NY - Karina Vetrano, 30, found murdered, Queens, 2 Aug 2016 #2

[Forager]

Yes I believe more has grown since google street view images were taken. Hurrican Sandy hit very hard in that area in 2012 so a lot of that area was under water, and I'm thinking the weeds have since grown back. If that makes any sense =)

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Good point. Not only is the Google Streetview imagery from the winter, it's from the winter of 2013, four growing seasons ago.

The Bing imagery isn't much more recent; it's from 7/14:

 

[ThinkHard]

I've added map markers to reflect your mention of two of suspects in other crimes in the area. (Which isn't to say that they are necessarily related to the Veterano case.)

Case map screenshot:

View attachment 101550

One marker is for the suspect in a 8/28/15 rape in Canarsie, Queens (the orange marker to the far west of the map). NEWS12 BROOKLYN,
Police release sketch of Canarsie rape suspect

View attachment 101547
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The suspect (below) in a series of robberies (the five orange pistol icons to the far east of the map) in Dec.'15 and Jan.'16. QNS.COM, Suspect wanted in string of south Queens armed robberies

View attachment 101548

To my knowledge Canarsie is in Brooklyn, rather then Queens, but is close to Queens as it's the far end of Brooklyn.

 

[Forager]

To my knowledge Canarsie is in Brooklyn, rather then Queens, but is close to Queens as it's the far end of Brooklyn.

Ouch! You're right!

 

[Jwal-NZ]

It's the internet, not a court of law.

Really? What a valuable point...

LE has specifically said that he is not a suspect or a person of interest so he should not be called a rapist or treated like KV's murderer- I thought this would be common sense: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

He is innocent until proven guilty- on the internet, in the "real world" and in court.

Obviously this can't and won't stop people spending hours comparing his sketch (which could be completely inaccurate) to sketches of suspects in other cases.

But, have you ever considered if someone spots the guy in the sketch or someone who resembles him in the "real world" and decides to serve out their own version of "natural justice" because on the internet they have seen people referring to him as a rapist and KV's murderer?!?

It may be the internet but wrongfully accusing people for crimes they have not committed on the internet can and has caused great harm in the past.

The case of Sunil Tripathi demonstrates the dangers of wrongfully accusing people on the internet: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php ; http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/tigresses-roar-keralas-pulikali-dance-sees-women-actors-first-time-200-years-50026

As the article above states:

Getting the story wrong has consequences, even in an age when the error may be as seemingly innocent as hitting retweet.

Actions do have consequences...even on the internet....

 

[FindHG]

Just read a very gracious and detailed email, sent this evening, from an NYPD Detective re the images of the guys not in the weeds. In summary, after viewing the images many times for "numerous hours," the "Detective Bureau of the NYPD with [their] investigation, the Task Force Detectives" did not believe at this point there are any people apparent, for a number of reasons that make sense to me.

- the area of focus is about 10 - 20 feet above ground.
- the reeds by the guardrail are 6 to 9 ft tall and too dense to see through
- a number of "natural factors (sunlight, leaf movement, tree shadows and wind)" resulted in the illusion of possible people there (and admittedly my eye for patterns)
- also included attachments showing the location of the video, similar to what has been posted on thread.

The email ended in kind and complementary terms to those willing to "volunteer their time to help the Vetrano's and other crime victims families get justice for their loss."

I'm sorry for wasting everybody's time and for strained eyes, and thank you for your indulgence.

 

[OldSteve]

Just read a very gracious and detailed email, sent this evening, from an NYPD Detective re the images of the guys not in the weeds. In summary, after viewing the images many times for "numerous hours," the "Detective Bureau of the NYPD with [their] investigation, the Task Force Detectives" did not believe at this point there are any people apparent, for a number of reasons that make sense to me.

- the area of focus is about 10 - 20 feet above ground.
- the reeds by the guardrail are 6 to 9 ft tall and too dense to see through
- a number of "natural factors (sunlight, leaf movement, tree shadows and wind)" resulted in the illusion of possible people there (and admittedly my eye for patterns)
- also included attachments showing the location of the video, similar to what has been posted on thread.

The email ended in kind and complementary terms to those willing to "volunteer their time to help the Vetrano's and other crime victims families get justice for their loss."

I'm sorry for wasting everybody's time and for strained eyes, and thank you for your indulgence.

No need to be sorry - your effort was a good one!

 

[Momoffourboys]

Just read a very gracious and detailed email, sent this evening, from an NYPD Detective re the images of the guys not in the weeds. In summary, after viewing the images many times for "numerous hours," the "Detective Bureau of the NYPD with [their] investigation, the Task Force Detectives" did not believe at this point there are any people apparent, for a number of reasons that make sense to me.

- the area of focus is about 10 - 20 feet above ground.
- the reeds by the guardrail are 6 to 9 ft tall and too dense to see through
- a number of "natural factors (sunlight, leaf movement, tree shadows and wind)" resulted in the illusion of possible people there (and admittedly my eye for patterns)
- also included attachments showing the location of the video, similar to what has been posted on thread.

The email ended in kind and complementary terms to those willing to "volunteer their time to help the Vetrano's and other crime victims families get justice for their loss."

I'm sorry for wasting everybody's time and for strained eyes, and thank you for your indulgence.

Don't be sorry. You put in time and effort to help find a brutal murderer.

 

[Sgt. Friday]

I agree do not apologize for a worthwhile effort, you are to be commended!!

 

[bettiepageturner]

Just read a very gracious and detailed email, sent this evening, from an NYPD Detective re the images of the guys not in the weeds. In summary, after viewing the images many times for "numerous hours," the "Detective Bureau of the NYPD with [their] investigation, the Task Force Detectives" did not believe at this point there are any people apparent, for a number of reasons that make sense to me.

- the area of focus is about 10 - 20 feet above ground.
- the reeds by the guardrail are 6 to 9 ft tall and too dense to see through
- a number of "natural factors (sunlight, leaf movement, tree shadows and wind)" resulted in the illusion of possible people there (and admittedly my eye for patterns)
- also included attachments showing the location of the video, similar to what has been posted on thread.

The email ended in kind and complementary terms to those willing to "volunteer their time to help the Vetrano's and other crime victims families get justice for their loss."

I'm sorry for wasting everybody's time and for strained eyes, and thank you for your indulgence.

Thank you so much for reaching out about this! It's citizen sleuths like you we need more of. I'm also impressed by the detailed, professional, and friendly response you received!

 

[Inthedetails]

Just read a very gracious and detailed email, sent this evening, from an NYPD Detective re the images of the guys not in the weeds. In summary, after viewing the images many times for "numerous hours," the "Detective Bureau of the NYPD with [their] investigation, the Task Force Detectives" did not believe at this point there are any people apparent, for a number of reasons that make sense to me.

- the area of focus is about 10 - 20 feet above ground.
- the reeds by the guardrail are 6 to 9 ft tall and too dense to see through
- a number of "natural factors (sunlight, leaf movement, tree shadows and wind)" resulted in the illusion of possible people there (and admittedly my eye for patterns)
- also included attachments showing the location of the video, similar to what has been posted on thread.

The email ended in kind and complementary terms to those willing to "volunteer their time to help the Vetrano's and other crime victims families get justice for their loss."

I'm sorry for wasting everybody's time and for strained eyes, and thank you for your indulgence.

What I love about WS is that people here care. No apologies needed for caring.

 

[Sallie22]

Nice job. We all have busy lives and I think it is amazing how everyone is trying to help. I also like the fact you kept the case on the officers minds. There is a lot going on in this world right now, and it wouldn't surprise me how many cases get put on the back burner.

 

[FindHG]

Oh boy... thank you all for the same things, websleuthers, and for teaching me how and for keeping me learning. Always take away more here than I give, without fail.

My thoughts and prayers continue to be with the Vetrano's, their family and friends, awaiting justice for Karina, and all the good people, LE, neighbors, and lots of people who care to see it too.

Thank you, btw, SeesSeas, for going out on a limb with me, and beyond, for your courage and great persistence. LE's response, it notes your call and is due to you. I'm ready if you are, for the next one ?

 

[DatelineFan]

Really? What a valuable point...

LE has specifically said that he is not a suspect or a person of interest so he should not be called a rapist or treated like KV's murderer- I thought this would be common sense: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

He is innocent until proven guilty- on the internet, in the "real world" and in court.

Obviously this can't and won't stop people spending hours comparing his sketch (which could be completely inaccurate) to sketches of suspects in other cases.

But, have you ever considered if someone spots the guy in the sketch or someone who resembles him in the "real world" and decides to serve out their own version of "natural justice" because on the internet they have seen people referring to him as a rapist and KV's murderer?!?

It may be the internet but wrongfully accusing people for crimes they have not committed on the internet can and has caused great harm in the past.

The case of Sunil Tripathi demonstrates the dangers of wrongfully accusing people on the internet: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php ; http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/tigresses-roar-keralas-pulikali-dance-sees-women-actors-first-time-200-years-50026

As the article above states:



Actions do have consequences...even on the internet....

BRAVO!!! A "thanks" wasn't enough!

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[Kaley Smith]

Just to encourage you sleuthers, a police officer working on another case told me she has read everything pertaining to her case on the Websleuths site. She recognized the value of research done by sleuthers, some of it quite meticulous and not just idle speculation.

 

[RPsleuth]

Where and when has it ever been stated that the man in the sketch in KV's case is a suspect or as you put it a "rapist"?!?

As far as I am aware, the person in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect or a person of interest and just someone who was seen by an eyewitness in the surrounding area who may have seen something and /or have information regarding KV's murder: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

I think it is extremely dangerous and unwise to assume the person in the sketch is KV's murderer. He may be completely innocent and have information regarding who is responsible yet be deterred from providing this valuable information because people have started labelling him as a rapist and murderer.

Innocent until proven guilty- he is not a suspect or person of interest and so should not be treated as such.

Pretty silly argument. Anyone can be a suspect. All of those sketches are suspects whether you want to believe it or not, because they were drawn of the suspect for their respective crimes. The police do not have to tell you who is or who isn't a suspect. Oh and just because they say they aren't a suspect is simply a ploy to get someone to rat them out. They do lie too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jwal-NZ]

Pretty silly argument. Anyone can be a suspect. All of those sketches are suspects whether you want to believe it or not, because they were drawn of the suspect for their respective crimes. The police do not have to tell you who is or who isn't a suspect. Oh and just because they say they aren't a suspect is simply a ploy to get someone to rat them out. They do lie too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for telling me my argument is silly...

I thought this forum was for speaking up for those without a voice, rather than criticising those that are trying to do their best to protect and speak up for the innocent that are not here to defend themselves against defamatory comments made by people relying upon unsubstantiated conceptions of investigative techniques that they assume are being used by LE in this case.

The guy in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect nor is he a person of interest- he is innocent until proven guilty (whether you acknowledge it or not): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

As I said in my former post, it is incredibly dangerous to wrongfully accuse people (even on the internet) for crimes they have not done- this can and has caused great harm in the past. I suggest you read the following article to get your head around the dangers of this: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php

I feel passionate about reinforcing this because I have done pro bono work for innocent people that have been wrongfully convicted and seen first hand just how dangerous assumptions like yours are.

P.S: Why have you started “following me” and my “silly arguments”?

 

[Mountaingazer]

Thank you for telling me my argument is silly...

I thought this forum was for speaking up for those without a voice, rather than criticising those that are trying to do their best to protect and speak up for the innocent that are not here to defend themselves against defamatory comments made by people relying upon unsubstantiated conceptions of investigative techniques that they assume are being used by LE in this case.

The guy in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect nor is he a person of interest- he is innocent until proven guilty (whether you acknowledge it or not): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

As I said in my former post, it is incredibly dangerous to wrongfully accuse people (even on the internet) for crimes they have not done- this can and has caused great harm in the past. I suggest you read the following article to get your head around the dangers of this: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php

I feel passionate about reinforcing this because I have done pro bono work for innocent people that have been wrongfully convicted and seen first hand just how dangerous assumptions like yours are.

P.S: Why have you started “following me” and my “silly arguments”?

I don't think your argument was silly, but just wanted to point out that the default setting in the Tapatalk app is to follow anyone who's post you quote, you have to go in and manually change it. I see they are using Tapatalk, so the follow was probably not intentional.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[RPsleuth]

Thank you for telling me my argument is silly...

I thought this forum was for speaking up for those without a voice, rather than criticising those that are trying to do their best to protect and speak up for the innocent that are not here to defend themselves against defamatory comments made by people relying upon unsubstantiated conceptions of investigative techniques that they assume are being used by LE in this case.

The guy in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect nor is he a person of interest- he is innocent until proven guilty (whether you acknowledge it or not): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

As I said in my former post, it is incredibly dangerous to wrongfully accuse people (even on the internet) for crimes they have not done- this can and has caused great harm in the past. I suggest you read the following article to get your head around the dangers of this: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php

I feel passionate about reinforcing this because I have done pro bono work for innocent people that have been wrongfully convicted and seen first hand just how dangerous assumptions like yours are.

P.S: Why have you started “following me” and my “silly arguments”?

I'm not sure I'm following you. But I am following this case here and thought I would comment to your post. We can agree to disagree. But every sketch is of a criminal. That is not to be disputed. The question is whether the different sketches are the same person. That's what I'm trying to say. Several sketches appear to be the same person. The sketch is a person of interest as he was seen with a winter hat on his head in August near the scene of a crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RPsleuth]

Thank you for telling me my argument is silly...

I thought this forum was for speaking up for those without a voice, rather than criticising those that are trying to do their best to protect and speak up for the innocent that are not here to defend themselves against defamatory comments made by people relying upon unsubstantiated conceptions of investigative techniques that they assume are being used by LE in this case.

The guy in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect nor is he a person of interest- he is innocent until proven guilty (whether you acknowledge it or not): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

As I said in my former post, it is incredibly dangerous to wrongfully accuse people (even on the internet) for crimes they have not done- this can and has caused great harm in the past. I suggest you read the following article to get your head around the dangers of this: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php

I feel passionate about reinforcing this because I have done pro bono work for innocent people that have been wrongfully convicted and seen first hand just how dangerous assumptions like yours are.

P.S: Why have you started “following me” and my “silly arguments”?

Sorry if I offended you. I certainly understand your point. I am all for what Bob Ruff of Truth & Justice podcast is doing. However we aren't trying to do anything but figure out who killed Ms. Vetrano, not try to frame someone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Theforeigner]

Thank you for telling me my argument is silly...

I thought this forum was for speaking up for those without a voice, rather than criticising those that are trying to do their best to protect and speak up for the innocent that are not here to defend themselves against defamatory comments made by people relying upon unsubstantiated conceptions of investigative techniques that they assume are being used by LE in this case.

The guy in the sketch in KV's case is not a suspect nor is he a person of interest- he is innocent until proven guilty (whether you acknowledge it or not): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/karina-vetrano-jogger-murder-sketch-released-of-man-who-may-have-info-nypd/

As I said in my former post, it is incredibly dangerous to wrongfully accuse people (even on the internet) for crimes they have not done- this can and has caused great harm in the past. I suggest you read the following article to get your head around the dangers of this: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/sunil_tripathi_was_already_dead.php

I feel passionate about reinforcing this because I have done pro bono work for innocent people that have been wrongfully convicted and seen first hand just how dangerous assumptions like yours are.

P.S: Why have you started “following me” and my “silly arguments”?

I'm not going to argue with you, but I can tell you that I sent my information to the NYPD crimestoppers and without asking for any reply or otherwise and shortly after I got an email back from a detective who wanted me to elaborate concerning my information, then the next day another detective sent me an email telling information about the case, info that I had not provided or mentioned but in a way could be connected to my information and thoughts, and the detective also asked me to get back to him if I came over additional information, so in that regard please understand that you are wrong when insinuating that my info and thoughts are wrong and without any value.
Have a nice evening