Warning! This post is an attempt to break the record for the longest post ever on WS. I advise the reader to have a cup of coffee (or two) in hand before reading any further.
(Also, much of the content taken from the article linked in the post above has been paraphrased or summarized so as to not violate WS TOS)..
The article linked above drives me crazy. It might seem nit-picky on my part, but nowhere in the article is Captain Smith or JCSO Moran quoted as saying that the two crimes are linked or connected.
Nowhere does either officer state, on the record, that the crimes are connected. So how did the reporter get that impression? Only Smith’s statement: “we have persons of interest” even comes close, and it is a far cry from an affirmation.
In the article it seems that it is the REPORTER [who perhaps suspects (or maybe even hopes?) that there is a link between the two crimes (a much better story, perhaps?)] - who confirms for us readers that there is a link - not officers Smith or Moran.
The reporter doesn’t tell us how he/she knows or learns for a fact that the two crimes are “connected”. The article is written - and reads - as if it is just the reporter’s impression.
I guess we are supposed to presume that Smith or Moran said something: nodded their heads, winked, - or maybe just didn’t deny it when the reporter mentioned it? Idk. The reader left is left to decide for themself..
Did the reporter even ASK that question? “Are the two crimes related?” We can’t tell from the article. We are left with hearsay from the reporter. Really shoddy reporting imo.
I’m not asking for Smith or Moran to give us a specific link is. I’m not demanding details. I don’t want to compromise the investigations. I just want to hear Smith or Moran, - or any directly involved (active) investigator - state (be quoted), ON THE RECORD, that Dave Lewis’s murder and Troy Dean Carney’s murder are without question, undeniably connected by factual evidence.
Why do I feel I have a right to demand such a statement (before blindly agreeing the crimes are connected)? Because we have read articles in the past, written supposedly by similarly qualified reporters quoting supposedly similarly qualified LE saying there’s no link between the two crimes AT ALL. None.
From the article we learn that:
-two crimes were committed miles apart (by my calc’s they were approx 20 miles apart)
-the two crimes were shocking
-Capt Smith spent many agonizing months investigating
-LE “investigated both cases very thoroughly and looked for all the similarities and connections. People connections, things connections.” (and..?)
-TDC was camping on the BCG near Central Pointe and Table Rock Rd
-TDC’s body was found three days after he’d been seen on Pilot Truck Stop cctv
-TDC was asleep in his sleeping bag, “we didn’t find anybody who says they heard a gunshot”
(Any hint so far (from LE) that there is any connection? Anything said by LE so far that you think might’ve given the reporter the impression that the two crimes were somehow connected? No? Let’s read on..)
-Investigators searched for clues at nearby transient camps (and..?)
-at one camp a strange item caught their eye, a yellow and black Wolverine mask
-you can find the mask on the cover of a comic book showing a mutant emerging..
-it was found in a campsite and “it was so distinctive we thought we might be able to locate witnesses camped there..”
-LE tracked down the mask’s owner with the help of DNA
-as for why the mask was at the campsite, police never asked
-“We did not make any connection.”
(Huh?!, then why have we been reading about a Wolverine mask and a comic book with a mutant emerging..? I would define this as a reporter dangling carrot; a reporter red herring, if there is such a thing. 20/20 sometimes does it to stretch a 15 minute story into a 2 hour episode)
(Btw I still don’t think we’ve heard anything from either officer that would lead a reporter to believe there’s a connection)
-Mike Moran with JCSO said: “As with a lot of things and any crimes you go to, things are not as they appear”
(Note to self: I wonder what in this case he thinks is not as it appears?)
-“little did police know, two fires on Dead Indian Memorial Rd would spark a 12 year investigation” (and..?)
-the first fire was at around 4 am at an empty cabin near Hyatt Lake
-the second, 3 hrs later, was a few miles down the road at the home of 46 yo Dave Lewis
-both blazes (on DIMR) were separately set
-both blazes (on DIMR) were intentionally set
-Moran says “why a fire erupted at a vacant cabin is something investigators still don’t understand” (note: they are comparing only the two DIME fires on 9/4)
-the second fire was more sinister
-two men found on same day (my add: true, but kind of misleading if the writer is suggesting a connection. The men were not MURDERED on the same day.. and the fires were not set on same day.)
-DL’s cause of death was a bullet wound
-“two men found on the same day, both shot to death” (note: but not SHOT on the same day)
(Again, I wonder why LE thinks the above statement somehow connects the two crimes? Maybe it was just the reporter who took it that way? The two men were not shot on the same day. The bullets did not match. The fires were 9 days apart. The men did not know each other. I guess you can always find something in common if you look hard enough and ignore any evidence to the contrary).
-as far as police could determine, Carney and Lewis didn’t know each other
(Note: still can’t find a statement made by either LE officer that would explain how the reporter could have gotten the impression that the crimes were related)
-9 days later a third fire where Carney was murdered
-Capt Smith asks: “why would someone 9 days later start a fire to destroy evidence when the could potentially do it sooner?”
(note: we know the fire was intentionally set… but what makes LE think the fire was even set for the purpose of covering up evidence? They’ve never said)
-Moran responds: “only the suspect or eyewitness will have those pieces of information” (so I guess they DON’T know why the fire was set. Or why it was set when it was set..)
-“trying to connect the dots today, Moran says, is a fruitless effort” (hmm. sounds like an admission that there’s no point in continuing the investigation. Does that mean it’s a cold case - or am I missing something?)
-but “we’ll never give up hope that someday, someone will come forward” (my add: and tell us what happened?)
-“it’s very troubling that someone would go to these lengths to commit this crime”
-Today there are no new leads and no new suspects in the murders
So how did the reporter get the impression from Interviewing those two LE officers that “they are connected”? It is beyond me.
(And another note: what happened to “persons of interest”, “people connections, things connections”? Was it those statements that gave the reporter the impression or vibe that the two crimes were connected? Because I can find nothing else that either officer said that would even come close to giving that impression)
LE (not the press) has had over 15 years… — not to specifically tell us why or how -- but just to state, on the record, that the two cases are connected. They have not done so. The only person who has ever stated that the two cases are connected is a reporter - who provided no statement from LE to substantiate his/her claim. I call that just an impression.
All jmo
Australia Australia - Marion Barter - Missing After Trip to UK - June 1997 #23
))))) 