GUILTY IN - Amanda Blackburn, 28, pregnant, murdered, Indianapolis, 10 Nov 2015 #4

[heidisams]

:fish: I'll take the bait. Taylor did not walk past Amanda's home when he left the unoccupied home. He crossed the street when he left the unoccupied dwelling. He walked from there to Amanda's porch. I believe he did this during the packing of the stolen goods into the stolen SUV.

There are three perps, Gordon, Taylor and Watson who leave ABull's apartment at Brendon Way Dr. Multiple crimes are committed. The first of the three 911 emergency calls is placed at 5:23am.

Coincidentally, we have two emergency phone calls within five minutes: one placed at 8:17 once the homeowner of the unoccupied dwelling arrives home; the other at 8:22 at Amanda's home on the same street a few houses apart. The medics called the police to Amanda's CS. Police arrive while the medics are carrying a dying Amanda to the ambulance.

A well-known detective once said, "A coincidence is a clue." ~ Author and Town Marshall James Kolar


Timeline from the PC statement with google map
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...vasion-Indianapolis-4&p=12211920#post12211920

Timeline from charging doc
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...vasion-Indianapolis-4&p=12211919#post12211919

BBM

I don't understand what you're trying to say here... While I agree that there are often no coincidences in crime, I'm not sure I agree that these emergency calls coming in when they did are coincidental? The burglaries all happened within the same timeframe, meaning back to back, so the calls coming in the way they did seem logical to me... It's simply the facts in the case, imo... I don't find odd or peculiar...

All jmo.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Maybe Dee Dee was just brainstorming. But forgot to add jmo. Idk

 

[Cardinal47]

I apologize for not being more specific. But I'd say that a majority of burglars go in armed with a knife or a gun. Do I think that ANYONE who decides they are going to burglarize intends to murder ? no. But I think if they get into a situation where a homeowner has a gun, they might struggle to get it away and potentially kill them. Yes, I think that has the potential to happen when it's "me or him". which is why i said "potential". They are putting themselves in a situation where "potentially" someone could be killed if things go a certain way. Intentions go out the window when you are fighting for your life.

I disagree. I don't think most burglars go in with weapons. Their goal is in and out with something of value they can use or sell. Carrying a weapon and breaking into somebody's home is another whole ballgame. That take you into the big leagues.

I offer this from a former burglar on https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130908165000AA7DtRN

Being a former burglar, I can say most don't carry weapons because getting caught with a weapon (other than the channel locks or pry bar we used to get in) is an additional crime, a felony in most cases. Two pitbulls? Throw a package of hot dogs in the yard and walk past the pitbulls. A big dog dish and some chewed on toys make a great deterrent because we don't see the dog, but we have every reason to think there is one. Burglars usually hit the easy targets, unlocked doors and windows, bushes covering windows or porch areas, doors with old locks or loose fitting frames, and don't think a light on is a deterrent, it makes it easy for us to get around if we watched the house and know nobody is home.

 

[Cardinal47]

Arrest records reported to the FBI indicate that approximately 70 percent of all burglary arrestees are white and 86 percent are male. Over 28 percent of those are under 18 years of age.

Over 50 percent of burglars live within two miles of the home they burglarize. Most burglars are not violent, do not carry weapons and work quickly.

The average burglary is over in less than 12 minutes. - See more at: http://simplisafe.com/blog/how-much-do-you-know-about-burglaries#sthash.v2iKZlM4.dpuf

This is an interesting read. http://alarmsystemsoklahoma.com/things-to-know-to-avoid-getting-your-home-robbed/

 

[DeDee]

<rsbm>The affidavit does not indicate that LT nor any of the suspects "crossed the street". Where does that come from? Where does it say the vehicle was across the street so that a suspect would have been "packing the stolen goods into the stolen SUV"?

---

“And perhaps I understood it all wrong, but I understood it and that was the novelty.”
&#8213; Samuel Beckett, Molloy

link

This was the question:

Brainstorming is great. Why not brainstorm the question I posed last night.
Why did LT leave the neighbor's home and walk PAST AB's house to be seen 2-3 doors to the RIGHT of 2812 before he entered? If AB was a target, why not walk directly to her house?

From the Press Conference:
"At approximately 6:00 there was a camera from west of the burglarized home that captured a dark colored [stolen] SUV driving quickly down the street. Approximately one minute later that vehicle was then seen leaving." [*See Post # 6 of this thread]

I brainstormed the question and concluded it was possible for LT to walk across the street instead of walking past Amanda's home.

Further, it is possible that when the time of their crime spree began, LT wanted to kill someone. Evidently LT was armed because, as the story goes, he had to be talked out of shooting the sleeping female victim on San Clemente, his neighbor. This is where I will note that most/many burglars do not carry a gun because their crime automatically becomes a felony if they are caught burglarizing with a firearm.

This is why I believe LT went to Amanda's home:
From the Probable Cause Affidavit:

According to CI, after second burglary, they wanted more money. Taylor walked to 2812 SuCo and opened front door. Taylor and Watson entered the home. Gordon waited at the Sebring parked at 2830 SuCo.

Watson later walked to the car and told Gordon a woman was inside, and Taylor busted her in the mouth with his gun. The two discussed leaving. Then Taylor walked up, and threw some cards in the car. Watson drove with Gordon to an ATM on N. Michigan Rd.
[*See Post # 6 of this thread]

What was Amanda doing while LT goes to the Sebring to give the other perps the debit card? It is so painful for me to consider. The ear witness neighbor reported she heard gunshots around 6:45. That is the time in between the unsuccessful ATM cash withdrawal and the successful ATM cash withdrawal.

 

[heidisams]

Arrest records reported to the FBI indicate that approximately 70 percent of all burglary arrestees are white and 86 percent are male. Over 28 percent of those are under 18 years of age.

Over 50 percent of burglars live within two miles of the home they burglarize. Most burglars are not violent, do not carry weapons and work quickly.

The average burglary is over in less than 12 minutes. - See more at: http://simplisafe.com/blog/how-much-do-you-know-about-burglaries#sthash.v2iKZlM4.dpuf

This is an interesting read. http://alarmsystemsoklahoma.com/things-to-know-to-avoid-getting-your-home-robbed/

The 2nd article discusses the two different types of burglars, the professional and the petty... It's the professional burglars that are in and out, know the laws, etc... These guys were petty burglars, imo. Unorganized and dangerous...

Excerpt:

The petty burglar is the most common, and the most dangerous to the homeowner, because they do not discriminate, may carry a gun, and vandalize your property. They steal to support a drug habit, or because they can’t, or are unwilling to find another mode of work.

All jmo.

 

[Lilibet]

I guess I've lost the original point of this discussion or argument. I'm not sure what these statistics and experiences of professional burglars have to do with this case. IMO It doesn't matter what most burglars do or don't do. In this particular case the killer carried a gun. It's quite clear that he was more killer than burglar.

I realize that MM opined that most burglars carry a gun to support an opinion that a burglary can escalate to murder given the right circumstances. Even if that statement about guns is wrong, the fact is that in this case the burglar carried a gun because he wanted to kill. Killing was clearly his intent that day, and his friends dissuaded him the first time. He carried out his original intent with Amanda.

So whether or not most burglars do or don't carry guns is irrelevant in Amanda's case...unless of course someone is trying to make a case that Amanda was targeted specifically. And we all know that entertaining that theory leads to further speculations we can't make and have no reason to make. JMO, MOO

I disagree. I don't think most burglars go in with weapons. Their goal is in and out with something of value they can use or sell. Carrying a weapon and breaking into somebody's home is another whole ballgame. That take you into the big leagues.

I offer this from a former burglar on https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130908165000AA7DtRN

Being a former burglar, I can say most don't carry weapons because getting caught with a weapon (other than the channel locks or pry bar we used to get in) is an additional crime, a felony in most cases. Two pitbulls? Throw a package of hot dogs in the yard and walk past the pitbulls. A big dog dish and some chewed on toys make a great deterrent because we don't see the dog, but we have every reason to think there is one. Burglars usually hit the easy targets, unlocked doors and windows, bushes covering windows or porch areas, doors with old locks or loose fitting frames, and don't think a light on is a deterrent, it makes it easy for us to get around if we watched the house and know nobody is home.

Arrest records reported to the FBI indicate that approximately 70 percent of all burglary arrestees are white and 86 percent are male. Over 28 percent of those are under 18 years of age.

Over 50 percent of burglars live within two miles of the home they burglarize. Most burglars are not violent, do not carry weapons and work quickly.

The average burglary is over in less than 12 minutes. - See more at: http://simplisafe.com/blog/how-much-do-you-know-about-burglaries#sthash.v2iKZlM4.dpuf

This is an interesting read. http://alarmsystemsoklahoma.com/things-to-know-to-avoid-getting-your-home-robbed/

 

[DexterMorgan]

I guess I've lost the original point of this discussion or argument. I'm not sure what these statistics and experiences of professional burglars have to do with this case. IMO It doesn't matter what most burglars do or don't do. In this particular case the killer carried a gun. It's quite clear that he was more killer than burglar.

I realize that MM opined that most burglars carry a gun to support an opinion that a burglary can escalate to murder given the right circumstances. Even if that statement about guns is wrong, the fact is that in this case the burglar carried a gun because he wanted to kill. Killing was clearly his intent that day, and his friends dissuaded him the first time. He carried out his original intent with Amanda.

So whether or not most burglars do or don't carry guns is irrelevant in Amanda's case...unless of course someone is trying to make a case that Amanda was targeted specifically. And we all know that entertaining that theory leads to further speculations we can't make and have no reason to make. JMO, MOO

Agree. Home invaders and killers do not follow statistics. They just do whatever they decide to do.

Which leaves the people that monitor statistics to document things for future number statistics.

So how home invaders did business in the 80s will definitely show different statistics of how home invaders did business in the 90s and 2000s and so forth.

 

[MJPeony]

Honestly fellow WS'ers, I do not understand why exploring a theory that the creeps went for AB specifically means the poster is "going where we shouldn't go". :dunno::banghead: I will never understand the reason those who keep saying this say this. Is that the only thing that could be some other theory??

Why is wondering if the guys had met her at yard sale, or seen her out with her baby, or knew her family from a church outreach event and resented them and thus wanted to target them, make me a conspiracy theorist who has a hidden agenda of "going where I know I shouldn't go" on these forums? That IS being judgmental. Like I said, I'm not brainstorming here anymore theories as to why the guys went to that house on Sunnyvale Court. Not productive. I may still lurk :lurk:, but needed to say my peace, for the last time, on motives (which apparently are remedial to some and branded as ill-intentioned). My motive has always been to "make sense" in my clearly pea-sized brain of a senseless crime. Which I can acknowledge cannot often be done- by definition. Not everyone has been trying to secretly speak of "things we shouldn't speak of".

 

[Lilibet]

Honestly fellow WS'ers, I do not understand why exploring a theory that the creeps went for AB specifically means the poster is "going where we shouldn't go".

I will never understand the reason those who keep saying this say this. If you ask me- which you didn't I realize but I'll share anyway- if anything, it speaks to what these posters have on their mind.

Why is wondering if the guys had met her at yard sale, or seen her out with her baby, or knew her family from a church outreach event and resented them and thus wanted to target them, make me a conspiracy theorist who has a hidden agenda of "going where I know I shouldn't go" on these forums? That IS being judgmental. And it's not true. Like I said, I'm not brainstorming here anymore theories as to why the guys went to that house on Sunnyvale Court. Not productive. I may still lurk

, but needed to say my peace, for the last time, on my own motives (which apparently are remedial to some and branded as ill-intentioned). My motive has always been to "make sense" in my clearly pea-sized brain of a senseless crime, which I acknowledge cannot often be done- by definition. Not everyone has been trying to secretly speak of "things we shouldn't speak of".

BBM

MJ I can only speak for my own statements, but they aren't directed at you personally and are not judgemental or accusatory. I intend my remarks about "going down that road" as a general caution and I apologize for hurting your feelings.

The problem we had here at the beginning is that there were members who were bound and determined to make Amanda's husband DB the bad guy, as in murder-for-hire. It was extremely ugly and the mods cracked down hard, thankfully. Apparently, this came up again, because we were AGAIN warned to stay away from DB just the other day. So in cautioning against this, it does not speak to what is on my mind at all, but rather to what was on the minds of some on this thread, who were extremely insistent and at times trying to be veiled about their views.

So, again speaking personally, when I read posts trying to come up with theories about "why Amanda?" or that they probably targeted her for some reason, or that bringing a gun may mean she was targeted, it seems to put us in danger of going down the DB blame road again. Perhaps you can understand my concerns and my desire to avoid going there again? eace:

I realize that you are simply trying to make sense of something that doesn't make sense. I have posted several times my opinion that some things happen in life that don't ever make sense. IMO Amanda's murder is one of those things. If you don't see it that way, that's fine. But arrests have been made of men whose lives appear on SM to have absolutely no connection with the Blackburn's. Since they engaged in other burglaries that morning before coming to Amanda's, there just doesn't seem to be a reason to think they were targeting her for any conceivable reason. JMO, MOO

 

[Eloise]

Amanda's murder would hardly be the first that happened for no 'reason' other than the perp just did it. They're probably the hardest to comprehend, which is why I think people want there to be some kind of reason behind it. Like, they knew her before, or yes - that her husband was connected. It is so much more comprehensible and understandable if there is some kind of prior connection, or 'reason' behind her becoming a murder victim. Fact is, sometimes people just kill. A schoolteacher was killed waiting at a bus stop here in Sydney a couple of days ago. He'd never met the murderer before. They hadn't argued. There was no robbery involved. There was no motive (other than possible mental illness of the perp, yet tbd) whatsoever. The guy just walked up to the victim, stabbed him in the chest and face, and ran off. The man died in hospital soon afterward. Sometimes bad things just happen when and where they shouldn't for no other reason than the worst of human nature.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Brainstorming is great. Why not brainstorm the question I posed last night.

Why did LT leave the neighbor's home and walk PAST AB's house to be seen 2-3 doors to the RIGHT of 2812 before he entered? If AB was a target, why not walk directly to her house?

Ok...Bessie...here is my take....LT sees Davey leave the house..he's not sure if someone is still home or not...he walks past the house to see if there are any lights on in any other rooms without trying to attract attention..when he doesn't see any other lights on, he believes the house is unoccupied.

I think often times, burglars will pose as repairmen or meter readers, etc. If he was acting like a meter reader, he would be walking around all of the houses as to not draw too much attention.

If someone was looking out the window and saw he looked like a meter reader, the would dismiss it as just that.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Reply to Dee Dee from today at 12:38pm....

You could be onto something here...Let's suppose there is a 4th individual involved (ABull maybe???) ABull is driving SUV, pulls up, guys load big ticket items and he takes off. When he pulls up, he know the general vicinity, but not the exact house, so he stops in front of the house across the street. LT takes the stolen goods to that vehicle.

This theory would also explain Bessie's question of why 2 doors west before he goes to Amanda's house. It also explains Bessie's other question of how they got all the big stuff is a small Sebring.

Good theory DeDee.

 

[DeDee]

Maybe Dee Dee was just brainstorming. But forgot to add jmo. Idk

DeDee was brainstorming. She did not "forget to add jmo". It is part of posting at WS that all messages express the view of the author. My right to post views and opinions, within reason, is listed on the Forum Rules page.

When a link is provided by DeDee, that means the words are taken straight from the provided link as a quote.

"All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community, nor vBulletin Solutions, Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message."

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

If this is incorrect, please post the proper rule that states I must slap a imoo, moo, imho, et al onto a post. TIA

 

[bessie]

You don't have to slap anything on your posts. If you present an opinion as fact, however, you can expect your post to be edited or removed.

To clarify, LE did not state that the dark SUV mentioned in the first press conference was "stolen". Nor is there any indication one or more of the suspects "crossed the street". It's certainly a possibility, but not a known fact.

 

[DeDee]

You don't have to slap anything on your posts. If you present an opinion as fact, however, you can expect your post to be edited or removed.

To clarify, LE did not state that the dark SUV mentioned in the first press conference was "stolen". Nor is there any indication one or more of the suspects "crossed the street". It's certainly a possibility, but not a known fact.

My apologies for not being more precise. I added the [stolen] to indicate that the SUV was in fact stolen. The stolen info came from Post #6. It came from a media source and not directly from the PC.

Reports say the stolen dark colored SUV was found abandoned near 40th St and Rookwood. LE hopes it will provide DNA, according to Paul Minser of the Indiana State Police who works with forensics.
http://wishtv.com/2015/11/13/investi...urders-friday/

We were asked to brainstorm on why LT walked past Amanda's home if Amanda was the target. Therefore, I brainstormed and concluded he possibly could have crossed the street and not actually walked past her home. Brainstorming is not presenting a surmise as fact.

Why I feel that I am being singled out to be publicly humiliated on this forum I cannot say but the feeling is not pleasant.

 

[DeDee]

In my life, I've been given the opportunity to be close to a select few people who possess a certain glow. Fact. There is a glowing white aura of purity that surrounds them. Opinion. I believe this is what Amanda possessed. Opinion. IMHO, it is a halo that is God-given to those who choose to love Him with their whole heart. They are the anointed ones. JMO


Neighborhood bond strengthens in month after murder of pastor's wife Updated: Dec 11, 2015 9:30 PM CST

"She just always looked so happy and so vibrant. She just glowed," one resident said.

http://www.wthr.com/story/30729771/...ngthens-in-month-after-murder-of-pastors-wife

 

[Lilibet]

I will probably regret jumping in, but here's how this turned into a big misunderstanding from my reading of the posts:

1) DeDee brainstormed, but stated that the killer had crossed the street...it sounded like she was stating a fact and including it in her brainstorm.
2) Bessie challenged the statement about crossing the street, thinking DeDee was stating it as fact within her brainstorm.
3) Dexter attempted to defend DeDee by saying she was just brainstorming but forgot to put JMO.
4) DeDee thought Dex was criticizing her for not putting JMO and defended herself that she was just brainstorming, asking about "slapping" JMO, IMO, etc on her posts.
5) Bessie answered, not realizing that the whole original post was hypothesis, not stating facts.

I think it's just a case of a bunch of misunderstandings escalating. We're all on the same side here. Group hug time everyone.

:grouphug:

 

[bessie]

No one wants to single you out or offend you, DeDee. The post about LT crossing the street, etc. was a bit confusing because of the way it was worded. That's all. I think it's clear to everyone now that you were stating your ideas.

 

[Boodles]

Off the top of my head, I can think of several burglary/home invasions which ended up in murder/violence:

1. Jason Williford raped and murdered Kathy Taft while she was lying in bed during the night in 2010. He is a white 20-something, middle class raised, druggie male.
2. In 2008, Lawrence Lovette killed Duke graduate student Abhijit Mahalo. But oh wait, I take that back, he was found N/G (IMO, due to gang member state's witnesses lying during trial, refusing to "snitch" even though they had previously provided evidence to detectives and a grand jury). However, he was also currently incarcerated for LWOP for murder 1 for robbing, torturing and murdering another person, UNC student body president Eve Carson. He's a black male 20-something yo who hung with gang guys.
3. Melissa Huggins was murdered during a 2013 home invasion by two black men in their 20's by accessing her apt on the 2nd floor via sliding glass door. Melissa awoke and they (allegedly*) stabbed her to death. A third suspect, Sarah Redden, 20 year old w/f was their "lookout" and provded evidence in return for a plea deal. One man plead guilty to avoid the death penalty. The other man* is now facing trial, and Sarah Redden is now changing her original story to help her bf (the one facing trial) get away with murder. They had been out stealing from parked cars in a nice neighborhood when they came across this home invasion opportunity. Btw, the victim's 8 yo daughter found her mom dead when she woke up the next morning.
4. Jason Beyer was shot and permanently paralyzed and his wife was sexually assaulted during a 2013 middle-of-the-night home invasion in nice, historic downtown neighborhood. Two black males were convicted, one in his 20s, a chronic burglar/home invader, the other his 17 yo younger brother. They broke in to burgle, found the homeowners and brutally assaulted them. 2013

These are recent, local to me, and just off the top of my head. So I totally get and acknowledge that burglaries and home invasions can escalate to violence and murder. But then again, some murders are not the result of this simplistic straightforward circumstance. I am beyond frustrated that other scenarios are forbidden from discussion. I am not a conspiracy theorist (not even close). But sometimes there may be other motives and scenarios, especially in a case like this one which has so many bizarre coincidences. I remain confused about why some cases are allowed discussion about multiple scenarios, but this one does not.