MarthaM
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 871
- Reaction score
- 8
I guess that is dependent upon how the software system was written.
The article said that "Police have never been able to determine who ran the check on the vehicle or why."
But they don't say whether the inquiry was traced to a specific location or userid, do they?
Once again...LE knows more than we do, and they're not talkin'. Frustrating for a sleuth!
Body found in one of the vehicles....which belonged to a missing person.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111028_11_0_Twoveh4248
"Different bones in different parts of the vehicle,” said Willingham.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/sto...ssing-persons-SUV/1vWgtNwADka7GzcwLJpAbw.cspx
Any thoughts on why someone all the way in Latimer County of all places would run the tag a month and a half after she disappeared? Seems really fishy (no pun intended). Would whoever is investigating this in Tulsa be able to find out who did the search and contact them?
Several things stand out from the article. None of them likely to lead to answers unfortunately.
They had divers in that pond. Did they find the vehicles in the pond? Did that info just not get out and is what led to authorities draining the pond? Or did they miss them entirely?
The remains were found scattered in the Expedition. Was that a natural part of the body decomposing? Or were they dismembered when they were put in the vehicle?
Authorities seemed to estimate that the foot found in the shoe was about 6 months old or less. Yet Sharp was missing since 2006. So are they related or are there two sets of remains?
From the article
So what was meant by that statement? Is he just referring to the fact that the remains were scattered in the vehicle? Or is there another meaning?
Also from the Fox article, LE says they have found other evidence they aren't releasing. What could that have been? Maybe a weapon?
Several things stand out from the article. None of them likely to lead to answers unfortunately.
They had divers in that pond. Did they find the vehicles in the pond? Did that info just not get out and is what led to authorities draining the pond? Or did they miss them entirely?
The remains were found scattered in the Expedition. Was that a natural part of the body decomposing? Or were they dismembered when they were put in the vehicle?
Authorities seemed to estimate that the foot found in the shoe was about 6 months old or less. Yet Sharp was missing since 2006. So are they related or are there two sets of remains?
From the article
So what was meant by that statement? Is he just referring to the fact that the remains were scattered in the vehicle? Or is there another meaning?
Also from the Fox article, LE says they have found other evidence they aren't releasing. What could that have been? Maybe a weapon?
BBM:
Could be one or the other, honestly. Water degrades in a specific way, depending on temp, flow, animal activity, injury, etc.
I'm no ME and this is mvhoo. (Where are our ME's??)
I tend to think at this point that the vehicle where the body found is related to the sneaker/foot, and that it likely degraded to the point of disarticulation. Perhaps with a little help along the way, either from injury, animal activity, or something else.
I hope they seized the vehicle to be processed for any additional potential DNA.
Several things stand out from the article. None of them likely to lead to answers unfortunately.
They had divers in that pond. Did they find the vehicles in the pond? Did that info just not get out and is what led to authorities draining the pond? Or did they miss them entirely?
The remains were found scattered in the Expedition. Was that a natural part of the body decomposing? Or were they dismembered when they were put in the vehicle?
Authorities seemed to estimate that the foot found in the shoe was about 6 months old or less. Yet Sharp was missing since 2006. So are they related or are there two sets of remains?
From the article
So what was meant by that statement? Is he just referring to the fact that the remains were scattered in the vehicle? Or is there another meaning?
Also from the Fox article, LE says they have found other evidence they aren't releasing. What could that have been? Maybe a weapon?
In a previously referenced article:
http://www.newson6.com/story/15899169/tulsa-retention-pond-drained-as-police-search-for-body
There is a reference to an article on March 31, 2006.
Would this encourage someone to look this info up?
No info here - just mentioning the dates.
The video showed that at least the window(s) on the driver's side was open.I don't find someone running the tag on that SUV after the fact of her disappearance strange at all. They were 'sleuthing'. The lady and her SUV are missing, so look in the computer and see if there has been an accident or any other kind of sighting in another county or in another state. IMO
Also, it says the skeletal remains were in the backseat and scattered in the vehicle. Once that vehicle is under water, the outside pressure of the water against the doors and windows will make it impossible to open either doors or windows. You can't get out, period, you'd better get them open before you are under water or you will drown. She either climbed back there trying to find a way out or she floated back there. That being said, how did the sneaker with bones get out of the car??? Or maybe a window was partially open but not enough for a person to get through, and that would account for fish and turtle activity.
Yes, it makes you wonder how many other missing people are in lakes, rivers, ponds, etc. A lot IMHOO. :waitasec: