Where Do You Think Teresa Halbach was Killed?

[missy1974]

It is in the CASO reports as to who else was there at the time. I know you said you were going "elsewhere" to look for snippets, but you really should read them yourself. Omitting the facts of who else was there leads people to believe that a MCSO found them all by himself. This was not the case.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

I'm not sure what you are talking about, I'm a bit confused. Not sure, but if you think that I get my facts from anywhere other than the documents you are mistaken. Any 'snippets' I take are from the documents on www.stevenaverycase.org.

They didn't even list that Ryan was there the first night, they just said her parents, her roommate Scott, and some of their mutual friends LOL it was Ryan who placed himself there with his testimony otherwise we would have no idea who was there that first night, and I'm still not sure we know who was there?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I agree, a lot of that happens here...from both sides. Lets be fair now. Would you like me to give you post #s of inflammatory comments directed at me? You seemed to have missed those.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Well, my apologies to you, it is never my intention to make "inflammatory comments" directed at anyone.

 

[missy1974]

Seriously, no prejudice, read through the CASO reports. We also don't have the reports from the DCI which would contain Sturdivants (Arson Squad) reports.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

You think I haven't read them? Ok then.

And yep, the DCI reports were requested over a month ago by SkippTopp from reddit, and he doesn't know if or when they will be released, and what they will give him, he has requested everything from lab reports to Eisenberg's reports IIRC. Sturdivant (former Arson Bureau, current Narcotics Bureau) will surely go into great detail about how he gridded the pit and called in an anthropologist and coroner and took pictures before disturbing the scene..... oh wait... not they won't.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

You specifically said:

The remains, they were not found by MCSD, they were found by a member of the arson squad. He was the only one who realised what they were. That goes to show how badly they were burned.


Which is not according to the facts as they were presented in the reports and in the trial (choose to believe it or not). According to Jost, he thought it was a vertebrae bone and he may have been right, we won't know because there is not picture of the bone that he found, and no coroner or forensic anthropologist was called in, it was shovelled into a pail and hauled off to the crime lab according to the CASO report.

No matter what side of the fence any of us are on, misstating the facts does everyone a disservice IMO Whether the facts support the theories that we have or if maybe we just don't believe the facts are correct as they were presented to us, they are the facts that we are all working with. I have noticed that we have some new posters that haven't been here for months like some of us, and I can only imagine that looking at some of these threads must seem overwhelming when trying to find out more information. Let's help them all with the 'facts', and let them decide. I don't have a horse in this race, if SA is exonerated or if he is guilty, my life will continue as it did before (with a little more awareness about the system and the issues within it). JMO

:cheers::goodpost::ditto::welcome2:

 

[Limaes]

I'm not sure what you are talking about, I'm a bit confused. Not sure, but if you think that I get my facts from anywhere other than the documents you are mistaken. Any 'snippets' I take are from the documents on www.stevenaverycase.org.

They didn't even list that Ryan was there the first night, they just said her parents, her roommate Scott, and some of their mutual friends LOL it was Ryan who placed himself there with his testimony otherwise we would have no idea who was there that first night, and I'm still not sure we know who was there?

Not so fast. You used his trial testimony to accuse him of hiding their relationship . What does that have to do with him placing himself there?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

uhmmm mats are typically made of carpet and hard rubber/plastic underneath to prevent moisture/dirt from going through and protecting the carpet underneath, at least they are in most vehicles I have seen.

[video=youtube;j92xU4r_w10]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j92xU4r_w10[/video] at about 3:35ish of the video it shows how the back seats go down (BCA... you were asking about the latch... they show it in this video!) and then it goes to the cargo area, it has a mat in there, no way of knowing if it is a factory one or if it was replaced at some point, but it's a good overview of what it would look like.... and we can see that the mat goes under those seats!

Your distaste for reddit is surprising considering it is because of reddit that we have all the documents that we have. JMO

Thanks Missy! Ok, so my old 2000 4-Runner was a little different. The latch to make the seats go down was at the top of the seat--not a pull string like this one. Thanks for sharing.

 

[missy1974]

Thanks Missy! Ok, so my old 2000 4-Runner was a little different. The latch to make the seats go down was at the top of the seat--not a pull string like this one. Thanks for sharing.

No problem... I was looking for the mat and remembered your comment about the latch..... I thought the latch was near the floor and was more of a handle, so thought I would share

 

[Limaes]

uhmmm mats are typically made of carpet and hard rubber/plastic underneath to prevent moisture/dirt from going through and protecting the carpet underneath, at least they are in most vehicles I have seen.

[video=youtube;j92xU4r_w10]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j92xU4r_w10[/video] at about 3:35ish of the video it shows how the back seats go down (BCA... you were asking about the latch... they show it in this video!) and then it goes to the cargo area, it has a mat in there, no way of knowing if it is a factory one or if it was replaced at some point, but it's a good overview of what it would look like.... and we can see that the mat goes under those seats!

Your distaste for reddit is surprising considering it is because of reddit that we have all the documents that we have. JMO

LOL...there could have been 10 mats made out of rubber, plastic, or solid steel. The blood coming from at least two gunshot wounds in her head would have seeped straight between the mat and the side panel. The imprint of her bloodied hair tells exactly how she was laid in there. The lack of blood flow down onto the carpet tells that she was wrapped in something.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Yes...lets continue...with facts rather than his memory during the trial.

"He told me he has known TERESA since they were freshmen in high school and they had dated on and off for approximately five years during that time"

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

IMO, I would rather rely on testimony than the CASO reports. I've read all 1116 pages and I've found areas where it is clear the report was not written on the day it states "date of Activity". Actually, I've looked at the date of activity and then read down where it states a date later than the day of activity and said to myself what the hey. I'll try to find an example.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Ok, here is an example. On page 17 and 18 of the CASO reports, the date of activity is 11/3/05, but then on page 18 it references "it should be noted that this voice mail message or answering machine message was subsequently copied by Det. Jacobs on Sunday, 11/6/05" Clearly, something that references Sunday 11/6/05, could not have occurred on 11/3/05.

With that said, it could very well have been written on a later date, when Dedering had more information. It is difficult to say for sure whether that information was given that night or on a subsequent date and included in the CASO from memory.

 

[Limaes]

IMO, I would rather rely on testimony than the CASO reports. I've read all 1116 pages and I've found areas where it is clear the report was not written on the day it states "date of Activity". Actually, I've looked at the date of activity and then read down where it states a date later than the day of activity and said to myself what the hey. I'll try to find an example.

I think I have proven that RH was upfront about his relationship with Teresa. If anyone wants to twist that proof, then that is up to them. It is time these innocent people were left alone. They feel her loss much greater than any internet sleuther hiding behind screen names to point their fingers. This is real life for them.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

Limaes... you realize that is the first night they came out and it was 2 1/2 weeks ago? I gave up on about page 85 that first night and jumped to page numbers of what was reported to be information I had been waiting on.

I'm insulted that you think I have not read them at this point.

 

[missy1974]

Ok, here is an example. On page 17 and 18 of the CASO reports, the date of activity is 11/3/05, but then on page 18 it references "it should be noted that this voice mail message or answering machine message was subsequently copied by Det. Jacobs on Sunday, 11/6/05" Clearly, something that references Sunday 11/6/05, could not have occurred on 11/3/05.

With that said, it could very well have been written on a later date, when Dedering had more information. It is difficult to say for sure whether that information was given that night or on a subsequent date and included in the CASO from memory.

Unfortunately with those reports, I have found that you have to use a bit of common sense, there are times they were investigating things in early 2005 if we went by the dates.... which would be months before she was even killed. They all needed a good lesson on taking good notes ;-)

I could see the year being mixed up in January/February... who doesn't do that? but I am surprised that they were never fixed to reflect the proper years.

 

[Limaes]

Ok, here is an example. On page 17 and 18 of the CASO reports, the date of activity is 11/3/05, but then on page 18 it references "it should be noted that this voice mail message or answering machine message was subsequently copied by Det. Jacobs on Sunday, 11/6/05" Clearly, something that references Sunday 11/6/05, could not have occurred on 11/3/05.

With that said, it could very well have been written on a later date, when Dedering had more information. It is difficult to say for sure whether that information was given that night or on a subsequent date and included in the CASO from memory.

It has to say the 3rd because that is when the actual event occured. That is, he listened to the voice mail on the 3rd.

They don't have to write the report on that same day, however, he would have made contemporaneous notes at the time.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Unfortunately with those reports, I have found that you have to use a bit of common sense, there are times they were investigating things in early 2005 if we went by the dates.... which would be months before she was even killed. They all needed a good lesson on taking good notes ;-)

I could see the year being mixed up in January/February... who doesn't do that? but I am surprised that they were never fixed to reflect the proper years.

I think there are dates that are referenced in 2004--not sure if that is what you were referring to....yeah, throughout there are reports correcting things, but I don't remember any correcting the dates.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

It has to say the 3rd because that is when the actual event occured. That is, he listened to the voice mail on the 3rd.

They don't have to write the report on that same day, however, he would have made contemporaneous notes at the time.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Ok, clearly this one on 03/01/07 references a conversation that took place a month before (2/1/07) but was only noted a month later. So, it is possible Dedering didn't know on the 1st day he interviewed RH and could have included that information obtained at a later date when he wrote up his report.

Hey, I have a better idea. Why don't you give Dedring a call or email and ask him if he knew that info on the 1st day he interviewed RH or at a subsequent date. Then you can report back to us with that clarification. Then we don't have to debate it anymore.

 

[missy1974]

Here is one for you BCA... http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=420



This would be a bombshell if we were to believe this date, no? February 18th, 2005, 8 months before TH went missing and Wiegert is asking about any female deceased relatives. Like I said... a bit of common sense is definitely useful while reading these LOL

 

[dexter75]

I have read every post here regarding SA and this case. Every link, every video, every podcast.

I have also read the CASO & transcripts.

No where have I seen at ALL where FACTS have been omitted where Missy is concerned.

It is in the CASO reports as to who else was there at the time. I know you said you were going "elsewhere" to look for snippets, but you really should read them yourself. Omitting the facts of who else was there leads people to believe that a MCSO found them all by himself. This was not the case.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Limaes]

I have read every post here regarding SA and this case. Every link, every video, every podcast.

I have also read the CASO & transcripts.

No where have I seen at ALL where FACTS have been omitted where Missy is concerned.

Then who was the CASO that was also involved with the discovery of the bones? That part keeps being left out.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Could you link us to the page/line in the CASO " you " are seeing different Limaes?
The way others do, ( page/line ) when stating something as fact. Because I have read them, and others have read them. And you are telling us repeatedly to read them and we are mistaken.

Seriously, no prejudice, read through the CASO reports. We also don't have the reports from the DCI which would contain Sturdivants (Arson Squad) reports.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk