Found Deceased UT - MacKenzie "Kenzie" Lueck, 23, Salt Lake City, 17 June 2019 #16 *ARREST*

[Jessthinkin]

We know why AA didn't want Lyft dropping off at his house; what we don't know is why ML agreed to meet him at the park instead of his house.

Can't wait to see the text exchanges between ML and AA; it will explain this, and should also shed light on the nature of their relationship.

 

[MsBetsy]

Can't wait to see the text exchanges between ML and AA; it will explain this, and should also shed light on the nature of their relationship.

Yes, although it's been assumed that he didn't want her knowing where she lived and it was his idea to meet in the park, we actually don't know that for sure. It's all speculation. Imo

 

[StarryStarryNight]

I’m guessing AA’s preliminary hearing is not today. Do we know yet when it will be and whether it will be televised?

 

[oviedo]

This all looks completely different, if Kenzie’s phone turning off has an innocent explanation.

Get past that detail, and the door locks become irrelevant.

She’s a willing passenger at that point, and the attack would have likely begun at his house, and not in the car.

I can’t get past that detail though.

Me either - I'm thinking he attacked her right there in the car - they towed it, so if there is blood evidence we will have our answer IMO.

 

[osu]

From a few comments that I’ve seen from MacKenzie’s close friends, IMO she was deeply grieving the loss of her grandmother when she returned from LA.

Maybe AA took advantage of that grief and offered her a quiet room to stay in for free at his lovely AirBNB, just to relax and rest up for a day or two before returning back to her busy life of school and work? IIRC, she didn't have to be back at work until Wednesday.

If she thought of him as a friend who was trying to help her, she might’ve taken him up on his offer just to relax.

IMO, I don’t believe she was ever at his house in SLC before and she possibly thought that he lived up in the North Salt Lake City area.

JMO

 

[Corpuschick]

No power ports on planes? And she didn’t really have time to charge her phone in the airport, I think—not with getting her checked bag.

So, the idea that she turned it off herself seems more plausible to me. As soon as she’d met up ‘safely’ with him, she didn’t need the phone, so she turned it off to charge faster, or to save the charge for when she needed it again.

I have been saying this from the beginning. It just doesn't make sense to me that he got her there (via lyft) 100% voluntarily, it seems. If so, what would be the point in attacking her in a car, in the middle of a parking lot, where there *could* have been other people around, as opposed to just driving to his (or even her!) house? If he was there to give her a ride home, he could have just done that, and attacked her at her own house. If she was there willingly to go to his house, just take her there. I just don't get the disconnect between "Young woman meets person voluntarily in parking lot" and THEN suddenly decides, after the Lyft driver is gone, to start being uncooperative. That's the only way I think she would have been attacked in the car, if he had said "Ok let's go to my place" and she said no. But after taking a Lyft to obviously meet him, that just doesn't seem plausible.

 

[PommyMommy]

In Utah the body being subjected to burning qualifies for aggravated murder. But there is also an aggravated kidnapping charge. MOO

Welcome to Websleuths, blackfire18.

And, also to you, @WrestlingMom.

Thanks for joining us!

 

[Jessthinkin]

I have been saying this from the beginning. It just doesn't make sense to me that he got her there (via lyft) 100% voluntarily, it seems. If so, what would be the point in attacking her in a car, in the middle of a parking lot, where there *could* have been other people around, as opposed to just driving to his (or even her!) house? If he was there to give her a ride home, he could have just done that, and attacked her at her own house. If she was there willingly to go to his house, just take her there. I just don't get the disconnect between "Young woman meets person voluntarily in parking lot" and THEN suddenly decides, after the Lyft driver is gone, to start being uncooperative. That's the only way I think she would have been attacked in the car, if he had said "Ok let's go to my place" and she said no. But after taking a Lyft to obviously meet him, that just doesn't seem plausible.

In my opinion, if there were an "attack" in the car it was just preliminary; a way to subdue ML in order to get possession of her phone & turn it off immediately so as not to provide LE a cellphone tower-ping trail to AA's house.

 

[evergreen]

breakfast at 3am? I must admit that is a new one on me.

let's say she wanted a nice big pancake breakfast at 3am, why not a girlfriend? Or why not instruct the lyft driver to drop off at the restaurant?

After a long exhausting flight especially one that arrives in the
middle of the night, the very first thing I want to do is get home.

there is no indication their relationship was sd/sb
there is no evidence that aa "failed many times" with girls.
evidence suggests he had no shortage of female visitors.

Welcome @WrestlingMom

That was me pushing the breakfast scenario. It seems the most plausible idea that she didn't want to go right home. I know how my friends and I were at that age, and that was the norm for most everyone we knew to grab breakfast early morning like that.

I really believe that on Kenzie's part, meeting at the park had nothing to do with sexual intentions. I think AA groomed her as a friend. I just don't see ML going to meet someone in a park at 3 AM that she A.) didn't know and B.) She was that desperate for money that she would meet a potential SD at that hour. Red flags would have been up all over the place. It's more likely IMO that AA had failed so many times in the past trying to get girls that he changed his tactic. I could see them meeting on Tinder and him changing his approach. I think however the meeting came to be AA made it so that everything was explained, plausible and made ML feel extremely comfortable like it was no big deal. 23-year-old girls today are not nearly as naive as some have suggested. I am far from that age, but I engage and am around that age bracket a lot, and almost all of them are wary and take extra precautions, especially involving dating apps and the like. Kenzie seemed smart and knowledgeable as well as educated, and I just don't see her willy-nilly running out to meet some stranger or SD like that. I could see her dropping him if he insisted because again if he was an SD and pressed her to meet him, all the red flags would have been raised.

MOO

 

[Whiteorchids]

breakfast at 3am? I must admit that is a new one on me.

let's say she wanted a nice big pancake breakfast at 3am, why not a girlfriend? Or why not instruct the lyft driver to drop off at the restaurant?

After a long exhausting flight especially one that arrives in the
middle of the night, the very first thing I want to do is get home.

there is no indication their relationship was sd/sb
there is no evidence that aa "failed many times" with girls.
evidence suggests he had no shortage of female visitors.

I think the one he really wanted was KL and he couldn’t have her so he killed her.

 

[iamcurious9]

Can't wait to see the text exchanges between ML and AA; it will explain this, and should also shed light on the nature of their relationship.

Absolutely correct . Simply stated and to the point.

 

[Corpuschick]

I have still not seen definitively that the cell phone was actually "turned off". The last article I read, long since lost about 15 threads back, read that (and sorry, like I say that was a few threads ago) that LE stated that "around 3 a.m." is when "all communication from Kenzie's phone ceased". If there is some information that someone knows of that states with certainty it was "turned off at 3:00 a.m.", that would go a long way in convincing me that he was the one who did so. If not, then I still speculate that she went to his house under her own power where things went south, and he then turned off the phone sometime during/after that. Seems kind of stupid (and of course, we have all come to the conclusion he was no rocket scientist), to be texting back and forth with her right up to that point then all of the sudden thinking to turn the phone off to cover his tracks.

 

[Whiteorchids]

I wonder if he raped her like the other woman and she tried to fight him off perhaps she threatened to call the cops and he went into a rage and killed her.

I wonder if there are any defensive wounds on his body scratches, cuts, bite marks? Being his skin is dark Would they be harder to see?

 

[oviedo]

I have still not seen definitively that the cell phone was actually "turned off". The last article I read, long since lost about 15 threads back, read that (and sorry, like I say that was a few threads ago) that LE stated that "around 3 a.m." is when "all communication from Kenzie's phone ceased". If there is some information that someone knows of that states with certainty it was "turned off at 3:00 a.m.", that would go a long way in convincing me that he was the one who did so. If not, then I still speculate that she went to his house under her own power where things went south, and he then turned off the phone sometime during/after that. Seems kind of stupid (and of course, we have all come to the conclusion he was no rocket scientist), to be texting back and forth with her right up to that point then all of the sudden thinking to turn the phone off to cover his tracks.

snipped
Investigators tracking her cell phone discovered that 23-year-old KL and the man expected to be charged with her murder were both in the park where she was last seen on June 17 within a minute of one another.

That was around the time KLs phone stopped receiving data or location services, police said.

Police said Friday that all communications with KLs phone ceased around 3 a.m. that morning -- the same time they said she left the park with the suspect.
BBM
Mackenzie Lueck killing: Cell phone photos and rideshare helped lead to arrest

IMO there is an assumption that due to location services /receiving data was stopped, the phone was shut off.

 

[blackfire18]

Welcome to Websleuths, blackfire18.

And, also to you, @WrestlingMom.

Thanks for joining us!

Thanks

 

[Tortoise]

I have still not seen definitively that the cell phone was actually "turned off". The last article I read, long since lost about 15 threads back, read that (and sorry, like I say that was a few threads ago) that LE stated that "around 3 a.m." is when "all communication from Kenzie's phone ceased". If there is some information that someone knows of that states with certainty it was "turned off at 3:00 a.m.", that would go a long way in convincing me that he was the one who did so. If not, then I still speculate that she went to his house under her own power where things went south, and he then turned off the phone sometime during/after that. Seems kind of stupid (and of course, we have all come to the conclusion he was no rocket scientist), to be texting back and forth with her right up to that point then all of the sudden thinking to turn the phone off to cover his tracks.

I think by communication they include communication with cell towers. That generally means turned off, put in airplane mode or out of range of towers.

MOO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

There are many conditions that can turn murder into aggravated murder. Body tampering, which applies here, is one.

I believe the state when talking to the jury in OS of the trial will say this was all a premeditated plan to torture, and murder KL before she even became trapped inside of his vehicle, and then forced to go to his house of horrors.

They may do so even before then if AA doesn't waive his PH.

Imo, a place she had never been to before.

Imo, how it all went down even before KL going to his home screams premeditation.

Jmhoo

 

[Corpuschick]

snipped

Police said Friday that all communications with KLs phone ceased around 3 a.m. that morning -- the same time they said she left the park with the suspect.
BBM
Mackenzie Lueck killing: Cell phone photos and rideshare helped lead to arrest

IMO there is an assumption that due to location services /receiving data was stopped, the phone was shut off.

With respect, to me, it doesn't. Because I simply don't know. Does anyone actually know? If you are just sitting there not using your phone for 15 minutes, will location services/receiving data show up somewhere? Not being argumentative....I just don't know enough about the technology for that one fact equaling the phone was shut off, and IMO that makes a big difference in the timeline. If they were that close to his house, and she and he had only been texting each other, it would make sense that if you are now with that person you wouldn't be texting them any longer.

 

[GordianKnot]

This all looks completely different, if Kenzie’s phone turning off has an innocent explanation.

Get past that detail, and the door locks become irrelevant.

She’s a willing passenger at that point, and the attack would have likely begun at his house, and not in the car.

I can’t get past that detail though.

BBM:

I can.

"Innocent explanation" is a complete oxymoron when it comes to this evil moron.

I'm firmly in the camp that believes ML's murder was premeditated.
I believe every one of AA's actions that night was directed toward that aim.

Clearly, AA used some pretext to get ML to meet him in that dark, isolated parking lot at 3 am.
Just as clearly, he was able to successfully dupe ML into believing whatever ruse he used.

She went willingly to meet him that night.
Willingly, but unwittingly.

It doesn't require a huge stretch of the imagination to believe that he could also come up with some pretext to get her to turn off her phone once she arrived at the meeting location.

She may very well have turned off her phone willingly.
Willingly, but unwittingly.

To me, it doesn't matter whether AA turned off ML's phone forcibly, whether ML turned it off under duress, or whether ML turned it off willingly.

Regardless of whatever method he employed to get her phone turned off, i.e., force, coercion, or duplicity, it shows premeditation on his part.

Any way you slice it, there is no innocent explanation for her phone being turned off.

It doesn't matter where the attack started, we end up with the same tragic outcome.

All roads lead to Rome here...notwithstanding the fact that Rome is not in Utah.

JMO.

 

[StarEyes]

Apple won't unlock their phones for passwords, iirc. Holly Bobo's case was one I first read about.

eta, FBI hired someone to unlock an Iphone during the San Bernardino terrorist case.

That’s why I gave my code to someone. I only learned that a year or so ago. I can see, and appreciate, Apple’s attention towards my privacy, but there’s just a certain point where it’s more detrimental to someone than beneficial. A missing person should meet that criteria. I wonder if there’s any way to opt in to have them use your code in an extreme emergency?