NJ - " I am the Watcher..." -- A Hoax ?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

wfgodot said:
Where does it say there was no DNA from the husband or fingerprints from him or his wife?
Click to expand...

It said the DNA found was from an unidentified female, thus eliminating the husband. The article stated the DNA did not match the wife (so she must have volunteered a DNA sample), and no mention was made of any fingerprints on the documents, though I'm sure they should contain at least the prints of whomever opened and handled the letter. Then again, having the husband and wife's fingerprints all over them would not constitute guilt on their part as their prints would be expected since they were the recipients of the letters. Of course I'm sure this article gives only that info which the police made public; sounds to me the police know more than they are letting on.
 
Ragamuffin said:
This next sentence may give all of you pause, and disregard what I'm stating, but anyone who has had a real/what they perceived as real/paranormal experience - they would not be blasting it all over social media.
Click to expand...
snip

On the contrary -- WebSleuths has more than a few threads dedicated to members' experiences in this line. Social media is rich in what once was mainly an oral tradition.

the ridiculous claims of Amytiville are just that. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Other than the fact that both involve allegedly spooky real estate, the "Amytiville" case -- NY -- and this one -- NJ -- have not much in common.
 
Veritas5 said:
It said the DNA found was from an unidentified female, thus eliminating the husband. The article stated the DNA did not match the wife (so she must have volunteered a DNA sample), and no mention was made of any fingerprints on the documents, though I'm sure they should contain at least the prints of whomever opened and handled the letter. Then again, having the husband and wife's fingerprints all over them would not constitute guilt on their part as their prints would be expected since they were the recipients of the letters. Of course I'm sure this article gives only that info which the police made public; sounds to me the police know more than they are letting on.
Click to expand...
The article does not mention the husband's DNA. How does this "eliminate" him? The article does not mention fingerprints as it concerned information apparently revealed about DNA.
 
wendybtn said:
Guilt is for a criminal trial. Here, there would be a judgment for plaintiff or defendant, if the suit ever goes anywhere. IMHO, the defendants have nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...

Hook 'em :D
I spoke with a lawyer friend of mine about this case, she told me that the "preponderance of evidence standard" is low in civil cases, meaning the "burden of proof" needed to find the defendants at fault is not as high as in a criminal case. She seems to think that as long as the homeowners can prove that the sellers got that first letter (regardless of its source, if unknown) and did not disclose receipt of that letter to the buyer, then they might very well win based on NJ law which generically categorizes an unknown "stalker" of this type as a "disorganized person". To her it seems that particular law is not unlike the car insurance law: when some unknown driver sideswipes your parked car and flees the scene, your insurance company is forced to treat the incident as an "uninsured driver" crime. They pay you simply because they can't legally hang the blame on an unknown person.
 
cutter99 said:
Okay, so if a former resident lived there for 25 years and grew up there, and has very pleasant memories, a couple things come to mind.

1) If there had been a previous "Watcher", they never interacted with the previous residents, who had children in the house.

2) Nothing scary, horrible, or nefarious happened to anyone in the house in its' near recent history, from 1963 until present. That is over 50 years of first person recollection of the history of the home. The former resident mentioned in the article has nothing to gain from lying about the time she spent in the house.

3) The "Watcher" is new to this situation and is somehow attached or related to the current owners.

Does anyone know what renovations were done to the house by the new owners? Were they extensive, did they involve opening any of the walls?

I would think if you have the resources to purchase a $1.3 million dollar home, you would have the resources to put in a state of the art security system, with video monitoring. Something about this just does not sit right with me!
Click to expand...

One of the photos of the front of the house I remember seeing (from one of the many news articles) clearly showed a blue ADT sign right out in front, by the front porch steps...
 
Lizzysun said:
I will add to you couple of things to your observations. Long time reader, first time poster so bear with me.

1. If my husband, children and I, had recently moved into a new house and received a threatening letter by a self proclaimed "Watcher", I would at the very least contact the police as a heads up kind of thing. In this day in age, I wouldn't have simply shrugged it off.

2. I would immediately call the seller to find out if they had any experiences with the "Watcher." Possibly the sellers could lie, nonetheless I'd ask.

3. As aforementioned, I would have installed security cameras outside and inside and other high tech security equipment.

4. How did the buyers know the sellers received a letter 'on or about the week of May 26'? I think the buyers said the "Watcher" mentioned it in the letter to them. The specificity of the date is strange to me. Why would the "Watcher" not just say, "I've sent a message to the Woods too." As opposed to giving the approximate receipt date of letter? The main point of the Watcher's letter to the buyers would be to let buyers know the seller recently received a letter too. The exact timeframe of the letter doesn't seem necessary. An approximation of the timeframe-yes but exact timeframe-no.

5. Why would the "Watcher" send a letter to the sellers first? Wouldn't it be more important that the current buyers know of the Watcher's self proclaimed "rightful ownership and possession" of the house? The sellers are no longer pertinent.

6. Now we have the third generation of the "Watcher" watching the house. Decades of watching, wouldn't there be some whisperings and/or rumors going around the neighborhood and/or the town about this supposed "Watcher?" Especially with the proximity of the List murders.

7. Were the buyer's cell records examined to see if their phones pinged on a tower in Kearney where the letters were postmarked? I know cell record evidence is controversial, but it would at least rule out that the buyers had been near the mailbox location.

8. Did either buyer mention receiving these letters to family members, friends or co-workers? If I'd received a threatening letter I'd immediately tell my sister, friends etc. Simply for the sake of discussion, but also in case something happened to me. I would also ask the neighbors if they knew anything about the "Watcher."

9. Did the buyers warn the construction workers about the possibility of evil doings by the "Watcher" so they could be on alert?

9. Have they done a forensic study of buyer's finances? This goes to the "in over their head" theory.

10. Was there DNA evidence found? Fingerprints on stamp, envelope, and/or letter?

11. Buyers only received 3 letters in year? If I were the "Watcher" and my family had been consumed/obsessed with this house for nearly 100 years, I'd be writing a whole lot of letters.

12. Were the letters handwritten or typed? Goes to have police doing forensic examination of buyer's computers, mobile phones etc.

13. It's hard for me to imagine that one family could have such a vendetta, hatred, obsession against a house and its' occupants that it would consume them for nearly 100 years.

14. I just googled to see if I could find any fiction book (as I type that it could be a non-fiction book too) had a similar plotline. But didn't find anything.

I don't buy the buyer's story. The evidence or lack thereof doesn't add up to me. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
Click to expand...

I agree, the narrative is far too fantastical and far-fetched--while the huge possible "elephant-in-the-room" motive lurks behind the screen. What bugs me is that since the plaintiffs are not on trial, the authorities probably have no right to investigate them.
 
wfgodot said:
snip

On the contrary -- WebSleuths has more than a few threads dedicated to members' experiences in this line. Social media is rich in what once was mainly an oral tradition.



Other than the fact that both involve allegedly spooky real estate, the "Amytiville" case -- NY -- and this one -- NJ -- have not much in common.
Click to expand...

No, not much at all. Apart from being totally made up by people looking for money, they have nothing in common at all.
 
In my opinion this is a hoax concocted by the owners. The story is ridiculous and now they have hired a crisis PR firm....really? I think they are trying to circle the wagons now that people are publicly questioning their claims. I think we will find out within the next month that this is a hoax.
 
Cappuccino said:
This story has shades of The Amytiville Horror. Maybe they were hoping to sell a book and film rights....
Click to expand...

I think that may be their intention, but I can't see them getting a book/movie deal if the story is proven to be a hoax.
 
One thing I thought of...we always hear of "squatters" moving into unoccupied houses (even though they may be owned)...were the Woods family actually living in the house when they sold it? I had seen a source saying that the Woods' live in Massachusetts; another source claiming that they hadn't lived in the house for 2 years before the sale. Can anyone verify this info?
 
Yes, I too remember reading an article saying that they have been living in Cape Cod for the last two years. This comment was actually used to support the fact that the Woods were not desperate to sell the house since 2 years had passed.
This is a very interesting direction you are going in with this. Good thought. Perhaps since the Woods were not living there, someone or several others were squatting there and they are behind this whole letter writing thing. It would be interesting to find out if the neighbor saw any activity in the house since the Woods left. Hmmm,again, interesting Veritas5
 
The article I read said that the Woods had purchased the other house, but did not positively state they were living in it.

I would think squatting in Westfield, NJ not be that easy to pull off, for a couple reasons. You are talking about a prominent $1.35 million house in a great neighborhood, not your average home in a development that turned into a wasteland when the economy crashed.

My guess would be that the house was shown frequently by multiple agents and not on the market all that long.

Squatters in that area of New Jersey are not going to be well tolerated. It is a wealthy, upscale area that is heavily trafficked. It is not rural and any suspicious activity will attract attention. Most New Jesersians I know are not wall flowers and if something like squatting is going on in their neighborhood, the police will be informed and expected to do something about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 77 more.
Total: 251 (members: 78, guests: 173)

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
173
Total visitors
251
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,466
Messages
18,239,844
Members
234,381
Latest member
Kaee_Samonee
Back
Top