Found Deceased MI - Venus Stewart, 32, Colon, 28 April 2010 - # 5 *D. Stewart guilty*

[blackdog]

He doesn't appear to worried. People uptown say he is in town, looking for a job,and seeking custody.

 

[PickieChickie]

Please tell me reasonable visitation was supervised. BBM. See, this is often a problem that I have read about in the past. At what age can a child testify? I'm getting OT here, but there has to be other means for which a child can be protected when the allegations are true.

Ugh. All I can hope at this point is Venus is found...... if not, there is too great a risk that Doug will gain custody of the kids and the maternal grandparents will have to fight for access to the kids. This is a no win situation all around.

No, it was whatever the father determined to be reasonable which could have been one hour a year supervised.

The father was ABUSING me and I moved out. After that, he was allowing the boys to spend a lot of time with the mother so he could be irresponsible and drink.

The court had ordered her to move out of her boyfriend's house and get her own place because he was locking the little one in the closet and dragging him around the house by the hair.

When I returned a few months later, the boys told me that the man was living with the mother in violation of the order.

I filed a Motion for Order To Show Cause for Contempt, a judge assigned the children an attorney, the mother BRIBED the children with promises of new bikes, etc. to get them to say they wanted to live with her every other week so that was what happened.

And, the mother MARRIED the man who the court ordered to stay away from the boys!

 

[spamelope]

In Doug's apartment, the police removed two digital voice recorders. They most have some relevance to the case. Maybe Doug recorded some of their arguments, and she threatened to accuse him of child molestation.

I think they can only take things that are relevant to the murder investigation. That would be a civil case. But I am wildly curious about why those items were taken. I can't see how they could fit into this case. I take it your trip to get paint wasn't fruitful and you aren't coming back with the answers to our questions? lol Drats.

 

[blackdog]

I now lot's of people who know what's going on, but feel funny about asking them and posting it on web.

 

[PickieChickie]

I now lot's of people who know what's going on, but feel funny about asking them and posting it on web.

Find out whatever you can but to protect yourself and avoid having your posts flagged for removal, make sure that you don't reveal who gave you the information and state that your information has not been verified and can only be considered speculation at this point, something I believe we are allowed to do.

The last thing you need is for people in your community to become angry with you for quoting them on the Internet.

I've seen other people post that they spoke with someone close to the case who revealed information which they posted on Websleuths. If you cross the line, I'm sure you'll be notified immediately by a moderator about what is an unacceptable post if you cross the line.

We are all here to learn as much as we can and want to know what you can learn. Hopefully you can present the information in a manner that will not violate Websleuths' Terms of Service.

 

[PickieChickie]

It was being openly discussed at the coffee shop. The same one's the police eat in each day.

Were coffee employee's saying they overheard the police discussing the case amongst themselves? If so, what were they reportedly saying? I think that's allowed.

 

[BeanE]

Here's the guidance we post for locals and those who know the victim in the cases we follow:

I just wanted to say welcome again to any locals or those who know Venus. We really do appreciate having you here. There are a few things to keep in mind, though.

Before you post ANY inside information that could help this case PLEASE report it to the police first. Here at Websleuths, we don't care about having "scoops" or "bombshells." We care about the cases, the people involved, and making sure Websleuths is not hindering the investigation by allowing people to post inside information that the police do not have yet.

If you know Venus and want to post about her, then Websleuths' owner Tricia needs to talk to you. Please email her at [email protected]

Unless what you are saying can be verified by law enforcement and/or the media, it is not considered a "fact" here. You may personally know for 100% certainty that it is true, but unless you are verified and/or can back it up with a link, we do have to consider it to be a rumor. This is not to single anyone out or to ignore information, but to maintain the integrity of a case and keep the best interests of the victims at the forefront.

Please do what is right by the case first before you post anything on Websleuths.

 

[blackdog]

I don't recall knowing them, the stuff I hear fits under the rumor definition. Besides, if someone tells me, it will ruin the challenge.

 

[PickieChickie]

Here's the guidance we post for locals and those who know the victim in the cases we follow:

I just wanted to say welcome again to any locals or those who know Venus. We really do appreciate having you here. There are a few things to keep in mind, though.

Before you post ANY inside information that could help this case PLEASE report it to the police first. Here at Websleuths, we don't care about having "scoops" or "bombshells." We care about the cases, the people involved, and making sure Websleuths is not hindering the investigation by allowing people to post inside information that the police do not have yet.

If you know Venus and want to post about her, then Websleuths' owner Tricia needs to talk to you. Please email her at [email protected]

Unless what you are saying can be verified by law enforcement and/or the media, it is not considered a "fact" here. You may personally know for 100% certainty that it is true, but unless you are verified and/or can back it up with a link, we do have to consider it to be a rumor. This is not to single anyone out or to ignore information, but to maintain the integrity of a case and keep the best interests of the victims at the forefront.

Please do what is right by the case first before you post anything on Websleuths.

To clarify, could the poster who was at the cafe where this case was being openly discussed and where the local police gather together for coffee, post a comment like this:

"I was at the local coffee shop today and one of the cafe employees said several police were having coffee this morning and told them that ..........................................." or "I was sitting next to the table where four local police officers were having coffee and they were loudly discussing this case and I heard one of them say .............................." ?

 

[Cubby]

To clarify, could the poster who was at the cafe where this case was being openly discussed and where the local police gather together for coffee, post a comment like this:

"I was at the local coffee shop today and one of the cafe employees said several police were having coffee this morning and told me that ..........................................." or "I was sitting next to the table where four local police officers were having coffee and they were loudly discussing this case and I heard one of them say .............................." ?

I don't think I would be that specific. I might say something along the lines of 'local rumor has it..... or overheard at a local coffee shop...... The last thing we want done is for anyone to pinpoint who is spreading rumors or speculation such as the employee at kind of thing. I would be cautious in sharing the rumor rather than who I heard it from kind of thing. For their protection of course.

At least that is how I would choose to share the info. I don't know that it matters so much who or where speculation starts other than it being local talk.

 

[blackdog]

I did not hear it from the police only talkative patrons of the restaurant passing time.

 

[BeanE]

Here's a post from Tricia specific to locals (those who live in the area but don't know the victim).

**************************************************************************************************************

NEW RULES ABOUT POSTING OUT AND OUT RUMORS. ​

Many posters have been requesting Rumor Threads on several cases. We do have a Rumor Thread in the members only part of WS about Haleigh Cummings. The reason we did this was because an overwhelming amount of locals who knew both families wanted to post. The best way to handle that situation was to have a rumor thread in the private area. However, I don't want rumor threads on all the cases. Too much time is needed to moderate a rumor thread and it can get very weary.

It would be naive of me not to recognize the aspect of rumors in cases like Elizabeth Olten and Somer. Therefore we are going to try something different.

If you are a local and you have heard a rumor that is not ridiculous post it clearly as a rumor.

I won't check if you say you are a local. This is different than saying you know the family.

If this doesn't work out because people start relying on rumors or repeating rumors as fact we will change it back.

If anyone has any questions go ahead and ask me, PM me or email me at [email protected]

ETA: one more from Tricia. Love the dental care

*Rumor's for locals and only if it is clearly marked as such and benefits the discussion of the case. I don't care about a suspect dental care unless it involves the case.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MO-New Diary Entry? Elizabeth Olten, 9, St. Martins Thread #7

 

[Cubby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tricia
************************************************** ************************************************** **********

NEW RULES ABOUT POSTING OUT AND OUT RUMORS. ​

Many posters have been requesting Rumor Threads on several cases. We do have a Rumor Thread in the members only part of WS about Haleigh Cummings. The reason we did this was because an overwhelming amount of locals who knew both families wanted to post. The best way to handle that situation was to have a rumor thread in the private area. However, I don't want rumor threads on all the cases. Too much time is needed to moderate a rumor thread and it can get very weary.

It would be naive of me not to recognize the aspect of rumors in cases like Elizabeth Olten and Somer. Therefore we are going to try something different.

If you are a local and you have heard a rumor that is not ridiculous post it clearly as a rumor.

I won't check if you say you are a local. This is different than saying you know the family.

If this doesn't work out because people start relying on rumors or repeating rumors as fact we will change it back.

If anyone has any questions go ahead and ask me, PM me or email me at [email protected]

In other words, you don't need to email Tricia to verify you are a local IF the rumors are reasonable and refered to as rumor not fact.

I want to remind everyone, we don't want to hinder you or for you to be so afraid to post an opinion or theory that you are afraid to post anything without a link to back it up as fact. But on the other hand, we also don't want the theories to get so unreasonably out of hand the thread becomes one big rumor mill kind of thing.

I trust you all will use your best judgement and if you are unsure, pm one of the moderators assigned to the forum or admin to ask first.

TIA!

 

[spamelope]

Well, as long as it's not about teeth, blackdog, I guess you're good to go as long as you warn us that it's a rumor.
(Quietly fist pumping here) LOL

 

[RubyRed]

All that is before the little girl told her about the molestation. At that point, the little girl was simply asking what that body part is.

I find no reason for a parent to interrogate a child who says they saw the other parent naked. Venus thought the child had seen Doug urinating. That's a normal assumption, and nothing to do an interrogation about.

You do make a point though, although an unintended one. If Venus were intent on bringing false charges of molestation against Doug, then as soon as her daughter said she simply saw him naked, I would think Venus would have jumped all over that. She didn't though. She didn't say to herself Oh my dear God he molested her! She didn't say to herself Wowzingo! Maybe I can 'get' him for molestation! She simply had a rational though, with no accusations of wrongdoing towards Doug - she thought Oh. He was just peeing.

This victim is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.

bbm

I read this in Pufs attachment, She said "Dad wanted me to pet it so I did."

Does that not warrant more questioning? Link to Pufs post below.


Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MI MI - Venus Rose Stewart, 32, Colon, 28 April 2010 - ABDUCTED - #5

 

[blackdog]

I will be more careful in the future. I'm going back to painting for a couple hrs.

 

[spamelope]

I will be more careful in the future. I'm going back to painting for a couple hrs.

NOoooooooooooooooooooooooooo
LOL
Hurry back. And I do mean that. lol

 

[Cubby]

bbm

I read this in Pufs attachment, She said "Dad wanted me to pet it so I did."

Does that not warrant more questioning? Link to Pufs post below.


Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MI MI - Venus Rose Stewart, 32, Colon, 28 April 2010 - ABDUCTED - #5

IMO, the transcription of what puf' was able to make out of the video is too short for an accurate 'analysis' of whether the allegation was fact or fiction. IMO - I am taking or interpreting it as coming from a very angry father right now. I don't blame him as he has every right to be angry, but as a parent if I were concerned about my children or grandchildren being molested by a family member I would refrain from commenting about said events until I could do so without being emotional or without having brough this to LE or someone who was in a position to verify such first.

Otherwise, at least imo, it only sounds like bringing more family into the ugliness of a bitter custody battle. At least where it pertains to allegations not proven.

JMO

 

[BeanE]

bbm

I read this in Pufs attachment, She said "Dad wanted me to pet it so I did."

Does that not warrant more questioning? Link to Pufs post below.


Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MI MI - Venus Rose Stewart, 32, Colon, 28 April 2010 - ABDUCTED - #5

The post I was responding to wasn't addressing that part of the conversation. It was addressing all the stuff that came before that part:

my daughter out of nowhere says to me, "What's that thing that hangs between dad's legs?"

My eyes got real big and I just sat there and didn't say anything thinking that she maybe saw him peeing and I didn't want to go there with her.

She kept on demanding an answer.

She says, "You know mom that long thing that hangs from his butt."

I said - when did you see that?

She says - "At the old house" (She is referring to the old house in Schoolcraft, MI)

But since you ask about that subsequent part, yes, IMO, that definitely warrants questioning. The transcription doesn't say whether or not Venus questioned her daughter about that part at that time.

 

[PickieChickie]

The post I was responding to wasn't addressing that part of the conversation. It was addressing all the stuff that came before that part:

my daughter out of nowhere says to me, "What's that thing that hangs between dad's legs?"

My eyes got real big and I just sat there and didn't say anything thinking that she maybe saw him peeing and I didn't want to go there with her.

She kept on demanding an answer.

She says, "You know mom that long thing that hangs from his butt."

I said - when did you see that?

She says - "At the old house" (She is referring to the old house in Schoolcraft, MI)

But since you ask about that subsequent part, yes, IMO, that definitely warrants questioning. The transcription doesn't say whether or not Venus questioned her daughter about that part at that time.

I don't to criticize Venus. But, when a little girl asks about her father's penis, to me, that would warrant immediate questions, not just ignoring to the point where the child has to demand answers.

My daughter NEVER saw a man's penis and she lived with four males. To me, that would be a big red flag.

It is also not clear how much time transpired between when this incident supposedly happened and when the child reported it.

If several months had passed since the move to Virginia, I would be very curious as to why the child was suddenly bringing the matter up now.