A few things.I did hear today, Lamar the company who does the big billboards around town is putting Cheryl’s billboard back up, it’s a start to get her face back out there...
I had a morning coffee with a old friend , a retired police officer, ( old cops are like old soldiers like me, we put are heart and soul into our careers, and it’s extremely difficult to step aside and say your retired, if they could let me put the uniform back on , I would do in a heartbeat, just like my friend )
We discussed this case, he is somewhat up to speed, and the biggest day we discussed was the day she went missing,.......
He had stated that the manner Cheryl’s SUV was found in the Kroger parking lot with her cell phone, ID , etc ... in the vehicle threw up big red flags....
He stated if this occurred he would have done some things different,like the following:
With her belongings found in her car, and the manner the car was located, he would have interviewed William, the oldest daughter, and Got a search warrant for Cheryls home, there cell phones, and other vehicles...
Second once the police found out about the so called “open marriage” , stories, and identified the other players, they would have been interviewed and homes searched if the need required, all would have been decided on their overall cooperation....
Would have visited hers and his employers, verified security cameras at the school, the store and the travel routes..
They won’t have waited 10 days to search the home....
He thinks if this case would have have been saturated from the first hour , crucial evidence would have been found, and just maybe solved by now....
So yes I do believe crucial mistakes were made in the beginning, and how this open marriage stuff was handled was a bad judgement call....
And yes the state he served in , the prime suspect would not be allowed to leave the jurisdiction, as long as he is a suspect in a murder case...
Remember he’s not a suspect in a robbery, theft, he is suspected of taking someone’s life, so taking a Florida vacation would be out of the picture,
So sad, too bad , he was the one who obtained that label....
First, and most important is the timeline of events as they happened as opposed to what law enforcement would only learn later due to what was collected via search warrants.
- Cheryl was not reported missing until just after midnight on Wednesday, October 3rd.
- Her car was not located until approximately 8 pm on Wednesday, October 3rd.
- Video footage from the businesses where her vehicle was parked was not obtained until Thursday, October 4th.
- The search of the residence was on Tuesday, October 9th - less than a week later, not 10 days later.
At the time she was reported missing there was no probable cause whatsoever that a crime had occurred or even an indication that one likely occurred. Even the fact that it was someone other than William that reported her missing wouldn't be something that would raise the alarm either since there was a divorce underway. There should be no expectation that the other spouse would give a flying fig where the other one was.
More so, the fact that Cheryl's car was located by her eldest daughter rather than by police - despite the fact it would be a vehicle that would stand out just sitting in a parking lot of closed businesses over night - means that law enforcement was not as concerned and thus not running an all-hands-on-deck investigation because there was zero indication that any crime had been committed. Even finding the things they did in her car isn't enough, in and of itself, to rise to the level of a crime must have been committed. She still could have met up with someone and went wherever she did of her own free will. But it would raise the level of concern that law enforcement would have. Suicide, where many important belongings are left in a vehicle is not uncommon at all. We see that enough around here.
It would not be until the next day when law enforcement viewed the video that was available that they would be able to build the beginnings of probable cause that something else was afoot. It is unknown when additional video showing the person dressed in black closer to the home was was located and reviewed but it seems very likely that it did not happen quickly. But as early as Thursday, October 4th law enforcement would have something to work with. They had her cell phone, though they would need to obtain a warrant to examine the contents. The video would be enough for that.
That it was apparent that things of value were still located in the car would give them reason to suspect that something other than robbery was afoot. Yet, it seems that the video was not sufficient to identify a suspect clearly and at that point. However, they would have started with William. The review of Cheryl's cell phone contents would have revealed quite a lot of what was going on with Cheryl and William and their relationship with each other and with others.
By Friday the 5th, I suspect that law enforcement began by interviewing the people that were connected to the relationships, in an effort to build more probable cause and obtain information that could be used to challenge an alibi, corroborate statements, etc. All of this takes time. Talking to employers, family, friends, co-workers and attempting to tighten the timeline and locations of various individuals all takes time. In addition to the fact that it would not be possible at that time to rule out that it could be a complete stranger that was responsible for what had transpired.
Even when the warrant was obtained for the home the allegation was of a crime committed was not homicide but kidnapping instead. There are zero legal requirements to prove any alleged facts to a judge when applying for a search warrant. You simply list your facts and the judge approves or not. So, clearly, at that time law enforcement was not able to establish facts that Cheryl was likely deceased.
Obtaining warrants to search the homes of other people would not have happened simply because Cheryl and William had been in relationships with them and certainly not two or three days into this. Law enforcement would certainly have interviewed them. They would certainly ask to obtain the contents of their phones. At some point, after the search of the home (no indication of how long), they would likely be able to build probable cause to obtain phone records and the contents of their phones.
The media has identified the man that Cheryl had been involved with, including where they met. This is not a mystery. Though the media has not named William's girlfriend, her existence has been reported numerous times. Again, no mystery. But only a few days into this, the presence of third parties involved in the marriage complicates things for law enforcement. Do either of these third parties have significant others? Exes? Friends in low places? Criminal histories?
It increases the number of people that could conceivably be responsible for whatever happened with Cheryl. All of them have to be run out and cleared. If not, any defense attorney can trot out alternative suspects and theories to cast reasonable doubt. It only takes one juror to be convinced of even the slightest reasonable doubt and you end up with no conviction. It isn't cheap to put on a murder trial. It is even worse if more than one juror thinks there is reasonable doubt. That increases the likelihood that a conviction will never be obtained.
For whatever reasons, prosecutors are pretty certain that actually charging William and taking this to trial will likely end in a mistrial or they would have charged him and we would already had the legal process moving forward. The biggest reason has to be the lack of a body but even recovering her body may not be enough. It is entirely possible that when Cheryl is recovered that not only will a cause of death not be able to be determined but even the manner of death would not be able to be determined. That would be the worst case scenario.
This is the kind of process that occurs. Law enforcement doesn't jump immediately to a criminal investigation when they receive a missing persons report. They can't get a judge to just approve warrants to do all kinds of intrusive searches based on nothing. Using hindsight, based entirely on information learned only through the process of obtaining evidence via warrants, to insist that law enforcement should have done this or that sooner is meaningless. Had all of the information that you use in your application of hindsight was available to law enforcement at the time Cheryl went missing then the warrants would have happened sooner. But it wasn't available and almost all of it came about due to the results of the warrants they did obtain, with pieces of information learned from one warrant being sufficient for probable cause to obtain the next one and so on.
Your law enforcement friend would have been able to accomplish exactly zero of what he said he would do.
As for William going wherever he pleases, whenever he pleases, he is free to do so. Law enforcement can't tell him to do anything or not to do anything. They have zero control over any of that. And no, they can't charge him as a fugitive from justice because he hasn't been charged with anything and therefore is not considered to be fleeing or hindering prosecution or anything. Calling someone a suspect does not give the government any new rights rights and certainly doesn't remove any individual rights.