GUILTY IN - Melinda Lindsey, 23, shot to death, Porter County, 16 Jan 2015 - #1

[ArabianLover]

If I haven't made myself clear, then I shall attempt. I have not witnessed ANYTHING first hand, nor has what I've posted been hearsay. It all comes from police reports and trial evidence. I don't know how to be clearer than that.

Then you haven't SEEN anything. You were told. What "trial evidence"?

 

[ArabianLover]

The only people who would be privy to "trial evidence" would be the attorneys and the defendant. So once again, you're hearing this information from the "defendent". And I didn't realize there had been a discovery hearing yet. So how do you know what's going to be "evidence" and what's not?

During the "discovery process" much of this "evidence" that you think shows Melinda filed stalking reports, etc., could very well be tossed out. It very well may come to light that she was MANIPULATED to file these reports by the defendent. So be careful about what you are calling "evidence".

 

[MyBelle]

Exactly right. Unless she was SITTING THERE WITH THEM and saw it with HER OWN EYES, I'm going to assume this was something told to her by Steve Lindsey. Just like most of the rest of her information.

Melinda made a report to police. I think because the information came from Melinda, it is why police did NOT arrest Steve right away. Somebody other than Steve threw the lingerie = co-conspirator.

JMO

 

[Nikk]

Certainly, Starshine does not have to clarify what she has been told from what she has observed. Asking her for clarification helps us to determine the source, and validity, of the information she posts.

She's been kind enough to clarify that her information is not through personal observations. I thank her for clarifying.

 

[MyBelle]

Then you haven't SEEN anything. You were told. What "trial evidence"?

It is very possible the verified insider has read the police report about the stalking.

"According to charging documents, the Lindseys contacted the sheriff's department in the days before the shooting because they thought someone was stalking their home."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...tb-lindsey-arrest-st-0213-20150212-story.html

 

[Nikk]

It is very possible the verified insider has read the police report about the stalking.

"According to charging documents, the Lindseys contacted the sheriff's department in the days before the shooting because they thought someone was stalking their home."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...tb-lindsey-arrest-st-0213-20150212-story.html

This article states that The Lindseys requested extra patrol because Steve thought there might be stalker.

http://www.commercial-news.com/news...71c-b702-11e4-be1b-bf515e255e47.html?mode=jqm

Police interviews may be evidence, but the interview itself may be tainted by bias and perspective. All will hopefully be sorted for the truth.

 

[Snowhite]

It is very possible the verified insider has read the police report about the stalking.

"According to charging documents, the Lindseys contacted the sheriff's department in the days before the shooting because they thought someone was stalking their home."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...tb-lindsey-arrest-st-0213-20150212-story.html

I read that article again ...I found something interesting to me...I know, its the victims Dad so please forgive me for pointing this out because as some have said...the newspaper don't get everything correct...but, if Melinda was texting her Dad to help her....why did he give this statement that was printed in that newspaper..."Melinda Lindsey was a stay-at-home mom, Kirby said, who a week or so before her death got a job as a waitress, though he wasn't sure where. She never said anything to her parents about whether her relationship with her husband was in trouble.

"Not to me or her mom," Kirby said. "She never said a word. Her problem was, she didn't want to fail, and that included her marriage."

 

[MyBelle]

This article states that The Lindseys requested extra patrol because Steve thought there might be stalker.

http://www.commercial-news.com/news...71c-b702-11e4-be1b-bf515e255e47.html?mode=jqm

Police interviews may be evidence, but the interview itself may be tainted by bias and perspective. All will hopefully be sorted for the truth.

My point is that Melinda also made the police report and she had no reason to lie about whether Steve was sitting with her when the lingerie came through the door.

JMO

 

[Nikk]

I do not find a police report for stalking at that residence. There may be one, but it isn't in the log.

Because The Lindseys requested extra patrol doesn't mean Melinda, or Steve, specifically filed a stalker report. The article poses Steve as the one claiming a stalker.

 

[MyBelle]

I read that article again ...I found something interesting to me...I know, its the victims Dad so please forgive me for pointing this out because as some have said...the newspaper don't get everything correct...but, if Melinda was texting her Dad to help her....why did he give this statement that was printed in that newspaper..."Melinda Lindsey was a stay-at-home mom, Kirby said, who a week or so before her death got a job as a waitress, though he wasn't sure where. She never said anything to her parents about whether her relationship with her husband was in trouble.

"Not to me or her mom," Kirby said. "She never said a word. Her problem was, she didn't want to fail, and that included her marriage."

She texted her dad about the baby, not about her marriage.

 

[MyBelle]

I do not find a police report for stalking at that residence. There may be one, but it isn't in the log.

Because The Lindseys requested extra patrol doesn't mean Melinda, or Steve, specifically filed a stalker report. The article poses Steve as the one claiming a stalker.

Maybe the charging documents got it wrong but I doubt it.

 

[Tina Grant]

If I haven't made myself clear, then I shall attempt. I have not witnessed ANYTHING first hand, nor has what I've posted been hearsay. It all comes from police reports and trial evidence. I don't know how to be clearer than that.

But there hasn't been a trial, so what exactly do you mean by trial evidence?

 

[Tina Grant]

My point is that Melinda also made the police report and she had no reason to lie about whether Steve was sitting with her when the lingerie came through the door.

JMO

If they were sitting on the couch when the lingerie came through the door, why didn't Steven, or both of them, chase the stalker down? It would seem they could have gotten close enough to at least see who it was.

 

[MyBelle]

If they were sitting on the couch when the lingerie came through the door, why didn't Steven, or both of them, chase the stalker down? It would seem they could have gotten close enough to at least see who it was.

I can't answer your question but I'm not about to blame Melinda for not running after whomever it was.

JMO

 

[Nikk]

MyBelle, I'm being picky, and I apologize, but I think there's a misundestanding.

The article you refer to regarding a "charging document" states, "According to charging documents, the Lindseys contacted the sheriff's department in the days before the shooting because they thought someone was stalking their home."

There is no mention of the lingerie incident, and no mention that Melinda filed a report, only mention that The Lindseys requested extra patrols. A later article by News Commercial states the call from the Lindseys was made the day previous to the murder.

I can find no specific stalker report filed in the police logs.

 

[starshine4u]

The only people who would be privy to "trial evidence" would be the attorneys and the defendant. So once again, you're hearing this information from the "defendent". And I didn't realize there had been a discovery hearing yet. So how do you know what's going to be "evidence" and what's not?

During the "discovery process" much of this "evidence" that you think shows Melinda filed stalking reports, etc., could very well be tossed out. It very well may come to light that she was MANIPULATED to file these reports by the defendent. So be careful about what you are calling "evidence".

The evidence HAS been turned over. And your wrong, the family is also privy to the trial evidence. I will say it one more time, what I posted came directly from POLICE REPORTS AND EVIDENCE, not from something someone told me. At the PRE-TRIAL the attorney will request other evidence he may feel is missing since he was given a list of everything "they" took into custody. ALL evidence is relevant.

 

[MyBelle]

MyBelle, I'm being picky, and I apologize, but I think there's a misundestanding.

The article you refer to regarding a "charging document" states, "According to charging documents, the Lindseys contacted the sheriff's department in the days before the shooting because they thought someone was stalking their home."

There is no mention of the lingerie incident, and no mention that Melinda filed a report, only mention that The Lindseys requested extra patrols. A later article by News Commercial states the call from the Lindseys was made the day previous to the murder.

I can find no specific stalker report filed in the police logs.

BBM. Melinda spoke to police. Police do not always file a written report. It wasn't a traffic accident. The officer will no doubt be asked to testify at trial as to what he was told by both Melinda and Steve.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

The evidence HAS been turned over. And your wrong, the family is also privy to the trial evidence. I will say it one more time, what I posted came directly from POLICE REPORTS AND EVIDENCE, not from something someone told me. At the PRE-TRIAL the attorney will request other evidence he may feel is missing since he was given a list of everything "they" took into custody. ALL evidence is relevant.

BBM. I think some don't understand that not all calls to police result in written reports that are made public.

JMO

 

[starshine4u]

BBM. I think some don't understand that not all calls to police result in written reports that are made public.

JMO

We have four of the stalking reports that were made.

 

[ArabianLover]

The evidence HAS been turned over. And your wrong, the family is also privy to the trial evidence. I will say it one more time, what I posted came directly from POLICE REPORTS AND EVIDENCE, not from something someone told me. At the PRE-TRIAL the attorney will request other evidence he may feel is missing since he was given a list of everything "they" took into custody. ALL evidence is relevant.

No. I am not wrong. Evidence used to arrest him and TRIAL EVIDENCE are two seperate things. And not all evidence is relevent.

*actually the term(s) is/are Admissible or Inadmissible. Not "relevent". And this will be argued by the attorneys and determined by the judge.