NC NC - Asha Degree, 9, Shelby, 14 Feb 2000 #2

Cleveland County Sheriff Dan Crawford “Crawford said that he now has some indication as to how the book bag got to the location. "It was thrown out by a moving car," he said. "It's highly likely now that this has involved foul play." (The Shelby Star)

There is also some old interview out there some amateur sleuth did with Terry Fleming the guy who found the book bag, and he said it was not buried.
That goes against everything I have ever read about this case. 20 to 50 yards off the road is an awfully long way to throw a backpack wrapped in two garbage bags. I'd love to see a link to the interview with Terry Fleming and see for myself what was said because that is not what the history of this case reflects.
 
I recall speaking to a professional driver recently mentioning how boring it would be to have a white car. She reminded me that it's very easy to see a white car in the dark so this is why its a positive to have one. Asha was completely dressed in white ; it would likely have been easy to spot her in the dark.. another reason a hit-and-run is less convincing. It could be the perp instructed her to wear white so drivers would see her easier on the road. As for the DNA in her bag ...its hard to believe Asha was hit by a car and that a 13 year old then casually rummaged in her backpack and put the NKOTB shirt and McElligotts Pool book into it. Like...what!? Considering Roy had so many cars and some of them were parked near woods behind a care facility...is it possible the perp stole the car to use it to abduct Asha that night, then went back to park it behind the woods? With so many cars, and Roy parking / storing them all over, isn't it possible someone could've used one without the Dedmons noticing? This could explain how the Dedmon DNA ended up with Asha's Bag. Truly far-fetched I know, but I'm just looking at all angles. The Dedmon girl was found deceptive on the polygraph...but only for "concealing information". Let's assume they asked her if she was driving that night, had been drinking or saw or killed Asha Degree...most likely they asked these questions on the poly and it appears that she didn't fail in those sections of the poly, only in "concealing information". So draw your own conclusions.
 
I recall speaking to a professional driver recently mentioning how boring it would be to have a white car. She reminded me that it's very easy to see a white car in the dark so this is why its a positive to have one. Asha was completely dressed in white ; it would likely have been easy to spot her in the dark.. another reason a hit-and-run is less convincing. It could be the perp instructed her to wear white so drivers would see her easier on the road. As for the DNA in her bag ...its hard to believe Asha was hit by a car and that a 13 year old then casually rummaged in her backpack and put the NKOTB shirt and McElligotts Pool book into it. Like...what!? Considering Roy had so many cars and some of them were parked near woods behind a care facility...is it possible the perp stole the car to use it to abduct Asha that night, then went back to park it behind the woods? With so many cars, and Roy parking / storing them all over, isn't it possible someone could've used one without the Dedmons noticing? This could explain how the Dedmon DNA ended up with Asha's Bag. Truly far-fetched I know, but I'm just looking at all angles. The Dedmon girl was found deceptive on the polygraph...but only for "concealing information". Let's assume they asked her if she was driving that night, had been drinking or saw or killed Asha Degree...most likely they asked these questions on the poly and it appears that she didn't fail in those sections of the poly, only in "concealing information". So draw your own conclusions.
Polygraphs are not evidence of any kind- the FBI allowing the Colonial Parkway Killer to roam free killing because he "passed" one- despite being repeatedly placed at relevant scenes harassing and threatening comparable victim-types by multiple witnesses- is just one of many reasons to reject it as anything but evidence of an unserious law enforcement agency whose statements can not be trusted.
<modsnip - if you know something is not an approved source, don't bring it here>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Polygraphs are not evidence of any kind- the FBI allowing the Colonial Parkway Killer to roam free killing because he "passed" one- despite being repeatedly placed at relevant scenes harassing and threatening comparable victim-types by multiple witnesses- is just one of many reasons to reject it as anything but evidence of an unserious law enforcement agency whose statements can not be trusted.
<modsnip - if you know something is not an approved source, don't bring it here>
All true, but the statements made before and after are admissible. For example, "I failed that, didn't i?"

it's certainly something that should probably be done away with but i'm sure it offers some vague guidance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
not silly at all. i think you're cooking on this one with grease. the question is why AD was out alone. yes, it was AD's parent's anniversary, but moreover, Valentine's Day. would she be shopping for her parents or herself?

if I can depart here and add my own hypothesizing...

regardless of whether Underhill was truly responsible/ an accessory, or just a convenient scapegoat, why didn’t anyone mention him to the cops in 2000?!

i can think of only two reasons:

1. he wasn’t directly responsible but knew the truth, making him too much of a risk to expose.

2. the Dedmons needed him alive—possibly to collect his social security or disability payments. maybe both.

at the very least, the second reason seems likely. wasn’t RD his power of attorney or the beneficiary of his will? and wasn’t his wife administering his medication while working as a receptionist? something about that setup always seemed shady.

is it possible that he was coerced into something—maybe even told to dispose of the backpack? if so, why not burn it? was it his form of insurance, or was he hoping someone would find it? maybe he was genuinely scared for his own life.

lastly, it's my opinion that the Dedmons felt like no one would care about a missing black girl. oftentimes, it feels like that's the truth in cases like this. but their time has come and oh how wrong they were.
I always thought she was lured by some girl, someone few years older, someone "cool" or "pretty", someone who she never expected her to talk and felt happy and excited that this type of girl wants to be friend. And I always thought it will be white girl. I kept thinking group of spoiled cruel brat teens who decided to hurt young black girl. I even had this idea of those girls growing up with some racists parents or racists friends.

So when I saw the update that there was indeed some teen white girl involved I almost couldn't believe.

That rupsack once again I think teen hid it, maybe she/they thought if they throw it in bin police would find, I think adults would simply burn it.

I do think parents know what happened and got rid off body. And the random guy who they took care of I would say not related at all. Perhaps he even witness somehting, after all he did die shortly no? Might be wrong.

And that girl on photo, again, feels like teen girls playing prank.

It is very strange and very sad.
 
All true, but the statements made before and after are admissible. For example, "I failed that, didn't i?"

it's certainly something that should probably be done away with but i'm sure it offers some vague guidance.
Yes, that is precisely the danger it represents, and the reason its presence is a red flag in an investigation.

If you are hooked up to the (older) machines, nervous, and it starts swinging wildly when you are asked a shocking question, any reasonably bright person understands the machine is indicating a physiological reaction that is associated with deception. But when they say they "failed", they are talking about "failing" to control autonominous nervous system functions, because, and it can't be said too often, correlation is not causation*.

Further, the unexamined underlying philosophy behind it's deployment is huge problem. In polygraph-land, crimes aren't puzzles or riddles to be solved, but competitions where the investigator "wins" when everyone perceives them to have "caught the bad guy." While correlation is still not causation, polygraphs appear more than chance would indicate in stories about coerced false confessions. Coerced false confessions are the inevitable consequences of Investigation as Completion.
And polygraphs are a leading indicator of Investigation as Competiton, and hence worse than no evidence at all.
(*This kind of amplified mis-understanding is the situation with the nothing-burger Dedmon text messages- they are not "confessions", they are genuinely innocent people, the girls at any rate, who don't understand they have been targeted by people willing to go to any lengths to convince the public of someone's guilt, true or not, as opposed to determining the truth of their guilt.
Investigation as Competiton.)
 
Yes, that is precisely the danger it represents, and the reason its presence is a red flag in an investigation.

If you are hooked up to the (older) machines, nervous, and it starts swinging wildly when you are asked a shocking question, any reasonably bright person understands the machine is indicating a physiological reaction that is associated with deception. But when they say they "failed", they are talking about "failing" to control autonominous nervous system functions, because, and it can't be said too often, correlation is not causation*.

Further, the unexamined underlying philosophy behind it's deployment is huge problem. In polygraph-land, crimes aren't puzzles or riddles to be solved, but competitions where the investigator "wins" when everyone perceives them to have "caught the bad guy." While correlation is still not causation, polygraphs appear more than chance would indicate in stories about coerced false confessions. Coerced false confessions are the inevitable consequences of Investigation as Completion.
And polygraphs are a leading indicator of Investigation as Competiton, and hence worse than no evidence at all.
(*This kind of amplified mis-understanding is the situation with the nothing-burger Dedmon text messages- they are not "confessions", they are genuinely innocent people, the girls at any rate, who don't understand they have been targeted by people willing to go to any lengths to convince the public of someone's guilt, true or not, as opposed to determining the truth of their guilt.
Investigation as Competiton.)
Great breakdown! It reminds me of psychics in investigations.
 
Yes, that is precisely the danger it represents, and the reason its presence is a red flag in an investigation.

If you are hooked up to the (older) machines, nervous, and it starts swinging wildly when you are asked a shocking question, any reasonably bright person understands the machine is indicating a physiological reaction that is associated with deception. But when they say they "failed", they are talking about "failing" to control autonominous nervous system functions, because, and it can't be said too often, correlation is not causation*.

Further, the unexamined underlying philosophy behind it's deployment is huge problem. In polygraph-land, crimes aren't puzzles or riddles to be solved, but competitions where the investigator "wins" when everyone perceives them to have "caught the bad guy." While correlation is still not causation, polygraphs appear more than chance would indicate in stories about coerced false confessions. Coerced false confessions are the inevitable consequences of Investigation as Completion.
And polygraphs are a leading indicator of Investigation as Competiton, and hence worse than no evidence at all.
(*This kind of amplified mis-understanding is the situation with the nothing-burger Dedmon text messages- they are not "confessions", they are genuinely innocent people, the girls at any rate, who don't understand they have been targeted by people willing to go to any lengths to convince the public of someone's guilt, true or not, as opposed to determining the truth of their guilt.
Investigation as Competiton.)

Polygraphs are a pet peeve of mine as well, would love to see them outlawed in some capacity.

They measure physical indicators of, I'm not sure if it's stress or anxiety or just emotion in general, but that is all they measure. They are particularly ineffective when investigating high profile crimes like kidnapping and murder, because the perpetrator is often highly narcissistic at best and an emotionless psychopath at worst, and they are often able to instinctively lie without feeling emotion.

Meanwhile, an innocent person (or victim even) can, often, easily be made to feel emotional in a context where they feel accused of such a crime.

There are likely instances where polygraphs can be insightful, but even then, I am not sure they are more effective than manually observing body language and other cues. There are likely instances where polygraphs can be effectively used as a interrogation tactic. But today criminals are more educated than in the past, and that would generally involve the use of intimidation and deception, which IMO is ideal to avoid where it isn't necessary to find good answers.

The problem to me is, I still see detectives referring to polygraphs like they are meaningful indications of guilt or innocence, and real or not I get the sense that investigators are often misled by polygraph results. And the public is often misled even where detectives (and suspects) are not. And the kicker is, conducting polygraph tests costs taxpayers money that could instead be put towards forensic testing. In 2018, it was estimated that polygraph testing was a $2 billion industry, and that each polygraph conducted cost an average of $700 (per Wired magazine per Wikipedia).
 
Regarding the photograph of a little girl found in the Turner’s Upholstery shed, that’s a mystery within a mystery. I want to know that that little girl is okay. How busy could this upholstery business have been? Not very IMO. Did the Turner’s keep records of their clients? Did they ask every single client if they knew who the little girl was in the photo?
 


 



"Records suggest the land was purchased by the current owner in 2004 from Roy Lee Dedmon and his wife Connie."
 
"Records suggest the land was purchased by the current owner in 2004 from Roy Lee Dedmon and his wife Connie."
Yeah, the current owner has nothing to do with it, has consented to the searches. A good egg, especially as they know LE are going to be digging up the place.

If there was possibly a dead kid buried in my yard, I'd tell them to bring on the excavator, too. Make as much of a mess as you like, just do your best to find her.

MOO
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
651
Total visitors
821

Forum statistics

Threads
625,583
Messages
18,506,581
Members
240,818
Latest member
wilson.emily3646
Back
Top