Found Deceased VA - Morgan Dana Harrington, 20, Charlottesville, 17 Oct 2009 - #13

[Walker]

I guess what I was getting at is that the actual word TIGHTS could have applied even if they were thigh-high rather than regular waist high. So the friends might have said "Tights", so possibly adjusting our definition of the word might be helpful especially when it comes to reconciling variations in the witness descriptions of the boots. See, as a female, the significant difference, IMO, between panty hose or stockings (which are practically synonyms) and "tights" is opacity. If they are opaque... I call 'em tights, If they are sheer... pantyhose. Generally speaking something thigh high fits into the category of "stockings" however if they were opaque I can see calling them tights b/c it would be more accurate, IMO, and would avoid possible misinterpretation. If I'd read in a description that she was wearing thigh high stockings, I would have assumed they were sheer (or even net) and that she was being intentionally a bit flirtatious in her dress for the evening. Not a good idea to convey if you are trying to garner victim sympathy to aid the immediate search efforts. (Right or wrong as that may be, I'm just saying...)

That's probably more of a discussion of hosiery anybody wants to have. It was just a thought that I entertained while pondering boots.

Yes, that's probably why they were vague about her exact outfit.

 

[Calliope]

Yes, that's probably why they were vague about her exact outfit.

Or maybe to weed out genuine witnesses from those who may be influenced by a more complete description? I am frustrated that the description was so generic (considering the age group involved and the event), but I suppose it's possible someone would have seen a person vaguely similar in appearance then used a more detailed published description to fill in the gaps, so to speak. Not to intentionally lie about what they saw, but subconsciously in their desire to help out. I guess it's possible the police don't want their description to alter what people really saw.

 

[Wes]

Or maybe to weed out genuine witnesses from those who may be influenced by a more complete description?....I guess it's possible the police don't want their description to alter what people really saw.

It's possible, but you would think initially in a missing persons case, that they would show exactly what the person looked like at the time they went missing. In all of this time there has yet to be one picture or video clip of Morgan released from that day. And in this day of social network sites and just about everyone haves a camera on their phone, people take pictures of themselves and friends all the time, especially at big events like a concert you were waiting on for over six months.

To me, not releasing any pix/video of her from that day means they 1) don't have any pix/vids of her or 2) They don't want to show her due to the state and/or attire she was wearing. I can't believe there aren't any pix of her from that day so I must conclude it's for reason #2. But what's strange is we all have been told what she was wearing. We know it's a mini-skirt and stockings and boots. So I can't understand why they won't show her, unless she was really, really messed up that day.

 

[Calliope]

It's possible, but you would think initially in a missing persons case, that they would show exactly what the person looked like at the time they went missing. In all of this time there has yet to be one picture or video clip of Morgan released from that day. And in this day of social network sites and just about everyone haves a camera on their phone, people take pictures of themselves and friends all the time, especially at big events like a concert you were waiting on for over six months.

To me, not releasing any pix/video of her from that day means they 1) don't have any pix/vids of her or 2) They don't want to show her due to the state and/or attire she was wearing. I can't believe there aren't any pix of her from that day so I must conclude it's for reason #2. But what's strange is we all have been told what she was wearing. We know it's a mini-skirt and stockings and boots. So I can't understand why they won't show her, unless she was really, really messed up that day.

It was initially a missing persons case, but remember her purse was found in the lot prior to her being reported missing. I think LE suspected foul play from the start.

 

[carbuff]

People see what they expect to see. If LE put out a picture of her even now, by midnight they'd have reports from at least a couple hundred people convinced they saw her buying gas or running off with a funny-looking couple in a white van.

 

[part time prof]

It's possible, but you would think initially in a missing persons case, that they would show exactly what the person looked like at the time they went missing. In all of this time there has yet to be one picture or video clip of Morgan released from that day. And in this day of social network sites and just about everyone haves a camera on their phone, people take pictures of themselves and friends all the time, especially at big events like a concert you were waiting on for over six months.

To me, not releasing any pix/video of her from that day means they 1) don't have any pix/vids of her or 2) They don't want to show her due to the state and/or attire she was wearing. I can't believe there aren't any pix of her from that day so I must conclude it's for reason #2. But what's strange is we all have been told what she was wearing. We know it's a mini-skirt and stockings and boots. So I can't understand why they won't show her, unless she was really, really messed up that day.

Or that Morgan was the "designated picture taker," with her (perhaps new) camera that has never turned up (that we know of)...but I agree wholeheartedly that it's strange that someone else wasn't at least using their phone to take some pix that day/evening, so there's perhaps something to their being withheld (if they do exist)...

 

[rossva]

It is not (at least at that time) printed on the tickets, but is on JPJA's website.

i am assuming had printed on them NO REENTRY with same ticket or something similiar.

 

[PaulR]

People see what they expect to see. If LE put out a picture of her even now, by midnight they'd have reports from at least a couple hundred people convinced they saw her buying gas or running off with a funny-looking couple in a white van.

Well, there was a sighting of her in Orange - good description according to the paper but almost certainly not her.

I would not like to be a police officer having to sort out all the "witness" reports, well-intentioned or not.

 

[Calliope]

Given whatever evidence was found at AF, and any tips that may have come in since the discovery of her body, I wonder if the police would go back over tips they received early on that they may have at that time dismissed as not credible?

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Regarding the idea of a picture of Morgan that night, there might well have been a few camera phone pictures, but they might have included others or they might not have had the focus and resolution to give a good idea of her face. Most missing person's posters or stories in the media I've seen use the "best" pictures of that person with a description of the clothing.

 

[Wes]

It was initially a missing persons case, but remember her purse was found in the lot prior to her being reported missing. I think LE suspected foul play from the start.

I'm just asking, but is it the norm to not release a picture of the missing person from the day they are missing if foul play is suspected?

 

[pittsburghgirl]

The purpose of the picture is to allow the public to look for that individual, who may or may not still be wearing the clothes he or she was wearing when last seen. So I don't think there's any policy other than to choose the best picture for the purpose of alerting the public.

Of course, I am not a missing person investigator. Someone else may have a better idea. But if you look at missing persons posters, you will see that they almost always have one or two "medium" or "head" shots that clearly show facial structure, hair and eyes.

I am curious as to why you are raising this issue.

 

[Walker]

I'm just asking, but is it the norm to not release a picture of the missing person from the day they are missing if foul play is suspected?

LE seemed to treat the case as a plain missing person case for a very long time; esp. considering the handbag & cell being found in one of the parking lots.

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

The purpose of the picture is to allow the public to look for that individual, who may or may not still be wearing the clothes he or she was wearing when last seen. So I don't think there's any policy other than to choose the best picture for the purpose of alerting the public.

Of course, I am not a missing person investigator. Someone else may have a better idea. But if you look at missing persons posters, you will see that they almost always have one or two "medium" or "head" shots that clearly show facial structure, hair and eyes.

I am curious as to why you are raising this issue.

Or they show current hair style, etc. Most missing persons cases show the most recent picture and indicate how new it is. I have always thought it odd if they had day of disappearance pictures in this case not to show them. Anyone else in the pix could always be psd out. MTCW.

 

[nostoneunturned]

The total lack in releasing information is strange. In most cases we would know, what was found at the scene with her. The lack of (1) photo of her that day..blows my mind.
There has to be photos..if she was there ,there has got to be photos...taken by fans..other concert goes,perhaps where she is in the background...I believe there are pictures..I just think LE has not had enough time to check out the people associated with her in the pictures.

I don't think being so tight lipped is helping to find MH's killer. I wish LE would start giving the public something that is assured as a fact about that night....the only thing we know for a fact is MH is dead.
The information..if you want to call it that..is just "he said she said" nothing concrete.
It has never been assured if her car made it there or not...if the friends told the H's everything ...why did MR H insist that MH's car never left Harrisonburg???In most murders it is always the least expected...and someone that was seen with the person...go back to the original people we know were with her...start there...

 

[gnomony]

the only thing we know for a fact is MH is dead.

With all due respect, this simply isn't true.

I hear a chorus of frustration on this thread by people who want to know the truth. But I don't see any evidence that LE is not doing its job. In my judgment, we simply can't tell. Withholding certain details is crucial to an investigation, for reasons others on this thread have explained.

But we do know "facts" about the bracelet, the purse, the cellphone, the text message, the lockout, the tee shirt, the witnesses who think they saw that she fell, that she was wobbly, that she stuck out her thumb as if to hitch a ride. We also have a witness who says she grabbed his arm and subsequently kicked him. We know where she was found and we know LE's opinion that only someone familiar with the terrain would be likely to leave her there. I could go on...

We know lots. We just don't know who did it or how or why. And, of course, that IS frustrating!

But I have to remind myself that alleviating my frustration is not on LE's to-do list.

 

[carbuff]

Thank you, gnomony, that's exactly what I've been thinking.

LE may know perfectly well who did it, but knowing and being able to prove it in a court of law are not the same thing.

 

[secretagent]

Yes, that's probably why they were vague about her exact outfit.

Given the fashion trends I would be willing to bet they are more like leggings.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

With all due respect, this simply isn't true.

I hear a chorus of frustration on this thread by people who want to know the truth. But I don't see any evidence that LE is not doing its job. In my judgment, we simply can't tell. Withholding certain details is crucial to an investigation, for reasons others on this thread have explained.

But we do know "facts" about the bracelet, the purse, the cellphone, the text message, the lockout, the tee shirt, the witnesses who think they saw that she fell, that she was wobbly, that she stuck out her thumb as if to hitch a ride. We also have a witness who says she grabbed his arm and subsequently kicked him. We know where she was found and we know LE's opinion that only someone familiar with the terrain would be likely to leave her there. I could go on...

We know lots. We just don't know who did it or how or why. And, of course, that IS frustrating!

But I have to remind myself that alleviating my frustration is not on LE's to-do list.

I agree. The case is already well along, simply because Morgan's body has been recovered. The body and the scene offer new forensic evidence, etc. While it is frustrating for internet sleuthers not to know everything--all the leads, evidence, and details, LE also doesn't tell the family all of that stuff. They can't compromise the investigation. And they have to keep certain details out of the media in order to eliminate crazy false confessions. We might also remember that some things that look like "clues" or significant details might also be coincidental distractors, not really germane to the case. It takes a trained mind with access to the whole picture to see the forest and not just the trees. Cold case detectives have the real advantage in that they are not dealing with a case as it unfolds and they can more easily see how pieces fit together or fail to fit. LE appears to be doing a very good job here. We need to be patient, although it is hard.

 

[carbuff]

Release of too much information can also jeopardize the eventual prosecution of the murderer. Biasing the jury pool and all that.