Sidney Moorer pretrial hearing - 18 April 2016

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, I always wondered how they killed Heather at the Landing. She was ran over possibly. There would be quite a bit of evidence if so or she was knocked off the side of the vehicle and died. But the black box recording 20 seconds of an accident fits. She could have been standing outside of her car. TM most likely would have ran her down. Sad & sucks.
 
ZooSleuth said:
:laughing:

After her rant yesterday I was curious about cars and black boxes so I did some googling. Here's an article that was published just over a year after Heather's disappearance: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/.../26/keep-your-car-black-box-private/20609035/

Note the end that was BBM:



So unless the Moorers crashed their vehicle that night, a black box is completely worthless and irrelevant to this case.
Click to expand...

Huh? I didn't know that. Ya learn something new every day!
 
Up to date on the SC law on black boxes in vehicles. There's the hang up and why TM was trashing them. She's oh so drama like. Reminds me of the militia in the Oregon Standoff.

As of April 6, 2016
Event data recorders (EDRs) capture information, such as the speed of a vehicle and the use of a safety belt, in the event of a collision to help understand how the vehicle’s systems performed. Many manufacturers install these devices in new vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a rule in August 2006, requiring automakers to tell new car buyers if an event data recorder (EDR) was installed, beginning with model year 2011 cars.
Some vehicle owners subscribe to services that provide directions or emergency assistance through recording devices that transmit information about the vehicle back to the service provider.
See also: State statutes and legislation by year: 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2009-2012 | 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Click to expand...

SOUTH CAROLINA
H.B. 3361
STATUS: Pending
Provides that a manufacturer of a new motor vehicle that is sold or leased in this state which is equipped with an event data recorder or a sensing and diagnostic module shall disclose this information in the motor vehicle's owner's manual and on its window sticker; provides that a company that rents a motor vehicle that is equipped with this device must disclose its existence in the company's rental agreement; restricts the use of certain data obtained by a recording device.
Click to expand...

http://www.ncsl.org/research/teleco...chnology/event-data-recorder-legislation.aspx
 
Madeleine74 said:
He's no victim, he's a full participant, according to the laws of the state. Doesn't matter who actually snuffed Heather's life out. They were both complicit and Sidney lured her out that early morning with the pretense of 'leaving his wife and wanting to start up with Heather again." What a cruel, cruel thing to do. Heather was finally out of TM's life, no longer in contact with SM and hadn't been for weeks, and *that's* the point TM decides that H.E. must die? I mean, why then? For heavens sake, Heather had moved on. I just don't understand the timing of this.
Click to expand...

My opinion is TM found out he was really leaving her that night. She had locked down everything to find out what he was doing. Or they were freaks with sex and both enjoyed what was taking place. It's possible considering SM is following suit. gulp They are an odd couple with very odd tastes to me, & just their actions are odd. Hopefully, the trial will make more sense.
 
Madeleine74 said:
He's no victim, he's a full participant, according to the laws of the state. Doesn't matter who actually snuffed Heather's life out. They were both complicit and Sidney lured her out that early morning with the pretense of 'leaving his wife and wanting to start up with Heather again." What a cruel, cruel thing to do. Heather was finally out of TM's life, no longer in contact with SM and hadn't been for weeks, and *that's* the point TM decides that H.E. must die? I mean, why then? For heavens sake, Heather had moved on. I just don't understand the timing of this.
Click to expand...

If you believe the state's "lured out" theory, the timing is hard to understand. Their theory suggests, that out of the blue, without any provocation, the M's plotted a plan to lure Heather out. Their intent was to cause her harm.That's a hard theory to buy. I believe something set the wheels in motion that night. Perhaps Sidney got caught trying to set up a meeting with Heather. There are many scenarios that could have played out after that point. It's possible Sidney blamed it all on Heather telling Tammy the same thing he told investigators.
 
magnolia said:
If you believe the state's "lured out" theory, the timing is hard to understand. Their theory suggests, that out of the blue, without any provocation, the M's plotted a plan to lure Heather out. Their intent was to cause her harm.That's a hard theory to buy. I believe something set the wheels in motion that night. Perhaps Sidney got caught trying to set up a meeting with Heather. There are many scenarios that could have played out after that point. It's possible Sidney blamed it all on Heather telling Tammy the same thing he told investigators.
Click to expand...

From Heather's side we will only know what her roommate/friend tells us.

Neither Moorer is going to tell us the 'why' of that night, that's for sure. Yes, I agree something set the wheels in motion. Maybe it started a couple days before, maybe Sidney said something to Tammy that got her upset. Who knows. Heather was 'lured' out that night. She wasn't otherwise in touch with Sidney and she had been on a date that night and was moving forward with her life. Something caused her to leave her apartment and go meet him after he called. I call that being 'lured' out and yes, it's believable.
 
Madeleine74 said:
From Heather's side we will only know what her roommate/friend tells us.

Neither Moorer is going to tell us the 'why' of that night, that's for sure. Yes, I agree something set the wheels in motion. Maybe it started a couple days before, maybe Sidney said something to Tammy that got her upset. Who knows. Heather was 'lured' out that night. She wasn't otherwise in touch with Sidney and she had been on a date that night and was moving forward with her life. Something caused her to leave her apartment and go meet him after he called. I call that being 'lured' out and yes, it's believable.
Click to expand...

I have always thought that somehow Sid knew that Heather was out on that date and proved that she was moving on. He couldn`t handle it any longer and wanted her to know that he was leaving Tam to be with her. After all, he must have known when she came back from her date because it was only a small amount of time before he placed that call from the pay phone. But, as it turns out, H tried to call him at the pay phone first and then called his cell at home and that is when it was set in motion. I am betting that T made S put the speaker on and made him talk to her. Who knows what was said, but, I do believe that is when it all came about. I don`t believe that she was murdered at PTL, but, I do believe that she was forcefully taken from there. T would have a lot of questions for her. After that was when the murder occurred.
 
Interesting theory, certainly possible!

I don't believe SM was ever really leaving TM that night. I don't know why I think that but I do. Why did SM *have* to contact Heather at nearly 2am? Yes, she was out on a date earlier, but still. What was so urgent it couldn't wait for him to call later that day? It wasn't like in the movies where the bride is walking down the aisle and the jilted boyfriend jumps out at the last minute to talk her out of getting married. Heather wasn't going anywhere at 2am that couldn't have waited for 8 more hours.

This scenario requires that SM be alone at the gas station to use the payphone to call Heather. Otherwise, if Tammy is in the vehicle, she'd know something was up. If SM is trying to leave TM for real, he certainly wouldn't want TM to aware that he's calling Heather. I dunno. SM helped get Heather right to PTL and he knew Heather was in danger at that point.
 
If SM called HE that night to tell her he was leaving TM (that part I can believe a tiny bit being true) I can't figure out the rest of the events. Obviously things go crazy from there but that is the one fact (the phone call is the fact not the actual intent of him leaving) that we have that start the chain of events in OUR TL. However, WHY....then?

I like what you are thinking Madeleine74, WHY? Why that night? At that time? If the night didn't start at the pay phone call maybe he saw her somewhere with the date? I know we have thrown that idea around before. Was it really just that out of the blue after 2 months (Oct-Dec) he just thought about her (okay I can believe that) or did he and TM have a fight and he had enough (maybe I can believe that) or did something else happen? We have literally tried to come up with every idea known to man but what have we NOT considered here? Is there another reason that would have prompted SM to call HE that night?

Side Note: They are forgetting the actual evidence puts (him) in contact with Heather that night so telling him to say you know nothing and having your mom say you were all at home asleep is really a waste of time and effort TAMMY. IMO of course. :gaah:

Ugh, this case is the reason I have trust issues AND bags under my eyes! lol
 
Madeleine74 said:
From Heather's side we will only know what her roommate/friend tells us.

Neither Moorer is going to tell us the 'why' of that night, that's for sure. Yes, I agree something set the wheels in motion. Maybe it started a couple days before, maybe Sidney said something to Tammy that got her upset. Who knows. Heather was 'lured' out that night. She wasn't otherwise in touch with Sidney and she had been on a date that night and was moving forward with her life. Something caused her to leave her apartment and go meet him after he called. I call that being 'lured' out and yes, it's believable.
Click to expand...

There is a different in luring out with the intent to harm and a man feeding a woman a line in order to try and convince her to meet with him (no intent to harm). You seemed to be having a difficult time understanding the timing, so I offered a theory based on the latter. I don't think Bree will be able to tell us whether Sidney sincerely wanted to see Heather or he lured her out with the intent to harm.
 
magnolia said:
There is a different in luring out with the intent to harm and a man feeding a woman a line in order to try and convince her to meet with him (no intent to harm). You seemed to be having a difficult time understanding the timing, so I offered a theory based on the latter. I don't think Bree will be able to tell us whether Sidney sincerely wanted to see Heather or he lured her out with the intent to harm.
Click to expand...

Exactly, there is no way of proving his intent unless they have text messages or some sort of electronic communication between the 2 of them from that night. Maybe some of the stuff protected by the Gag Order (the actual stuff it was intended for) will help clear up our questions once he goes to trial. I'm curious if his lawyers will get to see what they have closer to trial or if they have already seen the evidence? What is the timeline on that for SC?
 
lstiff said:
If SM called HE that night to tell her he was leaving TM (that part I can believe a tiny bit being true) I can't figure out the rest of the events. Obviously things go crazy from there but that is the one fact (the phone call is the fact not the actual intent of him leaving) that we have that start the chain of events in OUR TL. However, WHY....then?

I like what you are thinking Madeleine74, WHY? Why that night? At that time? If the night didn't start at the pay phone call maybe he saw her somewhere with the date? I know we have thrown that idea around before. Was it really just that out of the blue after 2 months (Oct-Dec) he just thought about her (okay I can believe that) or did he and TM have a fight and he had enough (maybe I can believe that) or did something else happen? We have literally tried to come up with every idea known to man but what have we NOT considered here? Is there another reason that would have prompted SM to call HE that night?

Side Note: They are forgetting the actual evidence puts (him) in contact with Heather that night so telling him to say you know nothing and having your mom say you were all at home asleep is really a waste of time and effort TAMMY. IMO of course. :gaah:

Ugh, this case is the reason I have trust issues AND bags under my eyes! lol
Click to expand...

BBM -- Sidney may have been feeding Heather a line. She was reluctant, so he told her what he thought she wanted to hear. Anything to convince her to meet with him. How often have we heard about married men telling the mistress that he is leaving his wife. Typical tactic used by a married man in order to get what he wants.

Yes, something else could have prompted SM to call Heather that night. That something else was not a fight with his wife. ;) IMO
 
magnolia said:
There is a different in luring out with the intent to harm and a man feeding a woman a line in order to try and convince her to meet with him (no intent to harm). You seemed to be having a difficult time understanding the timing, so I offered a theory based on the latter. I don't think Bree will be able to tell us whether Sidney sincerely wanted to see Heather or he lured her out with the intent to harm.
Click to expand...

I've always found it strange that she called him at the pay phone, then called him on his cell that he supposedly didn't have, where TM might either answer or know he answered.

I've never seen this as a neat and tidy scenario where SM either (suddenly) called Heather at that hour and announced that he was leaving TM, or, where he (suddenly) called her to "lure" her to the landing. There are too many other moving parts to the story between the pay phone call and her car ending up at PTL.

Since I don't believe a murder took place there and I'm not sure there was a "lure", someone sure was was in a hurry by landing time, including Heather who made three back to back phone calls in a span of 3 minutes or less after pulling into the landing.

I always come back to the question of at what point did she lose control of her phone and her ability to operate her own vehicle. I find it hard to believe she arrived at PTL and hopped out of her car, making it easier to grab her or whatever supposedly happened. I can believe a scenario where at gunpoint she was told to get out, although time was short at that point. But given how she was parked, I'm not sure she couldn't have escaped in her car. Even if we account for her being so frightened that she did what she was told, did she have the presence of mind to gather her purse and phone, get out, lock the car, then hop into the tool box or the cab, leaving no trace of having been in the truck? Or did one of the M's grab her possessions from the car, have the presence of mind to lock it (why?) and not leave a trace of evidence that there was an encounter at/in the car? That was one fast and smooth transition by both the M's and Heather.

I just think there's a chunk of the story that's missing and the perceived chain of events is not quite what happened. And the answer to 'Where is Heather?' is wrapped up in that somewhere. JMO
 
lstiff said:
Exactly, there is no way of proving his intent unless they have text messages or some sort of electronic communication between the 2 of them from that night. Maybe some of the stuff protected by the Gag Order (the actual stuff it was intended for) will help clear up our questions once he goes to trial. I'm curious if his lawyers will get to see what they have closer to trial or if they have already seen the evidence? What is the timeline on that for SC?
Click to expand...

At this late date, I feel sure the defense attorneys are privy to all the evidence.
 
jillycat said:
I've always found it strange that she called him at the pay phone, then called him on his cell that he supposedly didn't have, where TM might either answer or know he answered.

I've never seen this as a neat and tidy scenario where SM either (suddenly) called Heather at that hour and announced that he was leaving TM, or, where he (suddenly) called her to "lure" her to the landing. There are too many other moving parts to the story between the pay phone call and her car ending up at PTL.

Since I don't believe a murder took place there and I'm not sure there was a "lure", someone sure was was in a hurry by landing time, including Heather who made three back to back phone calls in a span of 3 minutes or less after pulling into the landing.

I always come back to the question of at what point did she lose control of her phone and her ability to operate her own vehicle. I find it hard to believe she arrived at PTL and hopped out of her car, making it easier to grab her or whatever supposedly happened. I can believe a scenario where at gunpoint she was told to get out, although time was short at that point. But given how she was parked, I'm not sure she couldn't have escaped in her car. Even if we account for her being so frightened that she did what she was told, did she have the presence of mind to gather her purse and phone, get out, lock the car, then hop into the tool box or the cab, leaving no trace of having been in the truck? Or did one of the M's grab her possessions from the car, have the presence of mind to lock it (why?) and not leave a trace of evidence that there was an encounter at/in the car? That was one fast and smooth transition by both the M's and Heather.

I just think there's a chunk of the story that's missing and the perceived chain of events is not quite what happened. And the answer to 'Where is Heather?' is wrapped up in that somewhere. JMO
Click to expand...

BBM -- I totally agree with that.
 
I couldn't help myself. I just had to drive by the compound, on my way home, and see those signs they put out. What a circus. They're like carnies. I thought about taking some pictures, but I know that's what they want, so I didn't oblige. That, and I didn't want to end up on their cameras. All of the signs are in PC's yard, which got me to thinking about my own mom and whether she would allow me to do such a thing at her house. The answer, regardless of whether their claims are true, is HELL NO! The mentality of these people is alien to me. I haven't taken enough psychology classes in my lifetime to ever understand their collective mindset. I think that's why we all have a hard time coming up with the perfect theory of what happened that night; it's damn near impossible to think like them.
 
I like this image as the title for this thread:

AR-160419894.jpg&MaxW=840&q=90


http://www.southstrandnews.com/article/20160419/GTT06/160419894/1154/SSN
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 137 more.
Total: 1,470 (members: 138, guests: 1,332)

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
1,332
Total visitors
1,470
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,361
Messages
18,202,550
Members
233,815
Latest member
Isla_lei
Back
Top