AZ AZ - Adrienne Salinas, 19, Tempe, 15 Jun 2013 - #8

  • #281
Ok, FWIW, last night I meditated for an hour on the events of the night in question before falling asleep. I put myself in Adrienne's place and really tried to reenact the timeline, which has always been very hazy to me. I have always thought there are many possibilities in this case as to the person(s) responsible, everything from someone(s) close to her, to someone at the party, to George, to a random perp, (and everything in between).

Last night I was able to really recreate in my mind the legitimacy / possibility of a cover up by someone(s) close to her. I wondered if there might have been a struggle in the car (hence the crash)...

I guess what I'm saying is that I am not ruling out anyone close to her, or anyone at the party, and I think the possibility of a cover up is still on the table. JMO.

I wonder, though, if someone else called the cab pretending to be her, would they not be afraid to do this for fear that the calls coming in may be recorded and later crosschecked to reveal that it is in fact not her voice? Or, they didn't think about this, or they didn't think this was likely...

IMO, just because LE does not officially name someone as a suspect or POI, it does not mean that they do not have their eyes on them. For instance, look at Mark Redwine. New search warrant issued, yet no arrest.

I know I'm all over the place in this case, that every day I lean toward a different theory. Today my hinky meter is up on those known to her.

*edit: I know someone(s) is not a word, lol.

Totally agree.
Plus the timeline is really hazy and it shouldn't be.
Why is it so hazy?
Why can't people get their stories straight?
Why can't LE line up the stories with people's cell phones (that are set to the correct time zones) and also any video filmage and the 911 calls?
It should be fairly easy to get a decent timeline *but* it has not been.

Why????
 
  • #282
LE may have a much cleaner and clearer timeline by now, than we know about. The police report does not include supplementary reports, follow-up interviews, not to mention correction of possible typos. They may have clarified a lot of the issues many people are having problems with.

I assume the roommates were probably not questioned until Sunday evening, or so, at the earliest, if Adrienne was reported missing on Sunday afternoon. Probably many of the partygoers were not interviewed until much later, and had already had another party since the Friday/Saturday one and her roommates most likely assumed she was at BF's or at her family home. I am surprised they got anything sensible at all out of them. JMO
 
  • #283
:scared: :scared: :scared:
This case has me spinning so much I have to re-read my comments at least twice to make sure I didn't negate the entire topic sentence with a rebuttal at the conclusion!!!!! Maybe I should put "Never mind" on my "IMO, OMO, MOO, etc., etc." sig line. :floorlaugh:

OMG! I know the feeling.Pair that with my not being able to get it out of my brain fast enough because my typing SUCKS and I feel like I could explode!!!! LOL!
 
  • #284
I agree that if LE had a strong suspect and evidence, finding Adrienne should have been the catalyst for an arrest.

We have a few other cases with people who seem to be POI's and once the victims bodies were found, many expected an arrest, but it hasn't happened, although in at least one of those cases, LE has been back to search the home of the possible POI.

So finding the body is not always enough; they have to have enough evidence already and if they do, they seem to be proceeding without the body more and more often.

JMO they do not have a solid suspect with evidence.
 
  • #285
Totally agree.
Plus the timeline is really hazy and it shouldn't be.
Why is it so hazy?
Why can't people get their stories straight?
Why can't LE line up the stories with people's cell phones (that are set to the correct time zones) and also any video filmage and the 911 calls?
It should be fairly easy to get a decent timeline *but* it has not been.

Why????

Great point, Honey! I'm so glad you mentioned this, because this is something I too was pondering last night----if it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense, right?! That in itself is an indication of something possible hinky! If its so hard to make the pieces fit, then one of the pieces of the puzzle might not belong there in the first place!!
 
  • #286
So she must have been buried (thus no vultures/buzzards yet). But she was found by a land owner because he noticed vultures around a particular area on his property. Therefore, her body had been preserved to a certain extent until it was found. If TOD was within 24 hours of her disappearance, isn't it rather incredible anything was left that interested vultures? Not to mention that at least a week had gone by since the wash/flood until she was found on August 6. How, pray tell, was there anything left on her body that would interest vultures? A scientist will know the answer or the possibilities as to how or why this occurred. Like you say, the body follows a natural progression of breaking down after we die. The elements/conditions either speed up or slow down the process. Heat speeds up the process. The desert is hot. When and where was she placed and under what conditions?

I'm curious if the autopsy revealed time of death. Extensive testing involving bone marrow is probably being conducted to reveal more information.

Brought over what I posted on the previous thread:


*Somewhat Graphic*

That was in response to GGE's thought that maybe the guys in the Blazer/Bronco were dumping the remains when they got stuck in the flood. That thought hit some of us but just momentarily.
You have to understand the desert, the climate changes, the terrain in that area, soil composition, and what it does to a body.
The area around there is rocky, except in the dried out washes. Those are sand, and the sand can go down MANY feet. It's the easiest and fastest place to dig.
Burying remains in the sand, in June, the hottest and driest month in Arizona, (temps upwards of 120 degrees in hot years, 7-12% humidity) causes the body to mummify. It's like drying flowers. The odor is not pungent after rising to the surface through several feet of sand.
Monsoon season "officially" starts mid June by the weather people's standard, but if you've lived here for a few years, it's pretty standard for the storms to start around the 4th of July.
Now, throw in a bigger than normal flash flood running down Weeks wash, the sand is going to shift, and the partially mummified remains are going to move up to the surface. The lungs and other parts of the body still have captured gases that make it buoyant and sand is heavier.
Surface water is usually far calmer than the water below. Flash floods have an undercurrent that is faster than the surface water. That's why it's pretty stupid to stand in a flash flood. 1. The undertow, and 2. You don't have a clue about what may be 6 inches below the surface, scorpions, snakes, garbage, uprooted vegetation....
More than likely, the remains were unearthed during this flood. Because we can assume it was in a partially mummified state, re-hydration would have taken longer, bacteria growth causing an odor would have taken longer, that in turn would attract raptors and predators to the remains. If left untouched, it would take even longer for an apparent odor to be noticed by human beings.

Not to be crude, but it's the difference between beef jerky and a raw steak. Put a steak several feet down in the sand of a wash in June in Arizona, it becomes the consistency of beef jerky after a few weeks. Add water and the beef jerky is going to float up through the sand, with or without a current. It might take a week or more, with high humidity and temps to cause bacteria to develop, which causes an odor.
It does NOT work the same in other areas, like Florida, which has a higher humidity all through the summer....and I will let you get your own graphic on that.
 
  • #287
If you knew that the police was going to question you about what happened would you talk to your friends about what happened and when beforehand?

You may agree on the time that you saw someone and both tell the police the same thing. MOO.

Been gone all day. Sorry. Just starting to read.

Yes, I guess I would talk to my friends about the times something happened. Of course, if they were as blitzed as I would have been, then the time in all questimate and can't be set in stone at all. It's more of the blind leading the blind. They really wouldn't know if it was 2:30 and 5:am. FWIW.
 
  • #288
I agree that if LE had a strong suspect and evidence, finding Adrienne should have been the catalyst for an arrest.

Not necessarily. Regardless of their circumstantial evidence (i.e. time discrepancies, stories not adding up, and so forth), they'll still need proof of a crime. That proof can come one of two ways, either by a forensic autopsy concluding cause of death as a homicide, or absent that, a preponderance of circumstances that make it probable that she was the victim of a homicide (being found concealed out in the middle of the desert 30 miles away from her last known location being one of those circumstances). Both of those situations would require a significant amount of work to piece together before an arrest could be made. They could pretty much already know what happened and who probably did it, but making an arrest without all of their ducks in a row could end up being problematic for a successful prosecution.

By the way, I have a feeling that the DA is calling the shots more than LE at this point. Even if LE wanted to make arrest as soon as she was found, the DA probably overrode that decision until more evidence can be obtained. Last thing a DA wants is a perp walking because he didn't have enough evidence to compel a judge to hold charges over.

Also, another reason an arrest has not been made yet could be because the case is in the hands of a grand jury. AZ law could require a GJ in a capital or 1st degree case, and if so they would need to hear evidence and deliberate before charges could be filed. I'm not sure on AZ law though.
 
  • #289
Been gone all day. Sorry. Just starting to read.

Yes, I guess I would talk to my friends about the times something happened. Of course, if they were as blitzed as I would have been, then the time in all questimate and can't be set in stone at all. It's more of the blind leading the blind. They really wouldn't know if it was 2:30 and 5:am. FWIW.

I agree. I was just looking at how they came up with the same time. MOO.
 
  • #290
hey ya'll. i remember someone mentioning something upthread about a screaming person in a trunk? can anyone give me more info? i must have missed that whole convo and i thought i'd been following closely! lol

TIA

sure seems like there is a serial killer out there and i hope he is caught (if he hasn't already been) before someone else falls victim. two bodies found in very close proximity, both found in a wash, both hispanic females (idk if Martinez looks anything like Adrienne, but i'd be interested in knowing!). this article doesn't really tell what time of day/night Martinez was last seen alive by her parents, and i'd be interested in knowing that too. was it early morning?

"Martinez was last seen by her parents on Wednesday, August 14, when she walked away from their home between.

When she left the house, Martinez failed to take her cell phone or any form of identification with her."

and she didn't take her cell phone or ID with her? Adrienne seemingly took her phone, but her ID was left behind too, no? forgive me.. i'm beyond exhausted.

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/story/23177465/2013/08/19/dead-body-discovered-in-mesa-canal
 
  • #291
Been gone all day. Sorry. Just starting to read.

Yes, I guess I would talk to my friends about the times something happened. Of course, if they were as blitzed as I would have been, then the time in all questimate and can't be set in stone at all. It's more of the blind leading the blind. They really wouldn't know if it was 2:30 and 5:am. FWIW.

I'm glad you brought this up Seajay, because in all fairness, it is challenging to pinpoint specific times in many instances, as I myself can not tell you what I did and when. I always think about if someone asked me, "Where were you at 6:07 on the night of blah blah blah", I'd be SOL because I can barely remember what I ate for lunch, let alone something in the past...then you add alcohol and possibly pot to the equation here and there's no telling who really recalls what from the party. And as I've mentioned before, a lot of people, particularly young folks (not everyone, just some) seem to be more in their own worlds these days, jmo, disconnected, on their cell phones, less observant and aware of their surroundings, imo etc....

Then again, sometimes events that are really life changing can be something that can really stick with you (for instance, I think everyone can say "where they were on 9/11".)...I would think your friend disappearing would be one of those types of instances...I have had many friends that have passed away, and one thing I always remember is the last time I saw them, and the last conversation we had...Sometimes I'll pull something out of my closet and remember I wore that to their funeral, etc. Sometimes situations like these can really force you to try to remember stuff...or forget stuff, lol...


Bernina, I know what you mean in your post above...By the time I get to the end of my post, I've pretty much contradicted everything I've written above, lol. Like I just did now!

All JMO, don't know if anything I just wrote makes any sense, lol.
 
  • #292
From what I am reading, charges can come from a "direct complaint" from the prosecutor's office or a grand jury, in AZ. Not sure if this is accurate but it is how I am reading it.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/superiorcourt/criminaldepartment/caseprocedures.asp

Doc, what I meant in my last post if that IF they already had enough evidence against a suspect, even if not for murder, we may have seen abduction charges, such as in the case of Alexis Murphy. They charged that suspect right away and still have not found her. So that is partly why I am doubtful they have solid evidence linking anyone to her abduction or murder at this time. JMO
 
  • #293
I agree. I was just looking at how they came up with the same time. MOO.

No doubt just talking to one another and figuring that it was about that time. With the way they were being, partying both nights, they probably had to discuss WHICH NIGHT, Adrienne was at the apartment. LOL
 
  • #294
From what I am reading, charges can come from a "direct complaint" from the prosecutor's office or a grand jury, in AZ. Not sure if this is accurate but it is how I am reading it.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/superiorcourt/criminaldepartment/caseprocedures.asp

Doc, what I meant in my last post if that IF they already had enough evidence against a suspect, even if not for murder, we may have seen abduction charges, such as in the case of Alexis Murphy. They charged that suspect right away and still have not found her. So that is partly why I am doubtful they have solid evidence linking anyone to her abduction or murder at this time. JMO

Hmmmm.....the County Prosecutor might hold off because of the "bond/bail" issue, if the suspect was charged with abduction, the Judge might allow for a bond, and the suspect could possibly be released before further evidence could be verified and another arrest warrant issued for murder?
If the CP could get an arrest on a no bond or high bond offense, he/she can always add lesser included. A possible suspect may have access to assets that the CA is aware of or..........? If the suspect was on probation or parole, they'd just revoke his status.
 
  • #295
No doubt just talking to one another and figuring that it was about that time. With the way they were being, partying both nights, they probably had to discuss WHICH NIGHT, Adrienne was at the apartment. LOL

Exactly. Now whether they were only trying to get a consensus about the times or they where trying to fabricate things is hard to say without corroborating evidence. Hopefully LE has something that tells them what is what. MOO.
 
  • #296
That link says that the woman's body was badly decomposed and she was found within five days. ^^^
 
  • #297
That link says that the woman's body was badly decomposed and she was found within five days. ^^^

Yeah, I noticed that too.

For those of us here who think random perp is a strong possibility, we may actually have a possible lead(s) here. JMO.
 
  • #298
Exactly. Now whether they were only trying to get a consensus about the times or they where trying to fabricate things is hard to say without corroborating evidence. Hopefully LE has something that tells them what is what. MOO.

True. If it's fabricated, then there is a reason, a cover-up. They all had to get their ducks in a row.

Maybe if they are involved that 2:30 am timeline is significant? As in something happened earlier, then that and the time was thrown out thinking it would account for an Adrienne sighting later. KWIM??
 
  • #299
I'm going to start a thread for Patricia for anyone who is interested in order as to not derail this thread. I would really like to know more about the circumstances of her murder, bless her heart.

(Can obviously rule George out here, right? Please tell me George is still in jail and hasn't gotten out on bond.) JMO.
 
  • #300
The suspects were killed? Which suspects? For Patricia's murder?
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
121
Guests online
3,418
Total visitors
3,539

Forum statistics

Threads
632,617
Messages
18,629,152
Members
243,219
Latest member
rhirhi123
Back
Top