Gilgo Beach LISK Serial Killer, Rex Heuermann, charged with 3 murders, July 2023

[Betty P]

That is awful IMO. It disgusts me

I have sympathy for some of the family members of the killers - Rex and Kohberger - but these amounts seem excessive compared to the burden borne by the family members of the victims. There needs to be a way to mediate this situation.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

This is really offensive.

ETA: As for the discussion of the killer's family as victims, this case doesn't seem to be as clear-cut as others. There is credible evidence that Rex's wife had some knowledge of his criminal activity or at least should have had suspicions.

The family members of the victims of the LISK murders have had the most difficult battle, JMO. These are family victims who spent 13 yrs or more battling police to fully investigate the murders of their loved ones. Their struggle has been much more difficult, their grief, stress and financial burdens much greater. JMO

It’s not AE driving the gravy train, it’s reality TV/media - their leadership sees $$$$ in AE & family.

Ask Media CEOs why they aren’t offering victim families deals - or maybe they are?

 

[Betty P]

It’s not AE driving the gravy train, it’s reality TV/media - their leadership sees $$$$ in AE & family.

Ask Media CEOs why they aren’t offering victim families deals - or maybe they are?

True, the whole situation is sick. I support the LISK victims and their families.

 

[Forest_Wood]

It’s not AE driving the gravy train, it’s reality TV/media - their leadership sees $$$$ in AE & family.

Ask Media CEOs why they aren’t offering victim families deals - or maybe they are?

AE is a capable adult who gets to make her own decisions. She IS the one driving the gravy train. She agreed to stay with her alleged SK husband for all those years, even if she allegedly knew about and/or participated in activities that have been brought to light by JR (swinger parties, SW's coming to the home when she was present, etc.). If she now comes out in this documentary to say he was abusive, and she chose to stay (yes, it really is about choice), it shows how messed up this whole facade really is. People always have tough choices to make. I mean, she has already declared she knew absolutely nothing (there's nothing to see here, folks), so what else is left? I'm thinking it will be more about how they are coping due to their circumstances rather than about any grand revelation. MOO of course.

 

[CuriousCricket]

“They will be filmed throughout the trial and after the trial’s outcome,” one source said. “The family will tell their entire story and everything about their life (with Heuermann) exclusively to the (documentary filmmakers).”

Ellerup’s lawyer, Robert Macedonio, is said to have signed a $400,000 deal while Vess Mitev, a lawyer for Heuermann’s daughter Victoria and his stepson Christopher, is said to have been paid $200,000. When contacted, Mitev and Macedonio both declined comment.

There's a photo of the mother/daughter sitting in their attorney's office dated July 31. Seems they planned this two weeks after his arrest. Why else take a picture of them in one's office?

To me, it's always been about $$$$ to these people. MOO.

Photos used with news stories are not always shot for the article they appear in. Sometimes editors use whatever photo is available in order to have "art" with the story. Some websites offer photos of newsworthy people -- some free and others to be purchased. The reporter for the story is often asked to supply the "art".

 

[Forest_Wood]

Photos used with news stories are not always shot for the article they appear in. Sometimes editors use whatever photo is available in order to have "art" with the story. Some websites offer photos of newsworthy people -- some free and others to be purchased. The reporter for the story is often asked to supply the "art".

The photo had a caption stating the date it was taken and that it was taken in the attorney's office though.

Wouldn't that indicate it may have been taken by the lawyer, especially seeing the vantage point of the photo (from someone on the other side of the desk). I guess that's what the lawyers are earning their hundreds of thousands of dollars for? Providing pics and opportunities. MOO.

ETA: It does have a source name indicated also. Maybe the attorney's arranged a photographer to come in? Or it's someone from the streaming service for the documentary who was invited to the office. MOO.

 

[Mrs.A]

This is a nation with Capitalism as it's number one religion. It doesn't surprise me at all that people with the means or ability to capitalize on this tragedy are doing so.

Of course it is unjust, but justice and fairness almost never take priority within our socioeconomic systems.

I think it would be great to get money to the families of the victims and fix the systems that give more value to some humans than others but the demand for that simply is not as high as it is for money.

It's also difficult to believe that those of us here who are obsessed with this case, from a supposed victim centric view will all abstain from watching the documentaries on principle. We gobble up every bit.

 

[Betty P]

This is a nation with Capitalism as it's number one religion. It doesn't surprise me at all that people with the means or ability to capitalize on this tragedy are doing so.

Of course it is unjust, but justice and fairness almost never take priority within our socioeconomic systems.

I think it would be great to get money to the families of the victims and fix the systems that give more value to some humans than others but the demand for that simply is not as high as it is for money.

It's also difficult to believe that those of us here who are obsessed with this case, from a supposed victim centric view will all abstain from watching the documentaries on principle. We gobble up every bit.

I will certainly avoid the one on Peacock/NBC.

 

[CuriousCricket]

The photo had a caption stating the date it was taken and that it was taken in the attorney's office though.

Wouldn't that indicate it may have been taken by the lawyer, especially seeing the vantage point of the photo (from someone on the other side of the desk). I guess that's what the lawyers are earning their hundreds of thousands of dollars for? Providing pics and opportunities. MOO.

ETA: It does have a source name indicated also. Maybe the attorney's arranged a photographer to come in? Or it's someone from the streaming service for the documentary who was invited to the office. MOO.

The photo has a credit line to James Carbone, Newsday RM, via Getty Images. I just looked up Getty Images.com and the website sells the usage of photos. Newsday Media is located on Long Island. I suspect Newsday knew it might make extra money by making the photo available on Getty Images. I have not checked out exactly how this particular image outlet works concerning copyrights and usages. It's certainly not public domain.

My original reply simply addressed the thought that this film event(s) was planned from as early as this July 31 visit. While that is possible, having this July photo with this November story does not necessarily mean that.

I suspect a local Newsday photographer was assigned to photograph the "historic" moment. (It happens even in small towns. A local reporter/photographer will be assigned to go take a picture of something the newpaper/media outlet thinks it can use later. It's wonderful to have file photos. I know as I worked for a small town paper for about 30 years. I must say though I don't think our publisher charged other media to use our photos - even an occasional international story. He could have, but anytime another paper asked permission through me, it was always just a verbal ok without any mention of payment.)

It's possible this photo of AE and VH will be used with a variety of other stories. If it's through "Getty Images", I would expect the publisher paid for the photo in order to have "art" with the story.

 

[Ruminations]

No issue with person making lemonade with the bag of rotten lemons they’ve been given. She was caught on camera worsts days of her life, literally her dirty laundry and unkempt home for world to see. Her disabled boy, daughter and her self on display for the world to pick over, speculate about etc. ooo I see them using food stamps, their house is worst, ooo creepy doll, they should get jobs…
She’s had a few months now and opportunity has fallen into her lap. She has made herself look tidy, as anyone would if the world is watching.
Media, news, John Ray are ALL also in it for the money. As if Mr Ray doesn’t do a blow-out and dress up for the camera!!
Mr Ray all about the civil damages, paid TV appearances, he’ll be after a chunk of ASA’s money for sure in civil suits.
If you want to hate on anyone, other than RH, then hate on the public who is the audience who literally the people paying ASA and her family.

There is a world of difference between John Ray and the others.

First, what civil damages? If John Ray were all about the money, there are much better civil trees to bark up. His earliest LISK related client was hasn't even officially been murdered, although that is pretty obviously a mistake, at best, IMO. Its a very long route to wrongful death. And murderers, once identified and arrested, burn through their assets lightning-quick. John Ray has put up for many, many hours of investigation, deposition taking, and evidence preserving (such as holding Shannan's devices, actually dedicating a room for all things LISK in his office) and throwing in defending Shannan's sister for the murder she committed, trying to get the mitigating factors acknowledged and figured into how she spends the rest of her life....there is no way John Ray is making a profit here. Just where do you think he can make money enough to break even?

Is he in public doing the right thing for those props? Well, I for one think he is doing the very right thing and deserves props. But I don't see him getting a thank you, except from class acts like Rodney Harrison. He mostly gets ridicule for his fashion choices, and suffers just-south-of-defamation lies, like he's trying to "stay relevant." Yeah right. He is doing relevant things on his own dime that for years LE woukd not do. And to an extent LE still won't do (address tip line issues). Doing relevant things is not "Trying to stay relevant." It's doing relevant things.

I haven't seen anyone you mentioned in your post lifting a finger to help the victims of LISK. John Ray is one of the reasons there is an official LE LISK case; he kept it from going into LE's deep freezer.

So please, never again lump John Ray in with the family's criminal attorney or toxic documentary makers.

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

It’s not AE driving the gravy train, it’s reality TV/media - their leadership sees $$$$ in AE & family.

Ask Media CEOs why they aren’t offering victim families deals - or maybe they are?

Anyone offering or entering an offensive contract is behaving offensively, IMO.

This is offensive.

MOO. JMO. MOO

 

[Ruminations]

This is a nation with Capitalism as it's number one religion. It doesn't surprise me at all that people with the means or ability to capitalize on this tragedy are doing so.

Of course it is unjust, but justice and fairness almost never take priority within our socioeconomic systems.

I think it would be great to get money to the families of the victims and fix the systems that give more value to some humans than others but the demand for that simply is not as high as it is for money.

It's also difficult to believe that those of us here who are obsessed with this case, from a supposed victim centric view will all abstain from watching the documentaries on principle. We gobble up every bit.

Maybe you will be watching this offensive production, but I won't. I don't gobble stuff like this. It's odious.

MOO

 

[Forest_Wood]

My original reply simply addressed the thought that this film event(s) was planned from as early as this July 31 visit. While that is possible, having this July photo with this November story does not necessarily mean that.

Yes, I understand what you mean. Thanks for explaining that.

 

[Teche]

That is rough but given her field, it shouldn't be impossible. There are jobs in that field that don't require front and center exposure or client contact. She could be looking at places like NYC Dept of Bldgs. She could even be an expediter for any number of construction companies. Maybe not at the salary she had (no idea what that was) and maybe below her level of experience (no idea what that is) but at least it keeps her in the game and she may even be able to set her own hours. We know this is what her father's business was so we have to assume she knows her way around this type of job.

jmo

Heck, there are plenty of job opportunities in the fast-food market and construction .

 

[Teche]

“They will be filmed throughout the trial and after the trial’s outcome,” one source said. “The family will tell their entire story and everything about their life (with Heuermann) exclusively to the (documentary filmmakers).”

Ellerup’s lawyer, Robert Macedonio, is said to have signed a $400,000 deal while Vess Mitev, a lawyer for Heuermann’s daughter Victoria and his stepson Christopher, is said to have been paid $200,000. When contacted, Mitev and Macedonio both declined comment.

There's a photo of the mother/daughter sitting in their attorney's office dated July 31. Seems they planned this two weeks after his arrest. Why else take a picture of them in one's office?

To me, it's always been about $$$$ to these people. MOO.

Makes me wish cameras would not be allowed during the trial. If money is dispersed, it should be for the victims’ families and not to the family of the alleged serial killer and their attorneys. What a payday. I do feel for Asa and her children.

 

[NoSpoonFeeding]

[/QUOTE]

Edit/update thereafter: my vote would be the prosecution should have the estranged wife on the proposed witness list - which as I understand would preclude their attendance during testimony or evidentiary proceedings.

This is complicated as she has filed for divorce. As of now, she can't be made to testify against him and he has the right to her not testifying against him. After the divorce is final, some things she can testify about, for the prosecution, if she chooses, but other things may be off limits such as personal private communications, as opposed to things she observed.
I think we will have to wait and see until close to trial time, to see if the divorce was finalized and if she still is supportive of him. A lot can change. I don't see the prosecution forcing/needing her as a witness to prove RH murdered three victims, especially when she may be uncooperative on the stand and seen as a victim. She can always agree to be called by the defense.
Edit to add, generally a witness is excluded from hearing other testimony that could influence/affect their own testimony. That wouldn't mean the entire trial, especially for this spouse, unless the judge was asked to order her to be excluded for all or part. Families are sometimes allowed to stay as observers and only excluded for certain testimony.


MOO


New York Court Discusses the Spousal Communication Privilege in a Medical Malpractice Matter

Federal law affords married parties a privilege with regard to confidential communications with their spouses. In order for the privilege to apply, the party invoking the privilege must show that the two parties whose communications are at issue were married at the time of the conversation, an actual communication is at issue, and the communication was made in confidence. Either spouse can invoke the privilege.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Ellerup’s lawyer, Robert Macedonio, is said to have signed a $400,000 deal while Vess Mitev, a lawyer for Heuermann’s daughter Victoria and his stepson Christopher, is said to have been paid $200,000. When contacted, Mitev and Macedonio both declined comment.

Wow, that's a bad look. jmo

There's a photo of the mother/daughter sitting in their attorney's office dated July 31. Seems they planned this two weeks after his arrest. Why else take a picture of them in one's office?

I noticed this too. You raise a good point. Makes you wonder if the legal team facilitated this - put feelers out to everyone and only Peacock bit.

jmo

 

[Forest_Wood]

Wow, that's a bad look. jmo


I noticed this too. You raise a good point. Makes you wonder if the legal team facilitated this - put feelers out to everyone and only Peacock bit.

jmo

That was around the same time the attorneys, and others, were trying to get the world to donate to their cause because they claimed she was so ill. Why else would the legal team be receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars if not for facilitating this and working as their agents. It's shocking this can even be permitted imo. The husband and father allegedly takes the lives of person after person and his family and attorneys receives fame and fortune as an outcome of those murders. MOO.

 

[Ruminations]

They'll be telling their story, but I don't for one moment believe it will be the true story of their relationship or their lives. Fiction reality television. I wonder if any of what they claim will be fact-checked along the way. MOO.

The good thing about this is that they won't be reliant on taxpayers to pay their way in life and they will have
to pay taxes on that money. Others will always want a claim of it, they'll be forever reliant on shady lawyers to try to keep it, and they'll never be free again because of their fifteen minutes of fame in this. MOO.

What does this do for the motivation and ability (both yet unshown) of Macedonio to represent AE?

Her interests are supposed to be first to her lawyer, above all but the Law in general.

But what if she wants/ needs/ should do something that could interfere with Macedonio's side work for 400k?

Wouldnt it make better TV and worse governmental outcomes if Asa did not speak to LE in private, where LE could use the information strategically, but teased it and put it out in her reality show to get subscribers? Wouldn't it make better TV and worse governmental outcomes if AE complained about her inconveniences like a routine (insofar as arrested alleged serial murderers is routine) house search, turning herself into the victim, as if her inconveniences are far more important than the crime victims, and as if M Moore and this million dollar documentary did not address the unpleasantness of this search at all? Wouldn't it take away the prosecutor's ability to tell the story he wants to jury to form with the facts, tying them to conclude without a reasonable doubt that the defendant is a murderer, when jurors woukd likely have been exposed to a (inaccurate) narrative where AE is the victim of LE, but murder victims are ignored to the point they fade in importance? If jurors think of LE has messy home searchers rather than dogged investigators, how does this help justice?

Now, neither Asa nor Macedonia are incentivized to do anything but make great TV. I hold that AE has no business putting herself in front of the murder victims families. But that does not mean she is not in an awful situation, and maybe she needs legAl rep. If she does, she doesn't have it now. She basically has a macabre talent agent, with a serious criminal past, whose incentive structure is potentially at odds with AE's best interests.

(Interestingly, the incentivization Structure is not at adds with Rex's defense.)

MOO

 

[Ruminations]

Spoon feed said this:

"This is complicated as she has filed for divorce. As of now, she can't be made to testify against him and he has the right to her not testifying against him. After the divorce is final, some things she can testify about, for the prosecution, if she chooses, but other things may be off limits such as personal private communications, as opposed to things she observed.
"I think we will have to wait and see until close to trial time, to see if the divorce was finalized and if she still is supportive of him. A lot can change. I don't see the prosecution forcing/needing her as a witness to prove RH murdered three victims, especially when she may be uncooperative on the stand and seen as a victim. She can always agree to be called by the defense.
"Edit to add, generally a witness is excluded from hearing other testimony that could influence/affect their own testimony. That wouldn't mean the entire trial, especially for this spouse, unless the judge was asked to order her to be excluded for all or part. Families are sometimes allowed to stay as observers and only excluded for certain testimony.


"MOO


" New York Court Discusses the Spousal Communication Privilege in a Medical Malpractice Matter

"Federal law affords married parties a privilege with regard to confidential communications with their spouses. In order for the privilege to apply, the party invoking the privilege must show that the two parties whose communications are at issue were married at the time of the conversation, an actual communication is at issue, and the communication was made in confidence. Either spouse can invoke the privilege.
[/QUOTE]"

ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss quote above sssssssssssssssssssssssss

For clarity, Rex is charged with crimes. This is not civil court, like medical malpractice. Different spousal privileges will apply. Different exceptions will apply. So your research is flawed, but I'd say very premature, so no worries.

IMO, you have the "let's wait" thing upside-down. First let us investigate and learn all we can, and then worry about what can and can't go to trial closer to trial time. We don't wait until trial time to find out that an investigative lead would have been useful--- shucks, privilege wouldn't have applied---bummer we are not prepared. You are suggesting to fail to uncover facts because the only available witness might be able to invoke a privilege or at least testify hostily.

I find it logically impossible that AE has nothing of interest for EITHER the defense or the prosecution. Double-life, blah, blah, blah. She knows something inculpating or exculpating. The only thing that is possible is that NEITHER she nor Macedonio knows just what is useful or how. So Macedonio also needs to drop opining that she woukd have nothing useful. He is not the investigator. He does not know. (I hope.)

Macedonio might be taking multiple symbiotic actions that enrich him and help Rex's defense (notably the 400k contract), but he is not Rex's attorney and presumably has no access to anything other than public information in the case against Rex. Agreed? He in theory does not know which observations of AE would help the investigator, except where it relates to public ally released information.

This whole Macedonio thing was sordid. Until he signed with a production company and it got even worse.

MOO

edited: I really don't know how I lost the boxes and highlights from the post I replied to. Sorry if clarity is lost.