GUILTY OR - Whitney Heichel, 21, Gresham, 16 Oct 2012 #5

[Glow]

Glow, I once tried to find information on the peeper thing and only found posts here in earlier threads referring to a comment made under an article in MSM. From what I remember, someone posted under the news article, that their friend lived in the same apartment complex where the Holts use to live and said JH peeped at her from the balcony, but it went unreported to the police.
It did occur to me that a there could be a possibility that it was reported to the apartment management though, and maybe the Holts were asked to move out. Again only rumor.
Also, there was a headline on MSM about Jonathan being obsessed with Whitney, but that was the extent of, no meat to the hook!

So it probably was neighbors that provided the peeping Tom statements and didnt want to be quoted by name.

As far as the JH was obsessed with Whitney statements, that was probably neighbors too, I wouldnt think it would be congregation members or even relatives that would say that because if they thought it I think it would have been mentioned to Whitney, even jokingly and she would have told Clint.

Clint didnt seem to have any indication of that in the interviews in the days following Whitneys murder.

So the peeping Tom thing is just something "someone said"

Personally, I wouldnt want to accuse a guy of that if he was otherwise a nice enough seeming man. In the case of JH though, once he became a murderer of an innocent girl, everything about him is suspect. In a court of law he is innocent until proven guilty. But I am not a court of law. I am a poster on a website posting about a man I consider heinous at worst and a creep at best. Everything about him is now open for public dissection. Dont like that? Dont murder people.:furious:

So either the peeping Tom statement is true or it is false. If it is false, the trail ends there. If it is true that causes other questions. Did it happen just once or was it a habit?

Is that a gateway "bad" behavior that leads to more brazen crimes later?

I wonder too, if he took pictures IF he was a peeper, and if he saved them on that laptop of his.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Thanks so much, nikb! I'm lucky in it was a pretty easy break and didn't realize it was broken; I walked around on it for the first 24 hours and even drove myself to urgent care. The doctor was amazed I said the pain was tolerable. *chuckles* No surgery, not even a cast, just a knee immobolizer since I broke the fibula just below the knee. I'm already able to gingerly walk on it again, I just have to be careful not to overdue it. That's the last time I roll down a dune and get tangled up with my ATV. :what:

...

Now that would be one hilarious cast! I wonder if they've ever done one like that?? Thanks for the well wishes. :seeya:

...

I'm not familar with iPhones, PIM, but I have a Droid and there are two possible scenarios that come to mind that could explain how JH could have pictures of Whitney (assuming my Droid is similar to the iPhone in this regard). First, there is a lot of memory on the phone itself and because of this, files can be stored within the phone memory or on the SIM card depending on where the user chooses to store it. If there were photos on the phone itself, they would still be there unless removed by Clint at the time he quit using the phone.

Secondly, if Clint's SIM card was still in his old phone, and again assuming it works much like my Droid, JH could have removed the pictures from the old SIM card and added them to his SIM card that he inserted when he began using the phone as his own. He could use a computer to "drag and drop" said pictures between any number of files.

Thanks for this, Kodi! And ouch on the leg; glad you're finding it tolerable. Knee immobilizers are much preferable to casts (which I've never had, thankfully, though I've heard they itch to high heaven).

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Well that is fair enough I guess but there isnt enough in your comment for me to form either an agreement or a counter argument or to glean info from. Describing JH as being one way or another is pretty much moot and highly subjective. You may be right in your assessment or not, I have no way of knowing and due to limited information, theres really nothing for me to comment on that I can see.

Yes, I know I didn't give you much to chew on, here. My impression of him combined with some things I've shared on here and some I haven't adds up to the picture I'm currently leaning toward. This part of my post was posted more as observation, not persuasion.

Thanks for the links and the info. I wouldnt be surprised if only one gun was used, even though I know he was hauling them both around with him. I am leaning at this point toward believing that he never intended to really use either gun.

You're welcome; it'll be interesting to hear about those at trial. Wish I was more the patient sort.

1) When LE asked Clint to look for his phone, he found it missing. How would LE know to tell Clint that? Because JH told them he took it.

True, Clint told LE it was missing. But again, the fact that JH told them "he stole it" is still the part not proved here)...though I'd agree he'll have a challenge with a jury going back on that part of his confession (if he plans to).

2) JH confessed to taking the phone. And yes, even if there were some discrepancies in his story, that doesnt mean the whole confession is valueless. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Yes, it doesn't mean ALL of the confession is unreliable. It just means, until certain parts are proven in court, we don't really know which parts are reliable and which are not. You can certainly have leanings, but they at this point are partially informed opinion, in other words.

3) The phone turned up where JH said he threw it.

Yes, but again...doesn't prove he stole it from Clint's dresser; just that he knew where it'd be (for whatever reason) by that Friday night. In the scenario I'm entertaining (more than just JH and WH in the car), it's even possible someone else put that phone there.

Yes, I found the transcript just now. I went looking for it because that word "often" didnt seem to fit with the facts as we know them.

Here is the link:

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/whitney-heichels-husband-interview-difficult-17532855

when you watch the video it is an interview interspersed with voice overs from the reporter. You dont hear Clint say directly that they watered the plants and cared for the Holts cat. What you hear is the reporter say that.

The reporter says:
He and Whitney took care of the Holts plants and cat when they were away.

That sentence starts at 1:02 in the video.

The transcript is underneath the video. It contains gross misspellings and word usage. The reporters voice is clearer than the transcript. At no time is the word "often" used however.

That word "often" doesnt pop up until the link you gave in your post which was from NWCN.com posted on October 24, 2012 at 12:14 PM. It is written by KGW Staff. That is apparently where the word "often" got inserted.

It didnt come from Clint Heichel.

Yes, that's the one I found yesterday. But I don't get the sense that that is the actual transcript from the show itself--it should be written out like a script, with Clint's name and a colon mark and what he said next to it. This seems more like a poorly transcribed news blurb about his appearance and what he said on the show. (Reads like it was transcribed via some audio transcription machine or something.)

I've written TV stations before and received actual transcripts and they're longer and much better written. I'll see what I can find.

 

[Boodles]

With JH sitting with his head against the window (rear seat, driver side with back rest in upright position) and WH in the middle back seat area, she was either starting to stand up or possibly reaching for her phone as a last ditch effort when it rang at 10:39am (either reaching inside the mid console, or inside her purse possibly in the front seat).. that is when JH shot her in the head twice and then the chest as she fell down in the back seat area.

Sasquatch, how do you deduce a 10:39am murder time? How can that fit in with the 11:17 time the SUV was captured entering the Walmart parking lot the first time? Do you think he killed her at Larch?

 

[Xavier]

Sasquatch!

Your post was amazing!

You really covered a lot of ground with that plus your extra information. My only thought

ok **graphic warning**

was that the blood on the hood may have come from him resting the body there briefly while deciding where to deposit it. But I like your thoughts also.

So tell me, have you any theories on the tooth(?) that was found I believe, on the drivers side floorboard?

And do you have a theory on who/why the phone was thrown out?

Once again, great post and thank you for sharing all your hard work and research.

SasQuatch--- Really good stuff, thanks for taking obviously considerable time to explain this.

The graphic details makes me uneasy, despite being a horror movie fan.

But, GLOW, IMO the description from SasQ's theory would mean to me the bullets went to Whit's back skul through her jaw and probably exited the front passenger window.

The shot knocked out her tooth, broke off some her scalp/hair, clipped off her earring and then went through the window. Her scalp, earring were in the back seat area, her tooth was found in the front seat area.

I wonder if then WH was lying face down in the extended back seat area and if Holt shot her twice more in her back.

SasQ, I think this scenario makes alot of sense. Perhaps Whit reached for the phone in desperation and Holt went berserk, then shot her. Maybe they had a struggle for the phone and Holt shot her then. Or maybe Holt had the gun hidden in his jacket. WH grabbed the phone, told Holt she's going to turn him in. And then he shot her possibly the first shot went through her neck/jaw area and around the earlobe. But this shot stunned her. Then Holt shot her again in the head.

I'm wondering why shoot her 4 times? Maybe WH was still alive when he moved her around the back seat area after shooting her twice before. If WH is lying face down her body compressed against the flat surface, I wonder then if there were exit wounds from her torso area.? Because obviously all the shots were very close range.

 

[Glow]

True, Clint told LE it was missing. But again, the fact that JH told them "he stole it" is still the part not proved here)...though I'd agree he'll have a challenge with a jury going back on that part of his confession (if he plans to).

What about Newsjunkies post and us finding out that his cell phone records will reveal that he was using that phone until his wife canceled it?

Yes, it doesn't mean ALL of the confession is unreliable. It just means, until certain parts are proven in court, we don't really know which parts are reliable and which are not. You can certainly have leanings, but they at this point are partially informed opinion, in other words.

I am guessing that is when the phone records will establish that the phone was taken (as JH said) and used until for whatever reason it was tossed on the day of the murder.

Yes, but again...doesn't prove he stole it from Clint's dresser; just that he knew where it'd be (for whatever reason) by that Friday night. In the scenario I'm entertaining (more than just JH and WH in the car), it's even possible someone else put that phone there.

IF he didnt steal it then it means "someone" did. IF he knew its location then it means "someone" told him. IF there was another person in the car, JH knows that too. So what exactly is keeping a weak, shy tentative, susceptible to bullying, erratic acting guy, who doesnt know "where to go" with his story to LE and who is not a "very good or experienced liar" and who freely gave up his finger prints and DNA, from talking about this "other person"?

How is he being silenced?

Yes, that's the one I found yesterday. But I don't get the sense that that is the actual transcript from the show itself--it should be written out like a script, with Clint's name and a colon mark and what he said next to it. This seems more like a poorly transcribed news blurb about his appearance and what he said on the show. (Reads like it was transcribed via some audio transcription machine or something.)

I've written TV stations before and received actual transcripts and they're longer and much better written. I'll see what I can find.

Ok, thanks Id like to read it!

 

[Sasquatch]

Sasquatch, how do you deduce a 10:39am murder time? How can that fit in with the 11:17 time the SUV was captured entering the Walmart parking lot the first time? Do you think he killed her at Larch?

Thank you for catching that Boodles! I just tried to go back and correct the time on my original post, but it is too late. I meant to say 8:39am (not 10:39am). I was typing so much information, I made a mistake.

My theory was that WH might have reached for the phone when CH tried to call her at 8:39am(page 27 of 44pg doc). The original "Probable Cause For Lodging Document", states the crime occurred at 8:40am.

I still believe she was killed at Roslyn Lake at 8:40am.

Thanks again for catching that!

 

[Sasquatch]

I think a lot of us are wondering what happened in those final moments. After reading the 44 page document a few times, it is still tough to sort out how all of the evidence fits into the timeline and how these events occurred.

<snipped for space>

With JH sitting with his head against the window (rear seat, driver side with back rest in upright position) and WH in the middle back seat area, she was either starting to stand up or possibly reaching for her phone as a last ditch effort when it rang at 10:39am (either reaching inside the mid console, or inside her purse possibly in the front seat).. that is when JH shot her in the head twice and then the chest as she fell down in the back seat area.
<snipped for space>

Since I can not correct my original post, the following is the correction. I meant to say that WH might have reached for her phone when she received a call at 8:39am. (Not 10:39am as I put down)

"With JH sitting with his head against the window (rear seat, driver side with back rest in upright position) and WH in the middle back seat area, she was either starting to stand up or possibly reaching for her phone as a last ditch effort when it rang at 8:39am (either reaching inside the mid console, or inside her purse possibly in the front seat).. that is when JH shot her in the head twice and then the chest as she fell down in the back seat area."
My theory is that she was killed at the 8:40am time at Roslyn Lake.

 

[Sasquatch]

Sasquatch!

Your post was amazing!

You really covered a lot of ground with that plus your extra information. My only thought

ok **graphic warning**

was that the blood on the hood may have come from him resting the body there briefly while deciding where to deposit it. But I like your thoughts also.

So tell me, have you any theories on the tooth(?) that was found I believe, on the drivers side floorboard?

And do you have a theory on who/why the phone was thrown out?

Once again, great post and thank you for sharing all your hard work and research.

Thank you! I tried to fit a lot in, without making too many mistakes or losing anybody in my thought process.

The reason that I believe that the red spots on the hood are from the gunshot, and not the resting of WH's body on the hood, has to do with the blood spot pattern described in the 44 page document. The spots were described as mostly round. IMO this seems to be blood that has traveled through the air. If the body was on the hood, it would most likely make transfer marks. If the body was picked up and blood flung onto the hood, then the spots would most likely be larger spots. Smaller spots usually mean a higher impact, from what I have read.

scroll down to the part that shows blood transfer vs. scatter on this link:
http://www.crimescene-forensics.com/Blood_Stains.html

"SPATTER VS TRANSFER: The simplest type of blood spatter analysis is determining spatters from transfers. Spatters are created when blood is acted upon by force, and travels through the air before landing on a target surface. Transfers occur when a blood source comes in direct contact with a target surface area."

The only thing that I can think of about the tooth, is the same thing about the earring back found on the back seat, floor. Both could have been a result of one of the head shots, possibly from the side of her head, and maybe the tooth ricocheted off of the mirror.

As far as JH throwing the stolen iPhone 3G onto the berm, I have a couple of different ideas. JH used the stolen phone for months and it served its purpose. Once he killed WH, then he tried to separate himself from any connection to WH and CH. He probably knew he would be in trouble if he got stopped with the phone in his backpack and the serial number could be connected to the CH. Sometimes a hitman will leave a stolen gun at the scene, so they are not caught with the stolen weapon during their escape. Michael Levine (a former Senior Federal Law Enforcement Agent) was a consultant on this article, and it stated: "If the gun is stolen, the serial number could lead cops down the wrong path, but a disciplined criminal would probably remove it just to be safe."

"Why do mafia hit men drop their guns at the scene of a crime?"

Maybe JH was leaving evidence to lead LE away from himself, and possibly to trying to have the evidence point to CH.

A simpler theory would be that the ditching of the iPhone, was just his first effort to start dumping evidence. The iPhone served its purpose and he simply just tossed it onto the berm. You will notice that JH did not destroy the iPhone or weapons, or toss them into the river (the water was high and muddy that day at Dodge Park, a perfect opportunity). JH's weapons, holster and other evidence were placed off of side streets of his main travel routes, near his home and at his workplace. The one thing that is important about JH hiding one of the handguns at the police station, is that the Gresham Police Station is right on a main MAX Lightrail stop. IMO he placed the guns and other important evidence in easy to remember places, on easily accessible routes to retrieve later when things cooled down. It seems like the important items to JH, were out of our sight, but not out of his mind.

According to the 44 page Doc, Holt mentioned that he had 50 dollars in the bank. At the start of the week that would be at least 80 dollars in the bank account. He texted AH that he filled up her tank on Monday with 20 dollars, then he purchased a Domino's Pizza probably for another 10 dollars that night. He did not have a lot of money in the bank. I do not think that JH intended to just destroy the guns, but rather placed them to use as a future resource if the need arose. He did not have the money for future purchases, of these resources, but he could not afford to be caught with them either.

 

[Sasquatch]

SasQuatch--- Really good stuff, thanks for taking obviously considerable time to explain this.

The graphic details makes me uneasy, despite being a horror movie fan.

But, GLOW, IMO the description from SasQ's theory would mean to me the bullets went to Whit's back skul through her jaw and probably exited the front passenger window.

The shot knocked out her tooth, broke off some her scalp/hair, clipped off her earring and then went through the window. Her scalp, earring were in the back seat area, her tooth was found in the front seat area.

I wonder if then WH was lying face down in the extended back seat area and if Holt shot her twice more in her back.

SasQ, I think this scenario makes alot of sense. Perhaps Whit reached for the phone in desperation and Holt went berserk, then shot her. Maybe they had a struggle for the phone and Holt shot her then. Or maybe Holt had the gun hidden in his jacket. WH grabbed the phone, told Holt she's going to turn him in. And then he shot her possibly the first shot went through her neck/jaw area and around the earlobe. But this shot stunned her. Then Holt shot her again in the head.

I'm wondering why shoot her 4 times? Maybe WH was still alive when he moved her around the back seat area after shooting her twice before. If WH is lying face down her body compressed against the flat surface, I wonder then if there were exit wounds from her torso area.? Because obviously all the shots were very close range.

You are welcome! Thank you!

I think we are limited by the 44 page document of knowing exactly how the shooting happened and what occurred. I tried to give a general idea on my theory on shot angles and what might have occurred by some of the evidence. Your scenarios are very possible as well. Thank you for sharing them. I am sure LE has a much clearer understanding of what happened at the crime scene, once they did more forensic testing. We probably will not hear more about the evidence that they found, until the trial next year.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

What about Newsjunkies post and us finding out that his cell phone records will reveal that he was using that phone until his wife canceled it?

...

I am guessing that is when the phone records will establish that the phone was taken (as JH said) and used until for whatever reason it was tossed on the day of the murder.

Yes, the phone record minutiae, according to newsjunkie's post, might be able to tell us more--that's why I was excited to read her post. But until the trial, we can only guess, and the fact that he stole it is not yet established. Though certainly opinions can be!

IF he didnt steal it then it means "someone" did. IF he knew its location then it means "someone" told him. IF there was another person in the car, JH knows that too. So what exactly is keeping a weak, shy tentative, susceptible to bullying, erratic acting guy, who doesnt know "where to go" with his story to LE and who is not a "very good or experienced liar" and who freely gave up his finger prints and DNA, from talking about this "other person"?

How is he being silenced?

Of course, this is just another theory, but I believe it 'fits' with him far better than with him being the killer. If the scenario I'm entertaining is true, it could be he's being silenced the way he has been 'pushed around' all his life--out of fear. That is what governs him, and any bully would know it. I said earlier I felt he acted as though someone with PTSD that Tuesday and Wednesday...if he witnessed that 'execution' style of kill, it could be he was threatened the same would happen to him or someone he cares about (younger brother or family member?) if he talks. If true, this could be an alternative reason for his being held in 24-hr. surveillance ("suicide watch") and for his "not guilty" plea. *Remember, Oregon state law says an inmate under suicide watch for more than 48 consecutive hours must be moved to an inmate mental facility for further evaluation. Has this happened? Not that we've been told.

In other words, I believe this crime was motivated by one or more persons wanting both WH and JH out of the way...two birds with one stone.

Ok, thanks Id like to read it!

I'll see what I can do.

 

[Boodles]

Of course, this is just another theory, but I believe it 'fits' with him far better than with him being the killer. If the scenario I'm entertaining is true, it could be he's being silenced the way he has been 'pushed around' all his life--out of fear. That is what governs him, and any bully would know it. I said earlier I felt he acted as though someone with PTSD that Tuesday and Wednesday...if he witnessed that 'execution' style of kill, it could be he was threatened the same would happen to him or someone he cares about (younger brother or family member?) if he talks. If true, this could be an alternative reason for his being held in 24-hr. surveillance ("suicide watch") and for his "not guilty" plea. *Remember, Oregon state law says an inmate under suicide watch for more than 48 consecutive hours must be moved to an inmate mental facility for further evaluation. Has this happened? Not that we've been told.

In other words, I believe this crime was motivated by one or more persons wanting both WH and JH out of the way...two birds with one stone.

If this were to be the case, that is, that another or others were involved in this murder, I would hope that JHs attorney, as his legal advocate, would get him to provide more information in order to identify any other co-conspirators.

I'm still back-and-forthing between JH being an anger-retaliatory type killer vs something more complicated. The hinky timeline and multiple locations involved, the miraculously fast and effective search by the Heichel family's associates, the white utility vehicle in the Walmart parking lot parked within feet of Whitney's vehicle and leaving within 1 minute of Holt parking next to it, all leave me wondering what the heck transpired. There are many circumstances that may end up being coincidences, but until more is known, I remain skeptical.

BTW, at first (within a day or two of this murder) I defaulted to a theory that JH was "obsessed" with WH. I don't believe that any longer and haven't for a long time. I believe he either: 1) needed a victim at that point in time and she provided the easiest and most timely opportunity; or, 2) something more complicated prompted this murder.

But a romantic or sexual obsession love-gone-wrong crime? No, I don't believe that any longer.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

If this were to be the case, that is, that another or others were involved in this murder, I would hope that JHs attorney, as his legal advocate, would get him to provide more information in order to identify any other co-conspirators.

<snipped>

But a romantic or sexual obsession love-gone-wrong crime? No, I don't believe that any longer.

Completely agree, on both counts.

 

[Xavier]

Yes, the phone record minutiae, according to newsjunkie's post, might be able to tell us more--that's why I was excited to read her post. But until the trial, we can only guess, and the fact that he stole it is not yet established. Though certainly opinions can be!


Of course, this is just another theory, but I believe it 'fits' with him far better than with him being the killer. If the scenario I'm entertaining is true, it could be he's being silenced the way he has been 'pushed around' all his life--out of fear. That is what governs him, and any bully would know it. I said earlier I felt he acted as though someone with PTSD that Tuesday and Wednesday...if he witnessed that 'execution' style of kill, it could be he was threatened the same would happen to him or someone he cares about (younger brother or family member?) if he talks. If true, this could be an alternative reason for his being held in 24-hr. surveillance ("suicide watch") and for his "not guilty" plea. *Remember, Oregon state law says an inmate under suicide watch for more than 48 consecutive hours must be moved to an inmate mental facility for further evaluation. Has this happened? Not that we've been told.

In other words, I believe this crime was motivated by one or more persons wanting both WH and JH out of the way...two birds with one stone.



I'll see what I can do.

I'd like to know the WHO and more importantly WHY of your theory PIM.

It is very hard to understand some of the incredulous gaffes by Holt placing evidence so easily found as if being invoted to be discovered.

 

[Sasquatch]

Here is some information on what kind of forensics LE can get from the 4 shell casings found in WH's SUV. The 44 page document does not say if either of JH's 9mm handguns have been identified as the murder weapon. The only thing identified in the document, is the shell casing stamp mark - S&B 9x19. (Sellier & Bellot 9mm casings) There is other evidence on the shell casings, that might match them to the two 9mms that were confiscated. This evidence might also match other weapons from previous crimes around the area, and even possibly from around the nation.

The additional evidence is called the case signature. When a handgun shoots a bullet it will leave 3 different signatures on the case - 1. The firing pin impression 2. The breach face impression 3. The ejector mark. These signatures can be hard copied (electroforming) and digitally copied, then matched with the 200,000 shell cartridge casings retrieved by LE every year. Both the hard copy and digital images then are matched forensically, with the quality assurance standards set by the National Institute of Standards and Technology - United States Department of Commerce. (NIST Standard Reference Material 2461)

Here is a recent NIST video explaining the forensics of a shell casing signature:
http://youtu.be/5Gk6fLnkDe4

 

[Glow]

Yes, the phone record minutiae, according to newsjunkie's post, might be able to tell us more--

might? :waitasec:

minutiae, I find that word choice somewhat surprising.

In the interest of accuracy I thought I would look up the definition of minutiae. It means : A small or trivial detail.

My impression (please correct me if I misstate your position) is that you are not convinced that JH took Clint Heichels old iPhone.

In view of that, wouldnt the data from the cell phone bill, which will contain the serial number of the phone, the numbers called/received, the times, the dates, the locations etc.. be slightly more than a "small or trivial detail"?

that's why I was excited to read her post. But until the trial, we can only guess, and the fact that he stole it is not yet established. Though certainly opinions can be!

Yes!

Of course, this is just another theory, but I believe it 'fits' with him far better than with him being the killer. If the scenario I'm entertaining is true, it could be he's being silenced the way he has been 'pushed around' all his life--out of fear. That is what governs him, and any bully would know it. I said earlier I felt he acted as though someone with PTSD that Tuesday and Wednesday...if he witnessed that 'execution' style of kill, it could be he was threatened the same would happen to him or someone he cares about (younger brother or family member?) if he talks. If true, this could be an alternative reason for his being held in 24-hr. surveillance ("suicide watch") and for his "not guilty" plea. *Remember, Oregon state law says an inmate under suicide watch for more than 48 consecutive hours must be moved to an inmate mental facility for further evaluation. Has this happened? Not that we've been told.

In other words, I believe this crime was motivated by one or more persons wanting both WH and JH out of the way...two birds with one stone.

In that case, wouldnt "these mysterious handlers" be keeping JH under observation? Why was there nothing of this sort showing up on surveillance cameras or spotted by the LE's surveillance on JH?

Maybe they kept in touch by phone, in which case that will all be in the phone records also, right?

 

[Glow]

I'm still back-and-forthing between JH being an anger-retaliatory type killer vs something more complicated.

BTW, at first (within a day or two of this murder) I defaulted to a theory that JH was "obsessed" with WH. I don't believe that any longer and haven't for a long time. I believe he either: 1) needed a victim at that point in time and she provided the easiest and most timely opportunity; or, 2) something more complicated prompted this murder.

But a romantic or sexual obsession love-gone-wrong crime? No, I don't believe that any longer.

Hi Boodles :seeya:

I would like to know what convinced you personally that it wasnt "obsession: related as I am still trying to decide where I stand on that. All your thouhts would be most welcome!

 

[gwenabob]

How did we go from here to there?
How did we get to know JH was pushed around all his life? Because he was said to be quiet and shy?
And how did this huge scenario of JH the poor bullied boy ever begin? From a few MSM quips from a girl who knew him in the 3rd grade?
Wow, now JH has PTSD from being forced to witness or commit murder? And not only that but we've declared poor JH "suicidal" because of a suicide smock, tears and from being told once he was on suicide watch?
And now we're trying to claim a breech of responsibility by LE and the State of Oregon for mistreatment?

This sounds like a whole different story, am I on the right thread?
I'm sorry, but I just can't fathom how we can know these things without the help of professionals who literally have contact with JH to make these evaluations and assessments.
JMO!

Sounds like somebody is making a lot of assumptions, doesn't it.

It is an assumption that JH was bullied all through his childhood. It is an assumption that he was truly suicidal. It is an assumption that his behavior that day was being directed by another unknown individual who was not caught on any surveillance nor has been mentioned at all, even to save the skin of the innocent boy who has been accused of murder and whose marriage, and entire life has been destroyed by this whole complicated conspiracy to murder a simple young woman for some unknown and unfathomable reason. That's a lot of assumptions from someone who has said we should not assume anything!

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

might? :waitasec:

minutiae, I find that word choice somewhat surprising.

In the interest of accuracy I thought I would look up the definition of minutiae. It means : A small or trivial detail.

My impression (please correct me if I misstate your position) is that you are not convinced that JH took Clint Heichels old iPhone.

In view of that, wouldnt the data from the cell phone bill, which will contain the serial number of the phone, the numbers called/received, the times, the dates, the locations etc.. be slightly more than a "small or trivial detail"?

Yes, I'm not convinced he stole the phone. Yes, I believe the small details from the phone records that we aren't privy to, yet, will shed more light on this case concerning the cell phone. (Dictionary, really??)

In that case, wouldnt "these mysterious handlers" be keeping JH under observation? Why was there nothing of this sort showing up on surveillance cameras or spotted by the LE's surveillance on JH?

What good would their following him around do? They wouldn't know from that what he's telling LE. Either he's going to cooperate or he's not; their physical presence would not be necessary to intimidate him.

Maybe they kept in touch by phone, in which case that will all be in the phone records also, right?

If they were pros, I personally believe they would not have kept in touch with him by phone. (Which supposedly was not in his possession since Tuesday morning, right?)

 

[La Louve]

In other words, I believe this crime was motivated by one or more persons wanting both WH and JH out of the way...two birds with one stone.


.

And Whitney is dead and Holt was walking around scott-free for several days after the murder. He's still alive and has not gone on trial. His conviction and sentencing is not a foregone conclusion.

So PIM, how in your theory does that end up getting rid of Holt????? Whitney's dead, so "they" got rid of her. But the second bird doesn't seem to have gotten the equal effect of the stone.

:waitasec: