SC - Heather Elvis, 20, Myrtle Beach, 18 Dec 2013 #27***ARREST**

[LookingForClues]

With all due respect, I am a journalist, and a good ethical journalist does NOT interpret. A journalist's job is to report the facts. Nothing more. And a good editor makes sure that the journalist is reporting just the facts. Unfortunately there are a lot of bad journalists out there. And there are a lot of bad media outlets out there, willing to give the people what they claim to want, and that is INSTANT NEWS. Media has changed. People want info NOW and everything is a ratings war because news is available 24/7. Anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want. But a trained journalist takes classes in ethics and First Amendment Law. A trained journalist checks their facts and good editors check facts. And a good publisher lets their reporters and editors do their job without pressuring them to beat the sensational media outlets. The only place you should find a journalist interpreting is in the editorial pages or in news analysis articles written by an expert.

I hope that helps clear up why so many of us are upset about the coverage of this and many other cases. Sloppy reporting gets us nowhere and causes a lot of confusion.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

LE has control over what the public knows about the investigation. If the media has it wrong, LE is free to correct the media and can do so without harming the case. Happens all the time in police statements. And, independent journalists or other media outlets are free to write a better article, or separate the facts from speculation and innuendo.

I don't always agree with the methods of the press. But I would rather see some stupidity and sloppiness from a free press, than limited or pre-determined remarks by a muzzled press.

We've all seen this happen to news articles posted online. They are updated after the fact. Or, in some cases completely removed.

IMO, LE will contact the news outlet to have them omit sensitive info or delete if they feel it impedes in their investigation.

I'm almost positive that the local news agencies here will comply since they are in it for the long haul. They wouldn't want to jeopardize the relationship they have with LE since they are a huge source for them.

Plus, they really want to help too! At least I would hope so.

Where's Heather?

 

[cluciano63]

Saying that DNA was found in one of the trucks is quite a stretch, if LE never said that. If that is what was said...

 

[PeterThomasFan]

With all due respect, I am a journalist, and a good ethical journalist does NOT interpret. A journalist's job is to report the facts. Nothing more. And a good editor makes sure that the journalist is reporting just the facts. Unfortunately there are a lot of bad journalists out there. And there are a lot of bad media outlets out there, willing to give the people what they claim to want, and that is INSTANT NEWS. Media has changed. People want info NOW and everything is a ratings war because news is available 24/7. Anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want. But a trained journalist takes classes in ethics and First Amendment Law. A trained journalist checks their facts and good editors check facts. And a good publisher lets their reporters and editors do their job without pressuring them to beat the sensational media outlets. The only place you should find a journalist interpreting is in the editorial pages or in news analysis articles written by an expert.

I hope that helps clear up why so many of us are upset about the coverage of this and many other cases. Sloppy reporting gets us nowhere and causes a lot of confusion.

Thank you for your professional feedback on this topic. Much appreciated.

In terms of news reporting, I take the definition of 'interpret' more as "an explanation in words" rather than a Reporter's feelings, assumptions, or conclusions.

In terms of an LE investigation concerning a crime, the word interpret takes on a slightly different meaning. A Crime Analyst may come to conclusions based off of evidence, experience, and science among other things. All the while, s(he) interprets the evidence to complete a report which can then be read and understood by others.

 

[jillycat]

With all due respect, I am a journalist, and a good ethical journalist does NOT interpret. A journalist's job is to report the facts. Nothing more. And a good editor makes sure that the journalist is reporting just the facts. Unfortunately there are a lot of bad journalists out there. And there are a lot of bad media outlets out there, willing to give the people what they claim to want, and that is INSTANT NEWS. Media has changed. People want info NOW and everything is a ratings war because news is available 24/7. Anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want. But a trained journalist takes classes in ethics and First Amendment Law. A trained journalist checks their facts and good editors check facts. And a good publisher lets their reporters and editors do their job without pressuring them to beat the sensational media outlets. The only place you should find a journalist interpreting is in the editorial pages or in news analysis articles written by an expert.

I hope that helps clear up why so many of us are upset about the coverage of this and many other cases. Sloppy reporting gets us nowhere and causes a lot of confusion.

There is no need in a free press environment for sloppy reporting to be the only reporting. We get the good with the bad, and I guess I don't understand who is stopping other journalists or media sources from competing and improving the quality of reporting in this case.

 

[evelyn24]

I guess we can assume the Moorers are not giving up anything or flipping on each other?
Still no Heather.
This is going to be one of those long cases. I bet a trial won't start until the end of the year if there is no plea.

 

[Dee10]

We know they got enough evidence from the house and property which would include vehicle(s) to determine Heather was in fact murdered as well as who was involved with her murder as well that DNA was found during this search. For me, I'm good whether it means the house and vehicle(s) or just a vehicle. I just wish they had found a clue whether Heather may be.

 

[ISWMLE]

I guess we can assume the Moorers are not giving up anything or flipping on each other?
Still no Heather.
This is going to be one of those long cases. I bet a trial won't start until the end of the year if there is no plea.

i'm thinking the same thing also. imo, we are going to get another sensational trial, much like the circus of a Casey Anthony one at that.

i just hope that there is no question in the minds of the jury that the evidence will prove that the two murdered Heather. all you need is one juror to doubt and we're all screwed.

 

[TedMac]

I guess we can assume the Moorers are not giving up anything or flipping on each other?
Still no Heather.
This is going to be one of those long cases. I bet a trial won't start until the end of the year if there is no plea.

BBM

Apparently they aren't giving up much if any information on themselves or on the other. But, that could change. I am certain that both of their attorneys will file all the standard motions for discovery, etc. After the motions are heard and the preliminary hearing is complete, if nothing has broke their way, their Attorneys will meet with TM & SM and discuss with them their chances of acquittal and the prudence of accepting a plea deal (assuming one is offered). If it isn't looking to good for them, probably one of them will roll on the other and point the finger saying he/she actually killed her and I was just there and took no part or something close to that. TM could play the part of the "Oppressed Woman" and say her domineering husband did it all. SM could paint TM as the aggressor and say something to the point of we were just planning to meet with Heather to discuss everything and TM blew up and killed her before I could stop her.

No one knows for sure how this will turn out. It could go one of several ways. Lets just hope that the truth comes out and justice is served-no matter what the outcome.

 

[LookingForClues]

I see some questions based on my earlier post about media and journalists. At the moment, I am not able to take the time to respond, but I promise to do so tomorrow when I am on a computer and not my smartphone.

 

[ISWMLE]

BBM

Apparently they aren't giving up much if any information on themselves or on the other. But, that could change. I am certain that both of their attorneys will file all the standard motions for discovery, etc. After the motions are heard and the preliminary hearing is complete, if nothing has broke their way, their Attorneys will meet with TM & SM and discuss with them their chances of acquittal and the prudence of accepting a plea deal (assuming one is offered). If it isn't looking to good for them, probably one of them will roll on the other and point the finger saying he/she actually killed her and I was just there and took no part or something close to that. TM could play the part of the "Oppressed Woman" and say her domineering husband did it all. SM could paint TM as the aggressor and say something to the point of we were just planning to meet with Heather to discuss everything and TM blew up and killed her before I could stop her.

No one knows for sure how this will turn out. It could go one of several ways. Lets just hope that the truth comes out and justice is served-no matter what the outcome.

i appreciate your point of view, but unless that evidence is really damning, imo, i think both will stay mute. so far, we've heard from SM's lawyer and frankly, if he remains SM's lawyer, his comments worried me...in the fact that he may be able to convince a jury.

but, we will have to wait and see.

 

[EireK]

In the previous thread, someone asked what kind of people would do this. If they were normal or not... I think that everyone has dark and light in them. Sometimes we can get so bogged down in negative experiences that the darkness threatens to consume us. Deciding to let it or to keep ourselves in the light can be like standing on the edge of a knife. I believe TM fell into the dark... and brought SM along with her. It was a choice to embrace it. I think Heather was full of light and now shines even brighter. The M's tried to destroy it... but we have all kept Heather's light alive. Shine on, Heather.

Just my :twocents:

 

[Ghostwheel]

I guess we can assume the Moorers are not giving up anything or flipping on each other?
Still no Heather.
This is going to be one of those long cases. I bet a trial won't start until the end of the year if there is no plea.

Or we could assume that one of them did flip on the other, but Heather's body still cannot be found (if it were in the river, or somewhere where it's been scattered-apologies). I wonder how that would shake out in the wash (as my mother used to say) if it were true.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

With all due respect, I am a journalist, and a good ethical journalist does NOT interpret. A journalist's job is to report the facts. Nothing more. And a good editor makes sure that the journalist is reporting just the facts. Unfortunately there are a lot of bad journalists out there. And there are a lot of bad media outlets out there, willing to give the people what they claim to want, and that is INSTANT NEWS. Media has changed. People want info NOW and everything is a ratings war because news is available 24/7. Anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want. But a trained journalist takes classes in ethics and First Amendment Law. A trained journalist checks their facts and good editors check facts. And a good publisher lets their reporters and editors do their job without pressuring them to beat the sensational media outlets. The only place you should find a journalist interpreting is in the editorial pages or in news analysis articles written by an expert.

I hope that helps clear up why so many of us are upset about the coverage of this and many other cases. Sloppy reporting gets us nowhere and causes a lot of confusion.

Agreed on all points. I have dubbed the others UNjournalists: UNreliable. UNprofessional. UNethical. UNworthy of the title.

BBM

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Or we could assume that one of them did flip on the other, but Heather's body still cannot be found (if it were in the river, or somewhere where it's been scattered-apologies). I wonder how that would shake out in the wash (as my mother used to say) if it were true.

There has to be corroborating evidence to back up their story, but not necessarily a body. Other things would have to fall in line and offer some proof of involvement to her murder. Difficult, but possible. :twocents:

 

[waitin'4thewrld2chg]

I have kept up with the HE threads since the beginning, with the exception of about a thread's worth of material that I had to bypass when the arrests were coming down and posting was happening at a furious pace. When those arrests were occurring, I was sorely tempted to call in to work with webitis sleuthosis and treat the condition with more reading, but I managed to keep myself on the straight and narrow.

In all this time, I haven't posted but once because everyone has said my stuff for me, but better, or, more often, has come up with great ideas that would not have dawned on me. Even now, I've little to offer, but here are two comments:

-the news station that used the image of a pay phone...we don't know if that image was germane to the case or just an image they used to represent phone communication. I can picture e-mailing the TV station, if it were in my locale, and saying, hey, would you be able to tell me if that particular shot at X location was just an artistic representation? Maybe there would be no response to my query---but somebody shot that footage locally and knows why, and they might be willing to say, oh, that pay phone was filler. If a particular pay phone was related to the individuals charged, that phone being filmed means somebody had inside information. And I am not sure how likely that is.

-the reported "bunches of trash" remark that was related to a car parked at PTL--->just generally speaking, I have a hard time imagining a man using the word "bunches". My impression---fwiw---is that it sounds more like something a woman would say, though I can't base that on anything solid, of course. And does it matter? Maybe, maybe not....?

 

[SharetheLight]

In the previous thread, someone asked what kind of people would do this. If they were normal or not... I think that everyone has dark and light in them. Sometimes we can get so bogged down in negative experiences that the darkness threatens to consume us. Deciding to let it or to keep ourselves in the light can be like standing on the edge of a knife. I believe TM fell into the dark... and brought SM along with her. It was a choice to embrace it. I think Heather was full of light and now shines even brighter. The M's tried to destroy it... but we have all kept Heather's light alive. Shine on, Heather.



Just my :twocents:

Share the Light

 

[Momoffourboys]

I have kept up with the HE threads since the beginning, with the exception of about a thread's worth of material that I had to bypass when the arrests were coming down and posting was happening at a furious pace. When those arrests were occurring, I was sorely tempted to call in to work with webitis sleuthosis and treat the condition with more reading, but I managed to keep myself on the straight and narrow.

In all this time, I haven't posted but once because everyone has said my stuff for me, but better, or, more often, has come up with great ideas that would not have dawned on me. Even now, I've little to offer, but here are two comments:

-the news station that used the image of a pay phone...we don't know if that image was germane to the case or just an image they used to represent phone communication. I can picture e-mailing the TV station, if it were in my locale, and saying, hey, would you be able to tell me if that particular shot at X location was just an artistic representation? Maybe there would be no response to my query---but somebody shot that footage locally and knows why, and they might be willing to say, oh, that pay phone was filler. If a particular pay phone was related to the individuals charged, that phone being filmed means somebody had inside information. And I am not sure how likely that is.

-the reported "bunches of trash" remark that was related to a car parked at PTL--->just generally speaking, I have a hard time imagining a man using the word "bunches". My impression---fwiw---is that it sounds more like something a woman would say, though I can't base that on anything solid, of course. And does it matter? Maybe, maybe not....?

Welcome to the thread. Great post.
Don't feel bad. My husband had me google "divorce on the grounds of websleuths" to see if it is common. SMH. He doesn't get it.
:goodpost:

 

[jeandrews]

I have kept up with the HE threads since the beginning, with the exception of about a thread's worth of material that I had to bypass when the arrests were coming down and posting was happening at a furious pace. When those arrests were occurring, I was sorely tempted to call in to work with webitis sleuthosis and treat the condition with more reading, but I managed to keep myself on the straight and narrow.

In all this time, I haven't posted but once because everyone has said my stuff for me, but better, or, more often, has come up with great ideas that would not have dawned on me. Even now, I've little to offer, but here are two comments:

-the news station that used the image of a pay phone...we don't know if that image was germane to the case or just an image they used to represent phone communication. I can picture e-mailing the TV station, if it were in my locale, and saying, hey, would you be able to tell me if that particular shot at X location was just an artistic representation? Maybe there would be no response to my query---but somebody shot that footage locally and knows why, and they might be willing to say, oh, that pay phone was filler. If a particular pay phone was related to the individuals charged, that phone being filmed means somebody had inside information. And I am not sure how likely that is.

-the reported "bunches of trash" remark that was related to a car parked at PTL--->just generally speaking, I have a hard time imagining a man using the word "bunches". My impression---fwiw---is that it sounds more like something a woman would say, though I can't base that on anything solid, of course. And does it matter? Maybe, maybe not....?

BBM. I asked my wife and she agreed that "bunches of trash" is more likely to be said by a woman whereas a man might say "a carpload of trash." Either way, the bottom line is that the person reporting the "trash loaded car" had to have looked in the vehicle to notice the "trashiness". Therefore, they would have known if someone was in the vehicle or not. Perhaps it was a female who called in the car . . .

 

[sls9193]

O/T but just wanna say how awesome you guys are at what you do. I love being able to read and chime in every once in a while. Y'all are all amazing and it's great to be a part of such an extraordinary group of people. Thank you all for going above and beyond on not only Heather's thread, but all of them here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk