• #15,921
That may have angered the FBI, who then didn't inform the sheriff that the Guthrie family had recorded a video (he found out from his wife).
I think that’s likely what happened when you break it down. There were subtle clues. Man this really bothers me
 
  • #15,922
It's utterly ridiculous that LE has clearly passed on privileged information to Harvey Levin. I don't care if the kidnapper shoved the ransom note up his rear end, it's beyond corrupt for LE to confirm the accuracy of any of that note with him.
He read the note. He has it. It was sent to TMZ.
 
  • #15,923
Doesn't make sense to me.

You can be a suspect and LE still ask for consent to search. You can be a suspect in an armed robbery and LE knock on your door and ask for consent. You say no and they detain you until the warrant is signed. That's pretty common practice.

I can't think of any reason LE would be searching a house, taking pics, and removing items if no one in that house was a suspect. That would be an unreasonable search and its frankly ludicrous a retired FBI agent would say someone isnt a suspect just because a warrant wasnt signed.
I remember LE searching Laci Peterson's home long before Scott was declared a suspect. As a matter of fact, he wasn't declared until they found her body. They took samples from their pool, his steering wheel house, everywhere prior to her being found and he let them i guess.
 
  • #15,925
So I looked at the route SIL would have taken from his house to NG's. Most of it is along Orange Grove which, in that area is very residential with walls and the backs of houses facing Orange Grove. I highly doubt there is any camera footage from there. There are no businesses. The route along Oracle from Las Lomitas to Orange Grove would have several businesses that may have had cameras.
Via Streetview, I also see what may be a traffic or public safety camera at the corner of Oracle and Orange Grove. Unconfirmed, MOO.
 
  • #15,926
I assume they meant that they have been seen by various networks, interviews etc.

but we don't "KNOW" this, right?

I do not know if SG/AG/TC have been seen at all. I don't even know if SG's husband is there, and if all the children are there. We don't know because we don't know. And just because no on says they have seen TC, is that really that unbelievable under the circumstances? No one has seen the other family members either.

I do believe it is only because of who SG is ... any other family in the same situation, the media would be all over it. JMO
 
  • #15,927
  • #15,928
Yep, deception during interrogation - not public statements, right?
If the public statements are being used to further the investigation, and find the truth, they can be deceptive. In short, broadly speaking, LE can not lie under Oath, including in Court or when submitting an Affidavit (such as for a warrant). Speaking broadly, generally, if LE is not under Oath, they can use tactics meant to further the investigation. Just my opinion.
 
  • #15,929
If the warrants are sealed, there will be no evidence that they exist until they are unsealed. Their existence only becomes known to those outside of LE and the judge when the suspect(s) is in custody or the case is unsealed. It is even possible that LE got "consent" from AG and TC while also getting a warrant that is sealed. It would be a huge blunder if they only went in with "consent" and then, for example, found blood evidence... then AG and TC could argue in court that they never gave consent. Etc etc.
Great summary. I would argue that during the consent search, evidence such as blood would immediately call for the house to be declared a crime scene, secured, and warrants signed then.

I do have a feeling you are correct that there are sealed warrants. I bet if they refused consent, the house would have been secured and warrants would have been produced.
 
  • #15,930
I can't think of a reason either, and I've taken in a lot of true crime.
If they declare them suspects before a body, they can mess it up. Its a process and you want a conviction in the end.
 
  • #15,931
She didn’t want to drive to her daughter’s house and took Uber instead?

the dinner at AG's was at night time, or at least, it would be when nancy left. and she knew she'd be able to get a ride home from family when it got dark. not weird.
 
  • #15,932
If they declare them suspects before a body, they can mess it up. Its a process and you want a conviction in the end.
Some clarity!! Thank you!!!!
 
  • #15,933
Deleted
 
Last edited:
  • #15,934
Last edited:
  • #15,935
If the public statements are being used to further the investigation, and find the truth, they can be deceptive. In short, broadly speaking, LE can not lie under Oath, including in Court or when submitting an Affidavit (such as for a warrant). Speaking broadly, generally, if LE is not under Oath, they can use tactics meant to further the investigation. Just my opinion.
Yes I agree with that interpretation. But LE cant hold a presser and say "Well, this is a forced entry kidnapping" when they know that no forced entry was made. Or "this was an random attack, everyone lock your doors!" if, in fact, they have reasonable suspicion it wasn't.
 
  • #15,936
  • #15,937
She didn’t want to drive to her daughter’s house and took Uber instead?
Because she would be returning after dark. She did not drive at night. jmo
 
  • #15,938
I deeply suspect that the olde pirate/ outlaw/ biker saying of : “Three can keep a secret- if two are dead” counts double for teenagers ala: Aw shucks boss man, I only told my ex girlfriend and my best buddy on the football team.

But…. As other posters suggest one does not need to be the consigliore of the Luchesse family, nor the CFO of the Gulf cartel to create complicated bit coin schemes.

Though I think an experienced crime group is behind it, I don’t think there is a reason why a Breaking Bad type teacher, two criminally well supervised teens, and…. a little luck could not get this far.
Cryptic, you have a way with words. Thought about writing murder mysteries?
 
  • #15,939
I do have a feeling you are correct that there are sealed warrants. I bet if they refused consent, the house would have been secured and warrants would have been produced.
Agreed.
 
  • #15,940
DBM
 
Last edited:
Chapter 1/4

Guardians Monthly Goal

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
263
Guests online
2,050
Total visitors
2,313

Forum statistics

Threads
644,182
Messages
18,812,439
Members
245,319
Latest member
Atinygirl
Top