IN - Amanda Blackburn, 28, pregnant, murdered, Indianapolis, 10 Nov 2015 - #2

[Hippiemomof5]

Murdering a pregnant mother and her unborn child is probably the absolute last thing the perp(s) should've done if they were trying to avoid "getting caught". :gaah:

Well, obviously! That's not what actually happens though!

 

[MJPeony]

I must have been really distracted this morning. I didn't realize that the apartment complex where the search warrant was served is part of the same residential community where the other break in occurred on the morning of November 10, the one with the surveillance video of the guys in hoodies. (And it definitely was November 10. I checked the crime map. Same day, same time that the burglary took place two doors down from the Blackburns.)....

snipped for brevity


Ok, I'm so confused. I think I've been obsessed with this case too much over the past couple of days and my brain has now short-circuited...

The 5:30am burglary on Tuesday morning?? I thought that was a couple of houses down from Blackburns? :cuckoo: (that's me: cuckoo...)

 

[LaborDayRN]

To be fair, with no one arrested, and the facts of the case still coming out, I think it is premature to say without noting it is your opinion, that this was a random crime.

When someone starts a statement with "I think," it seems pretty clear it's their opinion.

 

[LINEViBE]

I see that the most recent incident at 2812 Sunnyfield Ct has not been posted on the IMPD log yet. Does anyone know the date that the Blackburn family moved in to 2812 Sunnyfield Ct? I know the couple started working at Resonate Church in November 2011.

 

[bessie]

snipped for brevity


Ok, I'm so confused. I think I've been obsessed with this case too much over the past couple of days and my brain has now short-circuited...

The 5:30am burglary on Tuesday morning?? I thought that was a couple of houses down from Blackburns?:cuckoo:

It was.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

5:23 A.M. -- burglary in the 5700 block of San Clemente Drive (10-11 miles from Blackburns' residence)

5:30 A.M. -- burglary in the 2800 Sunnyfield Ct

6:01 A.M. -- SUV seen leaving the Sunnyfield Ct neighborhood

6:11 A.M. -- Amanda's husband leaves home

6:45 A.M. -- neighbors hear gunshots

So, either:

A. It's an uncanny coincidence, and the robberies are unrelated.

B. A large gang was hitting homes in different locations simultaneously.

C. The San Clemente robbery was reported at 5:23 A.M., but actually occurred a little earlier by the same individuals, who then went on to commit the Sunnyfield Ct. crimes.

I choose C, because remember, on the same crime map, the incident at AB's house shows as 8:32 A.M. because that's when the call came in. And 5:23 is a very exact time, which also suggests that is when the call was logged. JMO IMO MOO

 

[heartgoesout]

That's not how it was referenced.

 

[bessie]

I see that the most recent incident at 2812 Sunnyfield Ct has not been posted on the IMPD log yet. Does anyone know the date that the Blackburn family moved in to 2812 Sunnyfield Ct? I know the couple started working at Resonate Church in November 2011.

"V has lived on Sunnyfield Court for about nine years. She's known the Blackburns since they moved in about two years ago. "

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/...ured-morning-shooting-northwestside/75254320/

 

[bessie]

To be fair, with no one arrested, and the facts of the case still coming out, I think it is premature to say without noting it is your opinion, that this was a random crime.

What I actually said was that I "think" the point is... In other words, I was offering an OPINION on the meaning of the first poster's statement. However, I do "think" the crime was random, and that also is an opinion. Had I said that I KNOW the crime was random, your argument would be valid.

I think the point is that it was a random crime, and tragically, circumstances were such that her murder resulted.

 

[deoneta]

It was.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

5:30 A.M. -- burglary in the 5700 block of San Clemente Drive (10-11 miles from Blackburns' residence)

5:30 A.M. -- burglary in the 2800 Sunnyfield Ct

6:01 A.M. -- SUV seen leaving the Sunnyfield Ct neighborhood

6:11 A.M. -- Amanda's husband leaves home

6:45 A.M. -- neighbors hear gunshots

So, either:

A. It's an uncanny coincidence, and the robberies are unrelated.

B. A large gang was hitting homes in different locations simultaneously.

C. The San Clemente was reported at 5:30 A.M., but actually occurred a little earlier by the same individuals who then went on to commit the Sunnyfield Ct. crimes.

I choose C, because remember, on the same crime map, the incident at AB's house shows as 8:32 A.M. because that's when the call came in.

I thought I was following fairly well, but now I am all jumbled up. Is the home security video which shows the two burglars, one dressed pretty much like the murder suspect from the street video, from the San Clemente break in? That's what I was thinking. Or is it from the earlier Sunnyfield Ct. burglary?

 

[bessie]

I thought I was following fairly well, but now I am all jumbled up. Is the home security video which shows the two burglars, one dressed pretty much like the murder suspect from the street video, from the San Clemente break in? That's what I was thinking. Or is it from the earlier Sunnyfield Ct. burglary?

It's from the San Clemente break in. I'd posted the link in my previous post, but here it is again.

http://fox59.com/2015/11/11/surveillance-photos-show-burglars-breaking-into-northeast-side-home-2/

The only images released from the Sunnfieild Ct crimes are the two of the guy walking in the street.

http://fox59.com/2015/11/16/surveil...interest-in-amanda-blackburn-murder-released/

 

[MaxManning]

I don't know if it's off limits, I apologize if so.

I'm going to guess that Davey Blackburn's gun isn't involved in the crime at all. I would think that if it was involved, they wouldn't have been so quick to clear him. Not because it would make him guilty, but I'd think they'd have a lot more questioning to do if a gun from the house had been used.

I think exactly the opposite. If they did have a gun and it was loaded by amanda via fingerprint evidence and not carried into the residence by the burglar, that means that the primary motive was not murder or assault, but exactly what LE are saying at the moment. - robbery gone awry. That rules out alot of far more complex scenarios quickly.

Their initial reaction to this gun that was found was puzzling. I guess that'd be my secondary question - If it was a situation where the victim had a gun and that initiated the struggle, what would be their reason for hiding that fact ?

Keep in mind here that this is the response :

"There is nothing, nothing, nothing tying this gun to this case," said Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Rich Riddle.

Whenever someone says the same word 3 times, I start to wonder if the motive is persuasion.

Also, keep in mind that this is not a misreporting by media, but a direct quote of LE. Am I the only one that questions something that seems to go 180 degrees away from Crime Investigation 101 ?

I reserve the right to be very wrong, haha. Just a theory!

 

[MaxManning]

Quick question for anyone who has knowledge. How quickly could a firearm be ruled out ? obviously if it is the same caliber etc, then you have to go the next step to the bullet signature from the barrel or whatever.

LE saying that nothing, nothing, nothing ties this gun to this case, seems to indicate to me that it failed a very simple test --- wrong kind of gun completely.

Also, at this point would the police know the exact kind of gun that was used based on the bullet ? Or maybe just a more general idea ? Or at minimum something that would allow them to say "nothing, nothing, nothing" confidently ?

 

[SapphireSteel]

Quick question for anyone who has knowledge. How quickly could a firearm be ruled out ? obviously if it is the same caliber etc, then you have to go the next step to the bullet signature from the barrel or whatever.

LE saying that nothing, nothing, nothing ties this gun to this case, seems to indicate to me that it failed a very simple test --- wrong kind of gun completely.

Also, at this point would the police know the exact kind of gun that was used based on the bullet ? Or maybe just a more general idea ? Or at minimum something that would allow them to say "nothing, nothing, nothing" confidently ?

The ammunition found in Amanda didn't match...?

 

[SapphireSteel]

I think exactly the opposite. If they did have a gun and it was loaded by amanda via fingerprint evidence and not carried into the residence by the burglar, that means that the primary motive was not murder or assault, but exactly what LE are saying at the moment. - robbery gone awry. That rules out alot of far more complex scenarios quickly.

Their initial reaction to this gun that was found was puzzling. I guess that'd be my secondary question - If it was a situation where the victim had a gun and that initiated the struggle, what would be their reason for hiding that fact ?

Keep in mind here that this is the response :

"There is nothing, nothing, nothing tying this gun to this case," said Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Rich Riddle.

[/B]Whenever someone says the same word 3 times, I start to wonder if the motive is persuasion.
Also, keep in mind that this is not a misreporting by media, but a direct quote of LE. Am I the only one that questions something that seems to go 180 degrees away from Crime Investigation 101 ?

I reserve the right to be very wrong, haha. Just a theory!

Riddle may well be getting frustrated with some of the misreporting going on.

I know I am...ullhair:

 

[MaxManning]

The ammunition found in Amanda didn't match...?

Right, that's my point I think then. Am I correct in assuming that if they have the bullet from amanda, they could rule out a gun in moments based on the type of ammunition used by the gun and the bullet(s) from amanda ?


Which is why I am saying, they initially did that very quickly. Now, Oops, we are "investigating". Incompetence or deliberate motive for a backtrack ?

Have they even reported the ammunition/gun used in the murder - based on bullets from the scene ?

 

[MaxManning]

Riddle may well be getting frustrated with some of the misreporting going on.

I know I am...ullhair:

Well, is it reporting or Riddle/LE when he first says :

"There is nothing, nothing, nothing tying this gun to this case."

then later that evening he says :

"It certainly is of interest to our detectives to see if that weapon has any connection to any crime in that area,” Riddle said. “But most importantly the Amanda Blackburn case at this point.”

“Our detectives are looking at the caliber of the handgun recovered, to see if it does in fact match the caliber of the weapon used in the Amanda Blackburn case,” Riddle said.


These are both direct quotes, that are chronologically ordered to best of my knowledge.

Which is why I have pondered WHY he might have backtracked on what was initially dismissed so emphatically.

 

[bessie]

Right, that's my point I think then. Am I correct in assuming that if they have the bullet from amanda, they could rule out a gun in moments based on the type of ammunition used by the gun and the bullet(s) from amanda ?


Which is why I am saying, they initially did that very quickly. Now, Oops, we are "investigating". Incompetence or deliberate motive for a backtrack ?

Have they even reported the ammunition/gun used in the murder - based on bullets from the scene ?

I'm far from a ballistics expert. I would think that in some instances a determination can be made quickly, and in others, further analysis is required. And no, they've not released ballistics information from the murder.

It seems to me (in my OPINION) that the "we are checking out the gun" statement" came before the "nothing, nothing, nothing" one. I dunno. But honestly, I tend to agree that Riddle was growing frustrated with the hounding from reporters, and either didn't add, "at this time", or that part was left out in the report. What bothers me about that article is the "nothing, nothing, nothing" statement is the only direct quote. So we can't tell the context in which it was made.

In any case, I doubt that LE would make an official public statement on the spot, so to speak. :moo: :moo:

Hopefully, one of our members who is knowledgeable about weapons will come along and answer your question.

Recovered handgun may be linked to Amanda Blackburn murder case
Posted 4:42 PM, November 17, 2015,
by Zach Myers, Updated at 05:40pm, November 17, 2015

[...]
“It certainly is of interest to our detectives to see if that weapon has any connection to any crime in that area,” Riddle said. “But most importantly the Amanda Blackburn case at this point.”

[..]
“Our detectives are looking at the caliber of the handgun recovered, to see if it does in fact match the caliber of the weapon used in the Amanda Blackburn case,” Riddle said.

---

Police: Handgun not tied to Amanda Blackburn case
Michael Anthony Adams, [email protected]
5:27 p.m. EST November 17, 2015

[...]
"There is nothing, nothing, nothing tying this gun to this case," said Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Lt. Rich Riddle.

 

[Oghbeicae9]

<membersnip>

 

[QueenMictlan]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/pastors...1YWV1BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOQRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkAw--

Amanda was kept on life support and then her organs harvested. According to this report.

 

[AnaTeresa]

With regard to LE's statement that those arrested were for other issues and unrelated to Amanda's murder, it is not uncommon for LE to arrest a suspect on other charges to get them off the street while they are building additional charges. It is possible that these persons arrested may face charges related to Amanda later, which of course LE would not talk about. :twocents:

Also, just wanted to say thanks to bessie for doing such a great job both modding this thread and also frequently updating with facts and media. I appreciate your hard work, and I'm sure others in the thread do as well!