Apparently more than 5 weeks.IMO, the million dollar question is what was Noah's COD?? How flipping long does it take for them to get the tox results back??!!!
They must have an on - foot messenger delivering them...From Canada.
Apparently more than 5 weeks.IMO, the million dollar question is what was Noah's COD?? How flipping long does it take for them to get the tox results back??!!!
IMO, the million dollar question is what was Noah's COD?? How flipping long does it take for them to get the tox results back??!!!
Sorry if I missed it, but WHY did LE put them up in a hotel?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The house is probably seen as a crime scene. It was the last place Noah was seen. Preservation of the scene is critical. Having the parents out of the house means less contamination of the scene.
Apparently more than 5 weeks.
They must have an on - foot messenger delivering them...From Canada.
I bet the room was bugged.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If that were the case, then LE would have viewed this as a crime from the very beginning. I think that is the point. We know that LE would need to preserve evidence. But what we don't know is what led LE to believe the house was a "crime scene". If this was *just* a child who presumably walked out the front door as we were all led to believe at the beginning of the investigation, there wouldn't be a crime scene.
Sheriff Davis did say that they worked the case as two separate investigations from the very beginning and now I guess we know what he meant.
And, as Courtney asked, why a hotel? They both have family in the same area they could have gone to stay with but LE put them up in a hotel on the tax payers dime for a *reason*. To keep them close? To surveil them?
If LE thought they harmed the kids, it would be wrong to have them stay in a home with children domiciled. The hotel has surveillance so LE would be able to see who came and went-- less money than a detail. Although they were not POI, the hotel stay gave LE access to them 24 hrs a day if needed. The parents could talk to whoever they want so the hotel stay meant that they could surveil their calls through the hotel and cell phones. Them staying at the hotel meant that the parents did not see what LE was doing in their home or on the property. I just think keeping them separate allowed for LE to not have them tampering with other people's stories by interaction. Overall, it keeps the scene clean.
IF it were my kid who was missing, I would be fighting to stay in the house just in case he came home. If they said no to the house, I probably would have wanted to stay in a car or truck close because I was wanting to be in the last place my child had been. I wonder what the parents reacted like?
I was just about to post that when I saw your post. I don't know the law, but perhaps why they paid for it initially....as in if they paid for it, they were allowed to use it as they would their home. After they got the info they needed from the bug, they didn't need it in LE name anymore?
I was just about to post that when I saw your post. I don't know the law, but perhaps why they paid for it initially....as in if they paid for it, they were allowed to use it as they would their home. After they got the info they needed from the bug, they didn't need it in LE name anymore?
So maybe LE suspected the parents from the very beginning. They would have had to make Ashley and Paul THINK that they were on their side, in order to get them in a hotel, to surveil them. Which explains why the public kept being told the parents were grieving, cooperating, etc. Very smart. Made them feel comfortable enough so they could catch them incriminating themselves. Nice! Good possibility.
Interesting thought and maybe their phones.I bet the room was bugged.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Anyone else having issues with the site today? Sorry for all of my typos and corrections to posts. I can't seem to get the cursor and text to work correctly today. (No, it could not POSSIBLY be user error)
Yes, I understand that. I can't speak for Courtney but I don't think either of us were asking about practical application. It was not, "How do crime scene investigations work?" but "What, specifically, triggered LE to choose this strategy?" None of us know that at this time. The question is more rhetorical. I agree with what you wrote - the advantages to LE placing them in the hotel are pretty easy to see, but I don't think that is really what we are pondering. It was more about the various possibilities of what LE knew, when they knew it, and how it impacted LE's strategy. I, for one, understand that we won't get a hard and fast answer to that question at this point.
My reference to the financial aspect was not to question why they would spend the money. Investigations cost plenty and a hotel bill is a drop in the bucket. It was to point out though that they could not have justified it as an act of goodwill - it had to have value to the investigation. At the time they made those decisions and put AW & PT up in the hotel, the appearance to the public was that they were remaining in the home, they were fully cooperative, etc. So, it is a point of interest and something to think about what, specifically (was it a hunch, something they said, something they saw, based on other circumstances b/c the family was known to CPS and LE, etc) that drove LE to that strategy.
Your question as to how could parents react that way is more along the same lines. It is a good question. How does an innocent parent of a truly missing child react vs a parent who knows their child is deceased? What is "normal" in other similar case? (Not asking you to answer that, again, these question are rhetorical. I plan on looking at some other cases myself for a frame of reference but not asking to have the behavior explained).
There are both federal and state laws at play, I would guess, as wire tapping is a federal arena, as are privacy, personal liberties, etc. I am not versed on that law, either, but I think your scenario could fit pretty well with everything else we already know. It's simple. It makes sense.