EVIDENCE - Pro and Con #2

[TedMac]

My theory is pretty much exactly the same as yours. I also think the Ms knew she was home alone... but they didn't consider the fact that she might call her roommate (or anyone else, for that matter) after he called her from the pay phone. That really threw a monkey wrench into their plan.

BBM I believe SM found out from the phone call that she was alone as the topic probably came up in conversation. When the M's became aware that Heather was alone, they put their plan into action. I agree with your point that they could not have known that Heather had talked with her roommate. Her testimony will be crucial-if a trial ever happens.

 

[TedMac]

The items bbm, I think are right on the mark. That is an excellent point that you made about them not going to her apartment. In addition, it is quite possible, that there might be some video of Heather getting into her car alone at her apartment? I think your assessment of what probably happened that night is dead on!

BBM You may very well be correct about Heather being seen on video or even possibly seen by someone at the apartment complex as she was leaving.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

[/B]

BBMI believe that all any of us can do is speculate as to how all of the events went down. But, I think that the entire plan from stalking, to the meeting meeting, to the capture, to Heather's death and to the disposal of the body was planned in advance. The reason I question the M's coming to Heather's apartment and taking control of her there and driving her vehicle to PTL is I can't imagine them taking the risk of being seen there or Heather letting out a scream which would alert her neighbors. If they could convince her to drive away from there and meet them in a remote place such as PTL, that risk would be eliminated.

I have always thought that SM put the plan (that had been schemed out in advance) in motion when he went to the gas station and called Heather from the pay phone. He didn't know he would be seen on video. He thought he could call her and the said call could never be traced to him. It was agreed that they would meet at PTL later that night. I believe that Heather drove herself to PTL and the M's went together in their truck that was captured twice on video. Heather's calls that she made to SM's phone was her calling him possibly asking why he was late, etc. Once both parties arrived at PTL, Heather was quickly subdued and taken away in the M's truck to another location where she was killed and her body disposed of later that morning.

All of this is just my theory. I cannot prove any of the details. Heather's body will probably never be found and we may never know what really happened that night.

As you know, LE has been very tight lipped with regards to information around this case. But I believe that LE has a good idea of how the body was disposed of. Solicitor Richardson said in a press release prior to the gag order that the body may not be recoverable. I have always felt that statement indicates they pretty much know what happened to her.

Again, I am afraid that we may never know what really happened that night.

I do agree mostly with this scenario @TedMac (as most of us probably do). I just think it's possible that Heather may have been lured to a totally different location where she was taken then killed, and then her car was dumped at PTL. Why PTL, so close to the M's? I have no idea.

There is also no way to prove that Heather's phone was in her control that entire night/morning. So, her phone could have been used by one of the M's.

Things I cannot seem to get over:

1. How SM used the pay phone at the Kangaroo which never seemed to work IMO.
2. How it is believed she was killed at PTL. In such a short time, none of the neighbors hearing anything, what physical evidence at PTL supports this?
3. Why TE was able to drive her car away without it being fully processed by forensics.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

The items bbm, I think are right on the mark. That is an excellent point that you made about them not going to her apartment. In addition, it is quite possible, that there might be some video of Heather getting into her car alone at her apartment? I think your assessment of what probably happened that night is dead on!

BBM

There was no CCTV at Heather's apartment complex. I personally scouted that entire area.

There is no known video otherwise.... :notgood:

 

[TedMac]

I do agree mostly with this scenario @TedMac (as most of us probably do). I just think it's possible that Heather may have been lured to a totally different location where she was taken then killed, and then her car was dumped at PTL. Why PTL, so close to the M's? I have no idea.

There is also no way to prove that Heather's phone was in her control that entire night/morning. So, her phone could have been used by one of the M's.

Things I cannot seem to get over:

1. How SM used the pay phone at the Kangaroo which never seemed to work IMO.
2. How it is believed she was killed at PTL. In such a short time, none of the neighbors hearing anything, what physical evidence at PTL supports this?
3. Why TE was able to drive her car away without it being fully processed by forensics.

I agree it is certainly possible that Heather was lured away from her home to a different location. With the lack of information LE has released, about all we can do is speculate.

Heather's car may have been seen on video en route to PTL in the same manner the M's truck was seen. She would have passed thru several locations which at least some have surveillance cameras. Again, this is just a guess.

I have wondered about why PTL was selected. Maybe, it was a place they had previously used to meet? LE has speculated and even stated that they believe she was killed there, but I have not seen any physical evidence to support this. Since she was believed to be killed at approximately 3:30-3:40 am, probably most of the residents of the area were asleep and may have not heard anything? If she did meet the Moorers there, they may have simply slugged her, rendering her unconscious and drove her away to a different location where they finished her off. I don't have the link handy, but it was reported that approximately 4 am a noise such as an altercation was heard near the Moorer home. That may have been them finishing Heather off.

I was thinking that TM's truck was towed and then processed. I wasn't aware of it not being fully processed. That is very interesting.

 

[Madeleine74]

1. How SM used the payphone? He picked up the receiver, got a dial tone, inserted coins, and used it to call HE on her cell phone. We know it worked that particular moment in time because there's a record of a call coming to HE's cell phone from that pay phone, showing a connection lasting for a few minutes. That the payphone didn't work at other times/other days, after the crime was committed, doesn't change the fact that the payphone worked at the time SM made the call.

2. Maybe "killing" indicates the start of the crime ending in her death. No one, not even LE, can know for certain exactly what time HE breathed her last breath, but they can tell that PTL is where she ended up at the end of her drive at 3:xx am that morning after leaving her apartment. Unless there are bullet casings or something that shows she was attacked right there, it's probably some figure of speech that they are using that we lay people may not quite understand, thus twisting ourselves into pretzels trying to figure out exactly how she was killed right in that very spot.

3. The police, for whatever reason, didn't understand Heather was kidnapped right then and there. Remember, the call came to TE about an abandoned car and he was the contact person to come and pick it up. The car was locked, and police allowed TE to remove the vehicle since a report had been called in. Simple and as complicated as that. The police didn't know what else had gone down at that time and lacked psychic ability. It's not ideal, but it does happen sometimes.

 

[Motherof5]

I still don't think Heather drove herself to PTL. Anyone else think the same? Any speculation to say otherwise?

LE has not proven to me that Heather drove herself to PTL or that she called SM from PTL. I only know that her phone and car went to PTL. Her phone called SM's phone several times and shortly after went dead. In my mind, that was SM driving Heather's car to PTL and calling TM in a panic to come get him...which she did. I believe that Heather was in her trunk and SM drove her to PTL to meet TM. I don't believe that TM killed Heather. She wanted to. She planned it all. But if anyone would get caught, she'd want it to be SM. I think she ordered SM to do it and TM watched. She's sick and evil. I believe she would enjoy punishing Heather and SM that way.

 

[Madeleine74]

Perhaps the state has more information that we are not privy to. Something led the state to say, in open court no less, that Heather drove herself to PTL that fateful night/morning. Sure, they could be wrong, but they certainly know more than I do, and I have no reason to think I would know better, and based on nothing but my imagination of what could have happened. I take it at face value since that's just easier and likely more accurate.

If this trial never happens then we'll probably never know what the state has to allow them to make the assertion that Heather drove herself to PTL.

 

[jillycat]

I still don't think Heather drove herself to PTL. Anyone else think the same? Any speculation to say otherwise?

Have never thought she drove there.

 

[LBDunes]

There is also no way to prove that Heather's phone was in her control that entire night/morning. So, her phone could have been used by one of the M's. [/B]

Things I cannot seem to get over:

1. How SM used the pay phone at the Kangaroo which never seemed to work IMO.
2. How it is believed she was killed at PTL. In such a short time, none of the neighbors hearing anything, what physical evidence at PTL supports this?
3. Why TE was able to drive her car away without it being fully processed by forensics.

Yes, it is true that there is no way to prove she was in control of her phone, but what relevance or what point does that make in the case or in the trial.

SM and the payphone. I am not sure why you can't get over that. That should be easy. This was certainly said in the hearings and is a fact. There is no way in my mind that it is not true. This is probably the single most important piece of evidence that has been released to the public. It really shows intent and premeditation.

 

[LBDunes]

BBM

There was no CCTV at Heather's apartment complex. I personally scouted that entire area.

There is no known video otherwise.... :notgood:

Another angle on that is there could be video from the power plant across the way of the M's leaving their home together. That is quite possible. SM recently mentioned that those cameras are trained on their home. I just don't think they would have said they believe she drove herself to PTL w/o something behind it.

 

[jillycat]

Yes, it is true that there is no way to prove she was in control of her phone, but what relevance or what point does that make in the case or in the trial.

SM and the payphone. I am not sure why you can't get over that. That should be easy. This was certainly said in the hearings and is a fact. There is no way in my mind that it is not true. This is probably the single most important piece of evidence that has been released to the public. It really shows intent and premeditation.

If she was not in control of her phone when she was said to be, the underpinning of the state's circumstantial case begins to crumble because the timeline and crime scene are likely changed entirely. This is relevant because a defense attorney is going to pursue any and all avenues of dismantling the state's claims about how the crime unfolded and she was murdered at the hands of the M's. For example, if it wasn't Heather calling SM from PTL, who was it, where was Heather, and was she already dead? Was she ever at PTL? And why was her phone even being used to call SM?

I believe the state already has several obstacles in advancing their claims of what occurred, so if there is any doubt that Heather was the person on her phone at the times alleged, it's a problem for the state.

Conversely, the defense has obstacles separating their clients from Heather that morning so it's a problem for them if there's any indication that the M's had control of the phone. However, the state likely stands to lose that one because to take on that issue, they would have to agree that something other than their probable cause claims is what happened.

As for the pay phone call, I don't think that matters nearly as much as the other phone activity. It may have initiated a chain of events but what happened and when after the pay phone call, by phone and through direct contact, is what matters. The state can only say vehicles were leaving, going toward places, and ending up places, and phones were having contact with other phones. I just don't believe that tells the story, nor do I think it's a story the defense will sit out when it's told at a trial. If there's a trial.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

H.E. and the M's (specifically SM & SM's phone) are linked together in this case. Even if one surmises that somehow either SM or TM or both went to HE's apartment and did something to her there and then transported her, her cell phone, and her car to PTL, they're still linked together in time and space.

Then you have cell phone pings which can show movement. HE's cell phone was pinging showing movement to PTL and calling SM's cell phone. Still linked in time and place.

It doesn't matter if the defense suggests something happened to H.E. before she got to PTL -- that doesn't absolve the M's since they remain linked together to H.E. by video (truck on video seen at a few points), time (verified with phone calls and pings between SM's cell and H.E's cell), and HE's cell phone movements (not to mention her call to her roommate in FL which verifies H.E. was alive at that time and had confirmed she got a call from SM).

The only change is if one of the M's rolls over and blames the other, claiming it was that one who did something to H.E. and they knew nothing about it. Otherwise, they're in this together.

If a jury is considering this case they will easily infer, using just common sense, that H.E. and the M's encountered each other that particular night and H.E. is missing and deceased.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

As for the 2 CCTVs of the truck, I think if this ever goes to trial that the D will fight pretty hard to have them removed or will discredit them as they did in the second bond hearing.

 

[Madeleine74]

The videos were not discredited. The defense claimed the videos merely show a black blob. However, what the defense says and what reality shows can be very different. It's posturing. No way will the videos be tossed as evidence. It will ultimately be up to the jury to decide if what is seen on video is the M's truck or not (that is if the state ever takes this case to trial), not up to posturing lawyers.

 

[LBDunes]

As for the 2 CCTVs of the truck, I think if this ever goes to trial that the D will fight pretty hard to have them removed or will discredit them as they did in the second bond hearing.

We really don't know if there are only 2 videos of their truck or other activity. Also, I agree that the videos will not be tossed out. There are just too many coincidences in my mind for the jury to find that these 2 are not involved here. The things presented in the first bond hearing paint a narrative. Who knows what else the state may have? jmo, the pieces fit.

 

[jillycat]

H.E. and the M's (specifically SM & SM's phone) are linked together in this case. Even if one surmises that somehow either SM or TM or both went to HE's apartment and did something to her there and then transported her, her cell phone, and her car to PTL, they're still linked together in time and space.

Then you have cell phone pings which can show movement. HE's cell phone was pinging showing movement to PTL and calling SM's cell phone. Still linked in time and place.

It doesn't matter if the defense suggests something happened to H.E. before she got to PTL -- that doesn't absolve the M's since they remain linked together to H.E. by video (truck on video seen at a few points), time (verified with phone calls and pings between SM's cell and H.E's cell), and HE's cell phone movements (not to mention her call to her roommate in FL which verifies H.E. was alive at that time and had confirmed she got a call from SM).

The only change is if one of the M's rolls over and blames the other, claiming it was that one who did something to H.E. and they knew nothing about it. Otherwise, they're in this together.

If a jury is considering this case they will easily infer, using just common sense, that H.E. and the M's encountered each other that particular night and H.E. is missing and deceased.

There was a post that noted we don't know for sure whether or not it was Heather in control of her phone as the morning progressed, and I disagreed with a subsequent remark that whether she was or wasn't is irrelevant at trial. So, there is a difference between saying that who had control of Heather's phone and when could be an issue concerning timeline and crime scene, and arguing that the M's and Heather didn't have contact that night/morning, or Heather isn't dead. A jury can 'know' the M's did it, but not be able to square the state's claims under a reasonable doubt standard, particularly if the state's timeline is viewed as untenable, or other claims aren't stacking well.

In regard to pings, neither LE or the state have released information about pings. There was a rumor that the last ping from Heather's phone was at PTL, but it was never publicly substantiated by LE. The carrier records are what LE used to determine overall phone activity, and GPS indicated Heather's phone/car location as referenced by police. If they also obtained ping information, they've kept it to themselves.

FWIW, here is some interesting food for thought on cell phone information and what it can tell LE:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-your-cell-phone-cant-tell-the-police

I also wanted to respond to your post #666 in this link concerning the location of the murder:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...VIDENCE-Pro-and-Con-2&p=12073890#post12073890

I strongly disagree that language in a probable cause warrant such as Heather was "kidnapped and murdered at Peachtree Boat Landing on December 18, 2013" is a figure of speech a layperson can't understand. The state's case is predicated on a claim that there were phone exchanges that led to Heather driving to PTL at a particular time, and being kidnapped and murdered at that location. The state's speculation and claims of what occurred that early morning abruptly end there. For the state to potentially say later at trial that they didn't really mean the 'actual' murder took place there is not going to fly. Such a broad interpretation - on which a judge's signature on a probable cause warrant was obtained - reminds me of that graphic going around Facebook where a grinning Bob Ross (the late painter) is working on a landscape and the caption reads: "Ever make a mistake in life? Let's make them birds, yeah, they're birds now."

If the murder didn't 'really' take place at PTL, the state can't say in a trial 'let's make it another scenario...yeah, it happened another way, and our probable cause claims were just 'happy little mistakes'.

I have no doubt that a jury can infer the three parties encountered one another, just as we figured it out before we even saw the warrants, but the state still has to make the case under a legal standard, and the defense is not going to be silent about the PTL claim. So, in addition to my question of whether or not this case will see trial, I'd like to know along with PeterThomasFan, why do they believe she was kidnapped and murdered at PTL? If there's a reason besides it's the only place they can reasonably argue that all three parties were together, I'd like to hear the reason. But it looks to me like PTL is where the murder happened because they don't know where, when, or how, and hey, her car was parked there, right?

Let's make it a murder scene, yeah, it's a murder scene now....

JMO

 

[PeterThomasFan]

It does seem that the State found a "glove that fits". Sort of.

Until, new evidence is discovered, someone slips up, or a body is found, the State will be sticking to their story (that could be easily interpreted by a jury IMO).

Being this is a circumstantial case (at his point) – with no body or direct evidence, the State's scenario is only supported by some shoddy video, a few cell phone pings, a motive, and whatever was found at the M's compound which led to an arrest in the first place.

The strategy

Horry County Solicitor Jimmy Richardson said when the case got to his office, it was a matter of strategy to get the Moorers in custody on the lesser charges of indecent exposure and obstruction of justice before investigators brought in the U.S. Attorney’s General Office, the S.C. Highway Patrol’s Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division to build a case on the bigger charges.

“The stuff that was found at the house, if we didn’t have a lot of stuff already from two months ago or six weeks ago, it wouldn’t have been that much,” Richardson said. “But it has added to things we already expected. So we were able to find some extra stuff after what we already knew to be obstruction of justice and indecent exposure.​

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article13839275.html#storylink=cpy​

Why not just come out and say what basic information LE has to feel so strongly that HE drove to PTL and was killed there? Instead, they opted for a gag order. And further, the M's were granted bail with no contest.

Looking back at the search of PTL, why didn't LE collect more evidence (if any) where HE's car was parked? They seemed to focus all their efforts on searching the water IMO. I went there during and after the search and was alarmed to find a ton of debris in and around the location where her car was found. Not to mention several fresh tire tracks that could have been used as possible evidence. It appeared to me at least that the parking lot area was completely ignored. :facepalm: So, I guess add that to my "dumbfounded" list as well!

I agree and like your Bob Ross analogy @jillycat! :clap:

Sorry so sporadic. My coffee hasn't kicked in yet.

 

[stillwatersc]

It does seem that the State found a "glove that fits". Sort of.

Until, new evidence is discovered, someone slips up, or a body is found, the State will be sticking to their story (that could be easily interpreted by a jury IMO).

Being this is a circumstantial case (at his point) – with no body or direct evidence, the State's scenario is only supported by some shoddy video, a few cell phone pings, a motive, and whatever was found at the M's compound which led to an arrest in the first place.

IMO what Heather told the roommate + SM's lie + Heather's call back to his cell phone should be added to this list.

 

[Madeleine74]

Why not just come out and say what basic information LE has to feel so strongly that HE drove to PTL and was killed there? Instead, they opted for a gag order. And further, the M's were granted bail with no contest.

The state has to protect the integrity of the case, to the extent they can, and make sure a potential jury pool isn't tainted since they only get one bite of the apple (unless there's a mistrial). Convincing the public and informing the public details of the investigation and case prior to litigating the case is not their concern and could only hurt them rather than help them.

Certain information does come out through the filing of some legal documents with the court (which are then accessible by the media) and of course the public is privy to hearings/proceedings held in open court and the public will learn about the evidence if and when there's a trial and the state presents the evidence through witness testimony.