Found Deceased WA - Cheryl DeBoer, 54, Mountlake Terrace, 8 February 2016 #8

[bessie]

Cheryl DeBoer

​

Police ask help in finding missing Mountlake Terrace woman
Mountlake Terrace - Mountlake Terrace police are asking for the public's help in locating a missing woman.
Cheryl DeBoer, 54, was supposed to meet a friend at the Mountlake Terrace Park and Ride lot and carpool to work Monday morning. She texted her friend around 7 a.m. saying that she would catch a bus instead; she has not been seen or heard from since. Her vehicle was located parked in the 23400 block of 58th Avenue SW in Mountlake Terrace.
http://www.king5.com/story/news/loc...ing-missing-mountlake-terrace-woman/80068942/

Body found in Mountlake Terrace identified as missing woman
http://www.king5.com/story/news/loc...police-rule-womans-death-suspicious/80417266/
The Snohomish County Medical Examiner on Tuesday announced that they have identified a body found in Mountlake Terrace as 53-year-old Cheryl DeBoer. The cause and manner of death are pending further investigation, the ME's office said. Mountlake Terrace Police had said there is no reason to believe the public is in danger following the discovery of the body.

Medical examiner: Body found is missing Mountlake Terrace woman
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...e-police-return-to-site-where-body-was-found/
The family remains cooperative with the investigation, he said, adding DeBoer’s husband took a polygraph test late last week and police have eliminated him as a person of interest.

Celebrating Cheryl DeBoer

Verified Insiders:
Stryker57
Lavaland

Thread #1 Thread #2 Thread #3 Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7

 

[bessie]

VERIFIED PROFESSIONALS and CASE INSIDERS

We are lucky enough to have posters from all walks of life with a broad spectrum of expertise. Some hold specialized knowledge that applies to the various circumstances of the cases we discuss, and can contribute valuable insight and information. We welcome their participation.

To ensure that anyone posting as a "professional" in a specific field truly is what/who they claim to be, WS employs a verification process.

The verification process also applies to "case insiders". Relatives, friends, and others personally acquainted with a victim or suspect; or a professional working on behalf of a victim or the family, i.e., a private investigator, can submit a request to be verified as a "case insider".

If you would like to become verified, please contact the site owner at wsverify@gmail.com with your Websleuths name, your real name, the case, a telephone number, and the times when you can be reached.

If you are a "professional" or "case insider", but would prefer not to be verified, please understand that you will be required to follow the general rules for posting, and back up your statements with links to appropriate sources.

More information on how to submit a request, and the information required, can be found at this link:

Verification Process for Professionals and Insiders

NOTE: Websleuths does not condone members becoming personally involved in cases by initiating contact with family members, law enforcement, or the media. This does not preclude responding to a request for volunteers, or utilizing proper channels to report valid information, i.e., "a tip", to law enforcement.

Please read: RULES: WS ETIQUETTE & INFORMATION

 

[Sea gull]

I agree, that there are probably things that aren't being released for strategic reasons. I keep thinking about a statement CD's husband made-something to the effect that the public would be afraid if they knew some information that LE is keeping from us. If what ANZAC is saying is true then LE would not have shared this information with the husband either so why would he make that statement? Here is a link to an article with his quote. Also I re-read this article and this is the first one that I've seen that discusses blood on the exterior of the car ( they speculate that it is CDs but that has not been confirmed as far as I know). All of the other reports I've seen only discuss the blood on the interior of the door, the seat, the console and the floor (animal)
http://mynorthwest.com/11/2939704/Fa...e-womans-death

 

[otto]

@Anzac re holdback info and sensitive info: police did not release sensitive information about the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the body. When the body was found, people wanted details, but police said that the were withholding sensitive information, and that people would understand the reasons when that information was released - which would be after all the evidence was examined. Sensitive information was released to the family. The family shared some of that sensitive information with the public, more or less forcing the hand of the police, resulting in a police statement that revealed details about the plastic bag, the razor blade, the animal blood, the blood on the car exterior, and the condition of the body.

Police do not announce that they have hold back information. Holding back sensitive information is usually out of respect for the victims. I suspect that the information that police intended to hold back until after all evidence was examined is that it appears to be a tragic suicide. That, in itself, is sensitive.

 

[ANZAC]

@Anzac re holdback info and sensitive info: police did not release sensitive information about the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the body. When the body was found, people wanted details, but police said that the were withholding sensitive information, and that people would understand the reasons when that information was released - which would be after all the evidence was examined. Sensitive information was released to the family. The family shared some of that sensitive information with the public, more or less forcing the hand of the police, resulting in a police statement that revealed details about the plastic bag, the razor blade, the animal blood, the blood on the car exterior, and the condition of the body.

Police do not announce that they have hold back information. Holding back sensitive information is usually out of respect for the victims. I suspect that the information that police intended to hold back until after all evidence was examined is that it appears to be a tragic suicide. That, in itself, is sensitive.

When they use the phrase "holding back" it is usually about specific investigative information, not information that the family wouldn't know.

I do understand your point that there was information they felt the family would not want known publicly at that point because it might point to suicide, that they did tell the family that the family later released, HOWEVER, because they have used the words "hold back" rather than "not release" I believe there is ADDITIONAL information they have not told the family, or released publicly.

(edit) While the police normally do not say they have hold back information, in this case because of the level of public interest they wanted to signal they do have additional investigative facts that they are holding back. Hence him using the words "hold....back".

 

[Dushi]

If this is still an ongoing investigation, would LE release all they know?

 

[Eileen730]

JMO
MVOO

I think there is probably a lot that has been left unsaid by Family and by LE.

I also don't think the family thinks its Murder anymore only because they have not said anything more!

 

[Yvettea]

Maybe we will understand when the sensitive information is released:

Police said last month they were holding back on releasing “sensitive information”about the death of DeBoer until toxicology and forensic analysis of her computer and cellphone records are complete.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-...over-her-head/

@Anzac re holdback info and sensitive info: police did not release sensitive information about the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the body. When the body was found, people wanted details, but police said that the were withholding sensitive information, and that people would understand the reasons when that information was released - which would be after all the evidence was examined. Sensitive information was released to the family. The family shared some of that sensitive information with the public, more or less forcing the hand of the police, resulting in a police statement that revealed details about the plastic bag, the razor blade, the animal blood, the blood on the car exterior, and the condition of the body.

Police do not announce that they have hold back information. Holding back sensitive information is usually out of respect for the victims. I suspect that the information that police intended to hold back until after all evidence was examined is that it appears to be a tragic suicide. That, in itself, is sensitive.

While I still agree with you that the sensitive information being held back may have been the evidence pointing to suicide, police did not release the information because the family had already shared it. When police released the information to the media the family came out strongly denouncing their use of the phrase "lack of homicidal violence." They saw that as blaming Cheryl and they swiftly disagreed.

Cheryl's husband even made the interesting statement that people would be afraid if they had the evidence he's seen implying at least that there may yet be a bombshell out there.

ETA: For my part I do not believe the family has changed their mind. It has been their habit to say very little.

 

[Eileen730]

While I still agree with you that the sensitive information being held back may have been the evidence pointing to suicide, police did not release the information because the family had already shared it. When police released the information to the media the family came out strongly denouncing their use of the phrase "lack of homicidal violence." They saw that as blaming Cheryl and they swiftly disagreed.

Cheryl's husband even made the interesting statement that people would be afraid if they had the evidence he's seen implying at least that there may yet be a bombshell out there.

BBM
I think if there were any truth behind this statement we would have heard by now.
JMO

 

[ANZAC]

While I still agree with you that the sensitive information being held back may have been the evidence pointing to suicide

I don't know that is does point to suicide. All I'm saying is I think there is more they haven't told the family or the public because it is part of an active investigation and the SOP is to not release everything, to the family, to anyone.

I understand there was information that the family was told by LE and released, as otto has pointed out 3 times, but I believe there is additional information because of the wording used when they spoke to the media. (If they told the family then it is NOT "hold back" information, by definition.) Because LE used the words "hold ...back", I think there is more. otto has made an assumption that the bag/razor information was what LE was referring to because of the timing. I am saying I think the timing might be a coincidence and that they were talking about something investigative, not necessarily upsetting or confidential to the family.

Again, I am parsing the words and the sentence they used, so this is all IMHO based on how LE talks to the media.

 

[ANZAC]

If this is still an ongoing investigation, would LE release all they know?

No. Neither publicly or to the family. If this turns out to be a homicide they have to protect the investigation.

 

[AzPistonsGirl]

I am back to toxicology. I am still very curious about those results (and fully recognize that we are not owed any report about anything) but I am still curious and found it unlikely that results were back so quickly, as reported here in comments. I think about Cheryl often, like so many of you, and want justice for her if it is due. And peace for her if not.

 

[Sun009]

I don't know that is does point to suicide. All I'm saying is I think there is more they haven't told the family or the public because it is part of an active investigation and the SOP is to not release everything, to the family, to anyone.

I understand there was information that the family was told by LE and released, as otto has pointed out 3 times, but I believe there is additional information because of the wording used when they spoke to the media. (If they told the family then it is NOT "hold back" information, by definition.) Because LE used the words "hold ...back", I think there is more. otto has made an assumption that the bag/razor information was what LE was referring to because of the timing. I am saying I think the timing might be a coincidence and that they were talking about something investigative, not necessarily upsetting or confidential to the family.

Again, I am parsing the words and the sentence they used, so this is all IMHO based on how LE talks to the media.

Is toxicology testing pretty straight forward, or in a case that seems unusual, is it quadrupled checked over by multiple places? I know the family said it was clean, but publicly it hasn't been announced. I wonder if the investigator's weren't completely done looking at it.....

 

[otto]

When they use the phrase "holding back" it is usually about specific investigative information, not information that the family wouldn't know.

I do understand your point that there was information they felt the family would not want known publicly at that point because it might point to suicide, that they did tell the family that the family later released, HOWEVER, because they have used the words "hold back" rather than "not release" I believe there is ADDITIONAL information they have not told the family, or released publicly.

(edit) While the police normally do not say they have hold back information, in this case because of the level of public interest they wanted to signal they do have additional investigative facts that they are holding back. Hence him using the words "hold....back".

" We want to do what we can to hold sensitive information back until we see the phone, computer and lab results,” he said."

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...n-continues-as-police-await-forensic-results/

It may be more common for police to hold back investigative information, but in this case they wanted to hold sensitive information back.. There's no reason to change the meaning of what has been said.

 

[Mistree]

" We want to do what we can to hold sensitive information back until we see the phone, computer and lab results,” he said."

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...n-continues-as-police-await-forensic-results/

It may be more common for police to hold back investigative information, but in this case they wanted to hold sensitive information back.. There's no reason to change the meaning of what has been said.

I'm with you Otto. Especially considering that the phone, computer (s) and tox have all been investigated. I personally don't see what else could be sensitive info.
Seems the only thing left is the animal blood typing.

 

[ANZAC]

Is toxicology testing pretty straight forward, or in a case that seems unusual, is it quadrupled checked over by multiple places? I know the family said it was clean, but publicly it hasn't been announced. I wonder if the investigator's weren't completely done looking at it.....

That is a bit out of my general area. I know they take blood and other fluids during the autopsy. Given that her body may have been there for a couple of weeks I am not sure what it would affect. I thought they were waiting for results on the plastic bag (and maybe other items?). I am not sure they send it to multiple places - I believe they send it out to the place best equipped to handle each type of testing, and that doesn't have a huge backlog. I know people here are surprised by how long it is taking but from my POV this is very typical. All of these labs are handling all kinds of cases (assaults, rapes, thefts, you name it) day in and day out that don't make the news. It isn't like they are sitting around waiting for something to test.

Also the process between the detectives and the ME is interactive. We just had a case where the ME asked the detective to go back and find more evidence (and therefore the detective was calling us).

 

[ANZAC]

" We want to do what we can to hold sensitive information back until we see the phone, computer and lab results,” he said."

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...n-continues-as-police-await-forensic-results/

It may be more common for police to hold back investigative information, but in this case they wanted to hold sensitive information back.. There's no reason to change the meaning of what has been said.

We still don't know that this was the "sensitive information" that he meant. The timing may have been a coincidence.
I'm not trying to change the meaning of it - you and I disagree over what he is referring to.

Is there a quote where the MLT PD says the bag, razor etc. was the sensitive information he previously mentioned?

And they wouldn't say "hold sensitive information back" if they were simultaneously telling it to the family, and "hoping" they wouldn't release it. They would say "there is information we are not releasing at this time out of consideration for the family". (I should also point out I'm a trained public safety public information officer that talks to the media on behalf of law enforcement, but not on criminal cases) My experience is when they use the words "hold" and "back" it is about investigative information that NO ONE outside the case is getting.

 

[ANZAC]

I'm with you Otto. Especially considering that the phone, computer (s) and tox have all been investigated. I personally don't see what else could be sensitive info.
Seems the only thing left is the animal blood typing.

They've not released any of the info from the US Marshals. (cell forensics) They have not released any info from other items they may have found during the search around the body/creek.

 

[Mistree]

They've not released any of the info from the US Marshals. (cell forensics) They have not released any info from other items they may have found during the search around the body/creek.

Do you have a link for "the other items"?

 

[otto]

We still don't know that this was the "sensitive information" that he meant. The timing may have been a coincidence.
I'm not trying to change the meaning of it - you and I disagree over what he is referring to.

Is there a quote where the MLT PD says the bag, razor etc. was the sensitive information he previously mentioned?

And they wouldn't say "hold sensitive information back" if they were simultaneously telling it to the family, and "hoping" they wouldn't release it. They would say "there is information we are not releasing at this time out of consideration for the family". (I should also point out I'm a trained public safety public information officer that talks to the media on behalf of law enforcement, but not on criminal cases) My experience is when they use the words "hold" and "back" it is about investigative information that NO ONE outside the case is getting.

I need to keep my eye on the ball, so I'm bringing forward the exact quote from police:

"We want to do what we can to hold sensitive information back until we see the phone, computer and lab results,” he said."​

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...n-continues-as-police-await-forensic-results/

I'm not prepared to assume that police would not share sensitive information with the victim's family.

Knowing as much as you do about search and rescue, and investigative techniques, why would you assume that "sensitive information" means "holdback information"? Holdback information is, for example, something that only the perp would know. Sensitive information is typically included in the privacy act:

"Sensitive information is defined as information that is protected against unwarranted disclosure. Access to sensitive information should be safeguarded. Protection of sensitive information may be required for legal or ethical reasons, for issues pertaining to personal privacy, or for proprietary considerations."​

http://help.unc.edu/help/what-is-sensitive-data/

"88 ‘Sensitive information’ is a sub-set of personal information and is given a higher level of protection under the NPPs. The IPPs do not refer to sensitive information and agencies are required to handle all information, including sensitive information, in accordance with the IPPs. The principles recommended for handling sensitive information, and their extension to agencies, are discussed further in Chapter 22.

6.89 ‘Sensitive information’ is defined in the Privacy Act to mean information or an opinion about an individual’s:
◾racial or ethnic origin;
◾political opinions;
◾membership of a political association;
◾religious beliefs or affiliations;
◾philosophical beliefs;
◾membership of a professional or trade association;
◾membership of a trade union;
◾sexual preferences or practices; or
◾criminal record.

6.90 ‘Sensitive information’ also includes health information[98] and genetic information about an individual that is not otherwise health information.[99]

6.91 ‘Sensitive information’ is subject to a higher level of privacy protection than other ‘personal information’ handled by organisations in the following ways:
◾‘sensitive information’ may only be collected with consent, except in specified circumstances. Consent is generally not required to collect ‘personal information’ that is not ‘sensitive information’;[100]
◾‘sensitive information’ must not be used or disclosed for a secondary purpose unless the secondary purpose is directly related to the primary purpose of collection and within the reasonable expectations of the individual;[101]
◾‘sensitive information’ cannot be used for the secondary purpose of direct marketing;[102] and ... "​

http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications...e Important Definitions/sensitive-information