The (Alleged) Abduction

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Would that be an indicator that a crime was committed if it were? We all know she was in JM's car. It's a matter of finding evidence that some crime was committed. Whether something bad was done to her in that car. No crime for her to be in the car. I guess someone could take off a watch in the car and it not necessarily mean anything bad. If watch face is smashed, or it looks like watch was ripped off with unusual amount of skin, say or blood on it, a whole other story. Would a watch be likely to come off in a struggle?

Just trying to figure out how LE and everyone else knows she was in the car, and what the reason for the abduction charges are. Did I miss something more concrete, because I didn't realize it was a known fact she actually got in the car. The last I heard, LE has JM taking off in his car, but nothing to "prove" HG was with him.
 
What if HG actually had plans to meet up with someone at the Downtown Mall via an arrangement through social media...and that person turns out to be JM? LE may have gotten information from friends or from HG's computer. She makes plans to meet him, confirmation of meeting, she disappears....abduction.
 
Don't necessarily need that much. There are clear signs of a struggle. The AM case is one where the forensic evidence, including DNA, circumstantial evidence as well as facts all added up to a murder conviction even without the body. I believe the DA in that case also started out with an Abduction with an Intent to Defile charge, that was then escalated all the ways up to Murder 1. So, it could happen here too.

But not just from showing that Hannah was drunk, that she was in JM's car, or even if JM drove elsewhere rather than directly to where she lived. Not even sure if having had sex with JM would be enough evidence without some signs that it was forced, that she was injured, that there was a struggle. It is possible though I don't believe it, that she agreed to have sex with him before going home. In court, it will be the job of the DA to prove that a crime was committed, with a presumption of innocence firmly in place that has to be overcome.

I am pretty sure they can hold the charge if sex is proven because of her state of intoxication - if they can prove that. If she was intoxicated and he took advantage of that - abduct with intent to defile can stick.
 
Apparently, two rape allegations do not merit much. He is such a gentle soul. His defenders must still think the tooth fairy leaves money.
 
I am pretty sure they can hold the charge if sex is proven because of her state of intoxication - if they can prove that. If she was intoxicated and he took advantage of that - abduct with intent to defile can stick.

I agree. It might also be viable depending on the type of forensic evidence located. And, I think that is why the lesser charge of attempt to defile was used. JM has not been charged with rape, yet.
 
What if HG actually had plans to meet up with someone at the Downtown Mall via an arrangement through social media...and that person turns out to be JM? LE may have gotten information from friends or from HG's computer. She makes plans to meet him, confirmation of meeting, she disappears....abduction.

That just doesn't seem to vibe with what LE released before JM was a POI or a suspect. Why would they publicly release info stating that HG was lost, intoxicated, and that they believed she had happened upon the mall by accident? LE has been so diligent in finding her. I've heard helicoptors above my house every single day since the search began. Why on earth would they keep that detail private? LE released a video upon her disappearance, seeking to identify anyone on the mall. If they had computer evidence showing that she knew JM and planned on meeting up with him the whole time, I seriously doubt LE would've taken the stance they have in carefully waiting out their charges. JMO. IMO, nothing shows that HG was going to meet JM via social media or truly knew him before she ventured downtown. LE seems to be pretty sure that she didn't end up downtown on purpose and their reasoning will likely come out when JM goes to trial.
 
Bessie/Mod, is it ok to post a news source about another case in Charlottesville with a conviction of "abduction with intent to defile"? Since it's being debated on here whether HG getting in the car would be considered abduction, I would like to post a case in which a man in Charlottesville was recently convicted of the charge "abduction with intent to defile" after offering a woman a ride home and she willingly got into his car. This was less than two years ago, and the man is now serving a prison sentence of twenty years for that charge. I won't post if it violates anything though. I just wanted to make people aware that that charge is more broad than it sounds.
 
And that HG willingly accepted a ride from JM, it could still be a case of "abduction with intent to defile" even if she consented to getting in the car. I think the other case I referred to above shows exactly that, as it describes how the victim was offered a ride home and taken to an abandoned house. Perhaps it would belong on another thread, sorry if so. Just hoping to answer everyone's questions about the legality of that charge in the state of Virginia and specifically, Charlottesville.
 
Bessie/Mod, is it ok to post a news source about another case in Charlottesville with a conviction of "abduction with intent to defile"? Since it's being debated on here whether HG getting in the car would be considered abduction, I would like to post a case in which a man in Charlottesville was recently convicted of the charge "abduction with intent to defile" after offering a woman a ride home and she willingly got into his car. This was less than two years ago, and the man is now serving a prison sentence of twenty years for that charge. I won't post if it violates anything though. I just wanted to make people aware that that charge is more broad than it sounds.

You have to contact Bessie by pm as mods don't read everything.

I would love to read about that case!

20 years isn't enough, but if they can get him on the rape and MH, he will be enjoying prison life
 
That just doesn't seem to vibe with what LE released before JM was a POI or a suspect. Why would they publicly release info stating that HG was lost, intoxicated, and that they believed she had happened upon the mall by accident? LE has been so diligent in finding her. I've heard helicoptors above my house every single day since the search began. Why on earth would they keep that detail private? LE released a video upon her disappearance, seeking to identify anyone on the mall. If they had computer evidence showing that she knew JM and planned on meeting up with him the whole time, I seriously doubt LE would've taken the stance they have in carefully waiting out their charges. JMO. IMO, nothing shows that HG was going to meet JM via social media or truly knew him before she ventured downtown. LE seems to be pretty sure that she didn't end up downtown on purpose and their reasoning will likely come out when JM goes to trial.

It seems like the release of information has dried up since JM became the POI / suspect...there are plenty of details even before that point that won't be shared with us. Would LE retract their original statements if something new happened to contradict initial presumptions? I can't imagine they would.

I am not insinuating this scenario would mean HG is not missing and that helicopters wouldn't be looking for her if things happened that way. I am more questioning if LE may know something to indicate JM may have lured HG to the Downtown Mall.

You are correct, we need to wait for a trial to get further details of this investigation. Until then, we are all pretty much left to letting our imaginations be our guides.
 
Jmo I doubt JM was counting on a lone college girl coming on the plaza. From what people say, the college students do not frequent that area. And then he approaches her, talks her into a drink, uses his credit card, many people see him with her...whatever he did, he had not necessarily planned it from the start Imo. If he is such an experienced, never been caught killer, he surely would not had made so many mistakes in a planned abduction. Literally everyone knew he was the last known person to be with her. Does not make sense unless she fought him later on, which is likely. But for LE lay out a devious plan seems difficult at best.
 
Sadly he is good at 'planning something' because he wasn't charged after sexually assaulting a woman at LU, he wasn't arrested iirc after his assault at CNU and he wasn't linked to Morgan until 2014.

IMOO he wanted people to see him with Hannah and he wanted them to think he and Hannah were friends. In doing so he imoo didnt think people would link him to Hannah in a bad way.
 
Sadly he is good at 'planning something' because he wasn't charged after sexually assaulting a woman at LU, he wasn't arrested iirc after his assault at CNU and he wasn't linked to Morgan until 2014.

IMOO he wanted people to see him with Hannah and he wanted them to think he and Hannah were friends. In doing so he imoo didnt think people would link him to Hannah in a bad way.

I tend to agree. I think he had already gotten away with crimes to the point that he thought no one would suspect him if he acted "normal." He would simply say he bought her a drink and they parted ways or he drove her home. . .dropped her off and no one would be the wiser. After all, if he was a rapist and killer he surely wouldn't be seen with her the way he was, right? Hiding in plain sight was his MO. That is completely supported by the reaction of those who knew him after HG went missing. It couldn't possibly be JM. He had people completely snowed. It had worked up until now. Why would he have any reason to believe this time would be different?

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2
 
It seems like the release of information has dried up since JM became the POI / suspect...there are plenty of details even before that point that won't be shared with us. Would LE retract their original statements if something new happened to contradict initial presumptions? I can't imagine they would.

I am not insinuating this scenario would mean HG is not missing and that helicopters wouldn't be looking for her if things happened that way. I am more questioning if LE may know something to indicate JM may have lured HG to the Downtown Mall.

You are correct, we need to wait for a trial to get further details of this investigation. Until then, we are all pretty much left to letting our imaginations be our guides.

Nope. They didn't claim anything specific, just did the nudge nudge wink wink routine and let the media extrapolate from there. So they don't have anything to retract. The media might end up with egg on their faces, but that is the medias problem, not LEs.

They won't really say anything else unless they have proven that someone other than JM did it. Until/unless that happens he is the suspect they will go to trial with. If their case is weak it is in their interests to allow the media to convict him in the court of public opinion before the trial so the chances of losing it are greatly reduced, so they are not going to say anything that might cast doubt at this point or release any information that might challenge the status quo. That is how it works.
 
So if a woman is to drunk to know what is really going on and a man has sex with her is that not considered rape?
So if a woman is to drunk to know what is really going on and gets in a car with a man and they drive off wouldn't that be considered abduction? Considering that she has disappeared.
If she was so drunk she could not consent to sex, how would she legally been able to consent to be given a ride?
IMO there is a difference between willing and not knowing what the heck is going on.

Just getting in the car, drunk or not, is not abduction. It is the fact that she disappeared and has not been seen since she was last (allegedly) seen with him, that is what makes it abduction, since a reasonable person would infer that she did not disappear voluntarily (although obviously this does on occasion happen).
 
IF it goes to court, and it can be proven that a woman was too drunk to know what was going on, and a man had sex with her and she claims rape, yes, there is a case. Does happen, but a lot of times, most of the time, the woman isn't going to press charges. I think most of us know this.

Who is to say a woman is too drunk to know what is really going on and gets into a car with a man and drives off,that it is abduction? Apparently those who personally saw Hannah standing there with JM didn't feel a need to call the police to report some woman was too drunk to know what is really going on and seems to be with some guy who looks likes he's going to abduct her. Maybe she was too drunk maybe she threw up, maybe she had gas/stomache pains, who knows? Had she gotten home safely, there wouldn't be a murmur about this. A 23 year old card checker who didn't report any of this as suspcious is going to now say that it was?

A lot of people saw Hannah with JM and no one gave it a second thought. If they thought she was there against her will or being taken advantage of, someone might have reported it. It's a normal scene that often occurs. It happens all of the time. In fact, people often stick a drunk in a cab ( or as Hannah personally did onto a bus) to get them home, with them protesting.

The problem is though there is a difference, proving it in a court of law, which may be where all of this ends up, is not going to be easy, because the it is required to assume innocence on the part of the defendent, and it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt otherwise. In cases, where a verdict for the victim is favorable, the victim is often so attesting that she was too drunk to give consent for anything. In this case, there is no victim to so testify.

Not saying it would not be a go, but it's an uphill fight. No one got close enough to talk to Hannah, no one offered any help, nothing at the time. So that they thought she was that off, why did they not even say a word?

Also, Hannah looks like she was not in such bad shape walking through the mall. It's actually curious to me that she got so incapacitated to be described the way "Abby" did in that short time, and I am suspicious about what JM might have put in her beer, if it can even be proven he gave her one when he returned to Tempo and bought 2 of them. No one is reported to see her drink anything. It's even not a sure thing whether she was in there or not. IF it came to going to court, there is doubt about that.

We can speculate and fill in the blanks and say what looks reasonable, but it doesn't work that way when it actually is brought to charges against a person. Only the facts, for the most part.

IMO, it would be very difficult to prove that JM abducted Hannah with what we know LE has. If they have some big piece of evidence they haven't shared with us, that's a whole other story.

And really: I think Hannah did go willingly with JM. I believe he offered her a ride, and she accepted and was in her right mind enough to know what she was doing She was lost, tired, confused and wanted to go back to her part of town, and it was late. So a ride would have been god send to her, and I've no doubt JM"s demeanor was not at all threatening to her. Had he just given her a ride back, and she'd gotten home, there wouldn't be this problem So the offer of the ride, getting into the car, going with JM, all of that is fine. It's if there were a change in plans after she got into the car, if JM did not take her where she wanted to go, did things to her to which she did not consent, and if he harmed her, raped her and killed her that there is a big problem, and that is the case at hand now But there isn't any proof that happened. Maybe he did drop her off where she wanted, or maybe she agreed to go for a ride with him, and then he dropped her off where she wanted to dropped off after some recreational sex somewhere? Understand that JM doesn't have to say a thing to explain all of this. The DA has to prove otherwise. That's the way it works in court. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Actually, you can be unconscious and still walk around. I know because I have been in that state a few times when I was that age as well.

You wouldn't be walking normally though, it would be more like a stagger or a sort of zombie running style, and probably bumping into things/falling etc.

Her appearance walking in those two videos is not consistent with that state however, so she would not have been unconscious.

As for being drugged, it apparently takes at least about 15-20 minutes for someone to start feeling the effects, and probably longer than that for them to become debilitated. If he drugged her in the restaurant then she presumably would have been showing effects before they left, and you would think that someone would have noticed a badly drunk girl inside the restaurant itself, particularly the staff (whose job it is, in part, to pay attention to stuff like that). So it gets into the timeframe issue again for that.

Assuming that he was involved, I think it is far more likely that she was relatively drunk to the point where decision making was impaired to some extent, but not walking unconscious, neither was she drugged. That would allow a fit into the timeframe more easily as well as explain why relatively few people noticed her.
 
Nope. They didn't claim anything specific, just did the nudge nudge wink wink routine and let the media extrapolate from there. So they don't have anything to retract. The media might end up with egg on their faces, but that is the medias problem, not LEs.

They won't really say anything else unless they have proven that someone other than JM did it. Until/unless that happens he is the suspect they will go to trial with. If their case is weak it is in their interests to allow the media to convict him in the court of public opinion before the trial so the chances of losing it are greatly reduced, so they are not going to say anything that might cast doubt at this point or release any information that might challenge the status quo. That is how it works.

The media is not going to end up with egg on their face. LE is going to be tight lipped if they believe they might have the Hwy29 killer in their sights. However, LE and crime reporters have a trusted relationship. LE depends on them to release certain information and in exchange those reporters are sometimes privy to information they are not allowed to release if they want to keep their jobs and continue to have any type of working relationship with LE. This is an obvious unspoken for anyone who has any idea how these things work.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2
 
Jmo I doubt JM was counting on a lone college girl coming on the plaza. From what people say, the college students do not frequent that area. And then he approaches her, talks her into a drink, uses his credit card, many people see him with her...whatever he did, he had not necessarily planned it from the start Imo. If he is such an experienced, never been caught killer, he surely would not had made so many mistakes in a planned abduction. Literally everyone knew he was the last known person to be with her. Does not make sense unless she fought him later on, which is likely. But for LE lay out a devious plan seems difficult at best.

I think all along since he first raped way back in 2002 he always looked for unsuspecting future targets. He seems to strike when the opportunity is right in the trigger months of September and October. I believe it was always on his mind and he became a hunter always looking for the next opportunity. I do believe when he saw Hannah that night that he knew she would become his next victim.

Actually from what I have read about SKs and SRs the longer they get away with their crimes the sloppier they get and that is when they make mistakes that finally captures them. I think the same thing happened with JM. After getting away with horrific violent crimes for 12 years he had become to believe he was 10 feet tall and bullet proof. Arrogance and over confidence has brought down many like JM. They truly are convinced by then they are untouchable.

JM was so arrogant and smug that he began taking more and more risks being bolder than ever before.

He was so convinced by then that LE would never touch him or tie him to Hannah that he didn't even take the effort to remove items from his own car that linked him to Hannah. His own cockiness and arrogance is what brought him down.

IMO
 
The media is not going to end up with egg on their face. LE is going to be tight lipped if they believe they might have the Hwy29 killer in their sights. However, LE and crime reporters have a trusted relationship. LE depends on them to release certain information and in exchange those reporters are sometimes privy to information they are not allowed to release if they want to keep their jobs and continue to have any type of working relationship with LE. This is an obvious unspoken for anyone who has any idea how these things work.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

The Route 29 killing of Alicia Showalter Reynolds and the attempted abductions of women during that same time happened in 1996 - JM would have only been 16 at the time - while some media outlets have made reference to the Route 29 stalker while talking about MH and HG, I think it's safe to say, simply based on age, JM is not the Route 29 stalker/murderer.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
204
Total visitors
335

Forum statistics

Threads
609,506
Messages
18,255,081
Members
234,674
Latest member
sadzzz
Back
Top