MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #5

[Rocky1]

Respectfully, tasers can cause burns:

"Today, Taser warns that the device can cause burns. Moreover, the company acknowledges these burns can become infected. It warns that people who are shocked by Tasers can suffer bone fractures, hernias, ruptures and dislocations. Today, Taser suggests students be Tasered while lying facedown on the floor, eliminating falling hazards and stray Taser probes to the eye."

http://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/nov/23/cops-raise-taser-safety-claims/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I stand to be corrected.
I read a few more articles on Tasers, and yes, they can leave a burn about the size a little larger than the size of the barb, and stun guns can leave a burn about the size of a pea.
After looking at the crime scene photos, does anyone think a taser/stun gun was used?

 

[ThinkHard]

Interesting. I like the lost shoe idea. I don't think the clothes were burned because LE said her clothes were missing, and it's actually pretty difficult to get rid of clothes completely in a fire. There would likely be buttons, fasteners, and scraps of unburned cloth that would indicate that he burned her clothes and thus LE wouldn't say they were "missing". The lost shoe is definitely intriguing though.

We are talking summer running shoes...synthetic materials with pretty much no buckles or fasteners or snaps. She likely wasn't wearing much fabric to burn at all...shorts, a tee or tank maybe with a sports bra perhaps built in, and underwear. Plus shoes and socks of course...but running shorts and a tank and underwear is very little material and like I said doesn't typically have hardware...so I think burning would be relatively easy actually.

 

[Steleheart]

By Dianne Williamson
Telegram & Gazette Staff

Marcotte graduated from Bancroft School in Worcester in 2007 and studied communications at Boston University. She was an account manager at Google in New York and had been home for a few days visiting family. An investigative source said she was found naked and had suffered burns to her face, hands and feet.

Princeton slaying victim Vanessa Marcotte found naked, with burns
August 8, 2016
'Unimaginable' act sets Princeton on edge
August 8, 2016
SHOW MORE...
"This just doesn't make any sense," the source said. "She was a beautiful girl." He said police searched for the victim's clothes, cellphone and earbuds but came up empty. A partially burned sneaker was found near her body, the source said.

http://www.telegram.com/news/20160809/dianne-williamson-slaying-sends-shock-waves-through-princeton

We have been discussing the burned shoe left at the CS since very early in the second thread in August.

Katherine Huck owns the Mountain Market
http://www.telegram.com/news/20160808/unimaginable-act-sets-princeton-on-edge

There is no actual source for the shoe story though. I find that troubling.

JMO

 

[Kickoff61]

I stand to be corrected.
I read a few more articles on Tasers, and yes, they can leave a burn about the size a little larger than the size of the barb, and stun guns can leave a burn about the size of a pea.
After looking at the crime scene photos, does anyone think a taser/stun gun was used?

I don't know.

 

[Indy Anna]

I stand to be corrected.
I read a few more articles on Tasers, and yes, they can leave a burn about the size a little larger than the size of the barb, and stun guns can leave a burn about the size of a pea.
After looking at the crime scene photos, does anyone think a taser/stun gun was used?

BBM
I tried searching for articles telling how much/how long a taser jolt can burn. I didn't see anything about the possibility of starting a wood fire with tasers, but did see some photos of clothes and even a car catching on fire:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tas...1IMKHbBXDw0Q_AUICygE&biw=1280&bih=685#imgrc=_

So, yes, they can do quite a bit of damage. But, how easy would it be to contain the fire to avoid starting a major blaze?

A taser or stun gun would certainly enable the perp to control VM.

I have a couple of questions:

1.) I cannot find it now, but in early articles didn't a driver in a passing car claim to see someone in a car parked along BSR chatting with someone who looked like VM?

2.) IIRC, locals here said that there is a gully next to the cart path off BSR. Is that correct and, if so, is it only on one side of the cart path?

I'm thinking a driver pulled up to speak to VM in front of the cart path, perhaps with the pretense of needing directions. His intention may have been to abduct VM and he tried to get her into his car but she fought him off. If the car, guard rail and gully all blocked VM's access to the road, maybe her only alternative was to run down the cart path. I know the parked car was no longer there when the other driver turned around and drove past again, so maybe the perp drove down the cart path where he was undetected from the road and was able to catch VM....maybe knocking her down with a taser or stun gun. JMO

 

[ForensicMass]

I had those same thoughts when I first came here, that there was confusion with the KV story, and when asked, was told that MSN had talked about it refering to VM. I don't remember LE mentioning it at all.

But KV wasn't burned was she? If not, then I don't think they made up a burnt sneaker. If they had mentioned just any sneaker, yea I agree could be media mix-up. But a burnt sneaker? I'd say they had some true info.

 

[ForensicMass]

We are talking summer running shoes...synthetic materials with pretty much no buckles or fasteners or snaps. She likely wasn't wearing much fabric to burn at all...shorts, a tee or tank maybe with a sports bra perhaps built in, and underwear. Plus shoes and socks of course...but running shorts and a tank and underwear is very little material and like I said doesn't typically have hardware...so I think burning would be relatively easy actually.

Good point there would not be any metal fasteners on the stuff. Those materials to melt though more than burn. I still think it would be evidence of the clothes on the site. dbut you do bring up a good point about the nature of the clothes. Maybe it warrants an experiment. Im sure my gf has some junk clothes she doesn't need.

 

[ForensicMass]

BBM
I tried searching for articles telling how much/how long a taser jolt can burn. I didn't see anything about the possibility of starting a wood fire with tasers, but did see some photos of clothes and even a car catching on fire:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tas...1IMKHbBXDw0Q_AUICygE&biw=1280&bih=685#imgrc=_

So, yes, they can do quite a bit of damage. But, how easy would it be to contain the fire to avoid starting a major blaze?

A taser or stun gun would certainly enable the perp to control VM.

I have a couple of questions:

1.) I cannot find it now, but in early articles didn't a driver in a passing car claim to see someone in a car parked along BSR chatting with someone who looked like VM?

2.) IIRC, locals here said that there is a gully next to the cart path off BSR. Is that correct and, if so, is it only on one side of the cart path?

I'm thinking a driver pulled up to speak to VM in front of the cart path, perhaps with the pretense of needing directions. His intention may have been to abduct VM and he tried to get her into his car but she fought him off. If the car, guard rail and gully all blocked VM's access to the road, maybe her only alternative was to run down the cart path. I know the parked car was no longer there when the other driver turned around and drove past again, so maybe the perp drove down the cart path where he was undetected from the road and was able to catch VM....maybe knocking her down with a taser or stun gun. JMO

I Like this. I still think it highly possible VM was the first one down the path. I've tried to get that to stick but i seem to be relatively alone on it.

The path is not that great a site to murder someone and get away. Especially not when there are many other better places very close by. And especially when a vehicle is involved. To me these factors point toward the murder not being planned for this site. Failed abduction is still my front-runner.

There is plenty of precedence for it. Just in the weeks before her murder women elsewhere in Massachusetts were reportedly the victims of attempted abduction while jogging.

This crime was meant to happen elsewhere if a car was involved in any fashion.
IMO

 

[Steleheart]

I Like this. I still think it highly possible VM was the first one down the path. I've tried to get that to stick but i seem to be relatively alone on it.

The path is not that great a site to murder someone and get away. Especially not when there are many other better places very close by. And especially when a vehicle is involved. To me these factors point toward the murder not being planned for this site. Failed abduction is still my front-runner.

There is plenty of precedence for it. Just in the weeks before her murder women elsewhere in Massachusetts were reportedly the victims of attempted abduction while jogging.

This crime was meant to happen elsewhere if a car was involved in any fashion.
IMO

Personally I truly believe that this murder was meant to be an abduction, as she ran by his vehicle or she approached him on a pretense.

I have seen defense advise for women that says that if someone attacks you, under no circumstances let them take you to another location - fight with all you have, it might get someone's attention but if taken elsewhere you may never be found.
I believe VM had defense training. I think she fought with everything she had and he was left to do his thing right where they ended up.

JMO

 

[ForensicMass]

Personally I truly believe that this murder was meant to be an abduction, as she ran by his vehicle or she approached him on a pretense.

I have seen defense advise for women that says that if someone attacks you, under no circumstances let them take you to another location - fight with all you have, it might get someone's attention but if taken elsewhere you may never be found.
I believe VM had defense training. I think she fought with everything she had and he was left to do his thing right where they ended up.

JMO

This is also where I am at, though I will say it if he did remove her from there And assault her statistics arent good that she would be alive either. But as far as what happened. Botched abduction attempt. She hit hard, maybe gouged his eye, he got mad instead of fearful. Instead of running away, he did what he did.

Our biggest hurdle is why was he in Princeton. I haven't figured that out. Obviously he was there. Most people there are from there or close by, so one would assume he was too. As many have asserted, its not a target rich environment. There are other towns and places with a lot more potential victims. So he either knew the town, or was of genius intelligence and knew there wouldn't be a single useful security camera in the entire town- it's like a dark spot. An off-grid haven. Based on how he botched this and left the body, I don't think he's that smart. So I tend to think he was semi-local, I'll call it, and saw Vanessa that same day. I still think he had knowledge that she'd be running, since I think he got her within the first ten minutes of her run, and statistically the probability of a random encounter in that tight window is very very very slim. Chances go way up if he saw her at the store and saw where she went to from there, then drove around for a bit, maybe a half hour and thought about what he wanted to do, then Voila, on his third trip down BSR, bingo there she was.

 

[ThinkHard]

Personally I truly believe that this murder was meant to be an abduction, as she ran by his vehicle or she approached him on a pretense.

I have seen defense advise for women that says that if someone attacks you, under no circumstances let them take you to another location - fight with all you have, it might get someone's attention but if taken elsewhere you may never be found.
I believe VM had defense training. I think she fought with everything she had and he was left to do his thing right where they ended up.

JMO

If that is the case it certainly would explain why his vehicle may have been there longer then planned. Perhaps he wanted to take her somewhere and torture her
but as you have said when she was cornered and forced to flee into the woods, when he caught up with her he ended up strangling her...in which case he no longer had reason to bring the body with him...maybe he was more into torturing live victims...this might also explain why he might have a blow torch (because he planned on torturing her)....so he was forced to leave the body there and use what he had on hand to cover his tracks and get out quick.

Maybe he was pulled over pretending to be lost or broken down or getting something from his car...if he was planning to abduct her, perhaps he covered his plates...and perhaps this was noted on obvservations of a dark SUV making it particularly suspicious.

Ps every time someone writes torch instead of blow torch, I briefly think you are British and are referring to a flashlight. And for a second I can't figure out why you are talking about a flashlight. (Sorry for the side note)

BTW wanted to add...if there was a struggle I am assuming LE could tell from ground markings how a struggle went down...or they could find an expert to do so. However I do know one things that did effect this investigation was the rain that came down hairs and heavy two days later. But I was thinking ground marking would indicate a fight in addition to perhaps Skin cells under her nails or in her mouth.

 

[Indy Anna]

This is also where I am at, though I will say it if he did remove her from there And assault her statistics arent good that she would be alive either. But as far as what happened. Botched abduction attempt. She hit hard, maybe gouged his eye, he got mad instead of fearful. Instead of running away, he did what he did.

BBM
The nature of the crime does suggest the perp was angry. Like an angry hornet.

I hope LE is working on some promising tips. This has been in national news so I know people in all of the regions surrounding Princeton are aware of the murder. Someone must have suspicions. If the perp isn't a Princeton resident, I'm sure he is from a town nearby and was passing through. It's possible he lives in Princeton and didn't intend to stop until he spied VM. If he was on his way to work or to meet some friends, surely someone would have noticed his agitated state. Or, maybe he was on his way home from work or a church service. Family and friends surely would have noticed his agitation, too, and should have suspected something if he had visible bruising and scratches. Perhaps he lives alone and decided to leave town for awhile to avoid suspicion. Did someone call off work for an extended period after VM's murder? I would hope an employer would be suspicious and notify LE.

 

[Rocky1]

BBM
I tried searching for articles telling how much/how long a taser jolt can burn. I didn't see anything about the possibility of starting a wood fire with tasers, but did see some photos of clothes and even a car catching on fire:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tas...1IMKHbBXDw0Q_AUICygE&biw=1280&bih=685#imgrc=_

So, yes, they can do quite a bit of damage. But, how easy would it be to contain the fire to avoid starting a major blaze?

A taser or stun gun would certainly enable the perp to control VM.

I have a couple of questions:

1.) I cannot find it now, but in early articles didn't a driver in a passing car claim to see someone in a car parked along BSR chatting with someone who looked like VM?

2.) IIRC, locals here said that there is a gully next to the cart path off BSR. Is that correct and, if so, is it only on one side of the cart path?

I'm thinking a driver pulled up to speak to VM in front of the cart path, perhaps with the pretense of needing directions. His intention may have been to abduct VM and he tried to get her into his car but she fought him off. If the car, guard rail and gully all blocked VM's access to the road, maybe her only alternative was to run down the cart path. I know the parked car was no longer there when the other driver turned around and drove past again, so maybe the perp drove down the cart path where he was undetected from the road and was able to catch VM....maybe knocking her down with a taser or stun gun. JMO

Answer to your first qustion. I may be wrong, but, I believe
the.passing.car.said.that.they.saw.VM.walking,.then.saw.a.car.turning around, and when they came back VM was gone.I don't remember a report of a car stopped talking, but there may have been.
To your second question, yes, that was me that mentioned the gully. hard to see during the summer,(ie. google maps.) but once the leaves dropped, quite easy to see.
Here is a link. If you pause at 2:35, you can see the gully that would be to the left, as you are exiting the path. (to the right behind the guard rail if you were looking at the path from the road.)

http://www.fox25boston.com/news/unsolved-princeton-jogger-vanessa-marcotte-murder/463284608

 

[ThinkHard]

This is also where I am at, though I will say it if he did remove her from there And assault her statistics arent good that she would be alive either. But as far as what happened. Botched abduction attempt. She hit hard, maybe gouged his eye, he got mad instead of fearful. Instead of running away, he did what he did.

Our biggest hurdle is why was he in Princeton. I haven't figured that out. Obviously he was there. Most people there are from there or close by, so one would assume he was too. As many have asserted, its not a target rich environment. There are other towns and places with a lot more potential victims. So he either knew the town, or was of genius intelligence and knew there wouldn't be a single useful security camera in the entire town- it's like a dark spot. An off-grid haven. Based on how he botched this and left the body, I don't think he's that smart. So I tend to think he was semi-local, I'll call it, and saw Vanessa that same day. I still think he had knowledge that she'd be running, since I think he got her within the first ten minutes of her run, and statistically the probability of a random encounter in that tight window is very very very slim. Chances go way up if he saw her at the store and saw where she went to from there, then drove around for a bit, maybe a half hour and thought about what he wanted to do, then Voila, on his third trip down BSR, bingo there she was.

Not that I am totally disputing the store encounter angle...that would also imply he had all his supplies and a plan in mind for a while, whether against her directly or just when opportunity presented.

However I don't know if I feel like that is the strongest possibility ... such an impulsive choice, in brood daylight ... when there is nothing prior to have occurred like this? Why her? Why that day? Again unless he had a plan for a while.

Still to me it seems more likely that he somehow knew her, that she wasn't a random victim spotted that day. I suppose crimes of coincidences do happen...call them a series of unlucky events. But in this case it just seems like she was very specifically targeted.

 

[Indy Anna]

If that is the case it certainly would explain why his vehicle may have been there longer then planned. Perhaps he wanted to take her somewhere and torture her
but as you have said when she was cornered and forced to flee into the woods, when he caught up with her he ended up strangling her...in which case he no longer had reason to bring the body with him...maybe he was more into torturing live victims...this might also explain why he might have a blow torch (because he planned on torturing her)....so he was forced to leave the body there and use what he had on hand to cover his tracks and get out quick.

Maybe he was pulled over pretending to be lost or broken down or getting something from his car...if he was planning to abduct her, perhaps he covered his plates...and perhaps this was noted on obvservations of a dark SUV making it particularly suspicious.

Ps every time someone writes torch instead of blow torch, I briefly think you are British and are referring to a flashlight. And for a second I can't figure out why you are talking about a flashlight. (Sorry for the side note)

BTW wanted to add...if there was a struggle I am assuming LE could tell from ground markings how a struggle went down...or they could find an expert to do so. However I do know one things that did effect this investigation was the rain that came down hairs and heavy two days later. But I was thinking ground marking would indicate a fight in addition to perhaps Skin cells under her nails or in her mouth.

BBM
This thought made me wonder ... did he get out of his car and pretend to look for something in the trunk, and then try to abduct VM by attempting to get her into the trunk?

 

[Indy Anna]

Not that I am totally disputing the store encounter angle...that would also imply he had all his supplies and a plan in mind for a while, whether against her directly or just when opportunity presented.

However I don't know if I feel like that is the strongest possibility ... such an impulsive choice, in brood daylight ... when there is nothing prior to have occurred like this? Why her? Why that day? Again unless he had a plan for a while.

Still to me it seems more likely that he somehow knew her, that she wasn't a random victim spotted that day. I suppose crimes of coincidences do happen...call them a series of unlucky events. But in this case it just seems like she was very specifically targeted.

Wherever the perp was traveling that day, maybe he made that same journey every week and often noticed VM. So, it could have been both a targeted crime and a crime of opportunity. IOW, he had planned in advance what he intended to do, but was waiting for the right moment to spring on VM when no one else was around.

 

[ForensicMass]

Not that I am totally disputing the store encounter angle...that would also imply he had all his supplies and a plan in mind for a while, whether against her directly or just when opportunity presented.

However I don't know if I feel like that is the strongest possibility ... such an impulsive choice, in brood daylight ... when there is nothing prior to have occurred like this? Why her? Why that day? Again unless he had a plan for a while.

Still to me it seems more likely that he somehow knew her, that she wasn't a random victim spotted that day. I suppose crimes of coincidences do happen...call them a series of unlucky events. But in this case it just seems like she was very specifically targeted.

Similarly I don't discard the possibility of someone that knew her. But her runs just weren't that regular. It would have been someone willing to wait for hours upon hours, potentially. And if in a vehicle, that's hard to do. And a circumstance where he wasn't in a car, the planning and waiting doesnt jive with not trying to hide the body, for me at least.

I don't think he had much for supplies- if he had a torch, I think it was incidental. And he reasoned he could use it after the fact. I don't think he brought a torch for this reason. Same thing with a lighter if only that was used. Didn't require planning. Just had the stuff with him incidentally. It isn't rare to have a torch in the car.

I think I like a combination of the theories. He knew of her or had seen her around previously, at a minimum. Many times the victims location shortly before the crime plays an important role. I think this is one such case, as there's nowhere else to really bump into anyone In town. Also this would give enough time for someone to mull over the idea, solidify a scheme and try to employ it.

 

[liz b.]

If VM was in the store that day she either paid with cash or a bank card. Say she bought water,or gum etc. If she paid with her bankcard, t would be

easy for LE to find this out. In a perfect world, he would have paid with a bankcard too that day...

A question : why did he burn her face ?

 

[ForensicMass]

If VM was in the store that day she either paid with cash or a bank card. Say she bought water,or gum etc. If she paid with her bankcard, t would be

easy for LE to find this out. In a perfect world, he would have paid with a bankcard too that day...

A question : why did he burn her face ?

Perhaps She bit him, maybe in the arm/hand while he tried to strangle her. Or he was just trying to burn off the DNA he assumed he transferred in the strangulation.

 

[ThinkHard]

Similarly I don't discard the possibility of someone that knew her. But her runs just weren't that regular. It would have been someone willing to wait for hours upon hours, potentially. And if in a vehicle, that's hard to do. And a circumstance where he wasn't in a car, the planning and waiting doesnt jive with not trying to hide the body, for me at least.

I don't think he had much for supplies- if he had a torch, I think it was incidental. And he reasoned he could use it after the fact. I don't think he brought a torch for this reason. Same thing with a lighter if only that was used. Didn't require planning. Just had the stuff with him incidentally. It isn't rare to have a torch in the car.

I think I like a combination of the theories. He knew of her or had seen her around previously, at a minimum. Many times the victims location shortly before the crime plays an important role. I think this is one such case, as there's nowhere else to really bump into anyone In town. Also this would give enough time for someone to mull over the idea, solidify a scheme and try to employ it.

Ummm that's not what I was saying at all. Again I feel you have misunderstood me and twisted my words into something other then there intent. I certainly do not think nor did I even remotely suggest someone was waiting in the bushes for her for hours. I meant someone who would have known her in a way they would have known she would have been on a run then, on that specific day and targeted her at that time at that location with knowledge she would be there...which makes me think they may have known her. Please stop twisting my meaning, it's frustrating to feel like words are being put into my mouth. Again I don't think it's your intent but it's very frustrating.

I really do not see someone spotting her being in a store for five minutes buying a drink, and then he decides to kill her, and then drive around hoping to spot her...I'm sorry but I just really feel like that's a big stretch.

Perhaps someone who wanted her harmed and had fantasized about it and spotting her that day made him want to act on it...but I don't see it being someone who spotted her for the first time and acted in it right then.

Respectfully I just feel there are too many coincidences that would fall into place for it to be random crime of opportunity, and I personally feel it's more likely that this crime is not random...and that no other person would have fallen in harms way on that day.