WA - Mackenzie Cowell, 17, Wenatchee, 9 Feb 2010 - #11

[ChuckMaureen]

Question: IIRC someone mentioned on here that JF was a witness during the Jack Owen Spillman III trial. Was he testifying for the defense or the prosecution?

Question: Do the authorities know for sure that Spillman acted alone?

An absolutely excellent question.

 

[thecrux]

i will speak with my brother he has dove for the spd before. im pretty sure they have to have a boat in the water with them for evidence collecting. as apposed to swimming to shore or walking down stream when evidence is found.

 

[thecrux]

I dont know about the spillman theory. But i do know their is alot of people you could tie to spillman. I had a friend who was married to his sister at the time. They questioned him and many others at the time. But who knows.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Originally Posted by humwhatsup
Spoke with a young gal today that "SAID" she go to school at the Hair Accademy, that MC attended and she told me that MC signed out for a 15 min. break... Has that been confirmed?

I thought it was because it was on one of the MISSING posters of Mackenzie.

On the front door of the hair academy, lettering indicates it closes (at least for hair appointments?) at 4:00 pm. Is it unusual to take a break so close (@ 3:00 pm) to closing?

If MC did indeed intend to return, I would expect the break was for to do something timely urgent (such as a brief meeting with someone who could be available only at that time?) and that she expected to not be long away? IF true, then might we expect the murder was premeditated?

 

[del rio]

I assumed LE placed the buoy as a diver's evidence marker, perhaps that's where weapons were recovered?

On the other hand, if placed there by a perp to mark the property where a boat should place MC, then I would conclude Cb was specifically targeted for a reason ... so, were there recent potential buyers looking at CB in the days / weeks before the MC incident? Nahhh .....

I believe it was an LE evidence marker, a 'crime scene' boundary marker or a county / jurisdictional marker.

I think it's unlikely that the buoy is an evidence marker, a crime scene boundry marker, or a county / jurisdictional marker.

The buoy was connected to shore by a fixed, permanent line. This line is anchored to a permanent and heavy duty "steak" in the ground that was put there for the purpose of anchoring a buoy years ago.

The buoy was over 100 yards out into the river, and I think it's unlikely evidence would be that far out in the river.

The buoy location was fairly distance from the county lines, i.e., about 100 yards up river from the Grant / Douglas county line.

So, I SPECULATE that the sole purpose of the buoy was to tie a boat to it.

 

[del rio]

i will speak with my brother he has dove for the spd before. im pretty sure they have to have a boat in the water with them for evidence collecting. as apposed to swimming to shore or walking down stream when evidence is found.

That's kind of what I suspect the buoy was for. That said, I don't understand why LE left it out there for so long.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

A second spent shotgun shell near duck blind.

Looks like the shells in the pix are of different brands and / or gauge. Also, the shell in the previous pic appears more 'weathered'.

Given those assumptions, I conclude the shells were left by different people on different days, or by the same person on different days, who switched shell brands, or at least switched gun / gauge.

 

[pufnstuf]

In front of other residences such a buoy may be normal. But there was definitely no buoys in front of the CB property when I was there in November (and, believe me, I would know because I spent a lot of time staring out at the river).

The house has been in foreclosure for several months, and a bank has owned it for over a year now. So, noone has been living in the house for a long time.

If the white buoy was not out there in November, it must of been placed there sometime between then and mid-February. But who would place a buoy in the river during the Fall and Winter? And why? It doesn't make sense. If someone lived at the house, and it was the spring or summer time, then I could understand.

Someone lived in the house over the Summer of 2009. He posted from the house, said that he was spending the summer there, and even posted photos.

 

[del rio]

del rio, Did you explore the clearing a bit more this time? Any new ideas as to what it was all about? Or new ideas about the location of body?

Yes, I finally got up the courage to explore "the clearing", the trails, and the brushy-area. Turns out there are two "clearings", not just one. Both are on the trail, and neither were there last November. I speculate LE did a lot of the clearing in their search for evidence. But I also speculate LE had a very good reason for doing so, e.g., something happened at one or both of those spots.

I SPUCULATE that the perps attempted to dismember MC's body at one of the clearings. Or, the perps at least spent a considerable amount of time in one or both of the clearings.

My THEORY is still that MC's body was placed and subsequently found between the duck blind and the stream.

What I don't understand is why the perps didn't hide MC's body in the brushy-area--which provided more than ample cover--but instead transported her body an additional 40 or 50 feet to the stream where there was less cover and a greater chance of being discovered. The perps must have had some purpose in mind for doing so.

 

[del rio]

Someone lived in the house over the Summer of 2009. He posted from the house, said that he was spending the summer there, and even posted photos.

In that case, that must be the gospel truth.

 

[del rio]

Looks like the shells in the pix are of different brands and / or gauge. Also, the shell in the previous pic appears more 'weathered'.

Given those assumptions, I conclude the shells were left by different people on different days, or by the same person on different days, who switched shell brands, or at least switched gun / gauge.

Yes, they are different brands and different shot sizes. Same gauge (12), though.

 

[pufnstuf]

In that case, that must be the gospel truth.

Considering his posts and photos were timestamped on FB, I'd say so.

 

[del rio]

Considering his posts and photos were timestamped on FB, I'd say so.

I wouldn't.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

I think it's unlikely that the buoy is an evidence marker, a crime scene boundry marker, or a county / jurisdictional marker.

The buoy was connected to shore by a fixed, permanent line. This line is anchored to a permanent and heavy duty "steak" in the ground that was put there for the purpose of anchoring a buoy years ago.

The buoy was over 100 yards out into the river, and I think it's unlikely evidence would be that far out in the river.

The buoy location was fairly distance from the county lines, i.e., about 100 yards up river from the Grant / Douglas county line.

So, I SPECULATE that the sole purpose of the buoy was to tie a boat to it.

thx, del rio ...

I saw that 'fixed permanent line' in one of your previous 'shore' pix. I also saw the 'stake' in one of your more recent pix ... and it seems the stake is positioned near where the stream exits the property?

The line did not appear in the recent pic. No line now, so .. no buoy. Ok.

Is it typical in the area to moore a boat far off-shore? I suppose theft isn't a concern.

As for evidence at 100 yards out being 'unlikely', perhaps but I believe it depends on how far out one could wade into the shallow section of river off-shore and how far one could toss an item from that off-shore position, or from a boat or ... inflatable 'raft' mattress ... for that matter.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Yes, they are different brands and different shot sizes. Same gauge (12), though.

del rio, do you recall shot type and size?

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Considering his posts and photos were timestamped on FB, I'd say so.

puf, curious .. is the individual seen in any of the photos? Did he post commentary unusually praising (beyond 'great vacation spot', i.e.: 'there's something about this property that just gives me a thrill') of that property?

 

[alt.theory]

del rio,

About the places which appear to have been cleared away, (likely by LE):

Were these places with enough cover/concealment from the above roadway or neighbors, etc, that someone wouldn't be afraid to do something there during daylight hours?

Did you see any blood, or evidence that blood was removed, (soil disturbed/removed)?

After being on that hillside and thinking about more then just carrying ducks back home this time, what do you think of this being a one-man job or one man with wheel-barrow/cart job? Is everything continually downhill?


Let's skip on over to ASSUMPTION land: I keep going back to LE's statement that it appeared the body was "placed" at that particular location. Was it the suspect trying to give MC's body a more upright position so she could look over the river? (Would definitely be a tip to LE that it could be someone who knew and cared for her if "placed" means something like that).

 

[thecrux]

ot puff you do some excellent sleuting on this thread. I just got caught up with the other thread in wa state great sleuthing their too.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

del rio,

About the places which appear to have been cleared away, (likely by LE):

Were these places with enough cover/concealment from the above roadway or neighbors, etc, that someone wouldn't be afraid to do something there during daylight hours?

Did you see any blood, or evidence that blood was removed, (soil disturbed/removed)?

After being on that hillside and thinking about more then just carrying ducks back home this time, what do you think of this being a one-man job or one man with wheel-barrow/cart job? Is everything continually downhill?


Let's skip on over to ASSUMPTION land: I keep going back to LE's statement that it appeared the body was "placed" at that particular location. Was it the suspect trying to give MC's body a more upright position so she could look over the river? (Would definitely be a tip to LE that it could be someone who knew and cared for her if "placed" means something like that).

'.. so she could look over the river ..' ?

ummm .. with a bag over her head???

 

[thecrux]

Other thoughts ... somewhat graphic:

LE, and I suppose most of us here, suspect the MC murder to be personal in nature.

Let's play it out at a high level ...

Perp's initial rage point: blunt-force, which might not have resulted in immediate death.

Perp proceeds to strangulation now that his victim is fallen and / or moderately incapacitated. Now it's truly hands-on personal.

Perp's satisfaction rises. But, strangulation-to-kill is difficult because MC is young, [assumed] strong and able to struggle to some degree.

Perp's rage intensifies because MC is making it more difficult for him to achieve to an ultimate satisfaction. Now it's not only hands-on. It is frustrating because of the struggle.

Perp proceeds to stab to achieve an ultimate satisfaction. A final rageful thrust, a pain-inflicting intrusion into the body of his victim, to ensure death.

I expect gaps in that overview but I assume the general progression is accurate. I previously posted evidence (other crime descriptions) that indicates that progression of attack is not uncommon ... blunt-force, strangulation, stabbing.

I think along the same lines. Except i think the stabbing would be before the strangling. I think it takes more skill to kill than any of us know. if he hits her first that didnt work he would then go for his Knife when that doesnt work he would go to the choke. I think the strangulation is the one thing we all know would work. Just my oppinion.

I feel horrible typing this post