Found Safe NJ - unidentified woman, 20s, bloodied & screaming for help in semi cab, South Brunswick, August 3, 2022

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Glad she's been safely located. I wonder why they're referring to the suspected attacker as an "actor". It should be fairly easy to ask the victim who attacked her. They already know the driver of the truck was refusing to let her get out of the truck. He obviously saw the guy coming to the aid of the injured passenger who was trying to escape. At minimum, the driver was refusing to let her get out of the vehicle. That's kidnapping, right?

How much more proof do they need? JMO
 
Betty P said:
Glad she's been safely located. I wonder why they're referring to the suspected attacker as an "actor". It should be fairly easy to ask the victim who attacked her. They already know the driver of the truck was refusing to let her get out of the truck. He obviously saw the guy coming to the aid of the injured passenger who was trying to escape. At minimum, the driver was refusing to let her get out of the vehicle. That's kidnapping, right?

How much more proof do they need? JMO
Click to expand...
I've seen verified LE and SAR here refer to suspects, perps or POIs as "actors" in other cases. I think it's just LE jargon.

For example, in the Texas statute we see:

Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code:
(1) "Act" means a bodily movement, whether voluntary or involuntary, and includes speech.
(2) "Actor" means a person whose criminal responsibility is in issue in a criminal action. Whenever the term "suspect" is used in this code, it means "actor."

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

statutes.capitol.texas.gov
 
Betty P said:
Glad she's been safely located. I wonder why they're referring to the suspected attacker as an "actor". It should be fairly easy to ask the victim who attacked her. They already know the driver of the truck was refusing to let her get out of the truck. He obviously saw the guy coming to the aid of the injured passenger who was trying to escape. At minimum, the driver was refusing to let her get out of the vehicle. That's kidnapping, right?

How much more proof do they need? JMO
Click to expand...
That IS a very strange term even if it's a legit term. I've never heard of it and have followed cases here for quite some time, but maybe I zoned out hearing that at times. Weird!
 
MsMarple said:
I've seen verified LE and SAR here refer to suspects, perps or POIs as "actors" in other cases. I think it's just LE jargon.

For example, in the Texas statute we see:

Sec. 1.07. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this code:
(1) "Act" means a bodily movement, whether voluntary or involuntary, and includes speech.
(2) "Actor" means a person whose criminal responsibility is in issue in a criminal action. Whenever the term "suspect" is used in this code, it means "actor."

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

statutes.capitol.texas.gov
Click to expand...
I have seen that term used as well, imo meaning prime suspect, who they believe and hope will face consequences. Jmo.
 
JerseyWasHome2 said:
I wonder if it's a term unique to certain geographic regions. Either way - good, and I hope he faces consequences!!
Click to expand...
Very good point, that might be the case. I have rarely heard the term in my neck of the woods, and seems to be a more modern term now being used. JME.
 
Stunned said:
Now that I’ve thought about it I’ve heard it on NCIS. And not nicely.
Click to expand...
Oh maybe, imo there are at least 3 experts here that I have seen use the term. One is a SAR expert, trackergd. Very informative posts on Suzanne Morphew's forum, and iirc Linda Stoltzfoos. A lot of actual physical "boots on ground" work for poor Linda.
 
Last edited:
We had a case here....posted on NextDoor. A Ring video by a resident in which a woman was screaming for help from an open window in a car that raced by, at night. Police were informed, given the video footage etc....but we never heard anything more about it. It was frightening.
 
Wow!
I was earlier thinking/hoping it might be a father daughter issue, nothing nefarious.

It's husband and wife! They didn't even know they were being looked for.

Well, also doubt the woman was "about 20" , married to a 52 year old.
And here:
"They say that after falling, the wife even sent a photo of the injury to her daughter to tell her what happened."
bbm, from in the link above.
Long hair, petite. Just looked young.

So glad this is nicely resolved.
I hope the witness doesn't feel bad. He did the right thing!
 
I hate the stance that LE usually has towards domestic situations. Why is a domestic situation any less dangerous than a kidnapping or assault perpetrated by a stranger?

This sounds like an accident but it could’ve been something else and the witness did the right thing to report it and it’s LE job to do something about it. No resources were wasted, this is literally their job. A woman was distressed and injured, someone reported it, LE investigated and thankfully it sounds like it was just an accident.
 
Lusitana said:
I hate the stance that LE usually has towards domestic situations. Why is a domestic situation any less dangerous than a kidnapping or assault perpetrated by a stranger?

This sounds like an accident but it could’ve been something else and the witness did the right thing to report it and it’s LE job to do something about it. No resources were wasted, this is literally their job. A woman was distressed and injured, someone reported it, LE investigated and thankfully it sounds like it was just an accident.
Click to expand...

I don't feel like they frame statements that way to imply that DV is less serious or dangerous; instead, I think it is meant to try and put a pin in any hysteria over some maniac roaming the streets killing at random. I know it comes off tacky-sounding when they say things like "just a DV incident", but I don't feel they are downplaying anything. And seriously, in a day and age when this country has a hissy fit if someone makes a derogatory remark about absolutely everything, why on earth would LE open themselves up to more criticism and outrage by making such an inflammatory statement implying that DV is just an eye-roll and should be ignored?

It's a prime example of why context is so important.
 
deadfoot13 said:
I don't feel like they frame statements that way to imply that DV is less serious or dangerous; instead, I think it is meant to try and put a pin in any hysteria over some maniac roaming the streets killing at random. I know it comes off tacky-sounding when they say things like "just a DV incident", but I don't feel they are downplaying anything. And seriously, in a day and age when this country has a hissy fit if someone makes a derogatory remark about absolutely everything, why on earth would LE open themselves up to more criticism and outrage by making such an inflammatory statement implying that DV is just an eye-roll and should be ignored?

It's a prime example of why context is so important.
Click to expand...
It was not just the statement from this case, other posters were sharing other similar cases where dangerous situations were downplayed as “domestic” in nature and people ended up dead.

Wasn’t really a jab to this particular LE, it appears they did their job correctly but following up on the report and making sure everyone was safe. Sorry if it came out weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 71 more.
Total: 2,660 (members: 72, guests: 2,588)

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
2,588
Total visitors
2,660
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,923
Messages
18,101,649
Members
230,955
Latest member
ClueCrusader
Back
Top