PTL (Peach Tree Landing)

[Ghostwheel]

And in those cases, the case had gone to trial (Jessica) or the victims had been found (Elizabeth and Lyric). Why in such a rush to pave over the crime scene?

It is interesting that you think it is a rush to pave over the crime scene. By my count, it is four months after the fact, the area has been gone over at least twice by LE (once originally and once during the "re-enactment"), it has been rained on, driven on, had many people visit it, had several vigils upon it. I'm not seeing any kind of rush, personally.

I think that often, when there has been a kidnapping or violent crime (assumed to have happened at PTL because of what LE has said) in an area, the community tries to redress that area so it doesn't feel so creepy or dangerous. And they try to do it as soon as possible. In the case of Jessica Ridgeway, the park was named for her in October 2013, but that had been underway since before Austin Sigg's trial was supposed to start (even though he pleaded guilty and waived his trial). That park construction started in April, 2013.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/04/17/construction-begins-park-honoring-jessica-ridgeway/ and they decided to name it after her slightly over a month after she was found, in November 2012.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/11/30/jessica-ridgeway-honored-park-memorial/ It is my opinion that they chose that park because it was where she was supposed to meet a friend to walk to school. This would give it a very uncomfortable feel to the community.

In Heather's case, they haven't found her, but why leave the place she disappeared to be a reminder of something horrible? The community decided they'd rather have something less desolate. It makes sense to me from that point of view.

 

[Madeleine74]

And in those cases, the case had gone to trial (Jessica) or the victims had been found (Elizabeth and Lyric). Why in such a rush to pave over the crime scene?

What about crimes committed in homes where a bloody mess is left? Do you expect the owners of such a place to leave the blood for months, perhaps a year or more, in place, because doing anything else would be a rush to cover it up?

At what point is it okay to clean a scene or make changes? 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Never? What is the minimal amount of time? And how many people need to have investigated a particular crime scene before it's enough and the scene can be released? 10? 20? 50? The FBI, the state, the county, the city/town?

 

[eileenhawkeye]

What about crimes committed in homes where a bloody mess is left? Do you expect the owners of such a place to leave the blood for months, perhaps a year or more, in place, because doing anything else would be a rush to cover it up?

At what point is it okay to clean a scene or make changes? 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? Never? What is the minimal amount of time? And how many people need to have investigated a particular crime scene before it's enough and the scene can be released? 10? 20? 50? The FBI, the state, the county, the city/town?

I don't know why your post is talking about cleaning up blood splatter, when my post was about private citizens repaving part of a street, something I find completely unnecessary, as there are much better uses for the money. Where did I say that I don't expect blood to be cleaned up? How is that even equivalent to repaving a crime scene?

 

[eileenhawkeye]

It is interesting that you think it is a rush to pave over the crime scene. By my count, it is four months after the fact, the area has been gone over at least twice by LE (once originally and once during the "re-enactment"), it has been rained on, driven on, had many people visit it, had several vigils upon it. I'm not seeing any kind of rush, personally.

I think that often, when there has been a kidnapping or violent crime (assumed to have happened at PTL because of what LE has said) in an area, the community tries to redress that area so it doesn't feel so creepy or dangerous. And they try to do it as soon as possible. In the case of Jessica Ridgeway, the park was named for her in October 2013, but that had been underway since before Austin Sigg's trial was supposed to start (even though he pleaded guilty and waived his trial). That park construction started in April, 2013.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/04/17/construction-begins-park-honoring-jessica-ridgeway/ and they decided to name it after her slightly over a month after she was found, in November 2012.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/11/30/jessica-ridgeway-honored-park-memorial/ It is my opinion that they chose that park because it was where she was supposed to meet a friend to walk to school. This would give it a very uncomfortable feel to the community.

In Heather's case, they haven't found her, but why leave the place she disappeared to be a reminder of something horrible? The community decided they'd rather have something less desolate. It makes sense to me from that point of view.

Out of 13,000+ murders a year, very few get parks/gardens dedicated to the victim. It is not common at all. Anyway, it is not the garden I have an issue with, it is the repaving of the road. Why? It is odd. I also do not like that the whole thing is hush-hush. In Jessica's case, there were constant articles in the media, talking about what was being done, what needed to be donated, how much was raised. In this case, we just wake up one day, hear that there is a garden and renovations to PTL. It is not clear at all where the money came from, as some say it was all private donations, other say companies donated, etc.

 

[cluciano63]

The thing I find odd is that changes would be made so soon in this case, since Heather was never found and this area is presumed to be a scene of the crime. In other cases, usually the victim had been found before renovating the site, IMO, especially since the trial has not even happened. Jmo

 

[eileenhawkeye]

The thing I find odd is that changes would be made so soon in this case, since Heather was never found and this area is presumed to be a scene of the crime. In other cases, usually the victim had been found before renovating the site, IMO, especially since the trial has not even happened. Jmo

Yes. Imagine if the Ramseys decided to completely renovate the basement 4 months after JonBenet was killed. There would be a lot of questions and controversy over it.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Out of 13,000+ murders a year, very few get parks/gardens dedicated to the victim. It is not common at all. Anyway, it is not the garden I have an issue with, it is the repaving of the road. Why? It is odd. I also do not like that the whole thing is hush-hush. In Jessica's case, there were constant articles in the media, talking about what was being done, what needed to be donated, how much was raised. In this case, we just wake up one day, hear that there is a garden and renovations to PTL. It is not clear at all where the money came from, as some say it was all private donations, other say companies donated, etc.

I think a lot more gets dedicated than we know. There just isn't a big deal made about it. In 1995 a bridge was renamed for Cara Knott (Cara Knott Memorial Bridge), who was murdered by Highway Patrolman Craig Peyer in 1986 (that is 9 years later!) and her father had created a garden at the site she was murdered. The dedication of the bridge was a two liner in the bottom corner of the newspaper, and that was the first I'd read about the garden. Only a few people even remembered Cara at all.

I see that you find this odd and your opinion is that it isn't common at all. I do not find this odd, as I read about these things happening all the time, it just isn't a big news story. I believe it is pretty common, based on what I have read. Now that I realize it is just your opinion and not facts that you are working with, I agree to disagree.

 

[stillwatersc]

I remember there was a huge discussion over Angels Park for Lyric & Elizabeth and went back to refresh my memory and found a familiar name. Eileenhawkeye do you remember this? :floorlaugh:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Found Deceased IA - Elizabeth Collins, 8, and Lyric Cook, 10, Evansdale, 13 July 2012 - #30

 

[Madeleine74]

I don't know why your post is talking about cleaning up blood splatter, when my post was about private citizens repaving part of a street, something I find completely unnecessary, as there are much better uses for the money. Where did I say that I don't expect blood to be cleaned up? How is that even equivalent to repaving a crime scene?

Your argument was not that part of a street was repaved, but that this particular landing, which was considered a "crime scene" by LE, was somehow rushed to be repaved, with the inference that by doing so something is being either covered up or otherwise altered and it shouldn't be. I responded to that by asking what is the minimum time acceptable for any crime scene to be changed/altered/cleaned/repaved or whatever word you prefer to use.

I used blood as one example of evidence at a crime scene (not this particular scene), but nice attempt to strawman the point.

My question still stands: what is the minimum acceptable amount of time for a scene to be altered from it's original state when it was determined to be a "crime scene?" You said the word "rush." How much time would have elapse before you would not consider it a "rush" to change the scene?

 

[PPKik]

The thing I find odd is that changes would be made so soon in this case, since Heather was never found and this area is presumed to be a scene of the crime. In other cases, usually the victim had been found before renovating the site, IMO, especially since the trial has not even happened. Jmo

Thank you cluciano63. I was about the write the same thing when I read your post.

PTL has been named the scene of a violent crime, Heather has not been found, and the Moorers have not had a trial.

I have wondered if their lawyers had advanced notice. Would they have wanted to preserve PTL just as it was until the trial?

 

[PPKik]

Your argument was not that part of a street was repaved, but that this particular landing, which was considered a "crime scene" by LE, was somehow rushed to be repaved, with the inference that by doing so something is being either covered up or otherwise altered and it shouldn't be. I responded to that by asking what is the minimum time acceptable for any crime scene to be changed/altered/cleaned/repaved or whatever word you prefer to use.

I used blood as one example of evidence at a crime scene (not this particular scene), but nice attempt to strawman the point.

My question still stands: what is the minimum acceptable amount of time for a scene to be altered from it's original state when it was determined to be a "crime scene?"

Perhaps a place can be altered, after a trial, if it is deemed a "crime scene," specifically the scene of a violent kidnapping and murder. (I know you were not addressing me, but this re-sealing has bothered me, too.)

From what I can gather, it was re-sealed not paved. If people wanted to plant flowers and put up a table with seats, I think that is a positive thing.

I have been to PTL since it was designated a "crime scene." It was one of the most peaceful places I have ever been. There was no place to sit, but on the edge of the asphalt overlooking the Waccamaw.

I have thought a lot about why it felt so peaceful after the allegedly brutal crime that took place. I have no answers, but I do strongly believe that except for the memorial candles and other personal things for Heather, the flowers and the sitting places, the surface should not have been touched.

If for no other reason than as a matter of principle, because the Moorers have not had their day in court (What if the Moorers' lawyers wanted to re-visit PTL before or during a trial, or even bring a jury there?).

There was absolutely no reason to re-cover that surface, and, I, too, wonder why they did it.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Your argument was not that part of a street was repaved, but that this particular landing, which was considered a "crime scene" by LE, was somehow rushed to be repaved, with the inference that by doing so something is being either covered up or otherwise altered and it shouldn't be. I responded to that by asking what is the minimum time acceptable for any crime scene to be changed/altered/cleaned/repaved or whatever word you prefer to use.

I used blood as one example of evidence at a crime scene (not this particular scene), but nice attempt to strawman the point.

My question still stands: what is the minimum acceptable amount of time for a scene to be altered from it's original state when it was determined to be a "crime scene?" You said the word "rush." How much time would have elapse before you would not consider it a "rush" to change the scene?

I don't consider cleaning up blood and repaving a road to be the same thing. One is necessary, the other is not. Although, at least we would know, it would be LE who would be cleaning up blood, instead of private citizens who just had to repave the road.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Perhaps a place can be altered, after a trial, if it is deemed a "crime scene," specifically the scene of a violent kidnapping and murder. (I know you were not addressing me, but this re-sealing has bothered me, too.)

From what I can gather, it was re-sealed not paved. If people wanted to plant flowers and put up a table with seats, I think that is a positive thing.

I have been to PTL since it was designated a "crime scene." It was one of the most peaceful places I have ever been. There was no place to sit, but on the edge of the asphalt overlooking the Waccamaw.

I have thought a lot about why it felt so peaceful after the allegedly brutal crime that took place. I have no answers, but I do strongly believe that except for the memorial candles and other personal things for Heather, the flowers and the sitting places, the surface should not have been touched.

If for no other reason than as a matter of principle, because the Moorers have not had their day in court (What if the Moorers' lawyers wanted to re-visit PTL before or during a trial, or even bring a jury there?).

There was absolutely no reason to re-cover that surface, and, I, too, wonder why they did it.

Good point that I had not thought of. The question is: Why? What was the intention behind resealing PTL? Why was their no talk about this beforehand? Another thing is, people don't have to go to PTL. If it makes them uncomfortable, they can go to another boat landing. This is not a school where kids have no choice but to go back it after a shooting. So this idea that they had to completely renovate PTL because people don't like going there now doesn't add up. Not wanting to go to a place where a murder possibly occurred, I understand, but how would resealing the road make it better? Maybe I could understand cutting down all the trees (don't get any ideas!) to make it less dark and scary, but why altering the road?

 

[Jo in Calif]

Maybe it was not necessary to re coat, resurface, or re pave the landing.
But IMO the people of the community did this to freshen up the landing and make it a peaceful pretty place as a memorial to Heather and other people that have died there.
Granted we don't know 100% for sure that Heather died there but her car was left there and LE have stated she drove herself there and she was not seen or heard from after arriving there, not that any one has come forward and said anything different.
If LE felt like the landing held evidence that had to be preserved I would have thought they would have blocked any access to it and covered the surface with tarps
<Mod Snip>

 

[Mahouston69]

I think it's a legitimate concern. If something comes up at trial and the defense cannot use experts to retest original evidence or the original area has been altered it could possible keep prosecution evidence of a crime there thrown out..

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

The landing itself and the infrastructure around it is still intact. Once crime scene tape is taken down and a scene is reopened there will be people who go there to visit if it's an outdoor location and publicly accessible. Nothing precludes either the defense or the state from visiting PTL themselves now or anytime in the future.

Whatever potential evidence existed would have (should have) been gathered by LE/CSI teams before a scene would be dismantled and crime scene tape taken away. If LE didn't do their job at the time, it will hurt their case later on. Once the public has access to a scene, it is technically no longer the 'same' as it was at the time of the crime.

I personally don't see a problem with either the road being resealed, plants and mementos added, signs and banners hung, and other things done to the site. It is public land and not barred by LE anymore. It will not keep the M's from getting a fair trial, it will not suddenly make Heather appear, it won't affect the case as long as LE & CSI did a proper job during their time there.

I think it's no big deal, but in lieu of something to actually discuss, it's been given some kind of significance for the purpose of debate and argument. Crime scenes or potential crime scenes have been successfully processed and reopened for decades and without problem to either state or defense. I don't think this scene will become an actual issue. (IMO)

 

[PPKik]

The landing itself and the infrastructure around it is still intact. Once crime scene tape is taken down and a scene is reopened there will be people who go there to visit if it's an outdoor location and publicly accessible. Nothing precludes either the defense or the state from visiting PTL themselves now or anytime in the future.

Whatever potential evidence existed would have (should have) been gathered by LE/CSI teams before a scene would be dismantled and crime scene tape taken away. If LE didn't do their job at the time, it will hurt their case later on. Once the public has access to a scene, it is technically no longer the 'same' as it was at the time of the crime.

I personally don't see a problem with either the road being resealed, plants and mementos added, signs and banners hung, and other things done to the site. It is public land and not barred by LE anymore. It will not keep the M's from getting a fair trial, it will not suddenly make Heather appear, it won't affect the case as long as LE & CSI did a proper job during their time there.

I think it's no big deal, but in lieu of something to actually discuss, it's been given some kind of significance for the purpose of debate and argument. Crime scenes or potential crime scenes have been successfully processed and reopened for decades and without problem to either state or defense. I don't think this scene will become an actual issue. (IMO)

I am glad I'm not on trial. Defense teams re-visit evidence and crime scenes all the time. They re-test what the state has tested. The state often does a crappy job. I can cite cases if you want.

Just to be clear, I agree that making PTL more attractive is positive. I hope my post was clear. I just do not understand the need to re-seal PTL.

I don't believe any evidence was gathered there by the time LE decided the the alleged murder happened there, at PTL. But, that is completely besides the point.

The Moorers' attorneys should have the right, if they want it, of access to a "crime scene" as unchanged as possible, except by weather and other disturbances, the same disturbances as LE dealt with, by not cordoning PTL off at the very beginning of discovering Heather's car.

That in itself is bizarre: "Something is very wrong here, but drive the car home anyway. Don't process anything. Deal with it another day."

My life is not on the line, and neither is yours, in this case, but, if it were, I'd wonder why the scene of the crime was re-sealed, suddenly.

 

[jeandrews]

I live not far from PTL and I visit there often - I took the pictures posted above last Sunday. I will probably be there again this Sunday. I have combed PTL with my metal detector at least three times. I have been in the marshy water searching near where Heather was parked. A guy stopped in the store a few weeks ago - we got to talking about this case - he has combed PTL with his metal detector at least four times.

At least one crime was committed there (kidnapping). It is my firm belief that all the evidence related to the kidnapping that was there has been recovered. Paving over the asphalt and cleaning/fixing up the area is a good thing. Look at the pictures where the area has become "Heather's Garden". It is now a memorial to Heather. Every time I go there, there is someone else there - searching for clues or answers.

I'm not going to stop looking for her until she's found - and I'm sure I'm not alone. we will search, investigate, and eventually find our Heather.

 

[Dr. Know?]

For some reason I feel pretty secure that area at PTL was scoped with a fine tooth comb twice if not more. Any blood evidence was photographed hundreds of times, scraped up & sealed for testing, measurements, possibly a bullet fragment, skin tissue, wind velocity, temp, you name it. It would never remain the same even after a crime if it's a public place. If they got that much which it appears they might have, paving, cutting, planting etc...wouldn't matter. jmo

 

[Madeleine74]

Were the details kept secret or were they just not publicized in the media? Yes, there is a difference. I was aware of people making the site into a memorial site of sorts since I saw pictures posted on WS during and after the various candlelight vigils held (gasp) at the landing site. The "re-sealing" of the paved areas could have been a project that was slated to be done eventually OR maybe all the extra traffic caused more erosion or damage OR maybe people just thought it would be a nice thing to do. I don't understand the issue.

If the defense needs to test or retest evidence they will get that evidence from what the state gathered or found when LE & the CSI techs were processing the scene. It is up to the state to gather evidence and make the case. It is not ever up to the defense to process a scene and would be challenging for them to get evidence admitted if they claimed to find something at PTL. IF there was evidence and the CSI techs missed it then it doesn't hurt the defense and might just help them. Advantage here goes to defense since it would be less evidence in the case and less evidence attributed to the M's.

I'm just not seeing the problem that others are imagining. By some of the arguments you'd think this was the very first murder case ever in history in which a crime scene (or potential crime scene) existed outside AND the community later laid flowers and mementos and prettied up the site. It's over 4 months since Heather was abducted & killed. The M's have been incarcerated for nearly 2 months now. You think their attorneys could not have gone to PTL before the landing was resealed?

Again, what is the problem?