MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #6

[Rocky1]

That's possible. The main issue I have with that theory is not the same as the other folks on here. If I recall correctly people in general have just been of the opinion that the perp did not want the whole forest catching on fire. I won't say that's true. I don't know what this person wanted. but from an outdoorsman and former Boy Scout's perspective, my biggest problem is how easily he could have started an enormous fire in there if he wanted, under the specific conditions that existed at that time. We are talking about conditions where a discarded lit cigarette could very well catch the whole plot on fire. If this guy had a means to start a fire and he wanted the whole woods to go up all he would have to do is bounce around and light a couple different areas . Brings me to the last point- The one who wanted that whole wooded plot to go up in flames would have ignited more than just one small area where the body was.

I agree. those woods could have gone up easy. Truthfully I think he thought they would, so he lit the fire and left, knowing that the smoke would in a short time get peoples attention. After looking again at the photos, and seeing the dirt around that area, it just went out.
That's another reason I don't think he cared about her being found.

 

[Rocky1]

I was watching some footage when LE went back to the scene and it looked like they were spending a lot of time behind that guard rail,along the road.
What do you think about him hiding behind there in the gully, make sense?

 

[ForensicMass]

I was watching some footage when LE went back to the scene and it looked like they were spending a lot of time behind that guard rail,along the road.
What do you think about him hiding behind there in the gully, make sense?

I'm not sure how it fits with the car, but physically it is definitely possible. He could have been kneeling on the slant of it just near where it meets the path and lunged out as She went by. In fact,
He could have parked the car along the road- let's assume SUV- most have hatchbacks. Could he have parked facing northbound right at the path, then gotten out of the car (I think it's a good safe assumption that if he was trying to abduct her, he would have already been outside the vehicle, hiding, or faking a repair or car trouble). Then hid in the gully near the end of the guardrail and waited till just as she passed- his plan to grab her, incapacitate her and throw her in the back of the SUV. The SUV would then have provided cover from one direction blocking potential witnesses AND Vanessa's path. AND, if sort of "pinned" in this location it could explain a scenario where Vanessa ran down the path for lack of any option. This combines elements of several different theories.

No doubt with all our theories we are each right about SOMETHING

 

[Gussified]

Re: find my iPhone... I have had it show my daughter's phone at least 100 yards away, on a nearby golf course, when she was actually in the house with me. She often loses wifi in one corner of our house, so that could have been the case. So, assuming she had dropped wifi, and it had flipped to cellular, I think that demonstrates that cellular is not always very accurate. But in this case, the inaccuracy would not stretch as far as the crime scene.

On a related note, I notice on google maps that there are other business in the area of the mountain barn restaurant. Hmmm.

edit - barn not bar
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

Theories about perp riding a bike conflict with the apparent info LE has about a dark SUV parked (or seen) in the area near where VM was taken. Plus the perp would have to be carrying materials to start a fire, whilst riding this bike. Not seeing it.

I'm going with the LE theory as it makes more sense to me.

 

[Madeleine74]

Until or unless LE gets either a tip that leads them to learn the identity of a POI to check -or- a hit that matches the DNA they allegedly collected from the VM's body, there won't be any resolution. I doubt this person will come forward and confess to the crime; that leaves someone who knows them and is suspicious calling LE to report their suspicion or this person committing a crime where they are seen, leave DNA, or are caught and then a DNA is made.

 

[ForensicMass]

Re: find my iPhone... I have had it show my daughter's phone at least 100 yards away, on a nearby golf course, when she was actually in the house with me. She often loses wifi in one corner of our house, so that could have been the case. So, assuming she had dropped wifi, and it had flipped to cellular, I think that demonstrates that cellular is not always very accurate. But in this case, the inaccuracy would not stretch as far as the crime scene.

On a related note, I notice on google maps that there are other business in the area of the mountain barn restaurant. Hmmm.

edit - barn not bar
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks for the info. I will be testing the app tomorrow without wifi to see what we get!

 

[searunner]

I think luckier than smart personally. Don't discount luck, it does exist. My brother crashed his car going 120 mph. He hit a parked motor home and then t-boned a parked Ford F-250. Car was not recognizable. But he climbed out the window literally without a single scratch. My point being he wasn't unharmed because he was a great driver. He was lucky. Odd things do happen.

Let's not elevate this guy's status by assuming he's highly intelligent. The facts and the way this was attempted show otherwise to me. Yes things went wrong. But that's because his plan was poorly developed and left All kinds of room for scenarios that would not be within his control. Also, if he "didn't expect a fight" then I'm going to say he never tried abducting someone before. Many people wouldn't be complicit in this scenario. As we have heard from many females on here, none would readily and ably get into a vehicle. Everyone knows what that would mean. Statistically it would be giving up on your life. People in this scenario are falling back on instinct.

Great post. Totally on board. I have thought from the beginning average or so intelligence (somewhat above average, at best) with luck being a big factor. Luck or happenstance is huge in just about anything, a factor people like to discount because it makes us as humans feel better to think we have more control over our lives or the outcomes of things.

A very intelligent person would not chance having his car parked for any length of time, IMO, in broad daylight on a road that, while not heavily traveled, does have sporadic traffic.

I know Kickoff, for one, has long believed thus guy is very intelligent - that may be so - but we'll all have to respectfully disagree.

 

[searunner]

ThinkHard -

I don't have time to go back to quote your several responses to me and compose several posts.

1. The wording Mainley quoted from Vanessa's site set up by her family WAS accurate. I saw it myself. As I said, that wording is NO longer on the site, so there is no way to prove it was there. Nothing more to say here.

2. You have valid points to several of my points that I threw out for support, but the big picture is that I do NOT believe that a brief scream would necessarily be heard by anyone.

And she may have NOT screamed at all - as he could have covered her mouth ASAP. Any attacker with half a wit would almost surely cover her mouth asap. In my mind, he likely grabbed her around the waist with one arm and grabbed her around her neck/head with the other while covering her mouth. I have zip criminal experience and have never thought about things like how I would abduct (or worse) someone, but it's so obvious to me that preventing a scream is at the top of the list of things to do immediately. So, IF planned, he could have even had a rag or something to stuff in her mouth.

Even if there was a very brief time where her mouth wasn't covered, she might NOT have screamed at all. Some people are known to lose their voices in such shock situations, even if their fight/flight response kicks in big time. I think in the midst of shock this would probably happen with me actually, though I think I'd fight like mad.

I get the area and the type of people. I grew up upper-middle class in a big Victorian house. My family, indeed, had a vacation home (though most in the area did not), BUT we did NOT have central air for the reasons you cite - big old houses are drafty and it's often cost-prohibitive retrofit such a house. Plus, both parents were big "fresh area" people I should not have generalized about the ac. My fault. I was tired. But the bigger points are:

1. There are few people living within screaming distance to begin with because, as FM pointed out, foliage is great at absorbing sound. I know this from my running/walking and it still takes me by surprise. I can be running in what I think is a totally silent area in a park or whatever and be shocked to see a house party or kids out loudly playing, etc., in a very brief time.

2. SOME of those people would be inside in central a/c, SOME of those people would be on vacation (whether or not they owned a vacation house or not) as it was peak vacation season, SOME of those people would have the TV on, SOME of those people would be doing something weekendy - out to lunch, after-church activities, boating or doing other leisure activities.

Lack of population density + foliage + heat + peak summer vacation season + summer weekend when many people do something leisurely away from home = very few potential people to hear a scream, if one existed. And if it did, I have little doubt it was brief.

To be clear: I am NOT discounting the theory that she *could* have gone willingly with someone she knows into the path (don't think it is likely, but it's possible). I am just saying that I do not in any way believe a short scream would have necessarily been heard and that she may not have screamed at all.

 

[ForensicMass]

Great post. Totally on board. I have thought from the beginning average or so intelligence (somewhat above average, at best) with luck being a big factor. Luck or happenstance is huge in just about anything, a factor people like to discount because it makes us as humans feel better to think we have more control over our lives or the outcomes of things.

A very intelligent person would not chance having his car parked for any length of time, IMO, in broad daylight on a road that, while not heavily traveled, does have sporadic traffic.

I know Kickoff, for one, has long believed thus guy is very intelligent - that may be so - but we'll all have to respectfully disagree.

Thanks searunner! I'd consider myself above average intelligence, but by no means a genius. And I'm not a criminal, though I do break an occasional traffic law. But the setting of this crime would be OUT OF THE QUESTION for me. Way too little control over the possibilities overall. With or without the car, it's not a good spot. If you don't have a car, what're you doing there? You probably live far too close for this site to be a good option. If you do have a car, there's absolutely no way you'd park it there, in view of witnesses, even for a minute, if you were me. As a person, I must admit I tend to believe there is an inverse correlation between risky behavior and intelligence. It doesn't always hold true, but watch a few minutes of that old show "worlds most shocking videos", or whatever it's called. When I'm feeling down on myself, I should watch a few minutes of what these morons are doing, and realize things could always be worse!

 

[Rocky1]

Re: find my iPhone... I have had it show my daughter's phone at least 100 yards away, on a nearby golf course, when she was actually in the house with me. She often loses wifi in one corner of our house, so that could have been the case. So, assuming she had dropped wifi, and it had flipped to cellular, I think that demonstrates that cellular is not always very accurate. But in this case, the inaccuracy would not stretch as far as the crime scene.

On a related note, I notice on google maps that there are other business in the area of the mountain barn restaurant. Hmmm.

edit - barn not bar
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes,there are other business' near the Mountain Barn, The Storage Business always peaked my interests for some reason. A place to park your vehicle and take the bike out of the storage shed, and go for a ride, or a place to come running out of the woods, cross the road , get in your car and go.
Not sure, but I am willing to bet that LE checked out everyone that rents a spot there.
Good info on the phone, I was reading up on the accuracy of apps to find a lost phone, and although we don't know what ap VM had, ICloud can be off by two miles according to this, If you scroll down and read the 3rd post.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3521333?tstart=0

 

[Rocky1]

Thanks searunner! I'd consider myself above average intelligence, but by no means a genius. And I'm not a criminal, though I do break an occasional traffic law. But the setting of this crime would be OUT OF THE QUESTION for me. Way too little control over the possibilities overall. With or without the car, it's not a good spot. If you don't have a car, what're you doing there? You probably live far too close for this site to be a good option. If you do have a car, there's absolutely no way you'd park it there, in view of witnesses, even for a minute, if you were me. As a person, I must admit I tend to believe there is an inverse correlation between risky behavior and intelligence. It doesn't always hold true, but watch a few minutes of that old show "worlds most shocking videos", or whatever it's called. When I'm feeling down on myself, I should watch a few minutes of what these morons are doing, and realize things could always be worse!

Good post. I thought about all of that.
Would it be out of the question if your mind was set on doing harm to one particular person, and you knew that's the only place you had?

"If you don't have a car, what are you doing there?" You are on a bike. I agree. if you are on foot, you probably too close for this site to be an option, but on a bike, you can live a few miles away and still be close enough to have been on that road several times before, and have seen her jogging.

"If you do have a car, there's absolutely no way you'd park it there, in view of a witness, even for a minute.".....I agree.

Get me past why, if, LE is sure the SUV is involved, why are they spending thousands of dollars and all that extensive amount of time doing a random DNA dragnet?
Out of the tips about the SUV, given the amount of traffic on the road, and the timeline, how many people not only saw an SUV, but remembered it. 2? 3?
What's the chances the car that was parked along the road was someone stopped to make/answer a phone call, or any number of other reasons?
How many looked at their watches, and made a mental note about the time? 0?
I know many may not agree, but I still think it's possible that yes there was an SUV spotted parked, but if the time was off by less than a half hour, it could have been the first unmarked dark SUV State Police cruiser that showed up. Take your pick of the videos from BSR to watch. One of the first, shows the road blocked off at Radford, and a State Policeman standing there. There are two dark, unmarked SUVs parked there too. One dark blue, and one black. Watch the video with the 7 or 8 cruisers lined up along BSR. 2 dark unmarked SUVs. No blue plates.. totally unmarked. One dark gray, one black.
I know that some here say " Don't you think that LE put enough time into that by now that they know the time the SUV was parked?" No, I don't think they know the time themselves. If they did, why did they word it "The SUV was parked "around" the time of the murder." If they knew, they would have said "between 3 and 3:30" (example only) It's not like at this point they are holding that info close to the vest, they already brought it up. No exact color... Way too many holes in that tip.

Edit:
Sorry the post is so long.

 

[ThinkHard]

Personally it seems silly that people dismiss the SUV so easily...

Yes I agree If someone was planning this why park there.

Which again btw her getting down that path and someone not being concerned about parking there....the simplest answer in my mind is that she willingly went down that path with someone who she didn't fear and who wasn't planning on killing her.

If you are not planning on killing someone, you aren't worried about your car being seen....once you realize what you have done you might think "**** what if someone saw his car" but again perhaps it wasn't his car or he's just gotten lucky they can only ID the type and not the plates or specifics.

Honestly this is the only explanation that really makes sense in my head.

 

[ThinkHard]

Good post. I thought about all of that.
Would it be out of the question if your mind was set on doing harm to one particular person, and you knew that's the only place you had?

"If you don't have a car, what are you doing there?" You are on a bike. I agree. if you are on foot, you probably too close for this site to be an option, but on a bike, you can live a few miles away and still be close enough to have been on that road several times before, and have seen her jogging.

"If you do have a car, there's absolutely no way you'd park it there, in view of a witness, even for a minute.".....I agree.

Get me past why, if, LE is sure the SUV is involved, why are they spending thousands of dollars and all that extensive amount of time doing a random DNA dragnet?
Out of the tips about the SUV, given the amount of traffic on the road, and the timeline, how many people not only saw an SUV, but remembered it. 2? 3?
What's the chances the car that was parked along the road was someone stopped to make/answer a phone call, or any number of other reasons?
How many looked at their watches, and made a mental note about the time? 0?
I know many may not agree, but I still think it's possible that yes there was an SUV spotted parked, but if the time was off by less than a half hour, it could have been the first unmarked dark SUV State Police cruiser that showed up. Take your pick of the videos from BSR to watch. One of the first, shows the road blocked off at Radford, and a State Policeman standing there. There are two dark, unmarked SUVs parked there too. One dark blue, and one black. Watch the video with the 7 or 8 cruisers lined up along BSR. 2 dark unmarked SUVs. No blue plates.. totally unmarked. One dark gray, one black.
I know that some here say " Don't you think that LE put enough time into that by now that they know the time the SUV was parked?" No, I don't think they know the time themselves. If they did, why did they word it "The SUV was parked "around" the time of the murder." If they knew, they would have said "between 3 and 3:30" (example only) It's not like at this point they are holding that info close to the vest, they already brought it up. No exact color... Way too many holes in that tip.

Edit:
Sorry the post is so long.

I really really think they wouldn't have put that info out if there was any chance it was mixed up with a statey vehicle. And the timing would be more like an hour and a half off as I don't believe police began looking until 430.

So it seems silly to not give LE more credit here...I mean don't you think it would have crosse there mind someone could have mixed up a statey too...and waiting 3 month s to release this...I'm pretty sure they would have been sure it was most definetly NOT. JMO

 

[Gussified]

Which again btw her getting down that path and someone not being concerned about parking there....the simplest answer in my mind is that she willingly went down that path with someone who she didn't fear and who wasn't planning on killing her.

If you are not planning on killing someone, you aren't worried about your car being seen....once you realize what you have done you might think "**** what if someone saw his car" but again perhaps it wasn't his car or he's just gotten lucky they can only ID the type and not the plates or specifics.

Honestly this is the only explanation that really makes sense in my head.

I agree with you. I see two scenarios. Either

She met him there intentionally (secret relationship? comforting a friend?), he got aggressive, she fought back, he went into a rage and killed her, then tried to cover his tracks.

-or-

She was lured from her run by someone she 'kind of' knew. I think he was parked on the cart path, maybe claimed he had car trouble, asked to borrow her cell phone. He may have been planning to abduct her. He got her near his car, grabbed her, she fought back, he killed her, and then tried to cover his tracks.

jmo



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ThinkHard]

I agree with you. I see two scenarios. Either

She met him there intentionally (secret relationship? comforting a friend?), he got aggressive, she fought back, he went into a rage and killed her, then tried to cover his tracks.

-or-

She was lured from her run by someone she 'kind of' knew. I think he was parked on the cart path, maybe claimed he had car trouble, asked to borrow her cell phone. He may have been planning to abduct her. He got her near his car, grabbed her, she fought back, he killed her, and then tried to cover his tracks.

jmo



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

To me scenario one just seems like the simplest and most straightforward and in my mind most likely.

I can see the other way too...but in that scenario he still would have been planning something bad and that would still involve having his car being seen...if he knew he was going to do something bad...would he have taken that risk?

 

[Evey]

One camera is facing the door of the store which could probably see a portion of the entrance to the parking lot but I can't be certain of it the angle may not allow it. The rattled scenario is interesting but there are too many Hypotheticals built into that one scenario for my personal liking. I think the general thought that the "trip to the store" was misinterpreted or misleading,though, is certainly possible. Did she decide to go to a different store than usual for some reason ? Did she want to mislead her parents and really intended to do something else? still can't see the planned meet up for a talk, only because millennials are glued to their electronic devices like their eyes are glued into their sockets. If there was a plan to meet someone no one would expect that this level of digging would occur and no one would go to such incredible lengths to cover up such a meeting. VM would not need a burner phone to have a secret relationship because she could use her phone and know that no one was going to thoroughly investigate her call or message history. and to me the idea of a payphone is something out of an 80s movie. If I was running for my life looking for a payphone I don't think I could find one. In Princeton I don't see where she would have had access to a payphone. Again moreover I just do not see why she would go to those kinds of lengths when she could just use her own phone or messaging applications or Facebook or some other means to contact this person that she felt was secure enough that no one would know about it. People use their phone as a tool for everything these days. I have a fairly sturdy understanding of how millennials use technology. I know several people who are not faithful in their relationships and none of them use burner phones. so the meet up scenario hits a roadblock for me right there.

I'm not caught up but before i pass out to be blunt the reason to lie about where she went but without it being a relationship is to meet a dealer. WHIch codes would hide the intent but even if she needed adderol to help her work or maybe xanax or pain pills or weed then she could be buying it from a friebs type dealer. With how many times annoying people try asking to buy mine it wouldn't be surprise me since she wouldn't not be a hard drug user but maybe needed energy to focus at work. Again not say sahing was just saying it's the only other reason to lie and would mean she got in their car or house. Again doubt I to but it's one thing that happens a lot

 

[Evey]

Why not shut it off immediately at the attack?

Maybe as a clue she hid it in he car but the killer didn't notice until it rang etc

 

[Gussified]

To me scenario one just seems like the simplest and most straightforward and in my mind most likely.

I can see the other way too...but in that scenario he still would have been planning something bad and that would still involve having his car being seen...if he knew he was going to do something bad...would he have taken that risk?

That's why I think he was parked on the cart path. Less risky than parking along the road. His car would be obscured by the foliage. He would have needed his car for an abduction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ForensicMass]

I agree with you. I see two scenarios. Either

She met him there intentionally (secret relationship? comforting a friend?), he got aggressive, she fought back, he went into a rage and killed her, then tried to cover his tracks.

-or-

She was lured from her run by someone she 'kind of' knew. I think he was parked on the cart path, maybe claimed he had car trouble, asked to borrow her cell phone. He may have been planning to abduct her. He got her near his car, grabbed her, she fought back, he killed her, and then tried to cover his tracks.

jmo



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I very much prefer your second scenario.

As far as her going down the path to talk or meet someone, once you see the place, it's hard to make that seem reasonable. The path sort of dead-ends, and so is not really traveled at all. In the original photos, you can see that he entrance is overgrown with grass, a paradise for catching ticks- when I work in Princeton in June I almost always get a few on me as I am working in wooded areas with grasses. There seems to be a very healthy population of them there. Also, mosquitos are worst at that time of year, although the dry conditions did knock them back a bit. My girlfriend HATES when I make her follow me on hikes through areas like that.