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

[magnolia]

I can just picture TM sitting at her computer and saying "warmer, warmer, warmer, hot...hot...HOT!!!.....eh, warm....warm...colder.....colder....COLD..." with all of our theories. It's a drinking game and every time we get colder she gets to drink.

That is too funny.

 

[Madeleine74]

I really don't know why activity that's so much a part of the timeline and occurred after the first call would not be disclosed until now, or why the number of calls to the pay phone was simply characterized as "several" after the rest of the call timeline that was released was so detailed. I can see no advantage to the investigation by keeping that under wraps. In fact, there could have been other witnesses that emerged from disclosing this.

It seems that the LB's portion of the greater timeline is viewed as a sidebar. But her Tumblr posts and times are important?

They brought out certain facts during the bond hearings, but obviously held evidence back too, as is done in most cases. The goal is to try the case in a courtroom, not in the public domain. Heather's social media postings were public because the account(s) Heather used were not all private and that's how "sleuthers" came across them. And, with the inclusion of a gag order, the state would be going against that gag order to start talking about evidence at all before it was presented at trial.

 

[Hatfield]

I think Heather changed her mind. I also think that SM told her he was working at LB's - whether he was or not - to get Heather to that isolated parking lot. We all know what a relaxed liar Sidney is from the dashcam video.

Re BBM
I agree. I think HE was a very independent person who kept a lot of things to herself. I could see where she most likely changed her mind after talking with Bri. Especially since Bri also gave her opinion about it and if HE was going to do the opposite of her opinion then HE would not want to call her back about it.

HE seemed to be very independent person IMO.

 

[Teche]

When do you think a decision will be made to retry SM for kidnapping?

 

[lstiff]

WE know it was done intentionally. But would a jury? If he did an internet search on it, where are the records of his search history (like we saw with CA's trial). Not trying to be snarky by any means, just sharing what I think I would need to see as a juror.
Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

Exactly what I mentioned during the trial. This is vital in most court cases nowadays. IMO

IF she thought she was pregnant and SM calls to tell her he is now a free man, what are the chances she is going to "sleep on it" as to decide if she is going to see him again?
I think an outside agent needs to come in, look at all the evidence with new eyes, and tell what he sees.

LE was so determined about proving a murder charge against the Moorers, then had to drop it to only a kidnapping charge, I feel that they are overlooking / missed an important piece. To be able to put all this together on circumstantial evidence, is an amazing feat. However, it stops in mid-air! There is nothing after the alleged meeting at PTL.

Heather just disappears into thin air. Are there alligators in the waterways?

BBM Yes, I agree 100%. Those of us who have been following since day 1 have formed opinions and thoughts over time vs the new sleuths joining us who are just now forming an opinion and can give us a new perspective. The same would/could apply to the investigation IMVHO

One more thing I thought of this weekend. Was it said in the trial that Heather's car was parked facing the water at PTL? If I were going to meet someone in a secluded place like that, I would have pulled around kind of semi-circle so that I could see an approaching vehicle. Pulled in facing the water, to me, suggests Heather's car was dumped there. Also, I believe I remember from the trial that Heather's phone had never pinged at PTL before this night. Leads me to believe she was taken at LB's. I also think the PG test and cigar may have been a red herring. JMO

Yep, agree again. The car facing the water was very telling to me. Prosecution said she was ambushed b/c her back was towards the incoming truck but I can see at least 3 different scenarios for her car to be parked like that. I guess there is a small chance that she just pulled in like that waiting on him but I personally don't think that would be the most logical idea. IMHO

 

[jillycat]

They brought out certain facts during the bond hearings, but obviously held evidence back too, as is done in most cases. The goal is to try the case in a courtroom, not in the public domain. Heather's social media postings were public because the account(s) Heather used were not all private and that's how "sleuthers" came across them. And, with the inclusion of a gag order, the state would be going against that gag order to start talking about evidence at all before it was presented at trial.

I'm certain we alI understand that trials occur in courtrooms.

I think you're not understanding my post.

In regard to the state, my point was that a detailed piece of released evidence (the phone log), that spans the entire timeline, excluded part of the activity on that timeline. I'm not confused about goals of trying cases, nor do I think the state should or does release all evidence to the public. Does that help?

Re: Tumblr: I don't think Tumblr is/was ever relevant, I do think the Longbeard's portion of the timeline is.

 

[kodi]

Morning, everyone. Do we know if TM actually had SM followed as she claimed in her text exchanges with HE (where she was using SMs phone)? I know she claimed it but haven't seen anywhere if it truly took place or was just smoke. TIA.

 

[Hatfield]

Morning, everyone. Do we know if TM actually had SM followed as she claimed in her text exchanges with HE (where she was using SMs phone)? I know she claimed it but haven't seen anywhere if it truly took place or was just smoke. TIA.

Not sure but this brings up a good point. There may be someone out there that has more evidence testimony that they can provide to help the case get to the truth about SM or TM or both.

Even if they are close friends of the Ms or even direct relation to the Ms there could be someone out there that has decided that they really want to do the right thing now and they really should talk with the prosecution team. They maybe feeling very guilty themselves for not disclosing some very important information. They may not want to carry this burden their whole life for not doing the right thing. It will haunt them the rest of their lives.

If there is someone out there that has direct knowledge of certain things or of some things that were said to them by someone then why continue to hide that information just because a person asked you to. If they know in their heart that a murder was committed and they are beginning to realize they are doing a terrible thing by not saying anything then they may be having a change of heart.

Having close family or friends does not mean you have to stay silent when you know that person has committed a murder.

 

[poppygirl]

I think SM got the preg test thinking he could get HE to allow him to come to her apt that night. Telling her he left TM, wanted to see her, we can do the test together. HE didn't allow him. If she had she would have disappeared from there IMO.

She has no idea he is calling from a pay phone (he has no idea it can be traced) who knows what lie he told her about the phone number. He tells her he will be at LBs after a certain time, she waits 1:47 mins, changes clothes, leaves for LBs at 2:32. Waits 19 mins he doesn't show, she leaves, turns around gets back to LBs at 3:02, waits 14 more mins leaves at 3:16. With him telling her he left TM, she feels it's safe to call his cell, while driving from LBs to her apt she calls his cell at 3:16. While driving she is talking to him on his cell until 3:22. She arrives home at 3:20 still talking to him. They hang up at 3:24, at 3:25 she leaves for Peachtree landing. He told her to meet him there.

At 3:37 she is at the landing, he was on his way at 3:36 he passes the residence with the sec camera. She calls his cell at 3:38, 3:39 and 3:39:46' 3:39 he passes the business D n S sec camera, she calls his cell one last time at 3:41:05.

He passes the business leaving the landing at 3:46, the residence at 3:49. (I wonder where the road in front of the residence goes to, other than his house.

So within 5 mins of her last call and his driving by the residence she disappears. She had to be in the truck except there was no dns, hairs, fibers of her in the truck. I guess he could have had a blanket, sheet covering the seat or might have taken the truck and cleaned it out. I don't think she was killed in the truck because she would have struggled and left dna, hair or fibers.

IMO got out of her car, took keys, purse, phone, got in or was put in dead or alive. I'm thinking alive, TM was hiding in back, they took her someplace and killed her.

That's the way I see this happening. Both SM and TM being directly involved.

I also believe he knew she had a date that night. I believe someone working with HE was feeding SM, TM or both info about HE. Need to find out who.


May not be right but that's how I see it

IMO

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have pretty much the same scenario in mind!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[poppygirl]

I really don't know why activity that's so much a part of the timeline and occurred after the first call would not be disclosed until now, or why the number of calls to the pay phone was simply characterized as "several" after the rest of the call timeline that was released was so detailed. I can see no advantage to the investigation by keeping that under wraps. In fact, there could have been other witnesses that emerged from disclosing this.

It seems that the LB's portion of the greater timeline is viewed as a sidebar. But her Tumblr posts and times are important?

I agree - more witnesses could have come forward though probably a long shot at that point (i.e. Months after the actual abduction).

I think the advantage to the prosecution, if any, was to prevent a change of venue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kodi]

Not sure but this brings up a good point. There may be someone out there that has more evidence testimony that they can provide to help the case get to the truth about SM or TM or both.

Even if they are close friends of the Ms or even direct relation to the Ms there could be someone out there that has decided that they really want to do the right thing now and they really should talk with the prosecution team. They maybe feeling very guilty themselves for not disclosing some very important information. They may not want to carry this burden their whole life for not doing the right thing. It will haunt them the rest of their lives.

If there is someone out there that has direct knowledge of certain things or of some things that were said to them by someone then why continue to hide that information just because a person asked you to. If they know in their heart that a murder was committed and they are beginning to realize they are doing a terrible thing by not saying anything then they may be having a change of heart.

Having close family or friends does not mean you have to stay silent when you know that person has committed a murder.

I agree. With multiple theories being mentioned of possibly additional individuals being a part of this, logically, whoever it was - if true - that was following SM for TM would be the first individual to consider. Even if he/she wasn't involved, I would think they would have some knowledge that would be useful to the investigation. Additionally, if true, I would think LE would have spoken to this individual and gained any useful information.

I couldn't imagine carrying this kind of secret for ANYONE...it would eat me up alive.

 

[Madeleine74]

It just occurred to me that what some jurors do is exactly what forum members do on crime threads (propose theories and try to figure out and fill in holes that are often never able to be filled in). So they start questioning things ("what if" this and "what if" that) and of course no answers are forthcoming because the jurors are throwing out questions that have no answers. I mean it's not like the defendant is going to walk into the jury room and say "well this is how it all really went down, since you asked....."

It's futile because no answers emerge <insert crickets chirping>, and when a jury does it, it gets them away from their primary job which is to evaluate the evidence and testimony that was presented to them and work with that to see if the state proved the charges BARD. Filling in blanks and proposing "what if" scenarios and theories is not the job of the jury, and in circumstantial cases, it's rare that all the holes can be filled in anyway -- simply because the victim is not there to tell.

It sounded like there were some people on this jury who might have done just that. ("what if...")

 

[Deleted member 39678]

It just occurred to me that what some jurors do is exactly what forum members do on crime threads (propose theories and try to figure out and fill in holes that are often never able to be filled in). So they start questioning things ("what if" this and "what if" that) and of course no answers are forthcoming because the jurors are throwing out questions that have no answers. I mean it's not like the defendant is going to walk into the jury room and say "well this is how it all really went down, since you asked....."

It's futile because no answers emerge <insert crickets chirping>, and when a jury does it, it gets them away from their primary job which is to evaluate the evidence and testimony that was presented to them and work with that to see if the state proved the charges BARD. Filling in blanks and proposing "what if" scenarios and theories is not the job of the jury, and in circumstantial cases, it's rare that all the holes can be filled in anyway -- simply because the victim is not there to tell.

It sounded like there were some people on this jury who might have done just that. ("what if...")

There's no way a jury can answer "what if" questions. That's why their only supposed to use the evidence presented to them in court in making their decision.

When I see juries do things like this it has me considering professional juries. JMO

 

[PeterThomasFan]

I'm certain we alI understand that trials occur in courtrooms.

I think you're not understanding my post.

In regard to the state, my point was that a detailed piece of released evidence (the phone log), that spans the entire timeline, excluded part of the activity on that timeline. I'm not confused about goals of trying cases, nor do I think the state should or does release all evidence to the public. Does that help?

Re: Tumblr: I don't think Tumblr is/was ever relevant, I do think the Longbeard's portion of the timeline is.

Why and for what reason did HCDP and the Solicitor's office hold back on releasing information about Longbeard's as soon as it was available? It makes no sense to me! :banghead:

There should have been all-out searches surrounding that whole area, immediately! Where was CUE?

The dumpsters should have been tracked to the landfills and should have been searched thoroughly!

There should have been a "door-to-door campaign" for all residents and businesses within the immediate area asking if they had seen or heard anything that night!

LE/Solicitor should have made the public aware and asked if anyone was in that general vicinity and saw or heard anything suspicious.

I just don't get it!

 

[Madeleine74]

Why and for what reason did HCDP and the Solicitor's office hold back on releasing information about Longbeard's as soon as it was available? It makes no sense to me! :banghead:

There should have been all-out searches surrounding that whole area, immediately! Where was CUE?

The dumpsters should have been tracked to the landfills and should have been searched thoroughly!

There should have been a "door-to-door campaign" for all residents and businesses within the immediate area asking if they had seen or heard anything that night!

LE/Solicitor should have made the public aware and asked if anyone was in that general vicinity and saw or heard anything suspicious.

I just don't get it!

Investigations are done by the cops, detectives, and various LE agencies. That includes gathering the evidence, conducting searches or participating or supervising. I know there were searches done over many weeks, based on the info that the car was found at PTL. The ping and GPS info might have come in (much) later and that would include the other areas HE's phone was showing connections. The waterways around/near PTL were searched. How does one know that LE did not search in specific areas or did not ask various people or businesses along the way? I don't recall any info telling the public at large all the details of searches. (anyone?)

My understanding is the solicitor's job is not to go out looking for evidence; their job is to evaluate the evidence, determine if there's enough to take it to a grand jury for indictment and determine if they think they can prove the case to a jury of 12. If they don't think they can prove the case they should not move the case forward since they get only 1 bite of the apple. Ultimately they work with what they've got.

ETA: The goal is to preserve the case, preserve the evidence, not disclose the case to the public, not tip off the persons of interest, and keep the case from being tried in "the court of public opinion" to the extent possible. That's the reason for being close-lipped. That's the reason for gag orders. Each side has rights--the state and the accused.

 

[bestill]

Why and for what reason did HCDP and the Solicitor's office hold back on releasing information about Longbeard's as soon as it was available? It makes no sense to me! :banghead:

There should have been all-out searches surrounding that whole area, immediately! Where was CUE?

The dumpsters should have been tracked to the landfills and should have been searched thoroughly!

There should have been a "door-to-door campaign" for all residents and businesses within the immediate area asking if they had seen or heard anything that night!

LE/Solicitor should have made the public aware and asked if anyone was in that general vicinity and saw or heard anything suspicious.

I just don't get it!

I agree with you!! What about the employees they may have seen them meeting there in the past, so many questions! What's even stranger is the M's not trying to spin it, that's interesting to me. They could have so easily created some scenario thrown it out just like all of their other bs. Really perplexed about this.

 

[jillycat]

Why and for what reason did HCDP and the Solicitor's office hold back on releasing information about Longbeard's as soon as it was available? It makes no sense to me! :banghead:

There should have been all-out searches surrounding that whole area, immediately! Where was CUE?

The dumpsters should have been tracked to the landfills and should have been searched thoroughly!

There should have been a "door-to-door campaign" for all residents and businesses within the immediate area asking if they had seen or heard anything that night!

LE/Solicitor should have made the public aware and asked if anyone was in that general vicinity and saw or heard anything suspicious.

I just don't get it!

I honestly don't know why a location where the victim's phone was known to be 26 minutes before she disappeared forever would not be a search site - and would not have been made known to a population of potential witnesses. Seriously.

 

[Madeleine74]

The only location/ping information disclosed to the "public" was at the hearings for bond. At those hearing(s), it was shown by the solicitor's office that HE was on her phone at certain times, at home, and at a specific time her phone (and vehicle) were enroute to PTL. That was done to show they had a case against the M's and as such the M's should not be free at that time. There were some news articles that disclosed information, but it was just the basics. All the evidence was not made public--just enough to get the indictment and then to argue at the bond hearing.

The public was not privy to the inner working of the investigation, the public was not privy to the interviews conducted, nor all the activities done by LE and investigators. (The public is almost never privy to this information). There were searches by LE, there were searches by various volunteers. Info found by police was kept close to the vest, as is standard protocol.

 

[TTF14]

The only location/ping information disclosed to the "public" was at the hearings for bond. At those hearing(s), it was shown by the solicitor's office that HE was on her phone at certain times, at home, and at a specific time her phone (and vehicle) were enroute to PTL. That was done to show they had a case against the M's and as such the M's should not be free at that time. There were some news articles that disclosed information, but it was just the basics. All the evidence was not made public--just enough to get the indictment and then to argue at the bond hearing.

The public was not privy to the inner working of the investigation, the public was not privy to the interviews conducted, nor all the activities done by LE and investigators. (The public is almost never privy to this information). There were searches by LE, there were searches by various volunteers. Info found by police was kept close to the vest, as is standard protocol.

I think we all realize this. The question is WHY NOT specifically related to Longbeards? It seems like it would have been very helpful for the public to know to jog some memories. Now those memories are 2.5 years old.

 

[LBDunes]

It just occurred to me that what some jurors do is exactly what forum members do on crime threads (propose theories and try to figure out and fill in holes that are often never able to be filled in). So they start questioning things ("what if" this and "what if" that) and of course no answers are forthcoming because the jurors are throwing out questions that have no answers. I mean it's not like the defendant is going to walk into the jury room and say "well this is how it all really went down, since you asked....."

It's futile because no answers emerge <insert crickets chirping>, and when a jury does it, it gets them away from their primary job which is to evaluate the evidence and testimony that was presented to them and work with that to see if the state proved the charges BARD. Filling in blanks and proposing "what if" scenarios and theories is not the job of the jury, and in circumstantial cases, it's rare that all the holes can be filled in anyway -- simply because the victim is not there to tell.

It sounded like there were some people on this jury who might have done just that. ("what if...")

BBM - yes, at least one juror did just that. I believe it was the foreman (was rumored to be, anyway) that said, quoting to WBTW:

&#8220;If we were not doing a trial on circumstantial evidence, it would have been a much more way for us to sink our teeth into and come up with a proper verdict,&#8221; the juror explained. &#8220;But because of the fact there were so many what-ifs, &#8216;what if this happened,&#8217; &#8216;what if that happened,&#8217; and things of that nature, we were hopelessly deadlocked.&#8221;

http://wbtw.com/2016/06/24/juror-explains-mistrial-in-sidney-moorer-kidnapping-case/


Also, 2 jurors spoke to WMBF and said essentially that the evidence was right in front of them.

http://www.wmbfnews.com/Clip/12550126/jurors-speak-about-split-on-verdict