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

[Mamamerced]

"Conclusion: then she was not likely to be murdered in Haiku or Makawao, because transporting a whole or in parts body that far is a huge risk if you are stopped. Whereas clothes and stuff wrapped in a blanket are not so much. We then are back to the why of the ridiculous alibi and why lead the searchers so close to the crime scene, and why allow her phone to ping at almost 11 PM near Honomanu? Because if you kidnap someone, you check them for phone, and you turn it off, pretty basic stuff, and he would well know she had a smart phone."

I agree with Peter Tosh's theory that SC made up that story to cover his bases if/since people saw him up there that day/night. We know someone claimed to have seen him (in Hana?) that evening/night, not in his own car. It may not be admissable as evidence in court, but he needed to spin his web just in case. Why else place himself so near the crime scene?

 

[Kapua]

"Conclusion: then she was not likely to be murdered in Haiku or Makawao, because transporting a whole or in parts body that far is a huge risk if you are stopped. Whereas clothes and stuff wrapped in a blanket are not so much. We then are back to the why of the ridiculous alibi and why lead the searchers so close to the crime scene, and why allow her phone to ping at almost 11 PM near Honomanu? Because if you kidnap someone, you check them for phone, and you turn it off, pretty basic stuff, and he would well know she had a smart phone."

I agree with Peter Tosh's theory that SC made up that story to cover his bases if/since people saw him up there that day/night. We know someone claimed to have seen him (in Hana?) that evening/night, not in his own car. It may not be admissable as evidence in court, but he needed to spin his web just in case. Why else place himself so near the crime scene?

I also agree with Peter Tosh. SC's ridiculous alibi was to cover his bases in case someone saw him. My understanding that he was well-known in East Maui. I predict that his absurd alibi will be the thing that tips the scales, evidence-wise. The likelihood of Charli being apprehended, taken BACK to Honomanu, and murdered by some stranger when SC claims she in her vehicle with her large pit-bull mix dog on the way to Haiku is .00000000001%. Not enough to be considered reasonable doubt, IMHO.

As to why he would place himself so close to the crime scene... There is another infamous killer who placed himself near the crime scene. His name is Scott Peterson and he murdered his pregnant wife Laci back in 2002. He told investigators that he went fishing in San Francisco Bay and that is exactly where she was found. People stupid/crazy/narcissistic/heartless enough to kill another human being are not always clever enough to cover their tracks.

:cow:

 

[PeterTosh]

Amazing when I have thought myself so right to find I was way off base. Anyways...

Charli lived above the old Pukalani Dump. There is a lot of dirt that needs to be excavated. This along with where SC was staying. Kalipo I believe. IMO SC practiced. He had rehearsals. He practiced digging graves. He constantly was going to Hana the weeks prior to Feb 9th. He was able to pull off the crime. It remains to be seen whether or not he gets away with it. Again...IMO

And say he does? Does the terroristic threatening begin again. Does he wield the leverage of fear over them. Would he enjoy this power?

Rent free

 

[PeterTosh]

I also agree with Peter Tosh. SC's ridiculous alibi was to cover his bases in case someone saw him. My understanding that he was well-known in East Maui. I predict that his absurd alibi will be the thing that tips the scales, evidence-wise. The likelihood of Charli being apprehended, taken BACK to Honomanu, and murdered by some stranger when SC claims she in her vehicle with her large pit-bull mix dog on the way to Haiku is .00000000001%. Not enough to be considered reasonable doubt, IMHO.

As to why he would place himself so close to the crime scene... There is another infamous killer who placed himself near the crime scene. His name is Scott Peterson and he murdered his pregnant wife Laci back in 2002. He told investigators that he went fishing in San Francisco Bay and that is exactly where she was found. People stupid/crazy/narcissistic/heartless enough to kill another human being are not always clever enough to cover their tracks.

:cow:

A pregnant woman does not pick up a hitchhiker in the middle of nowhere. (If we are to believe Ulaena Loop is where he lost site of her...which is 6 miles from her turn off of the Hana Hwy to Kapakalua to Makawao...and very straight as the Hana turns are done...10 minutes maybe?.. How come he never saw this mysterious hitcher?)

 

[puakenikeni]

Right, the hitcher idea never made sense.

Its not not at all likely a carjacking would happen in the area so close to home that you mention. I can't think why he said this stupid story. All I can think is he was being questioned and pressured as to why he would not turn around if he lost her on a lonely road.

I've followed or been followed plenty of times in similar situations, and there's often a point where you are considered to have "made it" and the close following ends and people part ways. I think he may have imagined something like a point where it wasn't worrisome to say he left her behind. And maybe it would not have been in a situation where she didn't disappear, but it didn't placate anyone who heard the story being that she was pregnant and missing.

He should have practiced his alibi more -- maybe while digging practice graves.

I keep thinking that whatever alibi he concocted originally had to be tweaked because of something that had to be improvised that night.

 

[Kapua]

A pregnant woman does not pick up a hitchhiker in the middle of nowhere. (If we are to believe Ulaena Loop is where he lost site of her...which is 6 miles from her turn off of the Hana Hwy to Kapakalua to Makawao...and very straight as the Hana turns are done...10 minutes maybe?.. How come he never saw this mysterious hitcher?)

No woman, pregnant or not, picks up a hitchhiker - anywhere.

And remember that he claimed that her dog, Nala, was still with her. Then Nala was found in Hana - up one twisted, narrow, dark road in the opposite direction of where he claims she was going. Nobody is going to find his alibi believable in light of the evidence. And no stranger would have gone to that much trouble to drop off the dog.

 

[heartgoesout]

It a blizzard here is Pennsylvania. I cant even keep up with the shoveling! Everyone stay safe and warm on the east coast.

 

[puakenikeni]

No woman, pregnant or not, picks up a hitchhiker - anywhere.

And remember that he claimed that her dog, Nala, was still with her. Then Nala was found in Hana - up one twisted, narrow, dark road in the opposite direction of where he claims she was going. Nobody is going to find his alibi believable in light of the evidence. And no stranger would have gone to that much trouble to drop off the dog.

Agree. Whether a lying illogical alibi suffices for a murder conviction I do not know. An innocent person can invent an alibi too; doing so is not proof of the crime. Proof of the crime needs to be in the form of real connections to it, like witnesses, DNA, etc.. Even if the jury believes as we do that SC is 100% guilty, they cannot return a guilty verdict unless the prosecution meets that burden. I hope and pray they do.

The Scott family is so classy and caring. You can see how they are not resigned but aware that in some areas they will most likely not get the closure they need. I hope they do, of course. In the past two years, they have devoted themselves towards working for FUTURE crime victims to have more rights and more justice, and even a search and rescue ready to mobilize that they brought into being -- so that Charli's fate can make a difference to others. So much respect for their work.

 

[puakenikeni]

Just want to say re the alibi, that if I am the one who revived the topic, it wasn't to review the alibi for believability. I think it is utter crap. But it is good if you want to discuss it, just know I wasn't suggesting it is the real story.

My interest is in psychology and story-telling (my background), which I can tell isn't striking a chord here for the most part, which is fine. What I was trying to say is that people tell a specific story a specific way for a reason (or multiple reasons). Some of which they don't even realize consciously what is driving them to say it.

This applies all the more so to lies. Why that lie with that detail and not some other lie? Why tell a lie that is against your own self interest in getting away with the crime? Figure that out and you may figure out some whys and some wheres. That is all I was getting at.

We can say arrogant, cocky, dumb, inexperienced, young, angry, small pond syndrome, and reacting to being seen wrong time wrong place, and all those things may be true and may be factors, but I haven't yet seen a short one line explanation of Steven Capobianco that lays it all to rest and makes me say, OK, I completely get it now. So I keep plugging away.

 

[RunDaSurf]

How much they were allowed to search the Kalipo property for bodies. If they find them there its damning. If they find them near Paraquats not as much.

 

[RunDaSurf]

He left so much evidence and had days to go back for it. He led her family right to that area. Seems like not a mistake.

If it's not a mistake then what was he trying to do? Frame someone? Or misdirect from where bodies are? Or lead them right to it?

 

[RunDaSurf]

If you are SC and you are going to murder and know you will be prime suspect what do you do? Did he really think he'd get away with it? He didn't care about getting away with it as much as he wanted them dead and to be the one to do it in a heinous way. I think he wanted every one to assume he did it and in a heinous way. She defied him humiliated him to every one.

 

[RunDaSurf]

Maybe he just thought police would arrest him right away and he would lawyer up and refuse to talk. Maybe he didn't plan on her family having opportunity to ask him a lot of questions and ask him to go out to Keanae to show them where he said they were the night before.

 

[Mamamerced]

Amazing when I have thought myself so right to find I was way off base. Anyways...

Charli lived above the old Pukalani Dump. There is a lot of dirt that needs to be excavated. This along with where SC was staying. Kalipo I believe. IMO SC practiced. He had rehearsals. He practiced digging graves. He constantly was going to Hana the weeks prior to Feb 9th. He was able to pull off the crime. It remains to be seen whether or not he gets away with it. Again...IMO

And say he does? Does the terroristic threatening begin again. Does he wield the leverage of fear over them. Would he enjoy this power?

Rent free

Are you thinking he dug "practice" graves in different areas so he'd have one ready depending on where he ultimately ambushed Charli?
Do you know if the soil found on Charli's clothes was given a composition test to determine possible burial area? That wouldn't necessarily link SC to the murder, but it would fill in the picture a bit. Moo

 

[heartgoesout]

Pua, we did discuss his story telling and the truth that it might hold a few threads back. We are interested just kinda been there with no reasonable outcome. Always good to think it out though. Never know when something might just click.

 

[EmmaRose]

Pua, we did discuss his story telling and the truth that it might hold a few threads back. We are interested just kinda been there with no reasonable outcome. Always good to think it out though. Never know when something might just click.

Worth revisiting, IMO

 

[Kapua]

He left so much evidence and had days to go back for it. He led her family right to that area. Seems like not a mistake.

If it's not a mistake then what was he trying to do? Frame someone? Or misdirect from where bodies are? Or lead them right to it?

Go back and clean up? Hide the clothes and make sure that he didn't leave anything behind?

 

[puakenikeni]

Go back and clean up? Hide the clothes and make sure that he didn't leave anything behind?

Excellent point. He had all of Monday that he was not working.

I have a hard time accepting the theory that SC was resigned to getting caught and was dead set on murder no matter the cost. I thank RDS for putting the idea out, and I don't know SC IRL at all and have little to go on, I admit. Here are my hurdles to belief:
1) We have a fair amount of quotes from SC that he wasn't ready to be tied down by a kid because he had "plans" in life. We also know he had a big crush and she was coming back and he may have wanted to get kid out of the picture.

So getting caught for murder and arson is not a downer on plans and settling in with the girlfriend? It is worth it to him why, because he hated Charli? There's no evidence I've seen of hate: I can see annoyed, I see his disdain and poor treatment, I see his problems with mothers. I don't see the desire to obliterate her at all costs to his own pathetic life that he values quite a lot it would seem.

I see signs that he unraveled after the news came out in March that they ID'd her bone that got left at the scene, not to mention all the pressure from the community, the name calling, people calling him a monster. Before that I saw a guy trying to do damage control and hoping he got away with it.

 

[puakenikeni]

Worth revisiting, IMO

Agree.
In my case I don't get too far with spinning my brain on purpose. But when new information and discussion comes up, that starts the wheels going, sometimes in new ways.

To be clear, I'm not so much looking for any truth in his story, although it's not a bad thing. As I said, my POV is more psychoanalytic, looking for compulsions to insert or emphasize details even though they didn't help his alibi.

 

[heartgoesout]

Only thing, if he went back to clean up, he did a really bad job.