MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #4

[JEF]

We are on the same wavelength, roses. I almost mentioned the civil suit thought in my post.

I really hope that the Marcottes do so for the reason you mentioned -- it might shake some info loose -- but also because I believe they deserve to get whatever money they can from the perpetrator (or his family, if a minor, or estate, if deceased). It adds insult to injury that they not only have to suffer immensely, but that they have had to incur burial/funeral expenses because some monster killed their child. This is not even to mention the huge costs to society.

That compensation angle aside, it's the punitive nature of civil suits that seems just. People who commit such horrendous acts (as well as those who share responsibility for enabling, covering up, etc.) should be hit in the pocket.

They could bring a civil suit against the suspect if he's alive. They can also bring such a suit against his estate if he's not alive. I don't believe it matters whether his estate has little or no money. They might not get any money, which I'm sure they don't care about that, but they might get some justice. Unfortunately, they'd be out money in such a case, since they'd have to pay legal fees.

Yes, I just recently read about the new case in California involving a woman runner. Really sad and infuriating.

Women running (or walking/hiking) alone should ALWAYS have mace or a stun gun on them and NEVER listen to music why running unless they're in an area where there are always people around. It's not fair, but it is what it is.

I wish for you safe runs, roses!

I wish I could ask here why people believe that theory. I honestly don't buy it at all. But again maybe I am missing something....


Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[OldSteve]

Respectfully snipped -

Yes, I just recently read about the new case in California involving a woman runner. Really sad and infuriating.

Women running (or walking/hiking) alone should ALWAYS have mace or a stun gun on them and NEVER listen to music while running unless they're in an area where there are always people around.

Just adding my :twocents: and not discounting what you said, only adding - Sadly, Mickey Shudnick who was very fit, studied self-defense, an had pepper spay close at hand on her bicycle never got to use it because she was struck by perp in vehicle.... seems perps like to strike from behins with a vehicle to render victim helpless.... perhaps running opposite direction of traffic help...

 

[DexterMorgan]

Imo

The best way to stop abduction/rapes/murders/

Is by forcing every male to have their dna on file.

Jmo.

We would probably have 1 million old crimes solved in 1 month.

Plus it will deter most rape and/or murder cases.

 

[coastal]

Hi all. First time poster, but have been following this thread along since early on.

Count me in with agreeing with Camerabug and roses. I, too, believe that LE knows who committed this monstrous crime and that he’s no longer a threat, which is one reason they’ve been mum. Certainly, this crime suggests the monster lives/lived locally or at least is/was familiar with the area. So if LE believed there was a chance that a murderous maniac who attacks women in broad daylight was still a threat, it seems highly unlikely to me that they’d be radio silent for this long.

Just because they have a DNA sample from Vanessa and haven’t publicly announced a match doesn’t mean, as someone said, that they’re chasing rainbows. It could mean one of two things, in my opinion: 1. They’re still trying to obtain DNA from the suspect or one of his close relatives. 2. They obtained a DNA sample and it matched, but they don’t have a strong enough case to prove anything more than there was some contact between him and Vanessa.

I so hope for justice for Vanessa, her family/friends, and the public, especially the community. Sadly, however, I also think there’s a chance that LE might have their hands tied, and might not ever be able to publicly announce anything even if they feel certain they know who committed this horrendous act. I so hope this doesn’t prove the case.

I agree with the majority on this site, who have expressed the belief that this wasn’t a random crime. My theory is that this maniac was someone who was romantically interested in Vanessa and she wasn’t interested in him in that way, or that he just knew of her and she was the unfortunate outlet for his rage against women.

As a woman, and as a runner, I have felt such empathy for Vanessa and such sadness and outrage that there is such evil in this society. I can't even imagine what her family and close friends must be feeling; seeing pictures of her mother at the funeral is enough to rip a person's heart out.

Welcome to Websleuths, searunner!

 

[searunner]

Respectfully snipped -

Just adding my :twocents: and not discounting what you said, only adding - Sadly, Mickey Shudnick who was very fit, studied self-defense, an had pepper spay close at hand on her bicycle never got to use it because she was struck by perp in vehicle.... seems perps like to strike from behins with a vehicle to render victim helpless.... perhaps running opposite direction of traffic help...

Great add, Steve. Fully agree. I always run (and bike) against traffic not really because I'm thinking that someone might purposely hit me, but because it just seems safer in general -- not that I think it's a good idea to run or bike on heavily traveled roads or ones with narrow shoulders.

 

[bluesneakers]

Great add, Steve. Fully agree. I always run (and bike) against traffic not really because I'm thinking that someone might purposely hit me, but because it just seems safer in general -- not that I think it's a good idea to run or bike on heavily traveled roads or ones with narrow shoulders.

OT: Got curious....

edit:

Everything I can find says it's not only against the law but it's also dangerous to ride your bike against traffic. (I'm an avid cyclist and just assumed it was the law - I know I feel safer riding with traffic, especially when it comes to making turns but anyway...)

Debunking Wrong-Way Riding

Illegal to Ride a Bike Against Traffic?

 

[searunner]

OT: Isn't the law that bikes have to ride with traffic?

I'm mainly a runner, so running against traffic isn't an issue.

I rarely bike. But when I do, I sometimes will ride against traffic BUT only on non-busy roads with decent shoulders. As I said in my original post, I don't recommend people ride against traffic on busy roads or ones with narrow shoulders - it's dangerous.

But, yes, to answer your question, it is probably against the law to ride against traffic in most places. But I'd rather risk a warning or ticket or whatever (again, I am very careful) than risk being hit from behind by accident or (as Steve noted) by some monster intent upon disabling a female.... People need to make that decision for themselves.

 

[searunner]

I wish I could ask here why people believe that theory. I honestly don't buy it at all. But again maybe I am missing something....

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

I'm not full convinced of anything, JEF. That's the main reason I edited my post soon after posting. (On that note, if you could delete at least my quote in your post I'd appreciate it. I apparently wasn't fast enough in my edit.)

However, like apparently roses and a couple others, I do lean toward a theory.

I know Think Hard butted heads with several on this site. But from a content standpoint, I wish she'd come back because it helps to have some very local input.

 

[searunner]

Welcome to Websleuths, searunner!

Thank you! And I smiled at your beach tagline.

 

[ThinkHard]

Hi all. First time poster, but have been following this thread along since early on.

Count me in with agreeing with Camerabug and roses. I, too, believe that LE knows who committed this monstrous crime and that he’s no longer a threat, which is one reason they’ve been mum. Certainly, this crime suggests the monster lives/lived locally or at least is/was familiar with the area. So if LE believed there was a chance that a murderous maniac who attacks women in broad daylight was still a threat, it seems highly unlikely to me that they’d be radio silent for this long.

Just because they have a DNA sample from Vanessa and haven’t publicly announced a match doesn’t mean, as someone said, that they’re chasing rainbows. It could mean one of two things, in my opinion: 1. They’re still trying to obtain DNA from the suspect or one of his close relatives. 2. They obtained a DNA sample and it matched, but they don’t have a strong enough case to prove anything more than there was some contact between him and Vanessa.

I so hope for justice for Vanessa, her family/friends, and the public, especially the community. Sadly, however, I also think there’s a chance that LE might have their hands tied, and might not ever be able to publicly announce anything even if they feel certain they know who committed this horrendous act. I so hope this doesn’t prove the case.

I agree with the majority on this site, who have expressed the belief that this wasn’t a random crime. My theory is that this maniac was someone who was romantically interested in Vanessa and she wasn’t interested in him in that way, or that he just knew of her and she was the unfortunate outlet for his rage against women.

As a woman, and as a runner, I have felt such empathy for Vanessa and such sadness and outrage that there is such evil in this society. I can't even imagine what her family and close friends must be feeling; seeing pictures of her mother at the funeral is enough to rip a person's heart out.

I agree I think they know who he is, and I think he is no longer a threat to anyone, and I think because of this reason it's complicating the case and the way charges could even be filed.

 

[JEF]

I agree I think they know who he is, and I think he is no longer a threat to anyone, and I think because of this reason it's complicating the case and the way charges could even be filed.

Do you have any facts that support that or is that your gut feeling/the rumor in town? There could be many reasons police have said nothing.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[JEF]

I am not trying to be difficult, Thinkhard. But I too am local, though I do not live in town, and that is not what I have heard.

Do you have any facts that support that or is that your gut feeling/the rumor in town? There could be many reasons police have said nothing.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[JEF]

Welcome, Searunner. I would cut your quote but am afraid I don't know how - I too am relatively new to websleuths. Thanks for responding.

Thank you! And I smiled at your beach tagline.

 

[Mainely16]

Hi all....My issue with the "LE knows the perp and have decided he is no longer a threat" is how and why would LE put themselves in a place to predict what a "murderous maniac" might do?

Anyone who is able to grab a woman, rape her, set her on fire and discard her body so boldly -- in a small town on a Sunday afternoon -- is not someone I would stamp my name on as a safe bet. Why would anyone think a man like this is "no longer a threat"?

Can you imagine if LE knows who it is and rests on their laurels and the killer picks another? IMO, not only would they feel beyond responsible, they'd be strung up by their fingernails. I know it's tempting to connect this person directly to Vanessa as a romantic reject, and it may indeed be the case, but the ability to do this to Vanessa suggests a misogynistic, high-risk person without empathy. Sounds like some kind of ----path to me. (I don't want to get into socio vs psycho right now -- it is 4AM where I am

IMO, just because Vanessa is gone doesn't mean that his mindset about women has changed. If he falls for another woman next week who isn't interested, or interprets a passer-bys lack of a smile as rejection, who is to say he won't do it again?

Why wouldn't they think he is just getting started?

All IMO, of course. I so need to get off WS and go to bed!fftobed:

 

[Mainely16]

Unless, of course, he is deceased or in jail for something else...

 

[JEF]

Unless, of course, he is deceased or in jail for something else...

I believe that is the idea...

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Steleheart]

I hadn't read that the body had been stripped either. Also, she was "left out in the open" in a rather secluded area. Not being argumentative, but I wonder if (if this is where you got your info) some profilers use certain adjectives to make their point.


Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

"A state police source at the scene told NewsCenter 5 that it was not immediately clear if Marcotte was assaulted, but she was naked. The woman's hands, feet and part of head were burned, the source said."

http://www.wcvb.com/news/police-search-for-missing-jogger/41096848

IMO I think references to "out in the open" refer more to exposed as not buried or covered.

 

[searunner]

I agree I think they know who he is, and I think he is no longer a threat to anyone, and I think because of this reason it's complicating the case and the way charges could even be filed.

Glad you popped back in, TH. Going with that theory... agree it would be complicating the case. But I think it would be throwing a complete wrench in it. I'm almost certain LE would not be able to bring charges, as legally accused have a right to face their accusers (victims and/or the prosecutors).

Again, speculating in general...

Please be careful in wording your posts, as you did with one.

Can you report on the general mood in the area? I'd guess there is still a lingering unease. Thanks.

 

[Kickoff61]

This seems to be continually thrown off in directions without having the facts. I know people are speculating, but really we do not know what is happening, without info. to back it up.

 

[The Farm]

Welcome searunner and Mainely16. :autumn: