GrainneDhu
Verified Expert
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 5,159
- Reaction score
- 58
This is really disturbing. Especially the part that says he "Narc'd" other people out to reduce his sentence from 45 yrs to 10. That and the part where he broke his wife's finger. I can't help feeling that the girls missing and death is by the hands of someone he Narc'd on.
My opinion only. I have no information or facts other than this to back up my thoughts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/27/lyric-cook-morrissey-elizabeth-collins_n_1710467.html
The problem is, that's not the order of events in the timeline.
DM was offered a plea deal as of 12 July. The way those usually happen is that the defence attorney makes what is called a proffer to the prosecutor. A proffer is an outline of the sort of information the defendant might hypothetically offer in return for a reduction of charges, sentencing or both. The proffer doesn't usually include enough specific information to arrest anyone else and it's not due cause, either. It's all phrased in hypotheticals.
It isn't until the plea deal is accepted that the defendant has to give up the specific information alluded to in the proffer.
Dan Morrissey hadn't accept the plea bargain yet, so he had not given up the specific information as of 12 July, when he decided to turn it down. From a LE point of view, the proffer was no more than a fairy tale.
Anyone likely to feel endangered by DM would have been feeling very relieved and grateful the evening of 12 July because he was not going to give up his specific information.
After the girls disappeared, DM decided to give all the information he had to LE in the hope that it would lead to finding the two girls.
Whoever might have been threatened by what DM knew would have been the girls' bodyguard if they could see into the future! It was greatly to those hypotheticals disadvantage for the girls to disappear like that because it pretty much guaranteed that DM would stop looking for a plea deal and just give up the information.
I am troubled also by the account of the domestic violence incident but I keep two things in mind. One, we haven't heard DM's side of the story; right now, it is she said only. I'm not saying I believe MC is a liar but it's very common for two different people to have two different versions of the same event and for both people to believe their own version.
Two, even if it is true as known now, were there any mitigating circumstances? We don't know.
All I really know is that DM is in a position I would never wish on anyone. It is in the natural order of life for parents to die before their children. It is very sad but to an extent we are all prepared for that. I don't think anyone is prepared for their child to die before them and there is absolutely nothing that can prepare someone for that possibility.