GUILTY OR - Whitney Heichel, 21, Gresham, 16 Oct 2012 #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wouldn't they also have to prove the felony being committed? i.e. that she was taken forcibly rather than going with him on her own free will. It can be assumed the she went against her will but that would have to be proven in court for the aggravated to be valid correct?

The definition of kidnapping doesn't mandate removal by force. The Oregon laws can be found at 163.215-.235 here:

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/163.html
 
If the guy wasn't a flight risk and they could easily have had the FBI keep eyes on him why would they arrest him until they were confident they could get a conviction not just a charge. It's just weird to me. Unless they are going to use that aggravated to get him to plea down to regular murder.

Police make arrests based upon evidence required to charge- it's not up to law enforcement officers to interpret the likelihood of a conviction.
 
Yes, but at this point they have probable cause to believe she was taken against her will, which means they have enough evidence to support a charge of aggravated murder. A conviction is a different story...
"On Wednesday morning Oct. 17 with the additional resources, canvassing began in the Heichel’s apartment complex, detectives collected surveillance video"

https://www.greshamoregon.gov/news/newstemplate.aspx?id=281255

I can't tell from how this is worded. Did the apartment complex have surveillance cameras? (I could look it up I guess) - If so they might have proof of her being forced against her will.

moo

I can't locate the name of her complex. Anyone know it?
 
If the guy wasn't a flight risk and they could easily have had the FBI keep eyes on him why would they arrest him until they were confident they could get a conviction not just a charge. It's just weird to me. Unless they are going to use that aggravated to get him to plea down to regular murder.

I'm not sure what you mean...I think they are confident that they can get a conviction for aggravated murder, which is exactly why they charged him with it. My point was they do not need to prove that she was abducted to charge him with aggravated murder-they just need to have probable cause to believe she was.
 
The definition of kidnapping doesn't mandate removal by force. The Oregon laws can be found at 163.215-.235 here:

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/163.html
Exactly. The legal criteria for kidnapping is actually pretty wide. You can technically be "kidnapped" in your own home, if you are held against your will.

An example of this-in TX a woman named Lisa Coleman was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for the murder of her girlfriends 9 year old son. Because she kept him locked in his closet, they found her guilty of kidnapping as a special circumstance.
 
Going out on a limb and completely speculating...

I've identified JH's wife. If I am correct, she has a record.

What I'm speculating is that *possibly* she was the girl in the car- mistaken for Whitney. They are about the same small size, same color and texture of hair. Both very pretty.

I also noticed her resemblance to Whitney and my first thought was that maybe it was she who was seen in the car at the gas station.
 
Great! Just discovered we have NO tissues! :cry:

ehh the roll of toilet paper works too...
That video was precious!
 
I'm curious: why are people reluctant to believe the reports that Heichel was seen at the gas station? Is there anything that points to those reports being false?
 
Oh my heart is breaking for Clint.They were truly a couple in love.I hope he seeks the help he needs to get through this devastating time.
 
I'm reluctant to believe it because the police would not comment on it despite stating and commenting on the ATM card being used at various places. The gas attendant's testimony is based on Clint's statement to the news that a relative was passing out fliers at the gas station asking if anyone had seen her and the gas attentant said yes and then went into the story. Why would the police not comment on that or check the gas attendant themselves so it becomes an offical part of the timeline?
 
Essentially the cops know where the ATM was used and the location's it was used didn't include said gas station where attendant saw her.
 
I'm curious: why are people reluctant to believe the reports that Heichel was seen at the gas station? Is there anything that points to those reports being false?

It is hard for me to understand why she wasn't bringing attention to herself or screaming for help, when she was seen passively sitting in the passenger seat. So I think there is a chance that she was hog-tied in the back and his look alike wife was the one seen up front.
 
I'm reluctant to believe it because the police would not comment on it despite stating and commenting on the ATM card being used at various places. The gas attendant's testimony is based on Clint's statement to the news that a relative was passing out fliers at the gas station asking if anyone had seen her and the gas attentant said yes and then went into the story. Why would the police not comment on that or check the gas attendant themselves so it becomes an offical part of the timeline?

Meanwhile, at 9:14 a.m., Heichel's ATM card was used at a gas station at Southeast Stark Street and Southwest 257th Avenue. Police have interviewed the gas station attendant but declined to release details and employees declined to comment.

http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index.ssf/2012/10/gresham_police_spokesman_says.html
 
Not sure if this is the same gas station/attendant that Clint mentioned on Thursday. I was thinking that this was a separate situation. Clint mentioned that they found out that someone by her description was seen at that station. He didn't mention in the interview that that was the station that her ATM was used.
 
Lt. Claudio Grandjean declined to say if Heichel was seen after 7am, or to say who may have been driving her SUV.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-body-hidden-mountainside.html#ixzz29sud6vvV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

IDK...

They definitely should have known her was driving the based on surveaillance. Clint also mentions the amount withdrawn was odd. So it wasn't for gas it was taking out cash. 20 dollars and 30 dollars. Unless that 20 and 30 dollars was gas but if that that is odd that it's an exact amount. And according to some people can't pump their own gas in Oregon then that is at least 2 attendants who would have seen her.

I simply think that the time of death was before the guy got gas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
3,002
Total visitors
3,123

Forum statistics

Threads
603,996
Messages
18,166,416
Members
231,905
Latest member
kristens5487
Back
Top