TX - Shanna, 36, & Diederik Vandewege, 3 mos, slain, Fort Worth, 15 Dec 2016 *GUILTY*

[Oregonmama]

Slitting of a throat seems very drug cartel like. Mix in the fact that one if the victims was a baby and its is even more evil. Who ever did this is an animal. It's very suspicious to me that CV is hindering the investigation by not cooperating fully.

I don't know. Whoever is guilty , wanted things to be done quickly and quietly. Crimes like this , especially attacking a child screams mental health problems

 

[EntreNous]

I cannot shake the thought of Laci Peterson that keeps popping into my head. Cute, bubbly girl, swept off her feet by a super charmer of a guy. She dreamed of having a family and babies her whole life. Laci would likely be alive today had she not been bringing a baby boy into Scott Peterson's life.

 

[yllek]

Not Cooperating

Tuesday, 12/20 statement from Fort Worth Homicide Detective Barron:

Vandewege then left to call his attorney but has not been in contact with police since, Barron said. The detective said he has talked with a representative from the attorney’s office and is hopeful a meeting can be set up.

“It’s standard and it’s normal for us to try to exclude people close before we can move on and look elsewhere,” Barron said. “It stalls our investigation if there’s somebody that close that says flat out, ‘No, I’m not going to do 'it'.’ (BBM)http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article121971809.html#storylink=cpy

We don't know what 'it' is, so we don't really know what's being considered as 'not cooperating'.

LE had a couple of days to check into CV's answers from the initial interview when they attempted to question him again on Monday.

-Maybe CV refused to provide additional details or explain some things that didn't check out from his initial interview.
-Maybe he didn't want to answer a new line of questioning for some reason.
-Maybe LE couldn't verify some key basics and CV refused to take a lie detector test when requested.

In any case, we know CV had an attorney retained by Tuesday morning. And, it doesn't appear he's had contact with LE since he walked out of the interview on Monday (only three days after he called 911).

 

[Inthedetails]

Not sure I agree with the perp having probable experience with a knife. Case in point: Nicole Brown Simpson. However, I would think that there would have to be some kind of serious rage to want to slash someone's throat. That just seems a particularly brutal way to die. I agree that the baby was key in this murder. Poor little thing.

I followed the Simpson case way back when, but I honestly don't remember that Nicole was killed by slicing her throat.

I still think the perp in this case was someone experienced with a knife, but we'll eventually find out more and then we'll know for sure.

jmopinion at the moment.

 

[Cannonball3804]

Not Cooperating

Tuesday, 12/20 statement from Fort Worth Homicide Detective Barron:


We don't know what 'it' is, so we don't really know what's being considered as 'not cooperating'.

LE had a couple of days to check into CV's answers from the initial interview when they attempted to question him again on Monday.

-Maybe CV refused to provide additional details or explain some things that didn't check out from his initial interview.
-Maybe he didn't want to answer a new line of questioning for some reason.
-Maybe LE couldn't verify some key basics and CV refused to take a lie detector test when requested.

In any case, we know CV had an attorney retained by Tuesday morning. And, it doesn't appear he's had contact with LE since he walked out of the interview on Monday (only three days after he called 911).

And he himself would not have been expected to have contact with LE once the attorney was retained. That's what comes with getting an attorney - the lawyer becomes the point of contact rather than yourself.

There was nothing about that article that says to me he isn't cooperating. Quite the opposite, with the statement that they're hopeful of setting something up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Angie682]

I cannot shake the thought of Laci Peterson that keeps popping into my head. Cute, bubbly girl, swept off her feet by a super charmer of a guy. She dreamed of having a family and babies her whole life. Laci would likely be alive today had she not been bringing a baby boy into Scott Peterson's life.

I am reminded of that case too. That such evil people walk the earth is very frightening and sad. Marrying the wrong person can sometimes be a fatal mistake.

I have faith in forensics and science. In today's world you are on surveillance everywhere you go. It's very easy for online activities, Internet searches, dating sites, and phones records to be tracked. Not to mention DNA.

I have no doubt the killer will be caught, probably sooner rather than later and brought to justice.

 

[yllek]

And he himself would not have been expected to have contact with LE once the attorney was retained. That's what comes with getting an attorney - the lawyer becomes the point of contact rather than yourself.

There was nothing about that article that says to me he isn't cooperating. Quite the opposite, with the statement that they're hopeful of setting something up.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's true, 'not cooperating' wasn't verbiage specifically used, but I think 'extremely hindering the investigation' can reasonably be viewed as non-cooperative from LE's perspective.

From the same article: “This extremely hinders our ability to move ahead and definitely hinders our ability to eliminate him,” he (Detective Barron) added. http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article121971809.html#storylink=cpy

Detective Barron also said that CV "left to call his attorney". To me, it sounds like CV already had a local attorney prior to Monday's interview with police?

Ah well, not much to work with on this terribly sad case yet. Maybe LE or someone close to the victims will release a statement soon.

 

[Elainera]

I'll say first of all that I have no idea if CV did it. He may have. But I hope that LE won't get too attached too soon to one theory. Certainly not just because there were no signs of forced entry, or because "things like that don't happen in this neighborhood."

In the Amanda Blackburn case, there was no forced entry either. The husband went to the gym early and left the front door unlocked.

The neighborhood had been safe in the past , but someone had just burglarized a house two doors down and then saw Davy Blackburn leaving for work and seized the opportunity to do that house too. Shot the pregnant Amanda in the head.

If I'm a burglar, I might seek out neighborhoods that have NOT been burglarized in the past. Those folks are more likely to have their guard down, leave doors unlocked and alarm systems off.

bbm - Good point. I agree. (Although I lean more towards this was personal rather than a random burglary.)

Two things stands out: the throat cutting and the baby.

That is an unusual way to kill someone, imo. I would guess it takes either a very determined mind to cut someone's throat, or experience.

Someone with experience - like a medical person or a hunter - would know exactly where to cut, I would guess. Others who wanted to murder might not even consider cutting someone's throat as a method.

The victims were in bed, and one little victim was completely defenseless and couldn't fight an attack - so why not use a pillow to smother instead of cutting throat? Or stab if you have a knife?

Do we have any stats on throat cutting murders and murderers?

IMO, the murdering of an infant was personal against that particular infant. Someone didn't want this particular infant to live, imo.

"Usual suspect" in this type of case comes to mind as well as someone jealous. IMO, whoever did this has experience with a knife. (Or someone with mental illness, such as hearing voices to use a knife.)

The knife is key. The baby is key.

Only my opinion, subject to change as we learn more about the case.

So sad. My heart goes out to the extended family members who are living in shock now.

bbm - I agree with this too.

The knife - a surgeon perhaps? Did SV have an affair at the hospital in CO? Jealous doctor followed her to Texas? I hope LE has plain clothes present during the funeral.

And he himself would not have been expected to have contact with LE once the attorney was retained. That's what comes with getting an attorney - the lawyer becomes the point of contact rather than yourself.

There was nothing about that article that says to me he isn't cooperating. Quite the opposite, with the statement that they're hopeful of setting something up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bbm - This might have been in part why he got a lawyer. Your wife and baby gets killed - you want to withdraw and grieve and not be the point of contact for anyone including police if you have already told everything you know. jmo

 

[Cannonball3804]

That's true, 'not cooperating' wasn't verbiage specifically used, but I think 'extremely hindering the investigation' can reasonably be viewed as non-cooperative from LE's perspective.

From the same article: “This extremely hinders our ability to move ahead and definitely hinders our ability to eliminate him,” he (Detective Barron) added. http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article121971809.html#storylink=cpy

Detective Barron also said that CV "left to call his attorney". To me, it sounds like CV already had a local attorney prior to Monday's interview with police?

Ah well, not much to work with on this terribly sad case yet. Maybe LE or someone close to the victims will release a statement soon.

I think the quote from the detective is meant to put CV under pressure to cooperate, by getting it out to the media that they're not done talking to him and that he has a lawyer.

And if he already had a lawyer before he went in for the second interview, there is no way that lawyer would have allowed him to go without counsel present. Most likely he didn't have the attorney yet. But as you're trying to extricate yourself from the police station, you don't say "I'm going to go hire an attorney." You make the stronger statement of, "I need to consult with my attorney", which is stronger. It's the way I would say it, if it were me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yllek]

I think the quote from the detective is meant to put CV under pressure to cooperate, by getting it out to the media that they're not done talking to him and that he has a lawyer.

And if he already had a lawyer before he went in for the second interview, there is no way that lawyer would have allowed him to go without counsel present. Most likely he didn't have the attorney yet. But as you're trying to extricate yourself from the police station, you don't say "I'm going to go hire an attorney." You make the stronger statement of, "I need to consult with my attorney", which is stronger. It's the way I would say it, if it were me.

Thanks Cannonball. It's really interesting and helpful to note the different perspectives.

I agree that Detective Barron's media statements on Tuesday morning were likely meant, at least in part, to pressure CV into cooperating.

Personally, I'd not try to make police believe I already had an attorney lined-up if I did not. But, you might be right that CV did just that, same as you would do.

I hope whoever is responsible is arrested very soon, this case makes me sad and mad. I'm sure that's what LE wants too. Since the Vandeweges were new to the area and little D was new to the world, it's possible SV didn't have a lot of contact outside of CV and they're extra reliant on him.

Do we know if SV ever actually worked at the hospital in Forth Worth? I've read that she was employed there, but was still on maternity leave. I wondered if she'd been hired, but with an actual start date some weeks after delivery.

 

[Cannonball3804]

bbm - Good point. I agree. (Although I lean more towards this was personal rather than a random burglary.)




bbm - I agree with this too.

The knife - a surgeon perhaps? Did SV have an affair at the hospital in CO? Jealous doctor followed her to Texas? I hope LE has plain clothes present during the funeral.




bbm - This might have been in part why he got a lawyer. Your wife and baby gets killed - you want to withdraw and grieve and not be the point of contact for anyone including police if you have already told everything you know. jmo

Right. It will be interesting to see how CV and his attorney react to LE's statements now, or if they react at all.

There is such a PR aspect to high-profile murder cases. If this attorney is savvy, she will recognize the need to counter that damaging Star-Telegram article that managed to get "stalled" and "lawyered up" into one headline. Very biased, IMHO, and could taint a potential jury pool down the road.

So if I were the attorney, I would schedule a press conference. I would read from a prepared statement with CV standing beside me, silent and grieving. I would not take questions.

My statement would say, "First of all, CV wants me to convey how deeply grateful he is for the outpouring of support from so many in this community and also back home in Colorado. He feels your love and thanks you for the help that has been offered and given."

"My client is grieving the loss of his family. He is completely innocent and wants whoever did this to be brought to justice swiftly. Right now he is concentrating on funeral arrangements and the logistics of getting his wife and son returned to Colorado in order to lay them to rest."

"It isn't easy to deal with these practical matters while at the same time dealing with his own very fresh grief and shock. Yet he has nonetheless been as cooperative with police as he can be - meeting once for x hours and then again a second time before retaining my firm to assist him."

"I am aware, as I'm sure you all are, of certain statements made by law enforcement that CV is stalling them. I want to assure the police that this is NOT the case. My client needs to bury his family. It's that simple. He will return to Texas as soon as is possible after next Tuesday to help the police in any way he can."

"But let me be clear. My client did NOT harm his family. If the police aren't looking anywhere but at him and waiting for him to be available, then they are the ones who are stalling the investigation, not CV. We want them to do their jobs and find who did this, quickly. Now my client will not be taking questions today, and he would like you all as well as the public to respect his family's privacy at this difficult time. Thank you."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Elainera]

Do we know how long they were married? With three prior miscarriages, must have been at least 4 years? I don't 'feel' a Laci Peterson scenario here.

 

[yllek]

Do we know how long they were married? With three prior miscarriages, must have been at least 4 years? I don't 'feel' a Laci Peterson scenario here.

2 1/2 years; since May 2014.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I know I am not alone, but I would lawyer up if I felt LE was pushing something on me. I've seen cases where LE has harassed someone enough to confess to a murder. If they would of had a lawyer present maybe it wouldn't have happen. Even getting a lawyer, they still catch the bad guys.

But to me it seems they can't clear the husband, maybe the time from him leaving work to getting home is not adding up. It could be anything, possible affair. If it is true about dating sites, that have been used recently then yeah he got some explaining to do.

Hubby should have told investigators from the beginning that he will not answer the same question twice. Because this helps eliminate their chances to mess up your words plus to drag an interview on for major hours.

So I would not sit there and answer the same questions over again.

So either have the questions you want to ask ready; Or simply call me when you are ready with each question.

Or simply send me a questionnaire and I will fill it out.

So don't waste my time LE. Jmo

 

[DexterMorgan]

I would contribute go fund me money if it was her family asking.

But if the money is going to hubby for whatever reason; Then I would not contribute.

Because I would not want my money to pay his lawyers nor so he can relocate again to a nice 2 story home. Jmo

 

[yllek]

I don't understand objecting to answering the same questions twice if you're telling the truth, or to answering unprepared verbal questions that arise from answers and new information gleaned during the interview process, Dexter Morgan.

How is that a waste of time when you're trying to help LE find the killer(s) who slit the throats of your spouse and newborn in the family home?

Setting such limited self-serving conditions on cooperation from the get-go would be more suspicious, to me, than refusing to answer further questions without counsel present once questioning became contentious.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I don't understand objecting to answering the same questions twice if you're telling the truth, or to answering unprepared verbal questions that arise from answers and new information gleaned during the interview process, Dexter Morgan.

How is that a waste of time when you're trying to help LE find the killer(s) who slit the throats of your spouse and newborn in the family home?

Setting such limited self-serving conditions on cooperation from the get-go would be more suspicious, to me, than refusing to answer further questions without counsel present once questioning became contentious.

Your spouse and child was just murdered.

But LE wants to interview you for 8hrs.

Now do you really think that they have 8 hrs worth of questions?

Or is it plausible to think that they are asking questions 5hrs later that you already answered 5 hrs ago.

So your spouse is dead and you need to contact family and friends.

But you find yourself alone and stuck for 8hrs in a small room with 2 cops that are bent on trying to tie you to the murder.

Jmo. I have seen enough police interviews. And they will try and dispute your claims by asking you the same questions in different ways over and over and over again. Jmo

 

[Cannonball3804]

I don't understand objecting to answering the same questions twice if you're telling the truth, or to answering unprepared verbal questions that arise from answers and new information gleaned during the interview process, Dexter Morgan.

How is that a waste of time when you're trying to help LE find the killer(s) who slit the throats of your spouse and newborn in the family home?

Setting such limited self-serving conditions on cooperation from the get-go would be more suspicious, to me, than refusing to answer further questions without counsel present once questioning became contentious.

Because not even an innocent person has perfect recall. Also, once LE starts to head down a path with a person they suspect, it is less about getting to the truth and more about bolstering their case. At that point they will try to trip you, confuse you, whatever it takes to get you to say something that reinforces what they already suspect.

If in the first interview they ask you what you had for breakfast, you say scrambled eggs, hash browns, and biscuit with gravy. Then in he second interview they ask again and you say scrambled eggs, hash browns and biscuit with jelly... they'll bang their fist on the table and yell wait a minute! Biscuit with gravy, now biscuit with jelly... WHICH WAS IT???

And it won't matter that it had nothing to do with the murder...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yllek]

Your spouse and child was just murdered.

But LE wants to interview you for 8hrs.

Now do you really think that they have 8 hrs worth of questions?

Or is it plausible to think that they are asking questions 5hrs later that you already answered 5 hrs ago.

So your spouse is dead and you need to contact family and friends.

But you find yourself alone and stuck for 8hrs in a small room with 2 cops that are bent on trying to tie you to the murder.

Jmo. I have seen enough police interviews. And they will try and dispute your claims by asking you the same questions in different ways over and over and over again. Jmo

Thanks DexterMorgan. I understand that LE will have to grill the spouse under these circumstances and it's gotta be tough for any spouse, guilty or innocent.

We're told by SV's dad that CV was questioned late Thursday night (into Friday morning) -- after the deaths were reported. There had to be a lot going on at the station and it's unknown whether CV was questioned for 4 hours, or 6 hours, or 8 hours...

Anyway, CV wasn't questioned again until Monday morning, as far as we know. So, CV had Friday, Saturday, and Sunday to take care of notifications and LE had those 3 days to look into what CV told them.

I can't see LE focusing on what CV ate for breakfast at that point. More likely, to me, they'd be focusing on details that pertain to his alibi, the marital relationship and other relationships, the couple's finances, new information they'd gleaned during the weekend's investigation, etc...

But, I don't disagree that it's naive not to protect oneself from getting wrongly targeted by LE; it happens alright. I just think that assuming LE is out to pin a terrible crime on you no matter what, and to thus stop being forthcoming (with or without an attorney) early on.......is a sure way to hinder the investigation and invite/confirm LE suspicion.

 

[popsicle]

kelsy mittauer ‏@kelsymittauer [video=twitter;812054304827801600]https://twitter.com/kelsymittauer/status/812054304827801600[/video]
#BREAKING @fortworthpd arrests Craig Vandewege for murders of wife and 3mo son. Both were found in their beds with throats slit. #cbsdfw