CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #10

[InspectorGadget]

The investigator's did not get the IP addresses from Quickbooks. Hanke was asked about this. Day 19 Part 2. He was asked if his clone account gave him access to the IP addresses of where the activity was done from, he said it did not. Asked if he requested that information from QB, he did not.

Thank you!

 

[missy1974]

I don't think LE got his phone till at least 19th Feb so it is likely that any voicemails would have been been automatically deleted. "Any voicemail that is not listened to is deleted in 14 days"

I put one foot into that rabbit hole yesterday LOL In Dugal's testimony, he said that Summer's VM's were there, but Joey's were deleted. Even if they got the VM's on the 19th, 14 days prior was only the 5th, so any VM's from the 5th and on should have been there. There were no VM's from before the 15th (but the second message referenced it being on the news, so whenever it hit the news? I don't think it was the 15th, but no later than the 19th)

 

[mrjitty]

BBM Good to see that I wasn't the only one that caught that. Makes me wonder if they will say that this was not the first time he signed a cheque for or from Joey. JMO But Joey's signature did vary on his cheques pre-Feb 1st. I would love to see what an expert would say about them.

I think they will try to imply Joey pre-signed the blanks

Any other idea about Chase being allowed to forge Joey's signature is too silly

 

[missy1974]

But he was savvy enough to get into QB and print Checks? And savvy enough to try and delete the QB so he can reinstall and start over? Yeah, not buying it.

Not savvy enough to hide it.... and not savvy enough to actually delete it though if that was the goal

 

[missy1974]

IMO the story exists 99% on Websleuths and 1% in the trial

Then you are not watching the trial. IMO

 

[missy1974]

True. But we have the phone records that differentiate between calls and voicemails. Chase made many calls to JM prior to Thursday afternoon. All communications pretty much ceased after that. Merritt did say during the CNN interview that he did leave Joseph voice mails but this proved to be untrue.

BBM How is this proved to be untrue? As per testimony, the VM's were deleted.

 

[A lucas]

There was more than 1 call.

Nowhere near the same frequency as before though right? Something had changed...

 

[oceanblueeyes]

There is no smoking gun. It is a constellation of circumstances that point to the two timed ex con with a serious gambling habit and financial troubles. It is up to each juror to interpret that evidence. There is no evidence/proof that someone else committed this crime. This was not a murder/suicide. Someone put the family in those graves, and all signs point to the lying, thieving, ex-con,

Collectively, it does create a smoking gun. Imo

Although countless cases had no smoking gun when the defendants were convicted.

Some didn't even have the gun that was used to murder the victims, due to it never being found. It still did not stop justice from being served. Just like missing body murder cases are won because the state had overwhelming CE to prove them guilty BARD.

This is not a complex case by any means. It's rather straight forward. Imo.

Who had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry these 4 murders out?

The very same man who was inside the victims home writing himself a fraudulent check on the 4th. The very day the McStay family vanished into thin air only to be found buried in two shallow graves in an area that would be in CMs comfort zone.

It's actually a rather simple case, imho.

Imo

 

[mrjitty]

Then you are not watching the trial. IMO

As I have said repeatedly - these matters are 100% within the defendant's personal knowledge, yet he did not divulge them in his pre-trial statements.

Therefore, as he has not yet testified, they are not in evidence.

Statements by Maline/McGee are not evidence.

Meanwhile according to the pre-trial statements of the defendant, he was given the cheques by Joey - a fact disproven by the Quickbooks evidence.

So if the defence wants to now claim, contrary to their own client's pre-trial statements that there was a new accounting system - someone will need to testify to it.

If you see any other way this can work I am all ears.

 

[Mony Mony]

Then you are not watching the trial. IMO

Where in the trial was this specifically mentioned, that he had permission? I will go back and listen. I haven’t heard it.

 

[missy1974]

So I don’t understand how the DNA would be secondary transfer from the crime scene? Wouldn’t a crime scene worker actually touch the item in question? That wouldn’t be considered secondary, would it? Now if they said they traced that DNA to the spouse of worker, then ok, secondary transfer.

I'm not sure that he said it was 'secondary transfer' in regards to the DNA found in the graves. He did not speak about what was found specifically, he was asked about it, he said that he didn't believe any DNA would be found, but since they know that the defense was able to find some, IMO it was preemptive questioning about it.

But he was asked about secondary transfer in his testimony, which is what we know the defense is going with, and he agreed it was a possibility. We can pick and choose what we believe from the experts, but is it reasonable to believe one thing, and disregard another because it doesn't fit the "theory"? JMO Right now, I question the DNA in the graves because of what he said.. but because they didn't get into the details of that DNA, I will wait to see what the defense expert says. Again, JMO.

 

[missy1974]

I am (finally) gonna clean my house while they play that!

You will be too busy swearing at the live feed glitching

 

[missy1974]

So if we had the IP address: then what? CM has not said anything like a one armed man gave him the checks. We aren’t looking for another author of those checks.

Someone asked a question, and rather than saying "watch the testimony", I gave the answer because I had it handy in my notes

 

[missy1974]

What's the first thing you do when you add another "authorized signer" to your bank account?

You drag them down to your bank and have them sign a signature card and put whatever restriction you feel are needed for your account.

Joey was to have deposited a check in the bank the day of the 4th, according to PM. Why didn't he have CM meet him there? Why didn't he drag him own there BEFORE then?

And giving an employee blank signed checks? An employee you KNOW is a criminal? JM KNEW CM was, JM gave money to CJ when CM was put in jail.

I've owned enough businesses, and been a corporate officer, signer, and accountant for 2 LLC 's, and this is STANDARD business practice.

You DON'T allow someone to start writing checks before you do this. I don't buy that JM was that ignorant or stupid. He was in business with his 1st wife. This wasn't his first rodeo.

Bernina... do you know... would Chase have had to have an account there as well? Would he have had to do a background check if it was a business account?

 

[missy1974]

I can’t remeber now but is there a record of Chase calling Summer after the family vanished?

Let’s be honest the logical step is if you can’t reach Joey you would ring Summer to see why he couldn’t get hold of Joey.

Good question! I wonder if anyone looked for that? I wonder if he had EVER called Summer? Didn't they have a house phone as well? Did Chase EVER call that number? I don't mean in Feb 10, but ever? Did the family?

 

[missy1974]

Thank you!

Your welcome!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

BBM How is this proved to be untrue? As per testimony, the VM's were deleted.

By whom, and when were they deleted?

My voicemails will stay on my phone forever for both cell, and landline unless I delete them.

One of our dear friends passed away in 2015, and I have never deleted her last voicemail. It's still there, and it will be until I delete it...which will be never of course.

 

[missy1974]

Nowhere near the same frequency as before though right? Something had changed...

Right. and yes something had changed... Joey wasn't answering, and Joey wasn't calling him. The frequency of calls on the weekends sometimes was way less, but come Monday... it would have been extremely odd for him to not have heard from Joey at all.

 

[missy1974]

As I have said repeatedly - these matters are 100% within the defendant's personal knowledge, yet he did not divulge them in his pre-trial statements.

Therefore, as he has not yet testified, they are not in evidence.

Statements by Maline/McGee are not evidence.

Meanwhile according to the pre-trial statements of the defendant, he was given the cheques by Joey - a fact disproven by the Quickbooks evidence.

So if the defence wants to now claim, contrary to their own client's pre-trial statements that there was a new accounting system - someone will need to testify to it.

If you see any other way this can work I am all ears.

You keep saying his pre-trial statements like you have heard/read them all. We have not heard them all .... I do not expect him to testify, I don't think anyone does. But if they play that 8 hour long interview, it will be interesting to see what is said. IF he has said anything in relation to the cheques, I wouldn't expect the prosecution to play or show those statements, would you????

 

[mrjitty]

I guess I am old fashioned about evidential burden

But if the defence wants to claim Joey presigned blanks, gave chase 76 blanks, told him to delete cheques, asked him to delete quickbooks, then the evidential burden is upon the defence to establish an evidential basis for it.

Meanwhile the following has been shown

1. The signatures after 4 feb were different
2. Joey died at the lastest morning 5 feb so never signed any more cheques after that
3. Chase said he was given signed cheques on 4 feb
4. QB evidence proves chase created the same after 4 feb

So quite simply, at this point in the trial, there is no evidence of this strange accounting system