Possible Murder Motives#2

[Labrat]

Annie's fiance is studying physics.

He's a graduate student in Physics at Columbia University. They were a phenomenally bright pair. Every one who has commented on him to the press has said he's a wonderful guy.

I can't even begin to imagine what he's going through.

 

[Labrat]

Absolutely amazing! Welcome to Websleuths, QAQC-x, I'm sure glad you finally joined! To further add to this, I found the "union" payscale for Yale Animal Services. I didn't post it b/c I didn't feel it was important, don't think it was about his pay. I absolutely agree with you on Labrat..would like to add that the other people working in this field have provided much valuable info also. In regards to the belittling of "animal tech" on national television, I myself felt a pang of anger b/c I though that was kind of bunching everyone else that does that job as deemed menial. That's just simply not true. There's another poster on here named Joe that said the chief was only saying that b/c he probably feels hate or anger towards Raymond...the chief saw the dead body and all the evidence, therefore probably despises Raymond and that's why he was putting him down. He probably didn't mean it about everyone in the general sense. B/c I am so analytical, I may have looked too far into the chiefs choice of words. I just think he shouldn't have said that knowing full well Raymond has other members of his family that work there, in the same position, as well as the pther techs at Yale that he's obviously come in contact with during investigative questioning. It didn't sit well with me. I've been in contact with techs at several levels and never once did I feel above them...quite the contrary, I feel as though they were some of my best teachers! That's probably why I can't let go what the chief said.

The unfortunate thing is that the press picked up on it and keeps repeating it.

 

[Jersey*Girl]

Thank you- you too! I'm so glad it's Saturday.

The change of clothes doesn't bother me. There would be a locker/shower room for the animal techs. If he kept extra clothes in the locker- for going to the gym for example, he would have no need to go home.

The card swipes did show he was moving around a lot. Every animal room I've ever been in has it's own broom, mop, and mop bucket that permanently stays in the room. I don't think Yale would be different. It's a way to try to prevent the spread of disease- this way if something did break out, it would be contained in that room. Everything the animal tech needs to maintain the room is permanently in the room, including cleaning supplies.

Didn't the card swipe show he was in that room for an hour?

That brings me to something else that I never posted and now realize I should have. I'll be curious to find if Yale actually does have a regular broom, mop, and bucket used for cleanup. I "accidentally" found that they do not use those old fashioned rag mops that we might see large establishments use. They said it holds disease and since disease is what they research, they don't use them. I just let it go and didn't save it...at least I don't think so. It made me wonder how they actually did their cleanup. For all I know, they still used those big mops even though they say they didn't. What else would they use? A wet-dry vac? A steamer? Wouldn't it be crazy if they used a Swiffer? There's no way they'd use a Swiffer...right?

 

[Jersey*Girl]

The unfortunate thing is that the press picked up on it and keeps repeating it.

which makes me mad

 

[Labrat]

wow! you are taking things that all derived from circumstance -- what was at hand, what was available -- and ascribing motive and reason to them. that is causally backwards!

How about the choked or strangled her because that is the simplest, cleanest, easiest quietest and perhaps only method if you are a athletic powerful man in a semi public space with a 90 lb woman committing an unplanned murder.

How about he stuck her in an access opening because that was the only place where her body could be hidden considering the idiocy of already killing her in a moderately trafficked laboratory with security cameras at the entrances!

Really my goodness, it is not as if this guy had her trust and driven her to a remote place and had the choice of stabbing, beheading, choking, shooting or poisoning her! Then you could speculate or ascribe meaning to the mechanism of killing.

I have to agree with you on this- I can't think of a single thing in my mouse rooms that could be used as a weapon.

He wouldn't have been able to take her out of the facility, not even if he went back at night because of the card readers and cameras. There would not be a single place in the facility were she could remain concealed for long, except inside the wall.

 

[Jersey*Girl]

Apologies in advance for the long post.... I know there has been speculation about what may have set RC off down the deep end. We now know from the autopsy that the ME indicated she was struck first before strangled.

Here's a possibility. Just think if you were Annie, and you're in an isolated room with a guy who is taller, bigger, stronger and heavier than you. You're having a debate about cage cleanliness, and this bigger person is clearly becoming more angry and intimidating and needing to prove his point as "Lord of the Lab" (term, courtesy of tv's JVM).

So what would you do? You'd turn around and.... leave.

I know it has been reported that Annie was feisty, but we also know she was also very smart. It probably became clear to her that this debate was getting her nowhere. No matter the angle she approached this issue, it was clear he was just NOT going to acquiesce or compromise on the issue.

I would bet that at that at some point she recognized this and turned around to leave and THIS was the action that set RC off. He could no longer press his case with her, and be right; it was interpreted by him as a sign of rejection towards him (his ideas, possible fixations, job status etc), and probably made him feel lower than low. So when she turned around to leave, this action blew his top off like hot lava in a volcano.

So then what did he do?? He lashed out and struck her. And once he struck her, there was no turning back. After all, she could call the police, file a complaint, and then his job would probably be done for.

(He may have been unionized. In some unionized jobs, there typically has to be a series of mishaps before someone can be dismissed. However, striking another employee is one thing that cuts through all the red tape. From my experience as an employer, even an unionized employee can lose their job in an instant for striking a fellow employee.)

So then he was enraged, and seeing red, and all this was directed towards her. And then he couldn't let her go, because his livelihood--the only job he knew since high school--would be kaput.

If the strike didn't disable her, then she probably kept trying to get away. And so he kept strangling her until he killed her. In his crazed mind, there was no other choice.

Again, so sorry for the long post. All this to say that I'm betting Annie attempted to leave the escalating situation, and wondering if this was the slight (in RC's mind) that set him off.

I can't believe you said this! His job was unionized! Does that automatically mean he was unionized? I'm not sure of the technicalities there. I never posted the payscale...didn't think it was important. Maybe I was wrong. Should I look through my tem files for it?

I have to take my son to football. I'll check back later. If anyone wants it, I'll post it...just have to find it again! Have a nice day everyone!

 

[Jersey*Girl]

I have to agree with you on this- I can't think of a single thing in my mouse rooms that could be used as a weapon.

He wouldn't have been able to take her out of the facility, not even if he went back at night because of the card readers and cameras. There would not be a single place in the facility were she could remain concealed for long, except inside the wall.

I think they got into a fight that stemmed from an argument. He strangled her. If there was blood, maybe it's b/c he pushed her down and busted her head open...or something like that. I was thrown off b/c puffster said his sources informed she was cut up pretty badly. Then the media mentioned something about dismemberment. I guess we'll never know until it all comes out...if it ever does.

Have to go for real now. Have a ncie day!

 

[Labrat]

That brings me to something else that I never posted and now realize I should have. I'll be curious to find if Yale actually does have a regular broom, mop, and bucket used for cleanup. I "accidentally" found that they do not use those old fashioned rag mops that we might see large establishments use. They said it holds disease and since disease is what they research, they don't use them. I just let it go and didn't save it...at least I don't think so. It made me wonder how they actually did their cleanup. For all I know, they still used those big mops even though they say they didn't. What else would they use? A wet-dry vac? A steamer? Wouldn't it be crazy if they used a Swiffer? There's no way they'd use a Swiffer...right?

We've got those ratty rag mops, but the floors are mopped with either bleach or quatricide, so I guess we'll be OK. Whatever they have, there'll be one in each room. There are companies that supply animal room equipment- maybe they sell something with a disposable head so you use a new one each time.

 

[f_stills]

I think they got into a fight that stemmed from an argument. He strangled her. If there was blood, maybe it's b/c he pushed her down and busted her head open...or something like that. I was thrown off b/c puffster said his sources informed she was cut up pretty badly. Then the media mentioned something about dismemberment. I guess we'll never know until it all comes out...if it ever does.

Have to go for real now. Have a ncie day!

News media did say yesterday that she was first hit and then strangled. The blood could have come simply from that first hit and there was no more blood-causing injury done to her after that.

I am still interested in the Fox 61 news report that Clark "took apart her body" and puffster's sources, for the latter I think the exact words used were "mutilation" and "cutting."

You know, details of this case have been leaking left and right. I would think that something as major as dismemberment or other mutilation would have leaked by more than two known sources by now. But who among us could know for sure.

 

[masscph]

I think they got into a fight that stemmed from an argument. He strangled her. If there was blood, maybe it's b/c he pushed her down and busted her head open...or something like that.

I think that too.

One one side i think that it started with a push/blow that caused her injury, and then he panicked and to avoid the consequences of that, he killed her so she couldnt report him.

I also mostly tend to the belief that it was accidental, that he didnt plan to do it, but something just sparked a snap in him.

On the other hand - the way he has handled the case still wonders me. He looked like he was in serious mental trouble in court, his eyes were moving around like he was watching an internal movie all the time.

But he refuses to speak, and he has handled the case up to the arrest pretty stupid.

If it was all an accident, and things just went terrible wrong, wouldnt a guy like this crack up when he realises the game is over, and spill it out ? i would think so.

If he has absolutely no remorse then they it makes more sense the way he deals with the case now, not saying anything and try to fight his way through the case.

So that worries me abit, that it could that there has been alot more to it from his side, i dont believe there has been anything from Annie's side, but something suggest to me that she had a special place in his world one way or the other.

 

[masscph]

know i dont come up with anything new or something like that. Im just really wondering about whats going on with this guy Ray and the way he handles this, it makes no sense to me...

 

[Gene]

Comment #10 at the bottom of this article by Gerald is similar to those expressed here, but gives a slightly different spin saying that the system in general promotes conflict between animal resource departments and scientists. Gerald said:

"Mice that take years to generate, on which scientists careers depend can be killed at the mercy of the animal caretakers who can order them to be killed. "

Can you imagine how Annie may have reacted if Clark threated to kill her mice? Her entire project could have been jeapardized.....how might a highly driven, sleep deprived, about to get married, fiesty person react? How might an highly regimented, known to be violent, control freek respond to that?...like two express trains running head on into each other??..... BAM!!!!!

http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/u...-medical-students-react-news-arrest/comments/

 

[TonyGatto]

I think he's going to plead self-defense, panicked and hid the body. Otherwise he's going to either plead guilty or mental defect, insanity. The evidence seems to be too damning to try to say he had nothing at all to do with her death.

 

[Labrat]

Comment #10 at the bottom of this article by Gerald is similar to those expressed here, but gives a slightly different spin saying that the system in general promotes conflict between animal resource departments and scientists. Gerald said:

"Mice that take years to generate, on which scientists careers depend can be killed at the mercy of the animal caretakers who can order them to be killed. "

Can you imagine how Annie may have reacted if Clark threated to kill her mice? Her entire project could have been jeapardized.....how might a highly driven, sleep deprived, about to get married, fiesty person react? How might an highly regimented, known to be violent, control freek respond to that?...like two express trains running head on into each other??..... BAM!!!!!





http://www.yaledailynews.com/news/u...-medical-students-react-news-arrest/comments/

Eh, sounds like Gerald has an axe to grind. That is patently untrue. My animal tech can do no such thing. There is friction because the animal care department has to enforce the rules, and often the researchers feel the rules are getting in their way. In reality, the animal care staff and the IACUC bend over backwards to accomodate the researchers, but some things are just non-negotiable. We don't make up the rules to annoy people, we are there to enforce federal, state, and institutional guidelines. I constantly have researchers ask me to bend or break the rules to help them out. I will not do it. Some of them get mad- but I am not going to risk my job so they can get something done 2 days sooner than if they did it the correct way.

"As a scientist I can say it is quite stressful to have every single procedure second guessed by a person who has no ability to understand what is being done and the purpose and rationale of the work."

This would not be the animal techs- this would be the IACUC and the Veterinarians. You see here- this attitude of Gerald's is part of the very problem he's talking about. Pot, meet kettle.

I am sure most Researchers would love it if there was no oversight of their animal use. Everything is so much easier when there are no rules

 

[PatientOne]

Not important, but it occurs to me that with all the talk about RC cleaning up blood evidence, I wonder if during the struggle, other items in the lab could've been damaged that leaked their contents, thus proving a struggle took place in the room which could help to paint a picture of the final encounter?

I wonder if any mice cages were present, since the meeting's intent was to discuss cleanliness issues? Perhaps some cages were knocked about.

I've also wondered if there's a floor drain in the lab room where the murder took place, especially since it's in the basement.

 

[songline]

I think he's going to plead self-defense, panicked and hid the body. Otherwise he's going to either plead guilty or mental defect, insanity. The evidence seems to be too damning to try to say he had nothing at all to do with her death.

I really do not know what I myself am thinking with this case.
I am baffled by it...
My sense is that she provoked and he handled something very badly.
But I wonder what the real story is, If there is any temporary insanity ??
I have a feeling she was no walk in the park, that she lite this fire,
a feeling that he snapped for a reason.
Maybe I am just naive...But I do not think so.

 

[Gene]

Eh, sounds like Gerald has an axe to grind. That is patently untrue. My animal tech can do no such thing. There is friction because the animal care department has to enforce the rules, and often the researchers feel the rules are getting in their way. In reality, the animal care staff and the IACUC bend over backwards to accomodate the researchers, but some things are just non-negotiable. We don't make up the rules to annoy people, we are there to enforce federal, state, and institutional guidelines. I constantly have researchers ask me to bend or break the rules to help them out. I will not do it. Some of them get mad- but I am not going to risk my job so they can get something done 2 days sooner than if they did it the correct way.

"As a scientist I can say it is quite stressful to have every single procedure second guessed by a person who has no ability to understand what is being done and the purpose and rationale of the work."

This would not be the animal techs- this would be the IACUC and the Veterinarians. You see here- this attitude of Gerald's is part of the very problem he's talking about. Pot, meet kettle.

I am sure most Researchers would love it if there was no oversight of their animal use. Everything is so much easier when there are no rules

Labrat: I am not in a position to disagree, because I have been out of the area for a while.



But as far as I understand, animal techs report to the the Attending Veterinarian.

Policy The Attending Veterinarian is fully authorized to provide medical care and/or euthanasia to research animals. The Attending Veterinarian is not required to obtain approval from the Principal Investigator or other parties prior to providing treatment or euthanasia to research animals.

This policy pertains to the Attending Veterinarian and any person(s) acting as designee(s) under the authority and/or direction of the Attending Veterinarian.

http://www.bu.edu/research/complian...authority-of-the-attending-veterinarian.shtml

Now, this is the Policy of BU. Gerald is from Yale and has make a statement which is consistant with this policy. We have heard that Animal Techs are lab police with a great deal of authority over the animals.

 

[jjenny]

I think he's going to plead self-defense, panicked and hid the body. Otherwise he's going to either plead guilty or mental defect, insanity. The evidence seems to be too damning to try to say he had nothing at all to do with her death.

She was a tiny little girl, all of 90 pound.
What is he, almost six feet tall?
I would like to see him plead self-defense. Somehow I don't think people are going to buy it.

 

[Skigirl]

On the other hand - the way he has handled the case still wonders me. He looked like he was in serious mental trouble in court, his eyes were moving around like he was watching an internal movie all the time.

But he refuses to speak, and he has handled the case up to the arrest pretty stupid.

If it was all an accident, and things just went terrible wrong, wouldnt a guy like this crack up when he realises the game is over, and spill it out ? i would think so.

I have to respectfully disagree.

I don't think it's crazy for him to stay silent. A public defender friend of mine often says that if her clients would just keep their mouths shut and stay off the internet, it would be near-to-impossible to convict them. In this case, there's a lot of physical evidence (we've been told), so that probably isn't true here, but he can really only make things worse by not following his defense attorneys' advice to keep quiet. And anyone who's watched crime shows on TV knows that when the investigators start interrogating, it doesn't do you any good to continue to speak with them without a lawyer.

Even if he were going to try to work out a plea deal, it's to his advantage to remain silent to leave the investigators with information to want. If he gives them everything they want, he won't have any leverage in a negotiation.

 

[Labrat]

Labrat: I am not in a position to disagree, because I have been out of the area for a while.



But as far as I understand, animal techs report to the the Attending Veterinarian.

Policy The Attending Veterinarian is fully authorized to provide medical care and/or euthanasia to research animals. The Attending Veterinarian is not required to obtain approval from the Principal Investigator or other parties prior to providing treatment or euthanasia to research animals.

This policy pertains to the Attending Veterinarian and any person(s) acting as designee(s) under the authority and/or direction of the Attending Veterinarian.

http://www.bu.edu/research/complian...authority-of-the-attending-veterinarian.shtml

Now, this is the Policy of BU. Gerald is from Yale and has make a statement which is consistant with this policy. We have heard that Animal Techs are lab police with a great deal of authority over the animals.

Well, sure that's the policy, it's the policy where I am too, but you have to understand how it works in reality. It would not be the animal tech who made the decision- it would be the Veterinarian in consultation with the PI, although the Vet would have the last word. And it would be a single animal that was in extreme distress. We go to great lengths not to euthanize animals. I would greatly doubt this would happen with mice, it is probably far more likely to happen in large animal.

Gerald makes it sound as though an animal room tech could kill all his mice for no reason at all- that is what I am saying is simply not true.

Yes the animal techs could be seen as lab police- "wear your shoe covers, please take your empty cages to the dirty room, please put a water bottle in the SAC cage, please only open cages in the hood." This is their JOB! Violations like this put every investigator with animals in the facility at risk. They are trained to contain that risk.

You would be simply amazed how many research people think they are above these rules.

My lab tech was an animal room tech for many years. He's told me he was cursed out on a nearly daily basis often times with incredibly foul language and personal insults for making requests such as those above. He had to be asked to be taken out of certain PI's rooms because of the abuse, when he was only doing what his position required of him.

Animal room techs report to their facility supervisor who reports to the veterinarian. They simply would not ever have the authority to make that decision on their own. If a mouse is sick, they flag the cage and a Veterinary
Technician comes to examine it. If the condition is treatable, they treat it. If not they call to tell me that they believe mouse #x should be euthanized, and will I please come look at the mouse and make the decision. The idea is to prevent suffering. No animal care employee would take it into their head to euthanize healthy mice for no good reason.

The only time that would even be a possibility is if the Researcher let their protocol expire and refused to renew it, or transfer the mice to another protocol. Even then, my facility will put the animals on one of their own holding protocols while things are worked out.

I can understand both sides here. I was in research for 18 years before I switched to a position closely related to the animal facility. I will confess that I, too, felt the animal techs were a huge PITA back then. " I just want to get my experiments DONE, for Pete's sake! Why are these fools interfering in my WORK!?" Oh, yes, I have absolutely been there. Now that I have a much better understanding of what they do and why they do it, I am embarrassed by and somewhat ashamed of all the eyerolls and exasperated sighs I was guilty of.