CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #15

[Karinna]

View attachment 178454

Thankyou for posting it up.

 

[Tortoise]

And the paint on the hammer was identical to that in the home being painted, and same as the paint found on SM's bra wasn't it?

rsbm

I've only heard it matched the paint on the bra.

I think there were similarities to the paint in the house but there were some slight differences which they couldn't say whether were due to environmental exposure I think.

 

[Karinna]

rsbm

I've only heard it matched the paint on the bra.

I think there were similarities to the paint in the house but there were some slight differences which they couldn't say whether were due to environmental exposure I think.

Oh ok. Well i think it would definitely be from the house seeing that it was being painted at the time. And the roll of blue painters tape was also in the grave wrapped in a white towel. Blue painters tape was also used in the home. And paint definitely discolors over time just from exposure inside a home, so buried in the ground and exposed to weather as the desert would be, i would certainly expect some discoloration over time.

 

[Force Ten]

I really don't know what went wrong in this case.

LE knew -

from McGyver that Summer was really upset having CM in her home and he noted the tension and CM being there twice that week.
from Metro that there were problems with CM that he never reported himself on Feb 17th
from Metro that they held onto the cheques because the signatures didn't look right, not because of a problem with their bank account
from CM that he'd noted the partway opened window but only on his second visit after Mike asked him to look
the condition of the window was different when Mike went there - it appeared closed but not locked
the blinds were broken
CM said he went in the house with Mike but his only proof was Mike's wife telling a neighbor afterwards that she used the bathroom and he didn' know the kids had played upstairs
CM apologized for the unflushed toilet which could mean he'd left it unflushed
CM said he wouldn't go in the window when he went there alone even though there were grounds to
from Joey's phone records that CM was the last person Joey called, was the last person to see Joey, knew he was at his desk later, and then they all vanished and phone activity ceased at the same time a cheque to CM was created on Joey's computer
from CM that he'd used Joey's credit card to purchase Joey a new accounting software after Joey was missing
from Joey's bank records the cheques to CM around the 4th weren't in line with Joey's recent payments to CM
Joey emailed CM telling him he owed him about $43K which CM had not pointed out to them
CM was a criminal
Mike told them his last conversation with Joey he was frantic because money was missing from his account and the only cheque Joey had not written himself that came out on 2nd was one to CM
the stroller was in the garage
cushions were stripped of their covers
CM had spoken of them all in the past tense not in response to questions asked in the past tense
CM told them about heart problems which potentially showed consciousness of physical exertion involved in killing and then moving and burying the bodies
CM had no memory of the 8th and tried to curtail the call after Cathy told him she was out
CM had an injured hand
CM showed classic signs of diversion from questions in his answers
CM hesitated before saying he had been in the Trooper


I think the detectives had more than enough probable cause to treat the house as a crime scene, investigate CM and would have found the bodies sooner with CM's phone records.

JMO

Much of this, including Merritt's interview, happened after the warrants were executed on the home though. Dugal walked if luminal was used in the home and he stated the warrants wouldn't allow it. That's very curious to me. This is probably why the cadaver dogs were only outside as well.

While I can't place direct blame on family members, I think particular actions and comments made to detectives steered the case to voluntary missing. Then there's the video. Then you have Mike hiring the PI to go into Mexico to find the family, etc., etc.

 

[Karinna]

Much of this, including Merritt's interview, happened after the warrants were executed on the home though. Dugal walked if luminal was used in the home and he stated the warrants wouldn't allow it. That's very curious to me. This is probably why the cadaver dogs were only outside as well.

While I can't place direct blame on family members, I think particular actions and comments made to detectives steered the case to voluntary missing. Then there's the video. Then you have Mike hiring the PI to go into Mexico to find the family, etc., etc.

I agree, and think it did factor into it all as well.

 

[Tortoise]

Much of this, including Merritt's interview, happened after the warrants were executed on the home though. Dugal walked if luminal was used in the home and he stated the warrants wouldn't allow it. That's very curious to me. This is probably why the cadaver dogs were only outside as well.

While I can't place direct blame on family members, I think particular actions and comments made to detectives steered the case to voluntary missing. Then there's the video. Then you have Mike hiring the PI to go into Mexico to find the family, etc., etc.

Do you mean they had search warrants before the 17th but didn't go in until the 19th?

 

[Mica]

Much of this, including Merritt's interview, happened after the warrants were executed on the home though. Dugal walked if luminal was used in the home and he stated the warrants wouldn't allow it. That's very curious to me. This is probably why the cadaver dogs were only outside as well.

While I can't place direct blame on family members, I think particular actions and comments made to detectives steered the case to voluntary missing. Then there's the video. Then you have Mike hiring the PI to go into Mexico to find the family, etc., etc.

And this ...


The sheriff said he had support from the McStay family throughout his department’s investigation and it was the family that reinforced the belief that the Joseph McStay and his immediate family had gone to Mexico.

As detectives combed through the McStay’s Fallbrook home, they found no evidence that the family was killed inside, according to Gore.

"Trust me, our homicide detectives are very thorough and very experienced,” said Gore. “Had there been any signs of blood stain or blood spatter or dents in walls, those would have been discovered."

SD County Sheriff Defends Investigators on McStay Case

 

[smr]

She seems (to me) to be potentially quite a dangerous witness to have testifying in ANY criminal case - it's great to have a technology that can produce more sensitive results but in a field where it hasn't been proven how long DNA can survive and with the date that DNA got there being an unknown factor, her opinion is not really fit to be put in front of a jury IMO, if it means that even one person might not properly understand the implications. Jurors aren't experts and so it comes down to the skill of the attorneys to make sure they don't go away fooled or blinded by smoke and mirrors and a pretty face.

I had similar thoughts about Dr. Rudin and Mr. Lucio.

 

[missy1974]

If Summer's bra didn't yield Summer's DNA as the wearer of the garment then I'm not going to believe a degraded trace of stranger's touch DNA survived in the ground for 3 or 4 years and was still detectable after 8 years.

From what I understand there are no trials that show touch DNA can last anywhere like that length of time.

I'm all for explaining how touch and transfer DNA can get on an item. What I am opposed to is putting an expert on who is not really assisting the court and has the potential to confuse a jury and introduce doubt that isn't yet scientifically proven.

She seems (to me) to be potentially quite a dangerous witness to have testifying in ANY criminal case - it's great to have a technology that can produce more sensitive results but in a field where it hasn't been proven how long DNA can survive and with the date that DNA got there being an unknown factor, her opinion is not really fit to be put in front of a jury IMO, if it means that even one person might not properly understand the implications. Jurors aren't experts and so it comes down to the skill of the attorneys to make sure they don't go away fooled or blinded by smoke and mirrors and a pretty face.

JMO

I posted this yesterday.... but your comment about the DNA again reminds me of what Jone's said, that they can only say that DNA is there, not the mode of how it got there. That is in any case where DNA is found though. They can't say how long it's been there, how it got there, etc. With technology advancements in DNA, because they can detect it with such small samples now, I think it's posing a problem in a lot of criminal cases. Jones even explained Secondary DNA or transfer DNA, saying that if he shook hands with the prosecutor and then touched the counter, the prosecutor's DNA would be on the counter even if he had never touched it.

I have not listened to all of Ryan's testimony yet, so don't know what she has said, but I do know what Jone's said and I liked him and how he explained things. Ryan used the mvac to get this DNA, it's an accepted form of collecting DNA, and IIRC Jone's did say that San Bernadino Lab or wherever he worked out of did have one, so they obviously use it at times and accept that it's a method to collect DNA in certain cases, my understanding is that it's really expensive though and probably used very little in cases by the State because of the cost. JMO

I wonder like you do if they can tell how old the DNA is... whether they can say it was more likely it was left in 2010 or in 2014. I think some of that may come down to how the evidence was stored and preserved in the years between being collected and samples taken by Ryan. Evidence is stored in LE lockers for years and then been tested for DNA and viable DNA has been found years later (in cold cases for example), so is that degraded DNA found? or has it been preserved all those years? I hope we get some answers in all this testimony LOL I'm not sure we will get answers in Ryan's testimony though?

The defense needs to convince me that this degraded DNA survived since 2010 after listening to Jones' testimony, but I also think if there is DNA that was left there when processing the evidence, that it could also pose a problem for the prosecution in the sense that it was contaminated then. JMO

 

[Karinna]

This article states that the paint found on the rusted sledgehammer did match the paint in the house
(quote)
A rusted sledgehammer with paint matching the McStay's freshly painted house was buried with the bodies, investigators said.
McStay family’s killer used sledgehammer in brutal murders, detective says

 

[Karinna]

I posted this yesterday.... but your comment about the DNA again reminds me of what Jone's said, that they can only say that DNA is there, not the mode of how it got there. That is in any case where DNA is found though. They can't say how long it's been there, how it got there, etc. With technology advancements in DNA, because they can detect it with such small samples now, I think it's posing a problem in a lot of criminal cases. Jones even explained Secondary DNA or transfer DNA, saying that if he shook hands with the prosecutor and then touched the counter, the prosecutor's DNA would be on the counter even if he had never touched it.

I have not listened to all of Ryan's testimony yet, so don't know what she has said, but I do know what Jone's said and I liked him and how he explained things. Ryan used the mvac to get this DNA, it's an accepted form of collecting DNA, and IIRC Jone's did say that San Bernadino Lab or wherever he worked out of did have one, so they obviously use it at times and accept that it's a method to collect DNA in certain cases, my understanding is that it's really expensive though and probably used very little in cases by the State because of the cost. JMO

I wonder like you do if they can tell how old the DNA is... whether they can say it was more likely it was left in 2010 or in 2014. I think some of that may come down to how the evidence was stored and preserved in the years between being collected and samples taken by Ryan. Evidence is stored in LE lockers for years and then been tested for DNA and viable DNA has been found years later (in cold cases for example), so is that degraded DNA found? or has it been preserved all those years? I hope we get some answers in all this testimony LOL I'm not sure we will get answers in Ryan's testimony though?

The defense needs to convince me that this degraded DNA survived since 2010 after listening to Jones' testimony, but I also think if there is DNA that was left there when processing the evidence, that it could also pose a problem for the prosecution in the sense that it was contaminated then. JMO

I wonder with all this touch/contact DNA info. why Merritt's DNA was found on the drivers side of the vehicle, mainly on the steering wheel and gear shift, but no DNA from Merritt in the passengers side where he would of been sitting when he was in the McStay vehicle with JM when questioned about it by investigators that he admitted to? Strange that, IMO.

 

[Tortoise]

The defense needs to convince me that this degraded DNA survived since 2010 after listening to Jones' testimony, but I also think if there is DNA that was left there when processing the evidence, that it could also pose a problem for the prosecution in the sense that it was contaminated then. JMO

rsbm

I don't think he got any results from the graves though, so if there was contamination it didn't affect the prosecution's case that there was no usable DNA. Perhaps they have a system for screening out the touch DNA profiles of crime scene technicians, which in the 5 years between 2013 and 2018 would have become degraded. IDK

JMO

 

[Tortoise]

I had similar thoughts about Dr. Rudin and Mr. Lucio.

Except the judge allowed him/them to testify on the basis that he wasn't going to positively identify the truck as Merritt's I believe.

For me the biggest takeaway from that evidence was that it excluded the Trooper IMO. It doesn't matter to me in assessing his guilt what truck Merritt used. If he planned this as I believe he did he may very well have had a vehicle on loan. I think it probably was his truck in the video but I can't say for absolute certain it was because the video quality was so poor.

JMO

 

[missy1974]

I wonder with all this touch/contact DNA info. why Merritt's DNA was found on the drivers side of the vehicle, mainly on the steering wheel and gear shift, but no DNA from Merritt in the passengers side where he would of been sitting when he was in the McStay vehicle with JM when questioned about it by investigators that he admitted to? Strange that, IMO.

Someone posted earlier about the passenger side DNA, and I haven't listened to all of Ryan's testimony, so I only can go off of what I know from Jones' testimony right now... and he had a mix of DNA but didn't develop profiles IIRC I didn't take as good of notes back then so would have to listen to his testimony again to be sure. The judge also mentioned something during the motion to dismiss about this DNA and how a number of factors have to be considered, including if the Trooper was cleaned in that 6 week period and if it was reasonable to believe it would still be there 6 weeks later... but again, I would have to go back and listen to that again. So will say JMO for now ;-)

 

[missy1974]

rsbm

I don't think he got any results from the graves though, so if there was contamination it didn't affect the prosecution's case that there was no usable DNA. Perhaps they have a system for screening out the touch DNA profiles of crime scene technicians, which in the 5 years between 2013 and 2018 would have become degraded. IDK

JMO

He got very low grade results I think, much below the standard. But the fact that he got anything does give me a bit of pause and I'm open to believing they could get results using a better method for the items being tested, whether it will mean anything is another story. Maybe the electrical cord was new? Maybe it was a store employee's DNA?

I recall the defense asking Jones about Codis and if employees were in the database, which they are, technicians are for sure, but I don't think LE officers are. I'm sure they will imply that if there are profiles that were developed, if the State runs them in Codis, it would be easy to figure out if it was an employee or not. JMO I also recall the defense asking Jones about certain things, and where they would expect to find DNA, like putting a cord around a body and then putting knots in it, Jones agreed that someone would have to have a firm grip on the cord, the sweatpants/panties if removed by force. But then it brings in the use of gloves vs. no gloves

In my experience from other cases... the technicians are in the database and there are protocols put in place if the DNA of a technician is found. One case I follow.... protocol is that the DNA sample is then discarded, but they did an over ride on that sample because it was consumptive and they were not able to do the test again. It was contaminated, yet was used at trial, and is part of the appeal now. This is why I think it could be problematic if it's technician's DNA was found, maybe not in the trial, but even down the road on appeal. JMO

 

[Tortoise]

He got very low grade results I think, much below the standard. But the fact that he got anything does give me a bit of pause and I'm open to believing they could get results using a better method for the items being tested, whether it will mean anything is another story. Maybe the electrical cord was new? Maybe it was a store employee's DNA?

I recall the defense asking Jones about Codis and if employees were in the database, which they are, technicians are for sure, but I don't think LE officers are. I'm sure they will imply that if there are profiles that were developed, if the State runs them in Codis, it would be easy to figure out if it was an employee or not. JMO I also recall the defense asking Jones about certain things, and where they would expect to find DNA, like putting a cord around a body and then putting knots in it, Jones agreed that someone would have to have a firm grip on the cord, the sweatpants/panties if removed by force. But then it brings in the use of gloves vs. no gloves

In my experience from other cases... the technicians are in the database and there are protocols put in place if the DNA of a technician is found. One case I follow.... protocol is that the DNA sample is then discarded, but they did an over ride on that sample because it was consumptive and they were not able to do the test again. It was contaminated, yet was used at trial, and is part of the appeal now. This is why I think it could be problematic if it's technician's DNA was found, maybe not in the trial, but even down the road on appeal. JMO

Really, he got results from the graves? I'm going to have to listen again (probably) because I thought he said if he didn't even get the victims' DNA then he certainly wouldn't expect to get anyone else's. I don't disbelieve you because I'm sure you probably listened better than me and I don't listen well to evidence I find boring but I just had that memory of it being nothing and he wasn't surprised after so many years.

 

[missy1974]

Really, he got results from the graves? I'm going to have to listen again (probably) because I thought he said if he didn't even get the victims' DNA then he certainly wouldn't expect to get anyone else's. I don't disbelieve you because I'm sure you probably listened better than me and I don't listen well to evidence I find boring but I just had that memory of it being nothing and he wasn't surprised after so many years.

They were very low ... below the standard.... it's actually in Ryan's testimony... she pulls it from his bench notes IIRC. It's in the first half of her testimony, I only know that because that is all I have listened to so far lol

ETA: I have 27:30 as the time noted that she starts going through the items she received (I think part 2?) here are my notes... pls don't judge spelling haha I actually have not heard anything after 41 minutes of testimony in that Part, that's where I stopped.

B15 - another cord removed from JM. Jones processed but he took it through the quantitative stage, no DNA detected, so didn't process. Bench notes show there was a low level DNA of a male. Was below the standards of testing was detected. Ryan processed, mvaced the entire item, lossened the knots to see if there was dna under there. E15a filter label.

a26 - other half of bra, right cup. Jones did process the item, was not able to get a profile. quanitative analysis, low level human dna detected in bench notes. Higher than what was on the cord. The front of the bra, strap, and clasp. was in better condition,

ETAA: @Tortoise <<< tagging you to make sure you see my edit and you can go back and listen if you want

 

[Tortoise]

They were very low ... below the standard.... it's actually in Ryan's testimony... she pulls it from his bench notes IIRC. It's in the first half of her testimony, I only know that because that is all I have listened to so far lol

ETA: I have 27:30 as the time noted that she starts going through the items she received (I think part 2?) here are my notes... pls don't judge spelling haha I actually have not heard anything after 41 minutes of testimony in that Part, that's where I stopped.

B15 - another cord removed from JM. Jones processed but he took it through the quantitative stage, no DNA detected, so didn't process. Bench notes show there was a low level DNA of a male. Was below the standards of testing was detected. Ryan processed, mvaced the entire item, lossened the knots to see if there was dna under there. E15a filter label.

a26 - other half of bra, right cup. Jones did process the item, was not able to get a profile. quanitative analysis, low level human dna detected in bench notes. Higher than what was on the cord. The front of the bra, strap, and clasp. was in better condition,

ETAA: @Tortoise <<< tagging you to make sure you see my edit and you can go back and listen if you want

Thank you. I think I may have thought she was talking about the defense lab's results in the bench notes but obviously got that wrong. I also think I will sit back and let others who know what they're talking about discuss the DNA evidence

 

[smr]

I have a question: When exactly did Chase become a person of interest or suspect (before being arrested)?

 

[missy1974]

Thank you. I think I may have thought she was talking about the defense lab's results in the bench notes but obviously got that wrong. I also think I will sit back and let others who know what they're talking about discuss the DNA evidence

lol I really liked how Jones explained it, he made it really easy to understand, so I am hoping it makes the rest easier to understand as well. I was only taking the notes of the different evidence, in the hopes that I can find the time and will go back to other testimony to get the item numbers so we can get visuals on what is being tested and talked about. Hopefully I can do that later