GUILTY NC - PFC Kelli Bordeaux, 23, Fayetteville, 14 April 2012 - #8

[Eileen730]

Still, outside of the apartment and outside of Froggy's are so close together. If Kelli made it out of NH's car, but not as far as her building - that still leaves room for another abductor and may not have affected the cell pings.

LE knows the timing of the texts and LE knows NH's story - why haven't they charged him if something isn't matching up? If something happened to Kelli earlier than 1:20, and NH knew about the text because he sent it, then why would he push the time up that he dropped her off? He could have done something to Kelli between 12 and 1, then went on to tell the rest of the story (making it up). Still, the last ping and the time he says he dropped her off would have to match up pretty closely.

-What time did Kelli's phone ping for the last time?
-How can LE be certain it pinged from Froggy's, since Kelli's apt. location can access the same tower?
-what have the patrons from Froggy's told LE as far as the time they believe Kelli and Nick left the bar together?
Does that match up to the 1:00AM timeframe NH has claimed? (why did LE put out a plea for info focusing on a time an hour earlier?) Do some patrons recall Nick returning to the bar after he claims to have dropped Kelli off?
-What time was the final text sent in relation to the final ping? Same time? Or was the text sent first and the final ping not until much later?

Did anybody hear any screams or anything at all unusual around Froggy's or around Kelli's apartment? None reported that I know of. Was she dragged into a car and driven away? Again, what time was final ping?

If the barrels were lit on Friday night at Froggy's, weren't patrons using the space back there to smoke? If so, weren't people going in and out? If not, why were the barrels lit?

Anyone kow if her husband has a chopper?

 

[Eileen730]

People, please read the posts considering the full content. When I said Nick/stupid it was in combination with a theory that his story is not well thought out and he's 'stupid' if he thinks it's believable if it's not true - does that make sense? I'm using 'stupid' as in stupid is as stupid does. Do you ever say, 'That was dumb', about yourself? I do, when I do careless things - that doesn't mean I think I'm dumb overall at all times. But if I was trying to cover my arse, I'd brush off the cookie crumbs from my face before insisting I didn't eat the cookies.

Let's say Nick did something to Kelli way out back behind Froggy's because he's a sadistic rapist or couldn't take no for an answer so he ended up killing her. Why would he then say that he drove her home and name a specific time? Why not just say, Kelli insisted on walking home? No one claims to have seen them actually enter his car for the ride home.

Im not so sure there is any evidence Kelly was anywhere but INSIDE that bar and the parkinglot!
I dont think they found anythig that placed her out back .
JMO

 

[mamamia54]

People, please read the posts considering the full content. When I said Nick/stupid it was in combination with a theory that his story is not well thought out and he's 'stupid' if he thinks it's believable if it's not true - does that make sense? I'm using 'stupid' as in stupid is as stupid does. Do you ever say, 'That was dumb', about yourself? I do, when I do careless things - that doesn't mean I think I'm dumb overall at all times. But if I was trying to cover my arse, I'd brush off the cookie crumbs from my face before insisting I didn't eat the cookies.

Let's say Nick did something to Kelli way out back behind Froggy's because he's a sadistic rapist or couldn't take no for an answer so he ended up killing her. Why would he then say that he drove her home and name a specific time? Why not just say, Kelli insisted on walking home? No one claims to have seen them actually enter his car for the ride home.

That's exactly what I keep saying. He's not the brightest bulb in the pack but to do anything to her back there behind the bar where he lives is just beyond stupid. Plus, they would have a crime scene there behind the bar. Why would he place himself even with her really, apparently no one saw her enter his car and leaving the bar lot. Just not making sense.

 

[Melly53]

People, please read the posts considering the full content. When I said Nick/stupid it was in combination with a theory that his story is not well thought out and he's 'stupid' if he thinks it's believable if it's not true - does that make sense? I'm using 'stupid' as in stupid is as stupid does. Do you ever say, 'That was dumb', about yourself? I do, when I do careless things - that doesn't mean I think I'm dumb overall at all times. But if I was trying to cover my arse, I'd brush off the cookie crumbs from my face before insisting I didn't eat the cookies.

Let's say Nick did something to Kelli way out back behind Froggy's because he's a sadistic rapist or couldn't take no for an answer so he ended up killing her. Why would he then say that he drove her home and name a specific time? Why not just say, Kelli insisted on walking home? No one claims to have seen them actually enter his car for the ride home.

I look at what he said in his interviews somewhat differently. It has bothered me since the beginning that Nick offered "too many" details during his interview to suit my tastes. Why not just say he met her a couple of weeks ago at the bar instead of going into the story about putting his quarters up and that she was with not just any friend, but a MALE friend. Also instead of the supposed explanation about what happened when he dropped her off, why not just say he dropped her off at the entrance to her apartments, period. Or the, I didn't know she as married until the police told him yet he admitted to asking her if she was single and getting an "it's complicated" answer. Are we seriously supposed to believe that he did not ask what that meant??? Because of how many of these "extra" details I heard out of him, it started sounding more like excuses or attempts at deflection instead of the unaltered truth coming out. After all he was not talking to LE, just a news reporter. That seemed unusual to me and set off red flags. IMO

 

[Woe.be.gone]

But his crime was commited whe he was also cosidered a child!

How often does this occur and could it be the raging testosterone of a 16 yr old and it wouldnt have mattered to him if the victim was 5 or 15 or 25?

Also id like to know when a woman goes missing are they most likely to be found if the crime was done by a stranger or a loved one? Ayone know?

For some reason i think when a stranger murders them the stranger leaves them in a shallow grave or in a dump or trash site where loved ones take the time to hide the bodies ad the crime!

I dont know!

If Nick were a 25 when he hurt the child and now was 31 when we are thinking about his role in Kelli's disappearance, I wouldn't be cutting him half the slack I'm trying to now. Still, what he did was sick, even for a 16 yo.
But I still don't want him blamed for whatever has happened to Kelli if he didn't do it. There are a couple other possible scenarios to outrule. And NH may have unwittingly provided the perfect framework for a setup if Kelli was texting an up-to-date account of her moves that night. Like I said before, I just hope LE can outrule the possibility that somebody may have been waiting in the wings for her to arrive home.

I have seen cases where LE zeros in on someone and seems to make the evidence fit so they can convict and chalk that case up as one that's been solved. It does happen. When it does, the real perp goes free.

 

[writer7]

I've been thinking about the 'midnight' thing...

I'm wondering if the cops looking for more information around midnight isn't because of tips that have come in that they just need to check out. For instance, if (hypothetically) a few people reported seeing a shady-looking character acting strangely near Kelli's apartment at midnight, it would be nice to question Mr Shady himself. Maybe this hypothetical Mr Shady has an iron-clad alibi for the time Kelli did go missing. Then those tips could be cleared.

I don't think it necessarily changes the timeline that the cops are interested in that period of time.

The pings being confusing doesn't seem to hold up, knowing that there are two towers so close by, with her residence being closer to one of them. I thought the pings might not be so helpful at first, but that happens more often in cases where there aren't so many towers right there. Knowing she was texting and had a very modern phone, etc, just makes it more likely that the ping info is more targeted than in some other cases, imho.

Police haven't said that there were no pings by her apartment, so that is interesting. Her last ping being in one spot doesn't tell about any in-between pings.

OTOH, her apartment was released so quickly to the family, and it is not the center of the search radius. So much has focused closer to the bar. And the last text said she was home, so it would be weird to have pings closer to the bar after that. But it may still be possible that Nick did take her home, according to the info we have, I think. I don't think it's likely, but I think it is possible.

 

[mamamia54]

I look at what he said in his interviews somewhat differently. It has bothered me since the beginning that Nick offered "too many" details during his interview to suit my tastes. Why not just say he met her a couple of weeks ago at the bar instead of going into the story about putting his quarters up and that she was with not just any friend, but a MALE friend. Also instead of the supposed explanation about what happened when he dropped her off, why not just say he dropped her off at the entrance to her apartments, period. Or the, I didn't know she as married until the police told him yet he admitted to asking her if she was single and getting an "it's complicated" answer. Are we seriously supposed to believe that he did not ask what that meant??? Because of how many of these "extra" details I heard out of him, it started sounding more like excuses or attempts at deflection instead of the unaltered truth coming out. After all he was not talking to LE, just a news reporter. That seemed unusual to me and set off red flags. IMO

I'm tellin ya, this guy rattled on like his tongue was fitted with a phonograph needle. I don't think he was lying. Why say that he left her off anywhere BUT her apartment? Wouldn't he want to make cetain that knowing she was missing that he made da.. sure she got home, not left her off at the end of the block?

 

[writer7]

That's exactly what I keep saying. He's not the brightest bulb in the pack but to do anything to her back there behind the bar where he lives is just beyond stupid. Plus, they would have a crime scene there behind the bar. Why would he place himself even with her really, apparently no one saw her enter his car and leaving the bar lot. Just not making sense.

I'd think the woods would be much better than inside with carpet and real walls or car doors. With all of the organic material around, it would be very hard to find the kinds of tiny blood spatters and similar that tip off police about many crimes. You could take a big bucket of water and wash so much away, even!

And he had to explain what happened after they were seen leaving together for him to take her home. Folks know he was gone for at least a little while.

No, I think his story sounds like a story he would tell if he did do it. Just mho

 

[Melly53]

I think the police have very specific reasons for searching the areas they are searching which we are not privy too.

http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2012/04/26/1173824?sac=fo.local

"After about a week of investigative efforts, with all of the information and evidence - physical and testimonial - it brought us back to this area,'' said Jeff Locklear, a detective with the Police Department. "And there are some other reasons.''
He did not elaborate.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

I look at what he said in his interviews somewhat differently. It has bothered me since the beginning that Nick offered "too many" details during his interview to suit my tastes. Why not just say he met her a couple of weeks ago at the bar instead of going into the story about putting his quarters up and that she was with not just any friend, but a MALE friend. Also instead of the supposed explanation about what happened when he dropped her off, why not just say he dropped her off at the entrance to her apartments, period. Or the, I didn't know she as married until the police told him yet he admitted to asking her if she was single and getting an "it's complicated" answer. Are we seriously supposed to believe that he did not ask what that meant??? Because of how many of these "extra" details I heard out of him, it started sounding more like excuses or attempts at deflection instead of the unaltered truth coming out. After all he was not talking to LE, just a news reporter. That seemed unusual to me and set off red flags. IMO

On the other hand, if I were guilty, I'd not want to say anything to reporters. His behavior can be taken two ways. If he wasn't the one who hurt her, he's not afraid and just offering up his account of things as in he has nothing to hide. That's why I want to know (and I assume LE does to) if his account of things add up to what the patrons say, what the pings say, what the timeline proves out to be, etc. We know they have some of that information.

Nick didn't have to talk to the media, so why would he? He could be a pathological liar for all I know. I mean he did look into a camera when asked to do so and say, 'If I killed Kelli, then I deserve to die." So if he did, maybe he will. Still, what did he do with her body? VOH said that NH showed up at the bar on Saturday (don't think a time was given) so whatever he did, if he did it, he either did it by then or was taking a break from his evil deeds.

 

[writer7]

I'm tellin ya, this guy rattled on like his tongue was fitted with a phonograph needle. I don't think he was lying. Why say that he left her off anywhere BUT her apartment? Wouldn't he want to make cetain that knowing she was missing that he made da.. sure she got home, not left her off at the end of the block?

He didn't know whether neighbors were outside, or even if someone was at her place at the time he said he dropped her off. What if someone was walking the dog or looking out the window?

And how could the Boogeyman grab her with nobody seeing it? Because he dropped her off outside of the complex by trees, naturally You know he had to have known that that street was becoming infamous for those rapes. I think he thought it was a very clever story.

 

[Melly53]

I'm tellin ya, this guy rattled on like his tongue was fitted with a phonograph needle. I don't think he was lying. Why say that he left her off anywhere BUT her apartment? Wouldn't he want to make cetain that knowing she was missing that he made da.. sure she got home, not left her off at the end of the block?

Because to say he took her all the way to her apartment and/or saw that she was safely inside, leaves much less doubt that SODDI. (for the newbe's on the board that may not be familiar with our lingo, that means "some other dude did it") Seems more like he was trying to deflect the blame IMO!

 

[mamamia54]

Because to say he took her all the way to her apartment and/or saw that she was safely inside, leaves much less doubt that SODDI. (for the newbe's on the board that may not be familiar with our lingo, that means "some other dude did it") Seems more like he was trying to deflect the blame IMO!

Naw, he's not that bright. I just don't give him that much credit.

 

[StrayKat]

VOH... please do tell, the 4 or 5 times that you estimated seeing her at the bar did she arrive alone?

How many times did you see her in the company of her friend from Florida?
Did he go to the bar that last night?

Thank you

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Anyone kow if her husband has a chopper?

I don't, but someone would know. No one is willing to offer up answers to simple questions. He said, she said stuff going on about the state of their marriage, who the texts were sent to, etc. Why so secret about that? Why so secret about where Kelli's car was/is? How does the truth compromise the investigation?

The only reason I know of is to trip peeps up when LE is questioning them - they can match up their story to the evidence or something like that. Heck, I don't know anything but this is so frustrating!!!!!!!!

 

[Melly53]

On the other hand, if I were guilty, I'd not want to say anything to reporters. His behavior can be taken two ways. If he wasn't the one who hurt her, he's not afraid and just offering up his account of things as in he has nothing to hide. That's why I want to know (and I assume LE does to) if his account of things add up to what the patrons say, what the pings say, what the timeline proves out to be, etc. We know they have some of that information.

Nick didn't have to talk to the media, so why would he? He could be a pathological liar for all I know. I mean he did look into a camera when asked to do so and say, 'If I killed Kelli, then I deserve to die." So if he did, maybe he will. Still, what did he do with her body? VOH said that NH showed up at the bar on Saturday (don't think a time was given) so whatever he did, if he did it, he either did it by then or was taking a break from his evil deeds.

And it is pretty routine for LE to polgraph everyone directly associated to an investigation. So why didn't they offer Nick one? Or if they did why didn't he say he voluntarily took it and PASSED! Was he not offered one, did he take one and fail it or did he just refuse to take one? Also we have no one's word but Nick's that he actually did the looking into the camera thing!

You are right that Nick did not HAVE to talk to the media which is the choice most people, even innocent people make in an investigation. With no known way to contact him, Nick would almost had to have contacted the media himself to set up those interviews and to me that is not the way most innocent people behave. He reminds me of Scott Peterson, Drew Peterson, Susan Smith and a host of others who were guilty but tried to use the media to convince people that they were completely innocent of anything!!

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Im not so sure there is any evidence Kelly was anywhere but INSIDE that bar and the parkinglot!
I dont think they found anythig that placed her out back .
JMO

Eileen, I said 'if'. I know, as far as we know there is no evidence of a struggle or a reason that would cause a person to die and disappear.
Except, the stench that was reported behind the bar. The stench has not been confirmed or denied by LE. A reporter DID say that the stench didn't amount to anything but that may be what LE told the reporter as in 'none of your business'.

Why would someone report a stench if one wasn't present? So that LE could happen upon some planted sneakers?
Afterall, LE had already been out to Froggy's earlier that day. Didn't LE search and sniff at that time? wtf?

 

[Melly53]

Naw, he's not that bright. I just don't give him that much credit.

Or perhaps he just learned something from his first time getting cause, like in make LE think that it was possible that SODDI.

 

[mamamia54]

Eileen, I said 'if'. I know, as far as we know there is no evidence of a struggle or a reason that would cause a person to die and disappear.
Except, the stench that was reported behind the bar. The stench has not been confirmed or denied by LE. A reporter DID say that the stench didn't amount to anything but that may be what LE told the reporter as in 'none of your business'.

Why would someone report a stench if one wasn't present? So that LE could happen upon some planted sneakers?
Afterall, LE had already been out to Froggy's earlier that day. Didn't LE search and sniff at that time? wtf?

Yep, the even if was a dead body, it wouldn't have a stench that soon.

 

[vibert]

there is almost always a stench behind bars. It comes from old, stale, soured beer