Paperwork Details Elisa Baker’s Involvement In Investigation

[vjlaw]

Okay- I found the accessory after the fact for North Carolina.

Abuse of a corpse is generally a misdemeanor offense, but I cannot find an actual statue for it NC anyway, but it is generally a very minor offense all things considered.

The issue at hand is really accessory after the fact because the motivation to abuse the corpse and disperse the remains was to cover up the original criminal act (which has yet to be identified by a criminal statute, manslaughter, premeditated homicide etc....).

But in NC she is angling to be an accessory turned witness, which would get her charged two levels underneath whatever they charge Adam with (which is why she is saying he didn't intentionally kill her because she benefits from a more benign cause of death) and then will ask for leniency due to her cooperation and witness statements leading to his conviction.

But the fact of death is based, so far as we know, on what is being said by one perp. How did AB/EB determine she was dead. I just hope the remains are in a condition to determine that.

 

[impatientredhead]

I'm curious to hear how you think this might go if LE can only tie both to the disposal. If no cause of death can be determined due to the condition of the body, do you think the state could make a case against one or the other based on circumstantial evidence?

As I've said many times before, law is not my strong suit, so I may not even be asking the question intelligently. :waitasec:

I think there is a ton of evidence to convict them both of some type of homicide. There is no way for them to even say she died of natural causes without taking the stand to make that statement and that is a risky proposition for either of them.

So you assume neither of them are going to take the stand on their own behalf (might see one as a witness against the other in separate trials), so then you have all the evidence of dismemberment and hiding the death and the "kidnapping" story, I think most juries would convict them of being responsible for her death.

If you try to get to a premeditated, death penalty level of proof I think you potentially run into a problem (unless we have evidence of a fractured skull or something like that we have not seen yet). But I think there is a homicide conviction to be had no problem. Just not sure which degree, and I don't think we have a capital case unless there is a big change in the evidence.

And it is really early and one of them is already talking up a storm, so that could change.

 

[Clue Hopper]

Okay- I found the accessory after the fact for North Carolina.

Abuse of a corpse is generally a misdemeanor offense, but I cannot find an actual statue for it NC anyway, but it is generally a very minor offense all things considered.

The issue at hand is really accessory after the fact because the motivation to abuse the corpse and disperse the remains was to cover up the original criminal act (which has yet to be identified by a criminal statute, manslaughter, premeditated homicide etc....).

But in NC she is angling to be an accessory turned witness, which would get her charged two levels underneath whatever they charge Adam with (which is why she is saying he didn't intentionally kill her because she benefits from a more benign cause of death) and then will ask for leniency due to her cooperation and witness statements leading to his conviction.

Basically plan A the fake ransom note was set and it didn't work. So now Plan B say ZB had been sick, to set up for abuse of a corpse.

I think they planned ahead on how to get away with murder and dismemberment. (By the way now I do see AB as guilty with impatients post.) Being that it is a misdemeanor how much is max. time served if any? do you know?

 

[Melanie]

I believe, when this motion is read, the judge will up her bond to a million.

After reading it myself it sounds like an outlined confession!

MOO

Mel

 

[impatientredhead]

Basically plan A the fake ransom note was set and it didn't work. So now Plan B say ZB had been sick, to set up for abuse of a corpse.

I think they planned ahead on how to get away with murder and dismemberment. (By the way now I do see AB as guilty with impatients post.) Being that it is a misdemeanor how much is max. time served if any? do you know?

Misdemeanors are usually a year.
But this isn't a case of abuse of a corpse.
This accessory after the fact which in NC appears to equal:

The original felony (the death) that you are now complicit in covering up minus two felony catagories.

So if the scenario played out and Adam is charged with a first degree felony she would be charged with a third degree felony (and then she would be asking for leniency for cooperating).

But we don't know what they will be charging as the initial felony (cause of death) so we don't know what two degrees less will be (for being an accessory after the fact).

Does that make sense?

Abuse of a corpse won't come into play in my opinion. The abuse of the corpse was motivated by covering up a crime which is a more serious offense of accessory after the fact.

I think they will both be charged with homicide of some degree, and I don't think this plan of hers will work overall, but I think that is clearly what the legal strategy is lining up to be.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I think there is a ton of evidence to convict them both of some type of homicide. There is no way for them to even say she died of natural causes without taking the stand to make that statement and that is a risky proposition for either of them.

So you assume neither of them are going to take the stand on their own behalf (might see one as a witness against the other in separate trials), so then you have all the evidence of dismemberment and hiding the death and the "kidnapping" story, I think most juries would convict them of being responsible for her death.

If you try to get to a premeditated, death penalty level of proof I think you potentially run into a problem (unless we have evidence of a fractured skull or something like that we have not seen yet). But I think there is a homicide conviction to be had no problem. Just not sure which degree, and I don't think we have a capital case unless there is a big change in the evidence.

And it is really early and one of them is already talking up a storm, so that could change.

Would it be possible to use her lack of school attendance, this homeschooling story, and whatever the upcoming "home inspection" was, as a way to go for premeditation?

Granted, I know there is ALOT of information not available to us, so it's all speculation.

 

[ynotdivein]

I think there is a ton of evidence to convict them both of some type of homicide. There is no way for them to even say she died of natural causes without taking the stand to make that statement and that is a risky proposition for either of them.

So you assume neither of them are going to take the stand on their own behalf (might see one as a witness against the other in separate trials), so then you have all the evidence of dismemberment and hiding the death and the "kidnapping" story, I think most juries would convict them of being responsible for her death.

If you try to get to a premeditated, death penalty level of proof I think you potentially run into a problem (unless we have evidence of a fractured skull or something like that we have not seen yet). But I think there is a homicide conviction to be had no problem. Just not sure which degree, and I don't think we have a capital case unless there is a big change in the evidence.

And it is really early and one of them is already talking up a storm, so that could change.

:clap:

Now I am thinking, WHO the HECK thought that a faux fire/faux ransom note/faux 911 call/faux kidnapping scheme was THE BEST POSSIBLE WAY TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER THEY HAD DONE?

Sorry to shout. It is just extremely difficult to try and squeeze oneself into the mental machinations that motivated these two (unusual people) that morning, not to mention in the weeks before. :headache:

 

[Melanie]

I know we're not supposed to talk about him personally, but IIRC someone from London allegedly sent her $10,000 a while ago.

Who knows how many "friends" she has???

True, true! Where did that 10K go by the way -- does anyone know? If she only needs 6,500 to get out now, why can't she come up with that money? If a judge reduces her bond to 10K, she'll have to come up with 1K and probably won't be able to do that either.

The motion is probably the oddest thing I've read in a long time.

MOO

Mel

 

[lauriej]

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/25801554/detail.html

Tony Scheer, a legal expert, said he doubted a judge would lower the bond after reading the details revealed in the court filing. Scheer said the document could lead to more warrants and an increased bond.


District Attorney Jay Gaither told Channel 9 Eyewitness News that it could be a few weeks before Elisa Baker gets another bond hearing.

 

[JoeFromLB]

There is something macabre and psychopathic about choosing to dismember an amputee who is one's child. Only individuals clinically obsessed with the grotesque would follow-through with such a well-planned, time-consuming monstrous undertaking.

BBM.

Goth
Pagan (not the peaceful kind)
Vampire
Virtual world
"Dark wishes" (EB's signature)

Bad stuff. MOO.

 

[tehcloser]

District Attorney James Gaither Jr. told The Associated Press on Tuesday his office will oppose the effort by lawyers for Elisa Baker to have her bond reduced. Gaither says if necessary he would present evidence to prevent a lower bond.

http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/20101116/APN/1011162148

 

[ynotdivein]

Help me out here sleuthers. From the motion at http://images.bimedia.net/documents/111510+elisa+baker+bond+redux.pdf

"b. During the evening hours of October 22, 2010 and the early morning hours of October 23, 2010 the defense team verified that certain information provided by Ms. Baker was reliable. As part of that verification the defense team located and collected a significant item of evidence".

Huh. So she wouldn't give up the goods til she had a good defense team. Then she apparently gives some info to her defense team, which team fails to notify LE and goes and gets some kind of evidence themselves. Hink-tacular! What was that evidence?

"c. On October 23, 2010, at 11:00 am., the defense team contacted the District Attorney and indicated Ms. Baker’s desire to cooperate in the investigation into the disappearance of Zahra Baker. At the time of this communication the defense team informed the District Attorney that, due to weather concerns, time was of the essence in beginning the search for the remains of Zahra Baker. The defense team was told that law enforcement needed to be consulted and that the defense would be contacted when a determination was made as to how the State would proceed."


What does this imply? MSM has not to my knowledge made much of this "weather concerns" but it seems to me that it's a fairly significant piece of info. What was weather like 10/22-23 in those parts? All I can see from weatherunderground http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KMRN/2010/10/24/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA indicates that there was no rain forecast. No snowstorms. Certainly no plague of rainbows. So what up with trying to urge LE on with misplaced concerns about "weather conditions"?

(ETA: the "beginning the search" thing, as if LE had just been sitting around knitting tea cozies and idly wondering where Zahra might be, I simply cannot bring myself to comment upon. What (very extremely unusual) people.)

 

[SherlockHomey]

Help me out here sleuthers. From the motion at http://images.bimedia.net/documents/111510+elisa+baker+bond+redux.pdf

"b. During the evening hours of October 22, 2010 and the early morning hours of October 23, 2010 the defense team verified that certain information provided by Ms. Baker was reliable. As part of that verification the defense team located and collected a significant item of evidence".

Huh. So she wouldn't give up the goods til she had a good defense team. Then she apparently gives some info to her defense team, which team fails to notify LE and goes and gets some kind of evidence themselves. Hink-tacular! What was that evidence?

"c. On October 23, 2010, at 11:00 am., the defense team contacted the District Attorney and indicated Ms. Baker’s desire to cooperate in the investigation into the disappearance of Zahra Baker. At the time of this communication the defense team informed the District Attorney that, due to weather concerns, time was of the essence in beginning the search for the remains of Zahra Baker. The defense team was told that law enforcement needed to be consulted and that the defense would be contacted when a determination was made as to how the State would proceed."


What does this imply? MSM has not to my knowledge made much of this "weather concerns" but it seems to me that it's a fairly significant piece of info. What was weather like 10/22-23 in those parts? All I can see from weatherunderground http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KMRN/2010/10/24/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA indicates that there was no rain forecast. No snowstorms. Certainly no plague of rainbows. So what up with trying to urge LE on with misplaced concerns about "weather conditions"?

Im not exactly sure about the weather but that was probably when we were having tornadoes.

 

[AnaTeresa]

BBM.

Goth
Pagan (not the peaceful kind)
Vampire
Virtual world
"Dark wishes" (EB's signature)

Bad stuff. MOO.

Not to nitpick, but most of these subcultures aren't obsessed with the grotesque. Goths, Pagans, and those involved with virtual worlds are no more likely to dismember someone than anyone else. Even an artistic interest in the macabre - from Poe to art movements, does not indicate that someone could commit a heinous crime against another.

Let's not conflate EB's self-identification with actual people who are involved in these subcultures and/or beliefs.

 

[JoeFromLB]

Do I understand correctly that the defense team went out and "collected a significant item of evidence" by themselves, BEFORE notifying LE?

That doesn't sit right with me.

 

[tehcloser]

I've racked my brain trying to figure out what that "evidence" was. It has to be something that it wouldn't matter if they handled. I would at least think they wouldn't be so dumb as to handle certain stuff...anyway. So what could it have been? Phone? Computer? A tape of something?

 

[NancyA]

I've racked my brain trying to figure out what that "evidence" was. It has to be something that it wouldn't matter if they handled. I would at least think they wouldn't be so dumb as to handle certain stuff...anyway. So what could it have been? Phone? Computer? A tape of something?

Presumably it's evidence that points towards AB but I don't see how it would then be able to be used against him in court - wouldn't his lawyers argue that it was tainted or manufactured evidence because it came from EB and her attorneys and get it excluded?

 

[vjlaw]

I've racked my brain trying to figure out what that "evidence" was. It has to be something that it wouldn't matter if they handled. I would at least think they wouldn't be so dumb as to handle certain stuff...anyway. So what could it have been? Phone? Computer? A tape of something?

Since the gel part of the prosthetic leg was mentioned in the documents, maybe it was the titanium part of the prosthesis. jmo

 

[impatientredhead]

I've racked my brain trying to figure out what that "evidence" was. It has to be something that it wouldn't matter if they handled. I would at least think they wouldn't be so dumb as to handle certain stuff...anyway. So what could it have been? Phone? Computer? A tape of something?

The wording is odd, but I am sure it is something with a logical explanation. The document says they verified it and collected it in the early morning and were in contact with the state by 11am.

In another scenario if I show up at my with a gun and say it was used in a crime, my attorney can and should collect it, and then turn it over to LE.

The attorney cannot take it, hid it, destroy it, etc.... but they can collect it and turn it over.

I don't think they went out into a field and took a shovel to a gravesite, disturbed evidence etc.... they seem to be professionals.

 

[justus4all]

I've racked my brain trying to figure out what that "evidence" was. It has to be something that it wouldn't matter if they handled. I would at least think they wouldn't be so dumb as to handle certain stuff...anyway. So what could it have been? Phone? Computer? A tape of something?

Throwing this suggestion out here....whatever it was, it would have to be collected...(with integrity..and not compromised...)..by certain procedures..OR....was "evidence"...TAMPERED with/altered......to point the finger away from her...and onto possibly a "stranger" or AB...

Surely her defense team...would not "collect" anything...that would INCRIMINATE her....but...deflect....AWAY from her....moo...