MISTRIAL - Sidney Moorer on trial for the kidnapping of Heather Elvis #5

[barcode]

Madeleine, there are other circumstances and testimony in this case that need to be considered. For me, it is not as simple as you make it out to be. Did you watch the trial?

BBM -- No, I am not 100% certain exactly what Sidney said to Heather during the pay phone call conversation. You seem to consider the testimony as if it was proven fact. That is fine, but, some people need actual proof of what was said. My hesitation to fully accept the testimony as truth has nothing to do with Bri. It has to do with Heather and other reasons she had for possibly not telling Bri the whole truth about the conversation. People pick up on certain things during a trial that they simply can't ignore. I'm not saying Sidney did or didn't tell Heather he was leaving his wife. I'm just not totally convinced he did.

Not only that but people who also buy with hook, line, and sinker that he LURED her in that phone call, she does not seem like she was dragging her heals, quite the opposite, she appeared to be eager to see him after probably a disappointing date, had it been a great date and being closer to 2 am when SM called, I do not see her in such a hurry to meet up with him. I can not place the evil intent into a phone call, perhaps everything escalated after they met up.

I sure hope if there is a re-trial that the same/new prosecutor does not try to force that theory of luring during the phone call.

 

[escape2sc]

I think for the retrial , the State needs to show the date's phone records showing where his phone pinged when he texted HE to let her know he got home. Perhaps the Hart's and Jermey's records to. If the State can eliminate the Defense bringing the others into the equation that only leaves the evidence showing contact with Sidney after HE talked with Bri.

 

[peedoffinny]

I can try.

When I was catching up on the last few pages, there was a recurring theme - not being able to make sense of the pregnancy test. I was surprised by that, so I came up with a plausible theory, on the fly, to show that there are plenty of ways to put the pregnancy test in the story that night and have it make sense. I had just read stillwater's figures on SM's route that night, and those numbers made me think: There's no way it took 16 minutes to drive from that Wal-Mart to that payphone. Where else did he go? Well, as it turns out, he had time to drive by Heather's. If he did that, he likely saw her saying goodnight to her date, so he drove back to the payphone to call her.

And since the first time I heard he bought a cigar with the pregnancy test, I seriously doubted TM was with him. Men smoke cigars to celebrate weddings and babies. So if he was in a celebratory mood, that suggests he was being genuine about leaving TM and wanting to be with Heather.

Like I said, though, this was just a theory. I'm only speculating.

I think those disgusting photos (yes, I'm bringing it up again) they sent Heather prove that sm had no good intentions towards Heather on that night. He would never have participated in sending those photos if he had an ounce of feelings for Heather.

 

[TTF14]

Not only that but people who also buy with hook, line, and sinker that he LURED her in that phone call, she does not seem like she was dragging her heals, quite the opposite, she appeared to be eager to see him after probably a disappointing date, had it been a great date and being closer to 2 am when SM called, I do not see her in such a hurry to meet up with him. I can not place the evil intent into a phone call, perhaps everything escalated after they met up.

I sure hope if there is a re-trial that the same/new prosecutor does not try to force that theory of luring during the phone call.

How is hiding your vehicle out of site of a pay phone (when you can park right there) not lead you to believe it was luring? Oh, and using a pay phone!

And, did you watch the trial? She told her roommate he had a great date.

 

[jillycat]

The thing is, it doesn't require knowing exactly what happened minute by minute to determine evidence of guilt B.A.R.D. By that measure, no one would ever have been successfully convicted in the past. SM and HE are linked and that is undeniable. There is so much evidence linking the 2 of them that very night/morning. And on top of that you have multiple strange actions and lies by SM.

The problem is "the CSI effect" that is often referred to. And I think there's also a "CGI effect." People see a TV show and get excited by all of those possibilities and then expect real life to mirror what they saw on TV. Real life is so much more simple and mundane.

You have to dismiss everything you do know in order to say it was someone else...some other person, random, who just happened to come upon HE.

This faulty conclusion keeps being presented based on a premise that hasn't been advanced - that any perceived room for reasonable doubt in this case equals a claim that the M's aren't the perps. ?

Quite frankly, when the state announced it had DNA! on the tails of searching the Moorer home and making their arrests, and it turned out to be the DNA of the victim from her own car, I wondered if the authorities had seen too much TV and got a little too excited. And then. Nolle Prosequi.

No idea what "multiple strange actions" means to you, but I would argue that it's a sweeping generalization to view people as essentially too lacking in reasoning skills to credibly posit something besides the "obvious". If it was all so obvious, we wouldn't need trials and juries and cross and re-directs.

This case is complicated and while it's easy to try it from our computers, the truth is, we're spectators, much like TV viewers ourselves, and not a jury who is tasked with reviewing evidence and asking, "Does any evidence before me lead me to doubt that's reasonable?" When I refer to doubt in this case, I mean the legal standard and the instructions given by the court, not a belief or fantasy that someone else kidnapped/killed HE.

Sometimes the mundane and simple truth is, someone's dead who shouldn't be, persons in the known chain of events did it, and circumstantial evidence may or may not lead to a united heel-clicking conclusion by a jury. This doesn't mean there's a conspiracy, corruption, stupidity, or too much TV. JMO

 

[escape2sc]

I think LE made a HUGE mistake after TE declined to let them take HE's car in for a thorough forensic exam. LE should of gotten a subpoena to process that car. A young woman was missing and that car was her's. I will never understand why TE didn't insist the car be thoroughly examined or why LE didn't get a subpoena.

 

[PeterThomasFan]

I agree about getting as much detail as possible in presenting a case. However, what would be the relevance of the type of "cigar" that would weigh so heavily in favor of the solicitor's case?

Just showing what type of "cigar" was being purchased. It's in the details (as it should be in a case such as this IMO)!

If I was an "expecting father", I certainly wouldn't purchase a "real" cigar from Wal-Mart.

SLED Agent said that SM purchased a "cigar-like cigarette". Whatever that is.

A pregnancy test - $0.88
LTL Cigar - $3.63
SUBTOTAL: $4.51
TAX: $0.41
TOTAL: $4.92

Most Google searches for LTL points to Swisher brand and a few other brands with a quick search. (aka little cigars).

13:41 - https://youtu.be/HqMQmSul1j4?list=PLR2JAGZzf3U29fLzrfr5Wi6WCGE48Nqel
Also, not saying the "cigar" purchase was not a cigar, but screen-cap really looks like a pack of Marlboro Reds or newer 72's to me. :thinking:

 

[TTF14]

I think LE made a HUGE mistake after TE declined to let them take HE's car in for a thorough forensic exam. LE should of gotten a subpoena to process that car. A young woman was missing and that car was her's. I will never understand why TE didn't insist the car be thoroughly examined or why LE didn't get a subpoena.

Couldn't agree more! I'm sure TE will always regret that.

 

[barcode]

How is hiding your vehicle out of site of a pay phone (when you can park right there) not lead you to believe it was luring? Oh, and using a pay phone!

And, did you watch the trial? She told her roommate he had a great date.

I did not watch the full trial but did catch most of the final day. Bri clearly had things she did not want in front of the jury, that was made clear by her more than once. Me if I had such a great date, I would be like call me tomorrow, it was already going on 2am, after 2am is pretty much a booty call in most locations as not much is open.

 

[geevee]

I'm 100% with you on this. I think she had already been harmed and someone else had possession of her phone before making the trip out to Longbeards.

One of the reasons I think it happened at Longbeards and someone else had her phone is because the calls from PTL to his cell were the same amount of time (1.8 seconds each if memory serves), that's much more like a code than someone trying to get ahold of someone else.

 

[TTF14]

I did not watch the full trial but did catch most of the final day. Bri clearly had things she did not want in front of the jury, that was made clear by her more than once. Me if I had such a great date, I would be like call me tomorrow, it was already going on 2am, after 2am is pretty much a booty call in most locations as not much is open.

I think most of us would agree, but I've never been a 20 year old girl involved with a married man so I can't really say. Hormones dictate a lot of actions at age 20!

I agree that there are things that Bri did not say. I don't think she lied at all, but I do think she might not have divulged everything that was said in that conversation or everything she knew about Heather. I suspect, just reading between the lines, that Heather may have recently had an abortion, which would cause her to bleed, but not necessarily be "her period." She also wouldn't be allowed to use tampons so the fact that she wasn't using any, also true. If she'd recently had an abortion and then SM said he wanted to be with her, I could see why that would greatly upset her and send her into an emotional tailspin. This is all speculation and just a theory.

 

[barcode]

One of the reasons I think it happened at Longbeards and someone else had her phone is because the calls from PTL to his cell were the same amount of time (1.8 seconds each if memory serves), that's much more like a code than someone trying to get ahold of someone else.

I have not watched the videos BUT is there actual visual confirmation that HE drove her own car to PTL or could that have been TM or SM with either of the driving truck.

Accepting your theory, that she was killed at LB, then someone else would have to drive vehicle to dump it, it makes more sense than what has been put forth about PTL.

 

[TTF14]

I have not watched the videos BUT is there actual visual confirmation that HE drove her own car to PTL or could that have been TM or SM with either of the driving truck.

Accepting your theory, that she was killed at LB, then someone else would have to drive vehicle to dump it, it makes more sense than what has been put forth about PTL.

No, there is no visual confirmation of HE's car.

I'm leaning toward the third person theory too. I detailed it this morning (sorry it's long): http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...VIDENCE-Pro-and-Con-2&p=12660010#post12660010

 

[PeterThomasFan]

Just playing devil's advocate here...

It could be that there was no lure at all.

Both Heather and SM probably wanted to get together and discuss the "alleged" pregnancy. There isn't any definitive proof that Heather was even pregnant.

Now, everyone is talking as if she was.

*and when we suspected she was pregnant way back when, we weren't able to talk about it here.

 

[barcode]

No, there is no visual confirmation of HE's car.

I'm leaning toward the third person theory too. I detailed it this morning (sorry it's long): http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...VIDENCE-Pro-and-Con-2&p=12660010#post12660010

Funny you should say that....actually I have been busy, I was going to ask for a shorter version, not in red

 

[jillycat]

Not only that but people who also buy with hook, line, and sinker that he LURED her in that phone call, she does not seem like she was dragging her heals, quite the opposite, she appeared to be eager to see him after probably a disappointing date, had it been a great date and being closer to 2 am when SM called, I do not see her in such a hurry to meet up with him. I can not place the evil intent into a phone call, perhaps everything escalated after they met up.

I sure hope if there is a re-trial that the same/new prosecutor does not try to force that theory of luring during the phone call.

My view is that the state is trying to mitigate the lack of any physical evidence of a crime by appealing to the lure aspect of the statute and using PTL as the be all end all crime scene because it's the only place where the state can reasonably place Heather and SM/TM at the same time (depending on how a jury views the truck driver identity issue).

And, we have no idea what SM said to Heather or why she was crying about it in one breath and excited about SS in the next, saying she was going to sleep on any decision to even see SM. What changed, are there other communications, and what happened on her Longbeard journey? Because an escalation of events makes more sense to me than, suddenly, a pregnancy test, a lure related to it???, and a murder based on, presumably the test results??

In other words, hopefully the state can make a more plausible connection of ALL dots and leave the "creepin around" and pee in the cup theory out of it.

 

[TTF14]

Funny you should say that....actually I have been busy, I was going to ask for a shorter version, not in red

Haha! OK. Shorter version:

SM knows where HE lives. After buying the preg test, goes by her apt. to see if her car is there/she's home. She is, so he goes to a pay phone and calls and asks to meet at LB in an hour. She says yes (but tells Bri she said no), and then he goes home. Heather goes to LB at the pre-determined time. TM and SM have already arranged for a 3rd person to help, don't know who. HE is waiting at LB, calling the pay phone because she is wondering where SM is and doesn't know it's a pay phone....he told her it was his new phone/new number. She waits, leaves, decides to go back and give it more time. Eventually two out of the three (SM, TM and unknown helper) arrive, NOT in the back truck. In another vehicle. He's already told HE "I'll be in xyz car." She's ambushed and either strangled and put in that dumpster or carted off somewhere in xyz vehicle by one of the two who showed up to ambush her. The other one gets in HE's car and quickly realizes he/she left his/her phone (probably a burner) in xyz car, which sped off, and has no way to contact anyone. Panics, picks up HE's phone.

Meanwhile SM has turned his phone on at 3AM to create "proof" that his phone (and thus HIM) was home. But, he didn't plan on getting a call from HE's phone so he did not answer the first time person in xyz car called. He did answer the second time wondering what was going on. Driver was on his way to HE's apartment to dump the car while on the phone with SM/TM/whoever 3rd person was. Arrived at complex, got scared there would be cameras and didn't want to leave the care there, so they discussed a plan B and came up with PTL. He/she/3rd person drives to PTL. Arrives, and in a panic calls SM's phone several times to say I've arrived, maybe fearing that SM would abandon him/her there with the car of a missing woman. SM/TM arrives, grabs the phone, chucks it in the lake and they leave.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Madeleine, there are other circumstances and testimony in this case that need to be considered. For me, it is not as simple as you make it out to be. Did you watch the trial?

BBM -- No, I am not 100% certain exactly what Sidney said to Heather during the pay phone call conversation. You seem to consider the testimony as if it was proven fact. That is fine, but, some people need actual proof of what was said. My hesitation to fully accept the testimony as truth has nothing to do with Bri. It has to do with Heather and other reasons she had for possibly not telling Bri the whole truth about the conversation. People pick up on certain things during a trial that they simply can't ignore. I'm not saying Sidney did or didn't tell Heather he was leaving his wife. I'm just not totally convinced he did.

Why would Heather not tell Bri the whole truth about the phone conversation with SM?

 

[TTF14]

Why would Heather not tell Bri the whole truth about the phone conversation with SM?

Because she knew Bri would not approve and she valued her opinion of her. Didn't want to disappointed her. Wanted to make her proud.

 

[U2forever]

I think most of us would agree, but I've never been a 20 year old girl involved with a married man so I can't really say. Hormones dictate a lot of actions at age 20!

I agree that there are things that Bri did not say. I don't think she lied at all, but I do think she might not have divulged everything that was said in that conversation or everything she knew about Heather. I suspect, just reading between the lines, that Heather may have recently had an abortion, which would cause her to bleed, but not necessarily be "her period." She also wouldn't be allowed to use tampons so the fact that she wasn't using any, also true. If she'd recently had an abortion and then SM said he wanted to be with her, I could see why that would greatly upset her and send her into an emotional tailspin. This is all speculation and just a theory.

I was thinking the same thing, just didn't want to come out and say it. I had the same thing happen to me but I was 30 and my friend was not married, a prominent wealthy older man. It upset me terribly when he told me he wanted it a few years later. :tantrum: