GUILTY OR - Whitney Heichel, 21, Gresham, 16 Oct 2012 #4

[Joe Friday]

Joe, how do you think LE narrowed in on the Larch Mtn location? The phone was apparently turned off at ~9:07am, IIRC, and possibly thrown into the woods in Troutdale before the Explorer went to Larch Mountain.

Personally I think LE knew (Positively) she was at Larch Mountain because JH told them or showed them. Until then it was just a hunch based off of where clues had been found, and the distance JH could have traveled in the time frame.

Church members first found evidence near Dodge Park and at other locations. How they knew to look in that direction I think is from the cell phone records obtained by LE earlier.

I have been busy for the past few days so I didn't have a chance to read all the latest post and don't know if the following article was posted here on WS or not, I remember reading it somewhere but don't know where I ran across it, but I found it interesting how Whitney's church members mobilized and scoured the area finding clues. Led by a church member who was a Portland firefighter for nearly 30 years and a para-rescueman in the Air Force Reserve. I think this mans training and guidance in the search played a huge part in finding Whitney as well. I also think this man should be given reconciliation by the local authorities for a job well done.

The most disturbing part about the article I found was when they found Whitney's sweater and knew the situation was dire. I can imagine what would have given them this impression, but I don't want to post it here.

JMO

Church member Bob Weaver coordinated the search. He was a Portland firefighter for nearly 30 years and a para-rescueman in the Air Force Reserve.

"We were looking for Whitney. We weren't looking for evidence," Weaver said by phone Thursday while traveling.

He said the first clue they found was Heichel's sweater.

"They found the sweater and we marked that on a map and focused on and used that as a direction to focus our search," Weaver said. "And then we found evidence at Dodge Park at two in the morning – guy called me and I said, 'wait there, call police and wait there till police shows up.'"

Church members found Heichel's sweater along Dodge Park Boulevard east of Gresham near the tiny town of Pleasant Home. It is six miles from Dodge Park where church members found more undisclosed clues.

Weaver said they started their search at Heichel's apartment and from there sent out about 60 carloads of church members to scour remote areas for her. Those dozens, even hundreds, of searchers mobilized quickly. Searchers took cellphone pictures of areas highlighted on a map to use while searching.

The searchers began to realize the situation was dire when they found Heichel's sweater.

They targeted Larch Mountain where her body was found because they figured that's as far as anyone could have driven, considering the two and a half hours between the times she disappeared and her ATM card was used at a gas station in Gresham.

"Divided that in half (an hour and 15 minutes) and we started driving and seeing how far we can go in an hour and 15 minutes. (We) ended up at Larch Mountain, because of something on the Internet about Larch Mountain, which ended up not being true, but still, you got to do with every possible (lead); one hour 15 minutes, mile marker 9 up Larch Mountain Road – mile marker 10, it all worked out," Weaver said.

Many wondered if church members were tracking Heichel’s cellphone. But Weaver said they had no way to do that. He thinks if it weren't for the church's effort, Heichel's disappearance would still be a mystery.

http://www.katu.com/news/Search-lea...und-by-searchers-175893161.html?m=y&smobile=y

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

Seriously...gun or no gun...if some dude forces me to do oral sex on him...he WILL be missing his "Family Jewels!!"....The teeth are a mighty weapon!

I do not post this to be disrespectful of poor Whitney, so please do not take it that way. I am sure that she handled JH in the best way that SHE could! I sure wish she had been able to fight him Mickey Schnick style...and had given him some painful way to remember her! I does appear that he is suffering Mentally..for what that is worth!

Her death was so senseless. It saddens me to see that this world has become so twisted that one can not trust their friends, neighbors or even their church family!

Dear God..Please Bless the Family and Friends of Whitney Heichel!

BBM

I'm not picking on you because I've seen this come up several times in this thread-and I have heard a LOT of people say this when it comes to oral rape.

No one can predict with any degree of certainty how they would react in that situation. I will say that as a rape survivor and victims advocate, I have heard literally hundreds of stories from women and men who have been raped, and not a single one of them, including myself, have used biting a guys pecker off as a "defense" against being orally raped.

I have also experienced personally and heard others express guilt, shame, humiliation and regret because they feel they didn't fight back hard enough. It is a message that is reinforced by society, which tells rape victims that if you are not not left bloodied and bruised with DNA under your fingernails, chunks of hair in your fists, and grave physical injuries that you can see with the naked eye, that you simply did not do enough to prevent being raped. I've also heard many people say that it is "impossible" to be orally raped, because you can just "bite it off" and call it a day. We even have our elected leaders using terms like "legitimate" rape, and passing legislation to redefine it as "forcible" only. Pardon my french, but that's all a bunch of bullshyt.

Rape is a crime of power and control-and most victims will tell you that during every second of a sexual assault, you feel that death or grave bodily injury is imminent. Even if there are no direct threats to your life, even if there is no weapon involved, if someone takes away your bodily sovereignty, you quickly deduce they can just as easily take away your life. Your survival instincts kick in, and you do whatever you can to avoid that outcome. For most victims, that means being compliant and cooperative to avoid pissing your attacker off. For some, like Mickey Shunick, it means seizing an opportunity to turn the tables, fight back, and regain control. But if you ask ANY rape survivor why they reacted the way they did-whether they chose to "submit" to the attack, or fought back with all their might-the answer will always be the same:They wanted to survive.

For that reason, I don't think we should ever compare the actions of one victim to another. And I know this may not make me popular, but I have always been disturbed by the way people exalt Mickey Shunick. I think Mickey was an amazing woman, and I'm glad she got a few blows in against Lavergne before he murdered her, but when we call Mickey a hero because she fought back, the implicit, unspoken message that sends is that victims who don't fight back are somehow less worthy, less remarkable, and less deserving of our empathy. We may not consciously realize that, but that is the message it sends nonetheless.

JMO, and all other disclaimers :twocents:

 

[eyes2lookatu]

BBM

I'm not picking on you because I've seen this come up several times in this thread-and I have heard a LOT of people say this when it comes to oral rape.

No one can predict with any degree of certainty how they would react in that situation. I will say that as a rape survivor and victims advocate, I have heard literally hundreds of stories from women and men who have been raped, and not a single one of them, including myself, have used biting a guys pecker off as a "defense" against being orally raped.

I have also experienced personally and heard others express guilt, shame, humiliation and regret because they feel they didn't fight back hard enough. It is a message that is reinforced by society, which tells rape victims that if you are not not left bloodied and bruised with DNA under your fingernails, chunks of hair in your fists, and grave physical injuries that you can see with the naked eye, that you simply did not do enough to prevent being raped. I've also heard many people say that it is "impossible" to be orally raped, because you can just "bite it off" and call it a day. We even have our elected leaders using terms like "legitimate" rape, and passing legislation to redefine it as "forcible" only. Pardon my french, but that's all a bunch of bullshyt.

Rape is a crime of power and control-and most victims will tell you that during every second of a sexual assault, you feel that death or grave bodily injury is imminent. Even if there are no direct threats to your life, even if there is no weapon involved, if someone takes away your bodily sovereignty, you quickly deduce they can just as easily take away your life. Your survival instincts kick in, and you do whatever you can to avoid that outcome. For most victims, that means being compliant and cooperative to avoid pissing your attacker off. For some, like Mickey Shunick, it means seizing an opportunity to turn the tables, fight back, and regain control. But if you ask ANY rape survivor why they reacted the way they did-whether they chose to "submit" to the attack, or fought back with all their might-the answer will always be the same:They wanted to survive.

For that reason, I don't think we should ever compare the actions of one victim to another. And I know this may not make me popular, but I have always been disturbed by the way people exalt Mickey Shunick. I think Mickey was an amazing woman, and I'm glad she got a few blows in against Lavergne before he murdered her, but when we call Mickey a hero because she fought back, the implicit, unspoken message that sends is that victims who don't fight back are somehow less worthy, less remarkable, and less deserving of our empathy. We may not consciously realize that, but that is the message it sends nonetheless.

JMO, and all other disclaimers :twocents:

The simple thanks button was not enough. You put all of my thoughts and feelings into words and I actually have tears in my eyes. I too am a rape survivor, and your words not only were clear to those who have never experienced anything like what we have, while also making me feel better. So to that I say thank you with my whole heart. Bless you. And bless Whitney and all that she experienced.

 

[TreeClimbingGirl]

The simple thanks button was not enough. You put all of my thoughts and feelings into words and I actually have tears in my eyes. I too am a rape survivor, and your words not only were clear to those who have never experienced anything like what we have, while also making me feel better. So to that I say thank you with my whole heart. Bless you. And bless Whitney and all that she experienced.

((eyes))

It took me a very long time to get to the point where I was at peace with all of it. For years I tortured myself, going over every second with the "what if's", trying to figure out what I could have done differently, what it was about me that made me a target, and the worst shame I felt was over being so damn nice, compliant, and in my mind weak. It took talking to other women who went through it to help me understand that the way I reacted was normal, and I had no blame, nothing to feel ashamed of. We need to change that culture of victim shaming-and the only way that will happen is if more women and men come forward and talk openly about their experiences. So I want to say thank YOU for having the courage to say you are a survivor too :hug: And yes, bless Whitney, and Mickey, and all of the others who never will get an opportunity to do so. We have to step up and be a voice for them too.

 

[kodi]

This is a little O/T, but since she was mentioned on upthread, I thought I'd post.


Portland police said Sophia Cruz Rodriguez was visiting relatives in Vancouver from San Diego County, California when she was reported as a runaway. Her body was found on June 26.

http://www.kgw.com/home/Washington-Park-homicide-victim-IDd-as-CA-teen-176307791.html


I'm hopeful her family has found some solace in locating her and bringing her home, however, there undoubtedly is more heartache and grief due to the circumstances of her passing.

 

[ImWithTheBand]

FWIW re: luminol

Luminol has some drawbacks that may limit its use in a crime scene investigation:

<snipped>
Luminol will also detect the small amounts of blood present in urine, and it can be distorted if animal blood is present in the room that is being tested.

O/T
I had big dogs once, one since a puppy and one that was a rescue, both males. They got along most of the time, but one night they were playing and someone wasn't amused and bit down on an ear. I never knew that ears could produce so much blood and my baby was shaking his head, blood going EVERYWHERE! I tried to clean it best I could, all the while thinking, what if someone committed a crime in here one day? Wonder if all that blood I cleaned and couldn't see would show up? So does distorted mean it would show up? Or would show up differently?

 

[eyes2lookatu]

This is a little O/T, but since she was mentioned on upthread, I thought I'd post.


Portland police said Sophia Cruz Rodriguez was visiting relatives in Vancouver from San Diego County, California when she was reported as a runaway. Her body was found on June 26.

http://www.kgw.com/home/Washington-Park-homicide-victim-IDd-as-CA-teen-176307791.html


I'm hopeful her family has found some solace in locating her and bringing her home, however, there undoubtedly is more heartache and grief due to the circumstances of her passing.

Thank you for posting this, I saw this the other day and had made a mental note to post the update, but it slipped my mind. This is the young woman that was found in Washington Park around the same time a JH's previous "mental breakdown" that a fellow WS'er found. May she rest in peace.

 

[Indy Anna]

Considering that JH played football in HS, I think it's highly possible that the apparent disorganized thinking he exhibited following his crime could be related to repeated head trauma. The last few years has seen a lot of research on football-related head trauma and the neurological consequences, and much outcry against the sport. Here is a WA Times article discussing an American Academy of Neurology study on the subject: http://communities.washingtontimes....tters/2012/sep/8/should-my-son-play-football/

The following website discusses some of the symptoms of traumatic brain injury: http://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/tbi.htm
Symptoms include problems with executive functioning which encompasses planning and organizing tasks, problem-solving, and reacting to situations.

The possibility of a disorganized thought pattern resulting from repeated head trauma DOES NOT explain or excuse JH's crime, which appears premeditated. The head trauma hypothesis would only explain JH's erratic behavior following the commission of a crime. I think he tried to carefully organize the crime but did not have the cognitive ability to plan or react effectively. MOO

 

[Indy Anna]

Concerning JH's voluntary admission to the child *advertiser censored*, I vaguely remember a case in which another suspect in a crime volunteered commission of a crime unrelated to the one he was questioned about. I cannot remember anything about the case and don't think it was one I followed on WS because it seems so long ago. Anyway, I believe the thought in that case was that the suspect wanted to appear cooperative with LE and supposed that if he was honest about what he considered to be a lesser crime, that LE would believe anything he told them about the crime they were investigating. In the perp's thinking, I guess, it is better to be convicted of a lesser crime, and possibly receive a reduced sentence for cooperating, than to be convicted of murder and face a far greater sentence.

Not the most logical rationale, of course, but it's a possibility if I'm correct about the disorganized thought process related to football head trauma. JH obviously doesn't think rationally. MOO

 

[Joe Friday]

Considering that JH played football in HS, I think it's highly possible that the apparent disorganized thinking he exhibited following his crime could be related to repeated head trauma. The last few years has seen a lot of research on football-related head trauma and the neurological consequences, and much outcry against the sport. Here is a WA Times article discussing an American Academy of Neurology study on the subject: http://communities.washingtontimes....tters/2012/sep/8/should-my-son-play-football/

The following website discusses some of the symptoms of traumatic brain injury: http://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/tbi.htm
Symptoms include problems with executive functioning which encompasses planning and organizing tasks, problem-solving, and reacting to situations.

The possibility of a disorganized thought pattern resulting from repeated head trauma DOES NOT explain or excuse JH's crime, which appears premeditated. The head trauma hypothesis would only explain JH's erratic behavior following the commission of a crime. I think he tried to carefully organize the crime but did not have the cognitive ability to plan or react effectively. MOO

I think they would have been better off doing a study on boxers to see if repeated blows to the head affect thought patterns.

I can see a pro NFL player after many years of playing having some problems, but a kid that played on a high school team for a couple of years I don't see as someone that would be suffering from a brain injury, unless he was used as the battering ram for each play or he constantly ran into the goal post and knocked himself silly every time he ran to the end zone.

JMO

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

<snipped> It's a bit harder, for me at least, to understand the juxtaposition of the brutal way she was shot (2x in the face/head, and 2x in the chest/torso area) with the comparative passivity of just oral sex. <snipped>

Um, forced oral copulation IS rape, and having BTDT I can assure you it is anything but "passive"

ETA-sorry, I see this point has been addressed by others, I just got really pizzed off when I read that. Rape is rape, and I am tired of seeing people try to re-define it.

I wasn't going to come back in and quibble more about this, but I'll try one last time. I said it was comparatively passive - not only because it was oral sex, but because I was reading from the document where JH told police he had WH "perform oral sex on him."

To ME--this is a more passive-sounding event in that he is presumabaly lying still, from the inflection of the wording in the document. To me, it is a less aggressive positioning than what we think of when we think of what is traditionally referred to as rape. JMO.

From your comments, I know that some of you are leaping to the conclusion somehow that I am diminishing this assault by saying this. Not in the least. To say something is a more passive-oriented assault has to do with analyzing the perp's personality in his chosen mode of attack. But assault is still assault, and this crime is no less heinous for not having the charge of rape.

End of my comments on this.

 

[Elainera]

I wasn't going to come back in and quibble more about this, but I'll try one last time. I said it was comparatively passive - not only because it was oral sex, but because I was reading from the document where JH told police he had WH "perform oral sex on him."

To ME--this a more passive-sounding event in that he is presumabaly lying still, from the inflection of the wording in the document. To me, it is a less aggressive positioning than what we think of when we think of what is traditionally referred to as rape. JMO.

From your comments, I know that some of you are leaping to the conclusion somehow that I am diminishing this assault by saying this. Not in the least. To say something is a more passive-oriented assault has to do with analyzing the perp's personality in his chosen mode of attack. But assault is still assault, and this crime is no less heinous for not having the charge of rape.

End of my comments on this.

bbm

I doubt he was lying down. Probably sat or stood and forcing her head down on him. Nothing passive about that, not even comparatively. MOO

 

[Neptune]

Something else I found interesting in the affidavit was that LE had Whitney's cell phone records with in a few hours of her case being taken seriously.

I say seriously because Clint called LE early on when he received a call from Starbucks and he couldn't get a hold of Whitney himself and I believe later called LE back after Whitney's vehicle was found at Walmart. My feelings are when the vehicle was found at around 12:30 PM is when LE started looking at the case more seriously. Likely before that Clint was told to give it time and see if she shows up somewhere. There is no doubt LE (and maybe even the family members who found the car) seen the blood in the vehicle and knew the case would not end well at that point, and that is when LE seriously started looking into Whitney's case..

I knew the only way LE could know Whitney's or her vehicle had traveled to the Sandy OR area before any evidence in that area had been found had to be a result of Whitney's cell phone ping information. It just goes to show you how fast LE can obtain cell phone records in an emergency. The vehicle was found at approximately 12:30 PM and the cell phone information was obtained at 15:23. Not even three hours.

JMO

Here's some information to clarify:

Clint Heichel was told by LE that they could not act on his case or put Whitney's name in the (NamUs) database yet because not enough time had passed. Clint acted on his gut instinct and initiated his own search for his wife (including calling on people to help). Because he did this, he found key information pretty quickly and that information was suspicious.

I’m summarizing here, but see Affidavit Pg 19 for reference:
At almost 1pm on that Tues, Officer Muzyn went to the Shell station at 257th & Stark. Clinton Heichel was already there… Why? Because Clint had checked his wife’s account at the bank and the bank was able to confirm purchases made that day with Whitney’s ATM card. One of those purchases was at the Shell station, so Clint went there to check Shell’s surveillance footage. The time on the footage showing Whitney’s SUV matched approximately the time the transaction was made. Clint summoned Officer Muzyn who went to the Shell station. At the time they were speaking, Clint's friend Evan Judd called to say he had located Whitney’s SUV at WalMart.

 

[Boodles]

I don't think some people are understanding PIM's viewpoint.

It has to do with the manner by which the assailant commits the sexual assault. With oral sodomy, the victim is forced to participate, and that's the difference between this and (vaginal or anal) rape.

Many victims report, after an oral sodomy assault, feelings wrought with conflict, fear, shame, etc. specifically about their forced "participation" in the act.

So the differentiation is forcing participation of the victim vs the assailant taking the initiative (bad word, but can't think of another) to conduct the act.

Sexual assault of any form is violent and horrific. I don't think anyone's trying to assert that one variation is worse than another.

And in legal terms, "rape" is defined by state. In some states forced oral sex is called "rape", and in others, it's called "sodomy." But they're all sexual assaults.

 

[Xavier]

The link below are some interesting comments from the detectives oon the Heichel /Holt case.

These detectives speak about how they found an unusual bond with the families on this case, and it brought back memories of our Dad when an FBI supervisor in the famous Long Island NY FBI unit. Dad worked on the mob/ crime family cases, the A Bomb Espionage, Cuban Illegals, but working as a Nazi Hunter of the 3rd Reich war criminals during the 1950-60 era, Dad used to say how hard it was because the agents got very close to the pain Jewish families were enduring and had to separate the emotional side of East Coast American Jews who lost family in the hideous concentration camps..


Law Enforcement staffers have it harder than most people can grasp especially on these crimes of brutality and indifference to other people..





http://www.kptv.com/story/19962560/detectives-in-whitney-heichel-case

 

[Boodles]

Here's some information to clarify:

Clint Heichel was told by LE that they could not act on his case or put Whitney's name in the (NamUs) database yet because not enough time had passed. Clint acted on his gut instinct and initiated his own search for his wife (including calling on people to help). Because he did this, he found key information pretty quickly and that information was suspicious.

I’m summarizing here, but see Affidavit Pg 19 for reference:
At almost 1pm on that Tues, Officer Muzyn went to the Shell station at 257th & Stark. Clinton Heichel was already there… Why? Because Clint had checked his wife’s account at the bank and the bank was able to confirm purchases made that day with Whitney’s ATM card. One of those purchases was at the Shell station, so Clint went there to check Shell’s surveillance footage. The time on the footage showing Whitney’s SUV matched approximately the time the transaction was made. Clint summoned Officer Muzyn who went to the Shell station. At the time they were speaking, Clint's friend Evan Judd called to say he had located Whitney’s SUV at WalMart.

Neptune, I did not interpret the affidavit to say that Clint was at the Shell station when Muzyn arrived. I took it thay were still speaking via phone after their 1030am telco. The affidavit says Clint told Muzyn that "many family members and friends were in the area looking for Whitney Heichel and her vehicle." Although it's not totally clear, after reading it several times, I took it to mean that Muzyn continued to speak to Clint via phone while he spoke to the other "family" at the Shell station. The first time I could verify Clint's phyiscal presence was when he showed up and was interviewed at WalMart.

What do you think?

Affidavit Appendix A, pages 2 and 3

 

[Neptune]

Neptune, I did not interpret the affidavit to say that Clint was at the Shell station when Muzyn arrived. I took it thay were still speaking via phone after their 1030am telco. The affidavit says Clint told Muzyn that "many family members and friends were in the area looking for Whitney Heichel and her vehicle." Although it's not totally clear, after reading it several times, I took it to mean that Muzyn continued to speak to Clint via phone while he spoke to the other "family" at the Shell station. The first time I could verify Clint's phyiscal presence was when he showed up and was interviewed at WalMart.

What do you think?

Affidavit Appendix A, pages 2 and 3

It's vague to be sure, but the bolded wording (by me) suggests the presence of Clinton and family members and Officer Muzyn together at the Shell Station but it certainly could be family there with Muzyn and Clint present only by phone speaking with Muzyn.

Also correction to my earlier post: LEDS database, not NamUs.

Source: Affidavit, pg 19, middle of page
Excerpts:
At approximately 1253 hours, Officer Muzyn arrived at the Jackson's Shell (25737 SE Stark St, Troutdale...

Officer Muzyn was told that family members went to the Shell and viewed video and they observed a black Ford Explorer at a pump island at about the time the card was used.

As Officer Muzyne was talking with Clint Heichel and the family members, one of the family members received a phone call from a friend named Evan Judd who said he had located Whitney Heichel's missing Ford Explorer.

I think you know I don't like to be wrong in my facts, so I appreciate the call out, Boodles!

 

[Glow]

I wasn't going to come back in and quibble more about this, but I'll try one last time. I said it was comparatively passive - not only because it was oral sex, but because I was reading from the document where JH told police he had WH "perform oral sex on him."

To ME--this a more passive-sounding event in that he is presumabaly lying still, from the inflection of the wording in the document. To me, it is a less aggressive positioning than what we think of when we think of what is traditionally referred to as rape. JMO.

From your comments, I know that some of you are leaping to the conclusion somehow that I am diminishing this assault by saying this. Not in the least. To say something is a more passive-oriented assault has to do with analyzing the perp's personality in his chosen mode of attack. But assault is still assault, and this crime is no less heinous for not having the charge of rape.

End of my comments on this.

Well Poirotry...I dont want to let the fact that I have not agreed with some of your past posts to cause me to not comment on this one.

I think I understand the point you were trying to make. Part of finding a criminal and part of (hopefully) stopping future criminals is to understand the psychology behind their actions. Some people make a whole career out of profiling and they render a valuable public service. I dont think I could ever be very good at that because you have to really climb in their heads and look at some pretty gritty things very analytically and dispassionately. I usually get too creeped out and feel like I need a shower so that kind of skill remains one that I admire in others but dont have the ability to do.

So back to what you said...if I read you right, I think you were attempting to contrast and compare two things that JH has admitted to.

A) forcing his victim to perform oral sex on him

B) shooting his victim in the head and chest at a very close range.


It has bothered me from the beginning that there was no rape. (See how bad I am at this...? I have already phrased that wrong!) Ok, trying again....the typical way for this type of crime to go would have been for there to be a rape, sadly enough.

But there wasnt. At least that he has admitted to or that has been released publicly. Instead he admits to forcing his victim to perform oral sex on him.

Why? Why did he say that? Is that what really happened?

Did that even happen?

Did he make it up like some kind of weird bragging rights?

Was it part of a sexually fueled script that he had rehearsed in his head based on the type of *advertiser censored* he most preferred? Even if it didnt happen that way did he go ahead and say it because that is the way he had "thought" (fantasized) it going ahead of time?

I just dont know the answers but I can see the need for questions.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I don't think some people are understanding PIM's viewpoint.

It has to do with the manner by which the assailant commits the sexual assault. With oral sodomy, the victim is forced to participate, and that's the difference between this and (vaginal or anal) rape.

Many victims report, after an oral sodomy assault, feelings wrought with conflict, fear, shame, etc. specifically about their forced "participation" in the act.

So the differentiation is forcing participation of the victim vs the assailant taking the initiative (bad word, but can't think of another) to conduct the act.

Sexual assault of any form is violent and horrific. I don't think anyone's trying to assert that one variation is worse than another.

And in legal terms, "rape" is defined by state. In some states forced oral sex is called "rape", and in others, it's called "sodomy." But they're all sexual assaults.

Thanks, Boodles. You nailed it.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Well Poirotry...I dont want to let the fact that I have not agreed with some of your past posts to cause me to not comment on this one.

I think I understand the point you were trying to make. Part of finding a criminal and part of (hopefully) stopping future criminals is to understand the psychology behind their actions. Some people make a whole career out of profiling and they render a valuable public service. I dont think I could ever be very good at that because you have to really climb in their heads and look at some pretty gritty things very analytically and dispassionately. I usually get too creeped out and feel like I need a shower so that kind of skill remains one that I admire in others but dont have the ability to do.

So back to what you said...if I read you right, I think you were attempting to contrast and compare two things that JH has admitted to.

A) forcing his victim to perform oral sex on him

B) shooting his victim in the head and chest at a very close range.


It has bothered me from the beginning that there was no rape. (See how bad I am at this...? I have already phrased that wrong!) Ok, trying again....the typical way for this type of crime to go would have been for there to be a rape, sadly enough.

But there wasnt. At least that he has admitted to or that has been released publicly. Instead he admits to forcing his victim to perform oral sex on him.

Why? Why did he say that? Is that what really happened?

Did that even happen?

Did he make it up like some kind of weird bragging rights?

Was it part of a sexually fueled script that he had rehearsed in his head based on the type of *advertiser censored* he most preferred? Even if it didnt happen that way did he go ahead and say it because that is the way he had "thought" (fantasized) it going ahead of time?

I just dont know the answers but I can see the need for questions.

Glow, I really appreciate these comments. Have to admit, I'm a people-observer. I know it's 'icky' in a way, but I really am intrigued by studying the profiling of criminals..trying to figure out their personalities and who they might be based on the clues they've left behind (including the manner of assault). Can't remember the name of the show, but I sometimes watch a show that has an FBI criminal profiler on it, and I think she must have the most interesting job. Dark, for sure, but so rewarding when she finally puts the clues together and nabs the perp.