Murder Charges

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

I don't know if those who keep questioning the excessive number of phone calls to SM as excessive are as old as I am...but, boy do I remember, back before caller id and 'missed calls' were even working ideas (at least to my knowledge) calling people repeatedly hoping to get an answer...hoping they were just walking in the door. Okay, boys. Yup...I was a stalker, lol. If I was with a new guy I was really into, I might call a million times (maybe even hang up some times if he did answer), walk my dog past his house, when I was older drive by his house. Yeah, most of us girls did this stuff back then. We would have been horrified to know that in the distant future caller ID would hamper all this. I don't know how girls actually "stalk" guys these days with all this technology. But I do know it was innocent. It was fun. It was what we all did. So, no matter what was going on, I don't find a few one way calls indicative of anything. I don't think it shows one way or the other that she cared too much, or he cared too little. I don't think it shows anything, to be honest. He called her first. We don't know what she said. She called him back multiple times. We don't know what was said when she actually connected with someone and who that someone was. We just don't know.
 
There's a woman I know who I used to work at the same company and she'll do that. She'll call and if she doesn't get an answer or if my phone rolls right into VM, instead of leaving a msg or sending me a txt, like normal people do, she'll call again. And again. And again. One evening I saw on my phone log she had called 5 times within 10 in. I was like wtf! She never did leave a msg. Turns out she was on her evening commute home and she wanted to chat and wasn't going to stop calling. So glad I missed those calls! :shakehead:

Some people are super anxious and expect to reach a human immediately.
 
Madeleine74 said:
There's a woman I know who I used to work at the same company and she'll do that. She'll call and if she doesn't get an answer or if my phone rolls right into VM, instead of leaving a msg or sending me a txt, like normal people do, she'll call again. And again. And again. One evening I saw on my phone log she had called 5 times within 10 in. I was like wtf! She never did leave a msg. Turns out she was on her evening commute home and she wanted to chat and wasn't going to stop calling. So glad I missed those calls! :shakehead:

Some people are super anxious and expect to reach a human immediately.
Click to expand...

Yeah, actually now that you mention it, I have several acquaintances who do this. I hesitate to call them friends. They're not bad people, but they have no true friends because they have no boundaries- I put up with it, as best I can, because no one else will, and, as I said, they're not bad people.

One actually got hold of my son's cell number. So, if she doesn't reach me by cell, immediately, she will actually call my husband's cell, then my home phone, then my son's cell. OMG! And then she'll start again.

Somehow, I don't see Heather as being that 'stalkerish'. He gave her a reason to keep calling. IMO.
 
Madeleine74 said:
There's a woman I know who I used to work at the same company and she'll do that. She'll call and if she doesn't get an answer or if my phone rolls right into VM, instead of leaving a msg or sending me a txt, like normal people do, she'll call again. And again. And again. One evening I saw on my phone log she had called 5 times within 10 in. I was like wtf! She never did leave a msg. Turns out she was on her evening commute home and she wanted to chat and wasn't going to stop calling. So glad I missed those calls! :shakehead:

Some people are super anxious and expect to reach a human immediately.
Click to expand...

You just described my mother. If I didn't respond, it's because I'm physically unable to. NOT hearing the phone ring 3 times is the same as not hearing it ring once. Returning to 7 missed calls will have the same effect as returning to 1 missed call. :banghead: o/t..
 
Madeleine74 said:
We don't know what time the sexts were sent. We don't even know the specific day (day before? day off? sometime before that?). Piecing together anything between IE texts and subsequent calls is impossible because there's nothing that lines all of it up for us right now and we do not have the information. You could make up 1,000 different permutations of possibilities. There's only 1 correct sequence but this will remain unknown until, at least, trial, and possibly be unknown forever exactly how each thing went down. There's a great need to know what happened minute-by-minute, where each person stood, what each person said, the look on their face, the inflection in their voice. We'll never know that.

Back to the subject of this particular thread (the murder charges). Those charges IMO are not going to be dropped. Whether some kind of "deal" is negotiated later is anyone's guess and we won't know that either until it's a fait accompli. LE has drawn the line in the sand. The charges are real and they are sticking right now.
Click to expand...

I can only think of a few, but 1,000? that's even above my pay grade.
 
nosysw said:
Yeah, actually now that you mention it, I have several acquaintances who do this. I hesitate to call them friends. They're not bad people, but they have no true friends because they have no boundaries- I put up with it, as best I can, because no one else will, and, as I said, they're not bad people.

One actually got hold of my son's cell number. So, if she doesn't reach me by cell, immediately, she will actually call my husband's cell, then my home phone, then my son's cell. OMG! And then she'll start again.

Somehow, I don't see Heather as being that 'stalkerish'. He gave her a reason to keep calling. IMO.
Click to expand...

(Do you know my sister...)
 
nosysw said:
I don't know if those who keep questioning the excessive number of phone calls to SM as excessive are as old as I am...but, boy do I remember, back before caller id and 'missed calls' were even working ideas (at least to my knowledge) calling people repeatedly hoping to get an answer...hoping they were just walking in the door. Okay, boys. Yup...I was a stalker, lol. If I was with a new guy I was really into, I might call a million times (maybe even hang up some times if he did answer), walk my dog past his house, when I was older drive by his house. Yeah, most of us girls did this stuff back then. We would have been horrified to know that in the distant future caller ID would hamper all this. I don't know how girls actually "stalk" guys these days with all this technology. But I do know it was innocent. It was fun. It was what we all did. So, no matter what was going on, I don't find a few one way calls indicative of anything. I don't think it shows one way or the other that she cared too much, or he cared too little. I don't think it shows anything, to be honest. He called her first. We don't know what she said. She called him back multiple times. We don't know what was said when she actually connected with someone and who that someone was. We just don't know.
Click to expand...

BBM-

I remember doing the same. Yep, it was fun to ride by a guy's house hoping one wouldn't be seen.I'm sure young women in this day and age still do the same stuff. No harm done if everyone involved is single.
 
nosysw said:
Yeah, actually now that you mention it, I have several acquaintances who do this. I hesitate to call them friends. They're not bad people, but they have no true friends because they have no boundaries- I put up with it, as best I can, because no one else will, and, as I said, they're not bad people.

One actually got hold of my son's cell number. So, if she doesn't reach me by cell, immediately, she will actually call my husband's cell, then my home phone, then my son's cell. OMG! And then she'll start again.

Somehow, I don't see Heather as being that 'stalkerish'. He gave her a reason to keep calling. IMO.
Click to expand...

LOL! I know people like this too. One of my fiancees friends does this constantly. If he does not pick up for this one friend of his, the friend will begin calling me non stop, then calling our other friends, then calling our land line, leaving us Facebook messages. It's gotten to the point where I just ignore him. I wonder if it ever occurs to him, that if we don't pick up, it is because we are busy and cannot talk or we simply do not want to talk lol!
 
kenya2009 said:
LOL! I know people like this too. One of my fiancees friends does this constantly. If he does not pick up for this one friend of his, the friend will begin calling me non stop, then calling our other friends, then calling our land line, leaving us Facebook messages. It's gotten to the point where I just ignore him. I wonder if it ever occurs to him, that if we don't pick up, it is because we are busy and cannot talk or we simply do not want to talk lol!
Click to expand...

Most people I know have their cell phones with them at all times. That said, in most cases the BBM is the reason that people don't answer their phones. They simply don't want to talk. IMO
 
ISWMLE said:
BBM - if they had no communication between Nov 5 and Dec 17, why would SM call with the intention to tell Heather to leave him alone? she had already moved on
Click to expand...

That's a good point if you truly believe they had no communication between those dates.
 
Madeleine74 said:
There's a woman I know who I used to work at the same company and she'll do that. She'll call and if she doesn't get an answer or if my phone rolls right into VM, instead of leaving a msg or sending me a txt, like normal people do, she'll call again. And again. And again. One evening I saw on my phone log she had called 5 times within 10 in. I was like wtf! She never did leave a msg. Turns out she was on her evening commute home and she wanted to chat and wasn't going to stop calling. So glad I missed those calls! :shakehead:

Some people are super anxious and expect to reach a human immediately.
Click to expand...
I have the opposite problem. If my mother cannot reach me on my landline, she hangs up on the answering machine. So there is no message, just a hang up, and I don't have caller ID. And she won't call my cell phone, because if I didn't answer the landline, I must be busy. (or out of the house, Mom...) Then she complains when I don't call her back. :bang:
 
CHARGES ARE DROPPED !!!!!!!!!! Simply unbelievable. Speechless.
 
If the prosecution ever decides to try the Moorers for murder in the future, will Markley Dennis automatically preside? (If he hasn't retired by then.)
 
A Facebook account in the name of Sidney Moorer celebrated the dismissal of murder charges in a post dated March 10.

The post also made various accusations against Horry County police, the solicitor’s office and Circuit Judge Steven John, one of two judges presiding over the case.
Click to expand...

In a news release the solicitor’s office sent to local media Tuesday, Richardson said, “in preparation of trial on kidnapping and obstruction of justice charges, the state on March 10, 2016 dismissed, with leave to re-indict the charges of murder and two counts of indecent exposure against defendant Sidney Moorer.”
Click to expand...
The wording in Richardson's statement intrigues me. Is he saying they dropped the murder charges, for now, so they could turn all of their focus to the kidnapping charges?


http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_dd746884-e70b-11e5-ab83-2b8e42b844bb.html
 
Surfside said:
The wording in Richardson's statement intrigues me. Is he saying they dropped the murder charges, for now, so they could turn all of their focus to the kidnapping charges?


http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_dd746884-e70b-11e5-ab83-2b8e42b844bb.html
Click to expand...

And the defense is letting the state go back and forth with charges until something sticks? That's what this sounds like.

I have to wonder what they're smoking in the Solicitor's office.

The warrant language re: kidnapping is in this link:
http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/24804641/hcpd-couple-to-be-charged-with-murder-of-heather-elvis

"The kidnapping warrants state that the couple "did unlawfully seize, confine, kidnap, abduct or carry away Heather Elvis by any means whatsoever without the authority of the law."

Recall that after the arrest, the Solicitor said we think of kidnapping as putting a bag over someone's head and taking them away/out of state, but (simply) keeping someone from leaving is considered kidnapping. So...they're going to trial on a claim that Heather was kept from...leaving the landing? Then where is she? Because according to the state, the M's left the landing.

This will be fascinating to watch.
 
EmmaRose said:
If the prosecution ever decides to try the Moorers for murder in the future, will Markley Dennis automatically preside? (If he hasn't retired by then.)
Click to expand...

Oh geez I hope not! (but probably..)
Maybe they are waiting for him to retire before bringing charges back. (I know this isn't realistic just trying to find the light in all of this..)
Wishful thinking?:please:
 
jillycat said:
And the defense is letting the state go back and forth with charges until something sticks? That's what this sounds like.

I have to wonder what they're smoking in the Solicitor's office.

The warrant language re: kidnapping is in this link:
http://www.wmbfnews.com/story/24804641/hcpd-couple-to-be-charged-with-murder-of-heather-elvis

"The kidnapping warrants state that the couple "did unlawfully seize, confine, kidnap, abduct or carry away Heather Elvis by any means whatsoever without the authority of the law."

Recall that after the arrest, the Solicitor said we think of kidnapping as putting a bag over someone's head and taking them away/out of state, but (simply) keeping someone from leaving is considered kidnapping. So...they're going to trial on a claim that Heather was kept from...leaving the landing? Then where is she? Because according to the state, the M's left the landing.

This will be fascinating to watch.
Click to expand...

Maybe they are saying they kidnapped her at the landing and brought her to their home and didn't let her leave.

They don't have to prove H is dead to convict them of kidnapping. Maybe one of the missing pages of evidence that were leaked contained the kidnapping evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 132 more.
Total: 2,063 (members: 133, guests: 1,930)

Online statistics

Members online
133
Guests online
1,930
Total visitors
2,063
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,323
Messages
18,122,747
Members
231,012
Latest member
sadiew85
Back
Top