The FBI was involved with this case from the beginning which was one of the things that threw this case off the rails. The police chief had an FBI background and there was jealousy that the FBI would get all the glory. That's one of the sub-plots to this investigation. This was even covered in the "48 hour" piece.miles_draken said:
Here is Rick Norland's Bio Sheet. This is what Sgt. Mike Owen didn't tell you.miles_draken said:
Ken, I'm going to surprise you. I've actually come over to your side on this matter. That hole should be dug and done promptly. It is imperative that this be ruled out if they are not there because it is a needless impediment to the investigation if they are not there. Personally, I found Mr. Norland to be highly credible and I speak as someone who worked investigations for 30 years (although not in law enforcement.) I can usually; almost always, tell a con man from the genuine article and frankly I found him to carefully parse his words and he came across as someone I would give serious consideration. As to Owens he didn't name his "experts" and we don't know diddly squat about them. "Experts" are a dime a dozen in civil and criminal proceedings. Each one of us could, in some way, be qualified as an "expert" witness. In fact, many such people make a very good living traveling about the country giving "expert" testimony in open court. Most people are accepting of their testimony because they don't understand the legal system. The truth of the matter is that justice is not the goal of our legal system; it is only who wins the trial. That's the brutal truth, but it is the truth.Ken said:
I know that. I also know things that are not in the public domain. I'll address that later.miles_draken said:
That's a good question...The Hospital doesn't have a problem with the dig. The board members had seen the video well before it aired and they unanimously agreed to allow the dig on their property anytime the authorities want to do it. Obviously, all of the hospital board members had seen something in that video that Sgt. Mike Owen doesn't see.miles_draken said:
It is almost certainly a cruel hoax but perhaps someone should report it to the Springfield Police Department. Their phone # is 417-864-1810. At the very least these jerks, whoever did this, ought to be locked up for a month or two in one of those holding tanks with the other creeps and weirdos to teach them this is not fun and games. This photo was obviously Suzie when she was about 18 or 19 years old. This is what hinders investigations and drives the police crazy. I'm not going to report it because I've already got issues to deal with. I'm not getting into fraudsters. But thanks for bringing this to our attention.georgiagirl said:
I just found out who posted that and you don't want to know. I'd forget it.georgiagirl said:
Ok, thanks.Missouri Mule said:
Here is something else that Sgt. Mike Owen didn't tell you. The university professors that he is referring to are Professor Kevin Mickus and Professor Kevin Evans of the Geology department at Missouri State University.miles_draken said:
Doesn't surprise me. If one of the primary family members adamently refuses to hear bad news the police will likely accomodate that person. I suspect that is the overriding reason they don't want to do the dig. But I wouldn't rule out animal bones being there; possibly put there deliberately. I underestimated you Ken. You've done some good basic investigative work and found out what the police should have done themselves. Good work! You get a gold star.Ken said:
I invited you over to the other site several days ago and thus far I have seen nothing from you. That of course is your choice. The concensus of several, of which I happen to agree, is that the police are unwilling to do this because of what they might see, rather than what they might not see. IF (and this is a big IF), the remains are found, they would have to give the bad news to Janis McCall who appears to be unwilling to accept the idea that Stacy is deceased.miles_draken said:
Miles, You bring up a great point. The Prosecuting Attorneys Office has designated "the spot" as a potential crime scene; so nobody other than a law enforcement agency could tamper with it without getting into trouble. However, since the SPD has stated publically that they will not follow up on this lead; technically "the spot" shouldn't be considered a potential crime scene.miles_draken said:
Therefore it appears that most everyone is in agreement that the dig should commence. At last we apparently have a concensus. So why doesn't the police do it then? Are they so afraid to break the bad news to Mrs. McCall they can't bring themselves to do it? That's the only logical reason I can think of. It won't cost much. The question will be out of the way and we can immediately move on to other matters instead of arguing whether or not the equipment is good or bad or whose "experts" have more credibility. Anyone wish to take issue with that?Ken said:
