a cell phone or the home phone is because as of Wed/Thurs LE already had EO's cell records. I would think that they would have been doing some extensive interrogation of AB and the family before Friday. If the last known call came from AB or her family's phone when she had just left their home, I think that would have been a major red flag in the investigation.

IMO I believe AB was outside that afternoon when EO left, and somehow either by force or coercion took EO to the woods. I doubt that AB's family knew about this because AB would have been the prime suspect from the very beginning.

 

[Prof]

The only reason I don't think the "call" came from a cell phone or the home phone is because as of Wed/Thurs LE already had EO's cell records. I would think that they would have been doing some extensive interrogation of AB and the family before Friday. If the last known call came from AB or her family's phone when she had just left their home, I think that would have been a major red flag in the investigation.

IMO I believe AB was outside that afternoon when EO left, and somehow either by force or coercion took EO to the woods. I doubt that AB's family knew about this because AB would have been the prime suspect from the very beginning.

Thanks
I guess my question was not clear enough (I may still be in a vacation fog) -- if AB did not use her own phone or her gps phone to call EO back, how do we explain the following quote from an ABC news video on October 28th other than poor reporting?
"Elizabeth's family told ABC that suspect called Elizabeth to invite her back"

 

[LadyBug99]

Thanks
I guess my question was not clear enough (I may still be in a vacation fog) -- if AB did not use her own phone or her gps phone to call EO back, how do we explain the following quote from an ABC news video on October 28th other than poor reporting?
"Elizabeth's family told ABC that suspect called Elizabeth to invite her back"

That very well could be the case. Although, sometimes I think we(me) look TOO much into the wording in these news reports. I feel we are so desperate for any type of clue and will take whatever we can away from the articles.

It would seem odd to me that LE wasn't ALL over that family if they saw a text or call coming from anyone in that household. LE would have known the time that EO left. Like I said, to receive a call/text immediately after her departure should have been a huge red flag. IMO if that is what took place...LE should have considered someone in that family to be the suspect from day one.

 

[vjlaw]

It seems odd to me if AB called Elizabeth's cell phone that Elizabeth wouldn't just keep walking home. AB needed to get her hands on Elizabeth and you don't do that by cell. According to her twitter AB was missing her cell phone. It sounds like she didn't have her own cell that day. And I thought Elizabeth had her mother's cell, which meant AB had to have gotten the mother's cell number. I think AB needed to have the physical contact to get her to the planned location to kill and bury her. We don't know the exact wording of the family when they said she was called. Could have meant she "called her back" and the reporter just assumed it was by phone. JMO

 

[Prof]

It seems odd to me if AB called Elizabeth's cell phone that Elizabeth wouldn't just keep walking home. AB needed to get her hands on Elizabeth and you don't do that by cell. According to her twitter AB was missing her cell phone. It sounds like she didn't have her own cell that day. And I thought Elizabeth had her mother's cell, which meant AB had to have gotten the mother's cell number. I think AB needed to have the physical contact to get her to the planned location to kill and bury her. We don't know the exact wording of the family when they said she was called. Could have meant she "called her back" and the reporter just assumed it was by phone. JMO

Yes, and I have been less than clear in my question -- I am asking if AB "called her back" by a shout or physically rather than electronically, who would know? How would anyone know this except Elizabeth and AB? How did the relative of EO know this to tell ABC? It seems the only way to know this is from AB, and why would this not be brought up before in court?

 

[gliving]

Prof, I don't think anything has been brought up in court except to charge her as an adult. The trial hasn't started yet.

Nancy Grace (I know) showed a rerun of her AB program last night. They kept saying AB "lured" Elizabeth into the woods. AB must have had a great lure. I wonder what it was.

"GRACE: We are learning there is evidence that she lured the little girl, a little 9-year-old girl, into the woods, that she had dug a shallow grave several days before in anticipation of murdering this little girl."

 

[vjlaw]

Yes, and I have been less than clear in my question -- I am asking if AB "called her back" by a shout or physically rather than electronically, who would know? How would anyone know this except Elizabeth and AB? How did the relative of EO know this to tell ABC? It seems the only way to know this is from AB, and why would this not be brought up before in court?

I think the family was given at least a little bit of information. I think Mr. Couty mentioned in a news conference that he had talked with Elizabeth's family. I don't think it has been brought up in court because the adult certification hearing was about her ability to stand trial as an adult. I think they would want to save the details for the adult trial. JMO

 

[W8nC]

Right, "suspect called Elizabeth to invite her back", and/or "she lured the little girl", could be different ways of saying the same thing.

Something like....
<<shouting>>
"Elizabeth, I found your dog in the woods and he's hurt! Come help him!"
....don't know that E even had a dog, but you get my point. Something compelling that would be sure to get Elizabeth to come into the woods with her, at dusk.

Alyssa would have to have told LE as part of her confession, unless maybe her little sister heard the exchange and reported it. Then LE would have told EO's family about it, and they let that part slip when they did the interview.

IMO

 

[vjlaw]

Right, "suspect called Elizabeth to invite her back", and/or "she lured the little girl", could be different ways of saying the same thing.

Something like....
<<shouting>>
"Elizabeth, I found your dog in the woods and he's hurt! Come help him!"
....don't know that E even had a dog, but you get my point. Something compelling that would be sure to get Elizabeth to come into the woods with her, at dusk.

Alyssa would have to have told LE as part of her confession, unless maybe her little sister heard the exchange and reported it. Then LE would have told EO's family about it, and they let that part slip when they did the interview.

IMO

Seems to me the little sis would be at the door saying goodbye to her friend. So it is possible she saw something. Could have been a family member who was not a "close" family member. We don't know who was included in the family when Mr. Couty spoke with them. The family member who spoke with ABC could have been one who didn't realize what was being released and what wasn't. Maybe they had gotten that from another family member and just repeated it to the reporter. jmo

 

[Bibliophile]

Yes, and I have been less than clear in my question -- I am asking if AB "called her back" by a shout or physically rather than electronically, who would know? How would anyone know this except Elizabeth and AB? How did the relative of EO know this to tell ABC? It seems the only way to know this is from AB, and why would this not be brought up before in court?

I understand exactly what you're saying. There are only three possible scenarios -

1) Elizabeth made it home and was with a family member when she received a call to return.

2) Either through the interview with AB or by looking into Elizabeth's cell records, they discovered the last call Elizabeth received was from AB's home or cell phone. Phoning her to "get her to return" would be conjecture by LE unless AB specifically told them that is what she did.

3) ABC has faulty information.

 

[Prof]

I understand exactly what you're saying. There are only three possible scenarios -

1) Elizabeth made it home and was with a family member when she received a call to return.

2) Either through the interview with AB or by looking into Elizabeth's cell records, they discovered the last call Elizabeth received was from AB's home or cell phone. Phoning her to "get her to return" would be conjecture by LE unless AB specifically told them that is what she did.

3) ABC has faulty information.

Thank you
The first scenario is unlikely IMO as it does not match any of the conflicting reports for that night, nor the "timeline" or what we know of it.

Scenario number two might be likely; it seems to me that if AB admitted to calling EO back, it is significant information that would add to or at least reinforce the alleged motive discussed at the certification hearing. I think it might make a difference to some if AB admitted to calling EO back, or LE discovered it through a text message (which is the only way LE could know the content from a phone record), but AB tweeted that very morning how she missed her cell.

The third scenario is fairly likely.


There were many reports and conflicting scenarios for Wednesday--

One report by Fox, (who later edited this portion out):

"White said Elizabeth spoke with her parents on the phone before she left her friend's house. 'Her parents said she should leave and get home,' he told Fox."
Excerpted from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569338,00.html on October 23, 2009​

If this is true, IMO it seems less likely that Elizabeth would heed a call back.

This forum has discussed the rumor that AB's grandfather sent EO home (came from an EO "relative" on a Topix comment).

However, we also have discussed the rumor that AB's gps did not know that Elizabeth was at their home (came from ILC?)

Perhaps there is a clear story, one story where all the pieces fit, and LE is on their toes and not releasing any of it.

Sorry, but IMO the timeline and the adults' knowledge of the whereabouts of these children has not been made clear.

 

[vjlaw]

I think some were just trying to figure out how AB got Elizabeth into the woods. ILC also said the focus on Wed. night was the little sister. So it is possible she gave some information that led them to AB. Maybe she saw AB talking to EO as she was walking down the drive. During the course of AB's interview with LE she told them how she got Elizabeth into the woods. I doubt the reporting was totally accurate, but I do believe the mother and some family members were given some of the details especially since the family said Elizabeth was scared of the woods and the dark. JMO

 

[Bibliophile]

She was obviously using a cell phone to "tweet" that morning. Perhaps she borrowed one from a friend in class.

She could have "borrowed" another cell in the house to text, but my hunch is that if it happened, it was a land line call.

 

[vjlaw]

She was obviously using a cell phone to "tweet" that morning. Perhaps she borrowed one from a friend in class.

She could have "borrowed" another cell in the house to text, but my hunch is that if it happened, it was a land line call.

She needed to have the physical contact with Elizabeth to get her back to the woods. Any phone is not going to offer that contact. If she did use a phone, AB must have said something pretty powerful to get her to come back to AB instead of keep heading home. Especially since Elizabeth was scared of the dark and it was getting close to dark. jmo

 

[LadyBug99]

She was obviously using a cell phone to "tweet" that morning. Perhaps she borrowed one from a friend in class.

She could have "borrowed" another cell in the house to text, but my hunch is that if it happened, it was a land line call.

The twitter post said it was updated from web, she was not using a cell phone.

 

[hoppyfrog]

Dear Posters:

I want to make you aware of the “alert” button on each post. It is the white triangle in the upper right-hand corner of each post.

When you click on it, a box will open into which you can type the problem with the post. Then you click on send and the moderators receive the alert via email.

You don’t need to write a novel regarding a post you report. The reason you enter can be as simple as “rude” or “attacking” or “off-topic.”

I want to remind you about the alert button because the truth is that we don’t receive nearly enough alerts about problematic posts.

The sooner we as moderators are alerted to a post, the sooner we can look at and correct it, if needed.

I know some of you hesitate to use the alert button, but please don’t hesitate.

If a problematic post is not reported, the whole thread can go south very, very quickly. And then what happens is that we have to pull a thread and sometimes spend hours going through a thread post by post to clean it up.

And that is an incredible waste of time.

You’ll save us a lot of teeth-gnashing by reporting problematic posts promptly. (Say that ten times quickly!)

I would much rather spend my time posting new missing persons cases for us to sleuth than to spend time cleaning up threads; I currently have over 500 new, unread Google alerts in my inbox regarding missing persons. I’d rather be posting those new cases than refereeing arguments.


Please note that I write this as general advice, not in response to any one post or thread.

Thank you for taking time to read this, and have a blessed and joyous New Year!

Hoppy
mod

 

[mystified]

This thread sure got quiet. Is it closed or just no news to post about?

 

[spicedtea]

This thread sure got quiet. Is it closed or just no news to post about?

I dunno,but I'm just reading to catch up here myself. I'm too slow a reader/typer to keep up with everybody here,lol.

Probably the lack of new news on the case.

My own thoughts are that I hope that when it does eventually come to trial that they make sure that she never gets loose again. She doesn't deserve a "second chance" at the expense of other childrens "first chance" in life.

 

[LogicalMinds]

Regarding "how" Elizabeth was lured into the woods...from what I have read, that sweet little girl loved animals....
my guess is that Allyssa "called" to her in person..."Oh hurry...help me...I found a nest of ...birds/rabbits/a cat mom with kittens," whatever

Speaking of "teens who kill" and then get out....there is a former teen in prison who "wants out"...he was 16 when he killed a little 5 year old girl...now 16 years later he is trying to get parole...our letters can help her family to keep him locked up

Up for Parole Child Killer... *extremely disturbing* - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

~~~~

http://www.zanesvilletimesrecorder..../Family-fights-to-keep-child-killer-in-prison

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

Bumping for Elizabeth's memory. It saddens me to see her thread on page 3. I do realize there won't be much to discuss till the next time her killer appears in court, but, wanted to bump anyway to share my thoughts and prayers for Elizabeth's mother, other family and loved ones.