EVIDENCE - Pro and Con

[PeterThomasFan]

In the second theorized scenario of the timeline, what would be the reason TM drove so slowly to pick SM up from PTL? It doesn't add up to me.

If TM went home after HE's apartment, that could account for some time (waiting for SM to call her back – after he got to PTL). According to our calculations on the trip back, they were hauling butt! Not sure if they went straight home after that, to BiLo, or even back to HE's apartment. Still trying to figure that part out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Sorry for any typos!

 

[magnolia]

With the 'new' time line scenario posted ^^up there -- the lag in him arriving at he apartment COULD have been they had a brief moment of cold feet to go through with their plan? They were arguing about it?

Also - Heather may have given SM the address during that payphone call - could be that simple as to know where she was living.

I also believe there may have been 'something else' (I think it's a very slim possibility) that could've spurred this into TM wanting Heather completely out of the picture - but that 'something else' has never been verified and not allowed to be discussed here..... so I'm not saying anything more than that!!

I've thought about the something else as well. I think that is a situation where they would both want her completely out of the picture.

 

[NWLady]

Maybe TM was supposed to go back to the payphone and wait. Maybe the plan was to have no calls to their phones.
Good catch.

Good thinking, rob! Maybe the call from Heather's phone back to the payphone was SM calling TM at the payphone to say hey, come pick me up at the boat landing??

 

[magnolia]

Here are several things that I observed while looking through older news postings.

" Evidence located on the property led to the charge of Murder" (On the property but not in the house)?

"That day, Nov. 5th, Elder said, was the last time Elvis saw Sidney Moorer" "It is unclear what happened that day, or how prosecutors know Nov. 5 was the last time that she saw Sidney Moorer."

"Terry says Heather`s roommate told him it ended more than a month ago. Yet, according to witness statements to police and those same phone records,there were several calls back and forth between Heather and the married man the morning of Heather`s disappearance. That same roommate told police HEATHER WAS TALKING to that man AGAIN, and that night, he called to tell her he was leaving his wife and wanted to be with her."
It sounds to me like they were communicating all along. Unless I am reading it wrong. If that is the case, maybe H told S about her date that night. He was sitting somewhere waiting for her to come home from the date.

November the 5th may be the last time they saw each other. I believe phone calls continued tho.

 

[Madeleine74]

4 phone calls to sm's phone from Heather's phone at PTL and none were answered. That doesn't seem like 1 spouse calling the other to tell them something since none of those calls were answered.

 

[Madeleine74]

I think facts are being assumed to exist that are not known at all and then senarios are being created based on these imagined facts. Without having all the known information, it doesn't seem as likely that these scenarios are correct since there could well be information or evidence that would clearly refute what is being seen as "possible."

 

[SStarr33]

I've thought about the something else as well. I think that is a situation where they would both want her completely out of the picture.

I wonder if PTF is right and it really WAS our Heather who went to the hospital and was having that situation

 

[PeterThomasFan]

Not used to someone else's phone. Ringer off?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Sorry for any typos!

 

[PeterThomasFan]

I think facts are being assumed to exist that are not known at all and then senarios are being created based on these imagined facts. Without having all the known information, it doesn't seem as likely that these scenarios are correct since there could well be information or evidence that would clearly refute what is being seen as "possible."

Now my head is really spinning! Say what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Sorry for any typos!

 

[PeterThomasFan]

I think facts are being assumed to exist that are not known at all and then senarios are being created based on these imagined facts. Without having all the known information, it doesn't seem as likely that these scenarios are correct since there could well be information or evidence that would clearly refute what is being seen as "possible."

I think I know what you are trying to say and I don't particularly like scenarios without facts and evidence. But, aside from the CCTV, the BiLo receipt (when those details are determined). all the events and phone calls after 2:29AM are unknown. Only 3 people (possibly 6) know what really happened IMO. Hopefully LE has other supporting evidence to help with their scenario.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Sorry for any typos!

 

[stillwatersc]

I may be opening a can of worms.. :worms: We discussed these ad nauseam in the early threads. But for whoever asked:

Heather's twitter:
https://twitter.com/heatherelvis

Heather's tumblr:
http://hazy-dayys.tumblr.com/

Any discussions of these should be in the social media thread now IMO.

 

[LanieCoz]

It takes 3 minutes to go from camera A to camera B (one mile) on the way to PTL. It only takes a minute to go from camera B to camera A (one mile) on the way home. 3 minutes is a very long time to only go a mile in a vehicle. It was during that time that HE was calling SM's phone repeatedly. Did he/she slow down to attempt to answer the call?

Truck passes camera B on the way to PTL at 3:39. Article says this camera is "closer" to PTL, but doesn't say how close. 3:41, HE's phone goes dead. So between the truck being seen on camera at 3:39, to 2 minutes later at 3:41, something happened very quickly. I believe the phone had to be ripped out of her hands and thrown into the water.

Would love to hear descriptions of any other vehicles seen on those two cameras the night. Did HE go to meet SM at PTL and someone (TM? another person?) was already there and she was frantically calling SM to tell him his crazy wife was already there about to kill her?

I am WAY behind, so this may have already been discussed.... I agree with people who think the state will have a very difficult time convincing a jury that she was murdered at PTL, scene completely cleaned with no evidence left behind, and SM traveling back all within three minutes. It's just unbelievable. My thoughts are that SM went to meet up with HE alone, or at most if TM was with him then I think she may have been hidden in the backseat. I believe he convinced her to turn her phone off. It would be so easy to do. Obviously TM had HE's phone number, as she had previously harassed her. He could have easily told HE to turn her phone off in case or because TM had gotten wind that he was going to meet with HE, and she'd have probably done it so that her phone wouldn't continuously blow up. I think after that it likely went down hill quickly... If I were a juror, I'd be more likely to buy into something along those lines.

 

[NWLady]

Now this might seem like a dumb question because I probably have myself confused (imagine that, LOL). But if I understand correctly, didn't Waccamaw (?SP) publishers or whoever they are finally obtain the search warrant affidavits or something? And if so, why is that they can't or haven't been obtained by anyone else? Such as we the public?

 

[Madeleine74]

Prosecutors don't have to convince a jury that Heather was killed at PTL in order to obtain a conviction. They only need to convince a jury (beyond a reasonable doubt) that the M's killed Heather. Intentional/Premeditated for first degree murder. Where the death actually occurred and what exact time it actually occurred are not elements that are required to be met as no one but the perps can know that if there is not forensic evidence or a confession to indicate that. If the state can prove Heather with the M's at the time she disappeared, and if they can prove to the jury that she is deceased and if they can prove it's due to homicidal violence and was premeditated, then a jury should be able to conclude the state's burden was met.

 

[TTF14]

In the second theorized scenario of the timeline, what would be the reason TM drove so slowly to pick SM up from PTL? It doesn't add up to me.

The person driving to PTL had never been there. They were told, "just make a left into the landing after the xyz....you can't miss it..." (or make a right, whatever). This person was driving to an unfamiliar location, in the dark, didn't want to miss the turn, was trying to find it.

 

[TTF14]

I think facts are being assumed to exist that are not known at all and then senarios are being created based on these imagined facts. Without having all the known information, it doesn't seem as likely that these scenarios are correct since there could well be information or evidence that would clearly refute what is being seen as "possible."

I agree. For me, those facts are the phone records. I'm just not sure "we" (the public) have all of the information exactly as it occurred with regard to all phone calls/texts, and, in particular, pings/locations.

 

[tabinmaine]

Just thought of something I wanted to discuss with all of you while falling asleep last night...lol (this case runs through my mind daily)

During the last bond hearing, (finally got to watch it) SM's attorney stated "TM was in the room when LE was questioning SM if he ever contacted HE via payphone and he replied "No" because they had been trying to repair their marriage and he didn't want to admit that in front of TM"

However, when the DA got up, she stated that "Never once was TM in the interrogation room when LE asked him if he had contacted HE via payphone"

So who is telling the truth ? I know the lawyer for SM believes his client, but somewhere it must be written exactly what went down, or there must be a video of that interview and that lawyer must have viewed it or read it...... so who is lying ? Can the state DA lie ?

 

[TTF14]

Just thought of something I wanted to discuss with all of you while falling asleep last night...lol (this case runs through my mind daily)

During the last bond hearing, (finally got to watch it) SM's attorney stated "TM was in the room when LE was questioning SM if he ever contacted HE via payphone and he replied "No" because they had been trying to repair their marriage and he didn't want to admit that in front of TM"

However, when the DA got up, she stated that "Never once was TM in the interrogation room when LE asked him if he had contacted HE via payphone"

So who is telling the truth ? I know the lawyer for SM believes his client, but somewhere it must be written exactly what went down, or there must be a video of that interview and that lawyer must have viewed it or read it...... so who is lying ? Can the state DA lie ?

My guess is that SM told his attorney that lie and his attorney didn't bother to fact check.

 

[NFYIAMY]

It's possible too that she went into Heather's apartment or waited outside and then went to HWY 814 while SM drove her car to PTL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. Sorry for any typos!

Would be interesting to know if LE has pings of where the M's phones were during this time frame.

 

[tabinmaine]

Would be interesting to know if LE has pings of where the M's phones were during this time frame.

Pretty sure they do, the phones were at the M's home