SC - Heather Elvis, 20, Myrtle Beach, 18 Dec 2013 - #8

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
CarolinaAsh,

Thanks so much for making this timeline! If you need to change anything or add to it let me know and I can do that for you. Its a great timeline!

Ima
 
Do you think it's this?

Terry Elvis wrote:

"In my opinion, this was not a random disappearance, but I believe someone who she knew and trusted may have betrayed her."

http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/heather-elvis-disappearance-terry-elvis

What gets to me is the word "Trusted."
Somebody that Heather knew and trusted.
IMOO.

I kind of took that to mean that she would not go out into the night to meet someone she did not think she could trust...but may have been wrong.
 
To me it just looks she had a sweater on and took it off once she got in the car/truck and let it fall behind/beside her.

Hey, I'm short, too. I stuff anything and all I can find behind my back if I try to drive husbands truck.
 
To me it just looks she had a sweater on and took it off once she got in the car/truck and let it fall behind/beside her.

Perhaps "roomate" would know if it was a shawl, sweater, etc. It may become relevant at a later time - that is, if it leads LE to the perp. If LE has that item, have the dogs been sniffing it for HE's scent?
All MOO
 
I've read the police report which wasn't redacted, read the posts on fb, even those which have since been deleted, and come to a theory I'm sure others have pondered.



Yet, I read this story and there's something...I don't know what, nor do I know why, but something about this story is nagging at me.


I initially felt irked by the wording of that statement too when I read it. In fact, his tone regarding her date seems a bit skeptical throughout the whole thing. But, I honestly think what he said about being suspicious of everyone and any one is likely the reason he stated it that way and not because he actually thinks he might be involved with her disappearance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PS. I just realized I quoted the wrong post. I meant to quote the one about the first sentence of TE's article on xojane... about going out on a first date & he won't stop until he finds her.
 
Do you think it's this?

Terry Elvis wrote:

"In my opinion, this was not a random disappearance, but I believe someone who she knew and trusted may have betrayed her."

http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/heather-elvis-disappearance-terry-elvis

What gets to me is the word "Trusted."
Somebody that Heather knew and trusted.
IMOO.

There is a possibility that Heather thought she was texting back and forth with someone she knew, but it was someone else who easily had access to the "trusted" person's phone. She may have innocently agreed to meet that person to discuss a past/future but someone she wasn't expecting showed up in that person's place. Does this make sense to anyone?
 
There is a possibility that Heather thought she was texting back and forth with someone she knew, but it was someone else who easily had access to the "trusted" person's phone. She may have innocently agreed to meet that person to discuss a past/future but someone she wasn't expecting showed up in that person's place. Does this make sense to anyone?

I understand where you are coming from, but the way Terry worded the sentence sounds like to me he thinks she was betrayed by someone she knew and trusted, not betrayed by someone who knew the person she trusted.

IMOO.
 
I know we can't quote SM rumors but I think I'm allowed to say that there is a lot of very interesting recent comments on the find heather elvis FB page.

Terry Elvis's comment regarding Heather being betrayed by someone she trusted makes sense.

I really hope they find her very soon. And I hope LE is able to name a POI soon.
 
How are you guys understanding the phone calls he made to HE, the ones the night he was taken to the car? I think that's one of the things nagging at me.

I honestly expected the story to say something along the lines of "I immediately called or tried to get a hold of H" when the officer explained which car was abandoned.
 
There is a possibility that Heather thought she was texting back and forth with someone she knew, but it was someone else who easily had access to the "trusted" person's phone. She may have innocently agreed to meet that person to discuss a past/future but someone she wasn't expecting showed up in that person's place. Does this make sense to anyone?

That's an interesting take on the posibilities..but don't you think as soon as she saw a
A: a different car/truck that she didn't recognize she wouldn't stick around
B: saw someone she didn't recognize she wouldn't stick around especially
C: if it was someone who had it in for her she would leave
 
There is a possibility that Heather thought she was texting back and forth with someone she knew, but it was someone else who easily had access to the "trusted" person's phone. She may have innocently agreed to meet that person to discuss a past/future but someone she wasn't expecting showed up in that person's place. Does this make sense to anyone?

I've wondered about this too. The problem I have with it is that I don't think she would have even gotten out of her car if it wasn't the person she was supposed to meet...that is if we go on the theory that she did in fact drive to the landing. Or they might have been signs of a struggle if another person did show up other than who her dad says she trusted. Maybe there were two people?
 
I could have sworn someone on here who did prev. searches had even gotten an e-mail about it. But there's been so many... I could just be confused.

Also why does this give me an even hinkier feeling?

I got an email this afternoon from CUE that here will be no search this weekend but efforts will resume next weekend. Notification will be sent out next week as to time and meeting place.
 
Rewards have not helped in many cases at all...those "in the know" can't claim them. And anyone with too much information probably has some degree of guilt. I wonder, though, if a relative can claim a reward? JMO rewards make people look twice at a poster, mostly, which is not a bad thing in itself.

I think a person or persons may be more likely to recall details of the time in question once a POI name or possible vehicle description is out there. Hoping this happens soon...maybe a reward can be claimed in this way, by an innocent witness.

JMO

No but a large enough reward could turn two cheating spouses against each other. Jmo
 
I've read the police report which wasn't redacted, read the posts on fb, even those which have since been deleted, and come to a theory I'm sure others have pondered.

Yet, I read this story and there's something...I don't know what, nor do I know why, but something about this story is nagging at me.



To me we have a very accurate timeline, imo, created by another member. But in reading today's news article, the times seem to be different.
 
How are you guys understanding the phone calls he made to HE, the ones the night he was taken to the car? I think that's one of the things nagging at me.

I honestly expected the story to say something along the lines of "I immediately called or tried to get a hold of H" when the officer explained which car was abandoned.

The first time we heard about it I thought it seemed to mean he called for an hour and then it went to voicemail. But, I questioned whether it could have been poor wording and he meant he called for an hour during which time it kept going to v/m.

After the last article, written by TE, I was convinced it went to voicemail from the beginning, because he said it wasn't like Heather to turn her phone off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
165
Guests online
2,855
Total visitors
3,020

Forum statistics

Threads
604,050
Messages
18,166,959
Members
231,919
Latest member
daisy82504
Back
Top