I had the same thoughts. Possible he was "concerned for her safety", but also possible he saw an opportunity. Really, some one should have called the police that someone that looked off was running around lost. Not a good idea for males to approach females like that , as we can see.
I can't speak with absolute authority on this point, but no. JMO
Even if it's a weave, those take abundant time to remove and replace.
I hope this case gets reclassified and put under the juristiction of the state police or FBI. Everything from before can be taken as leads. I think it's been tainted with bias. We've got a missing girl, a "POI", potential defamation of the POI, arguable railroading and isolation/intimidation of the witness, and accusational statements being made by the Police department handling the case. To make matters worse, a possible suspect has fled the area. This makes me sick. I understand the reasons for everything said and done so far. Nevertheless, hand it over to the FBI before this gets ruined any further.
because there is no proof she is deceased.....I know folks in this thread have this POI convicted for every crime that ever happened remotely in this vicinity. But I haven't seen the police actually mention anything to suggest that this guy actually killed this victim. The minute the police found even a drop of evidence implicating him, they would immediately issue a warrant for his arrest. The fact that they apparently found no obvious clues, not a single hair, blood drop, etc. during the first search and have to re-search, and still no arrest warrant for murder, makes me doubt there is any viable claim against this guy.
I also worry that if the pd is barking up the wrong tree, that someone who truly may have been involved in her disappearance may have gotten away with destroying evidence etc. The reason I am skeptical is because this case strongly reminds me of a death penalty case I briefly worked on where the conviction was overturned with dna evidence. I won't get into those details but the cops were essentially lazy and rather than do an involved investigation and follow all leads, they picked the easiest guy to pin a case on.
WTOP.com published a 2012 photo of JLM, and I thought I'd include it with the sketch and poster photos
Hmmm, Driver's licenses expire on your birthday. He must've been doing a quick CYA there...
p.s. His birthday is 12/14
I agree that stepping out behind a woman and following her is one of the most effective ways to induce a coronary, but it's not that easy to know what to do, especially if you're a man. My husband just had this same dilemma a few days ago. He saw an drunk, dressed-up college-age woman walking alone in an unsafe area and had no idea what to do. He didn't want to call the police because "drunk college student" would describe... well... practically everyone out and about downtown past a certain time. He thought about pulling over and offering her a ride, but he didn't want to scare her and surely didn't want to be accused of trying to abduct her. So, he drove away and felt badly about it.
Maybe I'm naive but cases are routinely solved on Investigation Discovery by matching DNA to items in trashcans or discarded cigarette butts with no warrant...
And (my ignorance here) can dreds be removed and then put back in quickly? As in used to change an appearance?
what is HG suspected of? why wouldn't her parents give LE permission to use those samples?I would like to clarify my post regarding LE already having JM's DNA from his apartment. The issue to me is that he apparently had roommates, and heaven knows how many other people were in his apartment at one time or another. Example: how do you know which toothbrush is his? In addition, my understanding regarding DNA that will be used in court is that it must come directly from the suspect and that, in turn, must be obtained with a separate warrant.
Now, OTOH, if HG's DNA were to be found in the apartment on one of the items removed, that is a whole different kettle of fish, because one would assume that 1) LE obtained DNA from her parents or from some of HG's personal items; 2) her parents have given LE permission to use those samples; and 3) HG is not a suspect. MOO.
This is the latest one #15. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...le-17-Oct-2009-15&highlight=morgan+harrington
Maybe I'm just a more moral and community minded person than this lovely, teddy bear, committed Christian that is no where to be found and refusing to help police.
Has anyone out together an outline of events/facts for this case? There's so many posts in this ongoing thread, it would excellent to have an outline. Thanks!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The FBI has been involved for several days now. http://www.nbc12.com/story/26546838/fbi-now-involved-in-search-for-missing-uva-student
Please point me to "potential defamation of the POI". I have yet to see any and would be interested if that was happening.
Oh goody you're here.
I agree.
This thread is moving fast, you may not catch my question, but if you do...what is your opinion regarding the POI going to the DVM to renew his license on 9/19/14?
what is HG suspected of? why wouldn't her parents give LE permission to use those samples?