OH OH - Katelyn Markham, 22, Fairfield, 14 August 2011 - #3

[Dionysia]

If I've learned one thing from watching too much Ghost Hunters (what?!), it's that the human mind likes to make sense of random things. We see blurry shapes and immediately our brain wants to assign them into something that makes sense to us, like a face.

*back to lurking*

Di

 

[A_News_Junkie]

If I've learned one thing from watching too much Ghost Hunters (what?!), it's that the human mind likes to make sense of random things. We see blurry shapes and immediately our brain wants to assign them into something that makes sense to us, like a face.

*back to lurking*

Di

artyguy2: PARTY POOPER!!!!!!!!!! LOL :snowball:

But most of all:
:welcome4:

 

[JeannieC]

If I've learned one thing from watching too much Ghost Hunters (what?!), it's that the human mind likes to make sense of random things. We see blurry shapes and immediately our brain wants to assign them into something that makes sense to us, like a face.

*back to lurking*

Di

:welcome4:​

 

[CanManEh]

This so reminds me of my younger sister lol when she was in like grade 9 and she would buy these posters that if you stared at the right way you would see the image the poster was like a illusion type thing i don't know i allways saw stars no matter what the image was but thats what you get when you stare at nothing for an hour HaHa..

 

[deelytful1]

Transcript of JCs radio interview on august 18th
http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1178.html

Don't know if anyone had this or not. Was posted on the KMdce site.
Now I know where alot of the other answers out there came from!

I apologize if this is a repeat.

 

[SnoopyDoobyDoo]

I find the 'key in the purse' kind of odd. Usually if you come in the door with your keys you put them down in a regular place, like a side table or a place with a key hook or something. I don't know if it is just me, but I don't usually put my keys right back into my purse when I walk in the door. To me, imo, the keys inside her purse make it seem like JC did bring that stuff back to the apartment as part of a cover up. imoo

I do. If I don't, the keys are inevitably lost. Sometimes courtesy of pets, sometimes my own distractedness, and sometimes it has to be the little gremlins. But keys stay in the purse at all times. People I know with key hooks still have their "everyday" keys in their purses.

As for checking the purse for keys- it's possible the purse was open, but even if it wasn't that would be my first place to look.

Transcript of JCs radio interview on august 18th
http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1178.html

Don't know if anyone had this or not. Was posted on the KMdce site.
Now I know where alot of the other answers out there came from!

I apologize if this is a repeat.

Thanks for this, it actually clears up some of the statements that I found troublesome. The whole "force" thing makes more sense in context, for starters. He was talking about forcing vs. letting the move/relationship evolution happen organically (we weren't forcing it), and there is a good reason for the move being delayed a month. The past tense occurs right after a question about the past, so he was already speaking past tense and it took a moment to realise the question was more current. Something minor he dismissed might have happened at the fair, which might explain why he had a bad feeling and checked on her.


And wow, there is some mass generalisation about women and purses from one of the hosts:

S: What's really unusual about this too, John, is that the car, keys, that's unusual - but the purse!

JC: Yeah. [Continues saying "yeah" several times during Scott Sloan's next few sentences.]

SS: I don't know any woman who doesn't take their purse with them. When women go to the bathroom - when women are - wherever they are, they have their purse with them at all times. For her just to take her cellphone may indicate to me, and possibly the police as well, that there was some foul play here, because certainly she's not going to you know, go somewhere. Even if she decided, you know, "I want to leave and start another life," usually you're going to take something with you that's personal in nature.

Bolded by me. I must be some freak of womanly nature or something, because I often leave my purse at home, especially if I'm just running out for a minute. Thinking of the women I'm closest to, most of us do. I mean, all the evidence points to foul play and the purse with keys suggests leaving the house for a long period of time wasn't planned, but just saying that women keep their purse with them at all times is ridiculous. Going out for a walk, running to the bathroom while out, popping outside for fresh air, running out for a drink in the evenings, and so on... my purse doesn't come. A lot of people I know grab their keys and phone, then throw a couple of bills in their pocket if they won't be long or have need for money.

 

[deelytful1]

True Scooby... I live and die by my debit card and if I'm not driving.. no need for a purse. Phone in hand, debit card in pocket....But keys??? Only if the person I'm with had a set. NOT leaving my door wide open. Her keys were left behind too...

 

[keeponsearching]

So her keys were left behind. And cell is missing right?

When I am with my husband there are many times I do not need my purse just my cell.... In my early 20s I never carried a purse.

Is there any new evidence or something new? I have been following but not sure if I missed anything.

Has any of her family spoken out?

 

[voxrock2000]

I use photoshop a lot, and I can tell you that picture has been altered. You can see the area where the face is has been altered and the pixels do not match the texture of the rest of the photo, it has been smoothed and enhanced. The pixels that make up the bottom of her green erring have been smoothed and blurred by photoshop, they are complteley different than the pixels in the rest of the earring. The face part has a completely different resolution than the rest of the picture, that is a sure sign of manipulation. Considering the fact that nothing can be said for sure about where that picture came from makes it impossible to make any statemtent about its authenticity. Plus there are multiple generations, which makes it completely compromised. The bright reflection is not from the original photo of the photo and is clearly an artifact of photographing a highly reflective tv or computer monitor with a light on it. It does not look like a 'flash', rather an incandesent point source light. If it was a flash and the face was as far away as the size in the pictures suggests, the flash would be much bigger and more diffuse. The light looks to be very close to the screen it was captured from, suggesting a tv camera close to the monitor. Just my educated opinion.

 

[Sphere]

I use photoshop a lot, and I can tell you that picture has been altered. You can see the area where the face is has been altered and the pixels do not match the texture of the rest of the photo, it has been smoothed and enhanced. The pixels that make up the bottom of her green erring have been smoothed and blurred by photoshop, they are complteley different than the pixels in the rest of the earring. The face part has a completely different resolution than the rest of the picture, that is a sure sign of manipulation. Considering the fact that nothing can be said for sure about where that picture came from makes it impossible to make any statemtent about its authenticity. Plus there are multiple generations, which makes it completely compromised. The bright reflection is not from the original photo of the photo and is clearly an artifact of photographing a highly reflective tv or computer monitor with a light on it. It does not look like a 'flash', rather an incandesent point source light. If it was a flash and the face was as far away as the size in the pictures suggests, the flash would be much bigger and more diffuse. The light looks to be very close to the screen it was captured from, suggesting a tv camera close to the monitor. Just my educated opinion.

VoxRock2000, is it possible that the differences in pixels were part of her manipulation for a project or something?

I don't know much about photoshop, so there's probably a more refined way to change these things (that KM probably would have done if she had altered the picture) and a less refined way (that someone not as familiar w/ photoshop would have struggled to do).

Is there a way to tell when a photo is altered?

JMO and speculation.....:waitasec:

 

[Kamille]

Thanks for the link to the radio show transcript deelytful1. I have some questions and observations based on that interview.

JC mentions that they were at the festival on Friday night and it appears that Katelyn had to work the next day (Saturday) so did he stay over that night or was she alone on Friday night too? For a couple who are so in love and for one of them to be so busy, it would seem odd to me that they didn't spend whatever free time they had together if this is the case.

Why didn't JC work on either Friday or Saturday night? As a pizza delivery guy I would think those would have been their busiest nights.

I've seen some pictures of the festival from the year before and there was a stage with live entertainment and a beer tent. I've been to lots of local fairs and festivals and it has been my experience that the crowd "changes" after a certain time of night. The family atmosphere gives way to more of a bar atmosphere after a certain time. So I do understand what JC means by suggesting that there were a lot of people in the area that just would not normally have been there. It is quite a co-incidence that this happened at the time of the festival taking place, sometime after it had closed down for the evening and people would have been away from the actual festival grounds and making their way home. Can't believe that no one saw anything. Was the area completely cleared of people and traffic by 12:45am?

Still would like to know where the cat was found. It is a good explanation of why she might have gone outside. And since she had just sent a picture text to JC, she may have had her phone with her waiting for a response from him.

We've never heard how long a lag time there was between the text conversation and the final picture text. Did the picture get sent randomly after a long lapse in communication? And did JC respond to that final picture text. Why was there was no "goodnight" conversation text between them to indicate that the conversation was over.

MOO

 

[Joe Friday]

I have mixed feelings about JC. On the one hand, I don't have a strong feeling that he did something to KM. On the other hand, I've noticed that he frequently puts his foot in his mouth and changes details with each retelling of the story of the day she went missing. I know that when JC went to KM's town house, he must have gone through her purse when he was looking for her. In an early interview, he said that her purse was there and her keys WERE IN HER PURSE. I don't have the link to which interview it was but it told me that he had searched inside her purse to see what might be missing, probably looked for the phone there too. Until he said that, I had the impression that the keys might have been sitting on a table or counter near her purse. But JC looked for them IN the purse. And found them not there, and also the phone not there. I was wondering if he had taken the keys and searched the inside of the car, or the trunk of the car if it had one. Did the police take the car? Was the seat in the car set for HER size or for the size of another person?

SFS & BBM

JC never said when he made the 911 call the keys or anything else were in the house. He only said the phone was missing. Post containing 911 transcript


After LE came to the house they could have gone through the house quickly realizing then that the keys were in the purse. I'm not sure if it was ever reported if the keys were in her purse or just lying on the counter. If you have a link to the information about where the keys were found that you could post, I would like to see it.

What I'm saying is JC could have gotten the information about the keys being in the house from LE when they searched and that is how he knew the key were not missing when he did the interview. So he might not have gone through the purse but LE did.

JMO

 

[voxrock2000]

SFS & BBM

JC never said when he made the 911 call the keys or anything else were in the house. He only said the phone was missing. Post containing 911 transcript


After LE came to the house they could have gone through the house quickly realizing then that the keys were in the purse. I'm not sure if it was ever reported if the keys were in her purse or just lying on the counter. If you have a link to the information about where the keys were found that you could post, I would like to see it.

What I'm saying is JC could have gotten the information about the keys being in the house from LE when they searched and that is how he knew the key were not missing when he did the interview. So he might not have gone through the purse but LE did.

JMO

The transcript starts to address this 'her purse is still...', but the 911 operator cut him off.

 

[Joe Friday]

The transcript starts to address this 'her purse is still...', but the 911 operator cut him off.

Yes JC must have seen the purse in the apartment before making the 911 call but that doesn't conclude that JC went through the purse as Jan stated he must have.

My point is that you cannot conclude that JC went through the purse just because he said the keys were in the apartment in an interview in the days after she was reported missing. LE could have told JC the keys were in the apartment after they conducted a search of the apartment, just as they told JC what time the phone was shut off, that the phone couldn't be pinged and that the GPS had been turned off as well.

Not that it makes that big of deal who found the keys or who went through the purse. The important fact or clue is that she either didn't have time or the need to grab her purse and/or keys before she left or possibly who ever abducted her, left her purse and keys behind.

If I killed my significant other and wanted to make it look like she had just disappeared and walked away so I would be less likely to be implicated in the crime. I would have disposed of the purse, keys and any other items that she would normally take with her. I would probably go as far as removing a suit case from the house and filling it with her clothing to make it look as if she packed a bag. But I guess I see to much of this stuff and know that people that are leaving for the rest of their lives usually take more than just their phone.

JMO

 

[oh_gal]

My understanding is the 'considering everything' folks were using this pic
http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t105/LifeCoachOnTheCouch/A%20FRESH%20START/blowupfromthemissingpage.jpg
from this page (screen cap) http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/...uch/A FRESH START/missingpagepicupload816.jpg

That is still (or was an hour ago) on the 'orginal' (support JC or we will ban you, JMHO) page in their photos.

I would mark what I am seeing, but I am getting feedback my pics are showing up a blur here????? :waitasec:

I must be blind as a bat...because I don't see anything unusual in that picture. I mean, the flash blob thing, sure, but I don't see a face, or another ring, or Jimmy Hoffa, or anything!

 

[balaney]

I am inclined to think she left the house on her own and went to meet someone other than JC. Possibly they squabbled Friday night at the venue outside and he went home angry. Saturday rolls around and she decides to go to the party with someone else after work. When she gets home, JC could have been waiting for her outside - she could have gotten in his car and they drove around to "talk". Maybe a disagreement got out of hand and she got hurt. Whatever happened, probably did not happen inside her home. Saturday is probably not as explained - yes he may have seen her but maybe she was not going to bed - maybe she was getting ready to go out - without him. She did not have to get up early for work Sunday. No need to hit the sack early.

 

[oh_gal]

No, I see what they are seeing - I even did that side by side shot earlier.
They see this:

( I snagged that and blew it up for my own eyes - before they deleted it) and even though I hate to admit it ----> Yes, I see it too!

Meryl Streep singing "Nobody Understands Me" - YouTube

Wow. OK. Now I see something. Disregard my earlier post! Can it be blown up? (or can someone tell me how to do it?)
TIA!

 

[APIMaple]

Wow. OK. Now I see something. Disregard my earlier post! Can it be blown up? (or can someone tell me how to do it?)
TIA!

I'm not following this one either. I can't see anything except the flash from a camera??? and something blue maybe? What are people saying on this one?

Anything? Anyone please?

 

[voxrock2000]

I think the police did find something at her house and are biding their time. Here is the LE chronology I put together from news reports.

She was reported missing on Sunday the 14th and early news article said "Dave Markham says when he entered Katelyn's condo, it appeared to him that she had been asleep. John Carter says there didn't appear to be any signs of a struggle at the home- her car is still out back and her keys, purse, and pet dog were in the house." http://www.local12.com/news/local/s...g-Fairfield-Woman/Hb8WfZ0rpkuNpRRLpddC-w.cspx

It was reported the police went to the home on August 17 - "We need to preserve the items in the apartment, and basically take an inventory of the apartment," said Lt. Kevin Haddix of the Fairfield Police Department. While they still say nothing points to direct evidence of foul play, they're going through the process of piecing her belongings together, making sure nothing else is missing.
http://www.fox19.com/story/15286971/police-zero-in-on-missing-fairfield-womans-townhome

As the search for a missing Fairfield woman continued Wednesday, Fairfield Police Chief Mike Dickey denied reports indicating that police suspect foul play in the disappearance of Katelyn Markham. "We have no evidence of foul play. We don't know what happened,'' Dickey said. "Anything beyond that is supposition." http://communitypress.cincinnati.co...woman?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|communities|s

Then the police returned on August 18 to secure the house and go through it and take items and said "there is no direct evidence that there was foul play involved." Police said "Basically, it's just going over the apartment more thoroughly and just looking for anything that might give us an indication of what happened to Ms. Markham and possibly where she might be - just anything we could find,". Fairfield Police Lt. Kevin Haddix said the state agency offered their help in solving the Sunday disappearance of Katelyn Markham even though "there is no direct evidence that there was foul play involved." "But as we conduct our investigation, we have to consider that possibility and react accordingly. The potential is always there," Haddix said. He would not say what was taken. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110818/NEWS01/108190345/1179/WAP&template=wapart

After the search and collecting materials from the home on the 18th it is reported that, "Police now believe there was foul play in the disappearance of 22-year-old Katelyn Markham. The Butler County woman was reported missing Sunday after failing to show up for work. Police looked through her condo for clues. Her keys, purse and dog were inside." http://www.newstalkradiowhio.com/ne...ct-foul-play-butler-county-womans-disa/nDL8w/

Since then, the police have said nothing and suspended police searches, they have increased the reward and posted requests for tips. The subsequent searches are all family and private groups.

This seems like they have an idea what happened and are biding their time. Since they have not gone public with warnings of crazed random kidnappers, this suggests they have someone in mind and that it was not a random crime. It is typical LE to let people hang themselves and make mistakes to ensure a tighter case. I am not clear if they went there on the 17th to do an inventory, then returned the 18th and removed items? It seems like they treated it as a missing person at first and then escalated it to a crime scene based on what they observed? This would suggest they know more than they are letting on and are developing some information. I am sure they are following all the online chatter putting things together.

 

[A_News_Junkie]

Transcript of JCs radio interview on august 18th
http://kmdce.livejournal.com/1178.html

Don't know if anyone had this or not. Was posted on the KMdce site.
Now I know where alot of the other answers out there came from!

I apologize if this is a repeat.

THANK YOU for posting this!!!!!!!!!!

Now, besides the past tense talk - this dialog leaves me with a new question. Was the "boss" that took the photo really the director of the internship program and not her boss from David's Bridal or the Bookstore?
:banghead: I really want to know who took the pic, when, how she had it (hard copy or on computer or phone only) and I want to see the original and the original of the text. Okay and I want to know if he replied back to the pic of pic text with something like, "I love that shot it captures your beauty", or thanks for that pic or anything -- cause if he didn't one (me) would wonder if he didn't need to reply to it cause he sent it!

Snip from interview linked above:
"JC: Yeah. Exactly. And the thing is, is um... she had sent me a picture of a picture of her, that her boss took of her from her internship. I mean she had two jobs and her internship, and went to school full time. So I mean, she was consistently busy, but that stress made her stronger. I mean, she loved the fact that she was being so strong, and, and she was proud of herself. I mean, there was no, there was no anger [rueful laugh], at all, when it came to, to high stress. Um..."