GUILTY NC - PFC Kelli Bordeaux, 23, Fayetteville, 14 April 2012 - #10

[Tonto]

Madeleine,
The problem I have with NOT believing NH's story is that it is so utterly random that it is perfectly plausible. Most impulsive, violent criminals who try to cover up crimes either have such a grandiose, ridiculous narrative that it cannot possibly be believed, or a story so 'hypervigilantly' detailed and paranoid that it falls apart easily upon further examination.

Of course, I am not saying that he is not lying. I am just saying that if he is, he is so used to it that he finds a way to believe the story himself. If this is the case, he very well may be responsible for a lot more 'stuff' in the area, if you know what I'm saying.

 

[Allusonz]

Good question about how he got along. My guess is, doing odd jobs for FB, he also ate their food and drank their soda/beer/etc...I wouldn't be surprised if he also did odd jobs that weren't steady.

It is as well possible that he may of qualified for some federal/state funding, which if supplemented doing odd jobs, still would not be alot but would of been better than nothing.

 

[Allusonz]

Madeleine,
The problem I have with NOT believing NH's story is that it is so utterly random that it is perfectly plausible. Most impulsive, violent criminals who try to cover up crimes either have such a grandiose, ridiculous narrative that it cannot possibly be believed, or a story so 'hypervigilantly' detailed and paranoid that it falls apart easily upon further examination.

Of course, I am not saying that he is not lying. I am just saying that if he is, he is so used to it that he finds a way to believe the story himself. If this is the case, he very well may be responsible for a lot more 'stuff' in the area, if you know what I'm saying.

I have to agree here.

I don't believe many would of thought in the Samantha Koenig case that we would be at the end of day talking about a serial killer.

When I look back through various threads, it gives me pause when I see various players, whether that is the parents, or others already judged by many to be guilty. Yet rarely do I see the same individuals apologize to those that were accused yet not guilty. They simply move on to aother case, and repeat.

 

[Madeleine74]

Madeleine,
The problem I have with NOT believing NH's story is that it is so utterly random that it is perfectly plausible. Most impulsive, violent criminals who try to cover up crimes either have such a grandiose, ridiculous narrative that it cannot possibly be believed, or a story so 'hypervigilantly' detailed and paranoid that it falls apart easily upon further examination.

My impression of NH's story is that it was on the detailed side--i.e. he gave details that no one had asked. His story isn't utterly random at all. We know KB was in his car. Nick can't pretend KB was never in his car and that they didn't leave FB's together and that he didn't drive her away from the bar. So he's stuck with that bit of known information. We know KB sent at least one text message from the car. We know she disappeared. We also know that LE believes she never made it back to her apartment. NH says no one else was around her/bothering her. And, we know a text message was sent by someone with a vested interest in making people believe that KB did get home safely. Isn't it kind of convenient that the story has a perfectly fine KB getting out of NH's car and never being seen again. No one heard or saw her again. No reports of screams, nothing.

Someone looking to put blame on NH wouldn't have sent a txt message on KB's phone to try and paint that scenario (home safely). You have to consider: who would benefit if people believed KB made it home safely? Who would want to make it look like nothing happened to KB as a result of Nick driving her home, go to the trouble of sending a txt message from KB's phone that she got home safely, and therefore give Nick an 'out'?

Some random killer? Nope

Some random guy from the bar? Nope

Nick himself? Ayup.

 

[Madeleine74]

I have to agree here.

I don't believe many would of thought in the Samantha Koenig case that we would be at the end of day talking about a serial killer.

When I look back through various threads, it gives me pause when I see various players, whether that is the parents, or others already judged by many to be guilty. Yet rarely do I see the same individuals apologize to those that were accused yet not guilty. They simply move on to aother case, and repeat.

First of all, I don't know if NH is guilty. LE believes he is involved. KB's family believes he is involved (or is solely responsible). It's possible to discuss someone who was known to be with the victim as being an (obvious) POI without accusing them of a murder. LE has come out and publicly stated they believe NH at the very least knows more. If they are saying this it's because they have reason to believe this and since they know infinitely more than we do, I am taking what they say at face value and trusting their words.

Koenig was murdered by the last person she was with--and there was ample evidence that this guy came to her coffee stand specifically for her. His identity was unknown until the point he was discovered, but they knew some things from the get-go. That he turned out to be a serial killer is totally besides the point. From day 1 LE knew she was abducted, knew it was by a man, knew it was from that coffee stand, and information came out quickly that she had also been approached by this man and was afraid of him.

And once again, the last known person KB was with was Nick Holbert, who just happens to be a RSO. In NH's car KB sent a txt message that indicated all was not well. Something has made him the prime suspect in LE's eyes.

Should we pretend otherwise?

 

[Xavier]

[QUOTE=Tonto;8632760]Madeleine,
The problem I have with NOT believing NH's story is that it is so utterly random that it is perfectly plausible. Most impulsive, violent criminals who try to cover up crimes either have such a grandiose, ridiculous narrative that it cannot possibly be believed, or a story so 'hypervigilantly' detailed and paranoid that it falls apart easily upon further examination.

Of course, I am not saying that he is not lying. I am just saying that if he is, he is so used to it that he finds a way to believe the story himself. If this is the case, he very well may be responsible for a lot more 'stuff' in the area, if you know what I'm saying.[/QUOTE]

[B]I agree with both of you

Going to the timeline of statements

Nick said he left the bar around 1230-1am

There were a few cell phones pings coming from Kelli's cell phone while they were driving and then mor epings some distance from Froggys off Ramsey St & I 295. It was identified as the Dept of Transporation Engineering Bldg

Then , if I read correctly, the last ping/text came around Kelli's King's Grant Meadowbrook apt complex at 124am

So if Nick abducted/murdered Kelli it could've been at the DOT Bldg

LE said they searched Nick's car, tent and found nothing that we've heard yet

He would've had to really hustle to commit the crime and possibly place Kelli's body in his trunk ...but then you'd think forensics would've discovered DNA there...and still drive to the apt complex within maybe 45 minutes?

Or Nick drove back to the DOT Bldg after faking the last cellphone text and took Kelli somewhere else to dispose of her


No weapon, No DNA, No crime scene, No Kelli...pretty convenient for a seasoned drifter[/B]

 

[Madeleine74]

LE hasn't said anything in regards to what and where all they've searched and hasn't said anything about what they found. And they generally don't. Evidence comes out during a trial.

And yes, a body can be in a trunk for transport and there can be no DNA evidence or any evidence found. A murder case in my town occurred in which that happened. Husband strangled wife, wife's body was put in trunk, but no evidence was found in the trunk, his usually messy trunk was cleaned out and thoroughly vacuumed, which was in contrast to the condition of the passenger area of the car. He got caught based on his many lies and a google search of the body dump site that was found on his work computer, dated the day before his wife went missing.

 

[Tonto]

Someone looking to put blame on NH wouldn't have sent a txt message on KB's phone to try and paint that scenario (home safely). You have to consider: who would benefit if people believed KB made it home safely? Who would want to make it look like nothing happened to KB as a result of Nick driving her home, go to the trouble of sending a txt message from KB's phone that she got home safely, and therefore give Nick an 'out'?

Some random killer? Nope

Some random guy from the bar? Nope

Nick himself? Ayup.

Except the text message could have actually been from Kelli.

 

[Madeleine74]

Neither LE or KB's family believe she ever made it home that night. There was no evidence to suggest she did. She was not attacked in her apartment and nothing was askew. Her cell phone was missing, along with KB. The text message was sent 30-60 min after she would have gotten home if she would have arrived safely.

 

[VOH910]

Not to get into a political topic, but I'd imagine in NC like here in Ohio qualifying for govt aid, food stamps, health care, etc, depends on your income level, not whether you're an able bodied young adult. Just my opinion though

The govt IMO does not do a wekkly or monthly job verification if one's looking for work, etc...that's why the welfare programs have bloated out like a beached whale..

You qualify for food stamps, medicare, etc based on your income level per family size. If you qualify for unemployment, you report to the UE office monthly and bring proof that you have applied for at least 2 jobs a week, every week. You have to have previously had a job that was on the books for a specified period of time within a specific time range in order to collect unemployment. (You had to have paid into it to collect from it.) I'm not sure if convictions go against eligibility for government assistance.

I do not believe Nick to have been on any government assistance. He wasn't walking around with any decent chunk of change that a homeless person without any fiscal obligations would have if he was receiving government assistance; instead he always appear to "get by," having just enough cash for the "little pleasures in life" such as cigarettes.

I don't think he really ate much. I do remember bringing some food there one night and I wasn't going to finish it. He was staring at the food the whole time I ate it. When I was stuffed I offered it to him and he ate it like he hadn't eaten in days. I don't think many of us realize what a person can go without because we have it so often.

I'm sure he showered somewhere, but where, who knows? Like I said he never appeared dirty or unkept. In other words, his clothes didn't look dirty or worn. An odor didn't radiate from him. He didn't look greasy.

His car was extremely messy, but I wouldn't have thought he lived in it, because I have seen some of my friends' cars. (We cleaned the one one day and literally pulled out 2 large trash bags of garbage, and my buddy's not homeless - just not real clean (understatement).) It's all about perspective I guess.

 

[OldSteve]

Because NH is so obvious a suspect, I still wonder if someone else at the bar that night might have taken advantage of that, especially if they knew about NH's near homeless existence, or his RSO background.
NH would be the perfect fall-guy.

I'm still mulling around what I see back thread a bit...
okay, I'm a frustrated crime story writer ...
So the question has been raised, why would the perp in my story send a text message saying she's made home safely?
Two reasons, first as been stated, she might actually have before my perp strikes... or the perp might actually have sent it if he took her before she arrived home since it leaves LE without a crime scene.
The perp knows NH didn't do it, and therefore knows his car is not the crime scene - so confusion needed to actually draw attention away from NH's car since is clean (crime scene wise)... true,Kelli's apt. is also clean, but now there's confusion... and thus, we are where we are today - NH at the top of the list with LE waiting/hoping he will say something to a fellow prisoner, and meanwhile no arrest, case going cold...

 

[Madeleine74]

Why would a random perp want to take more steps than is necessary? And why would a random perp want to take the heat off of NH? If you think this through, it makes no sense for anyone else to go to the trouble of looking at KB's text history, find out she communicated with a friend that she was getting a ride home, and this attacker thought he should reply that KB got home safely. It defies common sense and logic. Since a random perp who wasn't known to be with KB wouldn't be suspected anyway, why would this guy care? (he wouldn't).

I'm not into writing fictional tales and I don't like to look at cases based on imagination and speculation, if I can help it. If KB didn't send that text herself (and KB's family has said she didn't), then it was done by the perp. A perp sending that message has a vested interest in people believing KB was not a victim of the last known person KB was with, and that was NH. Who is this perp who cares about NH to the extent he wants and needs to take these extra steps to use KB's phone?

Logic says the person who is most interested in NH's well-being is... NH himself.

 

[OldSteve]

Why would a random perp want to take more steps than is necessary? And why would a random perp want to take the heat off of NH? If you think this through, it makes no sense for anyone else to go to the trouble of looking at KB's text history, find out she communicated with a friend that she was getting a ride home, and this attacker thought he should reply that KB got home safely. It defies common sense and logic. Since a random perp who wasn't known to be with KB wouldn't be suspected anyway, why would this guy care? (he wouldn't).

I'm not into writing fictional tales and I don't like to look at cases based on imagination and speculation, if I can help it. If KB didn't send that text herself (and KB's family has said she didn't), then it was done by the perp. A perp sending that message has a vested interest in people believing KB was not a victim of the last known person KB was with, and that was NH. Who is this perp who cares about NH to the extent he wants and needs to take these extra steps to use KB's phone?

Logic says the person who is most interested in NH's well-being is... NH himself.

BBM
Yet, it's thru out-of-the-box, or even off-the-wall, if you like, speculation that I (and others) get others to put forth some really sound logic. Consider it a way of bumping this thread for Kelli.

 

[reedus23]

What I am curious about is what information LE has that leads them to believe NH knows more than he is telling. The fact they have some evidence that indicates NH is not being forthcoming, it is pretty damning of NH that he wouldn't tell everything he knows.

 

[Madeleine74]

What I am curious about is what information LE has that leads them to believe NH knows more than he is telling. The fact they have some evidence that indicates NH is not being forthcoming, it is pretty damning of NH that he wouldn't tell everything he knows.

That is a very good question! Considering that investigators are usually very tight-lipped about their cases, them opening up about this is indeed interesting. Something triggered this. That's as close as I've recently seen an LE agency say they believe someone is a suspect without actually saying they're a suspect.

 

[phantomthought]

'[B]I agree with both of you

Going to the timeline of statements

Nick said he left the bar around 1230-1am

There were a few cell phones pings coming from Kelli's cell phone while they were driving and then mor epings some distance from Froggys off Ramsey St & I 295. It was identified as the Dept of Transporation Engineering Bldg

Then , if I read correctly, the last ping/text came around Kelli's King's Grant Meadowbrook apt complex at 124am

So if Nick abducted/murdered Kelli it could've been at the DOT Bldg

LE said they searched Nick's car, tent and found nothing that we've heard yet

He would've had to really hustle to commit the crime and possibly place Kelli's body in his trunk ...but then you'd think forensics would've discovered DNA there...and still drive to the apt complex within maybe 45 minutes?

Or Nick drove back to the DOT Bldg after faking the last cellphone text and took Kelli somewhere else to dispose of her


No weapon, No DNA, No crime scene, No Kelli...pretty convenient for a seasoned drifter[/B][/QUOTE]
In the interviews I have seen NH claims to have left the bar between 1a.m. and 1:30.Not 12:30 to 1a.m.Yet every time LE has come out with an specific time for something whether it be looking for a witness or when she was actually attacked it is always before 1A.M. The only text message I have heard the det. say he actually believes she sent was the one about who she was with.He also said she sent this message after leaving the bar.Which would mean she would have had to have left the bar,gotten in a position were she felt the need to send this message and sent it before she was attacked which the police have reason to believe happened as early as 12:46 That puts you pretty close to the reason why they are asking the public's help in finding someone who saw something on Ramsey St. at 12 o'clock and not asking the public's help in finding someone who saw something at the time and place NH claims to have dropped her off.

 

[Tonto]

I'm not into writing fictional tales and I don't like to look at cases based on imagination and speculation, if I can help it. If KB didn't send that text herself (and KB's family has said she didn't), then it was done by the perp.

KBs family doesn't believe she sent the text. You don't believe that she sent the text. I get that. However, that doesn't mean that she didn't send the text. There is absolutely zero evidence that she didn't send the text. Therefore, despite your assertion to the contrary, this makes your storyline imaginative and speculative. There's nothing wrong with your strong belief under the circumstances - it is quite rational after all, but call it what it is. Don't chastise others for also rationally speculating from other angles and then running with it. It's no different than what you are doing.

A perp sending that message has a vested interest in people believing KB was not a victim of the last known person KB was with, and that was NH. Who is this perp who cares about NH to the extent he wants and needs to take these extra steps to use KB's phone?

Logic says the person who is most interested in NH's well-being is... NH himself.

Logic is a good tool and a great asset to those who possess it. However, you must remember that your logic is based on unverifiable assumptions just like everyone else. It is an unverifiable assumption that Kelli did not send that text.

 

[sundrop]

Fayetteville police put cold cases online

http://www.wral.com/fayetteville-police-put-cold-cases-online/11877696/

 

[Madeleine74]

KBs family doesn't believe she sent the text. You don't believe that she sent the text. I get that. However, that doesn't mean that she didn't send the text. There is absolutely zero evidence that she didn't send the text. Therefore, despite your assertion to the contrary, this makes your storyline imaginative and speculative.

False. I said LE and KB's family don't believe she sent the text. I never said what I believe or don't believe. My beliefs don't matter because I don't know the victim, the witnesses, or what information the investigators have.

Logic is a good tool and a great asset to those who possess it. However, you must remember that your logic is based on unverifiable assumptions just like everyone else. It is an unverifiable assumption that Kelli did not send that text.

Ah, but I never said who sent the text. And I wouldn't make such a pronouncement because I wasn't there and surely I don't know. The only thing I've posted is what LE and KB's family believe.

- If Kelli sent the text, the timing of which would be somewhere between 30 min or so after she would have gotten home, then where was Kelli abducted and when? Her apartment was allegedly in the same state she left it, with allegedly no signs of a struggle.

- If Kelli did not send the text, that means someone else did and they did it for a reason. Why would it be important to make others believe Kelli made it home safely after getting a ride home from FroggyBottoms?

 

[lowes123]

AT&T, not the best service in Fayetteville in certain areas, therefore, I think we need to take that in to account. If the text was sent at 12, (times only an example), she may not have bars until 1215, hence the time stamp difference. The person who she was texting was a friend in Florida, , maybe he was like hey let me know when you get home. If what NH says is true, he drops her off, maybe she texts and is walking. Maybe NH goes back after her, maybe she encounters someone else. I think it is likely NH is the culprit, but just as likely it is someone else. The fact that it has now been 8 months, and NH has been in jail on other charges and not been charged with anything else, that says a lot to me. From what I have read and seen in the media, it seems like NH was a likely suspect in the beginning, but maybe not so much anymore. Time will tell.