MO - Elizabeth Olten, 9, St Martin's, 21 Oct 2009 #6

[*~Aimee~*]

I'm sure you've all been to AB's web pages by now... What do you make of the page from one year ago stating her hobby was "killing people". I froze when I saw that, and I'm quite liberal... WTH??? Could something have been prevented there and then? Is there more to the teachers' woes than his illness?

I saw the page. Her account was created a year ago but do we know when she wrote her "hobbies?". I mean she could of recently changed her hobby? I change my profile things on my things at times. So if you were to read my myspace it was created a few years ago but maybe my hobbies, tv shows etc.. have changed and I updated them. So do we really know she wrote that a year ago? no we just know she joined youtube a year ago when the account was created. :waitasec:​

 

[Bibliophile]

emphasis added

ILC, I am wondering if that was a typo?

I think it was meant to read "Ab's boyfriend" not best friend.

 

[Prof]

Originally Posted by Ilovecookies

AB's bf? If he has one, we will never know of it.

emphasis added

Originally Posted by ynotdivein
emphasis added

ILC, I am wondering if that was a typo?

I think it was meant to read "Ab's boyfriend" not best friend.

First, I would like to state that I respect many a poster here, and I thank you for your warm welcome during the Nevaeh case

I, too, found myself with a couple days time-out

I may have replied and quoted someone looking for a birthdate for some initials related to the case with a generic "you are in the range", and I apologize for that (it would be helpful to know exactly why I had the time-out, and maybe I will find out now that I have apologized, Nanny I understand that this case in particular has kept the mods busy)

I also apologize for having no period (key) on my laptop at this time

I have been catching up, and that is time above and beyond all of the reading I must do for a living in the last couple of days

Of course, the number of posts and poster increased tremendously in 3 days of this case, especially with local posters; although, ILC is who caught everyone's attention

(I admit I skip over at least 50% of posts with no factual information to add That leaves at least 50% of posts with no factual information to add that I do read, only because those posts are consistently quoted)

When I read mutliple posts consistently quoted, with no verifiable facts, I determine the crediblity by other factors, such as consistency of tone, language, audience consideration, and story! (Credibility has yet to be determined)

However, the original posts of ILC have been so frequently deleted, it is difficult to contextualize any of his statements

(Of course, I appreciate any insight into this American tragedy, and I am thankful for all posters, so thank you ILC! )

I suppose ILC bowed out because his "job is done" Which means that ILC served his initial purpose to defend and clear the names of the innocent parties in the killer's house

Okay, now I am ready to make a point: the names against all adults connected with the suspects' house are not "cleared" (unless our definition of clearing is washing hands of all adult responsiblity involved in caring for children) Yes, perhaps the four adults indirectly involved in a 9 year old child's murder are "in the clear," but in clearing the adults responsible for the 15 year old child, the information against the 15 year old child suspect has been further clouded by this "first hand information" and an innocent victim's mother has been slandered by rumors of drug use and neglect


Anyone that reads through the last couple of days should easily spot all of the discrepencies posted, via second or third-hand biased hearsay

Clearly stated, I do not consider any adult in connection with this child an innocent party, as not that long ago someone petitioned for custody of children in MO courts

I am not sorry
Okay, ban me forever now

 

[heathcliff]

I've been lurking, and am truly confused by this teacher. So Wed E goes missing, by fri she is found and POI in custody. These poor kids are already dazed and confused. If he truly cared for his students, regardless of his own health concerns, WTF would he commit suicide on mon and add more heartache and stress to these kids-- on top of what they are going through. IMHO! Am i the only one thinking this was this a totally selfish act?

Maybe he wanted to commit suicide because of the terminal illness, but he hadn't because he didn't want to traumatize the kids. When he found out about Elizabeth's murder he realized the kids were going to be traumatized anyway and he saw it as his opportunity.

 

[lorann]

I've been lurking, and am truly confused by this teacher. So Wed E goes missing, by fri she is found and POI in custody. These poor kids are already dazed and confused. If he truly cared for his students, regardless of his own health concerns, WTF would he commit suicide on mon and add more heartache and stress to these kids-- on top of what they are going through. IMHO! Am i the only one thinking this was this a totally selfish act?

Unless he left a note for his family, we can't get into his head. I imagine he had been dealing with this longer than the killing of Elizabeth. I cannot judge his actions but do pray for his loved ones too.

 

[gliving]

I still think your theory could be right.

It seemed to me LE was given a letter after the pc - and that letter, along with other written evidence led them to AB. So, if the body was found around 3 pm, did LE come to the school to get AB out of class to question her? Was the teacher who committed suicide there that day?

I don't know if AB saw the teacher at school that day, but her family and the teacher attended the same church. It's been said AB attended church in the mornings before school so it's possible she might have contact with him at that time.

 

[Velouria]

So was it an arrest warrant or a search warrant?

Out of curiosity, I googled to see what statements were released ----

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) Monday, October 26, 2009 at 5:04 p.m.
-- "Police served a warrant at a neighbor's house just hours after finding the body of a 9-year-old Missouri girl. The Cole County Sheriff's Department served the warrant Friday night just several homes south of where Elizabeth Olten lived in St. Martins. Records don't indicate the type of warrant, and the department refused to comment Monday."

Associated Press - October 27, 2009 4:34 PM ET - "The Cole County Sheriff's Department served the warrant Friday night just hours after the body of Elizabeth Olten was discovered. The department said Tuesday the warrant was related to a traffic stop, not to the girl's death."

Tuesday, October 27, 2009 | 4:04 p.m. CDT
Columbia Missourian "JEFFERSON CITY — Authorities in mid-Missouri say a warrant served at a home in the neighborhood where a 9-year-old girl was found dead this past week was unrelated to the killing."


Chris Blank, The Associated Press, October 28, 2009 Springfield News Leader - "Sheriff's officials said Tuesday that a warrant served near a neighbor's house just hours after Elizabeth's body was found is unrelated to the case. The department said it was an arrest warrant that came during a traffic stop."

Thank you Bibliophile. Perhaps I'm worrying needlessly, but I'd really like to know the stated basis for that search warrant if it was not in connection to E's disappearance.

 

[PeriodicalCuriosity]

ILC told us today (pretty sure it was today) that the 3 of them were playing in the woods, that the 6 yo wasn't allowed in the woods by gp's - and that AB walked little sis back within site of the house so she could go home.

I know you all got this cleared up, but I do want to add that ILC DID say that the gps did not allow the 6 yr old in the woods--but not all the rest...I don't know if it is important and I'm not sure why I feel the need to tell it???

 

[lightlady]

I was confused about this too, but if you look at post #335 in this thread you will see that it was Iamhere that posted about this. I am not sure that any of this info came from the ILC posts.

 

[Mom2Yaya]

What's the point of posting the initials? Convince me that it's vital to name (by initials) the other one or two adults possibly living in the house.

All the best,

Hoppy

I don't know that it's "vital" at all. I think it has been interesting to read some of the blog comments the older step sister made with regard to AB and I believe the comments of the older step sister have offered us some insight into the home. Perhaps if this other person does live in the home and we sleuth her we will find more insights.

It's not that big a deal and again, I'm not interested in causing trouble or breaking rules and causing more work for the mods.

 

[hoppyfrog]

Okay, now I am ready to make a point: the names against all adults connected with the suspects' house are not "cleared" (unless our definition of clearing is washing hands of all adult responsiblity involved in caring for children) Yes, perhaps the four adults indirectly involved in a 9 year old child's murder are "in the clear," but in clearing the adults responsible for the 15 year old child, the information against the 15 year old child suspect has been further clouded by this "first hand information" and an innocent victim's mother has been slandered by rumors of drug use and neglect

Clearly stated, I do not consider any adult in connection with this child an innocent party, as not that long ago someone petitioned for custody of children in MO courts

I am not sorry
Okay, ban me forever now

Nah...no need to ban.

I fully understand and have a lot of sympathy for your point of view.

I think you and others realize that while adults are morally accountable for how they raise their children, that is a different issue than an adult being legally responsible for committing a crime. No adult surrounding Elizabeth's awful murder has been accused of that crime. In that sense, they are "innocent parties."

Welcome back!

Hoppy

 

[lajr56]

I am trying to catch up on thread from where I dropped reading last night. I see there were several posts by the 'local', ilovecookies that are quoted by other posters. However, I cannot find the original posts. It is making it hard to follow the context of the thread.

I am confused :banghead:

Am I missing something? If I am, any help getting back on track would be greatly appreciated!

 

[Mom2Yaya]

I am trying to catch up on thread from where I dropped reading last night. I see there were several posts by the 'local', ilovecookies that are quoted by other posters. However, I cannot find the original posts. It is making it hard to follow the context of the thread.

I am confused :banghead:

Am I missing something? If I am, any help getting back on track would be greatly appreciated!

I think ILC's posts are being deleted after he posts them by either himself or a mod. . . I'm not sure though.

 

[iamhere]

A few things that seem to make some sense on the timeline. I posted a timeline of information that has been revealed to me near the bottom of page 5.

First of all, I could believe that the Grandparents didn't initially know that EO was there. The girls were playing in the woods (a location the 6 yr. old was not supposed to be). Therefore, if they didn't even know their granddaughter was in the woods then they wouldn't have any idea that EO was in the woods.

Secondly (this is my own speculation, unlike my first post), does anyone have a quote from the LE that says EO's mom called to come home. I am not sure whether or not this happened. As I stated in my first post, I think the time the 6 year old arrived home may be where they are getting time of dissapearance. However, I could see the situation of the three girls playing in the woods. EO's mom calls. AB says I will take you home, but first let me take my sister up towards our house. She arrives back with EO, and walks her to the grave site on her way home. This would make sense because it would settle the question of how AB got EO to the grave. She got EO there "by walking her home."

 

[Jodibug]

I suppose ILC bowed out because his "job is done" Which means that ILC served his initial purpose to defend and clear the names of the innocent parties in the killer's house

Okay, now I am ready to make a point: the names against all adults connected with the suspects' house are not "cleared" (unless our definition of clearing is washing hands of all adult responsiblity involved in caring for children) Yes, perhaps the four adults indirectly involved in a 9 year old child's murder are "in the clear," but in clearing the adults responsible for the 15 year old child, the information against the 15 year old child suspect has been further clouded by this "first hand information" and an innocent victim's mother has been slandered by rumors of drug use and neglect


Anyone that reads through the last couple of days should easily spot all of the discrepencies posted, via second or third-hand biased hearsay

Clearly stated, I do not consider any adult in connection with this child an innocent party, as not that long ago someone petitioned for custody of children in MO courts

I am not sorry
Okay, ban me forever now

great post.

 

[hoppyfrog]

I don't know that it's "vital" at all. I think it has been interesting to read some of the blog comments the older step sister made with regard to AB and I believe the comments of the older step sister have offered us some insight into the home. Perhaps if this other person does live in the home and we sleuth her we will find more insights.

It's not that big a deal and again, I'm not interested in causing trouble or breaking rules and causing more work for the mods.

OK, go ahead and use the older step-sister's initials. It's certainly easier than calling her OSS21 or whatever.

However, all "the rules" still apply. No posting of ANY of her personal information. That will make this :froggie:go :crazy:.

Hoppy

 

[hoppyfrog]

I think ILC's posts are being deleted after he posts them by either himself or a mod. . . I'm not sure though.

He's deleting them himself.

Hoppy

 

[Kimster]

Interesting article on the psyche of juvenile murderers:

We want answers because we are frightened as parents for the safety of our children, or by the possibility that our child could ever harm another person. We look to video games and movies to blame the violence upon. We look to the parents and question them -- what they did and what they didn't do.

I think we want answers to put our minds at ease, and to feel in control of our world, family, and children. The simple answer is: No, it is not video games and movies, otherwise we would have thousands of little killers running around, but we don't -- we have some kids that, when given the wrong environment met with their temperament, are like a fire being fueled by gasoline. Teen killers usually have a lower IQ and a history of cruelty to animals, themselves, or siblings. They have little or no empathy for others, and violate the rights of others often without remorse.

We know violence is a learned behavior. Children learn to be violent from their family and friends, and observe it in their neighborhoods. These behaviors are then reinforced by movies, video games, and music. But again, not all kids that watch the movies or play the games will be violent. It is not the average ordinary kid that kills.

Read more: http://www.momlogic.com/2009/11/why...lizabeth_olten_alex_mercado.php#ixzz0VuHS3ySX

 

[lajr56]

I think ILC's posts are being deleted after he posts them by either himself or a mod. . . I'm not sure though.

Thanks, it's good to know I am going crazy. Any more than normal that is.

 

[Mom2Yaya]

OK, go ahead and use the older step-sister's initials. It's certainly easier than calling her OSS21 or whatever.

However, all "the rules" still apply. No posting of ANY of her personal information. That will make this :froggie:go :crazy:.

Hoppy

Actually, the initials I have are for ANOTHER adult living at that address. Not the step sister. However, upon further review, I'm not sure that person lives there anymore so I will just leave it be.