West Valley police chief opens up about Susan Powell investigation

[mysteriew]

I admit I have never seen an LE admit to receiving donations on a major case and search. But I have suspected that it may have have happened in other cases.

Major searches not only take time, but they do take a lot of money. Salary for the LE who are searching, equipment rental, planes. We are talking major cash. Many of the officers out there were volunteers from other agencies. But many many of them were local officers, some of whom were probably on overtime during the searches. How many ATV's were out there? I doubt the local department owned that many so the others had to be rented or borrowed. And the equipment to transport them. Didn't they have horses too? And the search dogs. And they would have had to provide food and fluids for the searchers also. Experts like the anthropologists that came to the scene. And he may have included lab expenses for testing the evidence found at the scene. Expenses for this kind of search add up quickly.

I've seen TES say how much they have spent on searches and they can run $350,000 and up. And they use mostly volunteers for the searches. And often get donations/loans of equipment and support animals.

As far as transparency of the donations I doubt it. At least not until after the trial. I would imagine that most donors would want their donations kept private. But I can think of some who might have donated. Probably corporations, like maybe Susan's employer. How those donations are spent, that info may be available after the trial, but probably won't be published, you would have to go to the department and ask for an accounting.

But most likely none of this will be available during the active investigation. because for instance equipment rental could tell how they found things and how likely it was that they found something substantial. Info that they may want to protect and release according to their plan. Or keep until trial.

As far as the time. Three months I would say would be conservative. Each item has to be documented. Then grossly examined, then lab testing begins. Then all the testing has to be evaluated then compared to the case info, separated into which case it belongs to. All this while they are working their regular load of evidence from other cases.

 

[ransackmobilize]

Well, I know everyone knows that Josh did the "deed".. Again, I say avoid tunnel vision. It happens. It's been over 2 years, and he hasn't been arrested yet. There is a reason for this- they want a tight case against him- with no holes. With today's technology, he should have been found guilty by now. They are using technicalities to stir him up (mentioning he is part of the chilld *advertiser censored* investigation, when in fact his father was doing these creepy things). Someone who is computer savvy; it's not uncommon to keep a dozen or so old computers for parts, etc.. I hope none of you are put under such scrutiny if/when you will eventually be presumed innocent. Mob mentality scares me (with exception of Steve, he is a sick weirdo- of course this is old news). Yes, I know- "Just talk to Police if you have nothing to hide". Take a look at the West Memphis 3 three. History is prone to repeat itself.

I will speculate (as everyone else does)- that even if Josh still lived elsewhere away from Steven, they would try to find a reason to tear him up. Josh knows the suggestibility of his children when drilled repeatedly (ie. LE psychologists making "suggestions" to the kids). I'm sure some have seen a documentary demonstrating during an experiment very young children will say just about anything to keep their questioners interested. I don't recall exactly what program it was, but it was quite scary. The kids made up some awful things (when demonstrating positions with dolls). Older children are much more reliable.

Just keep an open mind is all I am trying to get across. Camping at midnight, "forgetting" what day it is, being his goofy self, avoidance of LE, smores (lol), wetspot on carpet, car alarm going off, etc.. Yes I know it mostly points to him- however I really think it was completely Steven hiring out some thugs due to being shot down by Susan.

 

[mysteriew]

Well, I know everyone knows that Josh did the "deed".. Again, I say avoid tunnel vision. It happens. It's been over 2 years, and he hasn't been arrested yet. There is a reason for this- they want a tight case against him- with no holes. With today's technology, he should have been found guilty by now. They are using technicalities to stir him up (mentioning he is part of the chilld *advertiser censored* investigation, when in fact his father was doing these creepy things). Someone who is computer savvy; it's not uncommon to keep a dozen or so old computers for parts, etc.. I hope none of you are put under such scrutiny if/when you will eventually be presumed innocent. Mob mentality scares me (with exception of Steve, he is a sick weirdo- of course this is old news). Yes, I know- "Just talk to Police if you have nothing to hide". Take a look at the West Memphis 3 three. History is prone to repeat itself.

I will speculate (as everyone else does)- that even if Josh still lived elsewhere away from Steven, they would try to find a reason to tear him up. Josh knows the suggestibility of his children when drilled repeatedly (ie. LE psychologists making "suggestions" to the kids). I'm sure some have seen a documentary demonstrating during an experiment very young children will say just about anything to keep their questioners interested. I don't recall exactly what program it was, but it was quite scary. The kids made up some awful things (when demonstrating positions with dolls). Older children are much more reliable.

Just keep an open mind is all I am trying to get across. Camping at midnight, "forgetting" what day it is, being his goofy self, avoidance of LE, smores (lol), wetspot on carpet, car alarm going off, etc.. Yes I know it mostly points to him- however I really think it was completely Steven hiring out some thugs due to being shot down by Susan.

I understand your concerns. And we don't really know what LE has about where SP was that night. But the thing is that even SP couldn't have done it without JP's cooperation. JP is the one who left at midnight, leaving the way clear. JP is the one who didn't come home the next day, until well after he was notified that LE was at his home. It is JP that is refusing to talk to LE. It is the evidence that is building that points to it being JP.

SP couldn't have done it without JP either being present or leaving the home so it could happen. So even if it happened the way you are suggesting, JP is still guilty IMO. Because if you conspire in a person's murder, you are still guilty.

Is SP or another household member involved? I think it is likely (either during or after the fact), though no evidence has gotten out about that. Yet. But there is a lot that LE knows that we don't.

For instance where was JP's cell phone pinging that night? Or was his phone even on? What calls did he make and to whom? Where were they? Where was he when he was notified that LE was at his home? Where did he go with the rental car? What has the kids said about their mother? So many more things we don't know. But LE does.

I think LE has a pretty good picture of who did it, who covered it up and exactly what happened. I think the only reason that JP has not been arrested yet is that LE wants to get their ducks all in a row, and make sure they have enough info put together that a jury can see and understand who did it. After all it isn't easy to prosecute a case where there is no body. And many prosecutor's won't even try it. But I think they will in this case.

 

[Sha]

Where did you hear this?

Hi. On the 1st page, 1st post, SuziQ's post, she provided a link to a news clip. It showed a courtroom and a guy in a suit wearing a red tie said one of the boys made that comment.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Regarding donations, it appears these may have been coming to WVC PD through the website http://susancoxpowellfoundation.org/Donations.aspx

The Susan Cox Powell Foundation has no affiliation with the Powell family

any change in that status will be provided here.



The Foundation is still awaiting IRS designation as a 501.3C non profit foundation for tax purposes.

Donations can be made through PayPal

It would seem this could have been done by now? Is this correct? Maybe the website hasn't been updated that it is an IRS approved non profit foundation.

Thanks. This is unfamiliar territory for me and I am just trying to understand these donations a bit better.

 

[laniefi]

Thank you! Computer forensics take time, and with 15 computers? Three months is not at all unrealistic.

I, for one, support and applaud these LE agencies.

And who wants a repeat of tHE Cacheback/Casey Anthoy chloroform search issues!

 

[ChasingMoxie]

It's not only perfectly acceptable, but also quite common for businesses and unaffiliated citizens to donate to a search and rescue/recovery effort. Why would this be strange only in this case?

Those commenting on the article are probably just the usual disgruntled municipal complaint squad that accompanies any article; if not, then they are the Powell camp's hired "blogosphere" support trolls. Dismissed.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

It's not only perfectly acceptable, but also quite common for businesses and unaffiliated citizens to donate to a search and rescue/recovery effort. Why would this be strange only in this case?

Those commenting on the article are probably just the usual disgruntled municipal complaint squad that accompanies any article; if not, then they are the Powell camp's hired "blogosphere" support trolls. Dismissed.

Thank you. I agree it's perfectly acceptable to solicit donations and I think it makes total sense to have done that.

What I am currently trying to understand is the non-profit status of the foundation. Is it common for a foundation of nearly 2 years not to have this status approved?

Also, is it normal for their website status to have this:

REGISTRY WHOIS FOR SUSANCOXPOWELLFOUNDATION.ORG
Domain Name: susancoxpowellfoundation.org
Updated: 1 second ago - Refresh

Registrar: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (R91-LROR)
Status: CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED, CLIENT RENEW PROHIBITED, CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED, CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED

Expiration Date: 2013-02-14 05:44:05
Creation Date: 2010-02-14 05:44:05
Last Update Date: 2010-10-30 17:06:44

http://www.who.is/whois/susancoxpowellfoundation.org/

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Regarding the deleted comments (at the other website with article), I think it is dangerous and not symbolic of living in a free country to censor such communication. What is troubling is that they were approved in the first place, someone later objects, and they are taken down.

 

[HotLavaJavas]

Thank you. I agree it's perfectly acceptable to solicit donations and I think it makes total sense to have done that.

What I am currently trying to understand is the non-profit status of the foundation. Is it common for a foundation of nearly 2 years not to have this status approved?

Also, is it normal for their website status to have this:

REGISTRY WHOIS FOR SUSANCOXPOWELLFOUNDATION.ORG
Domain Name: susancoxpowellfoundation.org
Updated: 1 second ago - Refresh

Registrar: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (R91-LROR)
Status: CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED, CLIENT RENEW PROHIBITED, CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED, CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED

Expiration Date: 2013-02-14 05:44:05
Creation Date: 2010-02-14 05:44:05
Last Update Date: 2010-10-30 17:06:44

http://www.who.is/whois/susancoxpowellfoundation.org/

I don't know about the IRS part, but yes that is very common for domain names.

 

[laniefi]

Thank you. I agree it's perfectly acceptable to solicit donations and I think it makes total sense to have done that.

What I am currently trying to understand is the non-profit status of the foundation. Is it common for a foundation of nearly 2 years not to have this status approved?

Also, is it normal for their website status to have this:

REGISTRY WHOIS FOR SUSANCOXPOWELLFOUNDATION.ORG
Domain Name: susancoxpowellfoundation.org
Updated: 1 second ago - Refresh

Registrar: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (R91-LROR)
Status: CLIENT DELETE PROHIBITED, CLIENT RENEW PROHIBITED, CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED, CLIENT UPDATE PROHIBITED

Expiration Date: 2013-02-14 05:44:05
Creation Date: 2010-02-14 05:44:05
Last Update Date: 2010-10-30 17:06:44

http://www.who.is/whois/susancoxpowellfoundation.org/

HS - Completely normal. This relates to the website being hosted on GoDaddy's web servers. The "client" in this case is the indiviual who put up the website, and GoDaddy has physical possession of the website (web server) so the client does not have control of the website. I hope that made sense!

 

[ransackmobilize]

I understand your concerns. And we don't really know what LE has about where SP was that night. But the thing is that even SP couldn't have done it without JP's cooperation. JP is the one who left at midnight, leaving the way clear. JP is the one who didn't come home the next day, until well after he was notified that LE was at his home. It is JP that is refusing to talk to LE. It is the evidence that is building that points to it being JP.

SP couldn't have done it without JP either being present or leaving the home so it could happen. So even if it happened the way you are suggesting, JP is still guilty IMO. Because if you conspire in a person's murder, you are still guilty.

Is SP or another household member involved? I think it is likely (either during or after the fact), though no evidence has gotten out about that. Yet. But there is a lot that LE knows that we don't.

For instance where was JP's cell phone pinging that night? Or was his phone even on? What calls did he make and to whom? Where were they? Where was he when he was notified that LE was at his home? Where did he go with the rental car? What has the kids said about their mother? So many more things we don't know. But LE does.

I think LE has a pretty good picture of who did it, who covered it up and exactly what happened. I think the only reason that JP has not been arrested yet is that LE wants to get their ducks all in a row, and make sure they have enough info put together that a jury can see and understand who did it. After all it isn't easy to prosecute a case where there is no body. And many prosecutor's won't even try it. But I think they will in this case.

I agree.. They must know a lot more than they lead on. Taking the kids was a way to prevent him from fleeing, or holding them hostage when the time comes to arrest him. I'm anxiously awaiting when they find out exactly what happened to Susan- and it should be a very interesting Dateline Mystery (which will need to be broken up into 4- 2 hour blocks due to all the weird twists in this case).

It's difficult to take a step back and look at things completely differently than what you want to believe. My gut feeling is that Steve told Josh lies that Susan slept with him, and convinced him to drug her- so Steve could drive out and do what ever he needed to do. The wet spot of course was most likely vomit. Hopefully they have traces of a drug/poison in that sampling. So when Josh says "I didn't kill her", or to Peterson "It's not like I stabbed her", in his mind he's telling the truth. Also when he mentioned he was "in over his head" that to me points that Steven meant to drug her, have his way and do God knows what- however not kill Susan.. Josh was "brainwashed" and didn't mean for her to die through Steve's scheme. My other thought is that Steve hired some people to do the dirty work, after Josh spiked her pancakes.

Or.. The Peterson neighbor pulled something, that's why he was so outspoken right away- trying to divert the attention away from himself. The midnight camping trip still doesn't add up in this scenario however.

When I first saw this story on CNN, I thought to myself "How can such a dweeb land such a pretty woman".

 

[DomCasual]

Well, I know everyone knows that Josh did the "deed".. Again, I say avoid tunnel vision. It happens. It's been over 2 years, and he hasn't been arrested yet. There is a reason for this- they want a tight case against him- with no holes. With today's technology, he should have been found guilty by now. They are using technicalities to stir him up (mentioning he is part of the chilld *advertiser censored* investigation, when in fact his father was doing these creepy things). Someone who is computer savvy; it's not uncommon to keep a dozen or so old computers for parts, etc.. I hope none of you are put under such scrutiny if/when you will eventually be presumed innocent. Mob mentality scares me (with exception of Steve, he is a sick weirdo- of course this is old news). Yes, I know- "Just talk to Police if you have nothing to hide". Take a look at the West Memphis 3 three. History is prone to repeat itself.

I will speculate (as everyone else does)- that even if Josh still lived elsewhere away from Steven, they would try to find a reason to tear him up. Josh knows the suggestibility of his children when drilled repeatedly (ie. LE psychologists making "suggestions" to the kids). I'm sure some have seen a documentary demonstrating during an experiment very young children will say just about anything to keep their questioners interested. I don't recall exactly what program it was, but it was quite scary. The kids made up some awful things (when demonstrating positions with dolls). Older children are much more reliable.

Just keep an open mind is all I am trying to get across. Camping at midnight, "forgetting" what day it is, being his goofy self, avoidance of LE, smores (lol), wetspot on carpet, car alarm going off, etc.. Yes I know it mostly points to him- however I really think it was completely Steven hiring out some thugs due to being shot down by Susan.

Okay, I am going to ask you the same questions I asked the other day:

1) Josh's dad has said he had a sexual relationship with Susan. Why hasn't Josh been more vocal about that? The relationship between Josh and his dad seems good. What's the deal? I'm trying to understand. I don't really care who it was. I think I would tend to want to defend my wife's honor, if someone said/did those things.People say that Susan was complaining about that for some time. Did Josh ever address it with Steve?

2) You said that we don't understand who "wore the pants" in Josh and Susan's marriage. You implied that Josh was more of a victim of Susan's violence and moods than anything. Okay. What about the reports that:

A) Josh made Susan keep a garden;
B) Josh didn't let Susan use the family car - even to the point of making her ride her bike to work;
C) Josh didn't let Susan have free access to the family's finances - taking away debit cards, changing PINs, etc;
D) Josh never consistently contributed to the family's income?

Are those things just not true?

3) You said that there are things we don't know about the family dynamics - implying that if we did know these things, we would understand Josh's position better. This is the one that really confuses me. Josh and Steve were willing to disclose private, embarrassing information about Susan (publishing her journals, Steve saying she came on to him, etc). Are you saying that despite that, there is some information that could help exonerate him - details they've somehow held back? For what reason? They certainly don't seem to be chivalrous or noble, right? I mean, they've speculated that this woman deserted her children, basically framed her children's father/sole caregiver by staying underground, and did all this for a sexual liaison with Steven Koecher. Those are about the most despicable things you could say about a mother. What could they possibly be holding back?

You seem to avoid these questions, and speak only in generalities. You seem to know at least Josh. Help him! He's considered a devil here, and in the public, in general. What are we missing?

 

[gwenabob]

Or.. The Peterson neighbor pulled something, that's why he was so outspoken right away- trying to divert the attention away from himself. The midnight camping trip still doesn't add up in this scenario however.

When I first saw this story on CNN, I thought to myself "How can such a dweeb land such a pretty woman".

If the neighbor did something, why would he clean the carpets before he left? And how did he get Susan out of the house without being seen? And how did he lock the door behind him? I think the neighbor was outspoken right away because he was incensed at what he believed Josh did and wanted justice for his friend Susan and the boys.

 

[DomCasual]

When I first saw this story on CNN, I thought to myself "How can such a dweeb land such a pretty woman".

Okay, I'm totally confused. Here are a few of your quotes from the few posts you've made here:

First off; don't assume someone can poison someone just because "they look like someone who could do that". No wonder the guy went into hiding (after 3 police interviews). Any lawyer worth his money will always tell his client to not talk to police, especially if you are suspect #1 and they are grasping at straws. Being popular with public opinion is the least of Josh's worries. He's worried about his boys, angry/worried/confused regarding his wife, and of course the mob mentality which plagues him every day which he fears may turn into violence against him or his family. Look at the Casey Anthony trial- people threatening her family. Everyone reacts differently- and with the advent of the internet; any little detail can become misconstrued, distorted (in regards to his demeanor, affect, etc.). It's great to have forum discussion, but sad people have tunnel vision.


People need to remember the following quote from Kiirsi's blog:

"Here, once and for all is the short answer to those questions: You don’t know all the details here. There are many, many details of Susan’s background/relationship with Josh/etc. that have NOT been made public. And you WILL NOT hear them from me, either. My whole goal, focus and priority here is to find Susan. This includes not telling the world things the police want kept inside the investigation. "

And no; this just isn't related to Steve's antics.

Thank you, It's good to keep all possibilites open. People will never know the true family dynamics within that household. You can only wonder who wore the pants. Josh wouldn't lift a hand to his wife- only the silent treatment when being struck or yelled at- one can imagine.

I hope they find her.

It's for halloween. Steven made this to scare the kids when opened the door- it dropped down (the "homer" figure was in the noose).

To think of him passing out candy to kids is scarier than this contraption.

Yes it looks horrible and scary- but it's not the "exercise handle" that Josh thinks, that was probably in their basement to tie inside of a plate and do bicep curls with. They don't want his brother lifting weights too far up since he would crush his toes.

BBM

Wouldn't these things indicate that you know Josh? Now, you are saying that instead of a loving father trying to look out for his sons, and sad about his wife, that he's someone who was duped by his sadistic father into drugging his wife for sex?

Throw in the thing about you taking your moniker from verbs on Steve Powell's website about Susan, and - well, like I said, I'm confused.

What's your deal?

 

[ransackmobilize]

Okay, I am going to ask you the same questions I asked the other day:

1) Josh's dad has said he had a sexual relationship with Susan. Why hasn't Josh been more vocal about that? The relationship between Josh and his dad seems good. What's the deal? I'm trying to understand. I don't really care who it was. I think I would tend to want to defend my wife's honor, if someone said/did those things.People say that Susan was complaining about that for some time. Did Josh ever address it with Steve?

2) You said that we don't understand who "wore the pants" in Josh and Susan's marriage. You implied that Josh was more of a victim of Susan's violence and moods than anything. Okay. What about the reports that:

A) Josh made Susan keep a garden;
B) Josh didn't let Susan use the family car - even to the point of making her ride her bike to work;
C) Josh didn't let Susan have free access to the family's finances - taking away debit cards, changing PINs, etc;
D) Josh never consistently contributed to the family's income?

Are those things just not true?

3) You said that there are things we don't know about the family dynamics - implying that if we did know these things, we would understand Josh's position better. This is the one that really confuses me. Josh and Steve were willing to disclose private, embarrassing information about Susan (publishing her journals, Steve saying she came on to him, etc). Are you saying that despite that, there is some information that could help exonerate him - details they've somehow held back? For what reason? They certainly don't seem to be chivalrous or noble, right? I mean, they've speculated that this woman deserted her children, basically framed her children's father/sole caregiver by staying underground, and did all this for a sexual liaison with Steven Koecher. Those are about the most despicable things you could say about a mother. What could they possibly be holding back?

You seem to avoid these questions, and speak only in generalities. You seem to know at least Josh. Help him! He's considered a devil here, and in the public, in general. What are we missing?

I'm setting the tone for people to think. What if scenarios. No I don't know Josh, nor anyone related to that family. There are no hidden/cryptic meanings. This story has caught my attention from the start. From the sounds of it- (upon one of many articles I came across); it seems Susan wore the financial pants. And of course Josh stating she had unresolved issues psychologically speaking. He (Josh) did state she walked outside in her underwear, became deranged at one point, etc. Do I think that is true? I don't know. However just reading articles I can't come to any solid conclusion based on "he says, she says". The dynamics within that family from media reports sounds anything but normal. As far as the bicycle to work, car, etc.. I don't recall seeing that. I do remember articles pertaining to him attempting to control her finances.

A interesting point is people coming out stating that Josh is a non-stop chatterbox, and now he seems quite the opposite. If he was that opinionated, pretentious, boisterous what-have-you; that is telling in itself. Looking at his interviews now, I see a lost and upset husband. I'd probably act like him if I were in his situation with the media hounding me, and fingers pointed in my direction. However I'd talk to police regardless of being a suspect, of course with an attorney.

 

[ransackmobilize]

Okay, I'm totally confused. Here are a few of your quotes from the few posts you've made here:







BBM

Wouldn't these things indicate that you know Josh? Now, you are saying that instead of a loving father trying to look out for his sons, and sad about his wife, that he's someone who was duped by his sadistic father into drugging his wife for sex?

Throw in the thing about you taking your moniker from verbs on Steve Powell's website about Susan, and - well, like I said, I'm confused.

What's your deal?

Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate to get people thinking. It worked.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Deleted comments are now back up. Not sure what happened, but they are there now.

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=17441820&comments=true

 

[LambChop]

I'm setting the tone for people to think. What if scenarios. No I don't know Josh, nor anyone related to that family. There are no hidden/cryptic meanings. This story has caught my attention from the start. From the sounds of it- (upon one of many articles I came across); it seems Susan wore the financial pants. And of course Josh stating she had unresolved issues psychologically speaking. He (Josh) did state she walked outside in her underwear, became deranged at one point, etc. Do I think that is true? I don't know. However just reading articles I can't come to any solid conclusion based on "he says, she says". The dynamics within that family from media reports sounds anything but normal. As far as the bicycle to work, car, etc.. I don't recall seeing that. I do remember articles pertaining to him attempting to control her finances.

A interesting point is people coming out stating that Josh is a non-stop chatterbox, and now he seems quite the opposite. If he was that opinionated, pretentious, boisterous what-have-you; that is telling in itself. Looking at his interviews now, I see a lost and upset husband. I'd probably act like him if I were in his situation with the media hounding me, and fingers pointed in my direction. However I'd talk to police with regardless of being a suspect, of course with an attorney.

I have not been following this case but to me he looks and sounds as if he is terrified as to what his boys will say when not in his presence. jmo

 

[waltzingmatilda]

I agree.. They must know a lot more than they lead on. Taking the kids was a way to prevent him from fleeing, or holding them hostage when the time comes to arrest him. I'm anxiously awaiting when they find out exactly what happened to Susan- and it should be a very interesting Dateline Mystery (which will need to be broken up into 4- 2 hour blocks due to all the weird twists in this case).

It's difficult to take a step back and look at things completely differently than what you want to believe. My gut feeling is that Steve told Josh lies that Susan slept with him, and convinced him to drug her- so Steve could drive out and do what ever he needed to do. The wet spot of course was most likely vomit. Hopefully they have traces of a drug/poison in that sampling. So when Josh says "I didn't kill her", or to Peterson "It's not like I stabbed her", in his mind he's telling the truth. Also when he mentioned he was "in over his head" that to me points that Steven meant to drug her, have his way and do God knows what- however not kill Susan.. Josh was "brainwashed" and didn't mean for her to die through Steve's scheme. My other thought is that Steve hired some people to do the dirty work, after Josh spiked her pancakes.

Or.. The Peterson neighbor pulled something, that's why he was so outspoken right away- trying to divert the attention away from himself. The midnight camping trip still doesn't add up in this scenario however.

When I first saw this story on CNN, I thought to myself "How can such a dweeb land such a pretty woman".

ransack, Imo, the neighbors were only concerned with Susan's well being....as well as trying to be a good friend to Josh. Sometimes there are things that are to blatant to ignore, tho. Especially when many people voice the same concerns and I have no doubt that LE has those E-mails to Susan's friends and her journal from work.

I agree that SP is very possibly a POI in Susan's disappearance. But I am wondering if you have any opinion about Alina possibly being involved? Let's face it...there is a POSSIBILITY that A <mod snip> has been groomed from a very young age as she is very loyal to SP. I DO wonder if she knew about SP's obsession with Susan and felt her position as matriarch of the Powell compound was threatened. As a possible subservient keeper of the household there is no telling what she saw or knew or was told by SP. Thanks for your insight as you seem to know alot about the P family.

Just trying to think outside the box....however, I feel I am reaching a bit here as Josh's story is ludricrous, IMO so he is my #1 suspect in Susan's disappearance at this time.

wm

wm