GUILTY HI - Carly Joann 'Charli' Scott, 27, pregnant, Makawao, 9 Feb 2014 - #3

[heartgoesout]

If you put the tip of a blade in and twist a little, you get eraser sized (diameter) holes. Like goring an apple. Since we don't have her remains yet, I think the two inches refers to the length of the cut.

I'm not following. If I took a sharp blade and pressed it into and rotated it I do not think it would cut my shirt. If I put more pressure to actually cut the shirt it would make a much larger hole then a tiny pencil eraser.
Help me out, what am I missing?

 

[La Louve]

snipped from above linked article "20 holes on one side of the skirt below the waistband. Some of the holes were similar to the size of pencil erasers and many were up to 2 inches long. The holes were consistent with being made by a blade.

ok trying to visualize this. So her clothing, had holes both the size of a pencil eraser and holes/slashes 2 inches long. Why small round holes in the skirt?

Maybe the holes made by the stabbing instrument were then enlarged by the fabric moving as she was trying to fight him off? [I hate typing that]

 

[Kapua]

A tire gauge? A thin painter's brush end? Truck circuit pencil tester?

ice pick?

 

[Loio]

Let's not mistake holes for "round". I think if the description were tears or rips, maybe that would be a little more accurate.
Basically the fabric was torn. Some of the openings were large enough to fit a pencil eraser into (not necessarily round but at least 6 mm) and other openings measured at least 2 inches.

I don't know much about knives but I know lots about sewing and there have to be a dozen ways to describe openings in fabric.

 

[Loio]

Footnote: the skirt may have been snug against her belly in many places making it easier to tear.

 

[puakenikeni]

You know, I gotta tell you guys as someone who has read SC's private/friends posting, don't think for one second that you are getting a complete picture by reading his public posts. Many of his shares are just that, things he may have found comical at the time, shares that have been making the rounds for years now.

After Febrary 9, SC started trolling his FB because he knew everyone would be curious. In other words, those that didn't know him personally, were getting played. Still are?

yes, I don't mistake that public and private would be the same and I understand how shares go around, although what we choose to hit Share on says something about us. Web Sleuths does not allow talking about non-public posts, so that's off the table for this site, that's all.

I get that he was messing with people later on. I was thinking about posts from 2013 and 2012, when he presumably didn't expect to become a person of interest.

 

[puakenikeni]

http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/598754/
coverage of yesterday's motion hearing, questioning Det. Loo, will continue Monday.

There is another murder trial going on right now before the same judge, of a man who shot his girlfriend and mother of his four children. It has moved to the defense and they are going full out on blaming childhood abuse and bipolar illness to plead he was not criminally liable for his actions, which were witnessed, so it is quite different because not a mystery. Kind of an interesting read, and seems to be taking up most of Maui News court coverage at the moment.

 

[RunDaSurf]

http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/598754/Defense-questions-investigator-in-hearing-on-evidence.html?nav=10


"The defense argued in its motion that detectives knew Scott's dog had been found in the Nahiku area and did not inform Capobianco of his right to remain silent and not incriminate himself. Capobianco told police he had received a ride from Scott to his broken-down vehicle in nearby Keanae.
Loo acknowledged that the discovery of the dog caught his attention before Capobianco's interview, calling it "curious."
"To you, it was already ringing some bells in your detective head about possible suspicions of Steven?" Apo asked.
"There could've been a lot of variables," Loo said, hypothesizing that Scott could have gotten into an accident and her dog could have been ejected out of the car. "There are unknown possibilities on how the dog got out there."
"Do you know how the dog got there?" Apo asked.
"I don't know how the dog got out there," Loo replied.
Court proceedings on the motion will continue Monday."


I guess they still don't know or at least can't prove how Nala got to Nahiku

 

[Mamamerced]

[modsnip]

I'm sure you're nothing like that. I bet you're an amazing parent, educator and partner with a wealth of knowledge about all things law. See how that works?

Steven Capobianco is sitting in county lockup right now because he was charged with the murder of his ex girlfriend but don't judge a book by it's cover. Even his friends and Kimberlyn Scott were surprised by this.

Loio, which quote were you referencing? Surprised by what?

 

[puakenikeni]

http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/598754/Defense-questions-investigator-in-hearing-on-evidence.html?nav=10
"Do you know how the dog got there?" Apo asked.
"I don't know how the dog got out there," Loo replied.
Court proceedings on the motion will continue Monday."


I guess they still don't know or at least can't prove how Nala got to Nahiku

yeah, that is what caught my eye too. Was hoping they had a theory to present to account for Nala and all the weird details, and it doesn't sound like it from his testimony.

 

[Napili]

yeah, that is what caught my eye too. Was hoping they had a theory to present to account for Nala and all the weird details, and it doesn't sound like it from his testimony.

Loo might very well have a theory and yet state that he doesn't KNOW... They have to have theories. We hope they can prove them to the satisfaction of the court.

Re the knife cuts...this is horrible to visualize, but so it goes. Sorry....
The knife he wore hidden in his belt buckle is short, wide and skinny and tapers to a point, if it's like the ones shown on line. I think a knife like this clould produce both 2" cuts and 1/4" cuts, depending on whether it bottomed out on bone, like the pelvis, or went in deep as with soft tissue. Again, Sorry

If that was the murder weapon, how strange and stupid to be wearing it around like he was doing.

 

[puakenikeni]

Loo might very well have a theory and yet state that he doesn't KNOW... They have to have theories. We hope they can prove them to the satisfaction of the court.

Yes, that is true. I meant to say I had hoped they had a theory to present strongly and back with evidence. The less doubt in any area, the less reasonable doubt.

i was concerned at his statement because I think defense can use it if he later tries to show more conviction about what happened. I was surprised he didn't separate past and present more. Like, I didn't know how Nala got out there at that time. He could have covered the right base for the motion and still left room to say he has since figured it out.

The reason I can think of why he would say "I don't know," present tense, is that he's not going to present an answer to that mystery. Didn't get info from witnesses that cleared it up, Sc was not seen by anyone in the area of Nahiku, etc..
Hope I'm wrong.

 

[PeterTosh]

http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/598754/Defense-questions-investigator-in-hearing-on-evidence.html?nav=10


"The defense argued in its motion that detectives knew Scott's dog had been found in the Nahiku area and did not inform Capobianco of his right to remain silent and not incriminate himself. Capobianco told police he had received a ride from Scott to his broken-down vehicle in nearby Keanae.
Loo acknowledged that the discovery of the dog caught his attention before Capobianco's interview, calling it "curious."
"To you, it was already ringing some bells in your detective head about possible suspicions of Steven?" Apo asked.
"There could've been a lot of variables," Loo said, hypothesizing that Scott could have gotten into an accident and her dog could have been ejected out of the car. "There are unknown possibilities on how the dog got out there."
"Do you know how the dog got there?" Apo asked.
"I don't know how the dog got out there," Loo replied.
Court proceedings on the motion will continue Monday."


I guess they still don't know or at least can't prove how Nala got to Nahiku

All these defense questions are not to find out the truth they are merly a attempt to get DT Loo to contradict himself as if he is the one on trial. The Defense Attorney Apo is pulling straws out of his rear trying to tangle the forest even more.

 

[puakenikeni]

Right, defense is not trying to get at the truth, but Loo being under oath has to answer with the truth, and it has to be consistent with the truth he will testify to at trial. Just looking forward from the motion to what the trial may present.

Loo is doing a fine job with the motion, experienced detective, not falling into Apo's little traps. So far so good with the motion.

So far Apo has not brought out any SC testimony about Nala that would look to get Steven in trouble due to his talking about the trip to Keanae without knowing about the dog's recovery or where.

It seems to me Apo is just trying to make the point that Nala's discovery cast some suspicion on Steven and that Loo was holding back info as he would with a suspect, and Apo is trying to use that to prove the interview quasi-custodial.

 

[PeterTosh]

Right, defense is not trying to get at the truth, but Loo being under oath has to answer with the truth, and it has to be consistent with the truth he will testify to at trial. Just looking forward from the motion to what the trial may present.

Loo is doing a fine job with the motion, experienced detective, not falling into Apo's little traps. So far so good with the motion.

So far Apo has not brought out any SC testimony about Nala that would look to get Steven in trouble due to his talking about the trip to Keanae without knowing about the dog's recovery or where.

It seems to me Apo is just trying to make the point that Nala's discovery cast some suspicion on Steven and that Loo was holding back info as he would with a suspect, and Apo is trying to use that to prove the interview quasi-custodial.

In addition to trying to get Loo to contradict himself and bringing up Reality and fictional TV shows like 48 hrs and NCIS to relate to Loo..he is trying to paint him as having preconceived notions about SC going into the investigation due to the Mo Monsalve case ...bent on him(SC) having murdered Charli...as opposed to Loo stating he was just looking for a missing person.

 

[puakenikeni]

In addition to trying to get Loo to contradict himself and bringing up Reality and fictional TV shows like 48 hrs and NCIS to relate to Loo..he is trying to paint him as having preconceived notions about SC going into the investigation due to the Mo Monsalve case ...bent on him(SC) having murdered Charli...as opposed to Loo stating he was just looking for a missing person.

True. But he is arguing before a judge, not jury, so the innuendoes won't work. The judge is just looking at point of law, and the officer's testimony before him is considered to be true. Officer says he did not consider Mo, and so forth, so that is going to be accepted by the judge as veritas unless there is some other evidence to impeach the officer (don't expect it).

 

[heartgoesout]

Agreed, however it depends on how the law is written. The judge may have an opinion either way but must follow the written law. Laws are written to protect the defendants rights. Sometimes too much. Some laws have room for interpretation, others are clear and cut. Keeping in mind that it has been suggested his story has changed a few times, we still don't know verbatim what he said to the detective that is trying to be suppressed... for example, even if SC said to the detective that Nala did not go on the trip at all, or Nala came back in his car, it would, as Det Loo said, be curious but would simply not be enough to read SC his rights and arrest him. Having said that, I have no idea how the law is written in this situation and am praying this motion is not granted.
What really would have prompted miranda rights? Other then him saying I did it, the det. had nothing to arrest him for.

 

[heartgoesout]

In addition to trying to get Loo to contradict himself and bringing up Reality and fictional TV shows like 48 hrs and NCIS to relate to Loo..he is trying to paint him as having preconceived notions about SC going into the investigation due to the Mo Monsalve case ...bent on him(SC) having murdered Charli...as opposed to Loo stating he was just looking for a missing person.

But at the point of this interview there was no murder...certainly no evidence of a murder. There was no reason for the det. to believe that murder had been committed. SC was admitably the last person to see Charli. Asking SC to come down to talk to them would be normal with questions like, was she upset, did she talk about running away, was she happy about the pregnancy, go through that night for me, anything happen out of the ordinary? The dog had nothing to do with the detective trying to figure out her state of mind.
The only reason SC felt like he had to be there and could not leave was because if he did he knew that would look suspicious.

 

[heartgoesout]

Does anyone know if that interview was video taped or voice recorded? Or is this all base on Det. notes and memory?

 

[PeterTosh]

Does anyone know if that interview was video taped or voice recorded? Or is this all base on Det. notes and memory?

I dont know. I dont think the first one was. I believe that recordings are only made after one has been read their Miranda rights (Thank you Netflix) otherwise the are inadmissible. Therefore the second one was