Found Deceased CO - Gannon Stauch, 11, Colorado Springs, El Paso County, 27 Jan 2020 **ARREST** #37

[Angiebla]

She never explicitly says that he spanked the kids or that he was the "spanker." I keep seeing this said, and it isn't entirely accurate.

“She never even spanked those kids. She wasn’t the one that would get on them. Albert would do that."
​

Gannon Stauch's babysitter says she believes stepmother is innocent

wouldn’t the babysit mostly be there without the parents home? What would be the point of being there watching the kids with their parents there?

 

[I'm Just Here]

So an FBI might have been speaking to a public person? Could this be why there are so many FBI's listed? Maybe a person will show up later to court if need? I am kind of lost, thank you.

 

[I'm Just Here]

DBM

 

[GordianKnot]

While that's true, I imagine that LE contacted all local carwashes and ended up putting only one on the witness list. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to assume that this one carwash has evidence or a connection to the case. I don't think a carwash attendant is going to remember a phone call from a potential patron nor do I think LS would have given her name in such an instance.

I'm going to bet that she used that carwash.

BBM:

Me, too.

Having mapped its location, it looks like that car wash is <10 miles away from the Co. Springs Airport.
15 minute drive to the car wash from the airport, pretty much a straight shot up 21N.

خرائط ‪Google‬‏‏

It's 5.1 miles away from the Enterprise Rent-A-Car address listed on the witness list.

Directionally, the car wash lies pretty much on the route b/t Colorado Springs and Lorson Ranch.

Given the location of the Big Wave Car Wash, I'm thinking TS either washed her own car OR the rental there on Tuesday or Wednesday.

JMO.

 

[lilithblue]

So an FBI might have been speaking to a public person? Could this be why there are so many FBI's listed? Maybe a person will show up later to court if need? I am kind of lost, thank you.

I think the confusion is that the current witness list you're seeing is just the list of people that contributed to bringing the charges/complaint.

When/if there is a trial, there will be another witness list that will likely include a lot of the same people.

 

[MsBetsy]

Delete, double.

 

[SleuthBee]

If she made the mistake of logging in to any of her social media or called a couple of her known contacts from the burner that would give the game away in terms of tracking general movements. Retrospectively that is, after warrants. IMO

@mrlime It seems you are onto her game

Witnesses for the prosecution includes:

Green Dot, a company offering prepaid reloadable debit cards.
Conoco / 7-11 (Convenience store)
& Go (Convenience store)

Convenience stores sell Green dot prepaid re-loadable debit cards. Burner phones can be purchased with cash or a prepaid debit card, then easily activated without any form of ID. Easy peasy.

Burner phones range from $10 flip to $159 smart phones, having the exact capabilities as an iPhone. Also, an unlocked used iPhone can easily be purchased from eBay or Craigslist, and serviced by a prepaid plan.

SM limits the number of accounts associated with a phone # A burner phone can expand your limit of SM accounts. All of this can go undetected leaving no trail back to you unless:

• Your purchases are captured on store video surveillance.
  
• Store video surveillance captures you reloading your prepaid card.
  
• You use the phone to access an account associated to you.
• You contact someone connected to you.
  
• Burner accounts are accessed from your home PC.
• Your burner phone accesses your ISP using wifi.

IP and device MAC addresses are logged by websites, routers and ISPs. I bet the FBI's computer forensic and IT engineers derived enormous job satisfaction as a result of her lack of knowledge. I believe they are heroes in this case

* My theory based on facts from the prosecutions witness list.

 

[MsBetsy]

So an FBI might have been speaking to a public person? Could this be why there are so many FBI's listed? Maybe a person will show up later to court if need? I am kind of lost, thank you.

I think they could be anyone who participated in the investigation or were consulted for help in specialty areas. It's not necessarily a list for the witnesses that will testify.

Imo

 

[10ofRods]

Usually true.
In this case they might be ok coming amdnseing her appeals being

All true except in this case if there is intentionality in those driving clips MOO the jury will not be bored. Seeing the time go by while a human doesn't self correct and drive themselves to the police station but persists in executing an elaborate cover up is horrifying and compelling. The minutes ticking in the jury box, as they watch her as she passes this place, then that place by make real what happened.

I've been trying to keep track. In order to show that Gannon did not walk around at all (even by jumping over the back fence), that would be lots of independent camera points, from around his block. There will be RD's camera, the Stauch's own ring camera, and I'm guessing, at least 4-5 others (probably more). The defense will claim that Gannon could have left the house between 2 pm and 5 pm (and that LS may have dropped him somewhere nearby).

That could be a *lot* of empty video watching. One hour of No Gannon on this tape; one hour of No Gannon on that tape, X 20? 2 hours of video watching per day would be extreme for a 6 hour in-the-seat jury trial. The fact that many videos are likely silent is going to make jurors quite dull, possibly tuned out.

Three hours of No Gannon x ? number of Lorson Ranch videos? No judge is going to allow that, IMO. The defense would want a numb jury, of course.

Nope, I wouldn't give the defense that kind of mind-numbing ploy. Something has to be done to condense this down to 1-2 highly credible witnesses. If the defense wants to call something into question (such as the existence of RD's surveillance video), I suppose they could call him. The judge will have to decide and frankly, I think the PD would be really incompetent if they called RD to the stand, as he's clearly credible, clearly has a video surveillance system, lives two houses down and that's LS in the truck and that's Gannon in the videos. I'm pretty sure that AS can testify to all of that. AS also can testify as to how he came to see that video, if that becomes relevant (and it probably will).

Since LS has already admitted to driving all over CS that day and I'm guessing that AS has asked LS a few questions about why she says she took Gannon out of the house, that may be all they need on that excruciating topic.

 

[LietKynes]

Marking my spot.
Hoping for updated news soon.

 

[magnetic]

I just realized if she would have backed that truck in just another two feet the video would have been useless. That’s got to be driving her crazy!

Maybe this video would have been useless, but we don't know just how much other video from neighbors there might be. We only know of RDs video cause he went public. If any of those houses to the right had video, they probably might even show what horrible state GS might have been in.

 

[Boxer]

@mrlime It seems you are onto her game

Witnesses for the prosecution includes:

Green Dot, a company offering prepaid reloadable debit cards.
Conoco / 7-11 (Convenience store)
& Go (Convenience store)

Convenience stores sell Green dot prepaid re-loadable debit cards. Burner phones can be purchased with cash or a prepaid debit card, then easily activated without any form of ID. Easy peasy.

Burner phones range from $10 flip to $159 smart phones, having the exact capabilities as an iPhone. Also, an unlocked used iPhone can easily be purchased from eBay or Craigslist, and serviced by a prepaid plan.

SM limits the number of accounts associated with a phone # A burner phone can expand your limit of SM accounts. All of this can go undetected leaving no trail back to you unless:

• Your purchases are captured on store video surveillance.
  
• Store video surveillance captures you reloading your prepaid card.
  
• You use the phone to access an account associated to you.
• You contact someone connected to you.
  
• Burner accounts are accessed from your home PC.
• Your burner phone accesses your ISP using wifi.

IP and device MAC addresses are logged by websites, routers and ISPs. I bet the FBI's computer forensic and IT engineers derived enormous job satisfaction as a result of her lack of knowledge. I believe they are heroes in this case

* My theory based on facts from the prosecutions witness list.

Yes. All cover up efforts depend on her original runaway scenario being accepted.
But police deal with runaways, they have experience with the pattern, they would sense the unlikeliness of a Gannon type kid who was sick running away.

 

[LietKynes]

Maybe this video would have been useless, but we don't know just how much other video from neighbors there might be. We only know of RDs video cause he went public. If any of those houses to the right had video, they probably might even show what horrible state GS might have been in.

bbm
Agreed.
He may have already been badly injured and TS thought no one would see him.
I have faith that LE have a clearer copy and more -- of the footage we've seen !
She is going down and will at the very least face life w/o parole.

 

[10ofRods]

BBM:

Me, too.

Having mapped its location, it looks like that car wash is <10 miles away from the Co. Springs Airport.
15 minute drive to the car wash from the airport, pretty much a straight shot up 21N.

خرائط ‪Google‬‏‏

It's 5.1 miles away from the Enterprise Rent-A-Car address listed on the witness list.

Directionally, the car wash lies pretty much on the route b/t Colorado Springs and Lorson Ranch.

Given the location of the Big Wave Car Wash, I'm thinking TS either washed her own car OR the rental there on Tuesday or Wednesday.

JMO.

That makes me think she took the truck to the airport and calls it 'my car' in her typical fashion.

 

[Boxer]

I've been trying to keep track. In order to show that Gannon did not walk around at all (even by jumping over the back fence), that would be lots of independent camera points, from around his block. There will be RD's camera, the Stauch's own ring camera, and I'm guessing, at least 4-5 others (probably more). The defense will claim that Gannon could have left the house between 2 pm and 5 pm (and that LS may have dropped him somewhere nearby).

That could be a *lot* of empty video watching. One hour of No Gannon on this tape; one hour of No Gannon on that tape, X 20? 2 hours of video watching per day would be extreme for a 6 hour in-the-seat jury trial. The fact that many videos are likely silent is going to make jurors quite dull, possibly tuned out.

Three hours of No Gannon x ? number of Lorson Ranch videos? No judge is going to allow that, IMO. The defense would want a numb jury, of course.

Nope, I wouldn't give the defense that kind of mind-numbing ploy. Something has to be done to condense this down to 1-2 highly credible witnesses. If the defense wants to call something into question (such as the existence of RD's surveillance video), I suppose they could call him. The judge will have to decide and frankly, I think the PD would be really incompetent if they called RD to the stand, as he's clearly credible, clearly has a video surveillance system, lives two houses down and that's LS in the truck and that's Gannon in the videos. I'm pretty sure that AS can testify to all of that. AS also can testify as to how he came to see that video, if that becomes relevant (and it probably will).

Since LS has already admitted to driving all over CS that day and I'm guessing that AS has asked LS a few questions about why she says she took Gannon out of the house, that may be all they need on that excruciating topic.

One thing, the videos don't have to be watched in real time they can be fast forwarded to motion events.

 

[Hoosier952]

I think she means Albert was the disciplinarian in the family. I don't think we can determine anything beyond that from her quote. Even at that, we're relying on the word of a seemingly not very bright occasional babysitter.

I wouldn't rule out that LS stepped back as disciplinarian while Al was there. With the amount of manipulation I think she likely used on the children, it would be just another outlet for that manipulation. Not just with the kids, but with Al as well. It's why my own ex-stepmom did growing up. When my dad was there, she stepped back and allowed him to discipline. She rarely laid a hand on a child while he was there and if she did, it was usually one of her sons. When he wasn't there, everything was a weapon. From food to soap to makeshift paddles out of regular household items. When he would return home, she'd admit a child got in trouble, but would severely play down just how bad she had punished us and would lie about what we got in trouble for so it sounded like we were literal demon children running amok all day. So if one of us cried to him, he would have her story from the get go and thought we were being dramatic when we'd tell him just how bad it was or that we were lying about what we got in trouble for.

I don't fault him for believing her. I know my own kids will exaggerate on how unfairly they were treated by one parent to the other or conveniently omit the facts, but neither of us are murdering kids either.

 

[10ofRods]

Doesn't Green Dot require an account sign up? And doesn't it require a fee per month, taken out of some form of account?

They seem to be operating under US banking regulations. Their ToS says you must present a valid government-issued ID.

https://www.greendot.com/content/dam/greendot/legal/about/docs/gdunlimited3daa.pdf

Money laundering and drug purchases are not going to be as easy as some think. If one takes cash to Green Dot, Green Dot still has to open an account, following federal regs (and their own ToS amply provides for the usual banking info to be collected).

Of course, it's possible that LS is also into identity theft, we don't know.

I still want to know how a person can get a plan with any cellular carrier without providing some form of ID. Or IP.

 

[MummyRatcliffe]

Is there footage of her loading the truck that Monday morning? I've only seen the footage of her and Gannon getting in the truck and her coming home without him

Thanks

 

[Rosiebones]

So, I guess the babysitter's utterance can be seen as completely disjointed. "Get on them," to me, refers back to "spanked the kids."

What do you think "get on them" means in this context? What is it that you think she means "Albert would do"?

Sounds like a "wait till your father gets home" scenario to me, and includes spanking as well as other "getting on the kids."

"Get on them" where I come from (northeast) means holler at them put them in time out etc. It doesn't mean hit, spank or otherwise hurt them. Just discipline them. I took this to mean she may have said "Just wait till your dad gets home"

 

[10ofRods]

One thing, the videos don't have to be watched in real time they can be fast forwarded to motion events.

If so stipulated (frames will be lost and the effect will be even less realistic). The defense has every reason to want the jury to tune out. It will be a controversial decision to speed it all up (and of course, then, there's no sound).

I think the use of this kind of "negative" evidence (showing where Gannon was not) is going to be problematic. Maybe the expert can give a sample of what they did. There's probably a computer algorithm involved in searching large numbers of neighborhood tapes (and I don't think it'll just be January 27, I think LE has gone back further in time, especially with RD's sound-enabled cameras).