VA - Hannah Elizabeth Graham, 18, Charlottesville, 13 Sept 2014 - #11

[Jmm124567]

(modsnip)

I don't think police released anything about where the bloodhound went. I have seen multiple articles where it says police used a bloodhound but were unwilling to say were the track led to.

 

[Soulmagent]

Yes, that would be legal.

In VA. I do not believe any firearm is allowed where ABC is on. (meaning you drink it there)

 

[Lava]

Why now? Why today? He isn't home. Anyone could have brought him his clothes last night so he can do his tour of all corners of the nation and beyond. Makes no sense. I'm curious to hear more so we can put the pieces together on this one

yeah..why today . Especially since there has been talk that he packed stuff up and went to stay with family.

 

[chipmunk]

You made me think of something.
Lately, I have been running into more people, who rely exclusively, on wifi rather than one of the typical cell service providers (Verizon, ATT, etc.). They use apps like Viber (text video & voice) and WhatsApp (text & video). They have ditched a cell service provider, thereby incurring no monthly fee. These apps are very efficient, when traveling out of the country, and you don't want international service fees. A friend of mine, who has teens and college age kids, said it is much less of a headache, of one of them looses a cell phone, and it is only used via wifi. So, my point is - perhaps HG relied on wifi, exclusively. Downside is, if you need cell service, and you are just outside of a wifi hotspot - you're screwed. And as some here speculated, perhaps her previously transmitted text message, 'sat there' - until she was back in a wifi hot spot. And according to the timeline of videos - perhaps Tempo restaurant (or one of the nearby businesses) has wifi. And that was when the previously written text message was finally sent. HG's family might be able to confirm her cell phone set up.

Yes, she was using it all night so why would there be a sudden problem. I have a full service provider and my cell usually works. But in or near hospitals, schools, certain other places if no signal it witches to fiwi.

 

[Oddsocks]

Police executed a second search at the apartment where Jesse Matthew lives on Monday. His apartment was first searched Friday morning.
Longo says investigators were looking for "clothing" with this search warrant.

http://www.wset.com/story/26599588/...er-mountain-searched-sunday-for-hannah-graham

Why on earth didn't they do this the first time?!?

 

[Soulmagent]

I would have thought his clothes would have been the first thing taken.

If they do have evidence this is an issue for them in case building. I am sad about this.

They cannot say he hid the clothes if people moved out the apartment, someone could have stole his ugly shorts. Packed them up by mistake. donated the to somewhere.

 

[gitana1]

Are blogs allowed? I can never remember.

Mods, feel free to delete if so.

http://.com/2014/09/22/serial-abduc...lj-matthew-and-call-434-295-3851-immediately/

What is going on up in that corridor?

View attachment 59699

Holy smokes.

Police have issued a statement to say the black man shown walking with Hannah Graham in video footage released by police has been ruled out of their missing persons inquiry.

The man, seen in the video who has dreadlocks and is wearing three-quarter length trousers, has already been interviewed by detectives.
A spokesman for Charlottesville Police Department said: 'We already know who the black man in the video is and he has spoken with officers.
'He has been ruled out of the inquiry.
'He has nothing to do with Hannah's disappearance.'
Police have however released a description of a different black man seen with Hannah that they are desperately trying to trace.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hunt-person-seen-staggered-downtown-mall.html

Wth? So the dread guy isn't JM? How many men were glomming onto her that night?

VERY INTERESTING COMMENT on the HFHG FB page. The post with the pink text, initials CCR.

(modsnip).

What page is that?

 

[clearskies1]

Not sure what should be expected from DNA. Assuming JM is not a match to any DNA in CODIS, first of all, then what are we looking at? Hannah's DNA in his car and home may not be enough to charge him (depending on what, where and how much). The do not have Hannah, so they can't tell if his DNA is on her or her clothing/items that may be found with her, if she is found. We know he was with her, may have even touched her, or more, depening upon what happened after leaving the mall. Small amounts of her DNA, i.e could probably be explained away, if JM says he brought her back to his place and they had consensual sex. Sure, we might not buy it, and LE won't, but is that enough to charge him and if so, with what? She is not underage. (It is 18, though VA has some strange sex laws, including making sex between people who are not married illegal, apparently.). As of right now, he apparently is not locked into any statement and most likely has not signed one.

I don't want to pin too much of my hopes on tomorrow, I guess. Maybe they will get a link in the chain, but it may not be the huge break many seem to be expecting. Anyway...jmo

Yes, without finding Hannah, it seems like the only biological evidence that would advance the case is blood from Hannah in unexplainable patterns in the car or aptmt.

 

[perfectingpink]

Holy smokes.



Wth? So the dread guy isn't JM? How many men were glomming onto her that night?




What page is that?

The Daily Mail article was posted Sept. 19th...

Here is the FB page:
https://www.facebook.com/FindHannahGraham

 

[msteach]

I don't really believe that we are defending JM...but some of us ARE defending the constitutional rights that should be afforded to ANY citizen in this country. I'm certainly not defending him, but I AM in the "innocent until proven guilty" by a jury of his peers camp -- and, by that, I mean a real jury in a real courtroom and not someone who is tried and convicted by social media, message boards, or MSM when we don't have all of the evidence. At least that's the way I am looking at things. My heart is absolutely breaking for the Graham family. If you watched the PC yesterday and just saw the utter devastation in both parents' eyes and heard her mom sobbing off camera, you would have to be someone without a heart to be untouched and unmoved.

The problem is -- not one single person on this board knows for sure what exactly happened that night. The only two who know for sure are Hannah and whoever it was (and I suspect that there is a good chance that it was JM) who took her. There are lots of theories that others post that I don't understand, just as I'm sure some of my thoughts and ideas seem like nonsense to someone else. But...we all need to continue to respect one another here. In the words of my 80 year old mother -- "If you can't say something nice..." You know the rest. A little civility between each of us will go a long way. We're not all going to agree. There will always be those in the "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck" camp and there will be others of us in the "innocent until proven guilty" camp.

We have had 11 threads of speculation and a whole lot of contention and snarkiness between sleuthers because emotions are running very, very high in this case. We just all need to try to understand one another as best we can. We may not EVER understand someone whose thoughts are very, very different from our own -- but at least we can be civilized and polite to one another.

I just hope that, if JM is the guy, that LE has enough on him to convict and that they have an airtight case so that he doesn't get off on some technicality or a defense attorney can twist a rock solid case and play the jury when it comes to that. That is when the real justice will be served for Hannah and for her family.

Anyway...just my two cents, for whatever they are worth. I'm off to bed. When I return tomorrow, I'm sure hoping that they have some of the forensic results back and they can move forward one way or another.

I used the wrong phrase in my exhaustion saying "blindly"..What I meant was no matter who is innocent or guilty it seems many are more concerned with defending the POI than finding out what happened to Hannah..I don't blindly trust LE either but I don't believe they are doing anything other than trying to find Hannah and feel JM can help them get to that point..maybe I'm just too damn tired I just feel like we may be a little too worried about the person who I feel from what I've seen and what I believe LE has to have on him by their actions is 70% likely involved in some wrongdoing..JMO..I'll pass out though and try it again fresh tomorrow lol

 

[Oddsocks]

What page is that?

https://www.facebook.com/FindHannahGraham?ref=ts&fref=ts

 

[Lava]

Is this DM the only source for this? This is bizarre.

For what it is worth, that is NOT on their webpage, which is usually where official statements are kept. The last one says this:

The Charlottesville Police Department has released the description of a man a witness identified as having contact with Hannah Elizabeth Graham the night she disappeared. This person is described as a black male, 5’10”-5’11”, 250-285 pounds, close shaved head, goatee, with a slight ‘beer belly’. He is described as being in his late 20’s-early 30’s and wearing black jeans and a white t-shirt.

http://www.charlottesville.org/index.aspx?recordid=2544&page=635

 

[Jmm124567]

(modsnip)

I don't think police released anything about where the bloodhound went. I have seen multiple articles where it says police used a bloodhound but were unwilling to say were the track led to.

 

[msteach]

They changed the law a few years back and the law in bar/restaurants in VA is that you can carry as long as you don't drink while you are carrying. There was a big deal about that a few years ago and all sorts of protests orchestrated by the VCDL (Virginia Civil Defense League -- or something like that) where they would have "carry ins" for lack of a better word.

In VA. I do not believe any firearm is allowed where ABC is on. (meaning you drink it there)

 

[Jmm124567]

Re dailymail story that (modsnip) [JM] is no longer a POI. Does anyone have any other news reports about this?

What? Post a link

 

[gitana1]

I don't really believe that we are defending JM...but we ARE defending the constitutional rights that should be afforded to ANY citizen in this country. I'm certainly not defending him, but I AM in the "innocent until proven guilty" by a jury of his peers camp -- and, by that, I mean a real jury in a real courtroom and not someone who is tried and convicted by social media, message boards, or MSM when we don't have all of the evidence. At least that's the way I am looking at things. My heart is absolutely breaking for the Graham family. If you watched the PC yesterday and just saw the utter devastation in both parents' eyes and heard her mom sobbing off camera, you would have to be someone without a heart to be untouched and unmoved.

The problem is -- not one single person on this board knows for sure what exactly happened that night. The only two who know for sure are Hannah and whoever it was (and I suspect that there is a good chance that it was JM) who took her. There are lots of theories that others post that I don't understand, just as I'm sure some of my thoughts and ideas seem like nonsense to someone else. But...we all need to continue to respect one another here. In the words of my 80 year old mother -- "If you can't say something nice..." You know the rest. A little civility between each of us will go a long way. We're not all going to agree. There will always be those in the "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck" camp and there will be others of us in the "innocent until proven guilty" camp.

We have had 11 threads of speculation and a whole lot of contention and snarkiness between sleuthers because emotions are running very, very high in this case. We just all need to try to understand one another as best we can. We may not EVER understand someone whose thoughts are very, very different from our own -- but at least we can be civilized and polite to one another.

I just hope that, if JM is the guy, that LE has enough on him to convict and that they have an airtight case so that he doesn't get off on some technicality or a defense attorney can twist a rock solid case and play the jury when it comes to that. That is when the real justice will be served for Hannah and for her family.

Anyway...just my two cents, for whatever they are worth. I'm off to bed. When I return tomorrow, I'm sure hoping that they have some of the forensic results back and they can move forward one way or another.

The presumption of innocence is not listed in the constitution. It simply means that the prosecution has the burden of proof rather than the defense. It has no bearing on the media, society or how LE investigates. It has to do with who has the burden to prove their case. That's it.

 

[Lava]

I don't really believe that we are defending JM...but we ARE defending the constitutional rights that should be afforded to ANY citizen in this country. I'm certainly not defending him, but I AM in the "innocent until proven guilty" by a jury of his peers camp -- and, by that, I mean a real jury in a real courtroom and not someone who is tried and convicted by social media, message boards, or MSM when we don't have all of the evidence. At least that's the way I am looking at things. My heart is absolutely breaking for the Graham family. If you watched the PC yesterday and just saw the utter devastation in both parents' eyes and heard her mom sobbing off camera, you would have to be someone without a heart to be untouched and unmoved.

Snipped for space...


Yeah, I think people need to be careful when saying we are more concerned with defending a POI. Number one, we should be looking at this with just as much doubt as acceptance. We should be looking for the proof in what LE says before we publicly convict this POI. Number two, people who do choose to do that should not be vilified, and in the process making it harder for other people to speak up too. There is nothing wrong with wanting to see proof that this is the guy, with wanting clear evidence, with speculating about alternative theories. We don't all need to turn into a lynch mob, we should still be allowed to use our brains and try and figure this out.

 

[GhostGhost]

.
Grandma said he's always wearing those stupid white shorts and said they knew it was him.

It's him walking alone - left to right in that video

.

 

[Lava]

.
Grandma said he's always wearing those stupid white shorts and said they knew it was him.

It's him walking alone - left to right in that video

.

"Grandma" said this in a DM article. And the DM is now saying he has been cleared. This is why I said don't trust them, and why I said I don't use them for anything. Otherwise you are just picking and choosing what they publish to believe.

 

[Suthrnqt]

The presumption of innocence is not listed in the constitution. However, our constitution. It simply means that the prosecution has the burden of proof rather than the defense. It has no bearing on the media, society or how LE investigates. It has to do with who has the burden to prove their case. That's it.

Thanks button wasn't enough.