GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #35 *Arrest*

[daisytrail]

This has me curious. Do "we" think he was just waiting to pounce and anyone would do since his fuse was simmering?

For those who think he's done this before....what caused him to get caught this time?

Many things could have happened at that party to frustrate or anger him. (I have a theory about his nature.) I think he felt disrespected in some way perhaps, and whether he felt sexually rejected or not (It is likely that any rejection or disrespect angered him.), his ire rose again on his walk with Christina. To me the clue is that she seems not to be paying much attention to him on this walk. In fact, she may have been looking down much of the time, focusing on her phone. Likely, her mind was on HF. To someone as sensitive to rejection as I suspect EA is, this was the fuse. (I think it, the fuse, it always there, just waiting to be lit.)

Whether or not he had done this before (he may have), this was the moment where he made some determination to either get her attention, or lacking that, to assault her in some manner. To me, his motive lies within. It is in him. This is a part of who he is, this fury that he probably takes great pains to hide.

ETA: Just my theory as to "motive."

 

[daisytrail]

Another thing I think, based upon the interview he gave at his house, where the reporter was very patient and let him profess his innocence and talk about how he was being treated; he has no remorse. There is a part, which cannot remember verbatim, where there is this micro-expression of almost amusement when he is asked about wanting her to be found and her family to have closure. Well, of course he says he wants this, but his facial expression says something else. All pleas to any compassion of his will fall on deaf ears.

 

[Maiko]

EA's expectations and focus may have been set even earlier. Keep in mind that he lied to his GF about his plans for the evening (he told her he was staying in and going to bed early), and to me that offers the likely idea that he had "sneaked out" so to speak to get a little something-something. As far as she would ever know, he was home asleep, so in his mind, maybe he had a "free pass" for the night.

But then ....

Struck out at the apartment.

Struck out at the bar.

Struck out at the apartment.

IMO as he saw it, this was his big chance, he was intent on taking advantage of the window of opportunity, and as they walked to the garage, every step was one step closer to "this is it, or nothing."

Do you think he lied to his GF before this night...like he'd been successful in his 'free pass' outing? I bet he was and thought he could do it again. Thoughts?

 

[suzyjackson]

Do you think he lied to his GF before this night...like he'd been successful in his 'free pass' outing? I bet he was and thought he could do it again. Thoughts?

Yep, totally not the first time he'd gone out and lied about it. IMO this was probably a regular occurance. It seems to me that his relationship wasn't a typical BF/GF one


JMO

 

[Eileen730]

JMO
I do NOT think this had anything at all to do with a sexual attack.
Something else is behind all this and that's JMO

 

[Gigglingtoes]

Do you think he lied to his GF before this night...like he'd been successful in his 'free pass' outing? I bet he was and thought he could do it again. Thoughts?

Of course
They didn't get much time together (once a week is what was said) so for a young guy.....

 

[Maiko]

So he could have been frustrated.

I never put much into sexual line of thought, the drugs made more sense to me, however after thinking about the lies then he could have been pent up.

 

[Eileen730]

As you watch them walk to the garage there is no flirting he does not touch her in any way heck he hardly even looks at her.
I don't believe it's sexual at all. The cops
Used that excuse just to charge him.
Jmo

 

[zippixx]

As you watch them walk to the garage there is no flirting he does not touch her in any way heck he hardly even looks at her.
I don't believe it's sexual at all. The cops
Used that excuse just to charge him.
Jmo

CM was too busy on the phone, while walking, for any obvious flirting.. LE didn't need an "excuse" to charge him. "Inflicting bodily injury" is enough for an arrest.. doesn't even have to be sexual. Kidnapping is a crime..

http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/20.04.00.html

 

[Eileen730]

CM was too busy on the phone, while walking, for any obvious flirting.. LE didn't need an "excuse" to charge him. "Inflicting bodily injury" is enough for an arrest.. doesn't even have to be sexual. Kidnapping is a crime..

http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/20.04.00.html

Um mm I never said kidnapping g wasn't a crime !
What I'm saying is that I do not believe it was a sexual attack.
jmo

 

[zippixx]

Um mm I never said kidnapping g wasn't a crime !
What I'm saying is that I do not believe it was a sexual attack.
jmo

Oh, I know Eileen.. I was referring more to LE needing an "excuse".. They seem to think it was sexually motivated, so they use that theory in the affidavit..

 

[Gigglingtoes]

We only saw what, a minute of the two of them walking? Obviously something happened that night. The video we saw doesn't show anything but that doesn't mean he didn't try to touch her, grab a boob, whatever once the video stopped taping. We don't know.

 

[CuriousinNY]

If they have his clothes from that evening, there could be evidence of a sexual encounter. IMO

 

[SteveS]

I don't believe it's sexual at all. The cops
Used that excuse just to charge him.

Saying it's an "excuse" indicates pretense, and implies deception. But LE swore under oath that they had evidence that led them to the actual BELIEF (not just an excuse) that EA "intended to violate or abuse Christina Morris sexually." Are you asserting that LE lied about what they truly believed? Under oath? Wow.

 

[txyorkiemom]

Personal opinion only ..there is deception and skepticism completely surrounding this entire case.

I really hope Christina is recovered.

 

[txyorkiemom]

JMO
I do NOT think this had anything at all to do with a sexual attack.
Something else is behind all this and that's JMO

I agree!!
JMO~ there is still not enough evidence of motive being sexual nor do I believe the intent and actual action was kidnapping JMO~
Also
JMO~ If he is arrested for Aggravated Kidnapping in connection with the disappearance of Christina..then by all means put him on full trial for that..but it is a real shame for others in various forms of media to call him (or anyone else) a Killer when he has not been charged with that(no one gets a free pass to continually repeat publicly that he is a killer-pretty serious accusation when he is not charged,proven or convicted of such a crime) .... so if everyone in LE is 110% sure he killed her then drop the crazy Kidnapping charge and change it to Murder..put him on trial for that. Better hope that he gets a fair and impartial jury or this will go to appeals day 1. JMO~

 

[heather.scissorhands]

This is interesting. Thank you whoever posted the link to victimology.

"n context, imagine the following example: If the victim is prone to emotional outbursts, the individual may be more likely to storm out of a house during a fight to "cool down." While out, the person encounters an offender who assaults and abducts him/her. The emotional outburst has contributed to becoming a victim by virtue of the fact that it placed the person in harms way, and may lead others to believe the victim will not be back for hours, as this is usual following such a disagreement. This increases the amount of time the offender has to get away."

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/profiling/victimology/5.html

ETA: maybe he's smarter than I think. I wish we knew more about him.

 

[Eileen730]

saying it's an "excuse" indicates pretense, and implies deception. But le swore under oath that they had evidence that led them to the actual belief (not just an excuse) that ea "intended to violate or abuse christina morris sexually." are you asserting that le lied about what they truly believed? Under oath? Wow.

what???????

 

[SteveS]

I believe EA abducted Christina and that they already have more than enough AK evidence to lock him away for good, 99 years.

The totality of the evidence we've heard is compelling, and per LE there's a mountain more that we don't even know about yet. We know EA was the last person she was ever seen with, her DNA was found IN HIS TRUNK (where she would not have been willingly, nor for her welfare), he has lied and lied and lied about everything he did that night, the next day he showed up with his car and himself looking like crap with lies everywhere and to everyone about why, and she's never been seen or heard from again. Gone for good, and her DNA found in his trunk? Yeah, we know who did it.

I hope she's alive, but it's clear he probably killed her too and in the long run, I expect he will end up getting the death penalty for it, if he doesn't cooperate and tell what he did with her, while they are still searching.

IMO once they find her, he's toast. He only has one chip to bargain with, which is her location, and when she's found that chip is gone forever. Tick-tick-tick the clock is ticking down to zero on his window to cooperate and lessen his punishment.

 

[txyorkiemom]

Fact: Cops Lie Under Oath and for arrests
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/o...icers-lie-under-oath.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
<respectivley Snipped by me-to hit the important highlights>
But are police officers necessarily more trustworthy than alleged criminals? I think not. Not just because the police have a special inclination toward confabulation, but because, disturbingly, they have an incentive to lie. In this era of mass incarceration, the police shouldn&#8217;t be trusted any more than any other witness, perhaps less so.

It is a perversion of the American justice system that strikes directly at the rule of law. Yet it is the routine way of doing business in courtrooms everywhere in America.&#8221;

Mr. Keane, in his Chronicle article, offered two major reasons the police lie so much. First, because they can. Police officers &#8220;know that in a swearing match between a drug defendant and a police officer, the judge always rules in favor of the officer.&#8221; At worst, the case will be dismissed, but the officer is free to continue business as usual. Second, criminal defendants are typically poor and uneducated, often belong to a racial minority, and often have a criminal record. &#8220;Police know that no one cares about these people,&#8221; Mr. Keane explained.

All true, but there is more to the story than that.

Police departments have been rewarded in recent years for the sheer numbers of stops, searches and arrests.

Exposing police lying is difficult largely because it is rare for the police to admit their own lies or to acknowledge the lies of other officers. This reluctance derives partly from the code of silence that governs police practice and from the ways in which the system of mass incarceration is structured to reward dishonesty. But it&#8217;s also because police officers are human.

Research shows that ordinary human beings lie a lot &#8212; multiple times a day &#8212; even when there&#8217;s no clear benefit to lying.