Found Deceased MD - Rachel Morin, 37, left for walk on Ma & Pa Trail 6pm, car found at Williams St entrance, Bel Air, 5 Aug 2023

[makeadifference]

Her "being distracted" during the week before murder is telling IMO

Can you say more?

 

[Chimera]

The alleged severity of the attack feels personal.
Still ... I am on the fence regarding a random attacker, though !
Omo.

 

[iluvmua]

The alleged severity of the attack feels personal.
Still ... I am on the fence regarding a random attacker, though !
Omo.

I think whoever did it was already at the park/ on the trail/ in the tunnel. Jmo

 

[Inthedetails]

The alleged severity of the attack feels personal.
Still ... I am on the fence regarding a random attacker, though
Omo.

Or, she fought hard. She think she used her physical fitness and motherly instinct to fight as best she could, but her attacker overcame her.

jmo

 

[MyJoey]

I noticed on her older Facebook pictures she was/is a smoker. Very hard to be a runner if you smoke. Being an ex smoker myself, I struggle with running. Light jogs and fast walks is about it for me.

 

[MyJoey]

The alleged severity of the attack feels personal.
Still ... I am on the fence regarding a random attacker, though !
Omo.

Think the only thing that feels random for me is the rock, if that’s true. Whoever did it used whatever they could grab, being a rock.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Not sure if this link holds, but there was a Defendant's Petition to Modify Visitation filed on March 23, 2022 which was DENIED on 12/29/22. Not that it's related at all, just noting ...

Maryland Judiciary Case Search

I think this is very interesting actually. Because news reports made mention of the fathers and a reporter stated that the last activity was a custody hearing 6 years ago which is true. But as you discovered by going into the docket that case was reopened - and he lost. This was going on through the end of the year (literally end of Dec) and there may have been lingering feelings about it between them that carried into 2023. This is very relevant imo. Whether it leads to anything is a different matter, but it's certainly relevant and I'm thinking LE must be looking into this. Thanks for sharing this.

jmo

https://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=12C17000405&loc=56&detailLoc=ODYCIVIL

 

[Knox]

Think the only thing that feels random for me is the rock, if that’s true. Whoever did it used whatever they could grab, being a rock.

What other aspects besides the weapon, don't feel random to you?

 

[whitelilac]

I think whoever did it was already at the park/ on the trail/ in the tunnel. Jmo

I think so too.

Random and targeted at the same time.
I think she had been watched, since she ran there regularly. A very attractive petite woman caught someone's eye before this happened.
Person may have approached her, made advances, was rebuffed, he attacked her. This scenario has happened in numerous other cases, as listed upthread.
imo

 

[nao]

Moo..what would be the reason for her to go into those tunnels?

 

[OldCop]

I think they also need to check and see if anyone at the gym had been paying particular attention to her.

 

[MyJoey]

What other aspects besides the weapon, don't feel random to you?

Definitely could be random, however statistically the odds are higher she knew the person. If the reports are correct that her face was smashed, then it seems more personal in my opinion. Plus I’m in no way judging…..each their own but she did put her self out there on Facebook and now we hear dating sites. This could have been done by anyone that had a fancy for her at the gym, dating site, or it could have been someone the new boyfriend knows, didn’t one article somewhere say he was living in a recovery house? Maybe someone was feeling jealousy of his new found love. Whoever it is, I just feel they knew who she was.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Not sure if this link holds, but there was a Defendant's Petition to Modify Visitation filed on March 23, 2022 which was DENIED on 12/29/22. Not that it's related at all, just noting ...

Maryland Judiciary Case Search

This was a permanent order in 2017; was re-opened as an "emergency" motion in 2019 (what happened with Rachel in 2019?); was dismissed and then was re-opened again in 2022 as a petition to modify visitation. This was going on for years and even with a final order in 2017, was still never-ending at the time.

Look at the standard of relief required in order to meet the requirements for an emergency motion:

Standard for Relief

1. There must be sufficient showing that there is an imminent risk of harm or harassment to a party or minor child, unless there is sufficient showing that there will be an imminent loss of jurisdiction or removal of the child from the state.
2. Purely speculative evidence of harm in [sic] insufficient to grant emergency relief.

https://mdcourts.gov/sites/default/files/import/clerks/calvert/pdfs/emergencycustodyprocedurehandout.pdf

There is other relief listed by way of another motion but this emergency motion must be grounded on an actual emergency.

jmo

https://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=12C17000405&loc=56&detailLoc=ODYCIVIL

 

[MyJoey]

The rock I find the most puzzling. You would think a man’s strength would be enough to strangle her or bang her head against the ground…….sorry being so detailed but the rock just stands out to me.

 

[MyJoey]

This was a permanent order in 2017; was re-opened as an "emergency" motion in 2019 (what happened with Rachel in 2019?); was dismissed and then was re-opened again in 2022 as a petition to modify visitation. This was going on for years and even with a final order in 2017, was still never-ending at the time.

Look at the standard of relief required in order to meet the requirements for an emergency motion:

Standard for Relief

1. There must be sufficient showing that there is an imminent risk of harm or harassment to a party or minor child, unless there is sufficient showing that there will be an imminent loss of jurisdiction or removal of the child from the state.
2. Purely speculative evidence of harm in insufficient to grant emergency relief.

https://mdcourts.gov/sites/default/files/import/clerks/calvert/pdfs/emergencycustodyprocedurehandout.pdf

There is other relief listed by way of another motion but this emergency motion must be grounded on an actual emergency.

jmo

https://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiryDetail.jis?caseId=12C17000405&loc=56&detailLoc=ODYCIVIL

Could be one of the Ex’s didn’t like her life style and wanted the children……so many places to look.

 

[nao]

Moo. Maybe someone didn't like the man she was now officially dating. Moo

 

[crhedBngr]

Moo..what would be the reason for her to go into those tunnels?

Taking a shortcut from one part of the trail to another?

JMVHO.

 

[nao]

Taking a shortcut from one part of the trail to another?

JMVHO.

Those tunnels drain into a creek or something, they don't go anywhere....moo

 

[nao]

Dbm

 

[PommyMommy]

Moo..what would be the reason for her to go into those tunnels?

Someone dragged her there? According to MG there was a 15-20' blood trail to/from the tunnel. Of course, we don't know if that is factual at this point. MOO