Deaths of Male College Students-General Discussion #4

[SheerLuck]

Gannon and the family have not created this. These drownings and disappearances have been ongoing for years. I heard about this at least four years ago, pre-Gannon.

So, we should just dismiss 18 drownings and 7 missing? Open/Shut Case? 07-08 school year alone

IF one of these young men was my son, I would not just take this as a 'coincidence?' I would want to be SURE my son's death wasn't a crime. That would be the least I would owe him.

IF these cases are ALL just a COINCIDENCE, then it would appear that the East Coast, the MidWest, and Southern states need to educate the population on the DANGER of drinking when there's a body of water around, being ALONE (after having even a couple of drinks,) late at night and into the early morning hours.

We've gone from one potential victim (or accident?)in a year to 25 in one school year. We've gone from this happening in one state to numerous states. PLUS, it keeps happening over and over and over and over in the same cities, same states, same, same, same..........

These areas seem to have some sort of a drinking problem that is not evident in the rest of the United States. At least to such a great degree, IMO.

Ahhh......but that's just it, the perfect crime.

IF these are crimes, that's what the perps are counting on. No body = no crime......no evidence of foul play = no crime.

I see no harm in the government forming a task force to gather all the information regarding each individual case and LOOK into it. Talk to people. Look at computer info. Look at cell phone info.

IMO, that's the ONLY WAY they're going to be able to prove IF it's a crime or IF it's all a COINCIDENCE.

JMHO
fran

Fran; I don't think the numbers have changed much the past 40 years. As Luthers mama posted; it's the internet that's created this new awareness. Gannon said its "preposterious" to think all these young men could simply drink and accidentally drown, but is it? Or is Gannon wrong? He thought it made no sense that 8 Wisconsin men died the past 11 years; but 24 died the past 30 years; so 8 in 11 is right in line. 89 drownings nationwide of young men since 1997 is also not surprising. I agree with Gannon that drownings should be investigated differently; that I do agree with him on. But when there's not a shred of evidence and it's evident from either BAC or word of mouth from the unreported police questioning of friends; that the kid is highly intoxicated; then why leave it open and why form an expensive task force?

 

[SheerLuck]

SL:

For someone who has spent as much time as you have, if you recall, actually claiming to have these cases figured out in the very beginning, I am more than surprised to hear you say this is BS.

Secondly, since you feel the detectives theory in that these cases are linked is "debunked" for you- what is your explanation then based on your research?

I hope you'll forgive me for not quoting the source, but a colleague of mine gave me a statisitic yesterday that FLOORED ME.

In some Le departments, especially where they maintain jurisdiction because a MP case is not yet a death, or an a criminal act, the officers assigned in some cases actually have more training in ANIMAL CONTROL than they do in dealing with interviewing witnesses, securing possible crime scene evidence, and the like. How fair is it to put someone that has not been trained for such a task responsible for it, or in some cases, finding a loved one where time could be critical. Answers need to be had for these families and the process needs to change, or this is going to go on and on-

I researched every possible angle; including the ones people offered up here and none of them really make sense. Then I researched each case by comparing current news; with the original local newspaper articles. And what I found is that in almost every case; there was an attempt to not honestly discuss the drinking. The early articles would emphasize a lot of drinking in most cases and the later articles would down play the drinking. It became obvious; in case after case; that a lot of drinking was involved and the most likely answer to most of these cases is alcoholism or alcohol abuse. Look at all 8 of the 2006 cases from footprints. Almost everyone of them is probably just a drunk accident except 1(Kenji Ohmi; who sounds like a suicide).

http://footprintsattheriversedge.bl...d-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&max-results=8

 

[RR0004]

He was at Dapper Dog which is on 2nd Ave and 92nd Street. This is not far from the Hudson. Anyone's guess as to how he died; is pure speculation. Since his BAC is kept a secret by his family and since his family would never say if he was on any medicfication for depression or other problems; then it's a complete mystery how he died. He left the bar early because he said he was tired and was last seen walking on 90th street by a witness who said he looked disorientated. He was seen walking away from the subway he should have been taking to get back to Fordham. Sounds to me like he was wasted and didn't know what he was doing

Ok for the last time...I was in Manhattan last night...and you're wrong when you say 90th is not far from the Hudson, SL. The East River would be closer if he was intending on walking down there and jumping in. 90th street is on the way to the 86th st station...and you're right...we don't know what happened to this young man...but we should! More should be done for all these cases...and I totally agree each one should be looked at independently. There was a time in NY when a young man went missing soon after the news would report yet another body in NY rivers. There are a lot of easier ways to commit suicide in Manhattan...and walking all over the city to look for a body of water wouldn't be IMO the chosen method.

 

[fran]

and walking all over the city to look for a body of water wouldn't be IMO the chosen method.

That's EXACTLY what my 'young adult' children said. They would NOT choose to commit suicide by drowning. Of course, they're female, perhaps the mind set is different.

So, FWIW,
fran

PS.......YES, that's what I'm saying also, they should each be looked at individually and IMO, collectively IF possible, not just dismissed. A defense attorney refers to it as 'tunnel vision.' But, these poor young men aren't here to have an attorney, just voices like US, being sure every aspect of their case is reviewed to the fullest extent...........fran

 

[RR0004]

I just remembered something that I'd forgotten I had remembered the other day (senior moment!)...I actually know someone who's son was friends with Patrick (in my defense, it has been 10 years!) I will be seeing this person, hopefully, next month and will be sure to ask questions.

 

[mysteriew]

He was at Dapper Dog which is on 2nd Ave and 92nd Street. This is not far from the Hudson. Anyone's guess as to how he died; is pure speculation. Since his BAC is kept a secret by his family and since his family would never say if he was on any medicfication for depression or other problems; then it's a complete mystery how he died. He left the bar early because he said he was tired and was last seen walking on 90th street by a witness who said he looked disorientated. He was seen walking away from the subway he should have been taking to get back to Fordham. Sounds to me like he was wasted and didn't know what he was doing

You know I have seen you make statements that "the families" are "keeping the BAC secret" several times. That really bugs you doesn't it? Yet you also insist that these drownings were all accidental. If there is no crime, then the families are entitled to their right to privacy for their loved ones. They have no obligation at all to disclose the BAC's, mental status or health conditions of their loved ones. So by your own reasoning, we do not have a need for that BAC.

If they are being investigated as crimes, then LE might be requesting that the BAC's be kept secret and the family's may not have any choice about it. But even then it would come out in court if it ever goes to trial.

When a victim is found to be highly intoxicated, very often the perception is that their death must be their own fault. And very often it is. They drive impaired, they walk into traffic, they take unnecessary chances. And as a result their deaths become very easy to dismiss as a result of their own impairment. But that doesn't mean that no alcohol impaired person is ever a victim. Alcohol impaired persons are more likely to be mugged, to be victims of violence simply because they make such easy targets. Their alcohol/drug impairment makes any resistance on their part pretty ineffective. I think that is what happened here as far as the investigation. These boys ended up in the rivers. LE would have looked at their deaths very closely if they hadn't been alcohol/drug impaired. But they were impaired so it made it really easy to blame the deaths on "they were drunk."

 

[RR0004]

You know I have seen you make statements that "the families" are "keeping the BAC secret" several times. That really bugs you doesn't it? Yet you also insist that these drownings were all accidental. If there is no crime, then the families are entitled to their right to privacy for their loved ones. They have no obligation at all to disclose the BAC's, mental status or health conditions of their loved ones. So by your own reasoning, we do not have a need for that BAC.

If they are being investigated as crimes, then LE might be requesting that the BAC's be kept secret and the family's may not have any choice about it. But even then it would come out in court if it ever goes to trial.

When a victim is found to be highly intoxicated, very often the perception is that their death must be their own fault. And very often it is. They drive impaired, they walk into traffic, they take unnecessary chances. And as a result their deaths become very easy to dismiss as a result of their own impairment. But that doesn't mean that no alcohol impaired person is ever a victim. Alcohol impaired persons are more likely to be mugged, to be victims of violence simply because they make such easy targets. Their alcohol/drug impairment makes any resistance on their part pretty ineffective. I think that is what happened here as far as the investigation. These boys ended up in the rivers. LE would have looked at their deaths very closely if they hadn't been alcohol/drug impaired. But they were impaired so it made it really easy to blame the deaths on "they were drunk."

mysteriew...bless you...you're 100% correct in what you said about how LE perceives these boys the moment they become aware that alcohol is involved. That's what's so frustrating for me. Another thing that irks me is how territorial LE can be. They're not real good with exchanging information or allowing outside help to come in and take a look at these cases.

 

[SheerLuck]

Ok for the last time...I was in Manhattan last night...and you're wrong when you say 90th is not far from the Hudson, SL. The East River would be closer if he was intending on walking down there and jumping in. 90th street is on the way to the 86th st station...and you're right...we don't know what happened to this young man...but we should! More should be done for all these cases...and I totally agree each one should be looked at independently. There was a time in NY when a young man went missing soon after the news would report yet another body in NY rivers. There are a lot of easier ways to commit suicide in Manhattan...and walking all over the city to look for a body of water wouldn't be IMO the chosen method.

90th goes right down to the Hudson doesn't it? Or its about 2 miles when closer to 2nd Avenue? I don't know murder, suicide or accident but I just see McNeil as most of the others as being drunk, disorientated and an accident waiting to happen. Also; 1 other thing to investigate with McNeil is him and the kid who drowned the exact year later(Larry Andrews); were found in almost identical spots. It was off a pier in a harbor by Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. I'd be interested if there's an area somewhere near there where kids sometimes go and hang out. Along most rivers there are riverfronts and popular spots and these areas are where accidents happen

 

[SheerLuck]

Ok for the last time...I was in Manhattan last night...and you're wrong when you say 90th is not far from the Hudson, SL. The East River would be closer if he was intending on walking down there and jumping in. 90th street is on the way to the 86th st station...and you're right...we don't know what happened to this young man...but we should! More should be done for all these cases

We both agree that drowning deaths should be looked at closer and not closed so fast; so Gannon deserves credit for that. But here's map of 90th. and it does go right down to the Hudson within 2/10ths of a mile

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/[210-255]+W+90th+St+New+York+NY+10024/

 

[ArizonaGiGi]

I researched every possible angle; including the ones people offered up here and none of them really make sense. Then I researched each case by comparing current news; with the original local newspaper articles. And what I found is that in almost every case; there was an attempt to not honestly discuss the drinking. The early articles would emphasize a lot of drinking in most cases and the later articles would down play the drinking. It became obvious; in case after case; that a lot of drinking was involved and the most likely answer to most of these cases is alcoholism or alcohol abuse. Look at all 8 of the 2006 cases from footprints. Almost everyone of them is probably just a drunk accident except 1(Kenji Ohmi; who sounds like a suicide).

http://footprintsattheriversedge.bl...d-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&max-results=8

SL, you think Josh Szostak(sp) rearranged his clothes before "jumping into the water"? Firefighter T-shirt OVER his jacket, hoodie and undershirt missing.
I was not convinced these were murders until his murder. Now I have no question.

 

[Masterj]

90th goes right down to the Hudson doesn't it? Or its about 2 miles when closer to 2nd Avenue? I don't know murder, suicide or accident but I just see McNeil as most of the others as being drunk, disorientated and an accident waiting to happen. Also; 1 other thing to investigate with McNeil is him and the kid who drowned the exact year later(Larry Andrews); were found in almost identical spots. It was off a pier in a harbor by Bay Ridge, Brooklyn. I'd be interested if there's an area somewhere near there where kids sometimes go and hang out. Along most rivers there are riverfronts and popular spots and these areas are where accidents happen

I think the problem here is that you keep mentioning the Hudson river. However, another report said McNeil was found in the East river. Can someone with more knowledge of the case please clarify? There is a big difference between the two, and I think this is part of what makes SheerLuck's posts so confusing. Sheerluck, I suspect you are either confused or don't have a strong knowledge of Manhattan or both.

It would make more sense geographically if McNeil was found in the East River. The bar was on 2nd Ave and if heading to the East River, someone would turn left and walk towards 1st Ave, and across York and East End Ave to the East River. If heading to the Hudson River, you would have to go uphill and cross 2nd Ave, 3rd Ave, Lex, Park, Mad. Fifth and then cut through Central Park, go around the resevoir, cross Central Park West, Columbus Ave, Amsterdam, Broadway, West End Ave, Riverside Drive and then cross Riverside Park and then you reach the Hudson river.

Since McNeil's body was found in Brooklyn, I have to conclude he was actually found in the EAST river, but really hope someone could clarify this for me. I still would find it hard to believe he went to the East River, right by Gracie Mansion where there is a lot of security, trespassed and hopped a railing into the river. There is no way he could just tumble into the river at that location IMO.

 

[Blink34]

He was actually found in New York Harbor (11 Mi downstream from Bar) near a pier in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn if that helps.

Additionally, we should note that Patrick was UNDERAGE, and was served by the bartender, who was one of his roomates at Fordham. It is reported that he fell on the floor in the bathroom and was then cut off.

 

[Blink34]

I researched every possible angle; including the ones people offered up here and none of them really make sense. Then I researched each case by comparing current news; with the original local newspaper articles. And what I found is that in almost every case; there was an attempt to not honestly discuss the drinking. The early articles would emphasize a lot of drinking in most cases and the later articles would down play the drinking. It became obvious; in case after case; that a lot of drinking was involved and the most likely answer to most of these cases is alcoholism or alcohol abuse. Look at all 8 of the 2006 cases from footprints. Almost everyone of them is probably just a drunk accident except 1(Kenji Ohmi; who sounds like a suicide).

http://footprintsattheriversedge.bl...d-max=2007-01-01T00:00:00-06:00&max-results=8

SL-
Before I respond to your post I want to make sure I understand it-

1) Are you saying that the press exaggerated the level of drinking and then downplayed it at the end?

2) Please explain the "effort to not discuss the drinking openly." On whose part? Perhaps I am missing something, but I have seen you post before that families were witholding BAC- are you aware that the family does not determine what information is available to the public? That is based on the coroner/ME protocal and in some cases if a wrongful death is filed PRIOR to completion of the tox results, and a few other rarities, none I am aware of in these cases. Bottom line, unless there is a court order suppressing this information (and they have a time limit) all this info is public upon request.

I'm holding out until I see your responses, but from the guy who had these cases figured out from the beginning to use media accounts as a basis for coming to the same lame conclusion, easy-way out- I am confused yet again.

 

[fran]

He was actually found in New York Harbor (11 Mi downstream from Bar) near a pier in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn if that helps.

Additionally, we should note that Patrick was UNDERAGE, and was served by the bartender, who was one of his roomates at Fordham. It is reported that he fell on the floor in the bathroom and was then cut off.

Now, this is where so many of these cases get weird. I've seen reports that he fell down in the bathroom floor as you've stated and yet I saw another article where is BAL was minimal.

THEN I've seen where he left early explaining he had an early class the next day and then on the other hand, I've read he was waiting for a female fellow student who was in the restroom, so that they could leave. But when she returned, Patrick was gone.

Minimal BAL,.............disappeared within the bar?

Drunk, ...................disappeared into the night?

THIS is WHERE these cases look sinister, IMO. Connected or isolated incident, it looks suspicious, IMO. PLUS, there's a number of other cases the LE were BAFFLED, yet ultimately chalked it up to accidental drowning after a night of drinking.

IMO, either the cases are connected,.............or an isolated incident (ie meaning 'local' type foul play), LE should be sure they're investigating these to the fullest extent so there's NO question as to the death of these young men.



fran

 

[Blink34]

Fran-
I have come to learn that press accounts are solely based on what information THEY ARE GIVEN. The day of investigative reporting appears to be limited to Dateline, 48 hours, and the like.

I have actually seen where they keep updating an old article and DON'T change the erroneous facts in the original??

Your completely correct, disparity of info, of any kind that leaves a death suspicious should need to be answered.

One of the major issues, which unfortunately as unfair to LE as it is to the family and victim, is that LE HATES unsolved cases, the more open their cases stay, it interferes with their stats, budgets, merit raises, promos, etc.. That is a problem- I am not suggesting for a second that LE does not want to solve cases with successful prosecutions, Im saying in most cases, unless their is a designated MP task force (RARE) they are not structured to support the difficult investigations from almost every perspective.

 

[fran]

Blink:

I understand what you're saying about LE not liking opened cases. PLUS, I'm sure if they really suspected foul play, they would have checked further.

That, IMO, is part of this particular case. EACH INDIVIDUAL case can appear as if it were an accident or 'isolated' incident. However, the sheer # of times this SAME scenario has played over and over and over again, gives it the appearance that many of these are related, somehow.

THAT is what serial killers count on. Each victim in a different jurisdiction so that their victims appear to be an 'isolated' incident, thus NOT further investigated and that they were an accident at their own hand AND, or, their missing without a trace, which makes it appear they're gone of their own accord.

no proof of a crime = accident
no body = no case

no indication of a crime = perfect crime.

JMHO
fran

PS......there was a case in recent years where a # of young women were found on roadsides, turnouts, under bridges etc. Each woman was found in a different local, state, county, or whatever. It wasn't until just two were connected by they're last KNOWN vicinity, that as LE began checking, there were SEVERAL victims of the same perp. He and his accomplice were finally caught, but not after their crime spree had gone on undetected for a number of years.

There's also the case here in Cali of the 'Original Night Stalker,' from some years ago. It wasn't until a few years ago that LE connected a string of homicides in So. Calif with a much bigger string of rapes in the Sacramento area, that they realized they were dealing with the same person. Different crime, different MO, different profile of victims, same dna. OH, and fwiw, that perp had 50 or so rapes, 10 or so murders, and the case remains unsolved to this day......fran

 

[mysteriew]

I agree. There have been truckers who were serial killers, picking up women in truck stops, killing and dumping them, then moving on to a new state to do the same thing. They will kill for years without any determination of a serial killer being active. Several times the press first starts asking the questions and LE will deny the potential of an SK. But when finally caught they will link many cases to the same suspect. LE doesn't like to admit any info about an SK. Whether that is because they refuse to admit the possibility for their own reasons or whether it is because they don't believe in them I don't know. But it happens many times that the press is the first to ask questions about SK's, esp. if there are multiple jurisdictions.

 

[Blink34]

Fran- I agree totally, but I think your examples are what I would call obvious homicides. In these cases, most start out as MP (for LE drunks that are prob shacked up, or at least deserve what they get for being drunk, etc..). Once some investigation is done, and there is no EVIDENCE of foul play, and then they may or may not locate a victim who also does not show signs of foul play, there isn't really anywhere to go because there is pressure from above to close the case, and even if they suspect (Josh SZostak's a prime example) foul play, if they are reasonably sure they will not be able to prove it successfully, the "accidental drowning" looks like a good idea to clear the case.

I have to declare that it has actually been said to me that the alternative for some families to believe their child was murdered over "that it was an accident", is easier for them to bear. I do not personally subscribe to that theory, and I have an intimate experience with it and I know sometimes it's true. For me, and from what I have learned, it seems no-one seems to follow the exclusionary rule- which is standard investigation 101- if you cannot rule it out it stays in

 

[Masterj]

He was actually found in New York Harbor (11 Mi downstream from Bar) near a pier in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn if that helps.

Additionally, we should note that Patrick was UNDERAGE, and was served by the bartender, who was one of his roomates at Fordham. It is reported that he fell on the floor in the bathroom and was then cut off.

This would mean the East River. It is very confusing when Sheerluck keeps mentioning the Hudson River, which is completely inaccurate.

Has anyone seen any ideas of Pat's point of entry? Again - I can't imagine that he walked directly from the bar, to the East River and drunkenly fell in. If he turned down 90th and walked further east he would reach the East River after crossing 1st Ave, York Ave and East End. That would put him at 90th and East End which is EXACTLy 2 blocks from Gracie Mansion, also known as the offical residence of the Mayor. There is a LOT of security in this area. Not to mention, he couldn't have just fallen in as there are high railings there. He would have had to climb and jumped or been pushed, IMO. If that is the point of entry of course.

I also wanted to add that just a few blocks north of 90th street and 2nd ave, you start getting into the East Harlem area which isn't the safest area to be walking alone late at night.

 

[Blink34]

This would mean the East River. It is very confusing when Sheerluck keeps mentioning the Hudson River, which is completely inaccurate.

Has anyone seen any ideas of Pat's point of entry? Again - I can't imagine that he walked directly from the bar, to the East River and drunkenly fell in. If he turned down 90th and walked further east he would reach the East River after crossing 1st Ave, York Ave and East End. That would put him at 90th and East End which is EXACTLy 2 blocks from Gracie Mansion, also known as the offical residence of the Mayor. There is a LOT of security in this area. Not to mention, he couldn't have just fallen in as there are high railings there. He would have had to climb and jumped or been pushed, IMO. If that is the point of entry of course.

I also wanted to add that just a few blocks north of 90th street and 2nd ave, you start getting into the East Harlem area which isn't the safest area to be walking alone late at night.

Agreed, I think he is confused and thinking about Patrick Martin, who was found in the Hudson.