GUILTY OR - Whitney Heichel, 21, Gresham, 16 Oct 2012 #5

[newsjunkie]

The slip of paper with these two names on it was a slip of paper recovered from Amanda's car during the search warrant execution that Friday and entered into the affidavit--it wasn't a report from the media who has the option of editing out what they consider not pertinent. If the "Sound Dept" paper had more than two names on it I believe Gleason would have stated that in the report as precisely as he recorded all the other details of what they found; he has to sign this affidavit at the end, swearing to its truth, at risk of perjuring himself if it's not true. (See the fine print on the last page.)

I believe the description of the paper and what was on it would be precise, as it was part of the LE report about what was found during search warrant execution, and would be used in trial. If they omitted names for some important reason in that description (eg. sensitive information), you'd see a redaction (black line) or blank space in the affidavit.

I understand why it was put in the affadavit as it holds the names of the suspect and the victim's husband. The police officer wouldn't know it is just congregational information the same as you didn't originally know.

Regardless of how many names are on it though, I am telling you that it has nothing to do with the murder of Whitney Heichel. It is for scheduling purposes to tell which brother is assigned which area of the sound department for any given meeting.

 

[newsjunkie]

If you missed it I did too. IIRC the original reports were that JH's cell was tossed in one place and WH's in another, all well before the SUV was left at Walmart. Then later we found out that "JH's" cell was previously stolen from CH. Still only two phones though.

I'm also confused by another rumor about AH supposedly cancelling JH's phone service at 7am. Why would she do that if she hadn't heard about the fake robbery yet, and then why would she report trying to call him over and over again when she'd cancelled the service? Speculation, or more like thinking aloud: was there something on the phone that really, really upset her? The multiple calls are in the affidavit but the cancelling the cell contract I've only seen posted here. Apologies if it's in the affidavit and I missed it - I looked again and couldn't find it, but it's not the easiest thing to read between the subject matter and how disjointed it is. I'm not implying that AH was involved as anything other than a victim, I was just very confused by that particular statement/rumor.

Page 31 of the affadavit is what you are looking for. While on the phone with AT&T she found out that the phone had been used at 7 am and that there was data usage, at that point she had the phone cancelled. I took it to mean this happened after she was able to speak with JH. When he told her it was stolen, and that the last time he used it was the night before.

 

[Quester]

Re Sound Dept paper: Are “irregular” attendees typically assigned responsibilities at regular meetings? TIA

 

[newsjunkie]

Are “irregular” attendees typically assigned responsibilities at regular meetings? TIA

If he had a spurt of regular attendance, he might be given privileges with the thought that his "spurt" is a start of regular attendance.

Another reasoning could be if they just have a shortage of brothers to help.

A third thought is that the affadavit said it was "written". . .our lists are typed. It could have been something JH wrote where he was wishing or dreaming or whatever. . .that he was on such a list.

 

[nikb]

Page 31 of the affadavit is what you are looking for. While on the phone with AT&T she found out that the phone had been used at 7 am and that there was data usage, at that point she had the phone cancelled. I took it to mean this happened after she was able to speak with JH. When he told her it was stolen, and that the last time he used it was the night before.

Ah thank you!

 

[brooklyn55]

If he had a spurt of regular attendance, he might be given privileges with the thought that his "spurt" is a start of regular attendance.

Another reasoning could be if they just have a shortage of brothers to help.

A third thought is that the affadavit said it was "written". . .our lists are typed. It could have been something JH wrote where he was wishing or dreaming or whatever. . .that he was on such a list.

...or it could be old. There was no date noted.

 

[newsjunkie]

...or it could be old. There was no date noted.

Another good possibility.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

<snipped>
I'm also confused by another rumor about AH supposedly cancelling JH's phone service at 7am. Why would she do that if she hadn't heard about the fake robbery yet, and then why would she report trying to call him over and over again when she'd cancelled the service? <snipped> Apologies if it's in the affidavit and I missed it - I looked again and couldn't find it, but it's not the easiest thing to read between the subject matter and how disjointed it is. I'm not implying that AH was involved as anything other than a victim, I was just very confused by that particular statement/rumor.

No problem, nikb (that pdf is very disjointed). It is in the pdf that AH cancelled the cell phone but not at 7 AM--she cancelled it "at that time" [after 9PM, when JH got home and told her about the 6 AM robbery]. See top of p. 31 in the pdf, where JH is talking to Harrington and Rhodes:

"He said that he talked to his wife a little bit about what happened when he returned home....JH told them his wife got on the phone to AT&T and found out there was data usage and a call made at 7 am on the phone and she cancelled the line at this time. JH told them the last call he made on his phone was the prior day (Monday) when he called and told his wife what time he was going to pick her up for work."

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I understand why it was put in the affadavit as it holds the names of the suspect and the victim's husband. The police officer wouldn't know it is just congregational information the same as you didn't originally know.

Regardless of how many names are on it though, I am telling you that it has nothing to do with the murder of Whitney Heichel. It is for scheduling purposes to tell which brother is assigned which area of the sound department for any given meeting.

It likely is...that would've been my first thought, in fact.

What I don't understand is why it has evoked so many posts about it not being relevant, or that there should be other names on it.

 

[brooklyn55]

It likely is...that would've been my first thought, in fact.

What I don't understand is why it has evoked so many posts about it not being relevant, or that there should be other names on it.

I think because there have been so many posts questioning what it was and if it was relevant. Certainly maybe the LE will find some relevance, who knows. For those familiar with this type of schedule, however, its very common and not of any real significance. But, like I said, maybe LE will find something useful from that information.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

<snipped>
Originally in this case I thought there might be more than one person involved, however with all the news that has come out, JH's confession, and ALL his disorganized behavior, I believe JH acted alone. If anyone else was involved with him, I just don't see how he could have kept his mouth shut, KWIM?

Unless the one with him was the actual perp. Then he'd have very good reason to keep his mouth shut.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I think because there have been so many posts questioning what it was and if it was relevant. Certainly maybe the LE will find some relevance, who knows. For those familiar with this type of schedule, however, its very common and not of any real significance. But, like I said, maybe LE will find something useful from that information.

Our church has sound system schedules (I believe it's fairly common nowadays, esp if the church is large). Guess I just can't understand what the fuss is all about.

 

[iamnotagolem]

This poor family and her friends. I hope beyond all hope that they never find websleuths and never have to read the things people who have never met them are saying about them.

I don't know why this case is so different from others where you aren't allowed to sleuth witnesses or victims and speculate about their involvement when there is no evidence to back up the wild claims. This is probably the first case that I've followed that after an arrest is made that instead of hoping and wishing for justice, people are speculating about conspiracy theories.

There is a reason for the KISS theory. Because wild conspiracy theories are just not that common.

 

[Xavier]

westside, there are not 3 cell phones. There are 2 known cell phones: WH's and the one carried by JH (which was apparently previously stolen from CH).

THERE ARE 2 CELL PHONES.



Think you meant JH's ride. If the white utility vehicle was his ride (we don't know that it was), it might have been pre-arranged, e.g., "meet me at 11:35 at the northwest corner of the Walmart parking lot." Another possibility is the use of prepaid cell phones.

Assuming Holt got a ride. By the time the SUV was dropped off at Walmart, all the cell phones were ditched, thrown out...so if Holt did'nt use his cell phone(less of an implication to trace him to the crime) then it was pre arranged for a pick up ride or he used a payphone booth.

 

[Boodles]

There is a reason for the KISS theory. Because wild conspiracy theories are just not that common.

Not common, but do occur from time to time. I'm not a conspiracy theorist at all, but something about these circumstances seems hinky.

I hope LE investigates thoroughly and the guilty party(ies) is/are brought to justice. Whitney's family deserves the truth, whatever it is.

(You gotta admit, that white utility vehicle arriving at Walmart at 11:38, parking next to Holt, and Holt "disappearing" by 11:39 is very interesting, isn't it? I won't belabor the other oddities.)

 

[Xavier]

If you missed it I did too. IIRC the original reports were that JH's cell was tossed in one place and WH's in another. Then later we found out that "JH's" cell was previously stolen from CH. Still only two phones though.

I'm also confused by another rumor about AH supposedly cancelling JH's phone service at 7am. Why would she do that if she hadn't heard about the fake robbery yet, and then why would she report trying to call him over and over again when she'd cancelled the service? Speculation, or more like thinking aloud: was there something on the phone that really, really upset her? The multiple calls are in the affidavit but the cancelling the cell contract I've only seen posted here. Apologies if it's in the affidavit and I missed it - I looked again and couldn't find it, but it's not the easiest thing to read between the subject matter and how disjointed it is. I'm not implying that AH was involved as anything other than a victim, I was just very confused by that particular statement/rumor.

I may be wrong, but did'nt Amanda cancel Holt's ATT&T cell phone later that night of the crime or the next day. Not 7am the day of the crime on Oct 16th

 

[Xavier]

Thanks for this perspective, it seems to make sense of Holt's possible motives and frame of mind. Holt seems to fit this description to a "T" and maybe was "suppressed" by the women in his immediate circle maybe "pressuring him or encouraging him", and Holt took their comments, as negative about him. Just go back to the "head clearing comments" Holt made when his newlywed wife asked him about his work...Amanda Holt has said " her husband keeps things bottled up, never knowing how he's feeling about something".... Either way he sounds like a wimp who can't "man up" . Holt used WH and took out on her his his "suppressed", tormented feelings. Holt likely wanted to "wear the pants, be in control" and friendly, free spirited, open minded, open hearted Whitney was his trophy.

And Holt's mind was warped in a delusional world of all things . He would'nt hurt/assault his wife Amanda at the "home base", but all other women he felt attractive were likely "fair game " for his fantasies. This theory makes a lot of sense. Thanks so much for posting this article.


I won't go into too much detail, but in my opinion JH might have similarities to the
Anger Retaliatory Rapist

1 - (Link 1 -Profiling Violent Crimes /An Investigative Tool Holmes/Holmes Page 159) This rapist tends to go in 6 months to 1 to 2 year cycles, where the other categories tend to be shorter. (Possibly the July 2011 event where he took off was his first encounter, when his wife asked about a job and he got mad and stole his friends car to clear his head?) Over a year later the WH event occurs. The box chart also mentions Little Planning and use of weapons of opportunity. Thus the messy crime scene and a gun he had from two months before he moved into the apartment building.

2- (Link 2-The Psychology of Serial Killer Investigations/Robert Keppel/Birnes Page 155) The rape is planned and the murder involves Overkill! The rapist-murderer may not direct his anger toward a spouse, mother or female supervisor, but may take this anger out on a substitute victim whom he has sought out. Victims are usually same age group and race and often in the same neighborhood. The perpetrator tends to select victims from familiar areas. Sometimes choosing victims that remind them of the spouse or parent that has angered them.

3- Forced Oral Sex (used as intimidation and possibly because the rapist has a tendency of retarded ejaculation or because it is an act of anger, can not perform other acts of rape without the forced arousal)

4- Link 1 -Page 158 May work in an action orientated occupation (JH was certified to work as an EMT) , quick violent temper, is likely married and like many rapists are not assaultive toward their mate. His acts of rape tend to follow precipitating events involving his wife.


Starting on page 158(scroll up one page) this gives a brief account (not all pages might be there/google books)
http://books.google.com/books?id=110... sex&f=false

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I may be wrong, but did'nt Amanda cancel Holt's ATT&T cell phone later that night of the crime or the next day. Not 7am the day of the crime on Oct 16th

According to Holt's testimony (pdf, p.31) she cancelled it the night of the crime after calling AT&T and finding it had 'data usage' at 7 am that morning (an hour after Holt said it was stolen).

 

[Xavier]

I agree that JH was probably thinking that the coincidence of his personal robbery claim and Whitneys disappearance would have LE believing that his alleged robbers were the perps. Even to the point that he admitted to LE that he had been robbed of guns and ammunition that were in his pack back. Then in the ensuing days he began distributing the guns, ammo, holster, ammo boxes, etc. near his workplace, around his apartment complex, and even a gun at the Gresham police station. Is he being framed by the perps who robbed him? Or now can he claim that he was being framed by the LE who had him under surveillance? Just kind of sick and twisted anyway you look at it.

If LE had Holt's finger prints on the bullet casings, gun(s) and also had tested for "backfire" gunpowder residue left on his shooting hand, then it's crystal clear to me Holt was the killer/shooter.

 

[nikb]

I may be wrong, but did'nt Amanda cancel Holt's ATT&T cell phone later that night of the crime or the next day. Not 7am the day of the crime on Oct 16th

Sorry delayed reply but yes, I caught up and apparently it was later. Makes way more sense.