GUILTY MT - Sherry Arnold, 43, Sidney, 7 Jan 2012 - #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eoanthropus Dawsoni said:
They must have been living in the vehicle. The nearest motel rooms open probably would be Miles City, Glasgow, or Bismarck and even those are not going to be affordable for a couple of out of work losers.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, But it is my understanding that there was breakins in williston the weekend she went missing so it could be a possability they had money, or something stole to sell...... IMO
 
daisy.faithfull said:
Looking at that field I wonder if her shoe could fly so far off the road if she was hit by the car.

Whatever the case, maybe LE has tire tracks or a lack of tire tracks that has given them a good idea of what happened that morning.

What are snow tires like? Do those chains prevent tires from leaving skid marks like other tires? I wonder if there are any skid marks still remaining on the road.
Click to expand...

SBM

Last summer, a member of the Des Moines Iowa Police Department was hit (and run) by a drunk driver while he was directing traffic leaving the Iowa State Fair. His body was flung 47 feet. Amazingly, he survived and is already able to walk and talk:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120120/NEWS/301200041/1001/NEWS/?odyssey=nav|head

(warning: three hankie alert on the video clips!)

A vehicle-pedestrian impact can fling things like shoes (let alone whole bodies) an amazing distance.

Snow tires have tread patterns that are optimised for snow and ice (more zig-zaggy and deeper). They are heavier than regular tires and really, really cut into mileage.

I doubt they had chains on. It's a pain in the patoose to put the chains on and then you can only go a maximum of 30 mph. Well, you can push it a little, I suppose but you're likely to throw the chains.

Plus, if you drive with chains on dry pavement, you will damage your chains and the pavement; if you want to avoid LE attention, you would not drive around with chains on unless you are in a mandated area. It wouldn't just be LE, either; I know if I saw someone on my (fragile) gravel road with chains, I'd be calling 911 myself. The county barely maintains the road as it is, the few of us who live on this road don't need for it to be destroyed by someone using chains.

I strongly doubt that there were any skid marks because if there had been, I think LE would have focused in on the accident/abduction theory right away.
 
Questionning Mind said:
I think it would have taken those two way to long to cover her with old branches and dead trees. They wouldn't want to hang around any place to long because they weren't familiar with the area and really had no idea when someone may come upon them. I wonder if ANY new evidence has been reported?
Click to expand...

A good treeline is full of old branches and fallen trees. Those help shield the ground from the wind, provide habitat for a variety of small animals and birds and help fill in between the trees so that it is harder to nuisance trees to grow. A treeline should look pretty much the opposite of a park (neatly trimmed, generous spacing between trees, etc).

Here in Iowa, treelines often include wolf trees, which are deciduous trees that start branching very close to the ground. I don't know if this is true in Montana or North Dakota, though. If it is, well, even in winter, it is deceptively difficult to really see what is under a wolf tree; the leaf litter tends to be deep there because it is held in place by the lowest branches.
 
4UIhelp said:
Maybe so, But it is my understanding that there was breakins in williston the weekend she went missing so it could be a possability they had money, or something stole to sell...... IMO
Click to expand...

But even people who are earning 8K a month are living in their vehicles because there is no place else to stay.
 
daisy.faithfull said:
And LE is saying to look at dead trees. Its been speculated that came from one of the suspects, but there was an ex-fbi agent that commented that a witness would not be able to describe dead trees, scientifically analyzed evidence would give investigators that info though.
Click to expand...

I read that and went "huh?"

I'm a farm woman and I can tell the difference between young trees, mature trees, old growth trees and dead standing trees, winter or summer. Most mature deciduous trees in my area, I can identify in the winter based on bark, the way they branch and their location. Saplings are a little more difficult but with a little thought, I can usually ID them. Trees are like dogs or cattle, each type has identifying characteristics.

I'm also an expert at screaming "BE CAREFUL WITH THAT CHAINSAW!!!!"

I don't doubt that there are a lot of city people who could do the same. I've never had a formal course or apprenticeship, I just learned it by living in the country and learning what is good for my land.

Was the agent saying that the FBI would not accept a witness's account of the type and condition of trees? Because that just seems crazy to me.
 
In GA there was a case of a missing woman (Kristi Cornwall), and after about a year of searching, her brother was the one that finally located her body. In the meantime they all left no stone unturned and spent every free minute and financial resource they had looking for her. I realize there are things that make Sherry's case challenging and unique, but I wish law enforcement could help people who want to look for her, conduct a thorough search even though it's far and wide. Maybe they could start a coordinated gps database of roads that had been covered and searched so they don't doubleup or leave roads unchecked? It may take a year like in Kristi's case (or years), but people want to help, and her family wants her found. Give them the tools and resources and I'm certain people in the community will be relentless and thorough in a coordinated search.
 
4UIhelp said:
[/B]

If the law would release the public I KNOW many who are willing to day and night includeing myself look for her and do just as you say!!!
Click to expand...

I would want permission from the Arnold family.

The organiser would not be searching themselves or going onto anyone's land, they would be tracking down who is legally responsible for various tracts of land, explaining the situation and asking if those tracts of land have been searched and, if searched, how.

Plus attending gatherings like Sunday church, to present a plea to each congregation.

And have the people skills so that even if you contact the same person in three different ways, they are still willing to talk to you the fourth and fifth times.

Plus the money for topo maps of the area, enough knowledge to mark out areas via meets and bounds or via GPS.

It's complicated and it's not a job that a person can just take up for a few weeks (unless they get really lucky).

There's a reason why most families with a missing loved one never get a search like this underway. There just aren't that many people with the skill set to do it who are available to donate their time.
 
Noway said:
Why would a witness not recognize a dead tree as a dead tree? Pines would be easy of course but if surrounded by live trees (of same type), wouldn't identifying the dead ones be pretty easy?

eta
STEVE MOORE: Well, I think they`re determining it from the statements the guys made. I`m sure they said something like, "Well, yes, we hit her and she`s dead, and we can`t remember where we put her."

The fact, though, that they`re look for old growth trees in those tree belts along fields and with dead trees around would indicate to me that maybe they have some physical evidence. Things that were in the sole of their shoes. Things that the FBI lab would have come up with and said the tree was this old, it was dead. And then you can match that to the type of trees and where they would be in the area.

I think this is more, you know, witnesses say large trees along a road. When you`re looking for old growth trees, witnesses don`t say that. Evidence says that.

And the fact, by the way, that they`ve been charged with aggravated kidnapping pretty much says that they don`t believe the hit-and-run theory or the hit-and-take theory, because aggravated kidnapping in Montana means you kidnapped for a later purpose. So they are saying that the crime that aggravated it happened after they took her, not before.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/16/ijvm.01.html
Click to expand...

Regarding the first part, thank you for clearing that up. :)

I do understand that they are charged with aggravated kidnapping because she was taken for another purpose. I'm not sure if you are referring to my post about aggravated kidnapping and kidnapping, but I wasn't saying that I am questioning the aggravated kidnapping charges. I'm not clinging to the accident theory, but it took awhile and I think some people are tossing it around in their heads.

Anyway, I brought up the kidnapping because right now there is a case going on in MT where the defendants attorney filed a motion saying that MT's death penalty laws are unconstitutional because currently it is the judge that determines if aggravating circumstances exist. But the article specifically discussion of aggravating circumstances in murder.

It looks like it is the same way with aggravated kidnapping. The difference between aggravated kidnapping and kidnapping is those aggravating circumstances so I was wondering if like murder, it is up to the judge to determine the presence of aggravating circumstances.

I don't know, I think that it is just interesting what's going on with Miller and how it could have an affect on this case. And I was thinking that it relates to what Jacie E. brought up about the lesser included offenses.

I'm just trying to understand stuff, and I guess I'm just trying to move the pieces around to see how they fit. I'm sure people feel like a broken record most recently with me trying to figure out the whole federal gov. land, native land, state land, fed gov. charges, state charges, jurisdiction etc. etc. Maybe I need to put a warning at the beginning of my posts :)
 
GrainneDhu said:
I read that and went "huh?"

I'm a farm woman and I can tell the difference between young trees, mature trees, old growth trees and dead standing trees, winter or summer. Most mature deciduous trees in my area, I can identify in the winter based on bark, the way they branch and their location. Saplings are a little more difficult but with a little thought, I can usually ID them. Trees are like dogs or cattle, each type has identifying characteristics.

I'm also an expert at screaming "BE CAREFUL WITH THAT CHAINSAW!!!!"

I don't doubt that there are a lot of city people who could do the same. I've never had a formal course or apprenticeship, I just learned it by living in the country and learning what is good for my land.

Was the agent saying that the FBI would not accept a witness's account of the type and condition of trees? Because that just seems crazy to me.
Click to expand...


I do not know which ex-FBI agent made the comment, but it is possible he has never been to the area and (probable) he is not familiar with the various trees.


For those unfamiliar with the region I'll try to quickly explain the geography. There is quite a mixture of trees in the region and much depends on if they were in the river valleys or out on the plains. Until the area was settled, the valleys of the Missouri and Yellowstone were heavily forested, primarily with cottonwoods. The river bottoms are about 100 feel lower than the surrounding plains and the valley runs between five and ten miles wide. There are still a few isolated areas of original cottonwood forest with trees two hundred years old or more, but almost all of the forest has been removed because the valley is some of the most productive farmland in the country. The valley is crisscrossed with shelter belts, irrigation canals, and roads running every direction.

In order to prevent soil erosion farmers were encouraged to plant "shelter belts" between fields. In the valley most shelter belts are cottonwood or willow. Those trees require a lot of water, and are also very tolerant of the occasional flooding that has always been part of life in the valley. Out on the prairie outside of the valley that land is much more bare. Shelter belts are less frequent, but the more responsible farmers still try to keep trees growing. The land is much more dry, so Elm, Ash, Ponderosa Pine, and Russian Olive trees are favored. Every farm yard and old farmstead will have smaller shelter belts to protect the farm yard from wind and snow, but out across the areas that are strictly pasture trees are few and far between.

There are hundreds of coulees (small wooded valleys) that feed from the high prairie down into the river valleys. These coulees are naturally wooded, with cottonwoods and willows at the lower levels. As one moves up a coulee the trees change to ash, elm, and chokecherry. The closer one gets to the prairie, the smaller the trees. There are also small pockets of juniper throughout the coulees.

A look at the satellite view of the area shows the wooded valley and the more barren prairie grassland very well and gives a good idea as to the type of landscape.
 
I'm sorry if I missed this.. but do we have any ideas on which state she might be in? There's North Dakota, Montana, South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, even Nebraska.... And the topography along the North Dakota/Montana border varies greatly... It's very diverse.
 
M86 said:
I'm sorry if I missed this.. but do we have any ideas on which state she might be in? There's North Dakota, Montana, South Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, even Nebraska.... And the topography along the North Dakota/Montana border varies greatly... It's very diverse.
Click to expand...

North Dakota or Montana.
 
GrainneDhu said:
SBM



What people who don't live on the plains don't understand is that the plains want to be... plains. They aren't like forests, where you can see the disturbance in vegetation for years afterwards. They aren't like the deserts, where footprints can last for literally centuries in protected areas.

The plains have a relentless beauty all of their own.



I think that is the best comparison.



BLUSH!!! Thank you.

My fear is the possibility that one or both suspects are cooperating but have not the faintest idea of where they left her. It might not be a bargaining position at all, it may be simple ignorance.
Click to expand...

Last summer we took a long, multi-state road trip, and I was thinking about various cases I was following here on WS, and I thought that just about in any State, leaving a body somewhere even just off the highway, would later be like looking for a needle in a haystack. SO many areas without obvious landmarks, SO many long stretches between signs/exits. Not that I think that should deter anyone from being persistant in finding someone missing. And I agree, you're idea is a great one!
 
This is the case I was referring to if anyone else is interested in reading about it.

"By helicopter, by all-terrain vehicle and on foot, over the past year-and-a-half, Cornwell had searched the wilderness of North Georgia and nearby North Carolina for any remains of his sister Kristi Cornwell...They sold their lake-front vacation home to fund the search, paying for airplane and helicopter flights and mailing 80,000 fliers with information throughout Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee...Working with the GBI and using every lead they gave him, Richard Cornwell searched in every spare moment, using a meticulous system...He had a set process where he had to walk every foot of the area he was looking in," GBI spokesman John Bankhead said Monday. "He walked every square foot of an area."

http://www.ajc.com/news/brother-finds-cornwells-remains-794176.html
 
I have looked at the area on google maps and go down to street view when ever it allows, I did so on (W Holly St) Montana 16 west of the Post office and all along the field to the north of town I see nothing but red/orange flags, so with that said I am thinking that the flags may have been(gathered up) for a photo shoot. just sayin
 
BabyB said:
This is the case I was referring to if anyone else is interested in reading about it.

"By helicopter, by all-terrain vehicle and on foot, over the past year-and-a-half, Cornwell had searched the wilderness of North Georgia and nearby North Carolina for any remains of his sister Kristi Cornwell...They sold their lake-front vacation home to fund the search, paying for airplane and helicopter flights and mailing 80,000 fliers with information throughout Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee...Working with the GBI and using every lead they gave him, Richard Cornwell searched in every spare moment, using a meticulous system...He had a set process where he had to walk every foot of the area he was looking in," GBI spokesman John Bankhead said Monday. "He walked every square foot of an area."

http://www.ajc.com/news/brother-finds-cornwells-remains-794176.html
Click to expand...


It says they searched two square miles. Looking up from my computer as I type this and gazing out my window, the view consists of about 50 square miles. The counties involved in this case total over 12,000 square miles, larger than the state or Maryland. Reduced to an area that they could have driven in an hour, the area is only about 6,000 square miles. That is larger than the state of Connecticut.
 
An added factor in searches is the weather. Here in the Black Hills it was 55 degrees on Saturday afternoon yet we woke up to 5 new inches of snow on the ground Sunday morning. If any searchers were to get caught or disoriented in the fields during a weather episode then you would need searchers to look for searchers.
 
Jacie Estes said:
An added factor in searches is the weather. Here in the Black Hills it was 55 degrees on Saturday afternoon yet we woke up to 5 new inches of snow on the ground Sunday morning. If any searchers were to get caught or disoriented in the fields during a weather episode then you would need searchers to look for searchers.
Click to expand...

I've seen that happen before.
 
4UIhelp said:
If these two had cell phones and I dont know if they did,but if so,and the law looked at the pings it may narrow down areas of search. Even a few seconds between pings is crucial... IMO
I found this as I was searching for info on how pinging works.->

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2010/03/14/understanding-cell-phone-pings/
Click to expand...

I agree with you and I hope they had a cell phone or phones and that LE has obtained any pings. We have discussed that cell phone coverage is very spotty in those areas of ND and MT so it's possible there wasn't much cell phone coverage at all. Anything would help though I would think.

I keep wondering how LE seems certain that the search area is in northern ND and MT. Why not south of Sidney? Spell was found south of the area in Rapid City.
 
liltexans said:
I agree with you and I hope they had a cell phone or phones and that LE has obtained any pings. We have discussed that cell phone coverage is very spotty in those areas of ND and MT so it's possible there wasn't much cell phone coverage at all. Anything would help though I would think.

I keep wondering how LE seems certain that the search area is in northern ND and MT. Why not south of Sidney? Spell was found south of the area in Rapid City.
Click to expand...

I have good cell service. Unless a person is at the bottom of a valley cell coverage is quite good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 2,546 (members: 67, guests: 2,479)

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
2,479
Total visitors
2,546
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,928
Messages
18,131,991
Members
231,187
Latest member
atriumproperties
Back
Top