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

[mrjitty]

He would use the excuse that he was in their house almost every day, he'd moved their house contents for them and that probably included their clothing, he'd used their hammer to build the decking and the shed, he'd sat on their furniture, he'd dried his hands on their towels, etc.

DNA is only really useful when the perpetrator is unknown to their victims.

JMO

This was core in the Knox case.

The defence made a big deal of "No KNOX DNA in the murder room!" But of course forensics never searched for DNA generically in the murder room or in the house because its meaningless.

Instead they only search where the murderer(s) likely touched. e.g the victims body, bra strap. blood spots on the bathroom tap.

 

[mrjitty]

Surely because it isn't her house? She didn't have lawful possession at that time.

You are mixing up the contexts of possession and ownership.

If you lend me your car, I am lawfully in possession. i.e. I have de facto control of it.

I don't know Cali law, but I wondered when Joey's mum was in the house, trying to make sense of her son's disappearance, the house was under her lawful control, until such time as Joey returns

But from limited googling it seems this area is quite complicated and she might not be able to do so.

I still think the point all along was that Joey's mum was supposed to have a good look around and ideally discover something which would allow entry - but she missed the table top at least.

 

[Karinna]

IIRC its possible for a dog to give a hit on a body that was present for as little as 30 mins after death - but more usually the corpse has lain somewhere for longer than that.

I think it is quite unlikely the dog could hit on bodies from outside the house, or on a scent via merely carrying bodies say to a vehicle

Yes i agree, & i have discussed cadaver evidence in other cases, and within half an hour to an hour is when cadaver can usually be detected by the cadaver dogs after someone is deceased, from what i remember.

 

[mrjitty]

Yes i agree, & i have discussed cadaver evidence in other cases, and within half an hour to an hour is when cadaver can usually be detected by the cadaver dogs after someone is deceased, from what i remember.

Yes - provided the body was lying in place.

Recently in the Watts case the body was likely in the house more than 30 mins, but removed relatively swiftly, and may have been moved between locations internally.

The dogs didn't hit on it.

 

[Mica]

About SAR dogs.

Dogs In Search And Rescue

 

[travelbug]

Yes. I don't think they actually mentioned the date in the opening statements.

This is a direct quote from the opening statement:
..."They also learned that Charles Merritt was the one that alerted Joseph’s mother on February 9th. So they went to interview Charles Merritt. This is approximately 48 hours maybe a little bit less maybe a little bit more after San Diego detectives first learned that this family even exists, so keep in mind. So they went to the defendant’s residence, he lived in Rancho Cucamonga"...
It's interesting to note that LE states that CM was the first to alert SB, in contrast to what has been stated since that time. imho

 

[travelbug]

How so, do you think?

Criminals don't bother to walk around the home, after committing burglary or murder, and check to make sure the doors are locked. Frequently, they even leave the door open. jmho

 

[Tortoise]

This is a direct quote from the opening statement:
..."They also learned that Charles Merritt was the one that alerted Joseph’s mother on February 9th. So they went to interview Charles Merritt. This is approximately 48 hours maybe a little bit less maybe a little bit more after San Diego detectives first learned that this family even exists, so keep in mind. So they went to the defendant’s residence, he lived in Rancho Cucamonga"...
It's interesting to note that LE states that CM was the first to alert SB, in contrast to what has been stated since that time. imho

That doesn't differ from what Susan Blake testified to. Merritt showed up at her house on the 9th. And his cell phone records bear that out.

What is there in testimony in contrast to this that I missed?

 

[smr]

He would use the excuse that he was in their house almost every day, he'd moved their house contents for them and that probably included their clothing, he'd used their hammer to build the decking and the shed, he'd sat on their furniture, he'd dried his hands on their towels, etc.

DNA is only really useful when the perpetrator is unknown to their victims.

JMO

Until we hear that.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes i agree, & i have discussed cadaver evidence in other cases, and within half an hour to an hour is when cadaver can usually be detected by the cadaver dogs after someone is deceased, from what i remember.

Yes there is a time lapse that must occur, and that depends if the victim's body is laying in place for that long.

Imo, he quickly removed them. If any scent could have been detected at all it would be inside the home, and the dogs were never brought in to even check one way or the other. Sigh.

From what I understand they would have to have a specific type of cadaver air scent trailing dog.

One that is capable of detecting cadaver scents of victims who's bodies did not touch the outside ground around their home, but were removed, and put in a vehicle then transported by vehicle.

Most cadaver dogs are ground scenting dogs who detect bodies which have lain on a ground surface long enough to leave a cadaver scent.

In the past few years they are training some cadaver dogs now to be air scenters who can trail a vehicle's route with a dead body inside.

Also they are training cadaver dogs to detect dead bodies when they are submerged in all types of waterways.

When taken out in boats they are able to detect the decomposition gas bubbles that rise to the surface, even if the victim is still hidden well deep below the surface.

It is helping to find drowning victims, as well as victims who have been murdered.

I think if they had taken the cadaver dogs to go over CMs truck, the dogs would have gone crazy alerting on his truck.

Imo

 

[mrjitty]

I think if they had taken the cadaver dogs to go over CMs truck, the dogs would have gone crazy alerting on his truck.

Imo

This was the same mistake in the Watts case - but i guess again you need a warrant

 

[mrjitty]

Criminals don't bother to walk around the home, after committing burglary or murder, and check to make sure the doors are locked. Frequently, they even leave the door open. jmho

But this is where staging gets so fascinating.

Why would indoor dogs be locked up outside with their food outside?

Where ever the family were killed this aspect makes no sense unless the killer did it

 

[Karinna]

Criminals don't bother to walk around the home, after committing burglary or murder, and check to make sure the doors are locked. Frequently, they even leave the door open. jmho

That would depend i think. If the killer in this case wanted to make the murders look like a voluntary/urgent departure for whatever reason, and dump the trooper near the Mexican border to try and buy time for himself, and making it look like the family went into Mexico, then also making it look like they locked up the house quickly before they left as well to prove they were still alive in that scenario, is not out of the realm of possibility , IMO.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

This was the same mistake in the Watts case - but i guess again you need a warrant

Yes it was.

Like I have reiterrated so many times now, (lol) its mind boggling that Dugal didnt feel he had probable cause to obtain SWs for both inside their home, and get one so they would be able to constantly monitor for as long as it took all financial activity.

I don't think there is a judge who would have refused, if he had clearly laid out in an affidavit. all of the suspicious red flags, based on how the home, and dogs were found.

Did Dugal even try since probable cause is a much lower burden to meet?

Why was he unable to do it when just about every LE jurisdiction has been able to obtain one?

The mere suspicious circumstances surrounding their disappearance should have been more than enough to get a SW, with crime scene tape put up around the home, to make sure if there was any evidence there, it would be preserved, even if it turned out later they were willingly missing.

Dugal seem to jump the gun way too early assuming way too much. Imo.

Did he ever actually look into Joey's financial activities or lack of right after they disappeared? If so,wasnt he gravely concerned about what he saw happening? Did he believe Joey would just walk off and leave his new home, and 100K in the bank?

Did he ever see that CM was helping himself to money he wasnt legally entitled to have during this pivitol time?

Like I've said previously. Lol. Every detective I have seen who was investigating a missing person case say they treat it as highly suspicious immediately, and do the investigation like a homicide investigation until they positively know otherwise.

They say that is the only way to protect all the evidence that may be there by doing it this way right off the bat.

They first rule out the foul play option continuing to also investigate further if the missing person or persons are most likely willingly missing based on further investigation. That too must be supported by evidence.

A back view image of four individuals is not supporting evidence of anything unless its proven who the 4 individuals truly are.

It's really no different than investigating whether a death was accident, natural causes or homicide etc.. all options are always on the table.

Each option must be backed up by doing a thorough investigation to rule them in or out.

After awhile did Dugal ever change the case from willingly missing to suspected foul play had occurred?

What actual evidence did Dugal use to declare them willingly missing? Not mere assumptions or a back view images not even showing the faces, but concrete solid provable evidence?

Tia

Imo

 

[Meemaw12]

@Cathyrussen on Twitter posted

#McStay Family Murder Trial continues at 1:30pm PDT today. Defense DNA expert will be under cross exam. We'll have audio of the proceedings on YT channel this evening. Here's a very detailed recap of last week, including Michael McStay & DNA testimony. sbcsentinel.com/2019/04/merrit…

 

[oceanblueeyes]

But this is where staging gets so fascinating.

Why would indoor dogs be locked up outside with their food outside?

Where ever the family were killed this aspect makes no sense unless the killer did it

Absolutely, the killer did it.

One case I remember when LE arrived at the murder scene they found the victim's dog tied up on the front porch. Neighbors, and friends said the dog was always kept inside of the home as a much beloved inside pet, and the dog was never tied up outside.

The murderer had placed the dog outside.

The police should have immediately asked neighbors, and family or anyone who knew the family if the McStays would have ever abandoned their dogs putting them on the outside to fend for themselves, and this was happening day after day to their two beloved pets.

That alone should have raised red flags showing something was very wrong at the McStay home.

None of it pointed to them just leaving without a care in the world, and everything found did not support it either. It supported the total opposite. Immediately the police should have been very alarmed.

Imo

 

[KALI]

Right. That is a law that should be changed immediately imo.

To amend my own post (damn auto correct), Dugal said he didn't have authority to use luminal, the warrants wouldn't allow it.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Criminals don't bother to walk around the home, after committing burglary or murder, and check to make sure the doors are locked. Frequently, they even leave the door open. jmho

Hi travelbug!

I've seen some burglars who do it both ways. Some do make sure the door is locked like no one had accessed the home when the homeowners were gone, in case someone else comes by during the day.

It gives them longer time to distance themselves, from where the invasion happened.

BUT Murderers certainly have locked the door back though, wanting any others to believe the victims had locked them, and were simply gone somewhere together.

Was only one window found unlocked at their home? Was it normal for that particular window to be unlocked. I've always found that very suspicious, and very convenient. Imo

If so, I always thought CM made sure one window could be accessed when he, and Mike came there trying to gain entry to the home.

I'm sure he locked the doors making it look like the family locked up before leaving. Before alerting Mike finally or Susan I think he went there several days in the middle of the night to clean up.

But he knew Mike wouldn't have a key to access his brother's home so he made sure Mike would be able to find a window unlocked so he could go through the unlocked window.

Imo

 

[missy1974]

This was in a tweet from Cathy Russon, I believe she is wrong and testimony starts at 9:30, Ryan isn't back until 1:30 though:

#McStay Family Murder Trial continues at 1:30pm PDT today. Defense DNA expert will be under cross exam. We'll have audio of the proceedings on YT channel this evening. Here's a very detailed recap of last week, including Michael McStay & DNA testimony.
Merritt Defense Questions Victim’s Brother & Lays DNA Exoneration Foundation | SBCSentinel

From the above article, I'm posting some info that was not presented at the trial, but it seems like the reporter possibly spoke to the defense? Because some of this wasn't mentioned the other day IIRC and I thought it was interesting that there might be the same unknown DNA found in both graves, but again, I don't recall this from actual testimony yet, like the 3 males DNA, although we have heard about it before.


After court concluded that day, Maline told the Sentinel his rough cross examination of Michael McStay was not intended to seriously suggest that Michael McStay had murdered his brother and his brother’s family, but rather to illustrate to the jury that circumstances can be twisted to make outrageous suggestions as to guilt and culpability, as was being done by the prosecution to his client.

....

The Isuzu Trooper’s ignition and steering column was intact, Sergeant Smith testified under McGee’s questioning, an indication the car had not been hot-wired, but that rather a key had been used to start the vehicle when it was driven to the mall parking lot and abandoned near the border in San Ysidro.
McGee’s purpose in questioning Sergeant Smith on this topic was to establish that there is a possibility or even a likelihood that the Isuzu Trooper was driven to San Ysidro not by Merritt but by Joseph McStay.

....

Of significance is that the DNA analysis indicates that three individuals – all males – contributed the DNA that was found on the items in the graves and the half bra found outside the graves. Those DNA profiles do not match Joseph McStay, Gianni McStay, Joseph McStay, Jr. or Charles Merritt.
It is anticipated that the prosecution might suggest that the DNA found on those items could have been contributed by three of the sheriff’s department personnel who were involved in the excavation of the graves. This, however, is controverted by the consideration that there is some crossover with regard to the DNA found on items from both graves, and that in processing the graves, the sheriff’s department assigned different personnel to carry out the excavation of each grave, and kept those personnel separate throughout the processing such that only those individuals assigned to each grave, all of whom were wearing gloves, had contact with the contents of their particularly assigned grave. Additionally, the degradation of the DNA that was found is consistent with having been buried in the earth or exposed to the elements for three-and-a-half years. DNA that would have originated with the excavation team would not have been subject to that level of degradation. The defense maintains that the DNA found on the four items is connected to the actual killers of the McStay family.

 

[Mica]

RSBM

Merritt Defense Questions Victim’s Brother & Lays DNA Exoneration Foundation | SBCSentinel



Of significance is that the DNA analysis indicates that three individuals – all males – contributed the DNA that was found on the items in the graves and the half bra found outside the graves. Those DNA profiles do not match Joseph McStay, Gianni McStay, Joseph McStay, Jr. or Charles Merritt.
It is anticipated that the prosecution might suggest that the DNA found on those items could have been contributed by three of the sheriff’s department personnel who were involved in the excavation of the graves. This, however, is controverted by the consideration that there is some crossover with regard to the DNA found on items from both graves, and that in processing the graves, the sheriff’s department assigned different personnel to carry out the excavation of each grave, and kept those personnel separate throughout the processing such that only those individuals assigned to each grave, all of whom were wearing gloves, had contact with the contents of their particularly assigned grave. Additionally, the degradation of the DNA that was found is consistent with having been buried in the earth or exposed to the elements for three-and-a-half years. DNA that would have originated with the excavation team would not have been subject to that level of degradation. The defense maintains that the DNA found on the four items is connected to the actual killers of the McStay family.

Maybe Sheriff McMahon was initially correct...

Snip

Authorities identified the remains using dental records. At the time, San Bernardino County Sheriff John McMahon said the killings appeared to be "extremely orchestrated" and carried out by more than one person.

Suspect in McStay family killings arrested - CNN